Search
Search results
Li Hughes (285 KP) rated Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016) in Movies
Aug 5, 2017
(FYI, I meant to rate this a 9/10 but my mouse is borked. Have to wait 4 weeks to fix the rating.)
This is an amazing movie to wash Star Wars 1-3 from the collective palate. (To be fair, I didn't HATE those movies...they just didn't live up to the rest of the series.) This is basically a restart, but without losing any of the history that was already built up.
It is much more a straight-up war movie than any of the rest of the series. Death and violence were definitely present before, but always with a "galaxy far, far away" feeling to them. In Rogue One, every injury and death is immediate, not gory but much more real than Obi-Wan winking out of existence or Luke's hand shearing off with minor discomfort. The ending definitely continues in that vein: I love the sharp reality of it and the flavor it gives to rewatches of the original movies now, but it was so painful to watch in the theater!
My biggest gripe was simply the CGI done for young Leia and Tarkin. Leia wasn't too bad, just enough off that it makes my eyes want to slide off without quite knowing why. But Tarkin was awkward and just weird looking. If you're going to recreate characters for whatever reason, either put the money in to get the CGI right or if the effects simply aren't up to that yet, wait until they are.
This is an amazing movie to wash Star Wars 1-3 from the collective palate. (To be fair, I didn't HATE those movies...they just didn't live up to the rest of the series.) This is basically a restart, but without losing any of the history that was already built up.
It is much more a straight-up war movie than any of the rest of the series. Death and violence were definitely present before, but always with a "galaxy far, far away" feeling to them. In Rogue One, every injury and death is immediate, not gory but much more real than Obi-Wan winking out of existence or Luke's hand shearing off with minor discomfort. The ending definitely continues in that vein: I love the sharp reality of it and the flavor it gives to rewatches of the original movies now, but it was so painful to watch in the theater!
My biggest gripe was simply the CGI done for young Leia and Tarkin. Leia wasn't too bad, just enough off that it makes my eyes want to slide off without quite knowing why. But Tarkin was awkward and just weird looking. If you're going to recreate characters for whatever reason, either put the money in to get the CGI right or if the effects simply aren't up to that yet, wait until they are.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Hangar 18 (1980) in Movies
May 20, 2018 (Updated May 20, 2018)
Heroically low-budget, almost entirely inept pseudo-sci-fi from the makers of In Search of Noah's Ark and The Mysterious Monsters. There's less of a docu-drama vibe to this one but a definite proto-X-Files flavour as sinister government types cover up the crash-landing of a flying saucer, while fitting up two heroic, improbably-cast NASA astronauts for the death of a colleague in orbit. The cover-up is stupid and unconvincing; so are the astronaut characters; both are better than the special effects and props, which score highly on the crud-o-meter.
Main points of interest are as follows: Robert Vaughn as the slimy White House operator, who doesn't meet the rest of the main cast while giving a performance best-described as very Robert Vaughny. Darren McGavin comes as close as anyone to rescuing the movie as a sympathetic NASA director leading the investigation of the plastic UFO. (This is one of those movies with an almost wholly white male cast, so I expect it will be burnt at the stake in the not too distant future.)
The original ending, in which nearly everyone dies and the world is (probably) doomed by self-serving politicians, seems to have been lost to history, replaced by the one from the TV version, which is less downbeat but thoroughly pointless (so perhaps more appropriate for the movie). This isn't even fun junk, it's just witless stodge. Possibly of some value to cultural historians as a time capsule of fringe late-70s concerns, a waste of time for everyone else.
Main points of interest are as follows: Robert Vaughn as the slimy White House operator, who doesn't meet the rest of the main cast while giving a performance best-described as very Robert Vaughny. Darren McGavin comes as close as anyone to rescuing the movie as a sympathetic NASA director leading the investigation of the plastic UFO. (This is one of those movies with an almost wholly white male cast, so I expect it will be burnt at the stake in the not too distant future.)
