Search
Search results
xComfort Smart Home
Lifestyle
App
Please update your xComfort Smart Home Controller also to use the new features!! xComfort - Make...
Speed Legends
Games
App
Speed Legends takes the mobile racing & car driving genre to a whole new level by adding an...
The Greedy Cave
Games and Entertainment
App
In a land far, far away there once was a vast continent called Milton. It was a land where the power...
Budge World - Kids Games & Fun
Entertainment and Education
App
Budge World™ gives you access to all the most popular kids characters in one amazing app! Kids can...
Thor Polysonic Synthesizer
Music and Entertainment
App
Thor for iPad puts the mighty Thor synthesizer at your fingertips. “A truly must-have synth for...
KidloLand: Kids Nursery Rhymes
Education and Games
App
KidloLand is an award-winning app for kids (1-5 yrs) with 1000+ nursery rhymes, songs, games and...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Commuter (2018) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“This train is freaking me out”.
“The Commuter” is not a good film. You know that I’m not a prude about action films: “Die Hard” is one of my all time favourites and I even gave this actor/director combo’s previous outing – “Non-Stop” – a rather generous three Fads. But like many of my commutes, this is a hundred minutes of life that I won’t get back again.
Liam Neeson (“A Monster Calls“, “Taken 3“) plays Michael MacCauley an insurance salesman (no, I’m not making it up) who of course used to be a police officer with a certain set of skills. With advancing years, a couple of mortgages to keep up and a son about to go to college, he is financially rather exposed.
“Give me a sausage roll off the trolley…. NOW damn it”.
When a bad day turns worse, the commuting MacCauley is approached by a mysterious woman (Vera Farmiga, “The Judge“, “Up In The Air”) who offers him a financial bail-out for doing “just one small thing”. No, it’s not for sex in the toilet… it’s to use his familiarity with the train and its normal passengers to find the person that ‘doesn’t fit there’. For there is a lot at stake and MacCauley is drawn into a perilous game where his own life and the lives of his son and wife Karen (Elizabeth McGovern, “Downton Abbey”) are put at risk.
Vera Farmiga has a proposition for Liam Neeson.
What the inexperienced writers (Byron Willinger, Philip de Blasi and Ryan Engle (“Non-stop”)) were clearly shooting for was a Hitchcockian “ordinary man in deep-water” style flick of the James Stewart “North by Northwest” variety…. but they really miss this by a mile. With the 65 year old Liam Neeson – here playing 60 – performing acrobatics on, under and across an express train, belief is not just suspended – it is hung drawn and quartered! The action is just ludicrously unrealistic.
Unfortunately, Neeson – although still looking remarkably good for his advanced years – is increasingly is starting to look like Roger Moore in “A View to a Kill”: its time to hang up the ‘action hero’ coat and focus on more character acting pieces (this was the man who gave us Oskar Schindler after all).
A chain defies all the laws of physics… train guard Colin McFarlane tries to help Neeson avoid disaster. A green screen is obviously not evident!
The plot also has more holes than a moth-eaten jumper. Omnipotence of the villains is evident, but never explained, and while they are fiendishly clever in some aspects they are face-palmingly stupid about others. (No spoilers, but the threat to MacCauley’s family is mind-numbingly foilable).
It was fairly obvious that Obi Wan Kenobi was out of place on the train. No.. of course not… this was just MacCauley’s commuting pal Walt (Jonathan Banks)
A ‘major event’ at the end of reel two (if you’ve seen the spoilerish trailer you’ll know what this is) leads – notably without any ‘consequence’ – into a completely ridiculous final reel that beggars belief. It also includes a “twist” so obvious that the writers must have assumed an IQ of sub-50.
What’s the great Sam Neill (“Jurassic Park”) doing in this mess?
This is a film that melds “Taken”, “Non-stop”, “Unstoppable”, “Strangers on a Train” and – most bizarrely and cringe-worthily – “Spartacus” to create a cinematic mess of supreme proportions. I put director Jaume Collet-Serra’s last film – “The Shallows” – into my Top 10 films of 2016. He’ll be lucky if this one doesn’t make my “Turkeys of the Year” list for 2018.
Avoid!
Liam Neeson (“A Monster Calls“, “Taken 3“) plays Michael MacCauley an insurance salesman (no, I’m not making it up) who of course used to be a police officer with a certain set of skills. With advancing years, a couple of mortgages to keep up and a son about to go to college, he is financially rather exposed.
“Give me a sausage roll off the trolley…. NOW damn it”.
