Search
Search results
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Crazy Rich Asians (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
A Rom-Com with Substance
Yes, I know what you’re thinking. This isn’t really the kind of film I’m particularly fond of. Everything about it screams ‘cheesy rom-com’, just look at that poster. But, I’m happy to say I walked away from this film feeling so glad that I had watched it. This is a classic example of not judging a film by its poster or trailer, as it has so much more to offer.
As the title of my review suggests, I mainly loved this film because of the overall narrative. There’s a lot of character development and dark secrets, meaning your interest is constantly held throughout the film. You really start to care about these characters and their lives, and I didn’t feel like anyone was just thrown in there for the sake of it. The dynamics between characters is really well done and realistic, and it’s very easy for you to quickly love or hate them. I was so impressed by the quality of the acting, and how each actor brought their characters to life on screen. I was especially blown away by Michelle Yeoh and Gemma Chan, for very different reasons. I was also happy to see an all-Asian cast in a mainstream film, as we still have a lot to do when it comes to wider representation and films like this are a huge step in the right direction.
I also feel like people could identify with some of the themes, especially this idea of a class divide and feeling unwelcome. It was so eye-opening to see how some people are shunned by families because of their social status, and how important it is for families to protect their name and heritage at all costs. Whilst Crazy Rich Asians shows an extreme version of this type of behaviour, class divides are prevalent across the world so this was a really interesting theme to explore. This theme is one of the reasons why I felt this film had so much substance, as it goes beyond simply being just another rom-com and shows us some serious, real-life issues instead. There are some scenes in Crazy Rich Asians that are far from comedic, and shows us a darker side to life within a wealthy, influential circle. The results are as dark as you’d expect. I don’t want to give any spoilers – experience it for yourself instead.
As for the comedy, it was genuinely laugh-out-loud funny. I am always apprehensive with comedy films as sometimes it can become too ridiculous and slapstick, but Crazy Rich Asians was satirical and smart, with some silly moments thrown in there too. I’m so impressed with how they blended humour with drama this effortlessly. It knows how to balance this without going too far one way, and the result is an incredibly well-rounded and three dimensional film that made me laugh and cry in equal measure. It’s a truly captivating film from start to finish.
Visually, it’s a stunning piece of cinema. You’re greeted with bright colours, gorgeous set design, and you’re transported to a world of luxury and Chinese culture, with these hostile undertones. On the big screen it’s even better, because you get to experience this gorgeous film on a large scale. It’s hard to take your eyes off it. I’m looking forward to revisiting this film in future so I can look for more details the second time around, as I’m sure I missed stuff during my initial viewing!
If this is the future of rom-com, consider me converted. I was so impressed by the overall film and would recommend it to anyone. Please don’t let the title and synopsis put you off, it’s such a smart, funny, heartbreaking film and I urge you to give it a go. You might end up as surprised as me!
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/09/16/a-rom-com-with-substance-my-thoughts-on-crazy-rich-asians/
As the title of my review suggests, I mainly loved this film because of the overall narrative. There’s a lot of character development and dark secrets, meaning your interest is constantly held throughout the film. You really start to care about these characters and their lives, and I didn’t feel like anyone was just thrown in there for the sake of it. The dynamics between characters is really well done and realistic, and it’s very easy for you to quickly love or hate them. I was so impressed by the quality of the acting, and how each actor brought their characters to life on screen. I was especially blown away by Michelle Yeoh and Gemma Chan, for very different reasons. I was also happy to see an all-Asian cast in a mainstream film, as we still have a lot to do when it comes to wider representation and films like this are a huge step in the right direction.
I also feel like people could identify with some of the themes, especially this idea of a class divide and feeling unwelcome. It was so eye-opening to see how some people are shunned by families because of their social status, and how important it is for families to protect their name and heritage at all costs. Whilst Crazy Rich Asians shows an extreme version of this type of behaviour, class divides are prevalent across the world so this was a really interesting theme to explore. This theme is one of the reasons why I felt this film had so much substance, as it goes beyond simply being just another rom-com and shows us some serious, real-life issues instead. There are some scenes in Crazy Rich Asians that are far from comedic, and shows us a darker side to life within a wealthy, influential circle. The results are as dark as you’d expect. I don’t want to give any spoilers – experience it for yourself instead.
As for the comedy, it was genuinely laugh-out-loud funny. I am always apprehensive with comedy films as sometimes it can become too ridiculous and slapstick, but Crazy Rich Asians was satirical and smart, with some silly moments thrown in there too. I’m so impressed with how they blended humour with drama this effortlessly. It knows how to balance this without going too far one way, and the result is an incredibly well-rounded and three dimensional film that made me laugh and cry in equal measure. It’s a truly captivating film from start to finish.
