Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated King Arthur: Legend Of The Sword (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
The Arthurian legend: but with Cockneys.
So, bit difficult to describe this one… so I asked my bloke Alfie from Londinium to explain what’s it all about…
“‘Ere, OK bruv. So this is dun by that geezer Guy Ritchie – yer know, the one that dun that Sherlock Holmes with the Iron Man geezer Robert Junior Downey, that one. His new film is a rip-roarin’ acshun movie what retells da Arfurian legend in a novel new way.
That Hulk bloke Eric Bana is Arfur’s farfer an’ ‘e’s ‘avin’ a few problems wiv ‘is bruvver Vortigern (Jude Law, who’s a bi’ ov a cockney ‘imself, but ‘ere speaks like a posh bloke. Know what I mean?) So ‘e (Vortigern dat is) gets some magical ‘elp from some slippery watery bints in a puddle and so ‘is dad puts ‘is God Forbid in a boat an’ sends ‘im down da river ter The Smoke ter live wiv some prozzies.
But ‘e grows up big an’ strong an’ ‘andy wiv a sword. His friends tell ‘im ter get aaaht ov town as da King’s blokes are lookin’ fer da young geezer who would be king. An’ e says like “Scapa Flow sowf ov da river at dis time ov night. Are yew mad?”. So e gets caught like an’ gets tested by some famous football bloke ter pull a big sword aaaht ov just a random bi’ ov stone (nod, nod, wink wink, nice twist – ssshhh!).
The Vortigern bloke is very cross an’ tries to kill ‘im but ‘e gets rescued by some bird who can make birds, lol, an’ other fings do what she wants. So can Arfur beat ‘is uncle? Gawdon Bennet, I’m not gon’a tell yew da whole darn fing! Yer’ll ‘ave ter go an’ watch i’ ter find out.”
Thanks Alfie. Couldn’t have said it better myself!
The quirky style of Guy Ritchie isn’t one that you would think would translate well to the Arthurian setting, and as the film starts you tend to think you were right! But if you give it a chance it wears you down into acceptance and then – ultimately – a lot of enjoyment.
Jude Law is deliciously evil mixed with a heavy dose of mad, and delivers the goods.
Charlie Hunnam who plays Arthur (no, I hadn’t heard of him either but he was in the “Lost City of Z”) does a decent job as the medieval hunk, although he seems at time to have taken voice coaching in ‘Olde-English’ from Russell Crowe, since the lad’s Geordie accent seems to wander from Cockney through central southern England to Liverpudlian at one point (definitely channelling a young John Lennon)! Relative newcomer, the Spanish actress Astrid Bergès-Frisbey is effectively weird as the mage.
Particularly noteworthy (no pun intended) is the superb action soundtrack by Daniel Pemberton (“Steve Jobs“, “The Man from U.N.C.L.E.“) which propels the action really well and contains some standout moments.
Also a standout in the technical categories is the editing by James Herbert, who did both of Downey Junior’s “Sherlock Holmes” films (in a similar style) and also “Edge of Tomorrow“. The style is typified with Arthur’s growth to manhood in the streets of London which is stylishly done.
I saw the film in 3D – not a particularly favourite format – but quite well done, although falls into the “trying too hard” category at times with lots of drifting embers… you know the sort.
It’s not bloody Shakespeare. It’s not even the bloody Arthurian legend as you know it. But it is bloody good fun if you let it in.
“‘Ere, OK bruv. So this is dun by that geezer Guy Ritchie – yer know, the one that dun that Sherlock Holmes with the Iron Man geezer Robert Junior Downey, that one. His new film is a rip-roarin’ acshun movie what retells da Arfurian legend in a novel new way.
That Hulk bloke Eric Bana is Arfur’s farfer an’ ‘e’s ‘avin’ a few problems wiv ‘is bruvver Vortigern (Jude Law, who’s a bi’ ov a cockney ‘imself, but ‘ere speaks like a posh bloke. Know what I mean?) So ‘e (Vortigern dat is) gets some magical ‘elp from some slippery watery bints in a puddle and so ‘is dad puts ‘is God Forbid in a boat an’ sends ‘im down da river ter The Smoke ter live wiv some prozzies.
But ‘e grows up big an’ strong an’ ‘andy wiv a sword. His friends tell ‘im ter get aaaht ov town as da King’s blokes are lookin’ fer da young geezer who would be king. An’ e says like “Scapa Flow sowf ov da river at dis time ov night. Are yew mad?”. So e gets caught like an’ gets tested by some famous football bloke ter pull a big sword aaaht ov just a random bi’ ov stone (nod, nod, wink wink, nice twist – ssshhh!).
The Vortigern bloke is very cross an’ tries to kill ‘im but ‘e gets rescued by some bird who can make birds, lol, an’ other fings do what she wants. So can Arfur beat ‘is uncle? Gawdon Bennet, I’m not gon’a tell yew da whole darn fing! Yer’ll ‘ave ter go an’ watch i’ ter find out.”
Thanks Alfie. Couldn’t have said it better myself!
The quirky style of Guy Ritchie isn’t one that you would think would translate well to the Arthurian setting, and as the film starts you tend to think you were right! But if you give it a chance it wears you down into acceptance and then – ultimately – a lot of enjoyment.
Jude Law is deliciously evil mixed with a heavy dose of mad, and delivers the goods.
Charlie Hunnam who plays Arthur (no, I hadn’t heard of him either but he was in the “Lost City of Z”) does a decent job as the medieval hunk, although he seems at time to have taken voice coaching in ‘Olde-English’ from Russell Crowe, since the lad’s Geordie accent seems to wander from Cockney through central southern England to Liverpudlian at one point (definitely channelling a young John Lennon)! Relative newcomer, the Spanish actress Astrid Bergès-Frisbey is effectively weird as the mage.
Particularly noteworthy (no pun intended) is the superb action soundtrack by Daniel Pemberton (“Steve Jobs“, “The Man from U.N.C.L.E.“) which propels the action really well and contains some standout moments.
Also a standout in the technical categories is the editing by James Herbert, who did both of Downey Junior’s “Sherlock Holmes” films (in a similar style) and also “Edge of Tomorrow“. The style is typified with Arthur’s growth to manhood in the streets of London which is stylishly done.
I saw the film in 3D – not a particularly favourite format – but quite well done, although falls into the “trying too hard” category at times with lots of drifting embers… you know the sort.
It’s not bloody Shakespeare. It’s not even the bloody Arthurian legend as you know it. But it is bloody good fun if you let it in.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Jurassic World: Dominion (2022) in Movies
Jun 8, 2022
After having the film halted and its release delayed by the Pandemic, “Jurassic World: Dominion” has finally arrived and closes out the new trilogy in a spectacle of action and visual splendor.
Picking up a few years after the events of “Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom”, the dinosaurs have escaped into the wild and now mingle with and at times endanger society.
A multi-national company has been leading the way with a reserve to study the animals and their quirky leader Lewis Dodgson (Campbell Scott), promises the goal is to discover medicines that will benefit all of society.
At the same time, various concerns have arisen such as gigantic Locust swarms that threaten the food supply and activist Ellie Sattler (Laura Dern) is convinced that Dodgson and his company are behind it. Desperate to find answers, she seeks the help of Dr. Alan Grant (Sam Neill) and Dr. Ian Malcom (Jeff Goldblum) to get to the bottom of the mystery.
Owen Grady (Chris Pratt), and Claire Dearing (Bryce Dallas Howard), find their lives disrupted by the poaching of a unique dinosaur and a genetically unique young girl named Maisie (Isabella Sermon) and this puts them on a path to recover them both which takes them into the illegal world of dinosaur sales and on a collision course with Ellie and her team.
The old and new cast faces numerous dangers along the way before they unite for a rousing final act which effectively combines the original and new trilogy and cast very well.