The original ending, in which nearly everyone dies and the world is (probably) doomed by self-serving politicians, seems to have been lost to history, replaced by the one from the TV version, which is less downbeat but thoroughly pointless (so perhaps more appropriate for the movie). This isn't even fun junk, it's just witless stodge. Possibly of some value to cultural historians as a time capsule of fringe late-70s concerns, a waste of time for everyone else.
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Velvet Buzzsaw (2019) in Movies
Feb 2, 2019 (Updated Feb 3, 2019)
A little confused
A little confused is definitely how I feel about this film. In parts it’s a darkly satirical take on the art world with some horror thrown in, but the rest is just plain old dull with a handful of characters you care little about. Jake Gyllenhaal is great as usual, but I feel the rest of the cast were a let down. Zawe Ashton especially seemed to put in a very deadpan and robot like performance - must have been how her character was intended but it just didn’t work. It also doesn’t help that despite Jake Gyllenhaal, there’s no real main character in this and this is where it falls done, bouncing between a lot of mostly conceited unliveable characters.
This film spends far too much time talking and poking fun at the art world, instead of focusing more on the horror aspect. The story of art killing people is an intriguing one that sounds like it’s been taken straight out of a Stephen King book, it’s just a shame the film didn’t capitalise on this until well over an hour in. Especially as a lot of the horror parts were well done and quite disturbing, although some of the special effects were a bit OTT.
I just find this entire film a little bit meh. It wasn’t terrible, but it’s not particularly memorable either. And whilst I’m sure there’s a message about the fake and judgemental art world, it doesn’t really make for a great film.
This film spends far too much time talking and poking fun at the art world, instead of focusing more on the horror aspect. The story of art killing people is an intriguing one that sounds like it’s been taken straight out of a Stephen King book, it’s just a shame the film didn’t capitalise on this until well over an hour in. Especially as a lot of the horror parts were well done and quite disturbing, although some of the special effects were a bit OTT.
I just find this entire film a little bit meh. It wasn’t terrible, but it’s not particularly memorable either. And whilst I’m sure there’s a message about the fake and judgemental art world, it doesn’t really make for a great film.
Andrew Kennedy (199 KP) rated Birdemic: Shock And Terror (2008) in Movies
May 30, 2019
Terrible audio (3 more)
Laughable editing
The worst CG birds ever
Horrific acting
Contains spoilers, click to show
A friend posted a trailer for Birdemic, i have now watched this and must advise others to not make my mistake.
The editing is all over the place and the sound mix is horrendous, espically scenes on the beach. The score just starts and stops at random points. Then theres the cgi birds, oh my god they are the worst cg effects i have seen ever.
The story for the first half is a romance as Rod and Natalie meet and become a couple. To be fair Adam Bagh and Whitney Moore are a likeable couple but cant act and are hindered by the slapshot editing.
Then randomly birds attack. For no reason. They claw people, they explode but never blow up a gas station even though they hit two.
Our hero couple meet another couple and bravely fight the birds with coat hangers!
Get to the other couples van and suddenly they have guns!
They resuce some kids. On a road when in the first shot is deserted but in the rest of the shot is very busy.
They have a picnic. Meet a Dr who lectures us on Global Warming. Humoursly there is a bird in the background of this shot.
The rest of the film is forgettable. The director goes for the Hitchcock-esque ending of the birds just stop attacking and fly off.
This film is bad, characters make bizzare decisions, the birds are the worst they just sort of float there.
The editing is all over the place and the sound mix is horrendous, espically scenes on the beach. The score just starts and stops at random points. Then theres the cgi birds, oh my god they are the worst cg effects i have seen ever.
The story for the first half is a romance as Rod and Natalie meet and become a couple. To be fair Adam Bagh and Whitney Moore are a likeable couple but cant act and are hindered by the slapshot editing.
Then randomly birds attack. For no reason. They claw people, they explode but never blow up a gas station even though they hit two.
Our hero couple meet another couple and bravely fight the birds with coat hangers!
Get to the other couples van and suddenly they have guns!
They resuce some kids. On a road when in the first shot is deserted but in the rest of the shot is very busy.
They have a picnic. Meet a Dr who lectures us on Global Warming. Humoursly there is a bird in the background of this shot.
