Search
Search results
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.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Passengers (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Guilt trip.
“Passengers” is not a film that you can really talk about in much depth without straying into spoiler territory, so I will break my normal tradition of my reviews being entirely “Spoiler Free” and add a further discussion (but below the Fad Rating, so you are safe ‘til there).
The backdrop for “Passengers” is the spaceship “Avalon”, on a 120 year trip taking Earth colonists to the new world of “Homestead 2”. Following an ‘incident’ the story finds two individuals – Jim Preston, played by Chris “Jurassic World” Pratt, and Jennifer “Joy” Lawrence – as the only passengers awake on the automated ship among 5000+ other slumbering souls. It rather goes without saying that with two attractive and bankable Hollywood stars and nothing else to do, the two ‘get it on’. With things on the ship going from bad to worse, the two must work as a team to try to save the ship, crew and fellow passengers from disaster.
As a fan of sci-fi, I’ll start with a positive that the Avalon is a gloriously rendered spacecraft, and many of the scenes of space walking present beautiful cinematography (by Rodrigo Prieto of “The Wolf of Wall Street” and “Argo”). Many of the other special effects in the film – led by special effects supervisor Daniel Sudick, of the Marvel franchise – are spectacularly good, especially one which demonstrates why the lifeguards closed the pool on the International Space Station!
The overall premise of the film is also original and well-conceived, setting up the backdrop for some serious post-watch ethical debate (see spoiler section).
Where the wheels came off for me though is with the script by Jon Spaihts (“Prometheus”, “Doctor Strange”). Some of the dialogue is just appallingly trite, and some of the supposed capabilities of our hero, Preston, are laughable. For example, he possesses an uncanny ability as “an engineer” to open a cabinet of electronics, scan the circuits and say “Nope – that all looks fine”: the next time my washing machine controller packs in, he’s going to be on my speed-dial for sure! And (cue trite line – “every component on the ship has a spare”) Preston immediately finds the required part (curiously, it’s right next to the failing component and not in Bay 67 on cargo deck 327!) and knows how to plug and play it as required.
Chris Pratt; Jennifer Lawrence
Pratt and Lawrence, with Pratt about to debug my washing machine controller just by looking at it.
But, for me, there was one particularly dire point in the script where Spaihts obviously forgets which film he’s writing the scene for and ‘goes superhero’: oh, hang on, Preston doesn’t HAVE any superhero powers! For me, any goodwill the story had built up through to that point get vented into space.
The director is Morten Tyldum, whose “Headhunters” I really enjoyed but who is probably more famous for “The Imitation Game”. Not overawed by the production’s scale, he does a great job of getting good performances out of the rather wooden action hunk that is Chris Pratt and the reliable Oscar-winner Jennifer Lawrence who (apart from one dramatic and emotional scene) the script doesn’t really stretch. Michael Sheen is also a great watch as the witty and dry android bar-tender.
In summary, this was a nice premise with great special effects and gorgeous production design, but frustratingly let down with a weak screenplay. With a better script and another 10% of tweaking, this could have been a real sci-fi classic.
The backdrop for “Passengers” is the spaceship “Avalon”, on a 120 year trip taking Earth colonists to the new world of “Homestead 2”. Following an ‘incident’ the story finds two individuals – Jim Preston, played by Chris “Jurassic World” Pratt, and Jennifer “Joy” Lawrence – as the only passengers awake on the automated ship among 5000+ other slumbering souls. It rather goes without saying that with two attractive and bankable Hollywood stars and nothing else to do, the two ‘get it on’. With things on the ship going from bad to worse, the two must work as a team to try to save the ship, crew and fellow passengers from disaster.
As a fan of sci-fi, I’ll start with a positive that the Avalon is a gloriously rendered spacecraft, and many of the scenes of space walking present beautiful cinematography (by Rodrigo Prieto of “The Wolf of Wall Street” and “Argo”). Many of the other special effects in the film – led by special effects supervisor Daniel Sudick, of the Marvel franchise – are spectacularly good, especially one which demonstrates why the lifeguards closed the pool on the International Space Station!
The overall premise of the film is also original and well-conceived, setting up the backdrop for some serious post-watch ethical debate (see spoiler section).
Where the wheels came off for me though is with the script by Jon Spaihts (“Prometheus”, “Doctor Strange”). Some of the dialogue is just appallingly trite, and some of the supposed capabilities of our hero, Preston, are laughable. For example, he possesses an uncanny ability as “an engineer” to open a cabinet of electronics, scan the circuits and say “Nope – that all looks fine”: the next time my washing machine controller packs in, he’s going to be on my speed-dial for sure! And (cue trite line – “every component on the ship has a spare”) Preston immediately finds the required part (curiously, it’s right next to the failing component and not in Bay 67 on cargo deck 327!) and knows how to plug and play it as required.
Chris Pratt; Jennifer Lawrence
Pratt and Lawrence, with Pratt about to debug my washing machine controller just by looking at it.
