Search
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Colossal (2016) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
Gloria (Anne Hathaway) is out all night drinking and comes home to her boyfriend Tim (Dan Stevens). Tim is headed to work and tired of Gloria’s partying ways. He’s packed her bags and tells her to not be there when he comes home from work. With no job, no place to live, and her life seemingly in at its low point she decided to go back to her home town. She is able to stay in her childhood home which is empty and she finds herself sleeping on the floor. Gloria heads out to get an air mattress to make her a little more comfortable. On her way back she runs into a childhood friend Oscar (Jason Sudeikis). He invites her to the bar he owns and despite the fact drinking ruined her relationship and is the reason she finds herself in this position she agrees.
Gloria winds up spending all night drinking with Oscar and his buddies. She stumbles home and passes out. She is awoken the next day by a phone call telling her about a giant monster that has appeared in Seoul. Gloria, Oscar and his two friends (Tim Blake and Austin Stowell) meet up again that night to talk about the Earth shaking event and wind up drinking all night, again. Gloria wakes up in the morning and again the monster appears in Seoul. It showed up at the exact time and the exact same spot in Seoul. As Gloria watches the footage of the newest sighting a strange thing occurs, the monster scratches its head in a very familiar way. Ever since Gloria was little she had a tick of scratching the top of her head in a particular way. Now on TV the monster is doing the same thing. She looks at the footage from the last sighting and notices that the monster looks to be carrying something, exactly like she was carrying the mattress she bought the morning before through the park. Is she the monster? If she is why is it only appearing in Seoul?
Colossal is a very interesting and original take on the “monster” movie. I hesitate to describe any more of the movie in the narrative because I really was surprised by the direction the movie took and think anyone why watches it should not have a preconceived idea of what is going to happen. Anne Hathaway and Jason Sudeikis are real good. Sudeikis really surprised me in his role. It wasn’t his typical character and I thought he played it really well. The supporting cast is okay but not particularly memorable. But the story really was focused on the two main characters. I thought the film was funny and dark. I definitely laughed throughout the film. There were times I questioned where the story was going. It didn’t transition from one point to the next very well. But I thought it did a good job of bringing everything together in the end. The visuals were good but not great but that is to be expected with an independent film. Another thing I will remember from this film was the soundtrack. The music seem to really follow the tone of the movie well.
This is a movie I will definitely find myself watching again. The story was interesting and, minus some sloppy plot transitions, was really well done.
Gloria winds up spending all night drinking with Oscar and his buddies. She stumbles home and passes out. She is awoken the next day by a phone call telling her about a giant monster that has appeared in Seoul. Gloria, Oscar and his two friends (Tim Blake and Austin Stowell) meet up again that night to talk about the Earth shaking event and wind up drinking all night, again. Gloria wakes up in the morning and again the monster appears in Seoul. It showed up at the exact time and the exact same spot in Seoul. As Gloria watches the footage of the newest sighting a strange thing occurs, the monster scratches its head in a very familiar way. Ever since Gloria was little she had a tick of scratching the top of her head in a particular way. Now on TV the monster is doing the same thing. She looks at the footage from the last sighting and notices that the monster looks to be carrying something, exactly like she was carrying the mattress she bought the morning before through the park. Is she the monster? If she is why is it only appearing in Seoul?
Colossal is a very interesting and original take on the “monster” movie. I hesitate to describe any more of the movie in the narrative because I really was surprised by the direction the movie took and think anyone why watches it should not have a preconceived idea of what is going to happen. Anne Hathaway and Jason Sudeikis are real good. Sudeikis really surprised me in his role. It wasn’t his typical character and I thought he played it really well. The supporting cast is okay but not particularly memorable. But the story really was focused on the two main characters. I thought the film was funny and dark. I definitely laughed throughout the film. There were times I questioned where the story was going. It didn’t transition from one point to the next very well. But I thought it did a good job of bringing everything together in the end. The visuals were good but not great but that is to be expected with an independent film. Another thing I will remember from this film was the soundtrack. The music seem to really follow the tone of the movie well.
