Search
Search results
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Judas and the Black Messiah (2021) in Movies
Feb 23, 2021
Kaluuya in an Oscar worthy performance
Ever since Daniel Kaluuya burst onto the scene in 2017’s GET OUT, he has been an actor to watch - one who’s brilliance bursts off the screen in whatever project he is in.
This brilliance shines brightly in his latest effort JUDAS AND THE BLACK MESSIAH that teams him up with his GET OUT co-star LaKeith Stanfield in the true story of 1960’s Chicago Black Panther leader Fred Hampton (Kaluuya) and his friend/Security Chief, Bill O’Neal (Stanfield) who just happens to be an FBI informant.
Directed and Written by Shaka King, JUDAS AND THE BLACK MESSIAH tells an important, under-told story of the African-American struggle in the wild, changing times of America in the 1960’s.
Kaluuya’s performance as Hampton is up to the challenge of a story this big and bold - his Fred Hampton is charismatic and involving, drawing all into his world. He’s a bigger-than-life icon that demands attention whenever Kaluuya/Hampton is on the stage. I expect an Oscar nomination (at least) for this performance.
The problem with this film is that Kaluuya’s Hampton is such a strong and commanding presence that the rest of the story and characters pale in comparison to him.
Such is the case with Stanfield’s portrayal of O’Neal. I really like LaKeith Stanfield as a performer and was really looking forward to seeing him and Kaluuya go toe-to-toe, but his character is swallowed up in the largess of the Hampton character and, so, I never connected or sympathized with him. I don’t blame this on the actor, I blame this on the script and the direction of King, making the O’Neal character weak - especially when he is up against Hampton.
The character/actor that WAS able to hold their own with Kaluuya/Hampton is Dominique Fishback as Hampton’s lover (and mother of his child), Deborah Johnson. The scenes of Hampton and Johnson together were sharp and interesting - perhaps because Hampton was toned down, but also because Fishback’s portrayal of Johnson was strong enough to stand up to Kaluuya’s portrayal of Hampton.
In addition, Kaluuya’s performance is so strong in this film that it is noticeable when it is absent, so when his character is sent to prison (and disappears) for the middle 1/3 of this film, the movie drags considerably.
Finally, the film hits a plateau at about the 4/5 mark and doesn’t really build to a crescendo at the end - an ending that should be powerful, but just sorts of lies there.
All-in-all, JUDAS AND THE BLACK MESSIAH is worth seeing for the powerful performance by Daniel Kaluuya that more than makes up for the shortcomings of the rest of the film.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
This brilliance shines brightly in his latest effort JUDAS AND THE BLACK MESSIAH that teams him up with his GET OUT co-star LaKeith Stanfield in the true story of 1960’s Chicago Black Panther leader Fred Hampton (Kaluuya) and his friend/Security Chief, Bill O’Neal (Stanfield) who just happens to be an FBI informant.
Directed and Written by Shaka King, JUDAS AND THE BLACK MESSIAH tells an important, under-told story of the African-American struggle in the wild, changing times of America in the 1960’s.
Kaluuya’s performance as Hampton is up to the challenge of a story this big and bold - his Fred Hampton is charismatic and involving, drawing all into his world. He’s a bigger-than-life icon that demands attention whenever Kaluuya/Hampton is on the stage. I expect an Oscar nomination (at least) for this performance.
The problem with this film is that Kaluuya’s Hampton is such a strong and commanding presence that the rest of the story and characters pale in comparison to him.
Such is the case with Stanfield’s portrayal of O’Neal. I really like LaKeith Stanfield as a performer and was really looking forward to seeing him and Kaluuya go toe-to-toe, but his character is swallowed up in the largess of the Hampton character and, so, I never connected or sympathized with him. I don’t blame this on the actor, I blame this on the script and the direction of King, making the O’Neal character weak - especially when he is up against Hampton.
The character/actor that WAS able to hold their own with Kaluuya/Hampton is Dominique Fishback as Hampton’s lover (and mother of his child), Deborah Johnson. The scenes of Hampton and Johnson together were sharp and interesting - perhaps because Hampton was toned down, but also because Fishback’s portrayal of Johnson was strong enough to stand up to Kaluuya’s portrayal of Hampton.
In addition, Kaluuya’s performance is so strong in this film that it is noticeable when it is absent, so when his character is sent to prison (and disappears) for the middle 1/3 of this film, the movie drags considerably.
Finally, the film hits a plateau at about the 4/5 mark and doesn’t really build to a crescendo at the end - an ending that should be powerful, but just sorts of lies there.
All-in-all, JUDAS AND THE BLACK MESSIAH is worth seeing for the powerful performance by Daniel Kaluuya that more than makes up for the shortcomings of the rest of the film.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BookInspector (124 KP) rated Everything but the Truth in Books
Sep 24, 2020
I really don’t know, what I was expecting from this book, but it left me absolutely confused. I still can’t decide if I liked it or not. I enjoyed the story, but why did it make me feel bored at the same time?