Director Colin Trevorrow takes his time getting the story up to speed as the early part of the film is heavy on characters and set up before getting to the action but once it starts, there is an endless parade of dinosaurs old and new to endanger the cast and keep the tension moving.
While people may be able to find fault with elements of the plot, pacing, and dialogue, the cast is very effective and it is nice to see the cast from the original series being given a much larger role and how elements from the first film are addressed which have been a point of debate for fans.
The visuals are impressive and there is no end of snarling, biting, and deadly creatures mixed in with favorites old and new while people may want more depth or variation, the creatures are the focal point of the story and the film provides plenty of what fans have come to expect.
The formula of gathering the cast and endangering them with an array of dinosaurs does not change much aside from the locales and creatures involved but fans of the series know what they are getting and “Jurassic World: Dominion” gives fans what they expect and does it well.
DeWanda Wise and Mamoudou Athie are nice additions to the cast and Isabella Sermon appears to be a breakout star in the making. It will be interesting to see how long Universal waits before returning the franchise to cinemas as they have mentioned taking a break following this film, hopefully, it will not be as long as the break between “Jurassic Park 3”, and “Jurassic World” as it will be interesting to see what the next summer event film in the series will offer.
4 stars out of 5.
Picking up a few years after the events of “Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom”, the dinosaurs have escaped into the wild and now mingle with and at times endanger society.
A multi-national company has been leading the way with a reserve to study the animals and their quirky leader Lewis Dodgson (Campbell Scott), promises the goal is to discover medicines that will benefit all of society.
At the same time, various concerns have arisen such as gigantic Locust swarms that threaten the food supply and activist Ellie Sattler (Laura Dern) is convinced that Dodgson and his company are behind it. Desperate to find answers, she seeks the help of Dr. Alan Grant (Sam Neill) and Dr. Ian Malcom (Jeff Goldblum) to get to the bottom of the mystery.
Owen Grady (Chris Pratt), and Claire Dearing (Bryce Dallas Howard), find their lives disrupted by the poaching of a unique dinosaur and a genetically unique young girl named Maisie (Isabella Sermon) and this puts them on a path to recover them both which takes them into the illegal world of dinosaur sales and on a collision course with Ellie and her team.
The old and new cast faces numerous dangers along the way before they unite for a rousing final act which effectively combines the original and new trilogy and cast very well.
Director Colin Trevorrow takes his time getting the story up to speed as the early part of the film is heavy on characters and set up before getting to the action but once it starts, there is an endless parade of dinosaurs old and new to endanger the cast and keep the tension moving.
While people may be able to find fault with elements of the plot, pacing, and dialogue, the cast is very effective and it is nice to see the cast from the original series being given a much larger role and how elements from the first film are addressed which have been a point of debate for fans.
The visuals are impressive and there is no end of snarling, biting, and deadly creatures mixed in with favorites old and new while people may want more depth or variation, the creatures are the focal point of the story and the film provides plenty of what fans have come to expect.
The formula of gathering the cast and endangering them with an array of dinosaurs does not change much aside from the locales and creatures involved but fans of the series know what they are getting and “Jurassic World: Dominion” gives fans what they expect and does it well.
DeWanda Wise and Mamoudou Athie are nice additions to the cast and Isabella Sermon appears to be a breakout star in the making. It will be interesting to see how long Universal waits before returning the franchise to cinemas as they have mentioned taking a break following this film, hopefully, it will not be as long as the break between “Jurassic Park 3”, and “Jurassic World” as it will be interesting to see what the next summer event film in the series will offer.
4 stars out of 5.
Debbiereadsbook (1197 KP) rated Shadow Healer (Blood Shadows #3) in Books
Aug 22, 2023
I don't want it to end!
Independent reviewer for Book Sirens, I was gifted my copy of this book.
This is third book in the Blood Shadows trilogy and it CANNOT be read as a stand alone. You need to know what happened before, what James has done, and how he came to be in the mess of his making. And you know, cos I SAID SO!! Both books one and 2 were 5 star reads, and this one did not disappoint!
James knows what has happened before is entirely his fault. He trusted Gordon and look what happened. He lost the woman he loved, his friends, and his Shadows. Riley loved James, but she never actually voiced the words. Finding him again was bittersweet, though, given what he did and what has to happen now. They need to trust each other, but can they forgive?
Quoting from my review for book one, Shadow Guardian: James would be good, as the third in the Triad but that would mean he comes out of this mess. And if he does, he will be deeply damaged in many ways. Oh, he's gonna break my heart, I know he is! (Assuming he gets a book! *looks pleadingly at Ms Roberts!
And he did! James broke my heart, big time! But Riley as well. They had so much before, but neither had actually said what they felt, or where they wanted it to go, then Gordon came along and wrecked everything. Both of them suffered, deeply, in very different ways. It takes time for them to even speak to each other, but they need to reconnect to actually get one over on Gordon.
Gordon, the power tripping head of the council, makes his plans far more clearer here and it's not just the Norms of this world that will suffer if he gets his way. The Shadow Weavers will suffer, badly, if he gets his feet under the table and gets his way. One suffers here, and it wasn't easy to read, being Shadow stripped.
I think it does have a higher level of violence than the other books, but it really was needed. What Gordon did to James, and the others meant Gordon needed to be stopped at all costs. And it DOES cost, deeply, but it really was needed.
While heavy on the emotional side for James and Riley, I found it a little less explicit than the other books. The emotions are rife for Elizabeth and David too.
AND! The bad guy gets a say! Oh I love it when we hear from the bad guy! Now, I can't actually recall if we did before, cos I don't mention it, and ya;ll know how much I love getting the bad guy so I will always mention it, and we get Gordon in all his world dominating glory and I freaking loved it!
Writing this, even though it was an amazing third instalment, is making me sad. because it is the FINAL part of the trilogy and don't wanna leave them!
I can't wait to see what Roberts comes up with next. I'm really loving her mind and how she gets things across.
5 full and shiny stars, casting wonderfulyl coloured Shadows around!
*same worded review will appear elsewhere
This is third book in the Blood Shadows trilogy and it CANNOT be read as a stand alone. You need to know what happened before, what James has done, and how he came to be in the mess of his making. And you know, cos I SAID SO!! Both books one and 2 were 5 star reads, and this one did not disappoint!
James knows what has happened before is entirely his fault. He trusted Gordon and look what happened. He lost the woman he loved, his friends, and his Shadows. Riley loved James, but she never actually voiced the words. Finding him again was bittersweet, though, given what he did and what has to happen now. They need to trust each other, but can they forgive?
Quoting from my review for book one, Shadow Guardian: James would be good, as the third in the Triad but that would mean he comes out of this mess. And if he does, he will be deeply damaged in many ways. Oh, he's gonna break my heart, I know he is! (Assuming he gets a book! *looks pleadingly at Ms Roberts!
And he did! James broke my heart, big time! But Riley as well. They had so much before, but neither had actually said what they felt, or where they wanted it to go, then Gordon came along and wrecked everything. Both of them suffered, deeply, in very different ways. It takes time for them to even speak to each other, but they need to reconnect to actually get one over on Gordon.
Gordon, the power tripping head of the council, makes his plans far more clearer here and it's not just the Norms of this world that will suffer if he gets his way. The Shadow Weavers will suffer, badly, if he gets his feet under the table and gets his way. One suffers here, and it wasn't easy to read, being Shadow stripped.
I think it does have a higher level of violence than the other books, but it really was needed. What Gordon did to James, and the others meant Gordon needed to be stopped at all costs. And it DOES cost, deeply, but it really was needed.
While heavy on the emotional side for James and Riley, I found it a little less explicit than the other books. The emotions are rife for Elizabeth and David too.
