Search
Dianne Robbins (1738 KP) rated Adrift (2018) in Movies
May 25, 2019
Confusing (1 more)
Grim
Contains spoilers, click to show
You are immediately thrown into the action of Tami coming to after being tossed about below deck from the hurricane. Had I not been reading a play-by-play on IMDB, I might have been more confused than I was but I was intrigued by what I read so I wanted to see how it all played out onscreen. I would have preferred to see the hurricane shown because I'm a fan of disaster films, but instead, we are shown the aftermath and flashbacks of the couple's first meeting and the romance that followed. I would also have liked to see more of the actual rescue and her telling her story to the Japanese sailors and/or people in Hawaii when she was taken to the island instead of brief and vague glimpses of it.
The doldrums of trying to survive aboard a broken vessel and all the boredom of hours upon hours of being adrift is shown.
The acting is decent enough.
There is very little excitement to hold one's interest. I was disappointed that in the movie but it wasn't my story to tell. This is based on the true story of Tami Oldham Ashcraft, who is listed as one of the writers and is shown briefly at the end of the movie.
It's not great. Reading about the actual story online is more satisfying. I am curious about Ashcraft's book but it's probably as boring as the movie.
The doldrums of trying to survive aboard a broken vessel and all the boredom of hours upon hours of being adrift is shown.
The acting is decent enough.
There is very little excitement to hold one's interest. I was disappointed that in the movie but it wasn't my story to tell. This is based on the true story of Tami Oldham Ashcraft, who is listed as one of the writers and is shown briefly at the end of the movie.
It's not great. Reading about the actual story online is more satisfying. I am curious about Ashcraft's book but it's probably as boring as the movie.
Kim Pook (101 KP) rated Love, Guaranteed (2020) in Movies
Jan 28, 2021 (Updated Jan 28, 2021)
Loved it
Susan is a young single lawyer with a very busy life, she lives on leftover takeaways and her car is falling apart. On her way to work she bumps into an obnoxious guy who turns out to be a potential client in a very bizarre case. This guy wants to sue an online dating site called 'love, guaranteed' because he hasn't been able to find love. Susan takes the case and agrees to be signed up to the site herself for research, as well as interviewing Nicks past dates.
After a few bad dates, Susan decides to go out for a meal by herself only to find Nick on yet another disaster of a date, one thing leads to another and Nick and Susan end up eating together and have a lovely night, both agreeing it was their best meal out yet and of course anyone who has ever watched a romance move, knows where this goes.
To be honest I half expected this movie to be boring, but I enjoyed it from the start. It did take me a while to realise the main character was Rachel Leigh Cook as she looks so different, it's great to see her acting again though. I also though Heather gray am was very good in her role, she made her character seem real and who'd have thought a wayans brother would fit in to this kind of movie, it's like he was made for the part. I loved this feel good movie, but it did make me sick to death of Tiffany.
After a few bad dates, Susan decides to go out for a meal by herself only to find Nick on yet another disaster of a date, one thing leads to another and Nick and Susan end up eating together and have a lovely night, both agreeing it was their best meal out yet and of course anyone who has ever watched a romance move, knows where this goes.
To be honest I half expected this movie to be boring, but I enjoyed it from the start. It did take me a while to realise the main character was Rachel Leigh Cook as she looks so different, it's great to see her acting again though. I also though Heather gray am was very good in her role, she made her character seem real and who'd have thought a wayans brother would fit in to this kind of movie, it's like he was made for the part. I loved this feel good movie, but it did make me sick to death of Tiffany.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated The Year of Living Dangerously (1983) in Movies
Mar 9, 2020
A Story That Falls Short
The Year of Living Dangerously follows the story of reporter Guy Hamilton (Mel Gibson) during a tumultuous time of civil unrest in Indonesia.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 1
I won’t lie, I restarted this movie probably three times before I finally committed. It’s hard for a movie to bounce back for me when it gets off to such a sluggish start. The setup borders on painful in spots and it sets the tone for what is to come.
Characters: 6
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
One of the shining moments of the movie as it captures 60’s Indonesia beautifully. I was easily transported into the time period and the culture feeling right at home. I also appreciate how the romance between Hamilton and Jill Bryant (Sigourney Weaver) was captured by director Peter Weir. It felt both endearing and sincere.
Conflict: 6
Entertainment Value: 4
The movie was painfully dry. Outside of the romance, it was hard for anything else to really capture my attention. There were times where I thought things would pick up only to be let down again. Unfortunate as I was hoping for more.
