Search
Search results
BookInspector (124 KP) rated We Were the Salt of the Sea in Books
Sep 24, 2020
Ode to the sea, that would describe this book the best, I think. This novel could make even the coldest heart to fall in love with this powerful God’s creation. 🙂
Catherine was looking for her biological mother, and one day she found her, but she was dead. There were so many unanswered questions left, and Catherine was trying to find out, who her mother really was. The characters chosen for this novel were incredibly complex. Their thoughts and feelings filled this book with different states of mind and different perspectives. All the characters had their own unique personality, and sometimes, they were really mysterious to me. I needed quite a bit of time to analyze them. I didn’t have a particularly favourite character in this book, I think they all had their pros and cons, making them all very believable and realistic.
The narrative of this novel was very smartly written, drop feeding the reader with the investigation’s findings, and opening the characters bit by bit. It was quite a slow burner for me, and I really missed some good twists and turns, but I think this novel concentrates more on the character’s feelings and their search of true selves, rather than trying to solve the crime. I really liked the setting and atmosphere of this novel, and the whole plot was soaked with sea love. The author has a passion for sailing, and you can truly feel her love for the sea when she explains the bond, which sea brings out in sailors. Authors expertise shines not only through the sea love but also through knowledge of boats and fishermen’s routines.
The writing style of this novel was very beautiful and incredibly poetic. The chapters had pretty decent length and didn’t leave me bored. The language of this book has quite a lot of sailing terms and is filled with French charm, so I had to look up some of the terms, which sounded alien to me. 🙂 I did like the ending of this book, I think it rounded the story quite well, however, this book makes your brain work, and even though there is a clue of who Catherine’s father is, I still couldn’t figure it out. (I am too lazy 😀 ) So, if you read this book, please let me know in the comment section down below 😉
So, to conclude, if you like sea, boats and a little bit of crime, filled with charming prose and unique characters, then this book is definitely for you. Summer season is just around the corner, so don’t forget a copy of this book, while enjoying that drink on the beach 😉
Catherine was looking for her biological mother, and one day she found her, but she was dead. There were so many unanswered questions left, and Catherine was trying to find out, who her mother really was. The characters chosen for this novel were incredibly complex. Their thoughts and feelings filled this book with different states of mind and different perspectives. All the characters had their own unique personality, and sometimes, they were really mysterious to me. I needed quite a bit of time to analyze them. I didn’t have a particularly favourite character in this book, I think they all had their pros and cons, making them all very believable and realistic.
The narrative of this novel was very smartly written, drop feeding the reader with the investigation’s findings, and opening the characters bit by bit. It was quite a slow burner for me, and I really missed some good twists and turns, but I think this novel concentrates more on the character’s feelings and their search of true selves, rather than trying to solve the crime. I really liked the setting and atmosphere of this novel, and the whole plot was soaked with sea love. The author has a passion for sailing, and you can truly feel her love for the sea when she explains the bond, which sea brings out in sailors. Authors expertise shines not only through the sea love but also through knowledge of boats and fishermen’s routines.
The writing style of this novel was very beautiful and incredibly poetic. The chapters had pretty decent length and didn’t leave me bored. The language of this book has quite a lot of sailing terms and is filled with French charm, so I had to look up some of the terms, which sounded alien to me. 🙂 I did like the ending of this book, I think it rounded the story quite well, however, this book makes your brain work, and even though there is a clue of who Catherine’s father is, I still couldn’t figure it out. (I am too lazy 😀 ) So, if you read this book, please let me know in the comment section down below 😉
So, to conclude, if you like sea, boats and a little bit of crime, filled with charming prose and unique characters, then this book is definitely for you. Summer season is just around the corner, so don’t forget a copy of this book, while enjoying that drink on the beach 😉
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Eurovision Song Contest: The Story of Fire Saga (2020) in Movies
Jun 27, 2020
Rachel McAdams and Dan Stevens steal most of the scenes (1 more)
A real feelgood movie that spoofs the unspoofable pretty well
My lovely farce
Will Ferrell's output over the last few years has been decidedly patchy. I have to go back to "Get Hard" to find one of his movies that really got to my funny bone. But this latest Netflix offering hits the spot for me.
We start with the song recently voted the number one Eurovision song of all time by UK viewers: "Waterloo" by Abba. Young Lars Erickssong (LOL) (Alfie Melia) is transfixed watching the 1974 Eurovision winner with his recently bereaved father and local Lothario Erick (Pierce Brosnan). (Mental note to women: never marry Brosnan on screen... he gets through wives faster than you can murder "S.O.S."). Also present are his friends and young Sigrit ("probably not by sister") Ericksdottir (Sophia-Grace Donnelly). Lars vows to one day stand on that stage and make his father and his remote Icelandic fishing village proud.
Now all grown up, Lars (now Will Ferrell) and Sigrit (now Rachel McAdams) are still pursuing their dream of representing Iceland in the upcoming Eurovision Song Contest. They are, of course, dreadful - - so they should fit right in! But their way is blocked by the immensely talented Katiana (Demi Lovato) and all seems hopeless. Will Sigrit's faith in the power of the Elves see them through?
There's an obvious problem here. The Eurovision Song Contest is in itself so bat-s**t bonkers that it is almost impossible to spoof. (If anyone is not on this wavelength, checkout the genuine Russian entry in this year's (cancelled) contest on Youtube). But the team here (writers Will Ferrell and Andrew Steele and director David "The Judge" Dobkin) do a really great job. I'd love to know what a US audience - who I guess will mostly be unfamiliar with Eurovision - make of this. Since Australia are now honorary Europeans in the contest.... wouldn't it be great if there was a Mexican mariachi band attending and a country and western act from the States? (Brits would love the US to be involved.... as spoofed in the film, there's only one country European's hate more than the UK.... be nice to have someone else to join us in the "nul points" club!)
Wherever you may be on the "Ferrell-funny-or-not-ometer", there's one thing I hope we can all agree on here, and that is that Rachel McAdams continues to shine as a comic lead. She was fantastic in "Game Night" - one of my favourite comedies of recent years - and here she is both gorgeous and hilarious. She knocks it out of the park playing the elf-loving Icelandic pixie with the golden voice. (McAdams "sings" but is significantly "helped" in the mix by Swedish pop star Molly Sandén (aka My Marianne)).