But, for me, there was one particularly dire point in the script where Spaihts obviously forgets which film he’s writing the scene for and ‘goes superhero’: oh, hang on, Preston doesn’t HAVE any superhero powers! For me, any goodwill the story had built up through to that point get vented into space.
The director is Morten Tyldum, whose “Headhunters” I really enjoyed but who is probably more famous for “The Imitation Game”. Not overawed by the production’s scale, he does a great job of getting good performances out of the rather wooden action hunk that is Chris Pratt and the reliable Oscar-winner Jennifer Lawrence who (apart from one dramatic and emotional scene) the script doesn’t really stretch. Michael Sheen is also a great watch as the witty and dry android bar-tender.
In summary, this was a nice premise with great special effects and gorgeous production design, but frustratingly let down with a weak screenplay. With a better script and another 10% of tweaking, this could have been a real sci-fi classic.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Black Panther (2018) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 10, 2019)
Is the MCU all out of surprises?
The Marvel Cinematic Universe has become one of the most successful movie franchises ever made, and it’s easy to see why. Featuring incredible actors, up-and-coming directors and that trademark sense of humour, each film in the MCU has something to offer.
That doesn’t mean they’re perfect however. The MCU has a distinct lack of decent villains, strong female characters and characters from ethnic minorities. In the run-up to this year’s Infinity War, Black Panther aims to turn what we know about Marvel on its head. But has it succeeded?
After the death of his father, T’Challa (Chadwick Boseman) returns home to the African nation of Wakanda to take his rightful place as king. When a powerful enemy suddenly reappears, T’Challa’s mettle as king – and as Black Panther – gets tested when he’s drawn into a conflict that puts the fate of Wakanda and the entire world at risk. Faced with treachery and danger, the young king must rally his allies and release the full power of Black Panther to defeat his foes and secure the safety of his people.
The opening sequence of Black Panther is an absolute treat as the audience are given a brief history of Wakanda and the tribes from which it grew. It’s a great montage to kick off a film that’s packed with stunning visuals and gorgeous landscapes, even though some of the special effects are left wanting at times.
Cast wise, this is one of the strongest entries into the MCU. Chadwick Boseman absolutely embodies the young, naïve yet warm T’Challa beautifully and it’s nice to see his character given some reference points after his sudden inclusion in Captain America: Civil War. Elsewhere, Lupita Nyong’o is always a pleasure to see on screen and her love interest to Boseman keeps him grounded over the course of the runtime.
For me the standout character is Danai Gurira’s Okoye, leader of a group of female warriors ordered to protect Wakanda and its king no matter what the cost. She’s certainly not to be messed with and gets a pleasing arc throughout. The script also seems to work best when she’s on screen.
When it comes to the bad guy, director Ryan Coogler (Creed) gets it nearly spot on. After dozens of, shall we say, lacklustre villains, the MCU receives its best yet. Michael B. Jordan’s Killmonger is, despite his ridiculous name, absolutely brilliant. Menacing and oddly charming in equal measure, he does away with the tradition of bizarre villain motives in the MCU. In fact, his motives throughout feel entirely believable and the film feels more grounded because of this.
Coogler does a good job at creating a bustling and vibrant world, even if the special effects can sometimes bring you out of the illusion
Martin Freeman’s Agent Ross is a strange addition to the cast, simply because his character isn’t essential to the plot. Freeman is always a magnetic presence but he really doesn’t have all that much to do. Finally, Andy Serkis reprises his role as arms dealer Ulysses Klaue and is great fun.
Looking at Wakanda itself, Coogler does a good job at creating a bustling and vibrant world, even if the special effects can sometimes bring you out of the illusion. It certainly feels more real than the hollow golden towers of Asgard (something thankfully fixed in last year’s Thor: Ragnarok), and Wakanda is a great addition to the many locations the Marvel Cinematic Universe has created.
So, I’ve mentioned disappointing special effects twice in this review and whilst they aren’t terrible, there are a few occasions where they are a little poor – especially evident in the film’s finale. For all his exciting filming style, Coogler’s shot choices occasionally jar with the uninspiring and lifeless CGI. Some of the landscapes also feel like a brochure for Disney’s upcoming The Lion King live-action remake.
I think it’s time to talk about film politics, because as much as Black Panther is a great addition to the MCU and a fine solo movie in itself, the legacy it will leave on the industry will be absolutely huge. With a majority black cast, strong female characters and a black director, it’s progressive and incredibly brave in its choices.
Any less of a story, director or cast wouldn’t have made it work and despite some poor CGI and slight pacing issues at the start, Black Panther is one of the best solo Marvel movies in years. Bring on Infinity War.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/02/15/black-panther-review-is-the-mcu-all-out-of-surprises/
That doesn’t mean they’re perfect however. The MCU has a distinct lack of decent villains, strong female characters and characters from ethnic minorities. In the run-up to this year’s Infinity War, Black Panther aims to turn what we know about Marvel on its head. But has it succeeded?
