Search
Search results
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Martyrs (2008) in Movies
Dec 28, 2019
Entertaining In a Crazy Way
Sometimes it helps to watch a movie with another person to get an extra perspective on what makes a movie special. I’ll admit, I would have reamed Martyrs on my own merit, but I definitely looked at it differently once I got an alternate opinion from my wife who watched is as well. The movie follows the story of two friends Anna (Morjana Aloui) and Lucie (Mylene Jampanoi). Lucie finds herself looking out for Anna when Anna can’t stop seeing an apparition that makes her do terrible things. Anna’s got a secret that no one believes, including Lucie who has her doubts.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
In the beginning we see Anna running away from what can only be seen as an abusive situation. She’s cut up and bleeding. It doesn’t take long to be drawn into her story and want to know more about what happened.
Characters: 6
I appreciated the depth of Anna’s character. She has issues, layers of them. You feel bad for her and terrified of her at the same time. The other characters, however, left a bit to be desired. We don’t really get a deep dive into Lucie’s situation, only that she has this need to take care of Anna. Outside of these two, the rest of the characters definitely fall a bit flat.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Conflict: 6
There are some truly tense moments in Martyrs, but a good portion of the movie feels more like torture porn. The action comes in brief pockets and isn’t always effective when it does happen. There were some solid sequences that were truly terrifying, but overall things could have been better.
Entertainment Value: 7
This movie succeeds with intrigue and originality. If charisma alone was enough to pass a movie, my overall score would be a lot higher. I enjoyed the mystery of it all which held my attention throughout the film. Will Lucie get to the bottom of what’s going on with Anna? Is Anna telling the truth? You really don’t know what to expect.
Memorability: 5
Pace: 9
Plot: 5
I think Martyrs eventually becomes a victim of it’s own trope as it focuses too much on leaving you in the dark and not necessarily pushing a legit story. I definitely feel there are certain elements that could have made the story a lot better, but I’m hesitant to dive in too much for fear of ruining the story. The plot progression is mediocre at best and leaves too much to interpretation.
Resolution: 8
For what it’s worth, Martyrs has absolutely one of the craziest endings I have ever seen. If you would have told me at the start of the movie that the road would have led there, I wouldn’t believe you. The shock factor is definitely there.
Overall: 74
Had the story been stronger and a bit more character development considered, Martyrs might have had more success with me. As it stands, I consider it an interesting enough film to watch at least once. it will keep you guessing right up until the end.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
In the beginning we see Anna running away from what can only be seen as an abusive situation. She’s cut up and bleeding. It doesn’t take long to be drawn into her story and want to know more about what happened.
Characters: 6
I appreciated the depth of Anna’s character. She has issues, layers of them. You feel bad for her and terrified of her at the same time. The other characters, however, left a bit to be desired. We don’t really get a deep dive into Lucie’s situation, only that she has this need to take care of Anna. Outside of these two, the rest of the characters definitely fall a bit flat.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Conflict: 6
There are some truly tense moments in Martyrs, but a good portion of the movie feels more like torture porn. The action comes in brief pockets and isn’t always effective when it does happen. There were some solid sequences that were truly terrifying, but overall things could have been better.
Entertainment Value: 7
This movie succeeds with intrigue and originality. If charisma alone was enough to pass a movie, my overall score would be a lot higher. I enjoyed the mystery of it all which held my attention throughout the film. Will Lucie get to the bottom of what’s going on with Anna? Is Anna telling the truth? You really don’t know what to expect.
Memorability: 5
Pace: 9
Plot: 5
I think Martyrs eventually becomes a victim of it’s own trope as it focuses too much on leaving you in the dark and not necessarily pushing a legit story. I definitely feel there are certain elements that could have made the story a lot better, but I’m hesitant to dive in too much for fear of ruining the story. The plot progression is mediocre at best and leaves too much to interpretation.
Resolution: 8
For what it’s worth, Martyrs has absolutely one of the craziest endings I have ever seen. If you would have told me at the start of the movie that the road would have led there, I wouldn’t believe you. The shock factor is definitely there.
Overall: 74
Had the story been stronger and a bit more character development considered, Martyrs might have had more success with me. As it stands, I consider it an interesting enough film to watch at least once. it will keep you guessing right up until the end.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Point Blank (2019) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
Story: Point Blank starts when emergency room nurse Paul (Mackie) is preparing to have his first child with his wife Taryn (Parris), she is due within weeks, but she gets kidnapped by Mateo (Cooke) who wants Paul to help his injured brother Abe (Grillo) escape from the emergency room after being accused of murdering the DA.
Paul and Abe go on the run with LT Lewis (Harden) tracking them down as we see just who was really behind the murder of the DA.