This is a story told by Rachel, about the secrets Jack was hiding. But the funny part is, Rachel has her own secrets, which she is hiding from Jack. So there are so many lies in this book, that I am wondering, how these two even a couple. When Rachel found out that Jake is hiding something, she went all the way into finding it out. Full homemade detective: snooping around, checking emails, ordering court material, everything to find out what Jack is hiding. Why? Because Jack is not telling the truth, but amending it, to fit his needs. What she finds out shocks her, but leaves her confused as well. Is he really guilty?
I really enjoyed the determination of this little investigation. I liked the ways Rachel was seeking the truth, it was interesting to watch, and quite relatable. Most probably we all checked our other half’s phone, or observed their actions during some situations. The book was time travelling between past and present. The way author incorporated Rachel’s story from the past, with one of her cancer patients, was very amusing. I liked the way she described her feelings towards the boy, it was beautiful.
This book is full of decisions, and really difficult ones. The ones regarding Jack were quite repetitive to be honest, just like the whole wish to find everything out. It was written in so many places, why Rachel wants to know the truth, that it made it boring. Another thing, which was not my favourite, was her decision, which she should’ve taken after finding out the truth, that confusion was so dragged, that I wanted to shout “Either you want him or not, stop beating about the bush!”.
The themes used in this book where quite interesting, and they made me question myself, what I would’ve done in Jack’s place? Or, was Rachel’s decision right regarding her cancer patient? What I would’ve done in her place? That’s why this book made me confused, because it has really deep meaning and interesting topics, but it was boring at the same time.
The writing style of this novel is easy to read, with lovely and short chapters. This book didn’t offer any twists or turns in my opinion, and kind of just plodded along. Whatever twists or turns supposedly were in this book, were really predictable, even the ending of the book was predictable. So to conclude, I enjoyed some of the parts of this book, but I think it could’ve been better. Doctors, nurses, or people who have someone suffering from cancer would find this book close to their hearts and maybe a good read…
Was given this book by publisher and NetGalley for honest review.
This is a story told by Rachel, about the secrets Jack was hiding. But the funny part is, Rachel has her own secrets, which she is hiding from Jack. So there are so many lies in this book, that I am wondering, how these two even a couple. When Rachel found out that Jake is hiding something, she went all the way into finding it out. Full homemade detective: snooping around, checking emails, ordering court material, everything to find out what Jack is hiding. Why? Because Jack is not telling the truth, but amending it, to fit his needs. What she finds out shocks her, but leaves her confused as well. Is he really guilty?
I really enjoyed the determination of this little investigation. I liked the ways Rachel was seeking the truth, it was interesting to watch, and quite relatable. Most probably we all checked our other half’s phone, or observed their actions during some situations. The book was time travelling between past and present. The way author incorporated Rachel’s story from the past, with one of her cancer patients, was very amusing. I liked the way she described her feelings towards the boy, it was beautiful.
This book is full of decisions, and really difficult ones. The ones regarding Jack were quite repetitive to be honest, just like the whole wish to find everything out. It was written in so many places, why Rachel wants to know the truth, that it made it boring. Another thing, which was not my favourite, was her decision, which she should’ve taken after finding out the truth, that confusion was so dragged, that I wanted to shout “Either you want him or not, stop beating about the bush!”.
The themes used in this book where quite interesting, and they made me question myself, what I would’ve done in Jack’s place? Or, was Rachel’s decision right regarding her cancer patient? What I would’ve done in her place? That’s why this book made me confused, because it has really deep meaning and interesting topics, but it was boring at the same time.
The writing style of this novel is easy to read, with lovely and short chapters. This book didn’t offer any twists or turns in my opinion, and kind of just plodded along. Whatever twists or turns supposedly were in this book, were really predictable, even the ending of the book was predictable. So to conclude, I enjoyed some of the parts of this book, but I think it could’ve been better. Doctors, nurses, or people who have someone suffering from cancer would find this book close to their hearts and maybe a good read…
Was given this book by publisher and NetGalley for honest review.
Lottie disney bookworm (1056 KP) rated The Kingdom in Books
Sep 20, 2020
“Where Happily Ever After is not just a promise, but a rule”
I mean with a tag line like that you can’t not be drawn in by this book! If that doesn’t grab you then the gorgeous cover art will.
Once you get past the wonderful aesthetics; the ‘Disney x Westworld x Big Little Lies’ reality that Jess Rothenberg conjures is sure to captivate you. Rothenberg manages to describe her Kingdom in such minute detail without it seeming contrite: the brazen references to meet and greets, monorails and “the park” are like catnip to a Disney geek like myself; whilst the proclamation from the outset that a crime has occurred appeals to the (slightly) more mature side of this 32 year old bookworm.
The Kingdom is a magical place where dreams come true: or is it? The star attractions: the princesses; are beautiful, perfect, always say the right thing and…are Artificial Intelligence. Their sophisticated technology, wireless signals and encyclopaedic knowledge ensure the princesses are as perfect as possible but it quickly becomes apparent that the princesses are, in fact, prisoners: constantly under surveillance, tracked by GPS implants in their wrists and strapped to their beds at “downtime”.