AND! The bad guy gets a say! Oh I love it when we hear from the bad guy! Now, I can't actually recall if we did before, cos I don't mention it, and ya;ll know how much I love getting the bad guy so I will always mention it, and we get Gordon in all his world dominating glory and I freaking loved it!
Writing this, even though it was an amazing third instalment, is making me sad. because it is the FINAL part of the trilogy and don't wanna leave them!
I can't wait to see what Roberts comes up with next. I'm really loving her mind and how she gets things across.
5 full and shiny stars, casting wonderfulyl coloured Shadows around!
*same worded review will appear elsewhere
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Cloud Atlas (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
While I am not familiar with the novel, I was not excited to review the film adaptation of David Mitchell’s Cloud Atlas. Though the Screenplay was written and directed by the Wachowskis (The Matrix) and Tom Tykwer (Run Lola Run) I did not know exactly what I was getting into. The trailer shows it as an epic sci-fi film crossing the time and lives of several stories and how everything and everyone is connected. Needless to say my curiosity was piqued. But I was nervous because I knew it would take a grand effort to keep this epic and ambitious project from falling flat. And well, I can honestly say that I am not quite sure if the combined effort succeeded.
Allow me to explain. About an hour into the film I had a young film reviewer to my left and I noticed he started to nod his head in approval at each new developing story throughout the film. To my right was a friend of mine, I would consider as an average film viewer, who at this same time I could tell was counting the minutes till the lights came up but felt trapped with nowhere to go but forward. And for me, I can see both sides of these reactions.
The plot is comprised of a multi-narrative of six stories, each with a complete beginning, middle and end. These stories are told from different timelines following a group of souls throughout the ages to show how everything is woven together and the connection between them; From the 1849 slave trader, to a young composer in 1936 Britain, to a 1973 journalist attempting to uncover corruption of the big business ruling class, to a 2012 literary publisher who’s life becomes a daring escape from a geriatric home, to a 2144 Neo-Soul synthetic learning to become human, to a post-apocalyptic tribesman trying to save his world and family… Lost yet? Believe me you will want to focus during the first hour of this film as we are introduced to the sudden shift of timelines. All of the main actors appear as varying characters of significance in every narrative, each with different accents and types of language. It is a bit of an unexpected bother to keep everything straight at first, however if you pay attention it is fairly easy to follow. This first hour is where I feel the film becomes a make or break for those actively thinking about what they are watching and the average movie viewer who is just there to be entertained and see the new Tom Hanks (Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close) or Halle Berry (Perfect Stanger) movie. For those who make it through that first hour still engaged, the film moves along at a steady pace and provides everything from romance to action that keeps you guessing and intrigued at what is next to come.
The Wachowskis and Tykwer do an outstanding job of visually fleshing out each timeline in its own visual style, especially the futuristic ones, which subtlety organize each narrative for the viewer. Additionally, there are so many talented actors in this film and it is somewhat fascinating to try and pick them out throughout the film. It is almost like a giant game of Where’s Waldo on screen as the makeup and special effects artists do a fantastic job of making the actors fit each character in every timeline. In fact, during the fourth or fifth timeline a lady in my row asked her partner if the man on screen was Forrest Gump, which was surprising because Hanks was the easiest character to pick out among them all.
Tom Hanks delivers one of his better performances in years. We watch his character’s soul transition from a sinister and vile doctor to a tribesman making the righteous choice while struggling with that inkling of evil that is the devil within us all. It was refreshing to see Hanks play parts that were not just an “everyman” that he has played in recent years.
Halle Berry’s performance is mostly average in her parts with the exception of 1973 journalist role where she is the main protagonist. Hugo Weaving channels a bit of his Agent Smith role from The Matrix as he plays a villain throughout the timelines. Hugh Grant (Love Actually) makes unexpected soild appearances throughout the timelines. With Jim Sturgess (One Day), James D’Arcy (Mansfield Park) and Ben Whishaw (who is the new Q in the upcoming James Bond film Skyfall) rounding out the cast with a young contrast to the already heavy acting handled by the bigger names of this film. Each of these young actors hold’s their own against their older more notable counterparts. Whishaw’s performance as the lead in the 1936 composer role is especially noteworthy.
The other stand out performance in the film comes from Jim Broadbent best known in the states as Professor Slughorn in the Harry Potter Films. His performance in the 1936 composer and 2012 literary publisher are excellent. The Publisher story was my favorite timeline throughout the film. Not only did it deliver some much needed comic relief to an emotionally engaging and heavy film, but it also made me care the most about the elderly characters trying to escape the clutches of the geriatric prison of a nursing home. Unfortunately, other than the aforementioned comic relief this timeline seemed the most unnecessary to the overarching story at hand.
When I left the film and talked it over with my friend I was indifferent to the film. It was not great, it was not bad either. As my friend described it, it was a movie that was trying too hard. We agreed that somewhere in the six storylines there may be a great film, but we were not sure if we watched it.
However as the days have passed I have found myself thinking about the stories constantly. More specifically about how the main protagonist played by a different actor in each narrative has the same birthmark of a shooting star that in some way symbolizes some universal soul encompassing a new shell of a body in each timeline. Like some kind of reincarnation of that soul is fighting the same revolution throughout the ages against the powerful class and illusion of natural order. Additionally how each of the central characters found themselves connected with the main characters in the stories that preceded them through some kind of medium; whether it was by an old journal, or love letters, or a written story, or film, or message of hope. These subtle insights of growth and change for this main soul leaping into a new life in each timeline has caused me to examine our world and how we as people can be truly connected to one another not only today, but throughout the ages. I want to view the film again and am inspired to read the novel in some sort of effort to better understand these concepts.
Nevertheless as a film that is almost three hours long it does its best to be an epic sci-fi film and give something for everyone. And while it succeeds in many aspects of feel, it also falls short in aspects that are probably best accomplished in a literary form. As I said above, somewhere in the six storylines there may be a great film, but I am not sure if I watched it. Or maybe I am not intelligent enough to comprehend it. Because of that I can only give it an average score. Though I believe if you ask me after a second viewing, I may be inclined to raise it.
Allow me to explain. About an hour into the film I had a young film reviewer to my left and I noticed he started to nod his head in approval at each new developing story throughout the film. To my right was a friend of mine, I would consider as an average film viewer, who at this same time I could tell was counting the minutes till the lights came up but felt trapped with nowhere to go but forward. And for me, I can see both sides of these reactions.
The plot is comprised of a multi-narrative of six stories, each with a complete beginning, middle and end. These stories are told from different timelines following a group of souls throughout the ages to show how everything is woven together and the connection between them; From the 1849 slave trader, to a young composer in 1936 Britain, to a 1973 journalist attempting to uncover corruption of the big business ruling class, to a 2012 literary publisher who’s life becomes a daring escape from a geriatric home, to a 2144 Neo-Soul synthetic learning to become human, to a post-apocalyptic tribesman trying to save his world and family… Lost yet? Believe me you will want to focus during the first hour of this film as we are introduced to the sudden shift of timelines. All of the main actors appear as varying characters of significance in every narrative, each with different accents and types of language. It is a bit of an unexpected bother to keep everything straight at first, however if you pay attention it is fairly easy to follow. This first hour is where I feel the film becomes a make or break for those actively thinking about what they are watching and the average movie viewer who is just there to be entertained and see the new Tom Hanks (Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close) or Halle Berry (Perfect Stanger) movie. For those who make it through that first hour still engaged, the film moves along at a steady pace and provides everything from romance to action that keeps you guessing and intrigued at what is next to come.