This is a movie I will definitely find myself watching again. The story was interesting and, minus some sloppy plot transitions, was really well done.
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Cloverfield (2008) in Movies
Oct 5, 2020
Cloverfield is, at heart a found footage Kaiju movie with the twist that you don't see much of the main monster until the end of the film. Unlike Kaiju films like Godzilla or even Pacific rim, Cloverfield does not concentrate on the monster but on the people affected by it's rampage and the found footage aspect of the film helps bring us in close with a small group of survivors as they try to work out what is happening and try to find their friends.
I knew some one who absolutely hated this film for the very fact that the monster is rarely seen, although he clamed that you never actually saw the monster, which isn't true so I don't think he watched all the way to the end. He had a point though, if you want to watch a film where monsters fight it out amongst themselves then this probably won't be for you.
The monster is really nothing more than a plot device and the fact that it is only revealed in parts and not fully seen until the end helps to keep the film centred on the people and helps add a touch of reality to the film, after all if you lived in Japan during a Kaiju attack you would be more interested in saving your own life than weather you were about to be eaten by Godzilla or Ghidorah.
Being a found footage film, Cloverfield suffers slightly from the usual shaky camera work and occasional low sound but these are kept to a minimum. The film also manages to avoid relying on night vision or infra red so the footage is, for the most part, much clearer than other films of this style and doesn't keep switching formats which make the film less distracting than others.
Over all Cloverfield is a good monster/survival film which leaves some questions to be answered in the sequels (or not )
I knew some one who absolutely hated this film for the very fact that the monster is rarely seen, although he clamed that you never actually saw the monster, which isn't true so I don't think he watched all the way to the end. He had a point though, if you want to watch a film where monsters fight it out amongst themselves then this probably won't be for you.
The monster is really nothing more than a plot device and the fact that it is only revealed in parts and not fully seen until the end helps to keep the film centred on the people and helps add a touch of reality to the film, after all if you lived in Japan during a Kaiju attack you would be more interested in saving your own life than weather you were about to be eaten by Godzilla or Ghidorah.
Being a found footage film, Cloverfield suffers slightly from the usual shaky camera work and occasional low sound but these are kept to a minimum. The film also manages to avoid relying on night vision or infra red so the footage is, for the most part, much clearer than other films of this style and doesn't keep switching formats which make the film less distracting than others.
Over all Cloverfield is a good monster/survival film which leaves some questions to be answered in the sequels (or not )
Awix (3310 KP) rated Godzilla Vs Mechagodzilla II (1993) in Movies
Mar 11, 2018 (Updated Mar 11, 2018)
Old-school Toho monster mash follows the trend of early-90s Godzilla movies by reinventing popular characters from 60s and 70s films. Kind of suffers from the same problem as superhero films with multiple villains (cf Spider-Man 3 or Batman Forever), in that contriving a way for all the monsters to appear and interact requires some outlandish plotting and a good deal of hand-waving of implausibilities (not to mention indulgence from the audience).
In addition to Godzilla, in this film you get Mechagodzilla (well, duh), and also giant pterodactyl Rodan and Minilla (aka Baby Godzilla). The monster battles are pretty good, though there's a slight tendency towards the combatants just standing there and zapping each other with breath-rays, and the monster suits are excellent (the Rodan puppet is particularly impressive). Set against this we must place the fact that the movie doesn't actually have a plot, as such - things just happen one after the other with no sense of theme or structure. Most of the human characters are slightly annoying too. A step down from the previous few films, but still better than much of what was to follow in the late 90s and early 2000s.
In addition to Godzilla, in this film you get Mechagodzilla (well, duh), and also giant pterodactyl Rodan and Minilla (aka Baby Godzilla). The monster battles are pretty good, though there's a slight tendency towards the combatants just standing there and zapping each other with breath-rays, and the monster suits are excellent (the Rodan puppet is particularly impressive). Set against this we must place the fact that the movie doesn't actually have a plot, as such - things just happen one after the other with no sense of theme or structure. Most of the human characters are slightly annoying too. A step down from the previous few films, but still better than much of what was to follow in the late 90s and early 2000s.