Here she even gets to almost reprise her wonderful "YEESSSSS! Oh no, he died!" line from "Game Night".
Almost matching her in the scene-stealing stakes though is Downton's Dan Stevens as Lemtov: a Russian 'Tom Jones'-like contestant singing "Lion of Love" ("Let's get together; I'm a lion lover; And I hunt for love!"). He's DEFINITELY not gay ("There are no gays in Russia") but are his multi-millions enough to turn Sigrit's head?
For those who love their annual Eurovision parties, there are also an impressive array of nice cameos that will delight.
But where the film-makers really score (no pun intended) is making the music so fitting. Some of the tracks make you think "Yeah, if this was the real content, this might have got my vote". Director Dobkin is quoted as saying "It's okay if it's funny, but it has to be really good music. It has to still be great and just kitschy enough to be Eurovision, because that's part of what's fun about Eurovision" (Source: Vulture). Very true. This success is down to the involvement of pop writer/producer Savan Kotecha on the project: the man behind hits by Katy Petty, Ariana Grande and Ellie Goulding.
A comedy needs to make me laugh, and this one really did - numerous times. It's not just the dialogue. Some of the cut-away scenes are priceless and perfectly executed: jumping whales; a collapsing glacier; a small slamming door!
Sure, it borrows from a number of other sources in its plot: most notably THAT episode of "Father Ted" and the rap-battle scenes from "Pitch Perfect". And sure, some of the outRAGEOUS Icelandic accents sometimes swerve into an alarming mix of Indian, Welsh and Caribbean dialects! But above all, this is movie with real heart. The plot is pretty well signposted, but the finale still packs a (surprisingly) hefty emotional punch, and it leaves you with a really nice afterglow.
As we struggle out of Covid lockdown, it may not be a vaccine, but it is a pretty good medicine for the side-effects. Did I love this? Jaja Ding Dong!
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/06/27/one-manns-movies-film-review-eurovision-song-contest-the-story-of-fire-saga-2020/ ).
We start with the song recently voted the number one Eurovision song of all time by UK viewers: "Waterloo" by Abba. Young Lars Erickssong (LOL) (Alfie Melia) is transfixed watching the 1974 Eurovision winner with his recently bereaved father and local Lothario Erick (Pierce Brosnan). (Mental note to women: never marry Brosnan on screen... he gets through wives faster than you can murder "S.O.S."). Also present are his friends and young Sigrit ("probably not by sister") Ericksdottir (Sophia-Grace Donnelly). Lars vows to one day stand on that stage and make his father and his remote Icelandic fishing village proud.
Now all grown up, Lars (now Will Ferrell) and Sigrit (now Rachel McAdams) are still pursuing their dream of representing Iceland in the upcoming Eurovision Song Contest. They are, of course, dreadful - - so they should fit right in! But their way is blocked by the immensely talented Katiana (Demi Lovato) and all seems hopeless. Will Sigrit's faith in the power of the Elves see them through?
There's an obvious problem here. The Eurovision Song Contest is in itself so bat-s**t bonkers that it is almost impossible to spoof. (If anyone is not on this wavelength, checkout the genuine Russian entry in this year's (cancelled) contest on Youtube). But the team here (writers Will Ferrell and Andrew Steele and director David "The Judge" Dobkin) do a really great job. I'd love to know what a US audience - who I guess will mostly be unfamiliar with Eurovision - make of this. Since Australia are now honorary Europeans in the contest.... wouldn't it be great if there was a Mexican mariachi band attending and a country and western act from the States? (Brits would love the US to be involved.... as spoofed in the film, there's only one country European's hate more than the UK.... be nice to have someone else to join us in the "nul points" club!)
Wherever you may be on the "Ferrell-funny-or-not-ometer", there's one thing I hope we can all agree on here, and that is that Rachel McAdams continues to shine as a comic lead. She was fantastic in "Game Night" - one of my favourite comedies of recent years - and here she is both gorgeous and hilarious. She knocks it out of the park playing the elf-loving Icelandic pixie with the golden voice. (McAdams "sings" but is significantly "helped" in the mix by Swedish pop star Molly Sandén (aka My Marianne)).
Here she even gets to almost reprise her wonderful "YEESSSSS! Oh no, he died!" line from "Game Night".
Almost matching her in the scene-stealing stakes though is Downton's Dan Stevens as Lemtov: a Russian 'Tom Jones'-like contestant singing "Lion of Love" ("Let's get together; I'm a lion lover; And I hunt for love!"). He's DEFINITELY not gay ("There are no gays in Russia") but are his multi-millions enough to turn Sigrit's head?
For those who love their annual Eurovision parties, there are also an impressive array of nice cameos that will delight.
But where the film-makers really score (no pun intended) is making the music so fitting. Some of the tracks make you think "Yeah, if this was the real content, this might have got my vote". Director Dobkin is quoted as saying "It's okay if it's funny, but it has to be really good music. It has to still be great and just kitschy enough to be Eurovision, because that's part of what's fun about Eurovision" (Source: Vulture). Very true. This success is down to the involvement of pop writer/producer Savan Kotecha on the project: the man behind hits by Katy Petty, Ariana Grande and Ellie Goulding.
A comedy needs to make me laugh, and this one really did - numerous times. It's not just the dialogue. Some of the cut-away scenes are priceless and perfectly executed: jumping whales; a collapsing glacier; a small slamming door!
Sure, it borrows from a number of other sources in its plot: most notably THAT episode of "Father Ted" and the rap-battle scenes from "Pitch Perfect". And sure, some of the outRAGEOUS Icelandic accents sometimes swerve into an alarming mix of Indian, Welsh and Caribbean dialects! But above all, this is movie with real heart. The plot is pretty well signposted, but the finale still packs a (surprisingly) hefty emotional punch, and it leaves you with a really nice afterglow.
As we struggle out of Covid lockdown, it may not be a vaccine, but it is a pretty good medicine for the side-effects. Did I love this? Jaja Ding Dong!
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/06/27/one-manns-movies-film-review-eurovision-song-contest-the-story-of-fire-saga-2020/ ).
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Logan (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“When the man comes around”
At last – a superhero movie with real heart… (and not just the chunks over the knuckle blades!). Logan is a bit of a revelation. I was reluctant to go and see it, since a) I’m a lukewarm X-Men fan at best and b) I hadn’t seen either of the previous two Wolverine spin-off films. (Seeing the other Wolverine films, by the way, is not a pre-requisite for enjoying this one). After a long day at work, my choice was “Logan” or “Kong: Skull Island”. I voted for this one, and I’m so glad I did.