Thoughts on Point Blank
Characters – Paul is an emergency room nurse, he is married and about to start his family, his life is exactly where he wants it. His life takes a big change one this day when he gets forced to help a murder suspect escape from the hospital to save his pregnant wife, meaning he will need to start breaking the law to save her. Abe is the gun for hire that has been injured in the incident, he is the prime suspect and is being set up, where his brother is trying to help him escape, he is street smart and has connections in the criminal world which will help him stay ahead of the law. LT Lewis is the one trying to track down the pair trying to put away the person that killed the DA. Mateo is the brother of Abe that has gone to the extremes to try and get his brother out of custody.
Performances – Anthony Mackie and Frank Grillo do everything they can with this film, Grillo is starting make a name for himself in the trashing action films now, where he can play the bad boy with ease, Mackie doesn’t do much that you wouldn’t expect from him here though. Marcia Gay Harden gives us the basic cop figure, while Christian Cooke completes the main cast with a basic enough performance.
Story – The story here follows an emergency nurse that must help a murder suspect to save his kidnapped wife. This is a basic story which I always say is all you need for action at times, this is a remake of a French film, but we are lacking that one thing a good action film needs a villain that feels like a threat, we do get many suspects to who the villain might be because it is clear that Abe never committed a crime. We get moments of the unlikely couple needing to work together only for them to not have enough conflict about what is happening. This is basic storytelling that just never gets intense enough to the level it could do.
Action – The action involved in the film is the highlight of the film, even if a lot is basic, it does bring the film to life with the car chases involved.
Settings – The film is set in a big city which does help us understand how many people can be getting crimes done with ease.
Scene of the Movie – Big D
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Not enough villain potential.
Final Thoughts – This is a mostly by the book action film that just doesn’t get going.
Overall: Forgettable Action Film.
Paul and Abe go on the run with LT Lewis (Harden) tracking them down as we see just who was really behind the murder of the DA.
Thoughts on Point Blank
Characters – Paul is an emergency room nurse, he is married and about to start his family, his life is exactly where he wants it. His life takes a big change one this day when he gets forced to help a murder suspect escape from the hospital to save his pregnant wife, meaning he will need to start breaking the law to save her. Abe is the gun for hire that has been injured in the incident, he is the prime suspect and is being set up, where his brother is trying to help him escape, he is street smart and has connections in the criminal world which will help him stay ahead of the law. LT Lewis is the one trying to track down the pair trying to put away the person that killed the DA. Mateo is the brother of Abe that has gone to the extremes to try and get his brother out of custody.
Performances – Anthony Mackie and Frank Grillo do everything they can with this film, Grillo is starting make a name for himself in the trashing action films now, where he can play the bad boy with ease, Mackie doesn’t do much that you wouldn’t expect from him here though. Marcia Gay Harden gives us the basic cop figure, while Christian Cooke completes the main cast with a basic enough performance.
Story – The story here follows an emergency nurse that must help a murder suspect to save his kidnapped wife. This is a basic story which I always say is all you need for action at times, this is a remake of a French film, but we are lacking that one thing a good action film needs a villain that feels like a threat, we do get many suspects to who the villain might be because it is clear that Abe never committed a crime. We get moments of the unlikely couple needing to work together only for them to not have enough conflict about what is happening. This is basic storytelling that just never gets intense enough to the level it could do.
Action – The action involved in the film is the highlight of the film, even if a lot is basic, it does bring the film to life with the car chases involved.
Settings – The film is set in a big city which does help us understand how many people can be getting crimes done with ease.
Scene of the Movie – Big D
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Not enough villain potential.
Final Thoughts – This is a mostly by the book action film that just doesn’t get going.
Overall: Forgettable Action Film.
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated The Bootlegger in Books
Nov 11, 2019
The Bootlegger is the latest in the series of stories about the detective Isaac Bell from Cussler and Bell collaborator Justin Scott.
Time has moved on for Bell; it is now the early 1920s prohibition is in force and the loss of lives during the First World War has hit the Van Dorn detective agency hard. Faced with routine lawbreaking to smuggle and sell alcohol on the East Coast, and with lucrative government contracts being lost to new federal agencies, the struggle against crime has never been harder. And when Bell has to take over the role of head of the agency he faces a tough job.
Meanwhile the recent war in Europe has spread communist revolutionaries across the world, trying to destablise governments and bring about the fall of capitalism, following the example of the Russian Revolution. One resourceful operative sees the possibilities of bootlegging to finance his activities against America, but his masters are not so keen on the idea of making vast amounts of money, regardless of the use it is to be put to. But his fatal mistake is attracting the attention of the Van Dorns, who still stick by their motto - We Never Give Up. Ever.
You pretty much get what you expect with this book, more of the same from the previous Isaac Bell books. Personally I enjoy them, the insight into American early 20th century history is always a fantastic backdrop. Scott's seeming obsession with train timetables is kept to a small section here regarding moving a cargo from one place to another. There is still the full selection of large engined transport - fast cars, fast planes and in this one fast boats. There are exciting chases and shootouts, plots and subplots, ruthless villains and gangsters aplenty and the real motives of the villain do not become clear until the final showdown.