Awix (3310 KP) rated The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms (1953) in Movies
May 31, 2018 (Updated May 31, 2018)
American A-bomb test has unexpected consequences when the blast defrosts a frozen, wholly fictional dinosaur; the creature swims off to devastate the nearest city for no particularly well-explained reason. A decent monster movie with a surprisingly gritty tone (by the standards of the genre, anyway); in terms of cultural impact, utterly eclipsed by an unofficial Japanese remake which came out the following year and has had 31 sequels to date.
There are various quirky and tropey bits that will raise a smile for the seasoned viewer of this sort of thing (e.g. the moment when the sweet old supporting character postpones their first holiday in thirty years in order to look for the monster: they might as well have him followed around by a robed man with a scythe), but on the whole it passes the time well enough. There is a sense in which most of the film is just filling time until the climax, when the Rhedosaurus runs amok in the streets of New York, but it does so fairly engagingly; also manages to find a half-decent explanation as to why they don't just bomb the monster to death (Devlin and Emmerich, please take note). Wheeled on for monster-extermination duties is a young Lee van Cleef, who seems slightly annoyed to be appearing in this kind of film. Great fun to watch when you're about seven; stands up pretty well for older viewers, too.
There are various quirky and tropey bits that will raise a smile for the seasoned viewer of this sort of thing (e.g. the moment when the sweet old supporting character postpones their first holiday in thirty years in order to look for the monster: they might as well have him followed around by a robed man with a scythe), but on the whole it passes the time well enough. There is a sense in which most of the film is just filling time until the climax, when the Rhedosaurus runs amok in the streets of New York, but it does so fairly engagingly; also manages to find a half-decent explanation as to why they don't just bomb the monster to death (Devlin and Emmerich, please take note). Wheeled on for monster-extermination duties is a young Lee van Cleef, who seems slightly annoyed to be appearing in this kind of film. Great fun to watch when you're about seven; stands up pretty well for older viewers, too.
Lee KM Pallatina (951 KP) rated Jack Brooks: Monster Slayer (2007) in Movies
Jun 25, 2019
I used to be a plumber
Jack brooks: monster slayer pays homage to movies like Evil dead, from dusk till dawn & gremlins.
After witnessing his family's brutal murder as a child, he grows up with an unquenching fury he is constantly fighting.
After accidentally unleashing an ancient evil during a plumbing job, his client/professor (Robert Englund) becomes possessed and mutates into a gruesome monster with an undying hunger.
This results in Jack facing his fears he can no longer run from and discover the purpose of his inner rage.
This is a great movie that honestly pays off, a low budget project that deserves a franchise.
Starring Trevor Mathews & Robert Englund
Story by: John Ainslie; Jon Knautz; Trevor Matthews; Patrick White
Directed by: Jon Knautz
Release date: October 9, 2007 (Sitges Film Festival); July 25, 2008 (Canada); August
After witnessing his family's brutal murder as a child, he grows up with an unquenching fury he is constantly fighting.
After accidentally unleashing an ancient evil during a plumbing job, his client/professor (Robert Englund) becomes possessed and mutates into a gruesome monster with an undying hunger.
This results in Jack facing his fears he can no longer run from and discover the purpose of his inner rage.
This is a great movie that honestly pays off, a low budget project that deserves a franchise.
Starring Trevor Mathews & Robert Englund
Story by: John Ainslie; Jon Knautz; Trevor Matthews; Patrick White
Directed by: Jon Knautz
Release date: October 9, 2007 (Sitges Film Festival); July 25, 2008 (Canada); August
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated House of Dracula (1945) in Movies
Jun 18, 2020
Get The Gang All Together: The Crossover II
House of Dracula- was a direct sequel to House of Frankenstein, and continued the theme of combining Universal's three most popular monsters: Frankenstein's monster (Glenn Strange), Count Dracula (John Carradine), and the Wolf Man (Lon Chaney Jr.).