Visually, it’s a stunning piece of cinema. You’re greeted with bright colours, gorgeous set design, and you’re transported to a world of luxury and Chinese culture, with these hostile undertones. On the big screen it’s even better, because you get to experience this gorgeous film on a large scale. It’s hard to take your eyes off it. I’m looking forward to revisiting this film in future so I can look for more details the second time around, as I’m sure I missed stuff during my initial viewing!
If this is the future of rom-com, consider me converted. I was so impressed by the overall film and would recommend it to anyone. Please don’t let the title and synopsis put you off, it’s such a smart, funny, heartbreaking film and I urge you to give it a go. You might end up as surprised as me!
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/09/16/a-rom-com-with-substance-my-thoughts-on-crazy-rich-asians/
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Gremlins 2: The New Batch (1990) in Movies
Dec 22, 2020
Gremlins Take Over The Big Apple
Gremlins 2: The New Batch- is a good sequel. Its still has its dark humor, comedy, horror and of course many gremlins. And you cant not forgot about Hulk Hogan, yes you read that right Hulk Hogan is in this. And the horror legend and icon Christopher Lee is also in this.
The plot: The magical collectibles store that Gizmo calls home has just been destroyed, and the tiny monster finds his way into a newly erected skyscraper. Billy Peltzer (Zach Galligan) and his bride-to-be, Kate (Phoebe Cates), who have previously dealt with Gremlins run amok, discover that Gizmo and an impish legion of reptilian pals are inhabiting the downtown building. The couple tries to stop the creatures from escaping into New York City, but this new batch of beasts might be uncontrollable.
Like the first film, Gremlins 2: The New Batch is a live-action horror comedy film; however, Dante put effort into taking the sequel in new anarchistic directions. The film is meant to be more cartoon-like and less dark than the original, with slapstick violence, so the film received a PG-13 rating by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA). There are also a number of parodies of other films and stories, including Gremlins itself, the Rambo films, The Wizard of Oz, Marathon Man and The Phantom of the Opera.
Along with the main plot, there is animation by Chuck Jones in the film featuring the Looney Tunes characters Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck and Porky Pig. Jones had actually quit animation before returning to work on Gremlins 2: The New Batch.Dante explained the animation at the beginning of the film was meant to "set the anarchic tone."
The first scene appears at the very beginning of the movie, and features the classic Looney Tunes opening card, causing people to assume it is the short cartoon that usually plays before a movie begins; however, when Bugs appears through the rings on top of the Warner Bros. shield, Daffy interrupts the intro, and steals the shield from Bugs. Daffy attempts to recreate the opening with himself in Bugs' place, but the shield overshoots, causing the entire title card to fall apart. Daffy surrenders the stardom, claiming that since he will not star in the cartoon, they might as well just skip straight to the movie. Bugs is willing to do so, and spins Daffy off screen like a spinning top for the movie title to appear.
The DVD and Blu-ray include a longer version of the cartoon short. In it, Daffy is informed by Bugs that he has been promoted to executive and is subsequently put in charge writing the title of the movie. When Daffy mistakenly writes the title Gremlins 2 as "Gremlin Stew", Bugs corrects the error. Daffy then attempts to rename the film The Return of Super-Daffy Meets Gremlins 2 Part 6: The Movie, but Bugs rejects this for being too long, changing it back to Gremlins 2 (rendered in the font of the official logo). Daffy then quits his new job and Bugs decides to add in the subtitle, saying it looks "a little skimpy". This material was removed from the film because early audiences expected a live-action film and were bewildered by the lengthy animated sequence.
Throughout the film's closing credits, Daffy pops into frame sporadically and spouts off sarcastic comments. The last scene appears after the credits, and again features the Looney Tunes rings. This time, Porky comes out of the rings and tries to say his usual "Th-th-th-that's all, folks!" However, Daffy interrupts again and takes over. After Daffy says the slogan, the back of the Warner Bros. shield, with the words, "Title Animation Written & Directed by Chuck Jones (with Chuck Jones' signature)", smashes him. He peeks his head out to the left side and says, "Fade out," and the segment ends.
Its a good film.
The plot: The magical collectibles store that Gizmo calls home has just been destroyed, and the tiny monster finds his way into a newly erected skyscraper. Billy Peltzer (Zach Galligan) and his bride-to-be, Kate (Phoebe Cates), who have previously dealt with Gremlins run amok, discover that Gizmo and an impish legion of reptilian pals are inhabiting the downtown building. The couple tries to stop the creatures from escaping into New York City, but this new batch of beasts might be uncontrollable.
Like the first film, Gremlins 2: The New Batch is a live-action horror comedy film; however, Dante put effort into taking the sequel in new anarchistic directions. The film is meant to be more cartoon-like and less dark than the original, with slapstick violence, so the film received a PG-13 rating by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA). There are also a number of parodies of other films and stories, including Gremlins itself, the Rambo films, The Wizard of Oz, Marathon Man and The Phantom of the Opera.
