Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (974 KP) rated Kong: Skull Island (2017) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
The legendary King Kong returns in an all new adventure that gives the classic tale a much needed update and new setting. Unlike Perter Jackson’s retelling of the original Black and White film, “Kong: Skull Island” eschews the old for the new and in doing so breathes a much needed new life and vitality into the franchise.
The film is set in 1973 when William Randa (John Goodman), informs the government that they have detected a previously unknown island and need to investigate it before the Soviets learn of it and beat them to whatever the island my hold.
William recruits a team which includes a former British officer named James Conrad (Tom Hiddleston), and Photographer Mason Weaver (Brie Larson), to assist his team lead by Houston Brooks (Corey Hawkins), in mapping the island.
William also asks for a military escort and the government enlists Lt. Colonel Preston Packard (Samuel L. Jackson), and his team to accompany the mission. Packard is trying to find his place in the world as he and his helicopter combat team are dealing with the recent end of the Vietnam War. His men are looking forward to going home and resuming their lives, but a dour Packard jumps at the chance for another mission over the uncertainty of the future.
Upon arriving on the mysterious island and starting their survey mission by using seismic charges, the team attract the attention of Kong who is not at all pleased with the intrusion on his island. Kong makes short work of the copters and the team finds themselves scattered about the dangerous island. They soon learn that Kong is not the only danger on the island and must find a way to rejoin each other and make it to their extraction point alive.
Naturally some of the characters have a hidden agenda and there are dangerous and action around every corner. Further complicating matters is the appearance of Marlow (John C. Reilly), a downed WWII pilot who has been stranded on the island for 23 years and warns of dangers far greater than Kong that are ahead of the team.
The film combines a solid cast with state of the art special effects to take a new twist on the standard adventure fare. While many parts of the film remain silly Popcorn entertainment, the quality of the assembled cast allows the film to move beyond being just an assembly of potential victims for a menagerie of CGI creatures to dispatch.
While the story is more in lines with the linear and thin plots of adventure films of old, the sum of the parts does add up to an enjoyable film experience for those who like the giant creature films. You will want to make sure to stay after the credits as there is a very good scene that shows a setup for a future film that had those in attendance at our press screening cheering.
The film may be a bit intense for younger viewers but if you are looking for a touch of nostalgia and action, you may find the film just what you need.
http://sknr.net/2017/03/08/kong-skull-island/
The film is set in 1973 when William Randa (John Goodman), informs the government that they have detected a previously unknown island and need to investigate it before the Soviets learn of it and beat them to whatever the island my hold.
William recruits a team which includes a former British officer named James Conrad (Tom Hiddleston), and Photographer Mason Weaver (Brie Larson), to assist his team lead by Houston Brooks (Corey Hawkins), in mapping the island.
William also asks for a military escort and the government enlists Lt. Colonel Preston Packard (Samuel L. Jackson), and his team to accompany the mission. Packard is trying to find his place in the world as he and his helicopter combat team are dealing with the recent end of the Vietnam War. His men are looking forward to going home and resuming their lives, but a dour Packard jumps at the chance for another mission over the uncertainty of the future.
Upon arriving on the mysterious island and starting their survey mission by using seismic charges, the team attract the attention of Kong who is not at all pleased with the intrusion on his island. Kong makes short work of the copters and the team finds themselves scattered about the dangerous island. They soon learn that Kong is not the only danger on the island and must find a way to rejoin each other and make it to their extraction point alive.
Naturally some of the characters have a hidden agenda and there are dangerous and action around every corner. Further complicating matters is the appearance of Marlow (John C. Reilly), a downed WWII pilot who has been stranded on the island for 23 years and warns of dangers far greater than Kong that are ahead of the team.
The film combines a solid cast with state of the art special effects to take a new twist on the standard adventure fare. While many parts of the film remain silly Popcorn entertainment, the quality of the assembled cast allows the film to move beyond being just an assembly of potential victims for a menagerie of CGI creatures to dispatch.
While the story is more in lines with the linear and thin plots of adventure films of old, the sum of the parts does add up to an enjoyable film experience for those who like the giant creature films. You will want to make sure to stay after the credits as there is a very good scene that shows a setup for a future film that had those in attendance at our press screening cheering.
The film may be a bit intense for younger viewers but if you are looking for a touch of nostalgia and action, you may find the film just what you need.
http://sknr.net/2017/03/08/kong-skull-island/
Downriver (Poison River #1)
Book
A sulfur sky poisoned her family and her heart. Now revenge tastes sweeter than justice. It’s...