After the death of his father, T’Challa (Chadwick Boseman) returns home to the African nation of Wakanda to take his rightful place as king. When a powerful enemy suddenly reappears, T’Challa’s mettle as king – and as Black Panther – gets tested when he’s drawn into a conflict that puts the fate of Wakanda and the entire world at risk. Faced with treachery and danger, the young king must rally his allies and release the full power of Black Panther to defeat his foes and secure the safety of his people.
The opening sequence of Black Panther is an absolute treat as the audience are given a brief history of Wakanda and the tribes from which it grew. It’s a great montage to kick off a film that’s packed with stunning visuals and gorgeous landscapes, even though some of the special effects are left wanting at times.
Cast wise, this is one of the strongest entries into the MCU. Chadwick Boseman absolutely embodies the young, naïve yet warm T’Challa beautifully and it’s nice to see his character given some reference points after his sudden inclusion in Captain America: Civil War. Elsewhere, Lupita Nyong’o is always a pleasure to see on screen and her love interest to Boseman keeps him grounded over the course of the runtime.
For me the standout character is Danai Gurira’s Okoye, leader of a group of female warriors ordered to protect Wakanda and its king no matter what the cost. She’s certainly not to be messed with and gets a pleasing arc throughout. The script also seems to work best when she’s on screen.
When it comes to the bad guy, director Ryan Coogler (Creed) gets it nearly spot on. After dozens of, shall we say, lacklustre villains, the MCU receives its best yet. Michael B. Jordan’s Killmonger is, despite his ridiculous name, absolutely brilliant. Menacing and oddly charming in equal measure, he does away with the tradition of bizarre villain motives in the MCU. In fact, his motives throughout feel entirely believable and the film feels more grounded because of this.
Coogler does a good job at creating a bustling and vibrant world, even if the special effects can sometimes bring you out of the illusion
Martin Freeman’s Agent Ross is a strange addition to the cast, simply because his character isn’t essential to the plot. Freeman is always a magnetic presence but he really doesn’t have all that much to do. Finally, Andy Serkis reprises his role as arms dealer Ulysses Klaue and is great fun.
Looking at Wakanda itself, Coogler does a good job at creating a bustling and vibrant world, even if the special effects can sometimes bring you out of the illusion. It certainly feels more real than the hollow golden towers of Asgard (something thankfully fixed in last year’s Thor: Ragnarok), and Wakanda is a great addition to the many locations the Marvel Cinematic Universe has created.
So, I’ve mentioned disappointing special effects twice in this review and whilst they aren’t terrible, there are a few occasions where they are a little poor – especially evident in the film’s finale. For all his exciting filming style, Coogler’s shot choices occasionally jar with the uninspiring and lifeless CGI. Some of the landscapes also feel like a brochure for Disney’s upcoming The Lion King live-action remake.
I think it’s time to talk about film politics, because as much as Black Panther is a great addition to the MCU and a fine solo movie in itself, the legacy it will leave on the industry will be absolutely huge. With a majority black cast, strong female characters and a black director, it’s progressive and incredibly brave in its choices.
Any less of a story, director or cast wouldn’t have made it work and despite some poor CGI and slight pacing issues at the start, Black Panther is one of the best solo Marvel movies in years. Bring on Infinity War.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/02/15/black-panther-review-is-the-mcu-all-out-of-surprises/
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Moonfall (2022) in Movies
Feb 5, 2022
Terribly written. (2 more)
Overacted.
Halle Berry.
Moonfall Review: It’s Raining Moon
Moonfall is a $146 million sci-fi disaster film directed by Roland Emmerich (Independence Day, Godzilla) and written by Emmerich, Harald Kloser (2012, 10000 BC), and Spenser Cohen (Extinction, The Expendables 4).
On January 12, 2011, during what is referred to as routine outer space maintenance (it’s a thing), an unidentified technological swarm caused significant damage to the astronaut’s shuttle; killing one of them and incapacitating the surviving two crew members. Brian Harper (Patrick Wilson) maneuvers the shuttle back to earth with no power while his navigator Jocinda Fowl (Halle Berry) is unconscious. Brian takes the fall as he’s labeled incompetent despite previously being an acclaimed hero and he loses his job with NASA.
Ten years later, the moon suddenly begins changing course as a hole 26-kilometers deep is discovered in the center of it. People on earth have three weeks before the moon begins falling to earth in city-sized pieces. While NASA scrambles to discover a solution, an orbital megastructure aficionado and conspiracy blogger named K.C. Houseman (John Bradley) knew about the moon’s shift in course before NASA and may end up being the savior of mankind.
The opening scene of Moonfall lets its audience know that they’re in for an excruciating two hours. Patrick Wilson and Halle Berry argue over the lyrics to Toto’s “Africa” as Wilson musically screeches the 80s rock ballad to annoying results. The film does a few things right like earth’s gravity being a complete dumpster fire and the ocean literally being at foot of everyone’s door like Bo Burnham talked about in Inside. But then introduces the aspect of orbital megastructure in an attempt to not adhere to believable physics while lethargically committing to it.
