Search
Search results
The Wide Circumference of Love: A Novel
8.0
Rate It
Book
From acclaimed author Marita Golden comes a moving African-American family drama of love and...
Family
Resident Evil (Remake)
8.2
Rate It
Video Game Watch
Resident Evil, the game often credited with starting the survival-horror genre, has been reinvented...
Survival Horror Zombies
Jpb (34 KP) rated Malignant (2021) in Movies
Sep 12, 2021
Not your typical Wan
Contains spoilers, click to show
So I went see this , And with it being James Wan I expected a serious supernatural horror so, I started watching it with a mind set it might be a supernatural or entity type movie like the conjuring but I couldn’t of been more wrong. Its different in a good way its on the verge of silly but by damn he made it work. The visuals, the camera angles, the music, the gore its all one fun head fu**ed up ride! The special effects are crazy cool looking and the movie even gives you a hint of nostalgia to all those original horror movies. This movie is an unexpected mind blow I enjoyed every plot twist and hidden joke because there is some comedy in the mix or perhaps its just my dark sense of humor lol. Over all a good movie to watch a refreshing plot line to be honest. James Wan is a master at what he does and once again he delivered.
I came out thinking if this was the late 80s I would of just watched elm street about a serial kill that kills u in your sleep , which was also silly fun and scary. If you want something that pushes the boundaries then this is for you.
I came out thinking if this was the late 80s I would of just watched elm street about a serial kill that kills u in your sleep , which was also silly fun and scary. If you want something that pushes the boundaries then this is for you.
Merissa (12066 KP) rated Wait! (Oxley College #2) in Books
Apr 12, 2023
This is the third book in the Oxley College series although it can (and was by me) read as a standalone. This in no way disrupted my reading or enjoyment of the story.
This book concentrates on Jordan - a serious ex-rugby player who just wants to study hard and doesn't want any sort of relationship - and Hex - a fun-loving party girl who's hiding her hurt behind a smiling mask. They both have secrets and issues that they are dealing with and it's the way that they deal with them and each other that makes this book such a joy to read.
There is insta-lust between the two of them but they actually take the time to build up their relationship which makes a refreshing change.
This story is very well written and deals with some very hard subjects - binge drinking, the death of a sibling, the effects of words spoken by parents who don't know the child is listening - that sort of thing. None of it is preachy or judgmental but tells Jordan and Hex's story perfectly.
Definitely recommended to all fans of Contemporary Romance.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Jun 02, 2015
This book concentrates on Jordan - a serious ex-rugby player who just wants to study hard and doesn't want any sort of relationship - and Hex - a fun-loving party girl who's hiding her hurt behind a smiling mask. They both have secrets and issues that they are dealing with and it's the way that they deal with them and each other that makes this book such a joy to read.
There is insta-lust between the two of them but they actually take the time to build up their relationship which makes a refreshing change.
This story is very well written and deals with some very hard subjects - binge drinking, the death of a sibling, the effects of words spoken by parents who don't know the child is listening - that sort of thing. None of it is preachy or judgmental but tells Jordan and Hex's story perfectly.
Definitely recommended to all fans of Contemporary Romance.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Jun 02, 2015
Seven Knights
Games
App
Meet a visually powerful RPG like you’ve never experienced before! We invite you to the world of...
David McK (3425 KP) rated The Mummy Returns (2001) in Movies
Sep 6, 2021 (Updated Sep 3, 2023)
Brendan Fraser as Rick O'Connoll (1 more)
Rachel Weisz as Evie
There was a time in the mid to late 90s/early 00s where Brendan Fraser was a Bona Fide movie star, back before he took a break from acting.
A large part of that appeal was due to his (very) Indiana Jones-alike Rick O'Connell, a role he first portrayed in 1999s The Mummy and reprised in this (which is the middle of the Mummy films).