It’s now 2029. Hugh Jackman plays Wolverine, but this is not a Wolverine we have seen before. This is an aged and deteriorating superhero: his self-healing powers are waning; a limp is developing; and his fighting prowess (although still legendary) doesn’t show the stamina it once did. This is a Wolverine that is also an unlikely carer, looking after a mentally degenerating Professor Xavier (Patrick Stewart), now 90 years old and finding it increasingly difficult to keep his devastating mental superpowers under control. This is a Wolverine trying desperately to avoid the limelight, working diligently as a limo-driver in an effort to save money for the dream of buying a ‘Sunseeker’ and sailing off with Xavier into the sunset, gaining true anonymity among the boating fraternity.
Life doesn’t play ball though. A brutal encounter with a gang on the highway outside El Paso advertises Wolverine’s presence and brings him into contact with a strange eleven-year-old girl (Dafne Keen) with impressive powers of her own. The girl is being pursued by a “reiver” (Boyd Holbrook, “Run all Night”) supported by a small private army. Against his will, Wolverine is forced into a memorable road trip with the old man and the young girl that leaves a trail of bloodied bodies behind them.
For, be warned, this is an *extremely* violent film, with much dismemberment and ‘blade work’ that must have kept the prosthetics department busy for months. It’s also quite emotionally brutal, particularly within a central segment set in a “Field of Dreams” style idyll (featuring Eriq La Salle from E.R.) that you know in your gut is not going to end with “Goodnight John Boy” pleasantries.
The well-choreographed and frenetic action within the road-trip segment reminded me at times of the harsh cinematography and dynamics of “Mad Max: Fury Road” – a great compliment.
But the film also takes time to pause, in uncharacteristic Marvel-ways, for character development and genuinely intelligent dialogue. These interludes allow the acting to shine, and it is first-rate. We all know (from “Les Miserables” for instance) that Hugh Jackman can act, but this is arguably his best-ever performance: a meaty role (he actually has two in the film) that affords him tremendous range and emotion. At one point towards the end of the film I thought “this has genuine Oscar show-reel potential”. He will surely never get nominated – a Marvel film? Get Away! But wouldn’t it make a refreshing change if he was? Recognizing good acting, regardless of the context.
Patrick Stewart is a great Shakespearean actor, and here he also gets given full rein to impress as he hasn’t had chance to in most of his movie roles to date.
Claiming the prize so far this year for the most unusual casting decision is Stephen Merchant as the albino helper Caliban, unrecognizable to me at first until he had some lengthy dialogue to flex his Bristol accent on! A non-comic and dramatic role, Merchant does really well with it.
Finally, I can’t leave the acting without doffing my cap to young Dafne Keen whose mesmerising feral stare would probably put the fear of God into every parent of a pre-teen girl! Even though she has only a handful of lines, this is an impressive feature film debut. I predict we will see much more of this young lady.
Less convincing to me was Richard E Grant as the evil mastermind behind the scheme, who never quite seemed nasty enough to me to be believable: in one scene he could be calling back a dog that’s run off down the beach rather than desperately trying to gain control of an out of control situation!
Directed by James Mangold (“Walk the Line”, “Knight and Day”), who co-wrote the piece with Scott Frank (“Minority Report”) and Michael Green (“Green Lantern”… yes, really!), this was a gritty and well constructed movie. If you can stomach the gore and the body count (I would see it as very lucky to have got away with its UK ’15’ certificate) this is a rollercoaster of a movie that is recommended.
By the way, to save you from sitting through the end titles (although you do get a Johnny Cash classic to enjoy) there is no “monkey” at the end of this Marvel film. (I’m no stranger to still be sitting there as the lights come up… but many of the crowd that were left looked vaguely embarrassed!)
In terms of my rating, I’m not a fanboy for Marvel or DC properties, but here I award a rating I have only previously bestowed on two superhero films before: the quirky “Ant Man” and the anarchic “Deadpool“….
It’s now 2029. Hugh Jackman plays Wolverine, but this is not a Wolverine we have seen before. This is an aged and deteriorating superhero: his self-healing powers are waning; a limp is developing; and his fighting prowess (although still legendary) doesn’t show the stamina it once did. This is a Wolverine that is also an unlikely carer, looking after a mentally degenerating Professor Xavier (Patrick Stewart), now 90 years old and finding it increasingly difficult to keep his devastating mental superpowers under control. This is a Wolverine trying desperately to avoid the limelight, working diligently as a limo-driver in an effort to save money for the dream of buying a ‘Sunseeker’ and sailing off with Xavier into the sunset, gaining true anonymity among the boating fraternity.
Life doesn’t play ball though. A brutal encounter with a gang on the highway outside El Paso advertises Wolverine’s presence and brings him into contact with a strange eleven-year-old girl (Dafne Keen) with impressive powers of her own. The girl is being pursued by a “reiver” (Boyd Holbrook, “Run all Night”) supported by a small private army. Against his will, Wolverine is forced into a memorable road trip with the old man and the young girl that leaves a trail of bloodied bodies behind them.
For, be warned, this is an *extremely* violent film, with much dismemberment and ‘blade work’ that must have kept the prosthetics department busy for months. It’s also quite emotionally brutal, particularly within a central segment set in a “Field of Dreams” style idyll (featuring Eriq La Salle from E.R.) that you know in your gut is not going to end with “Goodnight John Boy” pleasantries.
The well-choreographed and frenetic action within the road-trip segment reminded me at times of the harsh cinematography and dynamics of “Mad Max: Fury Road” – a great compliment.
But the film also takes time to pause, in uncharacteristic Marvel-ways, for character development and genuinely intelligent dialogue. These interludes allow the acting to shine, and it is first-rate. We all know (from “Les Miserables” for instance) that Hugh Jackman can act, but this is arguably his best-ever performance: a meaty role (he actually has two in the film) that affords him tremendous range and emotion. At one point towards the end of the film I thought “this has genuine Oscar show-reel potential”. He will surely never get nominated – a Marvel film? Get Away! But wouldn’t it make a refreshing change if he was? Recognizing good acting, regardless of the context.
Patrick Stewart is a great Shakespearean actor, and here he also gets given full rein to impress as he hasn’t had chance to in most of his movie roles to date.