Memorability: 4
It’s a struggle trying to remember anything that stood out in the film. While there were one or two things that got my attention, things were pretty drab for the most part. Sitting through this again would almost be like a brand new boring experience.
Pace: 3
Slower than a turtle, there were times where I begged for this movie to end. I kept holding out hope that things would take a turn. Alas…You can’t take too long to get to the point and be disinteresting. That’s a recipe for disaster.
Plot: 7
The story itself wasn’t bad at all, I just wish they could have found a way to make things more interesting. The lack of layers really made things fall short for me. A lot of unrealized potential here just left on the table.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 61
For more reasons than one, I just couldn’t get into The Year of Living Dangerously. “Hate” would be a strong word as there were glimpses of a solid movie…but I can’t say I liked it. Nor can I recommend it. There are a number of better 80’s classics out there.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 1
I won’t lie, I restarted this movie probably three times before I finally committed. It’s hard for a movie to bounce back for me when it gets off to such a sluggish start. The setup borders on painful in spots and it sets the tone for what is to come.
Characters: 6
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
One of the shining moments of the movie as it captures 60’s Indonesia beautifully. I was easily transported into the time period and the culture feeling right at home. I also appreciate how the romance between Hamilton and Jill Bryant (Sigourney Weaver) was captured by director Peter Weir. It felt both endearing and sincere.
Conflict: 6
Entertainment Value: 4
The movie was painfully dry. Outside of the romance, it was hard for anything else to really capture my attention. There were times where I thought things would pick up only to be let down again. Unfortunate as I was hoping for more.
Memorability: 4
It’s a struggle trying to remember anything that stood out in the film. While there were one or two things that got my attention, things were pretty drab for the most part. Sitting through this again would almost be like a brand new boring experience.
Pace: 3
Slower than a turtle, there were times where I begged for this movie to end. I kept holding out hope that things would take a turn. Alas…You can’t take too long to get to the point and be disinteresting. That’s a recipe for disaster.
Plot: 7
The story itself wasn’t bad at all, I just wish they could have found a way to make things more interesting. The lack of layers really made things fall short for me. A lot of unrealized potential here just left on the table.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 61
For more reasons than one, I just couldn’t get into The Year of Living Dangerously. “Hate” would be a strong word as there were glimpses of a solid movie…but I can’t say I liked it. Nor can I recommend it. There are a number of better 80’s classics out there.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Deepwater Horizon (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“Full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing” could be a summary of this modern-age disaster movie. In 2010 the “Deepwater Horizon” drilling rig off the coast of Louisiana failed in spectacular fashion, bursting into flames and spewing millions of barrels of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico in what was the worst oil-spill in American history. Mark Wahlberg plays the well-respected electrical ‘Mr fixit’ Mike Williams on the rig, reporting to the Operations Manager Jimmy Harrell (Kurt Russell).
The exploratory project is way-behind and BP are not happy. Big-wigs from the company add support to Donald Vidrine, the BP site leader, in applying mounting pressure on Harrell to press on regardless without all the necessary and time-consuming tests by Schlumberger being completed. Rogue numbers in further tests are waved away as ‘glitches’. A familiar story of corporate greed and pressure overriding the expert’s better judgment.
When disaster strikes it strikes quickly, with some spectacular and exciting special effects that leave the audience especially hot under the collar. Female support is provided by the comely Andrea Fleytas (Gina Rodriguez), given the almost impossible job of keeping the floating bomb on station as chaos reigns about her. As an audience we are back on familiar ground here from classic Irwin Allen disaster movies such as “The Towering Inferno” and “The Poseidon Adventure”. Who will make it, and who won’t?
A more telling question here is “Do we care?” and unfortunately for the film, the answer is “Not really”. This feels a callous thing to say when this was a real and recent event and eleven people and – as touchingly illustrated at the end of the film in tribute – many of them family men with young kids, never went home again. But film-wise, we only really get bought into the fate of Williams, whose back-story, with cute wife (Kate Hudson) and cute daughter (Stella Allen) we get to meet and sympathize with.
We get a minimalist view of Fleytas’s backstory, but only enough to provide a recurring “Mustang” reference. And that’s it. All the other characters are just two-dimensional “rig crew”: cannon-fodder for the special effects team. The screenplay by Matthew Sand and Matthew Carnahan really doesn’t deliver enough heft to get us bought in.
While the special effects are good, the sound design isn’t, with much of the dialogue being incomprehensible.
