Search
Search results
VOR Tracker - IFR Procedure Trainer
Education and Reference
App
VOR Tracker is a small but powerful training tool for pilots. It is the only one of its kind for the...
GPS Kit HD
Navigation and Travel
App
- TIME Magazine’s 15 Fantastic Gadgets “Perfect for hiking or mountain biking.” - TUAW.com ...
Drop The Chicken
Games and Entertainment
App
OVER 5.5 MILLION PLAYERS GLOBALLY, THANKS TO ALL OUR FANS. ALSO MAKE SURE YOU GRAB THE NEW: DROP...
Quick Graph
Education and Utilities
App
"The app you need to survive the next semester" -- Gizmodo Quick Graph is the best graphing...
Lee (2222 KP) rated Dumbo (2019) in Movies
Mar 31, 2019
It's set to be a busy year for live action Disney remakes, with Aladdin and The Lion King already lined up for release this year. Kicking things off though, is this reimagining of the 1941 classic Dumbo, with Tim Burton directing.
It's 1919 and Holt Farrier (Colin Farrell) has returned from World War I, arriving by train to join the Medici Brothers Circus, where he worked before the war as a performer. But Holt has a number of issues to contend with on his return, the least of which being the loss one of his arms while in service. He's greeted at the station by his two young children, Milly and Joe, who lost their mother, Holt's wife, to influenza while he was away. On top of that, he learns that while he was away, the cash strapped circus owner, Max Medici (Danny DeVito) decided to sell the horses that were part of Holt's star act. Holt is put in charge of pregnant elephant Jumbo, with Max hoping that the arrival of a cute baby elephant will bring in the much needed crowds. It's a lot for Holt to come to terms with and adjust to.
Soon after, the baby elephant is born. But with clumsy, oversized ears, he's not quite the cute crowd pleaser they had all hoped for. Attempts to hide his ears only end in disaster, and ridicule from the circus crowds. Milly and Joe fall in love with the new arrival, and when they discover that he has the ability to use those big ears for flying, interest in him is quickly renewed.
The flying elephant not only draws in the crowds, but also the attentions of V.A. Vandevere (Michael Keaton), who offers Max a deal for him and his circus troupe to join his huge fancy theme park. It's at this point that the movie should really begin to soar, having introduced the circus family and their new arrival. Unfortunately, the arrival of Vandevere signals a sharp downward spiral in terms of story telling. The circus cast are all but forgotten, with the story focusing instead on the tired, familiar tale of sleazy, greedy businessman who is only interested in money and success, at the expense of the poor, trusting people who believed him.
The computerised Dumbo is simply oozing cuteness and technical wizardry. The eyes and the facial expressions are wonderful and he manages to steal every scene he is in. Every time he takes flight, it is a joy to watch. Unfortunately though, this version of Dumbo is trying to add a lot more to the original story and ends up becoming bit of a drag at times. The human characters are poorly written and mostly forgettable, and the movie really only soars when Dumbo himself does. While trying to steer clear of being a straight up remake, opting instead for the addition of plot and characters, it ultimately loses a lot of the charm. As with the recent remake of Beauty and the Beast, it's another case of style over substance.
It's 1919 and Holt Farrier (Colin Farrell) has returned from World War I, arriving by train to join the Medici Brothers Circus, where he worked before the war as a performer. But Holt has a number of issues to contend with on his return, the least of which being the loss one of his arms while in service. He's greeted at the station by his two young children, Milly and Joe, who lost their mother, Holt's wife, to influenza while he was away. On top of that, he learns that while he was away, the cash strapped circus owner, Max Medici (Danny DeVito) decided to sell the horses that were part of Holt's star act. Holt is put in charge of pregnant elephant Jumbo, with Max hoping that the arrival of a cute baby elephant will bring in the much needed crowds. It's a lot for Holt to come to terms with and adjust to.
Soon after, the baby elephant is born. But with clumsy, oversized ears, he's not quite the cute crowd pleaser they had all hoped for. Attempts to hide his ears only end in disaster, and ridicule from the circus crowds. Milly and Joe fall in love with the new arrival, and when they discover that he has the ability to use those big ears for flying, interest in him is quickly renewed.
The flying elephant not only draws in the crowds, but also the attentions of V.A. Vandevere (Michael Keaton), who offers Max a deal for him and his circus troupe to join his huge fancy theme park. It's at this point that the movie should really begin to soar, having introduced the circus family and their new arrival. Unfortunately, the arrival of Vandevere signals a sharp downward spiral in terms of story telling. The circus cast are all but forgotten, with the story focusing instead on the tired, familiar tale of sleazy, greedy businessman who is only interested in money and success, at the expense of the poor, trusting people who believed him.