It is a shame that we know the identity of the villain more or less right from the start rather than the Van Dorns having to piece the clues together to unmask him, as in the previous novels. Although in this case it would have been hard to explain the conflict between his communist aims and capitalist means of obtaining them, which is the real engine at the heart of the plot.
Unlike Columbo Bell is not sure who his man is for quite a way through the book until realisation dawns about who he must be looking for. But I felt that he suddenly went from not knowing the actual identity of the villain to seeing through all his subterfuge far too quickly. There didn't seem to be a Columbo 'Just one more thing' moment where the vital clue or clever insight threw everything wide open. But perhaps it was time for the story to cut to the chase - and it certainly does that to a satisfying (although possibly not great) finale.
Overall I enjoyed the book, the pace was good and the set pieces very well written. However it was never going to challenge the reader in any real way. But then it's an escapist adventure story, why should it?
Time has moved on for Bell; it is now the early 1920s prohibition is in force and the loss of lives during the First World War has hit the Van Dorn detective agency hard. Faced with routine lawbreaking to smuggle and sell alcohol on the East Coast, and with lucrative government contracts being lost to new federal agencies, the struggle against crime has never been harder. And when Bell has to take over the role of head of the agency he faces a tough job.
Meanwhile the recent war in Europe has spread communist revolutionaries across the world, trying to destablise governments and bring about the fall of capitalism, following the example of the Russian Revolution. One resourceful operative sees the possibilities of bootlegging to finance his activities against America, but his masters are not so keen on the idea of making vast amounts of money, regardless of the use it is to be put to. But his fatal mistake is attracting the attention of the Van Dorns, who still stick by their motto - We Never Give Up. Ever.
You pretty much get what you expect with this book, more of the same from the previous Isaac Bell books. Personally I enjoy them, the insight into American early 20th century history is always a fantastic backdrop. Scott's seeming obsession with train timetables is kept to a small section here regarding moving a cargo from one place to another. There is still the full selection of large engined transport - fast cars, fast planes and in this one fast boats. There are exciting chases and shootouts, plots and subplots, ruthless villains and gangsters aplenty and the real motives of the villain do not become clear until the final showdown.
It is a shame that we know the identity of the villain more or less right from the start rather than the Van Dorns having to piece the clues together to unmask him, as in the previous novels. Although in this case it would have been hard to explain the conflict between his communist aims and capitalist means of obtaining them, which is the real engine at the heart of the plot.
Unlike Columbo Bell is not sure who his man is for quite a way through the book until realisation dawns about who he must be looking for. But I felt that he suddenly went from not knowing the actual identity of the villain to seeing through all his subterfuge far too quickly. There didn't seem to be a Columbo 'Just one more thing' moment where the vital clue or clever insight threw everything wide open. But perhaps it was time for the story to cut to the chase - and it certainly does that to a satisfying (although possibly not great) finale.
Overall I enjoyed the book, the pace was good and the set pieces very well written. However it was never going to challenge the reader in any real way. But then it's an escapist adventure story, why should it?
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Legend (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Have you heard of Legend? Not the movie from the mid-eighties, but the story of Ronnie and Reggie Kray (Tom Hardy, playing both brothers). Don’t know who they are, that’s okay, neither did I. But if you are across the pond and are reading this, you probably do. They Kray brothers are twins, and perhaps the most notorious gangsters in London history. Think John Dillinger, or Al Capone, of the UK.
Legend is a story of Reggie and Ronnie Kray’s rise to power as the top gangsters of the East End of London, and beyond. However, it is told from the point of view of Reggie’s wife, Francis Kray (Emily Browning). Though, the movie starts with her meeting Reggie for the first time, and it is really a love story of how she fell in love with a gangster that would not change his ways. There is nothing solely remarkable about the plot of the movie, but it is definitely captivating. I went into the film not knowing much about the Krays, but glad that I didn’t as it might have marred my experience.
Hardy, however, is remarkable in his portrayal of the Kray brothers. Each brother having his own distinctive personality, and even distinctive looks despite being identical twin brothers. Ronnie, as Francis describes him, is a one man mob trying to take control of London. The only catch is that he is paranoid schizophrenic and has trouble in social situations. This leads to a high distrust of people, and some intriguing scenes during the course of the film, especially interacting with Francis and his brother. Reggie is the intelligent, methodical brother who has bigger goals and aspirations than his brother, but his loyalty to his family holds him back. He has a deep loyalty, and even in the height of conflict would not take his anger, or disappointment, out on Ronnie. This did not sit well with Francis, who desperately wanted Reggie to go straight, but still agreed to marry him, even against the wishes of her mother.