When a bad day turns worse, the commuting MacCauley is approached by a mysterious woman (Vera Farmiga, “The Judge“, “Up In The Air”) who offers him a financial bail-out for doing “just one small thing”. No, it’s not for sex in the toilet… it’s to use his familiarity with the train and its normal passengers to find the person that ‘doesn’t fit there’. For there is a lot at stake and MacCauley is drawn into a perilous game where his own life and the lives of his son and wife Karen (Elizabeth McGovern, “Downton Abbey”) are put at risk.
Vera Farmiga has a proposition for Liam Neeson.
What the inexperienced writers (Byron Willinger, Philip de Blasi and Ryan Engle (“Non-stop”)) were clearly shooting for was a Hitchcockian “ordinary man in deep-water” style flick of the James Stewart “North by Northwest” variety…. but they really miss this by a mile. With the 65 year old Liam Neeson – here playing 60 – performing acrobatics on, under and across an express train, belief is not just suspended – it is hung drawn and quartered! The action is just ludicrously unrealistic.
Unfortunately, Neeson – although still looking remarkably good for his advanced years – is increasingly is starting to look like Roger Moore in “A View to a Kill”: its time to hang up the ‘action hero’ coat and focus on more character acting pieces (this was the man who gave us Oskar Schindler after all).
A chain defies all the laws of physics… train guard Colin McFarlane tries to help Neeson avoid disaster. A green screen is obviously not evident!
The plot also has more holes than a moth-eaten jumper. Omnipotence of the villains is evident, but never explained, and while they are fiendishly clever in some aspects they are face-palmingly stupid about others. (No spoilers, but the threat to MacCauley’s family is mind-numbingly foilable).
It was fairly obvious that Obi Wan Kenobi was out of place on the train. No.. of course not… this was just MacCauley’s commuting pal Walt (Jonathan Banks)
A ‘major event’ at the end of reel two (if you’ve seen the spoilerish trailer you’ll know what this is) leads – notably without any ‘consequence’ – into a completely ridiculous final reel that beggars belief. It also includes a “twist” so obvious that the writers must have assumed an IQ of sub-50.
What’s the great Sam Neill (“Jurassic Park”) doing in this mess?
This is a film that melds “Taken”, “Non-stop”, “Unstoppable”, “Strangers on a Train” and – most bizarrely and cringe-worthily – “Spartacus” to create a cinematic mess of supreme proportions. I put director Jaume Collet-Serra’s last film – “The Shallows” – into my Top 10 films of 2016. He’ll be lucky if this one doesn’t make my “Turkeys of the Year” list for 2018.
Avoid!
Margaret A. Young (1 KP) rated Bears vs Babies in Tabletop Games
Nov 3, 2018 (Updated Nov 3, 2018)
Fun family or party game. (1 more)
Perfect for teens
Beasts vs Babies
Although my sons are known for loving their tech, we find table top games a great way to connect as a family. We really enjoy family game nights,but I have also been surprised by how much time my teen age son spends playing table top games when his friends come to visit. Everyone who comes to visit seems to love our game collection and they usually spend more time with card and board games than computers and gaming consoles.
We bought Bears vs. Babies because my sons loved Exploding Kittens which was created by the same people. While being a completely different game, I think this would appeal to anyone who enjoyed Exploding Kittens.
Bears vs Babies comes packaged in a sturdy box which is covered with fake fur. Although this is attractive, we bought a separate case for travel as the box it comes in is a bit bulky for camping and scouting trips, does not lock closed and the fur would get dirty quite easily. However, if you simply want it to keep it on a shelf it is fine, and the unique box does seem nice for a gift item.
Inside the box is the deck of cards, a rule book, another book of frequently asked questions, which I fact contains more rules, and a cloth playing mat. The frequently asked questions book says that you don't need to read it, but you really do. It shouldn't take more than a couple of minutes to read both, so do yourself a favour and have a quick read before starting the game.
This game has been played by my sons and their friends, ranging in ages from 8 - 13. This game is recommended for ages 10+, but I think it could be played with children as young as six with minor assistance, and my youngest was 9 when we got this.
Although the game is called Bears vs Babies, there is really only one bear unless you count a water bear, which isn't a bear at all. I think Beasts vs Babies would be a more accurate name. Some of the beasts you can make include a Grizzly Bear, a Llama, a Velociraptor, a Manatee and an undead looking rabbit. Or at least you can create creatures which look like a sin against nature with these heads. You collect and play other cards to add a body, legs, arms and accessories to your monsters, trying to get as many points as possible. The monsters are pitted against babies whose also look like abominations, though this is clearly intentional.