The computerised Dumbo is simply oozing cuteness and technical wizardry. The eyes and the facial expressions are wonderful and he manages to steal every scene he is in. Every time he takes flight, it is a joy to watch. Unfortunately though, this version of Dumbo is trying to add a lot more to the original story and ends up becoming bit of a drag at times. The human characters are poorly written and mostly forgettable, and the movie really only soars when Dumbo himself does. While trying to steer clear of being a straight up remake, opting instead for the addition of plot and characters, it ultimately loses a lot of the charm. As with the recent remake of Beauty and the Beast, it's another case of style over substance.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Legend of Tarzan (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
CPR Needed
As tends to be the case with Hollywood, studios pay very close attention to their rivals release schedules, eyeing up potential competition to pit their films against, maxing box-office returns in the process.
And when Disney announced they were rebooting The Jungle Book in March this year, Warner Bros quickly responded with another jungle-themed film; The Legend of Tarzan. But does this interpretation on the classic character swing or fall?
It’s been nearly a decade since Tarzan (Alexander Skarsgård), aka John Clayton III, left Africa to live in Victorian England with his wife Jane (Margot Robbie). Danger lurks on the horizon as Leon Rom (Christoph Waltz), a treacherous envoy for King Leopold, devises a scheme that lures the couple and friend George Williams (Samuel L Jackson) to the Congo. Rom plans to capture Tarzan and deliver him to an old enemy in exchange for diamonds. When Jane becomes a pawn in his devious plot, Tarzan must return to the jungle to save the woman he loves.
Directed by David Yates (Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows), Legend of Tarzan features committed performances from its lead cast, immersive scenery and impressive special effects, but all of the glitz can’t save a film that plods along at a dreadful pace. Not since Peter Jackson’s King Kong has there been a movie that wastes so much of its opening act.
Alexander Skarsgård is likeable and commanding as the titular character, but lacks enough acting prowess to tackle the deeper, more emotional side that writers Adam Cozad and Craig Brewer have brought to the table here. Therefore, the scenes featuring a solo Tarzan suffer somewhat and Samuel L Jackson feels wasted in a poorly written and half-hearted role.
It is in Margot Robbie and Christoph Waltz that we find the film’s saving graces. Their characters leap off the screen with Waltz in particular being a highlight throughout. It’s unfortunate that one of our greatest living actors is lambasted with poor dialogue however, though the script just about keeps him afloat.
David Yates brings a similar filming style here to that of his foray into Harry Potter. The action is confidently filmed, but he avoids the use of shaky-cam that many directors seem to find appealing nowadays. The CGI is on the whole very good, especially in the finale which is breath-taking to watch.
It’s just a shame the rest of the film is such a drag. The first hour is incredibly poorly paced with very brief, albeit well-filmed, action sequences not doing enough to brighten Legend of Tarzan up. Elsewhere, the use of flashbacks is at first a decent way of giving the audience some exposition, but after the tenth one, they’re a nuisance.
Overall, The Legend of Tarzan does a lot more with its iconic character than other films have done, but that doesn’t excuse its poor pacing. Thankfully, the exciting finale lifts the final act above the standard of the first hour, and commanding performances from all the cast sustain interest just about enough to see it through to the end.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/07/07/cpr-needed-the-legend-of-tarzan-review/
And when Disney announced they were rebooting The Jungle Book in March this year, Warner Bros quickly responded with another jungle-themed film; The Legend of Tarzan. But does this interpretation on the classic character swing or fall?
It’s been nearly a decade since Tarzan (Alexander Skarsgård), aka John Clayton III, left Africa to live in Victorian England with his wife Jane (Margot Robbie). Danger lurks on the horizon as Leon Rom (Christoph Waltz), a treacherous envoy for King Leopold, devises a scheme that lures the couple and friend George Williams (Samuel L Jackson) to the Congo. Rom plans to capture Tarzan and deliver him to an old enemy in exchange for diamonds. When Jane becomes a pawn in his devious plot, Tarzan must return to the jungle to save the woman he loves.
Directed by David Yates (Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows), Legend of Tarzan features committed performances from its lead cast, immersive scenery and impressive special effects, but all of the glitz can’t save a film that plods along at a dreadful pace. Not since Peter Jackson’s King Kong has there been a movie that wastes so much of its opening act.
Alexander Skarsgård is likeable and commanding as the titular character, but lacks enough acting prowess to tackle the deeper, more emotional side that writers Adam Cozad and Craig Brewer have brought to the table here. Therefore, the scenes featuring a solo Tarzan suffer somewhat and Samuel L Jackson feels wasted in a poorly written and half-hearted role.