Claiming the prize so far this year for the most unusual casting decision is Stephen Merchant as the albino helper Caliban, unrecognizable to me at first until he had some lengthy dialogue to flex his Bristol accent on! A non-comic and dramatic role, Merchant does really well with it.
Finally, I can’t leave the acting without doffing my cap to young Dafne Keen whose mesmerising feral stare would probably put the fear of God into every parent of a pre-teen girl! Even though she has only a handful of lines, this is an impressive feature film debut. I predict we will see much more of this young lady.
Less convincing to me was Richard E Grant as the evil mastermind behind the scheme, who never quite seemed nasty enough to me to be believable: in one scene he could be calling back a dog that’s run off down the beach rather than desperately trying to gain control of an out of control situation!
Directed by James Mangold (“Walk the Line”, “Knight and Day”), who co-wrote the piece with Scott Frank (“Minority Report”) and Michael Green (“Green Lantern”… yes, really!), this was a gritty and well constructed movie. If you can stomach the gore and the body count (I would see it as very lucky to have got away with its UK ’15’ certificate) this is a rollercoaster of a movie that is recommended.
By the way, to save you from sitting through the end titles (although you do get a Johnny Cash classic to enjoy) there is no “monkey” at the end of this Marvel film. (I’m no stranger to still be sitting there as the lights come up… but many of the crowd that were left looked vaguely embarrassed!)
In terms of my rating, I’m not a fanboy for Marvel or DC properties, but here I award a rating I have only previously bestowed on two superhero films before: the quirky “Ant Man” and the anarchic “Deadpool“….
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated San Andreas (2015) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
As solid as the Rock
Who doesn’t love a good disaster movie? From Dante’s Peak to The Day After Tomorrow, there’s enough city-levelling action in the movie archives to terrify even the most urban of us.
The genre came to a head somewhat in 2009 with the overly cheesy 2012. Directed by Roland Emmerich, aka the disaster movie king, it was a huge box-office success but audiences were turned off by the idea of destroying the entire globe.
After a few years off, the genre returns with San Andreas. But can this earthquake-based blockbuster evoke memories of yesteryear’s disaster flicks?
Dwayne Johnson stars as Ray Gaines, a chief rescue officer with the LAFD and in typical The Rock style, manages to captivate the audience from beginning to end of this exceptionally cheesy yet surprisingly effective movie.
The beautiful Carla Gugino plays Ray’s estranged wife, Emma with Alexandra Daddario taking on the role of their daughter Blake. There’s even a small role for Kylie Minogue, though she is rather unnoticed here.
San Andreas follows the three central characters as they try to reunite with one another after a series of devastating earthquakes along the west coast of America, all of which are predicted by brilliant seismologist Lawrence – a wasted Paul Giamatti.
The film is visually stunning, but as with any in the genre, lacks a defined story with the characters being thrown from one amazing set piece to another. From the very beginning the audience is subjected to gargantuan action sequences including the much-marketed tsunami that acts as a placeholder for the film’s final act – it is absolutely mesmerising to watch.
Johnson proves time-and-time again that he is in the right business. Along with Schwarzenegger he is at his best in films where his brawn is needed the most and it’s certainly the case here. Surprisingly though, The Rock provides a rich emotional undertone due to a horrific past family incident.
Unfortunately, there is such a lack of originality in San Andreas’ story that it’s easy to signpost exactly what is going to happen before it actually does. The reason? Simply because it’s been done to death. Disaster flicks are very 90s with Dante’s Peak having a similar family unit and even in the noughties, The Day After Tomorrow featuring the well-worn reuniting with children plotline.
There are some clever touches however, parts of the film where you would expect generic clichés, it cleverly dangles a red herring and then moves the plot in a completely different direction.
It’s clear to see that disaster movies will always find their audience. Those not looking for a deep and meaningful story and a rollercoaster ride of special effects instead will find much to enjoy here.
Dwayne Johnson is superb in his role with the majority of the other characters falling by the wayside somewhat, and in the end, San Andreas proves to be a solid if not overly original experience.
It’s fair to say though, this film is more than worth the price of a cinema ticket.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/05/31/as-solid-as-the-rock-san-andreas-review/
The genre came to a head somewhat in 2009 with the overly cheesy 2012. Directed by Roland Emmerich, aka the disaster movie king, it was a huge box-office success but audiences were turned off by the idea of destroying the entire globe.
After a few years off, the genre returns with San Andreas. But can this earthquake-based blockbuster evoke memories of yesteryear’s disaster flicks?
Dwayne Johnson stars as Ray Gaines, a chief rescue officer with the LAFD and in typical The Rock style, manages to captivate the audience from beginning to end of this exceptionally cheesy yet surprisingly effective movie.
The beautiful Carla Gugino plays Ray’s estranged wife, Emma with Alexandra Daddario taking on the role of their daughter Blake. There’s even a small role for Kylie Minogue, though she is rather unnoticed here.
San Andreas follows the three central characters as they try to reunite with one another after a series of devastating earthquakes along the west coast of America, all of which are predicted by brilliant seismologist Lawrence – a wasted Paul Giamatti.
The film is visually stunning, but as with any in the genre, lacks a defined story with the characters being thrown from one amazing set piece to another. From the very beginning the audience is subjected to gargantuan action sequences including the much-marketed tsunami that acts as a placeholder for the film’s final act – it is absolutely mesmerising to watch.
Johnson proves time-and-time again that he is in the right business. Along with Schwarzenegger he is at his best in films where his brawn is needed the most and it’s certainly the case here. Surprisingly though, The Rock provides a rich emotional undertone due to a horrific past family incident.
Unfortunately, there is such a lack of originality in San Andreas’ story that it’s easy to signpost exactly what is going to happen before it actually does. The reason? Simply because it’s been done to death. Disaster flicks are very 90s with Dante’s Peak having a similar family unit and even in the noughties, The Day After Tomorrow featuring the well-worn reuniting with children plotline.
There are some clever touches however, parts of the film where you would expect generic clichés, it cleverly dangles a red herring and then moves the plot in a completely different direction.
It’s clear to see that disaster movies will always find their audience. Those not looking for a deep and meaningful story and a rollercoaster ride of special effects instead will find much to enjoy here.