Ana is our princess and storyteller, opening her world to the reader and introducing us to her “sisters”, “mother” and “father” as well as those who have slightly less favourable views towards the AI, or Fantasists as they are known. There is no doubt that Ana is advanced in comparison to other Fantasists that we meet: she is aware of the park’s wireless blind spots and admits she becomes weary of some songs, unruly children and fathers with wandering eyes. Ironically, Ana is a profoundly human character with whom the reader immediately allies themselves with. Despite clearly being a suspect in the ongoing murder trial, I can’t see any reader convicting Ana. On the contrary, it is a real testament to Jess Rothenberg’s writing that the reader identifies with the Fantasists over and above every human character in her novel. Even Owen, the main human character, is never entirely trustworthy and does not reveal his intentions readily.
The format of The Kingdom is unlike anything else out there at the moment, in my opinion. The mix of prose, advertisements, interviews, trial transcripts and even apps allow our Fantasist to tell her story but also allows the reader to meet personnel and witness events that Ana would never see. This aspect is crucial to the murder mystery vibe of The Kingdom and Rothenberg leaves the reader guessing right to the very end and begging for a sequel.
Rothenberg’s kingdom is quick to show its murkier, thornier side. Those who question their surroundings are made an example of; nature is manipulated for entertainment and nothing is what it seems. If you haven’t guessed by now, I absolutely adored this book. It had me gripped from beginning to end. If you read one Disney book this year- read this one!
I mean with a tag line like that you can’t not be drawn in by this book! If that doesn’t grab you then the gorgeous cover art will.
Once you get past the wonderful aesthetics; the ‘Disney x Westworld x Big Little Lies’ reality that Jess Rothenberg conjures is sure to captivate you. Rothenberg manages to describe her Kingdom in such minute detail without it seeming contrite: the brazen references to meet and greets, monorails and “the park” are like catnip to a Disney geek like myself; whilst the proclamation from the outset that a crime has occurred appeals to the (slightly) more mature side of this 32 year old bookworm.
The Kingdom is a magical place where dreams come true: or is it? The star attractions: the princesses; are beautiful, perfect, always say the right thing and…are Artificial Intelligence. Their sophisticated technology, wireless signals and encyclopaedic knowledge ensure the princesses are as perfect as possible but it quickly becomes apparent that the princesses are, in fact, prisoners: constantly under surveillance, tracked by GPS implants in their wrists and strapped to their beds at “downtime”.
Ana is our princess and storyteller, opening her world to the reader and introducing us to her “sisters”, “mother” and “father” as well as those who have slightly less favourable views towards the AI, or Fantasists as they are known. There is no doubt that Ana is advanced in comparison to other Fantasists that we meet: she is aware of the park’s wireless blind spots and admits she becomes weary of some songs, unruly children and fathers with wandering eyes. Ironically, Ana is a profoundly human character with whom the reader immediately allies themselves with. Despite clearly being a suspect in the ongoing murder trial, I can’t see any reader convicting Ana. On the contrary, it is a real testament to Jess Rothenberg’s writing that the reader identifies with the Fantasists over and above every human character in her novel. Even Owen, the main human character, is never entirely trustworthy and does not reveal his intentions readily.
The format of The Kingdom is unlike anything else out there at the moment, in my opinion. The mix of prose, advertisements, interviews, trial transcripts and even apps allow our Fantasist to tell her story but also allows the reader to meet personnel and witness events that Ana would never see. This aspect is crucial to the murder mystery vibe of The Kingdom and Rothenberg leaves the reader guessing right to the very end and begging for a sequel.
Rothenberg’s kingdom is quick to show its murkier, thornier side. Those who question their surroundings are made an example of; nature is manipulated for entertainment and nothing is what it seems. If you haven’t guessed by now, I absolutely adored this book. It had me gripped from beginning to end. If you read one Disney book this year- read this one!
The Room Where It Happened
Book
As President Trump’s National Security Advisor, John Bolton spent many of his 453 days in the room...
Seriously Messed Up
“Thriller of the year” according to Observer; it makes you wonder what all the other thrillers were like. Gone Girl is a contemporary crime thriller by American author Gillian Flynn. Likable “Cool Girl” Amy Dunne is missing; the police think her husband has something to do with it, but what really happened?
Flynn begins the novel with an epigraph: “Love is the world’s infinite mutability; lies, hatred, murder even, are all knit up in it; it is the inevitable blossoming of its opposites, a magnificent rose smelling faintly of blood.” – Tony Kushner, The Illusion. This implies that love and hate, and perhaps murder, will be the main issues within the novel. It hints that relationships may not be all that they first appear, which becomes evident as you read deeper into the book.
Split into three parts, the first section alternates between a first person account from Nick Dunne, the husband, of what is occurring on the day in which Amy disappears and the following days when both he and the police are attempting to determine the truth about what has happened and trying to find out where Amy is; and diary entries from Amy dating as far back as 2005.
To begin with I did not think much of the story and did not particularly like Amy, despite her being portrayed as a likable character; however I soon got into the story siding with Nick and wanting him to be innocent even though evidence and suspicion were mounting against him.