There is no rise without a fall, but I won’t give too much insight into that as it will help the movie win you over if you know less. But Hardy and Browning were backed by a wonderful supporting cast including the likes of David Thewlis, Christopher Eccleston, Taron Egerton, and Chazz Palminteri. Hardy himself brought some levity to the more serious scenes, though there were times where I was taken out of the movie as Ronnie Kray had a slight tendency to sound like Bane, Hardy’s previous role in the Dark Knight franchise.
If you enjoy British films such as Rock’n’Rolla, Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, or Trainspotting, you will definitely enjoy Legend. In fact, Legend is the first movie rated 18+ in the UK to break the box office record set by Trainspotting in 1996. That says a lot about the movie. Will I add it to my collection upon home release? The jury is still out on that, but it definitely was a great film and worth seeing.
Legend is a story of Reggie and Ronnie Kray’s rise to power as the top gangsters of the East End of London, and beyond. However, it is told from the point of view of Reggie’s wife, Francis Kray (Emily Browning). Though, the movie starts with her meeting Reggie for the first time, and it is really a love story of how she fell in love with a gangster that would not change his ways. There is nothing solely remarkable about the plot of the movie, but it is definitely captivating. I went into the film not knowing much about the Krays, but glad that I didn’t as it might have marred my experience.
Hardy, however, is remarkable in his portrayal of the Kray brothers. Each brother having his own distinctive personality, and even distinctive looks despite being identical twin brothers. Ronnie, as Francis describes him, is a one man mob trying to take control of London. The only catch is that he is paranoid schizophrenic and has trouble in social situations. This leads to a high distrust of people, and some intriguing scenes during the course of the film, especially interacting with Francis and his brother. Reggie is the intelligent, methodical brother who has bigger goals and aspirations than his brother, but his loyalty to his family holds him back. He has a deep loyalty, and even in the height of conflict would not take his anger, or disappointment, out on Ronnie. This did not sit well with Francis, who desperately wanted Reggie to go straight, but still agreed to marry him, even against the wishes of her mother.
There is no rise without a fall, but I won’t give too much insight into that as it will help the movie win you over if you know less. But Hardy and Browning were backed by a wonderful supporting cast including the likes of David Thewlis, Christopher Eccleston, Taron Egerton, and Chazz Palminteri. Hardy himself brought some levity to the more serious scenes, though there were times where I was taken out of the movie as Ronnie Kray had a slight tendency to sound like Bane, Hardy’s previous role in the Dark Knight franchise.
If you enjoy British films such as Rock’n’Rolla, Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, or Trainspotting, you will definitely enjoy Legend. In fact, Legend is the first movie rated 18+ in the UK to break the box office record set by Trainspotting in 1996. That says a lot about the movie. Will I add it to my collection upon home release? The jury is still out on that, but it definitely was a great film and worth seeing.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated That's My Boy (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Adam Sandler movies have often been a mixed bag. For every “The Wedding Singer” and “50 First Dates” there are several forgettable offerings like “Little Nicky”, “I Now Prounounce You Chuck and Larry”, and “8 Crazy Nights”. To be fair there’ve also been several guilty pleasures such as “Happy Gilmore” and “The Waterboy” along the way. Sadly, his recent offerings, culminating in the disastrous “Jack and Jill”, have given me very low expectations for his new film “That’s My Boy” which pairs Sandler with former Saturday Night Live star Andy Samberg.
Sandler stars as Donny, a down-on his luck former celebrity who gained notoriety after impregnating his teacher at 13. While the teacher (Eva Amurri Martino) went on to a 30-year prison sentence, Donny used his notoriety to become a pop culture sensation. Unfortunately for Donny fame was fleeting and he wasted the money he had accumulated along the way. We soon learn Donny faces a prison sentence unless he comes up with $45,000 to pay back taxes.
Desperate, he turns to his estranged son Todd (Andy Samberg), who has pretty much disowned his father and does not even go by is given birth name. Todd is about to marry a socialite named Jamie (Leighton Meester), and since he is a numbers genius with an extremely bright future with a partnership pending, the arrival of his crude, drunken father, is a disaster in the making. Passing himself off as long-lost friend, Donny attempts to reconnect with his son and naturally this happens over some very vulgar and awkward moments, not all of which are limited to bachelor party scenes.
Of course anybody who has seen any of Sandler’s films will know the formula that follows: crude situations followed by conflict, mixed with celebrity cameos and an ’80s soundtrack tossed in with a few laughs along the way towards a tidy ending. To say that there is a definite formula to his films would be an understatement and Sandler gives the impression that he’s making up many of the scenes as he goes along, all the while sporting a hybrid Boston/Little Nicky accent.