The rest of the film is forgettable. The director goes for the Hitchcock-esque ending of the birds just stop attacking and fly off.
This film is bad, characters make bizzare decisions, the birds are the worst they just sort of float there.
Sean Farrell (9 KP) rated I am Pilgrim in Books
Mar 15, 2018
This novel has been garnering high praise all summer long so I was very excited to get into it, and I was certainly not disappointed. This suspense novel simultaneously tells the story of a mysterious murder in New York City and a potential terrorist plot in the Middle East that could have unimaginably catastrophic effects for civilization as we know it. The protagonist, who has gone by many names throughout his life, is a compelling and necessarily flawed character. There are certainly things about him that one could find disagreeable, but he is still more than human enough to be worth rooting for. The other primary characters are also fleshed out enough to be equally compelling. As for the plot, it jumps around the world and across decades smoothly and at such a breakneck pace that it gets harder and harder to put this book down as it goes. While the mystery winds up being satisfyingly twisty, it is the terrorist plot that is the main point of the book, and it is easily one of the most plausibly horrifying things I have ever read. Suffice it to say that it has added something new to my list of worries, and I certainly hope that some actions are taken to ensure something like this never happens in real life. This is one of the most entertaining (and harrowing) books I have read this year, and is likely to wind up on more than a few end-of-the-year best lists.
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Adrift (2018) in Movies
Jul 10, 2018
A very sad true story
I hadn't read many good reviews for this film so I honestly hadn't been expecting much, but it is actually quite good.
The film works well as it doesn't follow a linear narrative which would've been a little boring. Instead it opts to throw us straight into the immediate aftermath of the disaster, but flashing back to the couple and how they met, and how they came to be at sea. It also helps that Shailene Woodley is a great actress and very engaging and believable. This film wouldn't have worked half as well without her in it. Sam Claflin is perhaps a tad underused and I think there parts of this that maybe go a tad overboard (sorry) on the romance side. The effects may be slightly dodgy at times but the scenes at sea and in the aftermath are so harrowing and disturbing enough that it takes your mind off everything else. There is also a small "twist" in this which even I didn't see coming, which was quite refreshing. My only criticism is that despite it's short run time, the film does drag in a few parts and most of this run time is spent either on the boat or in flashbacks. Very little time is given to the ending so it feels a bit rushed and not quite wrapped up properly.
Overall though a very good and heartwrenching true story. Definitely one that could put you off sailing for life!
The film works well as it doesn't follow a linear narrative which would've been a little boring. Instead it opts to throw us straight into the immediate aftermath of the disaster, but flashing back to the couple and how they met, and how they came to be at sea. It also helps that Shailene Woodley is a great actress and very engaging and believable. This film wouldn't have worked half as well without her in it. Sam Claflin is perhaps a tad underused and I think there parts of this that maybe go a tad overboard (sorry) on the romance side. The effects may be slightly dodgy at times but the scenes at sea and in the aftermath are so harrowing and disturbing enough that it takes your mind off everything else. There is also a small "twist" in this which even I didn't see coming, which was quite refreshing. My only criticism is that despite it's short run time, the film does drag in a few parts and most of this run time is spent either on the boat or in flashbacks. Very little time is given to the ending so it feels a bit rushed and not quite wrapped up properly.
Overall though a very good and heartwrenching true story. Definitely one that could put you off sailing for life!
Awix (3310 KP) rated Peterloo (2018) in Movies
Nov 9, 2018 (Updated Nov 9, 2018)
Inescapably worthy costume drama sheds some light on a half-forgotten landmark in British political history, but in the process kind of comes across as Barry Lyndon as written by Jeremy Corbyn. Decent, heroic, possibly slightly naive reformers campaign to reform society; greedy and self-serving politicians, magistrates and businessmen unite to stop them; in the end the troops are sent in.