Initially I assumed that the truth would not be revealed until the end of the story rather than on the first page of part two. For the remainder of the book Nick’s narrative remains the same, progressing from where it left off at the end of part one; whereas Amy, instead of diary entries, she is telling the reader the truth about what happened on the 5th July – the day she went missing – and the subsequent days and weeks. At this point I became a bit bored with the story; as the reader we know the truth and it is frustrating that the police are getting it wrong. However part three contained more suspense than the rest of the novel.
So, why only three stars? As I already mentioned it did not seem that great at the beginning and to be honest I did not feel satisfied with the ending either. One of the main things that bothered me was the use of swear words. I understand that many people swear and so it is inevitable that these words would end up in novels; however in my opinion there is swearing and then there is swearing. This was beginning to border on the latter. Yes some of the characters were angry but I thought the use of expletives was slightly overdone.
Despite these misgivings it was a well-written piece of fiction that I think others may enjoy – the ratings on Goodreads certainly suggest that; but for me it was not anything special.
Flynn begins the novel with an epigraph: “Love is the world’s infinite mutability; lies, hatred, murder even, are all knit up in it; it is the inevitable blossoming of its opposites, a magnificent rose smelling faintly of blood.” – Tony Kushner, The Illusion. This implies that love and hate, and perhaps murder, will be the main issues within the novel. It hints that relationships may not be all that they first appear, which becomes evident as you read deeper into the book.
Split into three parts, the first section alternates between a first person account from Nick Dunne, the husband, of what is occurring on the day in which Amy disappears and the following days when both he and the police are attempting to determine the truth about what has happened and trying to find out where Amy is; and diary entries from Amy dating as far back as 2005.
To begin with I did not think much of the story and did not particularly like Amy, despite her being portrayed as a likable character; however I soon got into the story siding with Nick and wanting him to be innocent even though evidence and suspicion were mounting against him.
Initially I assumed that the truth would not be revealed until the end of the story rather than on the first page of part two. For the remainder of the book Nick’s narrative remains the same, progressing from where it left off at the end of part one; whereas Amy, instead of diary entries, she is telling the reader the truth about what happened on the 5th July – the day she went missing – and the subsequent days and weeks. At this point I became a bit bored with the story; as the reader we know the truth and it is frustrating that the police are getting it wrong. However part three contained more suspense than the rest of the novel.
So, why only three stars? As I already mentioned it did not seem that great at the beginning and to be honest I did not feel satisfied with the ending either. One of the main things that bothered me was the use of swear words. I understand that many people swear and so it is inevitable that these words would end up in novels; however in my opinion there is swearing and then there is swearing. This was beginning to border on the latter. Yes some of the characters were angry but I thought the use of expletives was slightly overdone.
Despite these misgivings it was a well-written piece of fiction that I think others may enjoy – the ratings on Goodreads certainly suggest that; but for me it was not anything special.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Tear Me Apart in Books
Mar 11, 2019
Quick, engaging read
Mindy Wright--an up and coming competitive teenage skier-- breaks her leg in competition. During surgery, doctors discover that Mindy is sick: she has an aggressive form of leukemia and needs a stem cell transplant. But when her family is tested, it is discovered that Mindy's parents are not her biological parents. What does this mean? Was she switched at birth, or did something more dark and dramatic happen? At the core, Mindy needs to live. But beyond that, what are the ramifications for the Wright family? What secrets will be revealed and uncovered while trying to save their precious daughter?
This was a dramatic and interesting story that grabbed me from the beginning. The first portion is told from the perspective of three women: Mindy, age 17; her mother, Lauren; and Lauren's sister, Juliet, who actually works as a scientist in a DNA crime lab. This gives Juliet early and easy access to DNA samples relating to Mindy and the "case" as it progresses on. We also get excerpts of letters that appear to be from or relating to a psychiatric hospital in the early 1990s. All of this makes for an interesting and compelling format to our story, with a slow and steady reveal of strange information that you know does not add up: a twisted web of secrets and lies. We are immediately left wondering what happened with Mindy--how is she not Lauren's daughter? What is going on?
I do not want to go into too much detail and ruin much of the plot, but I found this one very intriguing, as I was wondering where the story would go. I might have been a little slow on the uptake as to who was Mindy's real mother, but I did find it exciting to put all the pieces together. I really liked the characters of Mindy and Juliet and a few others who were introduced later on (the story is told in various parts, so you get some different narrators, too).
In true Ellison fashion, there's some great drama and a few good "whoa" moments, as well. When I first started the book, I hadn't refreshed myself on the description, and I was a little worried that this would be more of a family drama than a mystery, but have no fear--while this family has more than their share of drama, there's a great mystery/thriller aspect as well. In fact, the novel can get downright creepy at times, with a villain who can give you the chills.
Overall, I thought this was another winner from Ms. Ellison. It's a quick, engaging read with interesting characters and a plot that encourages you to put the pieces together. She's quickly becoming a go-to author of mine. I'm actually chasing down her Taylor Jackson series on Paperbackswap, because I want to read more of her books! If you enjoy a dramatic, quick-moving thriller, I highly recommend this one!