What ultimately sells the film is the energy and effort that the cast puts into their performances. While the plot can be charitably described as disjointed, there are several scenes that are LOL-inducing, especially those with James Caan as an angry priest and with Vanilla Ice and Todd Bridges lampooning their faded glory.
While the film is a bit cruder than most of Sandler’s usual fare it is, for the most part, good-natured and lighthearted. Obviously nobody is expected to take the film seriously. Samberg does a good job playing the restrained uptight Todd, and in the scenes where he lets loose, shows solid working chemistry with Sandler.
While it is not a great cinematic comedy it certainly has more than its fair share of laughs along the way, just as long as you’re willing to overlook the lackluster plot and uneven pacing of the film.
Sandler stars as Donny, a down-on his luck former celebrity who gained notoriety after impregnating his teacher at 13. While the teacher (Eva Amurri Martino) went on to a 30-year prison sentence, Donny used his notoriety to become a pop culture sensation. Unfortunately for Donny fame was fleeting and he wasted the money he had accumulated along the way. We soon learn Donny faces a prison sentence unless he comes up with $45,000 to pay back taxes.
Desperate, he turns to his estranged son Todd (Andy Samberg), who has pretty much disowned his father and does not even go by is given birth name. Todd is about to marry a socialite named Jamie (Leighton Meester), and since he is a numbers genius with an extremely bright future with a partnership pending, the arrival of his crude, drunken father, is a disaster in the making. Passing himself off as long-lost friend, Donny attempts to reconnect with his son and naturally this happens over some very vulgar and awkward moments, not all of which are limited to bachelor party scenes.
Of course anybody who has seen any of Sandler’s films will know the formula that follows: crude situations followed by conflict, mixed with celebrity cameos and an ’80s soundtrack tossed in with a few laughs along the way towards a tidy ending. To say that there is a definite formula to his films would be an understatement and Sandler gives the impression that he’s making up many of the scenes as he goes along, all the while sporting a hybrid Boston/Little Nicky accent.
What ultimately sells the film is the energy and effort that the cast puts into their performances. While the plot can be charitably described as disjointed, there are several scenes that are LOL-inducing, especially those with James Caan as an angry priest and with Vanilla Ice and Todd Bridges lampooning their faded glory.
While the film is a bit cruder than most of Sandler’s usual fare it is, for the most part, good-natured and lighthearted. Obviously nobody is expected to take the film seriously. Samberg does a good job playing the restrained uptight Todd, and in the scenes where he lets loose, shows solid working chemistry with Sandler.
While it is not a great cinematic comedy it certainly has more than its fair share of laughs along the way, just as long as you’re willing to overlook the lackluster plot and uneven pacing of the film.
Global Teams: How the Best Teams Achieve High Performance
Book
Working for a matrix international organisation, with its ensuing diverse global teams, based in a...
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Casino Royale (1967) in Movies
Jul 24, 2020
It Gets Real Bad
Here’s what Rotten Tomatoes has to say because I couldn’t begin to tell you what this shit-show is about: “This James Bond spoof features the hero coming out of retirement to attempt to fix some problems for SMERSH, while a multitude of other subplots unwind about the central figure.” Yeah, even RT was having trouble trying to figure out what the hell was going on with the 1967 Casino Royale. How bad is it? Well, let’s just say I just finished reading a list of the Top 100 Worst Movies of All Time and I was very surprised to not see this movie on there.
Acting: 10
The movie was bad, but I honestly can’t say that the acting was. These professionals had a job to do and they did it…more or less. While there’s no one performance that really stood out for me, I can definitely remember thinking that no one shit the bed at least.
Beginning: 6
This movie is weird through and through and the beginning is no exception. I will say there was some mild interest after the first ten minutes. I knew it was going to be different than the previous Bond movies, but I wasn’t sure if that was a good thing or not.
Characters: 8
In addition to solid acting, the characters weren’t all that bad either. Sure James Bond was way more lame than the usual guy we had come to know and love over the previous few movies. But throw in characters like the aloof Evelyn Tremble (Peter Sellers) and you’ve got a fun cast of characters that at least try to keep things interesting.
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
Casino Royale is shot like they were given the lowest budget imaginable. Everything feels extremely cheap and done with little to no effort. It is a far cry from the previous Bond movies that give you groundbreaking shots and decent special effects. This movie’s visuals are mediocre at best.
Conflict: 6
Entertainment Value: 3
It’s never a good sign when I have to stop watching a movie at night and continue on in the morning. When it’s good enough, I will stay up no matter how tired I am. This movie was bad enough to put me right to sleep. I scored it a 3 because it reached a point where my interest was piqued in just how bad things were going to get.
Memorability: 8
It’s bad sure…but boy is it unforgettable bad. With all the craziness that ensued, they made sure you would remember it a long time after watching it. And you know what? There’s a fun respectability that comes with that.
Pace: 1
Plot: 2
Resolution: 6
The best part about the end? It was the end.