The Wachowskis and Tykwer do an outstanding job of visually fleshing out each timeline in its own visual style, especially the futuristic ones, which subtlety organize each narrative for the viewer. Additionally, there are so many talented actors in this film and it is somewhat fascinating to try and pick them out throughout the film. It is almost like a giant game of Where’s Waldo on screen as the makeup and special effects artists do a fantastic job of making the actors fit each character in every timeline. In fact, during the fourth or fifth timeline a lady in my row asked her partner if the man on screen was Forrest Gump, which was surprising because Hanks was the easiest character to pick out among them all.
Tom Hanks delivers one of his better performances in years. We watch his character’s soul transition from a sinister and vile doctor to a tribesman making the righteous choice while struggling with that inkling of evil that is the devil within us all. It was refreshing to see Hanks play parts that were not just an “everyman” that he has played in recent years.
Halle Berry’s performance is mostly average in her parts with the exception of 1973 journalist role where she is the main protagonist. Hugo Weaving channels a bit of his Agent Smith role from The Matrix as he plays a villain throughout the timelines. Hugh Grant (Love Actually) makes unexpected soild appearances throughout the timelines. With Jim Sturgess (One Day), James D’Arcy (Mansfield Park) and Ben Whishaw (who is the new Q in the upcoming James Bond film Skyfall) rounding out the cast with a young contrast to the already heavy acting handled by the bigger names of this film. Each of these young actors hold’s their own against their older more notable counterparts. Whishaw’s performance as the lead in the 1936 composer role is especially noteworthy.
The other stand out performance in the film comes from Jim Broadbent best known in the states as Professor Slughorn in the Harry Potter Films. His performance in the 1936 composer and 2012 literary publisher are excellent. The Publisher story was my favorite timeline throughout the film. Not only did it deliver some much needed comic relief to an emotionally engaging and heavy film, but it also made me care the most about the elderly characters trying to escape the clutches of the geriatric prison of a nursing home. Unfortunately, other than the aforementioned comic relief this timeline seemed the most unnecessary to the overarching story at hand.
When I left the film and talked it over with my friend I was indifferent to the film. It was not great, it was not bad either. As my friend described it, it was a movie that was trying too hard. We agreed that somewhere in the six storylines there may be a great film, but we were not sure if we watched it.
However as the days have passed I have found myself thinking about the stories constantly. More specifically about how the main protagonist played by a different actor in each narrative has the same birthmark of a shooting star that in some way symbolizes some universal soul encompassing a new shell of a body in each timeline. Like some kind of reincarnation of that soul is fighting the same revolution throughout the ages against the powerful class and illusion of natural order. Additionally how each of the central characters found themselves connected with the main characters in the stories that preceded them through some kind of medium; whether it was by an old journal, or love letters, or a written story, or film, or message of hope. These subtle insights of growth and change for this main soul leaping into a new life in each timeline has caused me to examine our world and how we as people can be truly connected to one another not only today, but throughout the ages. I want to view the film again and am inspired to read the novel in some sort of effort to better understand these concepts.
Nevertheless as a film that is almost three hours long it does its best to be an epic sci-fi film and give something for everyone. And while it succeeds in many aspects of feel, it also falls short in aspects that are probably best accomplished in a literary form. As I said above, somewhere in the six storylines there may be a great film, but I am not sure if I watched it. Or maybe I am not intelligent enough to comprehend it. Because of that I can only give it an average score. Though I believe if you ask me after a second viewing, I may be inclined to raise it.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Shadows of Kilforth: A Fantasy Quest Game in Tabletop Games
Sep 3, 2020
Have you ever sat down to read a rulebook and had to split it up into several reading sessions? I have multiple times. This happened just recently when I sat down to learn Shadows of Kilforth. Granted, I have two kids that take up the majority of my time and they provide plenty of adorable distraction, but even still, this absolute unit of a rulebook took me a good few days to actually finish. Was the time and effort worth it in the end? Yes. Absolutely. Keep reading.
Shadows of Kilforth is subtitled, “A Fantasy Quest Game.” Right there in the title you find out exactly what you are up against in the very foreboding but unassumingly-sized box. A game set in a fantasy world that is focused on questing. I have to admit up front that this review will be treated a little differently as the rulebook is hefty and nobody wants to read a thorough rules essay on Shadows. So I will give you a very high-level overview of the main steps and then give you my thoughts on how it all works together.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
Shadows of Kilforth is essentially a card and dice RPG-esque adventure game with an Asian-style theme but set in a fantasy world where locations will be devastated into gloom (building upon the first in the series Gloom of Kilforth). The players, as the heroes, have the daunting task of journeying throughout Kilforth’s 25 locations to collect items, allies, spells, and titles to overcome main quests and subquests before every location falls into gloom. These quests usually have the players gathering specific card types to satisfy and complete. Once main player storyline quests, called Sagas, are completed the hero levels up and when they complete their fourth quest in their main Saga they may attempt their Finale and then may finally assault the big boss, the Ancient.
Each turn players have Action Points (AP) to spend on doing different actions: movement, discovering rumours (yes, I know it’s the Queen’s English), confrontations, and regaling a Saga chapter, among several others. Some actions are free actions, called Deeds. These include resolving loot tokens, assaulting an ancient, exchanging items between players, and several others. By using combinations of Actions and Deeds players will be able to travel around collecting those items, allies, and so forth needed to complete their Saga chapters.
To complete objectives and quests, players will typically be rolling dice to meet requirements on the cards. This, as all role-players know, can be either supremely lucky or incredibly and predictably debilitating. Skill checks are abundant in Shadows and diversifying characters may or may not have advantages by being able to complete Fight, Study, Sneak, and Influence tests. Players will win if they can complete their Sagas and defeat the Ancient before all of the locations fall into gloom, signaling the end of the game.
All this, again, is very high-level and there are many intricacies in Shadows that I just cannot go over for the sake of time and the health of my typing fingers. But, the game can be played solo, cooperatively, or competitively. So depending on the mode of play and number of players Shadows can range from a 45 minute foray to multi-hour epics. This is why I have played this solo with one character for my plays.
Components. Shadows of Kilforth is very card-heavy, but also includes other goodies. The cards themselves are firstly quite numerous, but also good quality. I can see myself sleeving this and loving every minute of that process. Aside from the cards, the game includes standees for player pieces on the card map, wooden components to track HP, AP, Fate, Obstacles, Gold, Hidden characters, great swirly 6d6, and also cardboard chits for Loot tokens. I haven’t even mentioned the art yet and that may be the most stunning component in this game! I LOVE a game with great art, and Shadows has simply amazing art. This is not usually my style of game art either, but it is so pleasing and everything makes sense and gets me immersed in the game. Everything provided is wonderful quality and an absolute joy to use during play.
Ok so like always, we place our ratings graphic right at the top of our posts so our readers can see right away what we think of the game. As you can tell, I love Shadows of Kilforth. It has essences of so many games I enjoy pieced together in a very attractive and captivating package. The movement and subsequent destruction of map-cards are reminiscent of Forbidden Island/Desert and Tiny Epic Defenders, which I really love (don’t hate – it’s a good game). The gathering of select card types and returning to a location to complete feels like fetch quests in MMORPGs (Final Fantasy XI being my main squeeze for many years). Obviously dice skill checks and level ups from tabletop RPGs are in there as well.
Shadows is just such a great collection of mechanics that I love that I can see myself playing this game over and over and over. Caveat: I will never play this any way other than absolutely solo. My first play, yes a learning session, was just shy of two hours from setup to tear-down. Adding players will increase game length, and playing with AP-prone friends is a no-go for me on Shadows; I had to reference both the excellent provided cheat sheet and the rulebook throughout the play but I eventually got the hang of it and was able to fly through. I may play this solo but with multiple characters cooperatively someday, but I do not wish to play this with other people. Ever.