Game play is pretty simple. You are allowed to actions per turn. So you can add parts to your monsters, play an action card, draw cards or provoke babies. Babies and monsters are divided into three categories, land, sea and air. When a baby is provoked, all the babies of that category attack all monsters of the same category on the table. The one with the most points wins.
As with any game, we add a few personal twists to it. Instead of just calling provoke to start a battle with babies, you can make each player come up with a unique way to provoke them... energy drink in the baby bottles, hide their teddy bears, and so on. Adding sound effects for the winning monster can add to the fun as well.
While I wouldn't say this is game that can keep children or teens entertained for hours, it is something that is chosen regularly, by both my own children and visitors. A round of the game can take perhaps 20 minutes and this is usually played once in a session before moving on to another game. To be fair, the boys do say they prefer Exploding Kittens, And Exploding Kittens does get played more frequently, but this is still a very welcome addition to our games collection and I am well pleased with our purchase.
We bought Bears vs. Babies because my sons loved Exploding Kittens which was created by the same people. While being a completely different game, I think this would appeal to anyone who enjoyed Exploding Kittens.
Bears vs Babies comes packaged in a sturdy box which is covered with fake fur. Although this is attractive, we bought a separate case for travel as the box it comes in is a bit bulky for camping and scouting trips, does not lock closed and the fur would get dirty quite easily. However, if you simply want it to keep it on a shelf it is fine, and the unique box does seem nice for a gift item.
Inside the box is the deck of cards, a rule book, another book of frequently asked questions, which I fact contains more rules, and a cloth playing mat. The frequently asked questions book says that you don't need to read it, but you really do. It shouldn't take more than a couple of minutes to read both, so do yourself a favour and have a quick read before starting the game.
This game has been played by my sons and their friends, ranging in ages from 8 - 13. This game is recommended for ages 10+, but I think it could be played with children as young as six with minor assistance, and my youngest was 9 when we got this.
Although the game is called Bears vs Babies, there is really only one bear unless you count a water bear, which isn't a bear at all. I think Beasts vs Babies would be a more accurate name. Some of the beasts you can make include a Grizzly Bear, a Llama, a Velociraptor, a Manatee and an undead looking rabbit. Or at least you can create creatures which look like a sin against nature with these heads. You collect and play other cards to add a body, legs, arms and accessories to your monsters, trying to get as many points as possible. The monsters are pitted against babies whose also look like abominations, though this is clearly intentional.
Game play is pretty simple. You are allowed to actions per turn. So you can add parts to your monsters, play an action card, draw cards or provoke babies. Babies and monsters are divided into three categories, land, sea and air. When a baby is provoked, all the babies of that category attack all monsters of the same category on the table. The one with the most points wins.
As with any game, we add a few personal twists to it. Instead of just calling provoke to start a battle with babies, you can make each player come up with a unique way to provoke them... energy drink in the baby bottles, hide their teddy bears, and so on. Adding sound effects for the winning monster can add to the fun as well.
While I wouldn't say this is game that can keep children or teens entertained for hours, it is something that is chosen regularly, by both my own children and visitors. A round of the game can take perhaps 20 minutes and this is usually played once in a session before moving on to another game. To be fair, the boys do say they prefer Exploding Kittens, And Exploding Kittens does get played more frequently, but this is still a very welcome addition to our games collection and I am well pleased with our purchase.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Goosebumps (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
I think I speak for most of my generation when I say I grew up on Goosebumps. Many a night I lay terrified and awake after reading one of the twisty tales concocted from the mind of R.L. Stine. Naturally, when Sony announced a Goosebumps movie, I was fearful. But they also had many different stories to tell as there were countless books in the series, all with a different monster. And then they went gave us the plot to the film… I was still fearful.
Goosebumps introduces us to Zach (Dylan Minnette) who, along with his mother, Gale (Amy Ryan), moved to the small town of Madison, Delaware one year after his father passed away. With quick resolve, Zach meets his neighbor, Hannah (Odeya Rush), whom he finds very intriguing. And as any protective father would do, Hannah’s creepy father (Jack Black) tries to scare off Zach. But as Zach is trying to get to the bottom of exactly who this family is, he discovers locked Goosebumps manuscripts in Hannah’s father’s study. Accidentally opening The Abominable Snowman of Pasadena, Zach soon discovers that there is something special about these manuscripts as the stories themselves, or rather the monsters from them, begin to come to life… for real. Can Zach, Hannah and her Father, along with the bumbling Champ (Ryan Lee), save Madison from the monsters? Watch and see.