All the acting is fine, with the ever-watchable John Malkovich nicely portraying the corporate head you love to hate. Wahlberg as well delivers enough range to make you forget in this “action mode” that he was also in “Ted”. And Rodriguez as a junior lead holds her own against the big guns in what is a creditable performance in a big film role for her.
While “Lone Survivor”/”Battleship” director Peter Berg neatly provides an insight into life on and around rigs, and (via subtitles) descriptions of the drilling process which I found interesting, this comes down to the sum of a tense build up, an hour of frenetic disaster, and then a whimper of an ending. Where were some of the dramatic scenes of conflict in the congressional hearing that the film’s opening implies might come? Where are the scenes of ecological disaster and local financial ruin to add emotional angles to the story? None of this is really exploited and the whole concoction comes across a bit “meh” as a result. Not a bad film by any means. But not one I will remember in a month or two’s time.
The exploratory project is way-behind and BP are not happy. Big-wigs from the company add support to Donald Vidrine, the BP site leader, in applying mounting pressure on Harrell to press on regardless without all the necessary and time-consuming tests by Schlumberger being completed. Rogue numbers in further tests are waved away as ‘glitches’. A familiar story of corporate greed and pressure overriding the expert’s better judgment.
When disaster strikes it strikes quickly, with some spectacular and exciting special effects that leave the audience especially hot under the collar. Female support is provided by the comely Andrea Fleytas (Gina Rodriguez), given the almost impossible job of keeping the floating bomb on station as chaos reigns about her. As an audience we are back on familiar ground here from classic Irwin Allen disaster movies such as “The Towering Inferno” and “The Poseidon Adventure”. Who will make it, and who won’t?
A more telling question here is “Do we care?” and unfortunately for the film, the answer is “Not really”. This feels a callous thing to say when this was a real and recent event and eleven people and – as touchingly illustrated at the end of the film in tribute – many of them family men with young kids, never went home again. But film-wise, we only really get bought into the fate of Williams, whose back-story, with cute wife (Kate Hudson) and cute daughter (Stella Allen) we get to meet and sympathize with.
We get a minimalist view of Fleytas’s backstory, but only enough to provide a recurring “Mustang” reference. And that’s it. All the other characters are just two-dimensional “rig crew”: cannon-fodder for the special effects team. The screenplay by Matthew Sand and Matthew Carnahan really doesn’t deliver enough heft to get us bought in.
While the special effects are good, the sound design isn’t, with much of the dialogue being incomprehensible.
All the acting is fine, with the ever-watchable John Malkovich nicely portraying the corporate head you love to hate. Wahlberg as well delivers enough range to make you forget in this “action mode” that he was also in “Ted”. And Rodriguez as a junior lead holds her own against the big guns in what is a creditable performance in a big film role for her.
While “Lone Survivor”/”Battleship” director Peter Berg neatly provides an insight into life on and around rigs, and (via subtitles) descriptions of the drilling process which I found interesting, this comes down to the sum of a tense build up, an hour of frenetic disaster, and then a whimper of an ending. Where were some of the dramatic scenes of conflict in the congressional hearing that the film’s opening implies might come? Where are the scenes of ecological disaster and local financial ruin to add emotional angles to the story? None of this is really exploited and the whole concoction comes across a bit “meh” as a result. Not a bad film by any means. But not one I will remember in a month or two’s time.
Domonique (0 KP) rated The Maze Runner in Books
May 12, 2018
I absolutely loved this book! I first heard about it via the movie of course and then once I was able to get a copy from the library, I started it immediately. And I was hooked! I love to read books told from the perspective of teenagers because it always amaze s me how perceptive and curious they can be. Even though I knew Thomas was supposed to be the hero and save everyone, there were still a few things I didn't see coming: the truth about the maze for one thing, where the kids came from and how they ended up in the maze to begin with and just the lengths people were willing to go to save humanity. It really makes me think about what would happen if the world as we know it suddenly was hit by a natural disaster that killed millions and created disease. How would we survive? It certainly makes you think and find out what happens next!
Awix (3310 KP) rated Apollo 11 (2019) in Movies
Jul 5, 2019 (Updated Jul 5, 2019)
Following the slick disaster movie (1995's Apollo 13) and the oddball horror flick (2011's Apollo 18), cinema's most unpredictable franchise returns with, of all things, a prequel documentary made up almost entirely of contemporary footage of the first manned Moon landing (or possibly a bunch of Stanley Kubrick's out-takes from faking the whole thing, depending on what you personally believe).