So here’s my final thought. Shadow of Kilforth is a beefy game, but is well worth the time and effort to learn and play a couple times before passing judgment. It has everything I love in a game and I can’t stop thinking about it. I want to play all the different Race/Class combinations and just dunk on all the Ancients. If only my dice didn’t hate me so much. I will certainly be keeping this one forever, and if you are a fan of fantasy themed adventure card games with heavy use of dice and cool components, DEFINITELY take a look at Shadows of Kilforth. As I am the only one who has played this, I speak for the team in saying Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a 6 / 6. Treat yoself to this one, folks.
Shadows of Kilforth is subtitled, “A Fantasy Quest Game.” Right there in the title you find out exactly what you are up against in the very foreboding but unassumingly-sized box. A game set in a fantasy world that is focused on questing. I have to admit up front that this review will be treated a little differently as the rulebook is hefty and nobody wants to read a thorough rules essay on Shadows. So I will give you a very high-level overview of the main steps and then give you my thoughts on how it all works together.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
Shadows of Kilforth is essentially a card and dice RPG-esque adventure game with an Asian-style theme but set in a fantasy world where locations will be devastated into gloom (building upon the first in the series Gloom of Kilforth). The players, as the heroes, have the daunting task of journeying throughout Kilforth’s 25 locations to collect items, allies, spells, and titles to overcome main quests and subquests before every location falls into gloom. These quests usually have the players gathering specific card types to satisfy and complete. Once main player storyline quests, called Sagas, are completed the hero levels up and when they complete their fourth quest in their main Saga they may attempt their Finale and then may finally assault the big boss, the Ancient.
Each turn players have Action Points (AP) to spend on doing different actions: movement, discovering rumours (yes, I know it’s the Queen’s English), confrontations, and regaling a Saga chapter, among several others. Some actions are free actions, called Deeds. These include resolving loot tokens, assaulting an ancient, exchanging items between players, and several others. By using combinations of Actions and Deeds players will be able to travel around collecting those items, allies, and so forth needed to complete their Saga chapters.
To complete objectives and quests, players will typically be rolling dice to meet requirements on the cards. This, as all role-players know, can be either supremely lucky or incredibly and predictably debilitating. Skill checks are abundant in Shadows and diversifying characters may or may not have advantages by being able to complete Fight, Study, Sneak, and Influence tests. Players will win if they can complete their Sagas and defeat the Ancient before all of the locations fall into gloom, signaling the end of the game.
All this, again, is very high-level and there are many intricacies in Shadows that I just cannot go over for the sake of time and the health of my typing fingers. But, the game can be played solo, cooperatively, or competitively. So depending on the mode of play and number of players Shadows can range from a 45 minute foray to multi-hour epics. This is why I have played this solo with one character for my plays.
Components. Shadows of Kilforth is very card-heavy, but also includes other goodies. The cards themselves are firstly quite numerous, but also good quality. I can see myself sleeving this and loving every minute of that process. Aside from the cards, the game includes standees for player pieces on the card map, wooden components to track HP, AP, Fate, Obstacles, Gold, Hidden characters, great swirly 6d6, and also cardboard chits for Loot tokens. I haven’t even mentioned the art yet and that may be the most stunning component in this game! I LOVE a game with great art, and Shadows has simply amazing art. This is not usually my style of game art either, but it is so pleasing and everything makes sense and gets me immersed in the game. Everything provided is wonderful quality and an absolute joy to use during play.
Ok so like always, we place our ratings graphic right at the top of our posts so our readers can see right away what we think of the game. As you can tell, I love Shadows of Kilforth. It has essences of so many games I enjoy pieced together in a very attractive and captivating package. The movement and subsequent destruction of map-cards are reminiscent of Forbidden Island/Desert and Tiny Epic Defenders, which I really love (don’t hate – it’s a good game). The gathering of select card types and returning to a location to complete feels like fetch quests in MMORPGs (Final Fantasy XI being my main squeeze for many years). Obviously dice skill checks and level ups from tabletop RPGs are in there as well.
Shadows is just such a great collection of mechanics that I love that I can see myself playing this game over and over and over. Caveat: I will never play this any way other than absolutely solo. My first play, yes a learning session, was just shy of two hours from setup to tear-down. Adding players will increase game length, and playing with AP-prone friends is a no-go for me on Shadows; I had to reference both the excellent provided cheat sheet and the rulebook throughout the play but I eventually got the hang of it and was able to fly through. I may play this solo but with multiple characters cooperatively someday, but I do not wish to play this with other people. Ever.
So here’s my final thought. Shadow of Kilforth is a beefy game, but is well worth the time and effort to learn and play a couple times before passing judgment. It has everything I love in a game and I can’t stop thinking about it. I want to play all the different Race/Class combinations and just dunk on all the Ancients. If only my dice didn’t hate me so much. I will certainly be keeping this one forever, and if you are a fan of fantasy themed adventure card games with heavy use of dice and cool components, DEFINITELY take a look at Shadows of Kilforth. As I am the only one who has played this, I speak for the team in saying Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a 6 / 6. Treat yoself to this one, folks.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Touching the Rock: An Experience of Blindness (Notes on Blindness Film Tie-in) in Books
May 23, 2017
Eye-opener (if you pardon the pun)
I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.
It is not often a blind man writes a book, and “write” is a word used due to the lack of a better. John M. Hull gradually lost his sight, registering as blind in 1980, a couple of days before the birth of his son. Although anticipating the event, John struggled to come to terms with his new circumstances and adjust to a new way of living. From 1983 through to 1985, John recorded his thoughts on tape, in diary form, as a way to ascertain and understand his predicament. Originally titled Touching the Rock (1990), John’s book has been republished as Notes on Blindness after the release of the film of the same name.
Initially, John made recordings every day, dictating the everyday occurrences he encountered. Amazingly, despite his disability, John was able to continue as a university lecturer and delve deeper into the world of theology. The way John thinks things through as he speaks reflects his academic abilities. Although he may have despaired at the thoughts of not being able to see his children, he had a fairly positive outlook on life.
John’s thought capacity and religious ideology are evident in his assemblage of diary entries. As a blind person, he learns to see the world in an alternative way, and often feels closer to God as a result. Through these new experiences, John begins to see the light despite the darkness.
The metaphorical descriptions of blindness help the reader to understand the horror and difficulties not being able to see visually provokes. This is heightened by John’s recordings of the bad dreams he often suffers, in which he is able to see. His fixations on these dreams are assumedly a fascination with visual imagery, which he does not have access to in his waking life.
It is hard not feel sorry for John as he reports the conversations he has with his young children. The effort to communicate and play with them is far greater than a seeing parent. Remarkably, as John begins to adjust to his new lifestyle, his children take the situation in their stride.
Notes on Blindness is also an educational narrative for those without sight problems. John explains the things other people, in attempts to be helpful, do that result in making things far more confusing for John as he tries to navigate his way from one place to another. Despite what most think, blind people are fairly good at walking routes they are familiar with, and, with the help of a stick, can safely travel through new areas. Once people start shouting instructions, it is difficult to pay attention to the location and listen to everyone else at the same time.
John’s voice is extremely articulate, and his thoughts profound, which may suggest heavy editing when compiling the recordings into written form. However, as he is an academician, his eloquence of speech does not feel forced or faked.
Notes on Blindness remains the same as the original publication but with the added inclusion of an introduction by Cathy Rentzenbrink, and an epilogue by his wife Marilyn, written in 2016, a year after his death. These, the latter in particular, provide an insight into how John’s blindness affected those around him and emphasises what a truly remarkable man he was.
Of the many memoirs available on bookshelves today, Notes on Blindness is a truly unique publication. It is not telling a story, or recounting a well-lived life, but gives great insight into the world of the blind. As John’s thoughts were not originally recorded with intention of being available to everyone, they are all the more personal and honest, provoking emotion and providing the reader with a new way of seeing. It is a book that will stay with you for a very long time.