Unlike the sequel to this, this one also sees the return of Rachel Weisz as his now-wife Evie O'Connell (a role recast in the third film) alongside returning players from the first movie: Arnold Vosloo's Imhotep himself, John Hannah as Evie's no-good brother, Oded Fehr as the Medjai Ardeth Bay - here on the O'Connell's side throughout - and Patricia Velasquez as the reincarnated Anck Su Namun.
As such, there are strong links to the original move here, with this particular entry also seeing Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson's breakthrough to acting, as the titular Scorpion King (although some of the later effects haven't aged all that well).
Mostly enjoyable, although (and, IMO, unfortunately), they went down the 'annoying child actor' route, with the whole plot about their child getting kidnapped that kicks the journey into motion ...
A large part of that appeal was due to his (very) Indiana Jones-alike Rick O'Connell, a role he first portrayed in 1999s The Mummy and reprised in this (which is the middle of the Mummy films).
Unlike the sequel to this, this one also sees the return of Rachel Weisz as his now-wife Evie O'Connell (a role recast in the third film) alongside returning players from the first movie: Arnold Vosloo's Imhotep himself, John Hannah as Evie's no-good brother, Oded Fehr as the Medjai Ardeth Bay - here on the O'Connell's side throughout - and Patricia Velasquez as the reincarnated Anck Su Namun.
As such, there are strong links to the original move here, with this particular entry also seeing Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson's breakthrough to acting, as the titular Scorpion King (although some of the later effects haven't aged all that well).
Mostly enjoyable, although (and, IMO, unfortunately), they went down the 'annoying child actor' route, with the whole plot about their child getting kidnapped that kicks the journey into motion ...
Abolishing the Traditions of Men in the Church
10.0
Rate It
Book
This book shows how the original Hebrews, including the followers of Christ, understood God’s...
religion
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Gemini Man (2019) in Movies
Nov 10, 2019
Will Smith plays top US hit-man Henry Brogan who is making the world "safer" one bullet at a time! With the mirror telling him his age, Henry hands in his firearm (not withstanding the arsenal under his stairs) to spend more time going fishing and doing the crossword.
But all is not well when Henry's 'one for the road' hit turns out to not be quite what it seems.
Teaming up with marina manager Danny (Danny??) Zakarweski (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), the pair go on the run from operatives of a government-funded black-ops organization called Gemini. Gemini is a private semi-military organization (didn't we just go here with "Angel Has Fallen"?!). These 'baddie goodies' would rather see Henry - and all who know him - fed to the fishes rather than have him catching them.
But one of these guys, under the direct command of Gemini-boss Clay Verris (Clive Owen), looks kinda familiar...
Let's focus on the positives for a minute. This is a spy movie that has all of the polish that the recent "Angel has Fallen" didn't have. Some nice photogenic locations fly in and out again (Georgia, Budapest and Colombia: the latter for no obvious reason I can remember!). It occasionally reminded me of a glossy Bond film, but without Bond.
There are also some high-class special effects (the special effects coordinator is Mark Hawker). A moonlit CGI Gulfstream with a zoom into the cockpit is particularly impressive.
Some of the action set pieces also entertain. A Will-on-Will bike chase is well done, and I've not seen a bike used as a hand-to-hand weapon in this way before!
And Will Smith is no doubt a class act, with his 'youngification' (I'm not sure what the official word is) also being effectively done. I also enjoyed Mary Elizabeth Winstead, who was great in "10 Cloverfield Lane". The lady has real screen presence.
But man oh man, that script. Let's name the guilty parties in this film: the scriptwriters David Benioff (Game of Thrones), Darren Lemke and Billy Ray. (I'll put Ray last in the list, since the story was by Benioff and Lemke and this has the smell to me of Ray - who has a history of some great scripts like Captain Phillips under his name - being drafted in to steady a listing ship).
Some of the dialogue in this film is not just a bit dodgy. It's head in the hands groan-worthy (and I actually did at times: fortunately the cinema was barely half full and I was on my own in the whole row). And some of it is just plain offensive. Henry meets his old pal Jack Willis (Douglas Hodge) on his yacht where he explains his wife is on a trip to Paris as a scantily clad dolly-bird wanders past. Henry comically rolls his eyes at this adulterous behaviour, with some sort of "Jack, what are you loike!" comment. Cringe-worthy.
