Search

Search only in certain items:

Shadow in the Cloud (2020)
Shadow in the Cloud (2020)
2020 | Action, Horror, War
6
6.0 (6 Ratings)
Movie Rating
Contains spoilers, click to show
In short, Shadow in the Cloud is a whole load of silly, but entertaining nonsense. In all honesty, the opening 30 or so minutes completely grabbed me - it has a foreboding synth heavy soundtrack that's completely at odds with its WWII time period but still works, it has a sort of gothic aesthetic in it's cloudy night sky setting that boasts some wonderful shots, it has a well built up sense of dread, and then, when the penny drops that there's something not quite right, there's a shot that is legitimately chilling. I was hooked and found myself thinking "this is going to be one of my new favourite films", but alas, it wasn't to last.
From the moment the gremlin creature is fully revealed, proceedings get sillier and sillier - there is one bit in particular that is so mind numbingly dumb, I felt some brain cells die off (but it still made me audibly laugh so, every cloud). The silliness isn't even the main problem, it's actually a plus, but it does highlight how shoddy most of the writing is. Chloë Grace Moretz does the best with what she's given, but honestly, Max Landis' claims that 95% of the finished product is still his work despite re-writes isn't something to be proud of. There's just a lot of iffy dialogue, and some narrative twists later down the line that feel forced and unnecessary.
However, all the silliness that I mentioned makes up for it, if that's your kind of thing. I really can't hate on a film too much when it has its lead beating the shit out of a CGI monkey-bat thing that's trying to eat her baby after all.
  
Star Trek - Nemesis (2002)
Star Trek - Nemesis (2002)
2002 | Action, Sci-Fi
This film should have worked. They had four years to work up the film: the biggest gap between movies in the series to date. The sets and special effects deployed are a notable improvement on “Insurrection” and are, at times, very impressive. It’s a movie that has personal angst for Picard; an epic space battle; and the death of a major character. And a young Tom Hardy turns in a memorable performance, belying what was to come: it’s interesting that this is only Hardy’s third feature (following his debut in “Black Hawk Down” just the year before!). It’s also a full NINE years before he won the BAFTA Rising Star award!

And yet it’s just not very engaging: I find myself fiddling with my phone while its on, which is never a good sign. Gone are any of the comic asides that have tended to lighten the mood of these films: this is dark and plot-heavy throughout. It’s even got a ‘mind-rape’ scene that is quite disturbing.

Naturally, the Enterprise insurance premium has taken another hammering by the end of the film. You can just imagine the discussion back in space dock… “no mate…” – sucking air in through his front teeth “…that whole front bumper’s gonna have to be replaced, and that’ll cost you a pretty packet”!

Combined with poor marketing and fierce competition (the film opening in the same month as “Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers”), this ended up with the worse financial performance of any of the Trek movies (in terms of budget to return ratio). And it killed the franchise. The only option was to be a full reboot: something that was to take another seven years to happen.
  
Death on the Nile (2022)
Death on the Nile (2022)
2022 | Mystery
The second of Kenneth Branagh's outing as Agatha Christie's sleuth Poirot, apparently much delayed by the Covid-19 pandemic, and set after The Murder on the Orient Express.

I've never seen that movie.

I have read the book on which it (Murder on Orient Express) is based, though.

As I'm not that big a fan of murder mysteries, I hadn't, however, read the story on which this is based.

Why does that matter?

Simply because it meant I was going into this with no preconceptions; no real idea of what would happen (other than there would be a murder which Poirot has to solve)!

I'm not sure whether the rest of Agatha Christie's Poirot novels are all like this or not - I've only read Murder on Orient Express and Murder of Roger Ackroyd, but I did find heavy similarities between the plots, with both Orient Express and is film largely taking place in a confined location, where there is a limited pool of suspects and where Poirot has to sit down and methodically think his way through.

This movie takes a while to get going, with the first hour or so in particular - I found - dragging quite a bit. I've also heard that there was extensive use of Green screen throughout, which might also explain why some of the Nile scenes just didn't sit quite right.

On the other hand, there is a veritable list of who's who acting talent on the screen: aside from Branagh himself, we have Gal Gadot (as the key victim), Emma Mackey, Arnie Hammer, Russel Brand (surprisingly understated), Annette Benning, Dawn French, Jennifer Saunders (yes, that French and Saunders!), Letitia Wright and Sophie Okonedo - nearly all of whom would have their own motives for the murder.
  
I absolutely loved Kerry Daynes’s first book, so when I was given the chance by NetGalley to read and review this book I knew that I was in for a treat.
Kerry Daynes gives us an insight into the world of forensic psychology and the different settings that she has worked in, from hospitals to her own private practice to a mother-and-baby unit. Her job is so varied and she talks about a wide range of characters that she has met throughout her career.
Kerry Daynes doesn’t pretend to be a robot and is the first to admit that sometimes her prejudice or feelings do appear during sessions with some of her patients. She says the most important thing is to realise this and to try to put them to one side at that moment in time. I have always been interested in psychology and it is the career I want to go into in the near future, and this book has ignited that passion even further but also put some of my doubts to bed.
I really did enjoy this book, and while I know that statistics and studies are important to back up facts in the book, I did feel that at some points the references and statistics were a bit too heavy, especially if you are not someone who likes to go away and read up on them afterwards. While they didn’t bother me too much, I did sometimes find I was skimming over them a little, so I wonder what people who don’t have any experience of psychology would think of these parts.
Overall, I really did enjoy the book and I enjoyed reading about the patients that Kerry Daynes included and felt satisfied when we found out what happened to them afterwards.