It is not often a blind man writes a book, and “write” is a word used due to the lack of a better. John M. Hull gradually lost his sight, registering as blind in 1980, a couple of days before the birth of his son. Although anticipating the event, John struggled to come to terms with his new circumstances and adjust to a new way of living. From 1983 through to 1985, John recorded his thoughts on tape, in diary form, as a way to ascertain and understand his predicament. Originally titled Touching the Rock (1990), John’s book has been republished as Notes on Blindness after the release of the film of the same name.
Initially, John made recordings every day, dictating the everyday occurrences he encountered. Amazingly, despite his disability, John was able to continue as a university lecturer and delve deeper into the world of theology. The way John thinks things through as he speaks reflects his academic abilities. Although he may have despaired at the thoughts of not being able to see his children, he had a fairly positive outlook on life.
John’s thought capacity and religious ideology are evident in his assemblage of diary entries. As a blind person, he learns to see the world in an alternative way, and often feels closer to God as a result. Through these new experiences, John begins to see the light despite the darkness.
The metaphorical descriptions of blindness help the reader to understand the horror and difficulties not being able to see visually provokes. This is heightened by John’s recordings of the bad dreams he often suffers, in which he is able to see. His fixations on these dreams are assumedly a fascination with visual imagery, which he does not have access to in his waking life.
It is hard not feel sorry for John as he reports the conversations he has with his young children. The effort to communicate and play with them is far greater than a seeing parent. Remarkably, as John begins to adjust to his new lifestyle, his children take the situation in their stride.
Notes on Blindness is also an educational narrative for those without sight problems. John explains the things other people, in attempts to be helpful, do that result in making things far more confusing for John as he tries to navigate his way from one place to another. Despite what most think, blind people are fairly good at walking routes they are familiar with, and, with the help of a stick, can safely travel through new areas. Once people start shouting instructions, it is difficult to pay attention to the location and listen to everyone else at the same time.
John’s voice is extremely articulate, and his thoughts profound, which may suggest heavy editing when compiling the recordings into written form. However, as he is an academician, his eloquence of speech does not feel forced or faked.
Notes on Blindness remains the same as the original publication but with the added inclusion of an introduction by Cathy Rentzenbrink, and an epilogue by his wife Marilyn, written in 2016, a year after his death. These, the latter in particular, provide an insight into how John’s blindness affected those around him and emphasises what a truly remarkable man he was.
Of the many memoirs available on bookshelves today, Notes on Blindness is a truly unique publication. It is not telling a story, or recounting a well-lived life, but gives great insight into the world of the blind. As John’s thoughts were not originally recorded with intention of being available to everyone, they are all the more personal and honest, provoking emotion and providing the reader with a new way of seeing. It is a book that will stay with you for a very long time.
Rachel King (13 KP) rated Ink Exchange (Wicked Lovely, #2) in Books
Feb 11, 2019
The second book in the Wicked Lovely series is decidely darker than the first book, especially as it focuses on the Dark Court. A major plot point is Leslie's struggles to deal with how her brother and father have fallen off the "deep end" and the rape that her brother allowed to happen to her. She believes a tattoo will allow her to reclaim her body as her own and stop being afraid, but the tattoo she chooses has unimaginable consequences as she becomes entangled into the drama of the faery courts that her best friend Aislinn belongs to.
I like the change in main characters, as we get to see this world through other characters' eyes as well as learn about different aspects that Keenan or Aislinn may not be familiar with. I had a difficult time finding a character to really love, as all three of the main characters, Leslie, Irial, and Niall, all seemed to have major faults that I had a hard time getting around. The theme for this book seemed to be the darker side of humanity and how deeply entrenched people can get into the "gray" area of life, while still believing that they are not doing anything wrong. Irial wants to only use Leslie, just as he has for every other mortal, but then he falls for her. Leslie wants to be her own person and hates her brother for his druggie lifestyle, but then becomes an addict just like Ren. Niall has shunned the Dark Court for all it stands for, even denying his own nature, but then wants Leslie so bad that he unknowingly uses what he is and what the Dark Court is about to try and lure her to him. In a word, they all behave like hypocrites, but Marr is such a good writer, that I find myself feeling sorry for all of them at some point. While in many fantasy genre works, the female lead often has to choose between two guys, Marr takes a completely unpredictable approach, and I think that I like this ending the best of all possibilities. Plus, since this is only the second book in a series, there is potential for Leslie to change her mind in the long run as she becomes more comfortable in her own skin.
The way that Marr approaches the horrific trauma that Leslie endured prior to this book's beginning is handled very delicately, as it should be. It is never really described in detail what exactly happens to her, and it is mostly left up to the reader's imagination, which I think is a smart move in that girls who have been in a situation similar to Leslie's can relate to her and feel like they have a voice in her words and thoughts. This alone is what makes this book both poignant and powerful. The fact that both males vying for her affection try to rescue her from this trauma in his own way is what redeems both of them for me.
Politics run heavy in this series, and while I am not really a fan of politics in real life, fantasy books often make it much more interesting, Marr's writing being no exception. The dynamics between the faery courts are quite intriguing and I think they seem to balance one another out well, even though at first glance it might seem like some should be kept over others. I find myself constantly wondering about the High Court and its Queen, Sorcha, which I can look forward to in the third installment in the series, Fragile Eternity (Wicked Lovely).
I like the change in main characters, as we get to see this world through other characters' eyes as well as learn about different aspects that Keenan or Aislinn may not be familiar with. I had a difficult time finding a character to really love, as all three of the main characters, Leslie, Irial, and Niall, all seemed to have major faults that I had a hard time getting around. The theme for this book seemed to be the darker side of humanity and how deeply entrenched people can get into the "gray" area of life, while still believing that they are not doing anything wrong. Irial wants to only use Leslie, just as he has for every other mortal, but then he falls for her. Leslie wants to be her own person and hates her brother for his druggie lifestyle, but then becomes an addict just like Ren. Niall has shunned the Dark Court for all it stands for, even denying his own nature, but then wants Leslie so bad that he unknowingly uses what he is and what the Dark Court is about to try and lure her to him. In a word, they all behave like hypocrites, but Marr is such a good writer, that I find myself feeling sorry for all of them at some point. While in many fantasy genre works, the female lead often has to choose between two guys, Marr takes a completely unpredictable approach, and I think that I like this ending the best of all possibilities. Plus, since this is only the second book in a series, there is potential for Leslie to change her mind in the long run as she becomes more comfortable in her own skin.
The way that Marr approaches the horrific trauma that Leslie endured prior to this book's beginning is handled very delicately, as it should be. It is never really described in detail what exactly happens to her, and it is mostly left up to the reader's imagination, which I think is a smart move in that girls who have been in a situation similar to Leslie's can relate to her and feel like they have a voice in her words and thoughts. This alone is what makes this book both poignant and powerful. The fact that both males vying for her affection try to rescue her from this trauma in his own way is what redeems both of them for me.
Politics run heavy in this series, and while I am not really a fan of politics in real life, fantasy books often make it much more interesting, Marr's writing being no exception. The dynamics between the faery courts are quite intriguing and I think they seem to balance one another out well, even though at first glance it might seem like some should be kept over others. I find myself constantly wondering about the High Court and its Queen, Sorcha, which I can look forward to in the third installment in the series, Fragile Eternity (Wicked Lovely).
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Avengers: Endgame (2019) in Movies
Apr 26, 2019 (Updated Apr 29, 2019)
Epic Indeed
Hours after viewing Avengers: Endgame, it’s taken me awhile to really get to the meat of what I wanted to say. The movie is bananas and heavy, both in a good way. It’s kind of like eating a really delicious meal, thinking you want more before deciding, “No, I think I’ve had the perfect amount actually.” The movie isn’t perfect, but damn if it isn’t an amazing spectacle. After The Snap, the Avengers set out to fix what went wrong by whatever means they can muster.