Overall: 55
I wanted to watch all the Bond movies, including the stinkers. Casino Royale is easily one of the stinkers. But, with movies as it is with everything, you can’t know where you’re going unless you see where you’ve been.
Acting: 10
The movie was bad, but I honestly can’t say that the acting was. These professionals had a job to do and they did it…more or less. While there’s no one performance that really stood out for me, I can definitely remember thinking that no one shit the bed at least.
Beginning: 6
This movie is weird through and through and the beginning is no exception. I will say there was some mild interest after the first ten minutes. I knew it was going to be different than the previous Bond movies, but I wasn’t sure if that was a good thing or not.
Characters: 8
In addition to solid acting, the characters weren’t all that bad either. Sure James Bond was way more lame than the usual guy we had come to know and love over the previous few movies. But throw in characters like the aloof Evelyn Tremble (Peter Sellers) and you’ve got a fun cast of characters that at least try to keep things interesting.
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
Casino Royale is shot like they were given the lowest budget imaginable. Everything feels extremely cheap and done with little to no effort. It is a far cry from the previous Bond movies that give you groundbreaking shots and decent special effects. This movie’s visuals are mediocre at best.
Conflict: 6
Entertainment Value: 3
It’s never a good sign when I have to stop watching a movie at night and continue on in the morning. When it’s good enough, I will stay up no matter how tired I am. This movie was bad enough to put me right to sleep. I scored it a 3 because it reached a point where my interest was piqued in just how bad things were going to get.
Memorability: 8
It’s bad sure…but boy is it unforgettable bad. With all the craziness that ensued, they made sure you would remember it a long time after watching it. And you know what? There’s a fun respectability that comes with that.
Pace: 1
Plot: 2
Resolution: 6
The best part about the end? It was the end.
Overall: 55
I wanted to watch all the Bond movies, including the stinkers. Casino Royale is easily one of the stinkers. But, with movies as it is with everything, you can’t know where you’re going unless you see where you’ve been.
BookInspector (124 KP) rated A Present from India in Books
Sep 24, 2020
When I started reading this book, it did not hook me, and that remained till the end of the book. The main characters of the book were mother whose name was Eva and her half Indian, half English daughter Dee. I really admired Eva’s character in this book. She was like an old wise owl, I liked that, at least now she was wise and made good decisions.(what I wouldn’t say about her study days) Unfortunately I found Dee quite stupid and annoying, with her silly decisions and being stubborn with those not logical wishes she makes in the book. Because of these real life character features I found them both to be very realistic and believable, there are many mixed marriages in the UK and I liked the diversity of the characters.
As it was mentioned in the description, there are two stories told of two generations. It is the trip to India which is happening at present and a time spent in Moscow in 1977. I really loved reading about Eva's time in Moscow; it was really interesting to me. I enjoyed all the details author told about Moscow. I think that's where authors experience comes in, she studied in Moscow during seventies herself, that's why she was able to portray the city and the atmosphere of those days quite accurate. The relationship Chandra was having with Eva was really complicated and for me it kept the suspense going, that's why I used to get excited once those chapters used to come up. Unfortunately the Indian trip was not very interesting to read for me. I think in many places there was too much detail which was not necessary. What drinks they had and what food they ate, I was not very interested in that. The characters wanted to see real India, but what was written in the book was far from the real India. Living in a hotel and travelling first class is not real India experience. It seemed like a tour which most probably author had, and this was the way to share the experience. As person who saw and lived in everyday Indian conditions, I can assure, it’s not like it was in the book. Even though I didn't really enjoy the parts of India voyage, it made me want to take my mother there. I liked the relationship which Eva and Dee shared during that trip.
I liked the writing style of this novel; it has this lovely English way: refined and polite, avoiding conflict. I am a big fan of short chapters, or long chapters divided into smaller, so the length of the chapters was not my favourite part in this book as well. They were long and too boring sometimes. Another thing I really enjoyed, was the ending of this book. It was unexpected to me and made sense why the novel was written in the way it was. So to conclude, if you never visited India and have interest in Soviet history, you will enjoy this book and will find some exotic places and interesting way of living in 1970ties Russia.
As it was mentioned in the description, there are two stories told of two generations. It is the trip to India which is happening at present and a time spent in Moscow in 1977. I really loved reading about Eva's time in Moscow; it was really interesting to me. I enjoyed all the details author told about Moscow. I think that's where authors experience comes in, she studied in Moscow during seventies herself, that's why she was able to portray the city and the atmosphere of those days quite accurate. The relationship Chandra was having with Eva was really complicated and for me it kept the suspense going, that's why I used to get excited once those chapters used to come up. Unfortunately the Indian trip was not very interesting to read for me. I think in many places there was too much detail which was not necessary. What drinks they had and what food they ate, I was not very interested in that. The characters wanted to see real India, but what was written in the book was far from the real India. Living in a hotel and travelling first class is not real India experience. It seemed like a tour which most probably author had, and this was the way to share the experience. As person who saw and lived in everyday Indian conditions, I can assure, it’s not like it was in the book. Even though I didn't really enjoy the parts of India voyage, it made me want to take my mother there. I liked the relationship which Eva and Dee shared during that trip.