Along with the main plot, there is animation by Chuck Jones in the film featuring the Looney Tunes characters Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck and Porky Pig. Jones had actually quit animation before returning to work on Gremlins 2: The New Batch.Dante explained the animation at the beginning of the film was meant to "set the anarchic tone."
The first scene appears at the very beginning of the movie, and features the classic Looney Tunes opening card, causing people to assume it is the short cartoon that usually plays before a movie begins; however, when Bugs appears through the rings on top of the Warner Bros. shield, Daffy interrupts the intro, and steals the shield from Bugs. Daffy attempts to recreate the opening with himself in Bugs' place, but the shield overshoots, causing the entire title card to fall apart. Daffy surrenders the stardom, claiming that since he will not star in the cartoon, they might as well just skip straight to the movie. Bugs is willing to do so, and spins Daffy off screen like a spinning top for the movie title to appear.
The DVD and Blu-ray include a longer version of the cartoon short. In it, Daffy is informed by Bugs that he has been promoted to executive and is subsequently put in charge writing the title of the movie. When Daffy mistakenly writes the title Gremlins 2 as "Gremlin Stew", Bugs corrects the error. Daffy then attempts to rename the film The Return of Super-Daffy Meets Gremlins 2 Part 6: The Movie, but Bugs rejects this for being too long, changing it back to Gremlins 2 (rendered in the font of the official logo). Daffy then quits his new job and Bugs decides to add in the subtitle, saying it looks "a little skimpy". This material was removed from the film because early audiences expected a live-action film and were bewildered by the lengthy animated sequence.
Throughout the film's closing credits, Daffy pops into frame sporadically and spouts off sarcastic comments. The last scene appears after the credits, and again features the Looney Tunes rings. This time, Porky comes out of the rings and tries to say his usual "Th-th-th-that's all, folks!" However, Daffy interrupts again and takes over. After Daffy says the slogan, the back of the Warner Bros. shield, with the words, "Title Animation Written & Directed by Chuck Jones (with Chuck Jones' signature)", smashes him. He peeks his head out to the left side and says, "Fade out," and the segment ends.
Its a good film.
Steve Fearon (84 KP) rated Bad Times at the El Royale (2018) in Movies
Oct 19, 2018
The Cast (1 more)
Especially Jeff Bridges
Overlong (1 more)
Marketing a little misleading
Not Bad (times at the El Royale)
This was a film suggested by my better half, on the basis of the trailer, excellent cast, and her love for Chris Hemsworth, which to be fair is justified, the guy's a looker.
The trailer had made it look like fun whoddunit, with a colourful cast of characters, a great group of actors, and a fairly lighthearted mystery, and this ticked all the right boxes for us, so along we went.
However, this movie gets pretty damn dark, fairly violent and pretty relentless, and at 140 minutes, this is a serious film.
There is a lot of love for Tarantino in "El Royale", with the style reminiscent of some of his work, though with a bit less feel for comedy, and bigger penchant for musical numbers.
It is enjoyable, and is broken up regularly by switching perspectives to show the viewer the backstory of the main characters, so it doesn't necessarily feel as long as its 140 minutes suggest.
However, it does begin to meander at times, and if it wasn't for the god-like charm of Jeff Bridges, the earnest performance of John Hamm or the captivating allure of Chris Hemsworth in particular, these scenes could have become unbearable.
Cynthia Erivo was spectacular as the soulful lounge singer, and she more than held her own against some of hollywood's finest, and I look forward to seeing her in more big movies in future.
The highlight for me (Chris Hemsworth dancing was hers) was without a doubt Jeff Bridges, the guy can just keep me entertained, no matter the script, no matter the setting, he is just a quality guy, and I loved his performance.
This is a solid 6/10 movie for me, entertaining, happy to watch it once, but I doubt I will watch it again.
The trailer had made it look like fun whoddunit, with a colourful cast of characters, a great group of actors, and a fairly lighthearted mystery, and this ticked all the right boxes for us, so along we went.
However, this movie gets pretty damn dark, fairly violent and pretty relentless, and at 140 minutes, this is a serious film.
There is a lot of love for Tarantino in "El Royale", with the style reminiscent of some of his work, though with a bit less feel for comedy, and bigger penchant for musical numbers.
It is enjoyable, and is broken up regularly by switching perspectives to show the viewer the backstory of the main characters, so it doesn't necessarily feel as long as its 140 minutes suggest.
However, it does begin to meander at times, and if it wasn't for the god-like charm of Jeff Bridges, the earnest performance of John Hamm or the captivating allure of Chris Hemsworth in particular, these scenes could have become unbearable.
Cynthia Erivo was spectacular as the soulful lounge singer, and she more than held her own against some of hollywood's finest, and I look forward to seeing her in more big movies in future.