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review (thank you!).
This was a dramatic and interesting story that grabbed me from the beginning. The first portion is told from the perspective of three women: Mindy, age 17; her mother, Lauren; and Lauren's sister, Juliet, who actually works as a scientist in a DNA crime lab. This gives Juliet early and easy access to DNA samples relating to Mindy and the "case" as it progresses on. We also get excerpts of letters that appear to be from or relating to a psychiatric hospital in the early 1990s. All of this makes for an interesting and compelling format to our story, with a slow and steady reveal of strange information that you know does not add up: a twisted web of secrets and lies. We are immediately left wondering what happened with Mindy--how is she not Lauren's daughter? What is going on?
I do not want to go into too much detail and ruin much of the plot, but I found this one very intriguing, as I was wondering where the story would go. I might have been a little slow on the uptake as to who was Mindy's real mother, but I did find it exciting to put all the pieces together. I really liked the characters of Mindy and Juliet and a few others who were introduced later on (the story is told in various parts, so you get some different narrators, too).
In true Ellison fashion, there's some great drama and a few good "whoa" moments, as well. When I first started the book, I hadn't refreshed myself on the description, and I was a little worried that this would be more of a family drama than a mystery, but have no fear--while this family has more than their share of drama, there's a great mystery/thriller aspect as well. In fact, the novel can get downright creepy at times, with a villain who can give you the chills.
Overall, I thought this was another winner from Ms. Ellison. It's a quick, engaging read with interesting characters and a plot that encourages you to put the pieces together. She's quickly becoming a go-to author of mine. I'm actually chasing down her Taylor Jackson series on Paperbackswap, because I want to read more of her books! If you enjoy a dramatic, quick-moving thriller, I highly recommend this one!
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review (thank you!).
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Ant-Man (2015) in Movies
May 10, 2019
"I Know a Guy"
I've been a comic book junkie all my life. I have, however, never been really interested in Ant-Man. It's not an easy super hero to fall for. It is therefore to me all the more astonishing they managed to pull it off so well in this troubled production.
There are only a handful of ways to treat an origin story an Ant-Man breaks no molds there. It hits every single beat you'd expect it to, builds up the story like you'd expect it to and concludes it like you'd expect it to. So it is left to the moments in between and the schwung with which it delivers them to make the film. And it works like a charm.
Every time I felt myself getting a bit annoyed with yet another piece of expository dialogue or predictable plot development, it sideswiped me with a fantastic action sequence, hilarious fight scene or the utterly brilliant Michael Peña. There is so much clever entertainment chucked into the film that it was very easy for me to just say 'Fuck it' and enjoy the ride.
What I loved about it was the toned down treatment of the bizarreness of the super powers. It would have been very easy to go completely overboard with this, but Reed actually manages to bring a level headedness to the fantastical which I appreciated and which actually strengthened what they were basically trying to instill in Rudd's character, some semblance of identifiable humanity. As much as I love Wright, I'm perhaps one of the few people who don't think he would have been able to restrain himself and gone the route of Scott Pilgrim which is not something that would have worked I feel.
Rudd is excellent and plays it straight, casting off a vibe of 'What the hell am I doing?' very successfully. He is likable and his transformation into this unlikely hero worked mainly because of the way he played it. The rest of the cast is great (CGI-Michael Douglas will haunt me forever) and Michael Peña truly is stellar. Give him his own film. Please.
The main attraction in this type of film is usually the action. And while the action in this is fantastic, there is surprisingly little of it, making the final confrontation actually something to look forward to And boy does it deliver. It uses the potential of the, let's be honest, silliness of the powers to its fullest, making it what it should be. A thrilling ride.
Ant-Man surprised me. Wright's involvement is palpable, which is good. But its main attraction lies in the simple fact that it is effortlessly entertaining. Fun, funny and exciting. Exactly what it should be.
There are only a handful of ways to treat an origin story an Ant-Man breaks no molds there. It hits every single beat you'd expect it to, builds up the story like you'd expect it to and concludes it like you'd expect it to. So it is left to the moments in between and the schwung with which it delivers them to make the film. And it works like a charm.
Every time I felt myself getting a bit annoyed with yet another piece of expository dialogue or predictable plot development, it sideswiped me with a fantastic action sequence, hilarious fight scene or the utterly brilliant Michael Peña. There is so much clever entertainment chucked into the film that it was very easy for me to just say 'Fuck it' and enjoy the ride.
What I loved about it was the toned down treatment of the bizarreness of the super powers. It would have been very easy to go completely overboard with this, but Reed actually manages to bring a level headedness to the fantastical which I appreciated and which actually strengthened what they were basically trying to instill in Rudd's character, some semblance of identifiable humanity. As much as I love Wright, I'm perhaps one of the few people who don't think he would have been able to restrain himself and gone the route of Scott Pilgrim which is not something that would have worked I feel.