Dwayne Johnson is superb in his role with the majority of the other characters falling by the wayside somewhat, and in the end, San Andreas proves to be a solid if not overly original experience.
It’s fair to say though, this film is more than worth the price of a cinema ticket.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/05/31/as-solid-as-the-rock-san-andreas-review/
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Wounds (2019) in Movies
Oct 17, 2019
Will's life isn't that complicated, he does his shifts at the bar, comes home to his girlfriend Carrie and in between he flirts with one of the regulars, Alicia.
Life in the bar is pretty predictable, everyone drinks too much and there's the occasional fight. On this particular evening things get even stranger. When Eric and his friends arrive already drunk Will leaves them be, he's more intrigued by the group of college kids who arrive looking quite out of place. Everything is turned upside down when Eric and his friends start fighting and bring the night to a quick end.
Clearing up the debris Will finds a phone belonging to one of the kids, he takes it home intending to put it in lost property the next day but before that happens he discovers some shocking images that lead him and Carrie down a terrifying rabbit hole.
Wounds has a nice idea behind it but once I came out of the film and started thinking about it I began realising that somehow it's all just a little vague. One of the things I like about films with sci-fi and supernatural leanings is finding out about where the "things" have come from, in Wounds they give you a hint about it but nothing solid to go on. Will and Carrie are only given the vaguest of clues about what is happening and it's surprisingly frustrating. It felt very much like we'd been handed film two in a series and somewhere along the line we'd be handed the first film as a prequel and watch it end as they drop the phone in the bar.
We're also probably subjected to a little too much drama. The beginning takes a while to get to the horror aspect of things. By the time it came out I was genuinely surprised. I'd assumed the horror tag was added at a stretch as it was coming across as a thriller more than everything else. Certainly the drama portion seemed to be unnecessary to most of what was going on by the end of the film.
Armie Hammer plays Will in the main role of the movie. Will's journey goes through a lot of stages, potentially too many. It does at least work in a sensible progression rather than jumping around. Hammer is convincing in all stages even if they do seem a little far fetched but I would personally have axed some of it.
Here's what I would have done... Zazie Beetz was great and I love her in everything I've seen, in my opinion she was underused in this film. I'd have given her the role of Carrie and expanded it slightly while cutting Alicia and her boyfriend out completely. Beetz's performance was great but there wasn't really anything to get her teeth into when it came to the horror side of everything. She had great chemistry with Hammer onscreen which I didn't get from his performances with Johnson. Johnson's performance in general felt underwhelming, Carrie wasn't going to be a likeable character but she could have been so much more.
Sound plays a very big part in the film. As I mentioned at the beginning creepy crawlies play a big part in Wounds, and even when they're not there you know they're there. It's incredibly well done because more than once I found myself getting twitchy that I could hear them in the background of scenes. The other noticeable sound related issue was around the phone, at one point Will answers the mobile and we're subjected to a loud piercing tone that cuts right through you. Again, fantastic use of sound, but in this instance while it makes you feel the unease of Will as it happens it is also painfully loud for anyone who is even slightly sensitive to things like that.
The film uses effects to create the swarms of bugs... although saying that, if they didn't then it's a very impressive bunch of cockroach wranglers they have on staff. The effects themselves aren't fantastic but when they happen it's so fast that it kind of works in the moment.
It might not be the best horror film but it certainly wasn't a bad watch. It comes out on Netflix tomorrow, I won't be seeing it again right away but it's definitely going onto the Watchlist for the future.
Originally posted on: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/10/wounds-movie-review.html
Life in the bar is pretty predictable, everyone drinks too much and there's the occasional fight. On this particular evening things get even stranger. When Eric and his friends arrive already drunk Will leaves them be, he's more intrigued by the group of college kids who arrive looking quite out of place. Everything is turned upside down when Eric and his friends start fighting and bring the night to a quick end.
Clearing up the debris Will finds a phone belonging to one of the kids, he takes it home intending to put it in lost property the next day but before that happens he discovers some shocking images that lead him and Carrie down a terrifying rabbit hole.
Wounds has a nice idea behind it but once I came out of the film and started thinking about it I began realising that somehow it's all just a little vague. One of the things I like about films with sci-fi and supernatural leanings is finding out about where the "things" have come from, in Wounds they give you a hint about it but nothing solid to go on. Will and Carrie are only given the vaguest of clues about what is happening and it's surprisingly frustrating. It felt very much like we'd been handed film two in a series and somewhere along the line we'd be handed the first film as a prequel and watch it end as they drop the phone in the bar.
We're also probably subjected to a little too much drama. The beginning takes a while to get to the horror aspect of things. By the time it came out I was genuinely surprised. I'd assumed the horror tag was added at a stretch as it was coming across as a thriller more than everything else. Certainly the drama portion seemed to be unnecessary to most of what was going on by the end of the film.
Armie Hammer plays Will in the main role of the movie. Will's journey goes through a lot of stages, potentially too many. It does at least work in a sensible progression rather than jumping around. Hammer is convincing in all stages even if they do seem a little far fetched but I would personally have axed some of it.
Here's what I would have done... Zazie Beetz was great and I love her in everything I've seen, in my opinion she was underused in this film. I'd have given her the role of Carrie and expanded it slightly while cutting Alicia and her boyfriend out completely. Beetz's performance was great but there wasn't really anything to get her teeth into when it came to the horror side of everything. She had great chemistry with Hammer onscreen which I didn't get from his performances with Johnson. Johnson's performance in general felt underwhelming, Carrie wasn't going to be a likeable character but she could have been so much more.
Sound plays a very big part in the film. As I mentioned at the beginning creepy crawlies play a big part in Wounds, and even when they're not there you know they're there. It's incredibly well done because more than once I found myself getting twitchy that I could hear them in the background of scenes. The other noticeable sound related issue was around the phone, at one point Will answers the mobile and we're subjected to a loud piercing tone that cuts right through you. Again, fantastic use of sound, but in this instance while it makes you feel the unease of Will as it happens it is also painfully loud for anyone who is even slightly sensitive to things like that.
The film uses effects to create the swarms of bugs... although saying that, if they didn't then it's a very impressive bunch of cockroach wranglers they have on staff. The effects themselves aren't fantastic but when they happen it's so fast that it kind of works in the moment.
It might not be the best horror film but it certainly wasn't a bad watch. It comes out on Netflix tomorrow, I won't be seeing it again right away but it's definitely going onto the Watchlist for the future.