Not quite as punishingly didactic as it sounds, but this may not have been intentional: what may also have been an accident is how close the film frequently comes to being actually quite funny. There are some spectacular wigs and hats, startling accents, and very broad performances from most of the cast - it almost feels like a parody of a bad costume drama in places. There's a scene where a family of semi-literate mill-workers pause to discuss the economic effects of the Corn Laws in some detail, mostly for the audience's benefit, while another scene arguably recycles a Monty Python gag. Casting someone from Blackadder as the Prince Regent was probably a misstep, too.
Still, it all reeks with conviction and moral outrage, and in the end the Peterloo massacre itself is staged quite well - though I still think it could have been handled slightly more cinematically. This is the movie equivalent of someone who hands out the Socialist Worker in the street: the intentions are so laudable that you kind of feel obliged to indulge the earnest lack of self-awareness. Looks quite good too.
Not quite as punishingly didactic as it sounds, but this may not have been intentional: what may also have been an accident is how close the film frequently comes to being actually quite funny. There are some spectacular wigs and hats, startling accents, and very broad performances from most of the cast - it almost feels like a parody of a bad costume drama in places. There's a scene where a family of semi-literate mill-workers pause to discuss the economic effects of the Corn Laws in some detail, mostly for the audience's benefit, while another scene arguably recycles a Monty Python gag. Casting someone from Blackadder as the Prince Regent was probably a misstep, too.
Still, it all reeks with conviction and moral outrage, and in the end the Peterloo massacre itself is staged quite well - though I still think it could have been handled slightly more cinematically. This is the movie equivalent of someone who hands out the Socialist Worker in the street: the intentions are so laudable that you kind of feel obliged to indulge the earnest lack of self-awareness. Looks quite good too.
Merissa (13197 KP) rated Crossing the Barrier (The Gray Eyes Series #1) in Books
Dec 17, 2018
Crossing the Barrier is the first book in the Grey Eyes series, and starts off with Lily who is an empath. She has worked hard on her 'shields' which help negate the effects of feeling everyone's emotions. These shields came into being partly because of the 'loving' relationship she has with her mother. However, a bump on her head loses her those shields and she has to find a way to cope. Malakai is the wide receiver (and yes, I had to google what that was!) and has been fascinated with the pretty clarinet player since Freshman year. However, he never had a chance to speak to her... until he ploughed into her and knocked her off her feet. Theirs is a turbulent relationship, not always because of them, but because of circumstances outside of their control.
This is a very well written YA Romance, that has more of a hint of paranormal about it. The story flows very well, and the characters are solid. There are no grammatical or editing errors to disrupt the reading flow. With hints of mystery, suspense, danger, as well as romance, this is a book that ticks many boxes. If I did half stars, then it would be a 4.5, but I don't, so it isn't ;) However, I do highly recommend this book for anyone who likes High School angst with a hint of paranormal and a dash of romance.
* I received this book from YA Reads in return for a fair and honest review. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
This is a very well written YA Romance, that has more of a hint of paranormal about it. The story flows very well, and the characters are solid. There are no grammatical or editing errors to disrupt the reading flow. With hints of mystery, suspense, danger, as well as romance, this is a book that ticks many boxes. If I did half stars, then it would be a 4.5, but I don't, so it isn't ;) However, I do highly recommend this book for anyone who likes High School angst with a hint of paranormal and a dash of romance.
* I received this book from YA Reads in return for a fair and honest review. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Peter Rabbit (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
Had they not attempt to make a movie based off a beloved children’s book
classic by Beatrix Potter, this film would be exceptional. Unfortunately,
they chose to deviate from the innocent storytelling and put a slapstick
comical spin on it. Peter Rabbit (James Corden) and his sisters, Flopsy,
Mopsy, Cottontail, and their cousin Benjamin are constantly trying to steal
vegetables from the unpleasant and always grumpy Mr. MacGregor’s garden.
Fortunately, the rabbits have one human on their side, MacGregor’s
neighbor, Bea (Rose Byrne), who reminds MacGregor, the animals were on the
land first and everyone should share.
One morning Mr. MacGregor (SamNeill) keels over after trying to save his garden from those pesky
rabbits. His straight-laced city boy grandnephew Thomas MacGregor (Dohmnall
Gleason) inherits the property and is left with trying to maintain the
“rodent” problem. An all-out war ensues between Peter and Thomas!