The highlight for me (Chris Hemsworth dancing was hers) was without a doubt Jeff Bridges, the guy can just keep me entertained, no matter the script, no matter the setting, he is just a quality guy, and I loved his performance.
This is a solid 6/10 movie for me, entertaining, happy to watch it once, but I doubt I will watch it again.
Sarah Betts (103 KP) rated Shadow Souls (The Vampire Diaries: The Return, #2) in Books
Dec 30, 2019
This is my review on Amazon.com:
I have to be honest. This book was actually better than The Return: Nightfall (Vampire Diaries). Sadly, this does not prevent it from being a horrible book.
This book was all over the place and the plot was barely coherent.
Here's the deal: Damon was possessed at the behest of Hot Topic rejects, Misao and Shinichi. This led him to tricking Stefan into going into a place called the Dark Dimension. Elena gets over floating like a balloon to team up with Damon to get him back.
Caroline is still possessed and trying to have Matt arrested for assaulting her. I have to say that the parts with Caroline were the only things remotely interesting about the book. Unfortunately the Matt/Caroline?Mrs Flowers scenes were shoved aside in favor of feeble attempts at eroticism with Damon and Elena.
Stefan and Elena bored me. Every time Elena had an out-of-body experience, I grit my teeth at the insipid dialogue and promised my brain Milk Duds to soothe the loss of brain cells.
Bonnie and Meredith? Strictly on the sidelines and BORING. Meredith was one of my favorite characters and now she's been reduced to generic friend. Ugh.
Another thing that bothered me was the unhealthy obsession with the ideas of purity and virginity. Elena is a virgin. Uh, okay and this is a secret WHY?
Also, readers do not need it pounded into their heads how hot Elena is. Seriously, it seemed like every five pages I was subjected to how awesomely and mind-blowingly hot she is. COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY!
Oh, and THE END *deep breath*... This could have been a shocking and heart-wrenching development, but for some reason LJS decided to play it for comedy. This left me feeling overtly hostile to the book and not at all looking forward to the next installation.
The thing is, LJS did better. I expect better of her. Come on! This is the woman who wrote Secret Vampire (Night World)!
I have to be honest. This book was actually better than The Return: Nightfall (Vampire Diaries). Sadly, this does not prevent it from being a horrible book.
This book was all over the place and the plot was barely coherent.
Here's the deal: Damon was possessed at the behest of Hot Topic rejects, Misao and Shinichi. This led him to tricking Stefan into going into a place called the Dark Dimension. Elena gets over floating like a balloon to team up with Damon to get him back.
Caroline is still possessed and trying to have Matt arrested for assaulting her. I have to say that the parts with Caroline were the only things remotely interesting about the book. Unfortunately the Matt/Caroline?Mrs Flowers scenes were shoved aside in favor of feeble attempts at eroticism with Damon and Elena.
Stefan and Elena bored me. Every time Elena had an out-of-body experience, I grit my teeth at the insipid dialogue and promised my brain Milk Duds to soothe the loss of brain cells.
Bonnie and Meredith? Strictly on the sidelines and BORING. Meredith was one of my favorite characters and now she's been reduced to generic friend. Ugh.
Another thing that bothered me was the unhealthy obsession with the ideas of purity and virginity. Elena is a virgin. Uh, okay and this is a secret WHY?
Also, readers do not need it pounded into their heads how hot Elena is. Seriously, it seemed like every five pages I was subjected to how awesomely and mind-blowingly hot she is. COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY!
Oh, and THE END *deep breath*... This could have been a shocking and heart-wrenching development, but for some reason LJS decided to play it for comedy. This left me feeling overtly hostile to the book and not at all looking forward to the next installation.
The thing is, LJS did better. I expect better of her. Come on! This is the woman who wrote Secret Vampire (Night World)!
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Inglourious Basterds (2009) in Movies
Aug 9, 2019
Should we be allowed to laugh at brutality? Is there room for comedy in a film about the Second World War? These are just some of the questions Quentin Tarantino’s latest film “Inglorious Bastards” is sure to bring to mind.
“Inglorious Bastards” is composed of two intertwined stories broken into chapters combining fictitious and factual historic events. The two stories, the tragic tale of orphaned Jewish girl Shosanna (Mélanie Laurent) and that of an oddly funny group of American soldiers, called “the Bastards”, create introspections into the meaning of glory, destruction, and propaganda.
Familiar faces are scattered throughout the film from creator of “the Office” B.J. Norvak to “Austin Powers“ star Mike Myers. The standout performance of Lieutenant Aldo Raine, played by the always-evolving Brad Pitt, is both comical and clever and the role of Nazi Colonel Hans Landa, Christoph Waltz, is so evil that, within the scope of the film, he some how manages to overshadow Hitler.
While the film is visually graphic, it is the ideas of violence rather than explicit visuals that litter the film. These violent scenes, from scalping to strangulation, are more dramatic than visually accurate.