Acting: 10
From Robert Downey Jr. to Paul Rudd, each of these actors/actresses manage to fit into their roles just right as if it was a part made just for them. One might say, “Well, they’ve played the roles for x amount of years. They should be good at it by now.” But it isn’t just their roles but the maturation of those roles that really make an impact. While one might think it easy just to play the same character repeatedly, we neglect to take into account the growth that characters do/should endure and how it affects the characters overall. Side note: I just love how much of a bad ass Brie Larson is and I can’t wait to see what Marvel has in store for her next.
Beginning: 10
Not only does the beginning have a strong emotional setup, it turns the entire film on its head. What you expected to happen is actually not happening at all. And furthermore…I LOVE IT!
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Visuals are absolutely jaw-dropping in certain spots. The movie probably had some of the absolute best one-shots in film PERIOD. I can’t go into detail without giving anything away, but serious eye candy awaits, especially during the battles.
Conflict: 10
Whatever the film lacks in action more than makes up for things in Endgame’s grand finale. The battle reminded me of old kung fu films and Helm’s Deep all rolled into one. Outside of The Lord of the Rings Trilogy, I can’t remember a battle so epic in movies. If you don’t love it, you don’t love movies.
Genre: 10
Memorability: 10
My brain is running 100 miles an hour as I type this, thinking of all the different scenes and how everything tied so seamlessly together. Just masterful and wonderfully crafted. This movie will remain etched in your brain for a long time to come. Talk about setting a bar.
Pace: 10
With a three-hour runtime, this was honestly where I expected the film to trip up. Thing is, it doesn’t feel like three hours, not even in the slightest. I would’ve watched another hour if they had let me. There are so many stories to tell and so much going on that you’re at the end before you know it.
Plot: 10
I did have to put my thinking cap on in some spots, but all plot points tied in really nicely with no glaring holes I could see. It would be easy to make the storyline overly complex, but The Russo Brothers were firing on all cylinders with the execution of the story. It’s just complex enough to keep you engaged, but not to over-the-top where you lose interest.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 100
Eleven years of these great superheroes leading up to this moment. Was Avengers: Endgame worth the wait? You better freakin’ believe it. Go see this with all the confidence in the world that you will walk away with a smile on your face and perhaps a tear or two in your eye. And, when you go, you might see me there because I’m DEFINITELY watching this again in theaters. All three hours.
Acting: 10
From Robert Downey Jr. to Paul Rudd, each of these actors/actresses manage to fit into their roles just right as if it was a part made just for them. One might say, “Well, they’ve played the roles for x amount of years. They should be good at it by now.” But it isn’t just their roles but the maturation of those roles that really make an impact. While one might think it easy just to play the same character repeatedly, we neglect to take into account the growth that characters do/should endure and how it affects the characters overall. Side note: I just love how much of a bad ass Brie Larson is and I can’t wait to see what Marvel has in store for her next.
Beginning: 10
Not only does the beginning have a strong emotional setup, it turns the entire film on its head. What you expected to happen is actually not happening at all. And furthermore…I LOVE IT!
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Visuals are absolutely jaw-dropping in certain spots. The movie probably had some of the absolute best one-shots in film PERIOD. I can’t go into detail without giving anything away, but serious eye candy awaits, especially during the battles.
Conflict: 10
Whatever the film lacks in action more than makes up for things in Endgame’s grand finale. The battle reminded me of old kung fu films and Helm’s Deep all rolled into one. Outside of The Lord of the Rings Trilogy, I can’t remember a battle so epic in movies. If you don’t love it, you don’t love movies.
Genre: 10
Memorability: 10
My brain is running 100 miles an hour as I type this, thinking of all the different scenes and how everything tied so seamlessly together. Just masterful and wonderfully crafted. This movie will remain etched in your brain for a long time to come. Talk about setting a bar.
Pace: 10
With a three-hour runtime, this was honestly where I expected the film to trip up. Thing is, it doesn’t feel like three hours, not even in the slightest. I would’ve watched another hour if they had let me. There are so many stories to tell and so much going on that you’re at the end before you know it.
Plot: 10
I did have to put my thinking cap on in some spots, but all plot points tied in really nicely with no glaring holes I could see. It would be easy to make the storyline overly complex, but The Russo Brothers were firing on all cylinders with the execution of the story. It’s just complex enough to keep you engaged, but not to over-the-top where you lose interest.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 100
Eleven years of these great superheroes leading up to this moment. Was Avengers: Endgame worth the wait? You better freakin’ believe it. Go see this with all the confidence in the world that you will walk away with a smile on your face and perhaps a tear or two in your eye. And, when you go, you might see me there because I’m DEFINITELY watching this again in theaters. All three hours.
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) in Movies
May 10, 2019
“You said it yourself bitch, we’re the Guardians of the Galaxy”
The Marvel marathon continues. We started with the story of a soldier out of time. Now we move on to the tale of a group of losers having to learn not to kill each other and maybe, just maybe, becoming friends along the way. Guardians of the Galaxy I view as the movie that fully cemented Marvel Studios as the powerhouse we know today. The popularity of Iron Man and Thor spiked after their respective films, but I'm gonna guess if you pulled someone random off the street and asked them who either character was before their movies were released, they could probably at least tell you who they are. Now, not too far separated from the humongous success of The Avengers, here comes Marvel with a film about characters next to no one, not even some avid fans of comics, knew existed. And wouldn't you know, five years after Guardians came out and made Groot a household word, it's still one of their best films Marvel has made.
Guardians of the Galaxy almost off the bat confronts two major complaints I hear about Marvel flicks. First, that they don't look cinematic. Call it the "TV show aesthetic." Moderately flat shots, muted colors, forgettable music, etc. Second, that they're too heavy on witty banter and don't leave enough room for genuinely meaty substance. In regards to the first point, this film looks gorgeous. The color palette and cinematography are both creative and have an absolute blast with the concept of creating a grandiose space opera with equal parts charm and toilet humor. Each planet has its own distinct decor and aliens. Gunn managed to create a fleshed-out, lively, and unique galaxy. In regards to the second point, while there is all sorts of banter to be found throughout, including a Jackson Pollock cum joke, Guardians of the Galaxy has to have the biggest heart out of any film in the MCU. The movie is a full measured ton of fun, but it tugs at the heartstrings in a way few modern blockbusters have been able to achieve.
Four of the five Guardians have something in their life that lead to great tragedy. Peter and Drax lost family very close to them. Gamora and Rocket were tortured and bred to be bloodthirsty warriors. But then, there's Groot. Sweet, unassuming Groot. A beast in battle, but a gentle giant otherwise. His existence seems simple. He eats a leaf off of his shoulder, he drinks water straight from a fountain, and he's more than willing to grow and give a flower to a small girl. He's perhaps the closest we have to a lead character who is wholly happy. The Guardians all start off as renegades, loners, folks reasonably hardened by lives that have enjoyed fucking them over. We get to see them by the end of the film not just grow into heroes, but friends and good people. I am Groot. You are Groot. We are Groot.
Marvel took a big gamble with this movie, but it payed off so absurdly well. The humor is great, the characters even better, and the atmosphere equal parts fun and emotional. Guardians of the Galaxy stands out in the sea of superhero films as a movie that wears its heart on its sleeve. It's weird, but it's damn proud of the fact that it is. Maybe it's alright to be a loser. The world could use a few more losers to help us along the way of life. I think what I'm trying to get down to is this: It was polite of James Gunn to make a movie to go along with his sick mixtape.