I had to constantly remind myself of the target audience for this film for about an hour after seeing it. I was hoping for so much more, and while it had mildly entertaining moments, I have feeling that this film is going to fall flat for most adults. Jack Black played the same part he has become really good at over the years, and it almost seems like he is basically playing it straight now. But it was kind of awesome to see some of the ideas of these books come to life, and with the evil Slappy the dummy (voiced by Black) at the helm, things did truly get out of hand. But I just found myself picking out plot holes and inconsistencies in the movie, which is highly unlike me. I may realize things like that much later after watching for most films, but this one I was noticing everything as I was watching it. This doesn’t bode well at all. For example, Hannah takes Zach to an abandoned carnival that was right in the middle of the woods. Hannah explains that they ran out of money before they finished building. So first, no one builds a permanent carnival like this in the middle of the woods, where the trees would interfere with pretty much everything the way it was set up. And it’s not like the trees grew up around the carnival, the technology was too new and the trees too big for that to make any sense. The other thing is, Hannah pulls a big lever and gets power to the carnival to light it up. First, why is there even power to an abandoned carnival? And let’s say we just accept that there is power to this place, we’re missing the second part. Hannah indicates that she visits the place often, but why haven’t the cops showed up to investigate why there was power at this abandoned carnival. The lights were clearly visible for miles, especially from up on top of the Ferris Wheel where we find Hannah and Zach.
But again… I remind myself of the intended audience. There were many youngsters in the screening with us. And most, if not all, really enjoyed the film. There was a continuous stream of laughter or gasps, as appropriate for the feel of the movie, and many after the film were incredibly happy. So I cannot say they missed their mark.
Ultimately, I ask myself the same question I always do: will I buy the movie on home release? The answer is probably yes, as I know a couple kids who would really enjoy the film, but I wouldn’t be making the purchase if it were just me in the picture. I give it 3 out of 5 stars. I would have given it a two, but I bring myself back to thinking about the target audience. And they definitely knocked it out of the water in that demographic.
Goosebumps introduces us to Zach (Dylan Minnette) who, along with his mother, Gale (Amy Ryan), moved to the small town of Madison, Delaware one year after his father passed away. With quick resolve, Zach meets his neighbor, Hannah (Odeya Rush), whom he finds very intriguing. And as any protective father would do, Hannah’s creepy father (Jack Black) tries to scare off Zach. But as Zach is trying to get to the bottom of exactly who this family is, he discovers locked Goosebumps manuscripts in Hannah’s father’s study. Accidentally opening The Abominable Snowman of Pasadena, Zach soon discovers that there is something special about these manuscripts as the stories themselves, or rather the monsters from them, begin to come to life… for real. Can Zach, Hannah and her Father, along with the bumbling Champ (Ryan Lee), save Madison from the monsters? Watch and see.
I had to constantly remind myself of the target audience for this film for about an hour after seeing it. I was hoping for so much more, and while it had mildly entertaining moments, I have feeling that this film is going to fall flat for most adults. Jack Black played the same part he has become really good at over the years, and it almost seems like he is basically playing it straight now. But it was kind of awesome to see some of the ideas of these books come to life, and with the evil Slappy the dummy (voiced by Black) at the helm, things did truly get out of hand. But I just found myself picking out plot holes and inconsistencies in the movie, which is highly unlike me. I may realize things like that much later after watching for most films, but this one I was noticing everything as I was watching it. This doesn’t bode well at all. For example, Hannah takes Zach to an abandoned carnival that was right in the middle of the woods. Hannah explains that they ran out of money before they finished building. So first, no one builds a permanent carnival like this in the middle of the woods, where the trees would interfere with pretty much everything the way it was set up. And it’s not like the trees grew up around the carnival, the technology was too new and the trees too big for that to make any sense. The other thing is, Hannah pulls a big lever and gets power to the carnival to light it up. First, why is there even power to an abandoned carnival? And let’s say we just accept that there is power to this place, we’re missing the second part. Hannah indicates that she visits the place often, but why haven’t the cops showed up to investigate why there was power at this abandoned carnival. The lights were clearly visible for miles, especially from up on top of the Ferris Wheel where we find Hannah and Zach.
But again… I remind myself of the intended audience. There were many youngsters in the screening with us. And most, if not all, really enjoyed the film. There was a continuous stream of laughter or gasps, as appropriate for the feel of the movie, and many after the film were incredibly happy. So I cannot say they missed their mark.
Ultimately, I ask myself the same question I always do: will I buy the movie on home release? The answer is probably yes, as I know a couple kids who would really enjoy the film, but I wouldn’t be making the purchase if it were just me in the picture. I give it 3 out of 5 stars. I would have given it a two, but I bring myself back to thinking about the target audience. And they definitely knocked it out of the water in that demographic.