The film did drag in parts such, as the dark Cinderella-like bar scene, and there was definitely room for further character development for “the Bastards”, yet the sly structure of the film shatters these minor faults but keeping viewers completely invested in the plotline.
“Inglorious Bastards” mixes classic film elements with techniques hauntingly David Lynch in style. From elements of television westerns to the hauntingly familiar sound of David Bowie, Tarintino has created a new way of looking at the past, all while using a time generally perceived as too awful to mention as a background for laughter.
Twisted, tortured, glorious and not “Inglorious Bastards” delivers as a film bound to become classic Tarantino. Fans will be elated and those who oppose the film’s adult themes will not walk away without at least thinking about the meaning of this one-of-kind feature.
“Inglorious Bastards” is composed of two intertwined stories broken into chapters combining fictitious and factual historic events. The two stories, the tragic tale of orphaned Jewish girl Shosanna (Mélanie Laurent) and that of an oddly funny group of American soldiers, called “the Bastards”, create introspections into the meaning of glory, destruction, and propaganda.
Familiar faces are scattered throughout the film from creator of “the Office” B.J. Norvak to “Austin Powers“ star Mike Myers. The standout performance of Lieutenant Aldo Raine, played by the always-evolving Brad Pitt, is both comical and clever and the role of Nazi Colonel Hans Landa, Christoph Waltz, is so evil that, within the scope of the film, he some how manages to overshadow Hitler.
While the film is visually graphic, it is the ideas of violence rather than explicit visuals that litter the film. These violent scenes, from scalping to strangulation, are more dramatic than visually accurate.
The film did drag in parts such, as the dark Cinderella-like bar scene, and there was definitely room for further character development for “the Bastards”, yet the sly structure of the film shatters these minor faults but keeping viewers completely invested in the plotline.
“Inglorious Bastards” mixes classic film elements with techniques hauntingly David Lynch in style. From elements of television westerns to the hauntingly familiar sound of David Bowie, Tarintino has created a new way of looking at the past, all while using a time generally perceived as too awful to mention as a background for laughter.
Twisted, tortured, glorious and not “Inglorious Bastards” delivers as a film bound to become classic Tarantino. Fans will be elated and those who oppose the film’s adult themes will not walk away without at least thinking about the meaning of this one-of-kind feature.
Nick Beaty (70 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies
Nov 25, 2019 (Updated Nov 26, 2019)
And the Oscar goes to...
First things first, you can not start a review of Joker without mentioning the lead performance from Joaquin Phoenix as Arthur Fleck. I would say he is probably an evens favourite to take home the best actor Oscar at next years ceremony.
As for the movie itself, Tod Phillips take on Joker almost feels like a tribute to early Martin Scorsese movies, with the most obvious being Taxi Driver & The King of Comedy, both starring Robert De Niro who also appears here. This is certainly not a bad thing as they are brilliant pieces of cinema, that will stand the test of time. As will Joker in my opinion for it's excellent cinematography & gritty authenticity, I think people will still be talking about this movie for many years to come.
There are a few very slight flaws that I could point out. The first being that because it is so Scorsese like, for me it loses the feeling of being set in Gotham city and just feels very much like we are in New York city. Secondly the Wayne's and Alfred are very much portrayed as the bad guys in this movie, in my opinion I felt myself siding with Arthur/Joker a little too much maybe, which makes you lose all sympathy for the reason Batman became the Dark Knight in the first place. Last but not least the very controversial choice of adding a Gary Glitter song at a pivotal point of the movie, is a strange choice to say the least.
Overall Joker is an exceptional character study of a very disturbed individual with many mental health issues, add to that a superb performance by Joaquin Phoenix and I think you have a movie that will only get better with time and become a genre classic. With the huge box office success, I just hope DC keep this grim, very true to life approach for their future Batman projects.
As for the movie itself, Tod Phillips take on Joker almost feels like a tribute to early Martin Scorsese movies, with the most obvious being Taxi Driver & The King of Comedy, both starring Robert De Niro who also appears here. This is certainly not a bad thing as they are brilliant pieces of cinema, that will stand the test of time. As will Joker in my opinion for it's excellent cinematography & gritty authenticity, I think people will still be talking about this movie for many years to come.
There are a few very slight flaws that I could point out. The first being that because it is so Scorsese like, for me it loses the feeling of being set in Gotham city and just feels very much like we are in New York city. Secondly the Wayne's and Alfred are very much portrayed as the bad guys in this movie, in my opinion I felt myself siding with Arthur/Joker a little too much maybe, which makes you lose all sympathy for the reason Batman became the Dark Knight in the first place. Last but not least the very controversial choice of adding a Gary Glitter song at a pivotal point of the movie, is a strange choice to say the least.