Originally posted on: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/10/wounds-movie-review.html
Darren (1599 KP) rated The Bromley Boys (2018) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Story: The Bromley Boys starts in 1969 three years after England won the World Cup, David Roberts (O’Connor) had wanted to support the popular teams of either West Ham or Tottenham, but his father Donald (Davies) has banned football in the house, leading to his mother Gertrude (McCutcheon) sneaking him a scarf of his local team Bromley.
This season is going to be David’s biggest as he learns about the corruption from the chairman Charlie McQueen (Foreman) and the potential sale of the club’s best player. David also meets Ruby (Baker) the daughter of the chairman that is the only girl that talks to him as he experiences love for the first time.
Thoughts on The Bromley Boys
Characters – David Roberts is a teenage boy that got dreams of being a footballer after seeing England win the World Cup in 1966, he is forced to support his local team, a small team with a tiny fanbase, he becomes a loyal fan and during the 1969 season he must figure out prove the chairman is out to ruin the club as they constantly struggle on the pitch. Ruby McQueen is the daughter of the chairman that starts dating David, she wants a normal relationship but often has to play second fiddle to his love of football. Charlie McQueen is the greedy chairman of Bromley, the fans and manager believe he is trying to put them out of business, which reflects on how David tries to expose his truth. Gertrude and Donald are David’s parents that are trying to give him the best future even if they don’t like him enjoy football.
Performances – Brenock O’Connor is delightful in the leading role showing us just how obsessed teenager can become when it comes to sports. Savannah Baker is great as the love interest who is looking for a future. Jamie Foreman looks all the part of a corrupt chairman through the film, with Alan Davies and Martine McCutcheon showing they have the star power from the English side.
Story – The story here follows a teenage football fan of his local team that starts to see things putting his beloved club in trouble after overhearing a conversation, he tries to fix things during the season just to make sure his team will be their next season. As a football fan this is one of the easiest films to relate to, seeing the ups, well downs more than often in this film, we can see how footballs can see their lives taken over by the season, it is even worse in modern day too, we do also have the important message about trying to support your local team instead of one of the more established teams that friends support. This is based on a trouble story which apart from the romantic angle does feel like it could have been real, but also the tales told from the tiny crowds to get buzz around their club. This is a story that is going to be one that the English market will enjoy the most.
Comedy – You will get plenty of laughs in this film, a lot comes from the love of football and seeing just how much it can change a life.
Settings – The film is set in and around the small town of Bromley, we spend plenty of time at the club, which helps us understand what this meant to David.
Scene of the Movie – The last game of the season.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The teachers seem very harsh.
Final Thoughts – This is an enjoyable British comedy, one that the English will enjoy most and one we can understand the passion behind supporting the team.
Overall: Truly fun and feel good film.
This season is going to be David’s biggest as he learns about the corruption from the chairman Charlie McQueen (Foreman) and the potential sale of the club’s best player. David also meets Ruby (Baker) the daughter of the chairman that is the only girl that talks to him as he experiences love for the first time.
Thoughts on The Bromley Boys
Characters – David Roberts is a teenage boy that got dreams of being a footballer after seeing England win the World Cup in 1966, he is forced to support his local team, a small team with a tiny fanbase, he becomes a loyal fan and during the 1969 season he must figure out prove the chairman is out to ruin the club as they constantly struggle on the pitch. Ruby McQueen is the daughter of the chairman that starts dating David, she wants a normal relationship but often has to play second fiddle to his love of football. Charlie McQueen is the greedy chairman of Bromley, the fans and manager believe he is trying to put them out of business, which reflects on how David tries to expose his truth. Gertrude and Donald are David’s parents that are trying to give him the best future even if they don’t like him enjoy football.
Performances – Brenock O’Connor is delightful in the leading role showing us just how obsessed teenager can become when it comes to sports. Savannah Baker is great as the love interest who is looking for a future. Jamie Foreman looks all the part of a corrupt chairman through the film, with Alan Davies and Martine McCutcheon showing they have the star power from the English side.
Story – The story here follows a teenage football fan of his local team that starts to see things putting his beloved club in trouble after overhearing a conversation, he tries to fix things during the season just to make sure his team will be their next season. As a football fan this is one of the easiest films to relate to, seeing the ups, well downs more than often in this film, we can see how footballs can see their lives taken over by the season, it is even worse in modern day too, we do also have the important message about trying to support your local team instead of one of the more established teams that friends support. This is based on a trouble story which apart from the romantic angle does feel like it could have been real, but also the tales told from the tiny crowds to get buzz around their club. This is a story that is going to be one that the English market will enjoy the most.
Comedy – You will get plenty of laughs in this film, a lot comes from the love of football and seeing just how much it can change a life.
Settings – The film is set in and around the small town of Bromley, we spend plenty of time at the club, which helps us understand what this meant to David.
Scene of the Movie – The last game of the season.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The teachers seem very harsh.
Final Thoughts – This is an enjoyable British comedy, one that the English will enjoy most and one we can understand the passion behind supporting the team.
Overall: Truly fun and feel good film.
Yvonne (12 KP) rated A Secret Muse in Books
Jun 9, 2019
Coco Rhodes was happy with her life, an artist and teacher, she enjoyed her freedom. Her brother Chris was a member of a secret society The Allegiance, and whilst her family and friends were members, she wanted nothing to do with them. However, when her life was put in danger, she had no choice but to accept their protection. But could that be enough to save her from Kenan, one of the evilest vampires they have come across
I liked Coco, she was happy to be herself, she was a free spirit, lost in her art and content with her own company. Even though her best friend and her brother were part of The Allegiance, she wanted nothing to do it, which showed how headstrong she was. Even after her accident, she was still stubborn and was literally forced into having additional protection.
I enjoyed how the supernatural overlapped with the real world, regular humans were not aware that supernatural beings lived and worked with them. Only a few people knew about the Allegiance and this kept everyone safe. Due to the society being large, they're quite a few characters in the story, but each one is relevant to the story and when we are introduced to them, parts of their backstory is revealed. As the story continues you soon come to realise how their lives interweave with each other and how they are connected in the future. There are various supernatural beings in this story, witches, vampires, to name but a few. All have an important role in the story.