Will Smith, Mary Elizabeth Winstead and Benedict Wong (their ally, adding some comic relief) are clearly good actors. But the script often makes them look utterly vacuous and stupid. And Lee seems to have a "good enough, move on" approach to the filming. One jaw-dropping moment has Will Smith telling the others that they are going to Budapest. "Budapest?" Winstead and Wong are supposed to say in union, but mistime it. "Can we do that again?". Nope. It's on the screen.
As for Clive Owen... sorry, he's really not in the same acting league, and the script does him even fewer favours. As he says at one point "It's like the Hindenburg crashing into the Titanic". I couldn't have put it better myself.
"Uncanny Valley". You know this phrase. The Princess Leia and Moff Tarkin scenes in "Rogue One" is the classic example. Effects that don't quite work on the big screen. "But" - you say to yourself - "Dr Bob just said that the 'youngification' of Will Smith was done really well?". And I'll repeat again that it was. It's on a par with Samuel L. Jackson's 'youngification' in "Captain Marvel". Where something strange happens is in the film's overall projection. Ang Lee has tried again with his experiment of filming at a massive 120 frames per second..... five times the normal movie frame rate of 24 fps. And the quality of the picture - particularly during high-speed action scenes - becomes outstandingly good! But equally it just doesn't 'look right'.
When the human eye presumably works at an equivalent "fps" of thousands of 'frames per second' you'd think that it should all be fine. But for some reason I just found it distracting. Presumably the audiences for "The Jazz Singer" thought the same about sound; and those for "Gone with the Wind" and the "Wizard of Oz" about colour. Maybe we've seen the future, and its the new norm that we just need to get used to. We'll see.
Ang Lee's "Life of Pi" was extraordinary. His "Hulk" was one of the poorest of the Marvel canon. Unfortunately, this movie is at the "Hulk" end of the spectrum. Which is a real shame. The duo of the 51 year old Smith and the 35 year old Winstead work really well together. They have great chemistry, but, you'll be relieved to hear, avoid any icky love interest.
What a shame. With a different script, and some good production values, this could have been a very different story.
(For the full graphical review, please check out https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2019/10/18/one-manns-movies-film-review-gemini-man-2019/ )
But all is not well when Henry's 'one for the road' hit turns out to not be quite what it seems.
Teaming up with marina manager Danny (Danny??) Zakarweski (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), the pair go on the run from operatives of a government-funded black-ops organization called Gemini. Gemini is a private semi-military organization (didn't we just go here with "Angel Has Fallen"?!). These 'baddie goodies' would rather see Henry - and all who know him - fed to the fishes rather than have him catching them.
But one of these guys, under the direct command of Gemini-boss Clay Verris (Clive Owen), looks kinda familiar...
Let's focus on the positives for a minute. This is a spy movie that has all of the polish that the recent "Angel has Fallen" didn't have. Some nice photogenic locations fly in and out again (Georgia, Budapest and Colombia: the latter for no obvious reason I can remember!). It occasionally reminded me of a glossy Bond film, but without Bond.
There are also some high-class special effects (the special effects coordinator is Mark Hawker). A moonlit CGI Gulfstream with a zoom into the cockpit is particularly impressive.
Some of the action set pieces also entertain. A Will-on-Will bike chase is well done, and I've not seen a bike used as a hand-to-hand weapon in this way before!
And Will Smith is no doubt a class act, with his 'youngification' (I'm not sure what the official word is) also being effectively done. I also enjoyed Mary Elizabeth Winstead, who was great in "10 Cloverfield Lane". The lady has real screen presence.
But man oh man, that script. Let's name the guilty parties in this film: the scriptwriters David Benioff (Game of Thrones), Darren Lemke and Billy Ray. (I'll put Ray last in the list, since the story was by Benioff and Lemke and this has the smell to me of Ray - who has a history of some great scripts like Captain Phillips under his name - being drafted in to steady a listing ship).