Overall Joker is an exceptional character study of a very disturbed individual with many mental health issues, add to that a superb performance by Joaquin Phoenix and I think you have a movie that will only get better with time and become a genre classic. With the huge box office success, I just hope DC keep this grim, very true to life approach for their future Batman projects.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated 47 Meters Down (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
The British horror film “47 Meters Down” tells the tale of two young women on vacation in Mexico who get far more of a thrill then they bargained for during a shark cage swim session. Sisters, Lisa (Mandy Moore) and Kate (Claire Holt) meet two charming young men as they try to lick Lisa’s post-break up wounds during a night out somewhere Mexico. When the guys offer to take them out on a shark swim adventure, Kate pushes Lisa to go ahead and do it in an effort to prove she is not as boring as her ex claims.
The film spends about twenty minutes building up this background story, but fails to create any moments for the audience to connect with the characters.
The whole premise is built around what clearly is a poor decision as a rusty old boat pulls into the marina to board the sisters. At this point forward, the entire rest of the film is shot primarily from Lisa’s point of view deep inside the ocean.
As the cage the girls are in first lowers down, there are a few shots of sharks that are very beautiful and thrilling. But after the predictable breakage of the winch holding the cage to the boat ensues, the girls sink to the bottom and attempt to fight for survival.
At this point forward it becomes a bit frustrating to watch because the entire film is very dark and you only get a few glimpses of a shark here or there. If there had been a bit more character build up or story line including rescue efforts, this may have been a theater worthy view. Audiences definitely won’t get as much excitement as they did from other shark films like that of “Jaws” or “Sharknado.” Mostly because this film attempts to take on a more realistic feel. Unfortunately it falls a bit flat and the audience finds comedy in what was supposed to be serious.
I give “47 meters Down” 1 out of 5 stars.
The film spends about twenty minutes building up this background story, but fails to create any moments for the audience to connect with the characters.
The whole premise is built around what clearly is a poor decision as a rusty old boat pulls into the marina to board the sisters. At this point forward, the entire rest of the film is shot primarily from Lisa’s point of view deep inside the ocean.
As the cage the girls are in first lowers down, there are a few shots of sharks that are very beautiful and thrilling. But after the predictable breakage of the winch holding the cage to the boat ensues, the girls sink to the bottom and attempt to fight for survival.
At this point forward it becomes a bit frustrating to watch because the entire film is very dark and you only get a few glimpses of a shark here or there. If there had been a bit more character build up or story line including rescue efforts, this may have been a theater worthy view. Audiences definitely won’t get as much excitement as they did from other shark films like that of “Jaws” or “Sharknado.” Mostly because this film attempts to take on a more realistic feel. Unfortunately it falls a bit flat and the audience finds comedy in what was supposed to be serious.
I give “47 meters Down” 1 out of 5 stars.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Batman (1989) in Movies
Oct 10, 2019
Batman- i love this movie, i have seen it about 7-9 times. I love michael Keaton as bruce wayne/batman. I love jack nicholson as the joker. This movie has action, comedy, suspense, laughing gas, a prince song, adventure and so much more. Also you have darkness, romance, lots of screaming from Vicki Vale played by Kim Basinger. Did i mention that Tim Burton directed this film.
The Plot: Having witnessed his parents' brutal murder as a child, millionaire philanthropist Bruce Wayne (Michael Keaton) fights crime in Gotham City disguised as Batman, a costumed hero who strikes fear into the hearts of villains. But when a deformed madman who calls himself "The Joker" (Jack Nicholson) seizes control of Gotham's criminal underworld, Batman must face his most ruthless nemesis ever while protecting both his identity and his love interest, reporter Vicki Vale (Kim Basinger).
Keaton's casting caused a controversy since, by 1988, he had become typecast as a comedic actor and many observers doubted he could portray a serious role. Nicholson accepted the role of the Joker under strict conditions that dictated top billing, a high salary, a portion of the box office profits and his own shooting schedule.
The tone and themes of the film were influenced in part by Alan Moore and Brian Bolland's The Killing Joke and Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns. The film primarily adapts the "Red Hood" origin story for the Joker, in which Batman inadvertently creates the Joker by causing him to fall into Axis Chemical acid, resulting in his transformation into a psychopath, but it adds a unique twist in presenting him specifically as a gangster named Jack Napier.
Considered the role of Batman, including Mel Gibson, Kevin Costner, Charlie Sheen, Tom Selleck, Bill Murray, Harrison Ford and Dennis Quaid.
Brad Dourif, Tim Curry, David Bowie, John Lithgow and James Woods were considered for the Joker.
This film is great and should be watched.
The Plot: Having witnessed his parents' brutal murder as a child, millionaire philanthropist Bruce Wayne (Michael Keaton) fights crime in Gotham City disguised as Batman, a costumed hero who strikes fear into the hearts of villains. But when a deformed madman who calls himself "The Joker" (Jack Nicholson) seizes control of Gotham's criminal underworld, Batman must face his most ruthless nemesis ever while protecting both his identity and his love interest, reporter Vicki Vale (Kim Basinger).