Flooding, earthquakes, and birds falling to the ground due to gravity alterations are the culmination of the insanity in Moonfall. The moon coming closer to earth also apparently means humans can lift trees above their head and jump over gaps left by fallen bridges with little effort. There’s an awkward car chase between some redneck looters and the main characters of the film.
It’s awkward due to the fact that it’s really funky visual effects (literally everything taking place on the road and in the background) with green screen (the actors driving the cars), but it’s difficult to distinguish what’s what in a bad way. The CGI and special effects in the film are that peculiar blend of not necessarily being bad, but are just off-putting enough to look weird in some capacity. It’s a high speed chase involving a gravity wave, which is mostly just cars and debris floating in the air as the sky turns red. Coincidentally enough, the disaster effects are the best part of the film because they do what they’re supposed to do without overstaying their welcome.
The dialogue in the film is atrocious and Halle Berry is a filter for most of the bad lines. Some of her gems include, “I don’t work for you, I work for the American people and I don’t like keeping them in the dark,” “I am…(the longest pause ever between one word and another)…thinking about our son,” and something overwhelmingly corny about earth’s hourglass and our time running out. Donald Sutherland can barely stomach a brief cameo appearance shared with Berry’s character before excusing himself to the loaded gun he left back in his room (yes, this actually happens).
The evacuation route in Moonfall seems to involve fleeing to Colorado. What is in Colorado and why that’s important is never really explained other than because everyone else is there. Jocinda Fowl becomes the lead director of NASA during the film and her ex-husband (played by Eme Ikwuakor) works for the military. Ikwuakor does nothing but squint like French Stewart the entire time. NASA wants to survey the activity of what’s transpiring on the moon, fly inside of its new fancy made hole, and come up with a plan to save earth in the process. The military just wants to blow up the moon with nukes; screw the consequences, this is America!
With Moonfall, Roland Emmerich has essentially made an even dumber version of Michael Bay’s Armageddon. There’s not a lot to enjoy here apart from KC Houseman’s house cat being named Fuzz Aldrin. With its idiotic premise, hammy dialogue involving some of the most exaggerated emotional speeches ever, stiff acting, unfunny humor, and purposely distorted CGI, Moonfall features an overwhelming amount of frenetic nonsense and has no excuse to be as boring as it is.
On January 12, 2011, during what is referred to as routine outer space maintenance (it’s a thing), an unidentified technological swarm caused significant damage to the astronaut’s shuttle; killing one of them and incapacitating the surviving two crew members. Brian Harper (Patrick Wilson) maneuvers the shuttle back to earth with no power while his navigator Jocinda Fowl (Halle Berry) is unconscious. Brian takes the fall as he’s labeled incompetent despite previously being an acclaimed hero and he loses his job with NASA.
Ten years later, the moon suddenly begins changing course as a hole 26-kilometers deep is discovered in the center of it. People on earth have three weeks before the moon begins falling to earth in city-sized pieces. While NASA scrambles to discover a solution, an orbital megastructure aficionado and conspiracy blogger named K.C. Houseman (John Bradley) knew about the moon’s shift in course before NASA and may end up being the savior of mankind.
The opening scene of Moonfall lets its audience know that they’re in for an excruciating two hours. Patrick Wilson and Halle Berry argue over the lyrics to Toto’s “Africa” as Wilson musically screeches the 80s rock ballad to annoying results. The film does a few things right like earth’s gravity being a complete dumpster fire and the ocean literally being at foot of everyone’s door like Bo Burnham talked about in Inside. But then introduces the aspect of orbital megastructure in an attempt to not adhere to believable physics while lethargically committing to it.
Flooding, earthquakes, and birds falling to the ground due to gravity alterations are the culmination of the insanity in Moonfall. The moon coming closer to earth also apparently means humans can lift trees above their head and jump over gaps left by fallen bridges with little effort. There’s an awkward car chase between some redneck looters and the main characters of the film.
It’s awkward due to the fact that it’s really funky visual effects (literally everything taking place on the road and in the background) with green screen (the actors driving the cars), but it’s difficult to distinguish what’s what in a bad way. The CGI and special effects in the film are that peculiar blend of not necessarily being bad, but are just off-putting enough to look weird in some capacity. It’s a high speed chase involving a gravity wave, which is mostly just cars and debris floating in the air as the sky turns red. Coincidentally enough, the disaster effects are the best part of the film because they do what they’re supposed to do without overstaying their welcome.
The dialogue in the film is atrocious and Halle Berry is a filter for most of the bad lines. Some of her gems include, “I don’t work for you, I work for the American people and I don’t like keeping them in the dark,” “I am…(the longest pause ever between one word and another)…thinking about our son,” and something overwhelmingly corny about earth’s hourglass and our time running out. Donald Sutherland can barely stomach a brief cameo appearance shared with Berry’s character before excusing himself to the loaded gun he left back in his room (yes, this actually happens).