It is in Margot Robbie and Christoph Waltz that we find the film’s saving graces. Their characters leap off the screen with Waltz in particular being a highlight throughout. It’s unfortunate that one of our greatest living actors is lambasted with poor dialogue however, though the script just about keeps him afloat.
David Yates brings a similar filming style here to that of his foray into Harry Potter. The action is confidently filmed, but he avoids the use of shaky-cam that many directors seem to find appealing nowadays. The CGI is on the whole very good, especially in the finale which is breath-taking to watch.
It’s just a shame the rest of the film is such a drag. The first hour is incredibly poorly paced with very brief, albeit well-filmed, action sequences not doing enough to brighten Legend of Tarzan up. Elsewhere, the use of flashbacks is at first a decent way of giving the audience some exposition, but after the tenth one, they’re a nuisance.
Overall, The Legend of Tarzan does a lot more with its iconic character than other films have done, but that doesn’t excuse its poor pacing. Thankfully, the exciting finale lifts the final act above the standard of the first hour, and commanding performances from all the cast sustain interest just about enough to see it through to the end.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/07/07/cpr-needed-the-legend-of-tarzan-review/
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Girl Before in Books
Jan 21, 2018
Suspenseful and different novel
Two wounded women reeling from personal issues are looking for a new apartment. For Emma, she requires a safe place after being the victim of a break-in while her loyal boyfriend, Simon, was out. For Jane, it is a new place that holds no reminders of the baby she lost. For each woman, the house at One Folgate Street seems to offer exactly what they are looking for. It is designed by well-known architect, Edward Monkford, and comes with a set of rules created by the inscrutable man himself. In fact, to live at One Folgate Streets means signing off on over 200 rules, ranging from no books or personal mementos, to total tidiness, to agreeing to showing the house on architectural tours, to accepting to the intense technology that it comes with, including the house monitoring your well-being and moods. At first, the rules and clarity that come with One Folgate Street seem comforting to Emma and Jane. But as they spend more time in the house--and learn about its past, including its mysterious builder--they become terrifying and stifling.
THE GIRL BEFORE is a fascinating novel told solely from the point of view of Emma, One Folgate Street's previous tenant, and Jane, its current tenant. All activities are filtered through the lens of these two women. The novel effectively builds suspense with the parallel nature of the two women's stories, but it also can get a little repetitive at times (and sometimes a little confusing, as you have to remind yourself, mostly in the beginning, who is talking). The book starts off exciting, as you are drawn into both Emma and Jane's tales while they acclimate to the house and all the oddities it offers. The house itself almost becomes another character in the novel. It starts to drag a bit halfway through as you wonder what will happen in the next half (people living in a technologically advanced house can only be so exciting, right?). But then, suddenly, the novel takes some odd turns (there are some interesting sexual plot twists) and eventually grows quite interesting again with some psychological and thrilling revelations. Perhaps my favorite part about this book is that many of these developments truly surprised me, which isn't always easy to do in a thriller.
Overall, this is an interesting novel. It's certainly suspenseful and different. To enjoy it, you really have to set your disbelief aside at the actual conditions of living at One Folgate Street (no books, what?!) and accept that the two women are so broken (and perhaps broke, as the house apparently comes at a great discount) that they will go along with anything. It has a lot of varied plot threads and some of them aren't always fully explored or truly necessary, which can be a little frustrating. Still, the book truly surprised me with its twists and kept me entertained, with a deep desire to get to the end. Overall, 3.5+ stars.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you!) in return for an unbiased review.
THE GIRL BEFORE is a fascinating novel told solely from the point of view of Emma, One Folgate Street's previous tenant, and Jane, its current tenant. All activities are filtered through the lens of these two women. The novel effectively builds suspense with the parallel nature of the two women's stories, but it also can get a little repetitive at times (and sometimes a little confusing, as you have to remind yourself, mostly in the beginning, who is talking). The book starts off exciting, as you are drawn into both Emma and Jane's tales while they acclimate to the house and all the oddities it offers. The house itself almost becomes another character in the novel. It starts to drag a bit halfway through as you wonder what will happen in the next half (people living in a technologically advanced house can only be so exciting, right?). But then, suddenly, the novel takes some odd turns (there are some interesting sexual plot twists) and eventually grows quite interesting again with some psychological and thrilling revelations. Perhaps my favorite part about this book is that many of these developments truly surprised me, which isn't always easy to do in a thriller.