I liked the writing style of this novel; it has this lovely English way: refined and polite, avoiding conflict. I am a big fan of short chapters, or long chapters divided into smaller, so the length of the chapters was not my favourite part in this book as well. They were long and too boring sometimes. Another thing I really enjoyed, was the ending of this book. It was unexpected to me and made sense why the novel was written in the way it was. So to conclude, if you never visited India and have interest in Soviet history, you will enjoy this book and will find some exotic places and interesting way of living in 1970ties Russia.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009) in Movies
Sep 10, 2020
Beautiful Visuals
A part of being a critic means being able to separate the art from the creator. In my recent review of Swing Time, I came to the conclusion that the movie as a whole was still enjoyable despite their use of blackface in one scene. While I don’t agree with everything JK Rowling is saying at this point in time, I can’t deny the magical world that she has created and the stories that lie within. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, the sixth installment in the franchise, is no exception. In this darker film, Harry is finding himself in preparation of facing off against the evil Lord Voldemort.
Acting: 10
This is my first review of a Harry Potter film. I must say, it has been a pleasure to watch these young actors grow into stars. Daniel Radcliffe was made for the role of Harry Potter and it appears he has matured at the same time his character has. Gone is the young innocence of the first film, replaced by teenage angst and anger. It is hard to imagine anyone else playing the role just as it is hard to imagine anyone but Alan Rickman playing the role of the hard-faced, dark Professor Snape.
Beginning: 10
The mayhem starts almost instantly and wastes no time in getting you sucked into the movie. You know right away what the heroes are up against and it ain’t looking good for the heroes. I appreciated that immediate intensity.
Characters: 10
The gang is all here from the previous five films, the characters we have grown to know and love. I respect the fact that every character continues to grow and mature in their own way, particularly Harry. Thrust into this world of magic and wizardry, becoming an adult becomes ten times more challenging with all the Hogwarts-related biz thrown into the mix.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
At some point in the movie, there is a scene shot in black and white involving Albus Dumbledore that’s super cool to watch unfold. Visually this film is just as strong as the previous ones, if not stronger as it is working with darker tones throughout. With beautiful camerawork, director David Yates makes you feel the tension of each scene as you are taken on this journey.
Conflict: 8
Entertainment Value: 9
Even if you aren’t a die-hard Harry Potter fan, the film takes you on an extremely intense journey. You experience a rollercoaster of emotions, many unexpected if you haven’t read the books. It is a wonderful setup for the film’s final act.
Memorability: 8
Pace: 7
Plot: 10
Resolution: 5
While the ending was necessary, it definitely left a bad taste in my mouth. it also didn’t quite feel complete as it was an obvious setup for things to come. The last ten minutes were mediocre at best for me.
Overall: 87
I could think of worse ways to spend your time than watching Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. The series continues to improve upon itself and this was a worthy installment. It has just the right level of creepiness factor to pique one’s interest.
Acting: 10
This is my first review of a Harry Potter film. I must say, it has been a pleasure to watch these young actors grow into stars. Daniel Radcliffe was made for the role of Harry Potter and it appears he has matured at the same time his character has. Gone is the young innocence of the first film, replaced by teenage angst and anger. It is hard to imagine anyone else playing the role just as it is hard to imagine anyone but Alan Rickman playing the role of the hard-faced, dark Professor Snape.
Beginning: 10
The mayhem starts almost instantly and wastes no time in getting you sucked into the movie. You know right away what the heroes are up against and it ain’t looking good for the heroes. I appreciated that immediate intensity.
Characters: 10
The gang is all here from the previous five films, the characters we have grown to know and love. I respect the fact that every character continues to grow and mature in their own way, particularly Harry. Thrust into this world of magic and wizardry, becoming an adult becomes ten times more challenging with all the Hogwarts-related biz thrown into the mix.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
At some point in the movie, there is a scene shot in black and white involving Albus Dumbledore that’s super cool to watch unfold. Visually this film is just as strong as the previous ones, if not stronger as it is working with darker tones throughout. With beautiful camerawork, director David Yates makes you feel the tension of each scene as you are taken on this journey.
Conflict: 8
Entertainment Value: 9
Even if you aren’t a die-hard Harry Potter fan, the film takes you on an extremely intense journey. You experience a rollercoaster of emotions, many unexpected if you haven’t read the books. It is a wonderful setup for the film’s final act.