The evacuation route in Moonfall seems to involve fleeing to Colorado. What is in Colorado and why that’s important is never really explained other than because everyone else is there. Jocinda Fowl becomes the lead director of NASA during the film and her ex-husband (played by Eme Ikwuakor) works for the military. Ikwuakor does nothing but squint like French Stewart the entire time. NASA wants to survey the activity of what’s transpiring on the moon, fly inside of its new fancy made hole, and come up with a plan to save earth in the process. The military just wants to blow up the moon with nukes; screw the consequences, this is America!
With Moonfall, Roland Emmerich has essentially made an even dumber version of Michael Bay’s Armageddon. There’s not a lot to enjoy here apart from KC Houseman’s house cat being named Fuzz Aldrin. With its idiotic premise, hammy dialogue involving some of the most exaggerated emotional speeches ever, stiff acting, unfunny humor, and purposely distorted CGI, Moonfall features an overwhelming amount of frenetic nonsense and has no excuse to be as boring as it is.
Joe Kline (10 KP) rated Beetlejuice (1988) in Movies
Dec 9, 2017
The style of Tim Burton makes this movie amazing visually (3 more)
Michael Keaton creates one of the funniest ghosts of all time
The score by Danny Elfman is phenomenal
Still unique after all these years
Some of the stop motion effects may turn off certain people (1 more)
Although originally rated PG it would easily be a PG13 by modern standards
80's Classic with Timeless Appeal
This is a movie about a young couple's struggle to cope with life, or rather their lack there of. The Maitlands discover that death is just the beginning and the living can be a nuisance.
Trouble is on the horizon as a yuppie couple and their terminally dismal daughter Lydia move in. The rustic country house is soon renovated into a warped view of abstract modernism. The Maitlands are unable to scare off the invaders. In a moment of desperation they respond to an erie advertisement by calling Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice.
After awakening this audacious spirit they soon realise why the other ghosts had warned against him. He is crass and crude and has no boundaries. However the Maitlands discover that putting this genie back in the bottle will not be easy.
Chaos ensues when Beetlejuice goes overboard and makes the family right back. Lydia, who has befriended the Maitlands, is caught in the middle.
This is one of my favorite movies of all time. It's a funny, quirky take on the afterlife. Tim Burton's signature style makes the world beyond both creepy and intriguing. It's paired perfectly with a brilliant score by Danny Elfman.
This is easily one of Michael Keaton best performances. Beetlejuice is the perfect villain that you love to hate, and you hate that you love. Every character is perfectly cast.
There are some negatives, but they're mostly nit-picks. This movie was PG when it came out, but some of the language and humor would easily make it a PG13 today. Some of the stop motion effects may look cheesey to some, although personally I love them. Finally, the eighties modern stylings of the Deets family may date the movie for some.
I cannot recommend this movie enough. If you love dark humor and the visual flare of Tim Burton you owe it to yourself to see this movie.
One final warning: The song Day-O will be stuck in your head for days.
Trouble is on the horizon as a yuppie couple and their terminally dismal daughter Lydia move in. The rustic country house is soon renovated into a warped view of abstract modernism. The Maitlands are unable to scare off the invaders. In a moment of desperation they respond to an erie advertisement by calling Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice.
After awakening this audacious spirit they soon realise why the other ghosts had warned against him. He is crass and crude and has no boundaries. However the Maitlands discover that putting this genie back in the bottle will not be easy.
Chaos ensues when Beetlejuice goes overboard and makes the family right back. Lydia, who has befriended the Maitlands, is caught in the middle.
This is one of my favorite movies of all time. It's a funny, quirky take on the afterlife. Tim Burton's signature style makes the world beyond both creepy and intriguing. It's paired perfectly with a brilliant score by Danny Elfman.
This is easily one of Michael Keaton best performances. Beetlejuice is the perfect villain that you love to hate, and you hate that you love. Every character is perfectly cast.
There are some negatives, but they're mostly nit-picks. This movie was PG when it came out, but some of the language and humor would easily make it a PG13 today. Some of the stop motion effects may look cheesey to some, although personally I love them. Finally, the eighties modern stylings of the Deets family may date the movie for some.
I cannot recommend this movie enough. If you love dark humor and the visual flare of Tim Burton you owe it to yourself to see this movie.
One final warning: The song Day-O will be stuck in your head for days.
Jamie (131 KP) rated The Walking Dead - Season 1 in TV
Jul 15, 2017
Gripping story (2 more)
Casting for the main characters was good
Dixon brothers are a great addition to the story
Bad special effects (2 more)
Characters actions sometimes don't make a lot of sense
A lot of filler characters and plot lines
Zombies in Atlanta
As a long time fan of The Walking Dead, including the comics, the books, and the video games, the television series did alright. I liked the casting for the main characters, much of the main story was kept loyal to the source material, and there were a few new characters and surprises added to the show.