The plot: This monster movie focuses on the iconic vampire, Count Dracula (John Carradine), and Lawrence Talbot (Lon Chaney), better known as the Wolf Man. Both beings of the night are tired of their supernatural afflictions, so they seek out Dr. Franz Edelmann (Onslow Stevens) for cures for their respective curses. While trying to aid the imposing creatures, Edelmann himself develops a transformative condition, adding to the many ghouls lurking around the foreboding landscape.
The working titles for the film were Dracula vs. the Wolf Man or The Wolf Man vs. Dracula.
Although Glenn Strange appears as the Monster in most of the film, footage of Chaney as the Monster from The Ghost of Frankenstein and Boris Karloff from Bride of Frankenstein was recycled; Karloff appears in a dream sequence, while Chaney, as well as his double Eddie Parker, are seen in footage in a fire scene.
Strange recounts that a scene with the Monster stuck in quicksand was particularly arduous for him. On top of three hours of getting into makeup, Strange spent the rest of the day buried in cold sand, including during the lunch break, and was so cold by midafternoon that he could barely feel his legs. Lon Chaney Jr. attempted to help Strange keep warm by passing him a bottle of scotch, with the result that Strange was so drunk that after getting out of costume and makeup, he had difficulty dressing himself in his street clothes. Chaney's drinking contributed to his reputation as being difficult to work with, and probably was the reason Universal let him go after the film was completed.
The film, which was the seventh Universal film to feature Frankenstein's monster, as well as the fourth with Count Dracula and the Wolf Man, was a commercial success, but was one of the last Universal movies featuring Frankenstein's monster, vampires, and werewolves, with the exception of the comedy Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein (1948), in which all three appear.
Its a fun entertaing horror film starring the universal monsters.
The plot: This monster movie focuses on the iconic vampire, Count Dracula (John Carradine), and Lawrence Talbot (Lon Chaney), better known as the Wolf Man. Both beings of the night are tired of their supernatural afflictions, so they seek out Dr. Franz Edelmann (Onslow Stevens) for cures for their respective curses. While trying to aid the imposing creatures, Edelmann himself develops a transformative condition, adding to the many ghouls lurking around the foreboding landscape.
The working titles for the film were Dracula vs. the Wolf Man or The Wolf Man vs. Dracula.
Although Glenn Strange appears as the Monster in most of the film, footage of Chaney as the Monster from The Ghost of Frankenstein and Boris Karloff from Bride of Frankenstein was recycled; Karloff appears in a dream sequence, while Chaney, as well as his double Eddie Parker, are seen in footage in a fire scene.
Strange recounts that a scene with the Monster stuck in quicksand was particularly arduous for him. On top of three hours of getting into makeup, Strange spent the rest of the day buried in cold sand, including during the lunch break, and was so cold by midafternoon that he could barely feel his legs. Lon Chaney Jr. attempted to help Strange keep warm by passing him a bottle of scotch, with the result that Strange was so drunk that after getting out of costume and makeup, he had difficulty dressing himself in his street clothes. Chaney's drinking contributed to his reputation as being difficult to work with, and probably was the reason Universal let him go after the film was completed.
The film, which was the seventh Universal film to feature Frankenstein's monster, as well as the fourth with Count Dracula and the Wolf Man, was a commercial success, but was one of the last Universal movies featuring Frankenstein's monster, vampires, and werewolves, with the exception of the comedy Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein (1948), in which all three appear.
Its a fun entertaing horror film starring the universal monsters.
James P. Sumner (65 KP) rated Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019) in Movies
Jun 4, 2019
Visuals (1 more)
Action
A true monster of a movie!
This sequel to the 2014 reboot of Godzilla is an enjoyable movie. It doesn't follow the common trend of "less is more", not wasting any time showing you the visually stunning monsters in all their glory.
The plot is simple enough: Godzilla has been absent since the last movie five years ago. More monsters (called Titans here) have been discovered around the world and the mysterious Monarch group are studying them. Needless to say, it doesn't take long for things to take a turn for the worst, and when a big, bad monster is revived and starts destroying things, our old pal Godzilla returns.