This story was well researched and as some of the characters are vampires, the story spans over a long time period. Whilst I do not know anything about art, I enjoyed reading about the supernatural involvement used to create some of the most famous paintings. The scenic views of Italy and the places visited were described in fine detail and whether it is the 15th century or the modern day you feel like you are transported there. The pace would quicken with the action, making it more intense. The fight scenes were full on, but the characters would change from fighters to lovers in a few scenes, slowing the pace making it an enjoyable read.
This is a book for adults and whether you are looking for those tall dark and brooding men or just a good fantasy read to start a new series than this is the story for you
I liked Coco, she was happy to be herself, she was a free spirit, lost in her art and content with her own company. Even though her best friend and her brother were part of The Allegiance, she wanted nothing to do it, which showed how headstrong she was. Even after her accident, she was still stubborn and was literally forced into having additional protection.
I enjoyed how the supernatural overlapped with the real world, regular humans were not aware that supernatural beings lived and worked with them. Only a few people knew about the Allegiance and this kept everyone safe. Due to the society being large, they're quite a few characters in the story, but each one is relevant to the story and when we are introduced to them, parts of their backstory is revealed. As the story continues you soon come to realise how their lives interweave with each other and how they are connected in the future. There are various supernatural beings in this story, witches, vampires, to name but a few. All have an important role in the story.
This story was well researched and as some of the characters are vampires, the story spans over a long time period. Whilst I do not know anything about art, I enjoyed reading about the supernatural involvement used to create some of the most famous paintings. The scenic views of Italy and the places visited were described in fine detail and whether it is the 15th century or the modern day you feel like you are transported there. The pace would quicken with the action, making it more intense. The fight scenes were full on, but the characters would change from fighters to lovers in a few scenes, slowing the pace making it an enjoyable read.
This is a book for adults and whether you are looking for those tall dark and brooding men or just a good fantasy read to start a new series than this is the story for you
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated 2-Headed Shark Attack (2012) in Movies
Aug 5, 2020
You know full well I'll be watching all the movies in the -Headed Shark Attack series!
When a boatful of students is attacked at sea they must get to the safety of a nearby atoll while crew remain on board to make repairs. As they explore their new surroundings the danger becomes even more real when the shark starts to pick them off one by one.
In my shark appreciation post (on my website) I listed off a lot of plus points to amusingly entertaining shark films and this has a lot of them. Science, geography, everything you learnt at school is wrong... if you use this film as a reference.
We start with the inexplicable "semester at sea" storyline...
"We could have them doing a day trip out to study marine life, a science field trip."
"That's not long enough, make it a whole semester at sea."
"Okay, but we don't have the budget for technically accurate sets with equipment for people studying the ocean to that level."
"They just need a boat."
"I mean, I've never studied the ocean but I imagine they'd have sonar and lots of diving gear..."
"Just give them a boat!
"Okay, I'll get the writers to give the boat an experienced crew and..."
"No, no, no! Why would they need that?"
"Because they're going to sea on an expedition..."
"Give them minimal crew, no common sense and make the most useful members of the crew not speak the same language as the majority of the others."
*blank stare*
See what I mean? Shark film gold! There are so many ridiculous things that I lost count.
From the completely logical inclusion of a scene where Carmen Electra sunbathes in a bikini in the middle of a crisis to some obligatory boobs, the human section of the cast are all playing their stereotypes well. The acting is fairly good for this sort of film, it's surprisingly convincing... occasionally.
The shark contingent has mystical control over the world around it. You know when you're driving and you inhale to get through tight gaps? I believe the shark harnesses that same magic to get into the shallow water.
2-Headed Shark Attack does everything I love in a shark film and it has that star quality that's needed (someone you know and someone who looks familiar and you have to IMDb them), I would happily watch it again, probably in a marathon with 3-, 5- and 6-Headed Shark Attack... but every time I write that down I worry about where 4- went.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/08/2-headed-shark-attack-movie-review.html
When a boatful of students is attacked at sea they must get to the safety of a nearby atoll while crew remain on board to make repairs. As they explore their new surroundings the danger becomes even more real when the shark starts to pick them off one by one.
In my shark appreciation post (on my website) I listed off a lot of plus points to amusingly entertaining shark films and this has a lot of them. Science, geography, everything you learnt at school is wrong... if you use this film as a reference.
We start with the inexplicable "semester at sea" storyline...
"We could have them doing a day trip out to study marine life, a science field trip."
"That's not long enough, make it a whole semester at sea."
"Okay, but we don't have the budget for technically accurate sets with equipment for people studying the ocean to that level."
"They just need a boat."
"I mean, I've never studied the ocean but I imagine they'd have sonar and lots of diving gear..."
"Just give them a boat!
"Okay, I'll get the writers to give the boat an experienced crew and..."
"No, no, no! Why would they need that?"
"Because they're going to sea on an expedition..."
"Give them minimal crew, no common sense and make the most useful members of the crew not speak the same language as the majority of the others."
*blank stare*
See what I mean? Shark film gold! There are so many ridiculous things that I lost count.
From the completely logical inclusion of a scene where Carmen Electra sunbathes in a bikini in the middle of a crisis to some obligatory boobs, the human section of the cast are all playing their stereotypes well. The acting is fairly good for this sort of film, it's surprisingly convincing... occasionally.
The shark contingent has mystical control over the world around it. You know when you're driving and you inhale to get through tight gaps? I believe the shark harnesses that same magic to get into the shallow water.
2-Headed Shark Attack does everything I love in a shark film and it has that star quality that's needed (someone you know and someone who looks familiar and you have to IMDb them), I would happily watch it again, probably in a marathon with 3-, 5- and 6-Headed Shark Attack... but every time I write that down I worry about where 4- went.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/08/2-headed-shark-attack-movie-review.html
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated The Cloverfield Paradox (2018) in Movies
Mar 23, 2018 (Updated Mar 24, 2018)
What? Why? How?
Right, quick disclaimer - this is going to be less of a review of the movie and more of a rant on how this movie ruins any Cloverfield movies going forward.
In terms of reviewing this film, I actually don't think that this film is as bad as most other people have been saying. There are actually some cool moments and neat ideas here, they just don't really work when they are all put together like this movie tried to do. I liked the cast, I thought that the set was cool, I even enjoyed some of the more cheesy sci-fi clichés in the film, but the whole point of the first two Cloverfield movies is that these planet altering events aren't explained. Even if you totally disregard the fact that this 'explanation,' actually makes no sense when you think about the timeline of the first movie's events, half the fun of the first movie was trying to work out exactly wtf was going on, this half arsed attempt at explaining it just ruins any of that potential fun.