Some of the dialogue in this film is not just a bit dodgy. It's head in the hands groan-worthy (and I actually did at times: fortunately the cinema was barely half full and I was on my own in the whole row). And some of it is just plain offensive. Henry meets his old pal Jack Willis (Douglas Hodge) on his yacht where he explains his wife is on a trip to Paris as a scantily clad dolly-bird wanders past. Henry comically rolls his eyes at this adulterous behaviour, with some sort of "Jack, what are you loike!" comment. Cringe-worthy.
Will Smith, Mary Elizabeth Winstead and Benedict Wong (their ally, adding some comic relief) are clearly good actors. But the script often makes them look utterly vacuous and stupid. And Lee seems to have a "good enough, move on" approach to the filming. One jaw-dropping moment has Will Smith telling the others that they are going to Budapest. "Budapest?" Winstead and Wong are supposed to say in union, but mistime it. "Can we do that again?". Nope. It's on the screen.
As for Clive Owen... sorry, he's really not in the same acting league, and the script does him even fewer favours. As he says at one point "It's like the Hindenburg crashing into the Titanic". I couldn't have put it better myself.
"Uncanny Valley". You know this phrase. The Princess Leia and Moff Tarkin scenes in "Rogue One" is the classic example. Effects that don't quite work on the big screen. "But" - you say to yourself - "Dr Bob just said that the 'youngification' of Will Smith was done really well?". And I'll repeat again that it was. It's on a par with Samuel L. Jackson's 'youngification' in "Captain Marvel". Where something strange happens is in the film's overall projection. Ang Lee has tried again with his experiment of filming at a massive 120 frames per second..... five times the normal movie frame rate of 24 fps. And the quality of the picture - particularly during high-speed action scenes - becomes outstandingly good! But equally it just doesn't 'look right'.
When the human eye presumably works at an equivalent "fps" of thousands of 'frames per second' you'd think that it should all be fine. But for some reason I just found it distracting. Presumably the audiences for "The Jazz Singer" thought the same about sound; and those for "Gone with the Wind" and the "Wizard of Oz" about colour. Maybe we've seen the future, and its the new norm that we just need to get used to. We'll see.
Ang Lee's "Life of Pi" was extraordinary. His "Hulk" was one of the poorest of the Marvel canon. Unfortunately, this movie is at the "Hulk" end of the spectrum. Which is a real shame. The duo of the 51 year old Smith and the 35 year old Winstead work really well together. They have great chemistry, but, you'll be relieved to hear, avoid any icky love interest.
What a shame. With a different script, and some good production values, this could have been a very different story.
(For the full graphical review, please check out https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2019/10/18/one-manns-movies-film-review-gemini-man-2019/ )
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Final Destination 5 (2011) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 11, 2019)
Did we really need another Final Destination film? After the last, merely average movie, the answer on everyone’s lips was a firm and resounding no. However, a surprising return to form for the franchise has ensured that even this old goat has life in it yet.
Gone are the cheap, cheesy shocks that littered Final Destination 3 and 4. In their place are the genuine thrills and spills from the first two films. The movie returns the guessing game element to its audience and for that I am thoroughly grateful.
Newcomer Steven Quale helms this instalment which combines excellent 3D with fantastic special effects and a dazzling set of opening credits which showcase the deaths from the films that preceded it. I wasn’t expecting much from this film, I have to admit, but the credits really are a highlight as you try and remember which film each death is from.
As with any film in the Final Destination franchise, an epic opening disaster is the norm. Whilst the motorway pileup from Final Destination 2 has been the best up until now, the bridge collapse in this film is utterly mesmerising and edge of your seat thrilling. From the flawless special effects to the scale of the production, it surpasses anything seen before in the series.