Rudd is excellent and plays it straight, casting off a vibe of 'What the hell am I doing?' very successfully. He is likable and his transformation into this unlikely hero worked mainly because of the way he played it. The rest of the cast is great (CGI-Michael Douglas will haunt me forever) and Michael Peña truly is stellar. Give him his own film. Please.
The main attraction in this type of film is usually the action. And while the action in this is fantastic, there is surprisingly little of it, making the final confrontation actually something to look forward to And boy does it deliver. It uses the potential of the, let's be honest, silliness of the powers to its fullest, making it what it should be. A thrilling ride.
Ant-Man surprised me. Wright's involvement is palpable, which is good. But its main attraction lies in the simple fact that it is effortlessly entertaining. Fun, funny and exciting. Exactly what it should be.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 10, 2019)
Here we go again
I can’t be the only one surprised that the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise has managed to withstand five films. Created on a whim by Disney in 2003, the first film propelled Johnny Depp into the lives of movie fans like never before.
However, come 2017 and Depp’s star is sinking faster than the Black Pearl. After three pretty dreadful sequels, the cast reunites for Salazar’s Revenge. But does a change in directors herald a new and exciting path for the plucky pirates?
Thrust into an all-new adventure, a down-on-his-luck Captain Jack Sparrow (Depp) feels the winds of ill-fortune blowing strongly when ghost sailors led by his nemesis, evil Captain Salazar (Javier Bardem), escape from the Devil’s Triangle. Jack’s only hope lies in seeking out the legendary Trident of Poseidon, but to find it, he must forge an uneasy alliance with a brilliant and beautiful astronomer (Kaya Scodelario and a headstrong young man in the British navy (Brenton Thwaites).
Newcomer directors Joachim Rønning and Espen Sandberg craft a film that is magnificent to look at and stunning to listen to, but features all of the same problems as its predecessors. The time really is up on this franchise.
Of the cast, only Javier Bardem’s snarling Salazar makes any sort of lasting impact. In fact, he’s probably the best antagonist the series has ever had and makes for a menacing presence throughout. Depp looks like he’s on autopilot, almost as bored of Jack Sparrow’s drunken antics as we are, and the normally excellent Kaya Scodelario (Skins, Maze Runner) plays a particularly bland female lead during the films running time.
Speaking of which, at 142 minutes, this is one migraine inducing slog. All four previous films have suffered from being overstuffed, and with the extra abundance of characters this time around, it’s even more painful. There simply is no need to create a film that’s nearly two and a half hours long, especially considering the plot is as paint-by-numbers as you can get.
Nevertheless, to look at, Salazar’s Revenge really is breath-taking. The action is filmed confidently and the sets are fantastically detailed using some exceptional practical effects. There are ghost sharks, glistening islands and the motion capture used on Javier Bardem and his crew is seamless. Only the CGI-heavy finale lets the film down. The music is also sublime. Geoff Zanelli’s thunderous melody features the trademark theme-tune mixed with some really lovely orchestral music.
Overall, Pirates of the Caribbean: Salazar’s Revenge kicks off a summer season filled to the brim with sequels and after the previous film’s poor reception, expectation was almost as low as it is for Transformers: the Last Knight.
What we’ve ended up with is a bit of a double-edged sword then. It’s certainly better than the previous three sequels and almost up to the standard of the 2003 original; the problem is, that film wasn’t particularly good in the first place.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/05/26/here-we-go-again-pirates-of-the-caribbean-salazars-revenge-review/
However, come 2017 and Depp’s star is sinking faster than the Black Pearl. After three pretty dreadful sequels, the cast reunites for Salazar’s Revenge. But does a change in directors herald a new and exciting path for the plucky pirates?
Thrust into an all-new adventure, a down-on-his-luck Captain Jack Sparrow (Depp) feels the winds of ill-fortune blowing strongly when ghost sailors led by his nemesis, evil Captain Salazar (Javier Bardem), escape from the Devil’s Triangle. Jack’s only hope lies in seeking out the legendary Trident of Poseidon, but to find it, he must forge an uneasy alliance with a brilliant and beautiful astronomer (Kaya Scodelario and a headstrong young man in the British navy (Brenton Thwaites).
Newcomer directors Joachim Rønning and Espen Sandberg craft a film that is magnificent to look at and stunning to listen to, but features all of the same problems as its predecessors. The time really is up on this franchise.
Of the cast, only Javier Bardem’s snarling Salazar makes any sort of lasting impact. In fact, he’s probably the best antagonist the series has ever had and makes for a menacing presence throughout. Depp looks like he’s on autopilot, almost as bored of Jack Sparrow’s drunken antics as we are, and the normally excellent Kaya Scodelario (Skins, Maze Runner) plays a particularly bland female lead during the films running time.
Speaking of which, at 142 minutes, this is one migraine inducing slog. All four previous films have suffered from being overstuffed, and with the extra abundance of characters this time around, it’s even more painful. There simply is no need to create a film that’s nearly two and a half hours long, especially considering the plot is as paint-by-numbers as you can get.