No narration, no talking heads, almost no music or graphics: this tells the story in the most stripped-back way imaginable and as a result makes it seem remarkably fresh and engaging. One's first reaction is to wonder where they found all this incredible footage, depicting every aspect of the mission in extraordinary, pristine detail. The director wisely makes the decision to basically get out of the way and let the pictures tell the story of the human race's greatest achievement. Essential viewing for anyone interested in history, or the future.
No narration, no talking heads, almost no music or graphics: this tells the story in the most stripped-back way imaginable and as a result makes it seem remarkably fresh and engaging. One's first reaction is to wonder where they found all this incredible footage, depicting every aspect of the mission in extraordinary, pristine detail. The director wisely makes the decision to basically get out of the way and let the pictures tell the story of the human race's greatest achievement. Essential viewing for anyone interested in history, or the future.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Mission: Impossible - Fallout (2018) in Movies
Apr 27, 2020
The Fallout: The Franchise That Never Stops
Mission: impossible - fallout, is the six instellment of the mission: impossible franchise. So my rank of the films goes 3, 6, 5, 1, 4 and 2. This one is really good, the greater good is a highly steak. Plus you have Henry Cavill as the villian. So thats a plus and that mustache. Hopefully that doesnt get GCI away in anethor movie. Cough "Justice League".
The plot: Ethan Hunt and the IMF team join forces with CIA assassin August Walker to prevent a disaster of epic proportions. Arms dealer John Lark and a group of terrorists known as the Apostles plan to use three plutonium cores for a simultaneous nuclear attack on the Vatican, Jerusalem and Mecca, Saudi Arabia. When the weapons go missing, Ethan and his crew find themselves in a desperate race against time to prevent them from falling into the wrong hands.
Its a great, excellent and phenomenal franchise. Alot of action, stunts, running, suspense and thrills.
The plot: Ethan Hunt and the IMF team join forces with CIA assassin August Walker to prevent a disaster of epic proportions. Arms dealer John Lark and a group of terrorists known as the Apostles plan to use three plutonium cores for a simultaneous nuclear attack on the Vatican, Jerusalem and Mecca, Saudi Arabia. When the weapons go missing, Ethan and his crew find themselves in a desperate race against time to prevent them from falling into the wrong hands.
Its a great, excellent and phenomenal franchise. Alot of action, stunts, running, suspense and thrills.
Coppola's Monster Film: The Making of Apocalypse Now
Book
In 1975, after his two Godfather epics, Francis Ford Coppola went to the Philippines to film...
Karina Longworth recommended Christopher Strong (1933) in Movies (curated)
Darren (1599 KP) rated Aftershock (2013) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: Aftershock starts as Gringo (Roth), Ariel (Levy) and Pollo (Martinez) travelling around Chile, they party over all night where they meet three girls Monica (Osvart), Irina (Yarovenko) and Kylie (Izzo). Going for one last party the six new friends find themselves in the middle of an earthquake, one seriously injured and an impending tsunami heading towards them.
The friends must race against time in a country none of them call home to make it out alive but the natural disaster isn’t the only threat when the prison is damaged leading to the prisoners being released upon the streets.
Aftershock gives us something very different because we get a disaster movie which comes off realistic and sudden which is a big plus but it doesn’t stop there by giving us a survival horror when the group have to survive from prisoners. It would be fair to say there is a negative with the building up to the disaster but this does help give us small character development. When we deal with the aftershock of the earthquake we have to deal with non-stop action throughout. This was a real surprise because I thought there would have been more hype about the film.
Actor Review
Eli Roth: Gringo is the single father on the trip, he is friends with Ariel which shows that he isn’t the closet with Pollo. He is using this holiday as a chance to get over the recently divorce but when the quake hits he finds himself having to pull Pollo out of his daze. Eli does well but it becomes clear he really should be behind the camera.
Andrea Osvart: Monica is the stricter older sister to Kylie who tries her best to keep her sister safe on their adventure but she has a secret from the rest which is very important for the aftershock side of the story. Andrea is good in this leading role being the sensible one during the situation.monica
Nicolas Martinez: Pollo is the Spanish talking member of the group, he has gotten by because the money his family has. He finds himself having to step up after the quake to do the things normal men wouldn’t. his final moments are slightly stupid but otherwise a good character. Nicolas is good in this role as the man who needs to step up.