The deaths have also returned to form too. Instead of out and out cheese, they’re shocking to the point of jaw-dropping. It’ll have you checking every loose nut and bolt from now on and probably have you resisting that fashionable laser eye surgery too. Thankfully though, away from the deaths, it errs on the side of humorous without delving into slapstick.
Nicholas D’Agosto leads a small cast as they try and find a way to cheat death after surviving that epic bridge disaster. An interesting storyline this time around has the cast told that they are able to cheat death by killing someone else, therefore having their life swapped with yours. The acting from all corners leaves a lot to be desired and the dialogue and performances are unashamedly wooden but this is a small point in a film that really does shock and surprise.
However, perhaps the best part of the film and the reason why it’s so enjoyable is the final twist, a twist that will leave you shouting at the screen in dismay. It’s practically impossible to see it coming until the last 5 minutes and in these last minutes you realise just how clever director Steven Quale has been in creating this film.
It may not be the most original movie to ever grace the big screen and the cast aren’t going to trouble the Oscars but Final Destination 5 returns a lifeless franchise to what it once was, bloody good fun and as such it is by far, the best in the series.
So, the question now is; do we need Final Destination 6?
https://moviemetropolis.net/2011/09/21/review-final-destination-5-2011/
Gone are the cheap, cheesy shocks that littered Final Destination 3 and 4. In their place are the genuine thrills and spills from the first two films. The movie returns the guessing game element to its audience and for that I am thoroughly grateful.
Newcomer Steven Quale helms this instalment which combines excellent 3D with fantastic special effects and a dazzling set of opening credits which showcase the deaths from the films that preceded it. I wasn’t expecting much from this film, I have to admit, but the credits really are a highlight as you try and remember which film each death is from.
As with any film in the Final Destination franchise, an epic opening disaster is the norm. Whilst the motorway pileup from Final Destination 2 has been the best up until now, the bridge collapse in this film is utterly mesmerising and edge of your seat thrilling. From the flawless special effects to the scale of the production, it surpasses anything seen before in the series.
The deaths have also returned to form too. Instead of out and out cheese, they’re shocking to the point of jaw-dropping. It’ll have you checking every loose nut and bolt from now on and probably have you resisting that fashionable laser eye surgery too. Thankfully though, away from the deaths, it errs on the side of humorous without delving into slapstick.
Nicholas D’Agosto leads a small cast as they try and find a way to cheat death after surviving that epic bridge disaster. An interesting storyline this time around has the cast told that they are able to cheat death by killing someone else, therefore having their life swapped with yours. The acting from all corners leaves a lot to be desired and the dialogue and performances are unashamedly wooden but this is a small point in a film that really does shock and surprise.
However, perhaps the best part of the film and the reason why it’s so enjoyable is the final twist, a twist that will leave you shouting at the screen in dismay. It’s practically impossible to see it coming until the last 5 minutes and in these last minutes you realise just how clever director Steven Quale has been in creating this film.
It may not be the most original movie to ever grace the big screen and the cast aren’t going to trouble the Oscars but Final Destination 5 returns a lifeless franchise to what it once was, bloody good fun and as such it is by far, the best in the series.
So, the question now is; do we need Final Destination 6?
https://moviemetropolis.net/2011/09/21/review-final-destination-5-2011/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Fantastic Four (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
An absolute snooze
Here comes yet another superhero film. Ending Marvel’s year that has included the charming Big Hero 6, the overstuffed Avengers: Age of Ultron and the surprisingly excellent Ant-Man, the Fox produced Fantastic Four reboot has a tough job trying to get audiences to forget the horror that came before it.
It’s been a tough ride for the quartet of heroes, but does director Josh Trank’s modern day reimagining of Marvel’s first team do enough to change perceptions?
Not by a long shot. Despite some excellent special effects, this yawnfest of a film that was plagued by rumours of constant behind-the-scenes tension and last-minute editing doesn’t have an ounce of originality in its short 100 minute running time.