This is one of those movies where you leave your brain and the real world at the door, and just enjoy it for what it is. There's a lot of criticism aimed at modern movies for overusing CGI, but this film needs it and uses it very well. The monsters look incredible, and genuinely look massive. The battles and subsequent destruction look amazing, too. It's a real treat for the eyes, packed with many WOW! moments.
Is it perfect? No. As graphically stunning as it is, the plot leaves a lot to be desired. Riddled with tiny (and the odd large) plot holes, it's a pretty basic storyline. But then, it doesn't need to be overly complex in a movie like this one.
No one comes to a Godzilla movie expecting Oscar-worthy performances and Aaron Sorkin-esque screenplays. They come to be entertained. And you will be here. Well worth stepping away from life for a couple of hours. Don't forget your popcorn!
The plot is simple enough: Godzilla has been absent since the last movie five years ago. More monsters (called Titans here) have been discovered around the world and the mysterious Monarch group are studying them. Needless to say, it doesn't take long for things to take a turn for the worst, and when a big, bad monster is revived and starts destroying things, our old pal Godzilla returns.
This is one of those movies where you leave your brain and the real world at the door, and just enjoy it for what it is. There's a lot of criticism aimed at modern movies for overusing CGI, but this film needs it and uses it very well. The monsters look incredible, and genuinely look massive. The battles and subsequent destruction look amazing, too. It's a real treat for the eyes, packed with many WOW! moments.
Is it perfect? No. As graphically stunning as it is, the plot leaves a lot to be desired. Riddled with tiny (and the odd large) plot holes, it's a pretty basic storyline. But then, it doesn't need to be overly complex in a movie like this one.
No one comes to a Godzilla movie expecting Oscar-worthy performances and Aaron Sorkin-esque screenplays. They come to be entertained. And you will be here. Well worth stepping away from life for a couple of hours. Don't forget your popcorn!
Kevin Wilson (179 KP) rated The Dinosaur Project (2012) in Movies
Jul 22, 2018
I stuck with it (1 more)
I've seen worse CGI and acting
Forgettable movie (2 more)
Not enough dinosaurs
Boring
Blair witch project meets Jurassic park?
Yet another £1 movie I discovered and I have to say it is not worth it. That is 1 hour and 20 mins I will never get back.
The front of the blu ray case says 'the best Dino film since Jurassic park". That is laughable. It might as well have been a monster movie because I did not see that many dinosaurs. Maybe 3 different types?
This is a found footage movie. This genre has been, I feel, exhausted. It is no longer fresh and unique. It felt a lot like Blair witch project with them trying to build a suspense but that was not there. A fear of the unknown which meant there was no action.
The acting isnt horrible and neither is the CGI. Only good things about it I guess. But the characters were forgettable and their relationships were not believable.
It is badly paced with a lot of slow talking scenes while doing a lot of travelling. It is a predictable movie with an obvious betrayal and and ending.
The front of the blu ray case says 'the best Dino film since Jurassic park". That is laughable. It might as well have been a monster movie because I did not see that many dinosaurs. Maybe 3 different types?
This is a found footage movie. This genre has been, I feel, exhausted. It is no longer fresh and unique. It felt a lot like Blair witch project with them trying to build a suspense but that was not there. A fear of the unknown which meant there was no action.
The acting isnt horrible and neither is the CGI. Only good things about it I guess. But the characters were forgettable and their relationships were not believable.
It is badly paced with a lot of slow talking scenes while doing a lot of travelling. It is a predictable movie with an obvious betrayal and and ending.
Rickstrong23 (216 KP) rated Kong: Skull Island (2017) in Movies
Mar 1, 2018
I actually didnt think id like this movie and had put off watching it for a bit.but just like the first one was plesently suprised .mix match cast worked well together action and effects good and jokes witch are usually pretty corny in movies like this i thought were funny.except for one monster they all looked real .they didnt need to do it so kinda ruined that part for me but pretty good real special effects other than that.