There are a lot of new characters added to the story, the highlights being Daryl and Merle Dixon. The rest were easily forgettable and felt like filler characters to feed to the meat grinder to get a reaction out of audiences. This was sort of a negative to me because I would hardly have a chance to like or care about these new characters before they were killed off. This makes character deaths in the series have a little less impact.
The story deviates from the comics in both good and bad ways. I liked that a few character arcs were switched around to keep the story fresh for folks that have already read the comics. I liked that one of my least favorite characters from the comics, Carol, was changed in a way that makes her character more compelling.
My only other complaint would be the filler. It seemed like the story kept getting off track and moving away from the main conflict (Rick and Shane) pretty often, which makes the story feel sloppy. I don't know if it's just me, but I just didn't like the story arc with the CDC. It was promising and was interesting at first, but it became predictable pretty quickly and everything about it was just too ridiculous to me. The special effects were bad and it just made little to no sense the way it happened.
I wanted to like this first season more and be blown away but overall it was okay/good to me. I think it sets things up well and piqued my interest enough to continue to the next season. For zombie fans, it's definitely a series worth checking out. For those already well acquainted with the story via the comics, don't expect a faithful adaptation and be prepared for the usual tv tropes and silly plot filler.
There are a lot of new characters added to the story, the highlights being Daryl and Merle Dixon. The rest were easily forgettable and felt like filler characters to feed to the meat grinder to get a reaction out of audiences. This was sort of a negative to me because I would hardly have a chance to like or care about these new characters before they were killed off. This makes character deaths in the series have a little less impact.
The story deviates from the comics in both good and bad ways. I liked that a few character arcs were switched around to keep the story fresh for folks that have already read the comics. I liked that one of my least favorite characters from the comics, Carol, was changed in a way that makes her character more compelling.
My only other complaint would be the filler. It seemed like the story kept getting off track and moving away from the main conflict (Rick and Shane) pretty often, which makes the story feel sloppy. I don't know if it's just me, but I just didn't like the story arc with the CDC. It was promising and was interesting at first, but it became predictable pretty quickly and everything about it was just too ridiculous to me. The special effects were bad and it just made little to no sense the way it happened.
I wanted to like this first season more and be blown away but overall it was okay/good to me. I think it sets things up well and piqued my interest enough to continue to the next season. For zombie fans, it's definitely a series worth checking out. For those already well acquainted with the story via the comics, don't expect a faithful adaptation and be prepared for the usual tv tropes and silly plot filler.
Rachel King (13 KP) rated The Proper Care and Feeding of Marriage in Books
Feb 11, 2019
I read and loved two of Schlessinger's earlier works, The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands and Woman Power: Transform Your Man, Your Marriage, Your Life, so when I spotted this in my local library, I didn't think twice about reading it. The context of this book is relatively simple, but it really resonates with me and how I think. Probably half of the book is taken up with quotes from Dr. Laura's readers and listeners on various topics related to marriage, which I appreciate because it means that this isn't just a preachy "only my way works" self-help book, but a book chock full of experiences of many, many other married couples. One chapter in and I knew this book was gold - and then practically demanded my husband read it right after me. (We'll see how that goes.) I even shed a few tears at the end over a 57th birthday love letter a man wrote to his wife.
While some people will likely take offense at some of Dr. Laura's very strong opinions about the man and woman's role in marriage - man goes to work, woman stays home and takes care of home and children - I happen to agree with her as I am a stay-at-home mom myself. But even she admits to necessary exceptions to that rule in some circumstances - such as an injury preventing the man from working, and the woman choosing to take a job to pay for "luxuries." She had much to say about the negative effects that extremist feminism has had on marriage and child-rearing - and how to reverse those effects in the reader's own marriage, backed up with example after example from other married couples. While many counselors and therapists will simply listen to you verbally bash and complain about your spouse for session after session, she constantly brings the focus back to the complainer and encourages that person to do the changing he or she wants to see in the spouse. Her belief is that in most marriages, if one spouse gives what the other person wants, then that person will reciprocate. Dr. Laura's goals were very simply love and happiness in marriage, which everyone wants when they get married but often forget how to "do." Following her own KISS principle - "Keep it simple / small, stupid!" - she breaks down how to reach those goals very quickly and efficiently.