Revenge Historical Fiction
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Misbehaviour (2020) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
A film guide on how to sit on the fence.
It’s only 50 years ago, but the timeframe of Misbehaviour feels like a very different world. Although only 9 years old in 1970, I remember sitting around the tele with my family to enjoy the regular Eric and Julia Morley ‘cattle market’ of girls parading in national dress and swimsuits. We were not alone. At its peak in the 70’s over 18 million Britons watched the show (not surprising bearing in mind there were only three channels to choose from in 1970… no streaming… no video players… not even smartphones to distract you!)
The background.
“Misbehaviour” tells the story of this eventful 1970 Miss World competition. It was eventful for a number of reasons: the Women’s Lib movement was rising in popularity, and the event was disrupted a flour-bombing group of women in the audience; the compere Bob Hope did an appallingly misjudged and mysoginistic routine that died a death; and, after significant pressure against the apartheid regime in South Africa, the country surprised the world by sending two entrants to the show – one white (Miss South Africa) and one black (Miss Africa South).
The movie charts the events leading up to that night and some of the fallout that resulted from it.
A strong ensemble cast.
“Misbehaviour” has a great cast.
Leading the women are posh-girl Sally Alexander (Keira Knightley) and punk-girl Jo Robinson (Jessie Buckley). I’m normally a big fan of both of these ladies. But here I never felt either of them connected particularly well with their characters. In particular, Buckley (although delivering as a similar maverick in “Wild Rose“) always felt a bit forced and out of place here.
On the event organisation side is Rhys Ifans, almost unrecognisable as Eric Morley, and Keeley Hawes as Julia Morley. Ifans gets the mannerisms of the impresario spot-on (as illustrated by some real-life footage shown at the end of the film). Also splendid is funny-man Miles Jupp as their “fixer” Clive.
Less successful for me was Greg Kinnear as Bob Hope. Hope clearly has such an unusual moon-shaped face that it’s difficult to find anyone to cast as a lookalike.
Just who is exploiting who here?
There’s no question in my mind that the event, in retrospect, is obscenely inappropriate – even though, bizarrely, it still runs to this day. But my biggest problem with the movie is that it never seems to pin its colours to any particular mast. It clearly illustrates the inappropriateness of Hope’s off-colour jokes and the instruction from host Michael Aspel (Charlie Anson), asking the swimsuit models to “show their rear view” to the audience, is gobsmackingly crass.
However, the script then takes a sympathetic view to the candidates from Grenada, South Africa, etc. who are clearly ‘using their bodies’ to get a leg-up to fame and fortune back in their home countries. (Final scenes showing the woman today, clearly affluent and happy, doesn’t help with that!)
As such, the movie sits magnificently on the fence and never reaches a ‘verdict’.
The racial sub-story.
Equally problematic is the really fascinating racial sub-story: this was an event, held in a UK that was racially far less tolerant than it is today, where no black person had EVER won. Indeed, a win was in most peoples’ eyes unthinkable. This was a time when “black lives didn’t matter”. Here we have Miss Grenada (an excellent Gugu Mbatha-Raw) and the utterly captivating Miss Africa South (a debut performance by Loreece Harrison) threatening to turn the tables . There was surely potential to get a lot more value out of this aspect of the story, but it is generally un-mined.
Perhaps a problem here is that there is so much story potential around this one historical event that there is just too much to fit comfortably into one screenplay. The writers Rebecca Frayn and Gaby Chiappe end up just giving a few bursts on the liquidizer and getting a slightly grey mush.
Nostalgia – it’s not what it used to be.
All this is not to say the movie was a write off. It’s a perfectly pleasant watch and for those (like me) of a certain age, the throwback fashions, vehicles and attitudes deliver a burst of nostalgia for the flawed but rose-coloured days of my first decade on the planet.
But it all feels like a bit of a missed opportunity to properly tackle either one of the two key issues highlighted in the script. As a female-led project (the director is Philippa Lowthorpe) I really wanted this to be good. But I’m afraid for me it’s all a bit “meh”.
If asked “would you like to watch that again?”… I would probably, politely, show my rear view and decline.
The background.