Natasha Yarovenko: Irina is one of the girls who is very similar to Gringo being a single parent and also a success. She starts off thinking she is more but soon becomes the strongest one during the situation. Natasha is good in this role and the sympathy between her and Gringo’s character comes through strong.
Lorenza Izzo: Kylie is the younger party animal of the two sisters, she just wants to have fun on her trip but with her old sister trying to protect her she finds herself being held back until the quake hits and she wants her sister to help her. Lorenza is good in this bratty like character which put her on the map for a future horror scream queen.
Support Cast: Aftershock has the basic supporting cast that all help with the survival side of the story.
Director Review: Nicolas Lopez – Nicolas gives us a film that keeps pulling us in once the earthquake hits.
Action: Aftershock use the action for the destruction side of the story which helps us with mother nature side of the story.
Horror: Aftershock comes from the human side of the story as we see just how twisted they can become in a situation our characters find themselves in.
Thriller: Aftershock keeps us on edge from start to finish.
Settings: Aftershock uses Chile for the settings which works for a different location and shows our characters lost during a disaster.
Special Effects: Aftershock has good effects to create what happens to the characters in the disaster.
Suggestion: Aftershock is one to watch especially is you like disaster movies. (Watch)
Best Part: Earthquake.
Worst Part: Slightly too much before the quake.
Believability: No
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Budget: $2 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 29 Minutes
Tagline: The only thing more terrifying than Mother Nature is human nature.
Overall: Surprisingly intense film that blends two great genres.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/08/19/movie-reviews-101-midnight-horror-aftershock-2012/
The friends must race against time in a country none of them call home to make it out alive but the natural disaster isn’t the only threat when the prison is damaged leading to the prisoners being released upon the streets.
Aftershock gives us something very different because we get a disaster movie which comes off realistic and sudden which is a big plus but it doesn’t stop there by giving us a survival horror when the group have to survive from prisoners. It would be fair to say there is a negative with the building up to the disaster but this does help give us small character development. When we deal with the aftershock of the earthquake we have to deal with non-stop action throughout. This was a real surprise because I thought there would have been more hype about the film.
Actor Review
Eli Roth: Gringo is the single father on the trip, he is friends with Ariel which shows that he isn’t the closet with Pollo. He is using this holiday as a chance to get over the recently divorce but when the quake hits he finds himself having to pull Pollo out of his daze. Eli does well but it becomes clear he really should be behind the camera.
Andrea Osvart: Monica is the stricter older sister to Kylie who tries her best to keep her sister safe on their adventure but she has a secret from the rest which is very important for the aftershock side of the story. Andrea is good in this leading role being the sensible one during the situation.monica
Nicolas Martinez: Pollo is the Spanish talking member of the group, he has gotten by because the money his family has. He finds himself having to step up after the quake to do the things normal men wouldn’t. his final moments are slightly stupid but otherwise a good character. Nicolas is good in this role as the man who needs to step up.
Natasha Yarovenko: Irina is one of the girls who is very similar to Gringo being a single parent and also a success. She starts off thinking she is more but soon becomes the strongest one during the situation. Natasha is good in this role and the sympathy between her and Gringo’s character comes through strong.
Lorenza Izzo: Kylie is the younger party animal of the two sisters, she just wants to have fun on her trip but with her old sister trying to protect her she finds herself being held back until the quake hits and she wants her sister to help her. Lorenza is good in this bratty like character which put her on the map for a future horror scream queen.
Support Cast: Aftershock has the basic supporting cast that all help with the survival side of the story.
Director Review: Nicolas Lopez – Nicolas gives us a film that keeps pulling us in once the earthquake hits.
Action: Aftershock use the action for the destruction side of the story which helps us with mother nature side of the story.
Horror: Aftershock comes from the human side of the story as we see just how twisted they can become in a situation our characters find themselves in.
Thriller: Aftershock keeps us on edge from start to finish.
Settings: Aftershock uses Chile for the settings which works for a different location and shows our characters lost during a disaster.
Special Effects: Aftershock has good effects to create what happens to the characters in the disaster.
Suggestion: Aftershock is one to watch especially is you like disaster movies. (Watch)
Best Part: Earthquake.
Worst Part: Slightly too much before the quake.
Believability: No
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Budget: $2 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 29 Minutes
Tagline: The only thing more terrifying than Mother Nature is human nature.
Overall: Surprisingly intense film that blends two great genres.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/08/19/movie-reviews-101-midnight-horror-aftershock-2012/