While some people will likely take offense at some of Dr. Laura's very strong opinions about the man and woman's role in marriage - man goes to work, woman stays home and takes care of home and children - I happen to agree with her as I am a stay-at-home mom myself. But even she admits to necessary exceptions to that rule in some circumstances - such as an injury preventing the man from working, and the woman choosing to take a job to pay for "luxuries." She had much to say about the negative effects that extremist feminism has had on marriage and child-rearing - and how to reverse those effects in the reader's own marriage, backed up with example after example from other married couples. While many counselors and therapists will simply listen to you verbally bash and complain about your spouse for session after session, she constantly brings the focus back to the complainer and encourages that person to do the changing he or she wants to see in the spouse. Her belief is that in most marriages, if one spouse gives what the other person wants, then that person will reciprocate. Dr. Laura's goals were very simply love and happiness in marriage, which everyone wants when they get married but often forget how to "do." Following her own KISS principle - "Keep it simple / small, stupid!" - she breaks down how to reach those goals very quickly and efficiently.
p3anut (62 KP) rated Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (2018) in Movies
Feb 20, 2019
Story (2 more)
The jokes
Graphics
Another trek into the jurassic
Contains spoilers, click to show
I would like to start out by saying that Jurassic Park is my favorite movie of all time! I remember being 7 and not having any fascination with dinosaurs and my parents took me and my sister to see it at the movie theater and I was immediately blown away and obsessed.
Flash forward 25 years and I'm still in love with the Jurassic Park series. Are they hollow shells of the original? Sure, but they are alot of fun.
This one starts out right after the events of Jurassic world and I liked the direction the movie was heading in. I thought some of the call backs to Jurassic world were really fun and clever but I thought the overall story arch of getting Claire to the island to rescue dinosaurs before the volcano erupted, was very reminiscent of the Jurassic Park 3 story line and we all know that movie was a straight up brontosaurus turd! Think about it, grant was lied to about taking Mr Kirby on a tour of dinosaurs and they landed to rescue Eric. Claire was lied to about saving dinosaurs so the main villan could get her to the island to save all these sepcies so he could sell them. ??? Trash setup.
The graphics were very well done and they had some pretty good practical effects and some pretty good practical effects with a slight layer of cgi. I loved the blue background story and I love that they are keeping rexy as a main dinosaur in these iterations.
Overall this movie was just a filler "episode" in the Jurassic Park series with some fun little throw backs to the previous films. It didn't really do anything that makes it standout in the series other than setup for the next movie.
I hope the next one delivers on the promise that dinosaurs will be roaming free around us. I honestly hope it goes even more sci-fi and massie turns evil and has a connection to the genetically engineered Dino's. And they try to take over the world! Just kidding on that last part. But if it is going to be the last movie in the new trilogy I hope they really nail the tone and the pace unlike this movie did.
Until next time my friends.
Flash forward 25 years and I'm still in love with the Jurassic Park series. Are they hollow shells of the original? Sure, but they are alot of fun.
This one starts out right after the events of Jurassic world and I liked the direction the movie was heading in. I thought some of the call backs to Jurassic world were really fun and clever but I thought the overall story arch of getting Claire to the island to rescue dinosaurs before the volcano erupted, was very reminiscent of the Jurassic Park 3 story line and we all know that movie was a straight up brontosaurus turd! Think about it, grant was lied to about taking Mr Kirby on a tour of dinosaurs and they landed to rescue Eric. Claire was lied to about saving dinosaurs so the main villan could get her to the island to save all these sepcies so he could sell them. ??? Trash setup.
The graphics were very well done and they had some pretty good practical effects and some pretty good practical effects with a slight layer of cgi. I loved the blue background story and I love that they are keeping rexy as a main dinosaur in these iterations.
Overall this movie was just a filler "episode" in the Jurassic Park series with some fun little throw backs to the previous films. It didn't really do anything that makes it standout in the series other than setup for the next movie.
I hope the next one delivers on the promise that dinosaurs will be roaming free around us. I honestly hope it goes even more sci-fi and massie turns evil and has a connection to the genetically engineered Dino's. And they try to take over the world! Just kidding on that last part. But if it is going to be the last movie in the new trilogy I hope they really nail the tone and the pace unlike this movie did.
Until next time my friends.
I received a copy of this book from Netgalley in exchange for an honest review.
This novel is set in London in a society where Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is on the rise. Ritalin is a drug that is used to calm children/teens with ADHD, however there is a new wonder drug Concentr8 which has the same desired effects but better and cheaper
The concentr8 program has been abandoned! as a result London is in chaos with riots, looting, and fires.
The novel starts off with 5 teenagers Blaze, Troy, Femi, Lee and Karen, on a whim they to decide to kidnap an employee from the Mayors offices and tie him to a radiator, but they don't really know why. It just happens.
I hadn't heard much about this book or the author when I requested it and the synopsis intrigued me or maybe it was the blinding yellow of the book that drew me in (who knows).
I really didn't like the writing style of this book, every chapter was told by a different person and because they were so short, I had to go back to remind myself who the narrator was. I have never seen writing like this before either, the words are mashed together, eg <b>"It's like all your lifeyou knowwhat's fantasyand whats solid..."</b> It is
like this throughout the book and I had to make sure what i was reading as could be confusing at times.There are lack of comma's, full stops and pretty appalling grammar with thick London accents.
So I researched ADHD and some of the symptoms are impulsiveness, little or no sense of danger, excessive talking, unable to concentrate, short attention span and many more. Which does come across in the characters.