“Misbehaviour” tells the story of this eventful 1970 Miss World competition. It was eventful for a number of reasons: the Women’s Lib movement was rising in popularity, and the event was disrupted a flour-bombing group of women in the audience; the compere Bob Hope did an appallingly misjudged and mysoginistic routine that died a death; and, after significant pressure against the apartheid regime in South Africa, the country surprised the world by sending two entrants to the show – one white (Miss South Africa) and one black (Miss Africa South).
The movie charts the events leading up to that night and some of the fallout that resulted from it.
A strong ensemble cast.
“Misbehaviour” has a great cast.
Leading the women are posh-girl Sally Alexander (Keira Knightley) and punk-girl Jo Robinson (Jessie Buckley). I’m normally a big fan of both of these ladies. But here I never felt either of them connected particularly well with their characters. In particular, Buckley (although delivering as a similar maverick in “Wild Rose“) always felt a bit forced and out of place here.
On the event organisation side is Rhys Ifans, almost unrecognisable as Eric Morley, and Keeley Hawes as Julia Morley. Ifans gets the mannerisms of the impresario spot-on (as illustrated by some real-life footage shown at the end of the film). Also splendid is funny-man Miles Jupp as their “fixer” Clive.
Less successful for me was Greg Kinnear as Bob Hope. Hope clearly has such an unusual moon-shaped face that it’s difficult to find anyone to cast as a lookalike.
Just who is exploiting who here?
There’s no question in my mind that the event, in retrospect, is obscenely inappropriate – even though, bizarrely, it still runs to this day. But my biggest problem with the movie is that it never seems to pin its colours to any particular mast. It clearly illustrates the inappropriateness of Hope’s off-colour jokes and the instruction from host Michael Aspel (Charlie Anson), asking the swimsuit models to “show their rear view” to the audience, is gobsmackingly crass.
However, the script then takes a sympathetic view to the candidates from Grenada, South Africa, etc. who are clearly ‘using their bodies’ to get a leg-up to fame and fortune back in their home countries. (Final scenes showing the woman today, clearly affluent and happy, doesn’t help with that!)
As such, the movie sits magnificently on the fence and never reaches a ‘verdict’.
The racial sub-story.
Equally problematic is the really fascinating racial sub-story: this was an event, held in a UK that was racially far less tolerant than it is today, where no black person had EVER won. Indeed, a win was in most peoples’ eyes unthinkable. This was a time when “black lives didn’t matter”. Here we have Miss Grenada (an excellent Gugu Mbatha-Raw) and the utterly captivating Miss Africa South (a debut performance by Loreece Harrison) threatening to turn the tables . There was surely potential to get a lot more value out of this aspect of the story, but it is generally un-mined.
Perhaps a problem here is that there is so much story potential around this one historical event that there is just too much to fit comfortably into one screenplay. The writers Rebecca Frayn and Gaby Chiappe end up just giving a few bursts on the liquidizer and getting a slightly grey mush.
Nostalgia – it’s not what it used to be.
All this is not to say the movie was a write off. It’s a perfectly pleasant watch and for those (like me) of a certain age, the throwback fashions, vehicles and attitudes deliver a burst of nostalgia for the flawed but rose-coloured days of my first decade on the planet.
But it all feels like a bit of a missed opportunity to properly tackle either one of the two key issues highlighted in the script. As a female-led project (the director is Philippa Lowthorpe) I really wanted this to be good. But I’m afraid for me it’s all a bit “meh”.
If asked “would you like to watch that again?”… I would probably, politely, show my rear view and decline.
Lindsay (1714 KP) rated The Nutcracker Conspiracy in Books
Jan 25, 2020
Are you a fan of Murphy and Jessica? Then do not look much further than that of Lauren Carr. The Thorny Rose Mystery is picked up once again. We find that Murphy and Jessica are in the thick of things once again in “The Nutcracker Conspiracy”.
The plot seems to be interconnected a bit. Is it just that or is it two different things but involvement. This book seems too real like it really as if I am in real-world experience in my time. There seem to be Jessica who seems to in the middle of defending her friend Amy and her friend Kenneth. When her house is blown up and her husband is killed? Is it Amy that plotted it or is it someone else?
Murphy seems to be trying to find out who killed not one person but several different people. I seem to like this what my real-life government might be doing in a fictional tale. I hope not. But the plot seems to involve more than just the murder but also doing something called a spy ring?
What is the PEAA group? Will Murphy and Jessica come out of this okay and survive? This book has it all. It got surprises and twists and turns from beginning to end. We even get Chris Matheson involved to a point. What is going on? What happens with the President's assassination attempt?