Overall, this is an interesting novel. It's certainly suspenseful and different. To enjoy it, you really have to set your disbelief aside at the actual conditions of living at One Folgate Street (no books, what?!) and accept that the two women are so broken (and perhaps broke, as the house apparently comes at a great discount) that they will go along with anything. It has a lot of varied plot threads and some of them aren't always fully explored or truly necessary, which can be a little frustrating. Still, the book truly surprised me with its twists and kept me entertained, with a deep desire to get to the end. Overall, 3.5+ stars.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you!) in return for an unbiased review.
Sensitivemuse (246 KP) rated Silence for the Dead in Books
Mar 29, 2018
Good ghost story, slow dragged out ending
Anything to do with a horror ghost theme and an asylum has to be good right? Well, yes and no. The book was somewhat enjoyable to read but it had its’ moments.
The plot itself was good. It had the elements of a good gothic theme - not scary enough to make people read it in daytime (seriously?) but it had some good decent creep factor in it. It’s enough to set the mood and theme of the book but nothing to make the skin crawl. The element of mystery was also there and the ghost story aspect was good - nothing to blind side you - except perhaps for a little twist in the end (with where the ghost was and who was it manipulating etc etc). It’s pretty much a stable plot with all the main points closed (or is it? *queue creepy organ music*) so I’d have to say the gothic ghost story was what was in it for me.
Character wise. Kitty is likable. She’s resourceful, and a survivor from horrible abuse. Big applause for her for being strong and able to stand up and survive through various ordeals. Captain Mabry stood out for me because I enjoyed reading about his character. He seemed to be the strong stable silent type in the asylum where you have various patients with various issues (most were casualties of World War One) and there was a certain calmness about him that made him likable.
It’s pretty much obvious Kitty and Jack were to be together. The romance aspect in the book was all right. Necessary? I’m not sure perhaps. It’s not really for me. When their romance was more cemented was where the book was starting to take a slight turn downhill.
So near the ending when everything was revealed, all plot holes start to close. Sometimes, depending on the writing, you can stretch it out and make it interesting. Or you can make it drag. This one, unfortunately drags. We’re done with the ghosts, everything was answered, and the last 30 pages or so I just wanted the book to end. The romance of Kitty and Jack intensify and this is where intense eye rolling is also induced. Dear Lord, am I reading this just to see if there’s a scary twist at the end? Or am I wasting my time? Well sadly, I wasted my time. It was good to see what happened to characters like Mabry, and even Matron, but it just dragged way too much. Yeah okay we get it Kitty and Jack forever. Why do we need so many pages of this, am I suddenly reading a romance now?
Other than the ghost story in this book, the romance nearly killed it for me and a dragged out ending. Perhaps a nice twist in the ending would be nice. Or maybe skim the 30 pages and be done. I would say take it or leave it with this book. It was moderately enjoyable for me.
The plot itself was good. It had the elements of a good gothic theme - not scary enough to make people read it in daytime (seriously?) but it had some good decent creep factor in it. It’s enough to set the mood and theme of the book but nothing to make the skin crawl. The element of mystery was also there and the ghost story aspect was good - nothing to blind side you - except perhaps for a little twist in the end (with where the ghost was and who was it manipulating etc etc). It’s pretty much a stable plot with all the main points closed (or is it? *queue creepy organ music*) so I’d have to say the gothic ghost story was what was in it for me.
Character wise. Kitty is likable. She’s resourceful, and a survivor from horrible abuse. Big applause for her for being strong and able to stand up and survive through various ordeals. Captain Mabry stood out for me because I enjoyed reading about his character. He seemed to be the strong stable silent type in the asylum where you have various patients with various issues (most were casualties of World War One) and there was a certain calmness about him that made him likable.
It’s pretty much obvious Kitty and Jack were to be together. The romance aspect in the book was all right. Necessary? I’m not sure perhaps. It’s not really for me. When their romance was more cemented was where the book was starting to take a slight turn downhill.
So near the ending when everything was revealed, all plot holes start to close. Sometimes, depending on the writing, you can stretch it out and make it interesting. Or you can make it drag. This one, unfortunately drags. We’re done with the ghosts, everything was answered, and the last 30 pages or so I just wanted the book to end. The romance of Kitty and Jack intensify and this is where intense eye rolling is also induced. Dear Lord, am I reading this just to see if there’s a scary twist at the end? Or am I wasting my time? Well sadly, I wasted my time. It was good to see what happened to characters like Mabry, and even Matron, but it just dragged way too much. Yeah okay we get it Kitty and Jack forever. Why do we need so many pages of this, am I suddenly reading a romance now?
Other than the ghost story in this book, the romance nearly killed it for me and a dragged out ending. Perhaps a nice twist in the ending would be nice. Or maybe skim the 30 pages and be done. I would say take it or leave it with this book. It was moderately enjoyable for me.