What made Beatrix Potter’s books so appealing, was her ability to show a
vulnerability to where the reader could sympathize with such
mischievous rabbits.
This film was chalked full of naughty behavior, jealousy, and entitlement
within the story line characters. As a film, it’s hilarious—Home Alone
type shenanigans with a little Dennis the Menace antics peppered in. Live
action mixed in with CGI effects is quite impressive—too good, you almost
think the rabbits were real. If you can deviate from the stories we’ve all
grown to love, this film is excellent, entertaining, and for the intended
audience-kids under the age of 10……… which all thought it was
“totally awesome!”
classic by Beatrix Potter, this film would be exceptional. Unfortunately,
they chose to deviate from the innocent storytelling and put a slapstick
comical spin on it. Peter Rabbit (James Corden) and his sisters, Flopsy,
Mopsy, Cottontail, and their cousin Benjamin are constantly trying to steal
vegetables from the unpleasant and always grumpy Mr. MacGregor’s garden.
Fortunately, the rabbits have one human on their side, MacGregor’s
neighbor, Bea (Rose Byrne), who reminds MacGregor, the animals were on the
land first and everyone should share.
One morning Mr. MacGregor (SamNeill) keels over after trying to save his garden from those pesky
rabbits. His straight-laced city boy grandnephew Thomas MacGregor (Dohmnall
Gleason) inherits the property and is left with trying to maintain the
“rodent” problem. An all-out war ensues between Peter and Thomas!
What made Beatrix Potter’s books so appealing, was her ability to show a
vulnerability to where the reader could sympathize with such
mischievous rabbits.
This film was chalked full of naughty behavior, jealousy, and entitlement
within the story line characters. As a film, it’s hilarious—Home Alone
type shenanigans with a little Dennis the Menace antics peppered in. Live
action mixed in with CGI effects is quite impressive—too good, you almost
think the rabbits were real. If you can deviate from the stories we’ve all
grown to love, this film is excellent, entertaining, and for the intended
audience-kids under the age of 10……… which all thought it was
“totally awesome!”
RyzorGick (43 KP) rated Doctor Sleep (2019) in Movies
Nov 11, 2019
Atmosphere (3 more)
Acting
Effective Horror Moments
Special Effects
I was a bit dubious about this sequel to The Shining. I didn't think Kubrick style was really something that could be reproduced. Luckily the film mainly does it's own thing but when it does call back to the original film I felt it did succeed.
I've seen some people complain abouy Rebecca Ferguson being wrong for the role of villain but I have to disagree. She does behave animated and feels less serious in some scenes but this does fit her character. She is powerful being that has lived longer than natural and feels she has little to fear, so it makes sense she would be overly confident and nonchalant.
Overall this film succeeds as a sequel. It gives us answers about what happened to the characters of the first film while having it's own plot and themes that connects to the original without relying on it too much. However some references may go over your head if you've not seen The Shining for a while.
It was a bit jarring to have people playing Jack Nicholson and Shelley Duvall but they did give it their all.
Doctor Sleep is a horror film that has more than just the usual jump scares. It's atmosphere and sense of foreboding are what truly sold me on it from the very beginning of the film. (I will never look at a shower curtain the same way again.)
I've seen some people complain abouy Rebecca Ferguson being wrong for the role of villain but I have to disagree. She does behave animated and feels less serious in some scenes but this does fit her character. She is powerful being that has lived longer than natural and feels she has little to fear, so it makes sense she would be overly confident and nonchalant.
Overall this film succeeds as a sequel. It gives us answers about what happened to the characters of the first film while having it's own plot and themes that connects to the original without relying on it too much. However some references may go over your head if you've not seen The Shining for a while.
It was a bit jarring to have people playing Jack Nicholson and Shelley Duvall but they did give it their all.
Doctor Sleep is a horror film that has more than just the usual jump scares. It's atmosphere and sense of foreboding are what truly sold me on it from the very beginning of the film. (I will never look at a shower curtain the same way again.)
Dean (6927 KP) Sep 29, 2018