The plot seems to be interconnected a bit. Is it just that or is it two different things but involvement. This book seems too real like it really as if I am in real-world experience in my time. There seem to be Jessica who seems to in the middle of defending her friend Amy and her friend Kenneth. When her house is blown up and her husband is killed? Is it Amy that plotted it or is it someone else?
Murphy seems to be trying to find out who killed not one person but several different people. I seem to like this what my real-life government might be doing in a fictional tale. I hope not. But the plot seems to involve more than just the murder but also doing something called a spy ring?
What is the PEAA group? Will Murphy and Jessica come out of this okay and survive? This book has it all. It got surprises and twists and turns from beginning to end. We even get Chris Matheson involved to a point. What is going on? What happens with the President's assassination attempt?
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Nightmare City in Books
Jun 7, 2018
(This review can also be found on my blog <a href="http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.com/">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a>).
When I read the blurb to Nightmare City by Andrew Klavan, I knew it was a book I had to read! While it wasn't a fantastic read, it was still decent enough.
I think the title of this book suits it quite well. What the main character is in is a city made from his nightmares!
At first I wasn't sure if I liked the cover, but it's kind of grown on me. Now I do like it. I like how we see the monsters coming out of the fog. Definitely creepy!
I thought the world building was done really well. It has a super creepy and sinister feel about it. In fact, the world felt so real at times, it was like I was Tom.
The pacing does let the book down somewhat, I felt. For the first three quarters of the book, I felt that the pacing was a bit slow. In fact, there were times when I would just skim paragraphs as I became bored. However, the pacing did pick up in the last quarter of the book, of which I was thankful. From there until the end, I couldn't put the book down!
I thought the whole idea for the plot was interesting. It's not an original idea, but Klavan put his own spin on it making it a bit different. I'd go into more detail, but I don't want to give any spoilers away. Oh, and as for the mystery part of the book, I would've never guessed who the culprit was! There's no cliff hangers, so I believe this book may just be a stand alone.
I thought all the characters were written superbly! Though most of the book, the only character featured is Tom. Tom seemed to me like a typical 17 year old male. He likes cars and girls, but he also quests for the truth which puts his life in jeopardy. I liked how down to Earth Tom was and how he couldn't be intimidated when it came to letting the truth be known. Even though she isn't featured very much, I did like the character of Lisa. I liked how friendly she was, and I felt like she was just a very warm person. There's also the character of Marie, Tom's crush, which I liked to begin with, but I'm not going to say anything due to spoilers.
The dialogue flowed very well, as did the character interactions. Nothing felt disjointed or awkward at all. There's no swearing in this book and only mild violence.
Overall, Nightmare City is a decent read. The pacing does let it down a bit, but I think most people would like the book.
I'd recommend this book to those aged 14+ who are fans of horror or those who want to be a bit creeped out.
I'd give Nightmare City by Andrew Klavan a 3.5 out of 5.
(I received a hardback copy of this book for free from booksneeze.com in exchange for a a fair and honest review).
When I read the blurb to Nightmare City by Andrew Klavan, I knew it was a book I had to read! While it wasn't a fantastic read, it was still decent enough.
I think the title of this book suits it quite well. What the main character is in is a city made from his nightmares!
At first I wasn't sure if I liked the cover, but it's kind of grown on me. Now I do like it. I like how we see the monsters coming out of the fog. Definitely creepy!
I thought the world building was done really well. It has a super creepy and sinister feel about it. In fact, the world felt so real at times, it was like I was Tom.
The pacing does let the book down somewhat, I felt. For the first three quarters of the book, I felt that the pacing was a bit slow. In fact, there were times when I would just skim paragraphs as I became bored. However, the pacing did pick up in the last quarter of the book, of which I was thankful. From there until the end, I couldn't put the book down!
I thought the whole idea for the plot was interesting. It's not an original idea, but Klavan put his own spin on it making it a bit different. I'd go into more detail, but I don't want to give any spoilers away. Oh, and as for the mystery part of the book, I would've never guessed who the culprit was! There's no cliff hangers, so I believe this book may just be a stand alone.
I thought all the characters were written superbly! Though most of the book, the only character featured is Tom. Tom seemed to me like a typical 17 year old male. He likes cars and girls, but he also quests for the truth which puts his life in jeopardy. I liked how down to Earth Tom was and how he couldn't be intimidated when it came to letting the truth be known. Even though she isn't featured very much, I did like the character of Lisa. I liked how friendly she was, and I felt like she was just a very warm person. There's also the character of Marie, Tom's crush, which I liked to begin with, but I'm not going to say anything due to spoilers.