Nevertheless, to look at, Salazar’s Revenge really is breath-taking. The action is filmed confidently and the sets are fantastically detailed using some exceptional practical effects. There are ghost sharks, glistening islands and the motion capture used on Javier Bardem and his crew is seamless. Only the CGI-heavy finale lets the film down. The music is also sublime. Geoff Zanelli’s thunderous melody features the trademark theme-tune mixed with some really lovely orchestral music.
Overall, Pirates of the Caribbean: Salazar’s Revenge kicks off a summer season filled to the brim with sequels and after the previous film’s poor reception, expectation was almost as low as it is for Transformers: the Last Knight.
What we’ve ended up with is a bit of a double-edged sword then. It’s certainly better than the previous three sequels and almost up to the standard of the 2003 original; the problem is, that film wasn’t particularly good in the first place.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/05/26/here-we-go-again-pirates-of-the-caribbean-salazars-revenge-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Terminator Genisys (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Not a complete disaster
Sequels and reboots are making up the bulk of 2015’s cinematic offerings. With films added to franchises like Jurassic Park, Star Wars and James Bond, it was always going to be tough for others to make much of a dent.
It’s been six years since Christian Bale took over lead billing from Arnold Schwarzenegger in the Terminator series in the critically panned Terminator Salvation. But director Alan Taylor (Thor: the Dark World), a newcomer to the sci-fi adventure series, resurrects the franchise with Terminator Genisys. But is it worth a watch?
Acting as a reboot and a sequel, the film follows the story of a young Kyle Reece (Jai Courtney), sent back in time by John Connor (Jason Clarke) to protect his mother Sarah, played by Game of Thrones’ Emilia Clarke. His aim is to stop the war before it even begins.
The duo are joined on their travels by the naturally charismatic Arnold Schwarzenegger who is one of the only highlights in a film full of soulless set-pieces, meaningless dialogue and a sickening sense of nostalgia.
Genisys constantly reminds you of the brilliance radiating from James Cameron’s first two films. Herein lies the problem, this sequel has none of the soul or charm of its predecessors with the homages coming across as insulting attempts to cash in on the series.
Even the iconic “I’ll be back” phrase is shoehorned into an awkward position where it doesn’t really make much sense.
And there we move onto the second issue. It makes hardly any sense at all. With continuity errors abound, Genisys relies on your knowledge of Terminator and Judgement Day being in tip-top shape, and after more than two decades it’s safe to say the majority of people will need a refresher course first.
The set pieces are, on the whole, glorious and despite being slightly overlong at 126 minutes, Genisys is a well-paced film without a boring moment to its name. It’s just a shame the plot doesn’t make more of an impact.
It feels like the characters are stuck in a video game, with a climactic action piece signalling the next level, moving on up until the obligatory big-boss fight that makes a further sequel seem incredibly likely.
Emilia Clarke is well-worth noting however. Despite being more used to being in the company of dragons rather than robots, she plays her character well and steps into Linda Hamilton’s shoes with ease. The casting is spot on here with Clarke having more than a whiff of Hamilton in her appearance.
The rest of the cast, bar Schwarzenegger fail to make an impression with Jai Courtney’s character proving particularly dull.
Overall, Terminator Genisys isn’t a complete disaster but comes close to being a write off. The action pieces are thrilling but a lack of soul, comprehension and individuality ensures it’ll end up being forgotten once 2015 is over.
With a sequel almost definitely on the cards, all fans of the franchise can hope for is a film worthy of James Cameron’s brilliant original – and this is not it.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/07/05/not-a-complete-disaster-terminator-genisys-review/
It’s been six years since Christian Bale took over lead billing from Arnold Schwarzenegger in the Terminator series in the critically panned Terminator Salvation. But director Alan Taylor (Thor: the Dark World), a newcomer to the sci-fi adventure series, resurrects the franchise with Terminator Genisys. But is it worth a watch?
Acting as a reboot and a sequel, the film follows the story of a young Kyle Reece (Jai Courtney), sent back in time by John Connor (Jason Clarke) to protect his mother Sarah, played by Game of Thrones’ Emilia Clarke. His aim is to stop the war before it even begins.
The duo are joined on their travels by the naturally charismatic Arnold Schwarzenegger who is one of the only highlights in a film full of soulless set-pieces, meaningless dialogue and a sickening sense of nostalgia.
Genisys constantly reminds you of the brilliance radiating from James Cameron’s first two films. Herein lies the problem, this sequel has none of the soul or charm of its predecessors with the homages coming across as insulting attempts to cash in on the series.
Even the iconic “I’ll be back” phrase is shoehorned into an awkward position where it doesn’t really make much sense.
And there we move onto the second issue. It makes hardly any sense at all. With continuity errors abound, Genisys relies on your knowledge of Terminator and Judgement Day being in tip-top shape, and after more than two decades it’s safe to say the majority of people will need a refresher course first.
The set pieces are, on the whole, glorious and despite being slightly overlong at 126 minutes, Genisys is a well-paced film without a boring moment to its name. It’s just a shame the plot doesn’t make more of an impact.