Miles Teller (Insurgent), Kate Mara (Transcendence), Michael B. Jordan (Chronicle) and Jamie Bell (Billy Elliot) take on the roles of Reed Richards, Sue Storm, Johnny Storm and Ben Grimm respectively and are fine, if lacking in any real chemistry.
Fantastic Four is above all, an origins story as the four young adults try to crack interdimensional travel. Naturally, things don’t go quite to plan and they, alongside fellow colleague Victor Von Doom end up with an unusual set of powers – with Doom becoming the main antagonist.
Unfortunately, the plot, devised by no less than three writers is a complete bore. There is hardly anything of interest throughout the entire film as Trank pushes his cast from one underwhelming set piece to another.
When things do get tense, it’s only for a five minute scene involving Doom breaking out of a research facility. This is when we get to see what Fantastic Four could’ve been, a dark and brooding film with a disturbing villain at its core.
However, it seems this has been pushed back to make way for an unusually flat sense of humour and an uninteresting origins story. Marvel films live and die on their comedic elements and unfortunately Fantastic Four is as poor as they come.
Nevertheless, the film’s special effects are on the whole, very good. The other dimension looks fantastic and The Thing in particular is rendered using excellent motion capture animation.
An underwhelming climax wraps up a bitterly disappointing outing for the four heroes. Most superhero films end with a spectacular showdown of good versus evil but Fantastic Four has none of this. The ending is clichéd, short and has no real payoff.
Overall, expectations were already low for this reboot and despite director Josh Trank’s obvious talent for direction, this talent is nowhere to be found in Fantastic Four.
A cast that doesn’t gel together, a poor soundtrack and a lack of tonal balance ensures it will rest alongside X-Men Origins: Wolverine as proof that Marvel Studios needs the rights to all of its heroes returning to it.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/08/09/an-absolute-snooze-fantastic-four-review/
It’s been a tough ride for the quartet of heroes, but does director Josh Trank’s modern day reimagining of Marvel’s first team do enough to change perceptions?
Not by a long shot. Despite some excellent special effects, this yawnfest of a film that was plagued by rumours of constant behind-the-scenes tension and last-minute editing doesn’t have an ounce of originality in its short 100 minute running time.
Miles Teller (Insurgent), Kate Mara (Transcendence), Michael B. Jordan (Chronicle) and Jamie Bell (Billy Elliot) take on the roles of Reed Richards, Sue Storm, Johnny Storm and Ben Grimm respectively and are fine, if lacking in any real chemistry.
Fantastic Four is above all, an origins story as the four young adults try to crack interdimensional travel. Naturally, things don’t go quite to plan and they, alongside fellow colleague Victor Von Doom end up with an unusual set of powers – with Doom becoming the main antagonist.
Unfortunately, the plot, devised by no less than three writers is a complete bore. There is hardly anything of interest throughout the entire film as Trank pushes his cast from one underwhelming set piece to another.
When things do get tense, it’s only for a five minute scene involving Doom breaking out of a research facility. This is when we get to see what Fantastic Four could’ve been, a dark and brooding film with a disturbing villain at its core.
However, it seems this has been pushed back to make way for an unusually flat sense of humour and an uninteresting origins story. Marvel films live and die on their comedic elements and unfortunately Fantastic Four is as poor as they come.
Nevertheless, the film’s special effects are on the whole, very good. The other dimension looks fantastic and The Thing in particular is rendered using excellent motion capture animation.
An underwhelming climax wraps up a bitterly disappointing outing for the four heroes. Most superhero films end with a spectacular showdown of good versus evil but Fantastic Four has none of this. The ending is clichéd, short and has no real payoff.
Overall, expectations were already low for this reboot and despite director Josh Trank’s obvious talent for direction, this talent is nowhere to be found in Fantastic Four.
A cast that doesn’t gel together, a poor soundtrack and a lack of tonal balance ensures it will rest alongside X-Men Origins: Wolverine as proof that Marvel Studios needs the rights to all of its heroes returning to it.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/08/09/an-absolute-snooze-fantastic-four-review/