The dialogue flowed very well, as did the character interactions. Nothing felt disjointed or awkward at all. There's no swearing in this book and only mild violence.
Overall, Nightmare City is a decent read. The pacing does let it down a bit, but I think most people would like the book.
I'd recommend this book to those aged 14+ who are fans of horror or those who want to be a bit creeped out.
I'd give Nightmare City by Andrew Klavan a 3.5 out of 5.
(I received a hardback copy of this book for free from booksneeze.com in exchange for a a fair and honest review).
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Resident Evil: Extinction (2007) in Movies
Nov 25, 2020
"Slowly but surely, the Earth began to wither and die." - Alice
This quote sums up how I feel about the Resident Evil series and it's effect on the world of movies...
Resident Evil: Extinction is the third in the franchise, and honestly, it's a big improvement on the first two. The effects are a lot better for a start, and it feels more like a horror. It at least attempts (and unfortunately fails) to make you care about other characters other than Milla Jovovich's Alice, and it does have some good shots here and there, courtesy of Highlander director Russell Mulcahy.
However it has a butt load of issues (surprise surprise).
Although it leans more towards horror than before, Extinction ticks off every zombie cliché in the book, but has the arrogance to act like it's showing the audience something new. This culminates in a laughable number of unearned and predictable jump scares, and any action scenes are once again riddled with unnecessary edits and cuts.
The characters are another issue. This series continues to drip feed characters from the games, but they're nothing more than glorified cameos. Claire Redfield (Ali Larter) is adapted this time around, and although it's nice to see her character, she doesn't really do much beyond leading a group of survivors around, a group of characters who feel like they're straight out of one of the boring episode of The Walking Dead.
Then there's poor Iain Glen. Before Game of Thrones came along, he was destined to always be that evil dude who got to be in video game movies. *Spoiler Alert* - he turns into the Tyrant from the game series near the end, but he still sounds like Iain Glen when he talks (which is really fucking weird), and is then dispatched without much hassle, meaning that once again, this film series fucks up another classic Resident Evil monster. We also get a tease of Albert Wesker but it's all thoroughly underwhelming.
Apart from all that, I still struggle to connect to Alice as a protagonist, no matter how undeniably badass she may be.
Extinction is way more watchable than most of these movies but still, they should be better, and they're not. Ugh.
This quote sums up how I feel about the Resident Evil series and it's effect on the world of movies...
Resident Evil: Extinction is the third in the franchise, and honestly, it's a big improvement on the first two. The effects are a lot better for a start, and it feels more like a horror. It at least attempts (and unfortunately fails) to make you care about other characters other than Milla Jovovich's Alice, and it does have some good shots here and there, courtesy of Highlander director Russell Mulcahy.
However it has a butt load of issues (surprise surprise).
Although it leans more towards horror than before, Extinction ticks off every zombie cliché in the book, but has the arrogance to act like it's showing the audience something new. This culminates in a laughable number of unearned and predictable jump scares, and any action scenes are once again riddled with unnecessary edits and cuts.
The characters are another issue. This series continues to drip feed characters from the games, but they're nothing more than glorified cameos. Claire Redfield (Ali Larter) is adapted this time around, and although it's nice to see her character, she doesn't really do much beyond leading a group of survivors around, a group of characters who feel like they're straight out of one of the boring episode of The Walking Dead.
Then there's poor Iain Glen. Before Game of Thrones came along, he was destined to always be that evil dude who got to be in video game movies. *Spoiler Alert* - he turns into the Tyrant from the game series near the end, but he still sounds like Iain Glen when he talks (which is really fucking weird), and is then dispatched without much hassle, meaning that once again, this film series fucks up another classic Resident Evil monster. We also get a tease of Albert Wesker but it's all thoroughly underwhelming.
Apart from all that, I still struggle to connect to Alice as a protagonist, no matter how undeniably badass she may be.
Extinction is way more watchable than most of these movies but still, they should be better, and they're not. Ugh.
Paint Sparkles Draw
Education and Games
App
~~~ Top selling education app! Over 11,000,000 downloads around the world! ~~~ ~~~ No.1 Kids...
Non-Duality Questions, Non-Duality Answers: Exploring Spirituality and Existence in the Modern World
Book
Since time immemorial, key questions about the nature of existence have nagged at our consciousness:...