Guardians of the Galaxy almost off the bat confronts two major complaints I hear about Marvel flicks. First, that they don't look cinematic. Call it the "TV show aesthetic." Moderately flat shots, muted colors, forgettable music, etc. Second, that they're too heavy on witty banter and don't leave enough room for genuinely meaty substance. In regards to the first point, this film looks gorgeous. The color palette and cinematography are both creative and have an absolute blast with the concept of creating a grandiose space opera with equal parts charm and toilet humor. Each planet has its own distinct decor and aliens. Gunn managed to create a fleshed-out, lively, and unique galaxy. In regards to the second point, while there is all sorts of banter to be found throughout, including a Jackson Pollock cum joke, Guardians of the Galaxy has to have the biggest heart out of any film in the MCU. The movie is a full measured ton of fun, but it tugs at the heartstrings in a way few modern blockbusters have been able to achieve.
Four of the five Guardians have something in their life that lead to great tragedy. Peter and Drax lost family very close to them. Gamora and Rocket were tortured and bred to be bloodthirsty warriors. But then, there's Groot. Sweet, unassuming Groot. A beast in battle, but a gentle giant otherwise. His existence seems simple. He eats a leaf off of his shoulder, he drinks water straight from a fountain, and he's more than willing to grow and give a flower to a small girl. He's perhaps the closest we have to a lead character who is wholly happy. The Guardians all start off as renegades, loners, folks reasonably hardened by lives that have enjoyed fucking them over. We get to see them by the end of the film not just grow into heroes, but friends and good people. I am Groot. You are Groot. We are Groot.
Marvel took a big gamble with this movie, but it payed off so absurdly well. The humor is great, the characters even better, and the atmosphere equal parts fun and emotional. Guardians of the Galaxy stands out in the sea of superhero films as a movie that wears its heart on its sleeve. It's weird, but it's damn proud of the fact that it is. Maybe it's alright to be a loser. The world could use a few more losers to help us along the way of life. I think what I'm trying to get down to is this: It was polite of James Gunn to make a movie to go along with his sick mixtape.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Beauty and the Beast (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 10, 2019)
A tale as old as time
Whichever big wig down at Disney decided it would be a good idea to remake all of their animated classics using live-action is surely due a massive promotion. The studio’s reputation is soaring after the acquisition of Marvel and Lucasfilm and this new way of thinking is paying off at the box office.
Last year’s The Jungle Book earned just shy of $1billion worldwide, their Marvel Cinematic Universe has taken upwards of $5billion and don’t get me started on Star Wars. Continuing the studio’s trend of remaking their animated features is Beauty & the Beast, but does this modern day reimagining of a fairly modern classic conjure up memories of 1991?
Belle (Emma Watson), a bright, beautiful and independent young woman, is taken prisoner by a beast (Dan Stevens) in its castle. Despite her fears, she befriends the castle’s enchanted staff including Cogsworth (Ian McKellen) and Lumiere (Ewan McGregor) and tries her best to learn to look beyond the beast’s hideous exterior, allowing her to recognise the kind heart and soul of the true prince that hides on the inside.
There were gasps of shock when Harry Potter actress Emma Watson was cast as Belle, but thankfully after sitting through 129 minutes of her singing and dancing, there is no reason to be concerned. She slots into the role of a Disney princess with ease, though it’s still incredibly difficult to see her as anything but the talented witch from Hogwarts.
The rest of the cast is very good with the exception of Ewan McGregor’s dreadful French accent. It can be forgiven however because the sense of nostalgia that the castle’s staff bring to the table is wonderful. Ian McKellen, Emma Thompson, Stanley Tucci all lend their voices with Thompson taking over from Angela Lansbury beautifully. Her rendition of the iconic titular song brings goose bumps.
Elsewhere, Luke Evans is an excellent choice to play villainous Gaston. It’s hard to imagine anyone better to play the gluttonous womaniser and Josh Gad is sublime as his sidekick.
Dan Stevens’ transformation into Beast is one that’s a little bit harder to judge. There is no doubt he is up to the task of playing this iconic character, but the limits of current motion capture technology can sometimes render him a little playdoh like. There are fleeting moments when the illusion is shattered because of something as trivial as the way his fur moves.
Nevertheless, the rest of the special effects are absolutely top notch. The costumes and the set design all integrate perfectly with the naturally heavy use of CGI to create a film that harks back to its predecessor in every way.
Whilst not as dark as last year’s The Jungle Book, Beauty & the Beast is still a deeply disturbing film at times, made all the more so by its recreation in live-action. Young children may find it a troubling watch, a reason why the BBFC has awarded it a PG rating rather than the typical U that most other Disney features receive.
Overall, Beauty & the Beast is a faithful recreation of its 1991 predecessor and that comes with its own set of challenges. The animated version is widely regarded as one of Disney’s best films, so director Bill Condon (Dreamgirls, Twilight) had massive shoes to fill. For the most part, he’s succeeded in crafting a visually stunning and poignant movie that’s only drawbacks are its length and poor motion capture. Much better than Cinderella, but not quite as ground-breaking as The Jungle Book, it’s a lovely watch for all the family.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/03/17/a-tale-as-old-as-time-beauty-the-beast-review/
Last year’s The Jungle Book earned just shy of $1billion worldwide, their Marvel Cinematic Universe has taken upwards of $5billion and don’t get me started on Star Wars. Continuing the studio’s trend of remaking their animated features is Beauty & the Beast, but does this modern day reimagining of a fairly modern classic conjure up memories of 1991?
Belle (Emma Watson), a bright, beautiful and independent young woman, is taken prisoner by a beast (Dan Stevens) in its castle. Despite her fears, she befriends the castle’s enchanted staff including Cogsworth (Ian McKellen) and Lumiere (Ewan McGregor) and tries her best to learn to look beyond the beast’s hideous exterior, allowing her to recognise the kind heart and soul of the true prince that hides on the inside.
There were gasps of shock when Harry Potter actress Emma Watson was cast as Belle, but thankfully after sitting through 129 minutes of her singing and dancing, there is no reason to be concerned. She slots into the role of a Disney princess with ease, though it’s still incredibly difficult to see her as anything but the talented witch from Hogwarts.
The rest of the cast is very good with the exception of Ewan McGregor’s dreadful French accent. It can be forgiven however because the sense of nostalgia that the castle’s staff bring to the table is wonderful. Ian McKellen, Emma Thompson, Stanley Tucci all lend their voices with Thompson taking over from Angela Lansbury beautifully. Her rendition of the iconic titular song brings goose bumps.
Elsewhere, Luke Evans is an excellent choice to play villainous Gaston. It’s hard to imagine anyone better to play the gluttonous womaniser and Josh Gad is sublime as his sidekick.
Dan Stevens’ transformation into Beast is one that’s a little bit harder to judge. There is no doubt he is up to the task of playing this iconic character, but the limits of current motion capture technology can sometimes render him a little playdoh like. There are fleeting moments when the illusion is shattered because of something as trivial as the way his fur moves.
Nevertheless, the rest of the special effects are absolutely top notch. The costumes and the set design all integrate perfectly with the naturally heavy use of CGI to create a film that harks back to its predecessor in every way.
Whilst not as dark as last year’s The Jungle Book, Beauty & the Beast is still a deeply disturbing film at times, made all the more so by its recreation in live-action. Young children may find it a troubling watch, a reason why the BBFC has awarded it a PG rating rather than the typical U that most other Disney features receive.
Overall, Beauty & the Beast is a faithful recreation of its 1991 predecessor and that comes with its own set of challenges. The animated version is widely regarded as one of Disney’s best films, so director Bill Condon (Dreamgirls, Twilight) had massive shoes to fill. For the most part, he’s succeeded in crafting a visually stunning and poignant movie that’s only drawbacks are its length and poor motion capture. Much better than Cinderella, but not quite as ground-breaking as The Jungle Book, it’s a lovely watch for all the family.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/03/17/a-tale-as-old-as-time-beauty-the-beast-review/