This is one of the mental health issues that hasn't really be discussed in books that much and I was looking forward to it being touched upon. There are also excerpts in every chapter that has been taken from real life twitter accounts, magazines and other sources regarding Ritalin.
The book is very thought-provoking about ADHD, medications that are used, their side effects and diagnosis.
If you are interested in Mental Health and diverse books then have a look.
I personally didn't enjoy this book but made myself finish it (DNF is a rarity)
This novel is set in London in a society where Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is on the rise. Ritalin is a drug that is used to calm children/teens with ADHD, however there is a new wonder drug Concentr8 which has the same desired effects but better and cheaper
The concentr8 program has been abandoned! as a result London is in chaos with riots, looting, and fires.
The novel starts off with 5 teenagers Blaze, Troy, Femi, Lee and Karen, on a whim they to decide to kidnap an employee from the Mayors offices and tie him to a radiator, but they don't really know why. It just happens.
I hadn't heard much about this book or the author when I requested it and the synopsis intrigued me or maybe it was the blinding yellow of the book that drew me in (who knows).
I really didn't like the writing style of this book, every chapter was told by a different person and because they were so short, I had to go back to remind myself who the narrator was. I have never seen writing like this before either, the words are mashed together, eg <b>"It's like all your lifeyou knowwhat's fantasyand whats solid..."</b> It is
like this throughout the book and I had to make sure what i was reading as could be confusing at times.There are lack of comma's, full stops and pretty appalling grammar with thick London accents.
So I researched ADHD and some of the symptoms are impulsiveness, little or no sense of danger, excessive talking, unable to concentrate, short attention span and many more. Which does come across in the characters.
This is one of the mental health issues that hasn't really be discussed in books that much and I was looking forward to it being touched upon. There are also excerpts in every chapter that has been taken from real life twitter accounts, magazines and other sources regarding Ritalin.
The book is very thought-provoking about ADHD, medications that are used, their side effects and diagnosis.
If you are interested in Mental Health and diverse books then have a look.
I personally didn't enjoy this book but made myself finish it (DNF is a rarity)
Darren (1599 KP) rated Dracula (1958) in Movies
Oct 31, 2019
Characters – Doctor Van Helsing has been trying to hunt down Dracula for years now, his latest attempt sees him anger the vampire, forcing him to defend his loved ones before he starts his own attack on the vampire. Count Dracula has lived a life where his presence has struck fear in the locals, he is a vampire with his age seemingly unknown, after his bride is taken from him, he goes after the people that took her, in search of finding his new bride. Arthur is one of the people working with Van Helsing, it is his family that has becomes the target of Dracula, with Mina being the wife of Arthur that is one of the women Dracula wants to make his brides.
Performances – Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee are the icons on the 50’s horrors, this film shows they are just wonderful in the horror performances both sides of the good and evil scale. When it comes to the supporting roles, it appears that the rest of the cast are meant to just let the lead two stars take the spotlight.
Story – The story here is the basic Dracula story, where after one of his brides is killed, Dracula targets the family that took his bride to get his own new bride and revenge. The Dracula story has been told so many times, it does become slightly boring to watch a story that doesn’t offer anything new to the tried and tested formula. If you do know the basic story, you will know everything that happens in this film which just ends up being nothing refreshing.
Horror – The horror comes the ideas of vampires with Dracula lurking in the darkness, most doesn’t come off scary though which is disappointing.
Settings – The film uses the couple of main locations, we have the castle of course which we don’t spend enough time around, the English house that shows how the family will try to hide from Dracula.
Special Effects – The effects are practical which do bring one of the most memorable scenes in the film.
Scene of the Movie – final showdown.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It isn’t anything new.
Final Thoughts – This is a hammer horror version of Dracula, it works well enough for the basic idea, only it doesn’t reach too much new to the story idea.
Overall: Hammer Horror Dracula.
Performances – Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee are the icons on the 50’s horrors, this film shows they are just wonderful in the horror performances both sides of the good and evil scale. When it comes to the supporting roles, it appears that the rest of the cast are meant to just let the lead two stars take the spotlight.
Story – The story here is the basic Dracula story, where after one of his brides is killed, Dracula targets the family that took his bride to get his own new bride and revenge. The Dracula story has been told so many times, it does become slightly boring to watch a story that doesn’t offer anything new to the tried and tested formula. If you do know the basic story, you will know everything that happens in this film which just ends up being nothing refreshing.
Horror – The horror comes the ideas of vampires with Dracula lurking in the darkness, most doesn’t come off scary though which is disappointing.
Settings – The film uses the couple of main locations, we have the castle of course which we don’t spend enough time around, the English house that shows how the family will try to hide from Dracula.
Special Effects – The effects are practical which do bring one of the most memorable scenes in the film.
Scene of the Movie – final showdown.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It isn’t anything new.
Final Thoughts – This is a hammer horror version of Dracula, it works well enough for the basic idea, only it doesn’t reach too much new to the story idea.
Overall: Hammer Horror Dracula.