Memorability: 8
Pace: 7
Plot: 10
Resolution: 5
While the ending was necessary, it definitely left a bad taste in my mouth. it also didn’t quite feel complete as it was an obvious setup for things to come. The last ten minutes were mediocre at best for me.
Overall: 87
I could think of worse ways to spend your time than watching Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. The series continues to improve upon itself and this was a worthy installment. It has just the right level of creepiness factor to pique one’s interest.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2 (2011) in Movies
Dec 14, 2020
Great Performances, Even Better Film
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 is one of the most gratifying ways to end a series. After such a long series, you’re hoping that the end does the rest of the series justice and thIS movie doesn’t disappoint in the slightest. It’s the harrowing conclusion to Harry Potter’s journey as he tries to put a stop to the evil Voldemort once and for all.
Acting: 10
It’s not surprise that the acting is so stellar as these wonderful actors/actresses have had years to grow comfortable in the skin of their characters. Daniel Radcliffe continues to be sensational in his role as Harry Potter as he embraces Potter’s ascension into manhood. Rupert Grint (Ron) and Emma Watson (Hermione) shine yet again playing his dedicated friends and sidekicks. You can tell that the three of them have formed such a strong bond over the eight movies as their synergy is extremely on point.
Beginning: 4
Characters: 10
This final film pulls out all the stops as it’s an all-out good vs. evil war. Teeming with amazing characters, I was hardpressed trying to uncover who exactly my favorite was. Potter is wonderful, yes, but so are dozens of others literally. I was really impressed with the maturation of Ron’s character. It can be hard at times developing a sidekick but in some ways, Ron’s journey to completion is just as satisfying as Harry’s.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
This one is for all the marbles so they hold nothing back when it comes to amazing action sequences. The battles sprawl all across Hogwarts filled with dope magic and wonder. Sparks fly in abundance of blacks, greens and reds across a dark backdrop, a spectacular display. Sometimes you have no idea who’s even winning, but it looks damn cool.
Entertainment Value: 10
Potter vs. Voldemort alone is worth the price of admission. The battle definitely lives up to the hype. Even moreso to see closure happen on every level is a welcome treat. Outside of a slow(ish) start, the movie is enjoyable from beginning to end.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
The beauty of the final book being done in two parts for the movie is they definitely saved the best for last. All the best battles and memorable scenes are jam-packed into Part 2, causing things to fly by at a breakneck pace. Just over two hours, the final installment just flies by.
Plot: 10
JK Rowling wraps up this beautiful adventure quite nicely. The thing I keep going back to and have an immense amount of respect for: No loose ends. The stakes are higher than ever in this story that succeeds with a few cool twists along the way.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 94
The magical battles alone are enough to make Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 worth a watch. With the combination of rich characters who each get a proper sendoff, a speedy pace, and a chunk of memorable moments, this is a movie to remember.
Acting: 10
It’s not surprise that the acting is so stellar as these wonderful actors/actresses have had years to grow comfortable in the skin of their characters. Daniel Radcliffe continues to be sensational in his role as Harry Potter as he embraces Potter’s ascension into manhood. Rupert Grint (Ron) and Emma Watson (Hermione) shine yet again playing his dedicated friends and sidekicks. You can tell that the three of them have formed such a strong bond over the eight movies as their synergy is extremely on point.
Beginning: 4
Characters: 10
This final film pulls out all the stops as it’s an all-out good vs. evil war. Teeming with amazing characters, I was hardpressed trying to uncover who exactly my favorite was. Potter is wonderful, yes, but so are dozens of others literally. I was really impressed with the maturation of Ron’s character. It can be hard at times developing a sidekick but in some ways, Ron’s journey to completion is just as satisfying as Harry’s.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
This one is for all the marbles so they hold nothing back when it comes to amazing action sequences. The battles sprawl all across Hogwarts filled with dope magic and wonder. Sparks fly in abundance of blacks, greens and reds across a dark backdrop, a spectacular display. Sometimes you have no idea who’s even winning, but it looks damn cool.
Entertainment Value: 10
Potter vs. Voldemort alone is worth the price of admission. The battle definitely lives up to the hype. Even moreso to see closure happen on every level is a welcome treat. Outside of a slow(ish) start, the movie is enjoyable from beginning to end.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
The beauty of the final book being done in two parts for the movie is they definitely saved the best for last. All the best battles and memorable scenes are jam-packed into Part 2, causing things to fly by at a breakneck pace. Just over two hours, the final installment just flies by.
Plot: 10
JK Rowling wraps up this beautiful adventure quite nicely. The thing I keep going back to and have an immense amount of respect for: No loose ends. The stakes are higher than ever in this story that succeeds with a few cool twists along the way.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 94
The magical battles alone are enough to make Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 worth a watch. With the combination of rich characters who each get a proper sendoff, a speedy pace, and a chunk of memorable moments, this is a movie to remember.