It feels like the characters are stuck in a video game, with a climactic action piece signalling the next level, moving on up until the obligatory big-boss fight that makes a further sequel seem incredibly likely.
Emilia Clarke is well-worth noting however. Despite being more used to being in the company of dragons rather than robots, she plays her character well and steps into Linda Hamilton’s shoes with ease. The casting is spot on here with Clarke having more than a whiff of Hamilton in her appearance.
The rest of the cast, bar Schwarzenegger fail to make an impression with Jai Courtney’s character proving particularly dull.
Overall, Terminator Genisys isn’t a complete disaster but comes close to being a write off. The action pieces are thrilling but a lack of soul, comprehension and individuality ensures it’ll end up being forgotten once 2015 is over.
With a sequel almost definitely on the cards, all fans of the franchise can hope for is a film worthy of James Cameron’s brilliant original – and this is not it.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/07/05/not-a-complete-disaster-terminator-genisys-review/
Beckie Shelton (40 KP) rated Twisted Luck in Books
Feb 8, 2018
Twisted Luck was one of them reads where I'm slightly on the fence in regards to its characters It did keep my interest but there were just a few niggles that dragged it down a star for me.
This for me is more of an individual preference than a black mark for the book and this no way takes away from the flow of the writing as Twisted Luck was expertly written, It is just a personal opinion and might not be an issue for anyone else reading this.
So here we go, Olivia has had a string of bad luck, enter Leo WELL WELL!!! upon first meeting Leo as Oliva is drowning herself in tequila at a local bar I thought, here we go, real bad boy, won't take no crap from no one yay my type of anti-hero this is going to be epic and here lies my problem, apart from the fact that Leo is an honest to god Demon and not just in the sack I found him just a bit, well, wussy. I wanted him to stand up to his kind of a dad Sam and stop wimping out, grow a pair you're a demon for god's sake.
I also didn't think our Leo would have forgotten how to have a pee even if it has been years this is just something that you don't forget and finally the use of the word the magic, it was the magic this, the magic that, it got a bit irritating after a bit, would have liked to see a different word occasionally maybe my powers or I would have even settled for Va Va Voom for a change rather than the magic.
now I have that out of the way I'm going to explain why you should read this. Twisted luck was apart from my above points a page turner. I may be slightly biased in regard to Leo as I prefer a slightly darker hero or in my case anti-hero to drool over, but if you like a more human hero this book is for you.
I really do get what Mia was trying to convey Our Demon Leo transforming into a more human version of himself in a way un-demonising Leo and showing a warmer more flawed version of him as he slowly learned what it was like to love and be loved by Olivia and also reside without the use of here we go lol THE MAGIC!!!!.
And this was accomplished and pulled off with finesse and humour so if you like stories where the girl redeems the guy and they live HEA then this is the book for you I passed a very enjoyable few hours immersed in this and that's what Twisted Luck is Enjoyable and not too hard, an easy warm read that you can snuggle up with when you just want some R & R and some downtime.
I received an e-copy of this book free from NetGalley and this is my honest opinion.
https://www.beckiebookworm.com/
https://www.facebook.com/beckiebookworm/
This for me is more of an individual preference than a black mark for the book and this no way takes away from the flow of the writing as Twisted Luck was expertly written, It is just a personal opinion and might not be an issue for anyone else reading this.
So here we go, Olivia has had a string of bad luck, enter Leo WELL WELL!!! upon first meeting Leo as Oliva is drowning herself in tequila at a local bar I thought, here we go, real bad boy, won't take no crap from no one yay my type of anti-hero this is going to be epic and here lies my problem, apart from the fact that Leo is an honest to god Demon and not just in the sack I found him just a bit, well, wussy. I wanted him to stand up to his kind of a dad Sam and stop wimping out, grow a pair you're a demon for god's sake.
I also didn't think our Leo would have forgotten how to have a pee even if it has been years this is just something that you don't forget and finally the use of the word the magic, it was the magic this, the magic that, it got a bit irritating after a bit, would have liked to see a different word occasionally maybe my powers or I would have even settled for Va Va Voom for a change rather than the magic.
now I have that out of the way I'm going to explain why you should read this. Twisted luck was apart from my above points a page turner. I may be slightly biased in regard to Leo as I prefer a slightly darker hero or in my case anti-hero to drool over, but if you like a more human hero this book is for you.
I really do get what Mia was trying to convey Our Demon Leo transforming into a more human version of himself in a way un-demonising Leo and showing a warmer more flawed version of him as he slowly learned what it was like to love and be loved by Olivia and also reside without the use of here we go lol THE MAGIC!!!!.
And this was accomplished and pulled off with finesse and humour so if you like stories where the girl redeems the guy and they live HEA then this is the book for you I passed a very enjoyable few hours immersed in this and that's what Twisted Luck is Enjoyable and not too hard, an easy warm read that you can snuggle up with when you just want some R & R and some downtime.
I received an e-copy of this book free from NetGalley and this is my honest opinion.
https://www.beckiebookworm.com/
https://www.facebook.com/beckiebookworm/