Keaton's casting caused a controversy since, by 1988, he had become typecast as a comedic actor and many observers doubted he could portray a serious role. Nicholson accepted the role of the Joker under strict conditions that dictated top billing, a high salary, a portion of the box office profits and his own shooting schedule.
The tone and themes of the film were influenced in part by Alan Moore and Brian Bolland's The Killing Joke and Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns. The film primarily adapts the "Red Hood" origin story for the Joker, in which Batman inadvertently creates the Joker by causing him to fall into Axis Chemical acid, resulting in his transformation into a psychopath, but it adds a unique twist in presenting him specifically as a gangster named Jack Napier.
Considered the role of Batman, including Mel Gibson, Kevin Costner, Charlie Sheen, Tom Selleck, Bill Murray, Harrison Ford and Dennis Quaid.
Brad Dourif, Tim Curry, David Bowie, John Lithgow and James Woods were considered for the Joker.
This film is great and should be watched.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Hercules (1997) in Movies
Sep 5, 2020
Great Combo of Action and Hilarity
Disney’s animated retelling of the classic story of the Greek demi-god. The fun spin that was put on it just happens to make it my favorite. You can’t help but have a good time while watching Disney’s Hercules.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Hercules is beautiful from a visual standpoint. I love the contrast of bright colors against dark backgrounds. My favorite scene is when Hercules is battling the hydra in the rain while flying on his pegasus. It’s so grand in scale as he soars in and out of the dozens of heads. Oh, and I haven’t even touched on the beauty of Hades. It’s gorgeous even in its weird creepiness. So much attention to detail that it’s hard not to appreciate.
Conflict: 9
Entertainment Value: 9
From the opening scene where the awesome divas are singing the setup, I knew I was going to be watching something original and new. With a combo of action-packed sequences and a number of hilarious moments from a great cast, I was invested in the movie from beginning to end. It’s a damn good ride.
Memorability: 8
Pace: 10
Hercules moves extremely efficiently through its story which I find some stories hard to do when singing is involved. There is very little lingering if any as scenes get their point across and you’re off to the next thing. I respect films that can do that as I know a number of movies that overstay their welcome.
Plot: 8
Resolution: 8
Overall: 92
Not only does it have action and comedy, but there is also a love story in true Disney fashion within Hercules. And it all works. I do wish that they would have jumped into Hercules’ hero aspect a smidge earlier, but overall I think the movie is fantastic. Great job yet again by Disney.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Hercules is beautiful from a visual standpoint. I love the contrast of bright colors against dark backgrounds. My favorite scene is when Hercules is battling the hydra in the rain while flying on his pegasus. It’s so grand in scale as he soars in and out of the dozens of heads. Oh, and I haven’t even touched on the beauty of Hades. It’s gorgeous even in its weird creepiness. So much attention to detail that it’s hard not to appreciate.
Conflict: 9
Entertainment Value: 9
From the opening scene where the awesome divas are singing the setup, I knew I was going to be watching something original and new. With a combo of action-packed sequences and a number of hilarious moments from a great cast, I was invested in the movie from beginning to end. It’s a damn good ride.
Memorability: 8
Pace: 10
Hercules moves extremely efficiently through its story which I find some stories hard to do when singing is involved. There is very little lingering if any as scenes get their point across and you’re off to the next thing. I respect films that can do that as I know a number of movies that overstay their welcome.
Plot: 8
Resolution: 8
Overall: 92
Not only does it have action and comedy, but there is also a love story in true Disney fashion within Hercules. And it all works. I do wish that they would have jumped into Hercules’ hero aspect a smidge earlier, but overall I think the movie is fantastic. Great job yet again by Disney.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Willy's Wonderland (2021) in Movies
Mar 20, 2021
Could’ve been so much better
If you’ve seen the trailer for Willy’s Wonderland, you were no doubt wondering what on earth your eyes had just been witness to, and I’m afraid the full film doesn’t get any less demented. Willy’s Wonderland is a 2021 horror comedy from director Kevin Lewis that is every bit a modern day B-movie, complete with cheesy script and questionable acting. On paper it sounds like it should be entertainingly bad but silly, but unfortunately in reality it’s just bad.
Willy’s Wonderland follows a drifter (Nicolas Cage) who experiences car troubles on his way cross country, and is tricked into becoming a janitor overnight for the condemned Willy’s Wonderland to pay off his car repairs. Willy’s is a kids restaurant slash indoor play area themed around Willy the weasel and his animatronic friends, including a crocodile, chameleon, gorilla and ostrich. However Willy’s isn’t just your ordinary run down restaurant as it has a dark and horrific history involving murderers, criminals and satanic rituals. Now the friendly animatronic creatures have taken on a murderous life of their own and in a bid to appease them, the town elders (including the sheriff played by Beth Grant) have turned to tricking people travelling through into Willy’s to act as human sacrifices. Unfortunately the townsfolk don’t get quite what they expected with Cage’s unnamed drifter, who alongside local girl Liv (Emily Tosta), gives the demonic creatures a lot more than they bargained for.