Then, the second movie established that the 'Cloverfield,' label was more of an umbrella that went over these exciting sci-fi movies. Sure, it ties the movies together as a franchise, but there are no obvious links between the franchise entries and that's ok. Think of the 'Cloverfield,' title as being similar to the 'Twilight Zone.' Not everything has to make sense and call back/forward to another entry in the franchise. The tenuous links we had in the other movies, like how it was mentioned in 10CL that Howard worked at a satellite company before building his underground bunker, was more than enough to constitute a link and spark the online fan theories, we didn't need any more than that. Then there was all of the online marketing stuff involving Slusho and Tagruato, which was so clever and unique and elevated the first movie from being a mediocre monster flick to something intriguing and ripe for discussion.
Now this movie comes along and claims that all of these events are interconnected, even though the events of of the previous two movies took place years before the events of Cloverfield Paradox. Then they think by showing us a huge version of Clover from the first movie at the end of Paradox just automatically makes everything okay?
Why did they not just make this movie about a group of astronauts on a space station having some weird shit happening to them, (like the original script for this film was written,) and then call it Cloverfield: God Particle? (which was the movie's original title.) They could have still had Stambler's brother on the news at the start talking about how the crew's mission is dangerous and that would be enough to link this to the other movies. Why they included the appearance of Clover at the end of Paradox and the other half arsed attempts to tie the other two movies into this one is beyond me. It is so unnecessary and defeats the whole point of the Cloverfield franchise as a whole.
That is the reason I didn't like this movie, not because of the movie itself. The film itself was ok, but what it tried to do in terms of connecting these movies was stupid and unnecessary and may have ruined any other Cloverfield movies going forward.
In terms of reviewing this film, I actually don't think that this film is as bad as most other people have been saying. There are actually some cool moments and neat ideas here, they just don't really work when they are all put together like this movie tried to do. I liked the cast, I thought that the set was cool, I even enjoyed some of the more cheesy sci-fi clichés in the film, but the whole point of the first two Cloverfield movies is that these planet altering events aren't explained. Even if you totally disregard the fact that this 'explanation,' actually makes no sense when you think about the timeline of the first movie's events, half the fun of the first movie was trying to work out exactly wtf was going on, this half arsed attempt at explaining it just ruins any of that potential fun.
Then, the second movie established that the 'Cloverfield,' label was more of an umbrella that went over these exciting sci-fi movies. Sure, it ties the movies together as a franchise, but there are no obvious links between the franchise entries and that's ok. Think of the 'Cloverfield,' title as being similar to the 'Twilight Zone.' Not everything has to make sense and call back/forward to another entry in the franchise. The tenuous links we had in the other movies, like how it was mentioned in 10CL that Howard worked at a satellite company before building his underground bunker, was more than enough to constitute a link and spark the online fan theories, we didn't need any more than that. Then there was all of the online marketing stuff involving Slusho and Tagruato, which was so clever and unique and elevated the first movie from being a mediocre monster flick to something intriguing and ripe for discussion.
Now this movie comes along and claims that all of these events are interconnected, even though the events of of the previous two movies took place years before the events of Cloverfield Paradox. Then they think by showing us a huge version of Clover from the first movie at the end of Paradox just automatically makes everything okay?
Why did they not just make this movie about a group of astronauts on a space station having some weird shit happening to them, (like the original script for this film was written,) and then call it Cloverfield: God Particle? (which was the movie's original title.) They could have still had Stambler's brother on the news at the start talking about how the crew's mission is dangerous and that would be enough to link this to the other movies. Why they included the appearance of Clover at the end of Paradox and the other half arsed attempts to tie the other two movies into this one is beyond me. It is so unnecessary and defeats the whole point of the Cloverfield franchise as a whole.
That is the reason I didn't like this movie, not because of the movie itself. The film itself was ok, but what it tried to do in terms of connecting these movies was stupid and unnecessary and may have ruined any other Cloverfield movies going forward.
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated The Addams Family (2019) in Movies
Nov 1, 2019 (Updated Nov 1, 2019)
Everyone knows pink is a gateway colour
addams family attempts to bring the classic family into modern day and while not a bad little film it doesnt do nearly enough to make them as memorable for a new generation of kids/teens as it did for people my age growing up. I must say I quite admire this film for trying to differentiate its self from the constant barrage of animated features weve had this year. Its colour pallet is mostly drab, cold and dark colours which I enjoyed and fit well with the gothic/spooky vibe of the film. Theres also a lot of cool halloween things to look at in the scenes that are set inside the familys house and humor at times can be incredibly gross or darkly adult too which really made me giggle (most of which children are thankfuly to young to understand). Animation while not overly detailed was nice to look at also be it the warts on an old hags nose, spiders crawling the walls or the way the bottom of Morticias dress squirms around the floor as she walks are just some of the neat little attentions to detail making this world a little more strange and alive. Plot and story wise its a little dull and while I found some clever ideas implemented here they really are not executed very interestingly. I did find some of the ideas fun however like the way the movie pokes fun at current trends eg all the girls at the school wednesday goes to have those hidious duck lips, all look identical to one another and obsess over instagram. Everyone in the town also has odd habbits of thier own and the seemingly nicest person also has a much darker side to her, not to mention the entire town is filled with hatred for anything diffrent, easily influenced by social media, full of fake happiness and coated in hidiously garish colour choices which makes you question who the 'ugly' and 'strange' ones really are here. Subtle themes of child abuse, belonging, acceptance, being yourself, death, honour, pressure, loneliness as well as other heavy subjects strangely fit well here making the film a little darker than I expected too. Sadly theres not much here for kids who will undoubtedly be bored quick because big spectacle set pieces are few and far between/not very exciting either and what I found enjoyable ie the subbtle violence, gross adult humour, adult themes and gothic visuals wont likely intrest them either. Oscar isaac and Charlize theron voice work for Morticia and Gomez I found very enjoyable and the score at times really stood out to me a lot at times creating a nice eerie atmosphere. Not nearly as bad as people make out Adams Family may be a tad forgettable, have an extreamly rushed third act, story arcs that go nowhere its creepy, kooky, spooky, and enjoyable enough to warrent seeing at the cinema for sure.