I have been dying to watch this film since seeing the trailer. It looked like it’d be absolutely crazy silliness from start to finish and one of those films that are so bad they’re good. But as much as I wanted to like this, I feel like it fell short from what was promised. The first major problem is that it’s meant to be a horror comedy, but there was little humour on offer and the only time I really found myself laughing was at the sheer bizarreness of this entire film. Horror-wise there is a decent amount of blood and gore, but some of it looks badly done and unrealistic and there’s little to be scared of here either. Towards the start of the film there are a few creepy scenes with the animatronic animals, but as the story progresses the scares are lost and this is where the film suffers. It is possible to make a film that’s scary, funny and good (Cabin in the Woods is a shining example), but sadly Willy’s Wonderland doesn’t pull it off.
The fight scenes are lost due to the crazy artistic and surreal style of camera work, meaning you barely have a clue what’s going on and the backing music to accompany these fight scenes doesn’t always work either. And then there’s Nicolas Cage. For some unknown reason, they’ve decided to make his character completely mute with absolutely no dialogue whatsoever. This works in the first few scenes, but as the story unfolds you find yourself crying out for him to say something, anything. If any film was suitable for Cage’s signature crazy eyed overacting, it’s this one and not utilising this is criminal. What were they thinking?! The script isn’t great and the majority of characters are entirely wasted and one dimensional, even for a horror film, with only Emily Tosta coming out of this relatively unscathed, so a bit of Cage’s acting could’ve really helped make this a lot more entertaining.
Willy’s Wonderland had a lot of promise, with an interesting and crazy B-movie horror storyline. However it’s the execution which has let it down, as it’s severely lacking in horror or comedy and doesn’t make use of the cast or promising story. It’s a shame as it’s semi enjoyable as is, but could’ve been so much better!
Willy’s Wonderland follows a drifter (Nicolas Cage) who experiences car troubles on his way cross country, and is tricked into becoming a janitor overnight for the condemned Willy’s Wonderland to pay off his car repairs. Willy’s is a kids restaurant slash indoor play area themed around Willy the weasel and his animatronic friends, including a crocodile, chameleon, gorilla and ostrich. However Willy’s isn’t just your ordinary run down restaurant as it has a dark and horrific history involving murderers, criminals and satanic rituals. Now the friendly animatronic creatures have taken on a murderous life of their own and in a bid to appease them, the town elders (including the sheriff played by Beth Grant) have turned to tricking people travelling through into Willy’s to act as human sacrifices. Unfortunately the townsfolk don’t get quite what they expected with Cage’s unnamed drifter, who alongside local girl Liv (Emily Tosta), gives the demonic creatures a lot more than they bargained for.
I have been dying to watch this film since seeing the trailer. It looked like it’d be absolutely crazy silliness from start to finish and one of those films that are so bad they’re good. But as much as I wanted to like this, I feel like it fell short from what was promised. The first major problem is that it’s meant to be a horror comedy, but there was little humour on offer and the only time I really found myself laughing was at the sheer bizarreness of this entire film. Horror-wise there is a decent amount of blood and gore, but some of it looks badly done and unrealistic and there’s little to be scared of here either. Towards the start of the film there are a few creepy scenes with the animatronic animals, but as the story progresses the scares are lost and this is where the film suffers. It is possible to make a film that’s scary, funny and good (Cabin in the Woods is a shining example), but sadly Willy’s Wonderland doesn’t pull it off.
The fight scenes are lost due to the crazy artistic and surreal style of camera work, meaning you barely have a clue what’s going on and the backing music to accompany these fight scenes doesn’t always work either. And then there’s Nicolas Cage. For some unknown reason, they’ve decided to make his character completely mute with absolutely no dialogue whatsoever. This works in the first few scenes, but as the story unfolds you find yourself crying out for him to say something, anything. If any film was suitable for Cage’s signature crazy eyed overacting, it’s this one and not utilising this is criminal. What were they thinking?! The script isn’t great and the majority of characters are entirely wasted and one dimensional, even for a horror film, with only Emily Tosta coming out of this relatively unscathed, so a bit of Cage’s acting could’ve really helped make this a lot more entertaining.
Willy’s Wonderland had a lot of promise, with an interesting and crazy B-movie horror storyline. However it’s the execution which has let it down, as it’s severely lacking in horror or comedy and doesn’t make use of the cast or promising story. It’s a shame as it’s semi enjoyable as is, but could’ve been so much better!