Search
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Tron Legacy (2010) in Movies
Nov 20, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
Ok this was actually good which is a bit surprising as there have been a few sequels to older films released over the past few years and they haven't all be great, not that they haven't necessarily been bad but, depending on how they continuing they have been a bit problematic. Either by using now outdated concepts or trying to to match modern political standards and missing the mark, Ghostbusters I'm looking at you. Tron: Legacy goes down the path of of handing the franchise over to the next generation in a similar manner to Bill and Ted Face the Music and I think Tron does it better.
I'll start by saying that Tron: Legacy is not as original or forward thinking as it's predecessor but that is to be expected. The original had Ideas that were slightly before it's time which i talk about in my review of that film. Tron: Legacy can't re do that originality, partly because its a sequel and so is constrained by the world built in the original but also because a lot of the ideas have been used since, we've had the likes of 'The Matrix' and 'Wreck-it Ralph' and so Tron: Legacy seems to concentrate on being a Tron film and nothing more.
The film keeps close to the original by bringing back quite a few things, we have Jeff Bridges and Bruce Boxleitner reprising their roles of Kevin Flynn And Alan Bradley, with Kevin now trapped in the computer world known as the Grid. The light cycles are back as well as few other craft. The effects have been updated but the grid and it's games are still very recognisable and there are a few through back lines and scenes.
Tron: Legacy does feel a bit Matrixy at times, neither of the flynns are Neo but it does draw on the familiar God/Devil tropes that you often see. The costumes are more cyber punk than the original, still using the red/blue lighting but also being more PVC and trench coat in its aesthetic with many characters supporting visors or crash helmets, to the point that Daft Punk actually look like they belong there.
Like a lot of Cyberpunk films there is a night club and this has one of the films stand out characters, Castor, played by Michael Sheen who is doing his best 'Ziggy Stardust' impression.
The strange thing is, this is a good film, with good franchise potential and Disney don't seem to have marketed it well, it's 10 years old (at the time of writing) and isn't mentioned much and it's only due to watching this on Disney+ that I now know about the spin off animated series, Tron: Uprising, which I'm going to have to watch.
I'll start by saying that Tron: Legacy is not as original or forward thinking as it's predecessor but that is to be expected. The original had Ideas that were slightly before it's time which i talk about in my review of that film. Tron: Legacy can't re do that originality, partly because its a sequel and so is constrained by the world built in the original but also because a lot of the ideas have been used since, we've had the likes of 'The Matrix' and 'Wreck-it Ralph' and so Tron: Legacy seems to concentrate on being a Tron film and nothing more.
The film keeps close to the original by bringing back quite a few things, we have Jeff Bridges and Bruce Boxleitner reprising their roles of Kevin Flynn And Alan Bradley, with Kevin now trapped in the computer world known as the Grid. The light cycles are back as well as few other craft. The effects have been updated but the grid and it's games are still very recognisable and there are a few through back lines and scenes.
Tron: Legacy does feel a bit Matrixy at times, neither of the flynns are Neo but it does draw on the familiar God/Devil tropes that you often see. The costumes are more cyber punk than the original, still using the red/blue lighting but also being more PVC and trench coat in its aesthetic with many characters supporting visors or crash helmets, to the point that Daft Punk actually look like they belong there.
Like a lot of Cyberpunk films there is a night club and this has one of the films stand out characters, Castor, played by Michael Sheen who is doing his best 'Ziggy Stardust' impression.
The strange thing is, this is a good film, with good franchise potential and Disney don't seem to have marketed it well, it's 10 years old (at the time of writing) and isn't mentioned much and it's only due to watching this on Disney+ that I now know about the spin off animated series, Tron: Uprising, which I'm going to have to watch.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Dark Crimes (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
great many of us film aficionados have, at one time or another, thought that they’ve seen so many films from so many different genres or written by so many ‘messed up’ writers or directed by so many warped minds that have simply ‘walked off the map’ that nothing and I mean absolutely nothing could shock us. We think we’ve ‘seen everything’ or have been ‘prepared’ for anything shocking that filmmakers might throw our way. As today’s film for your consideration will demonstrate, even folks like ‘us’ can be caught off guard by the occasional ‘curve ball’ by a writer, director, or actor/actress we’ve become acquainted with through their work over the years. I can say this much before we go any further … I have never seen nor did I ever imagine seeing Jim Carrey in a film like this.
Today’s selection is a 2016 Polish-American dramatic-mystery film entitled ‘Dark Crimes’. The film is based upon an article published in ‘The New Yorker’ in 2008 entitled ‘True Crime:A Post-Modern Murder Mystery’ by David Grann about convicted Polish murderer, writer, and photographer Krystian Bala. Directed by Alexandros Avranas and written by Jeremey Brock, ‘Dark Crimes’ stars Jim Carrey, Marton Csokas, Agata Kulesza, Kati Outinen, Charlotte Gainsbourg, and Zbigniew Zamachowski. Jim Carrey is Detective Tadek. Formerly a highly decorated and respected detective, his recent work with the police department has been nothing more than administrative duties in the records department after a controversial case he was investigating involving an unsolved murder at a sex club was suddenly ‘shelved’ and he was relegated to his current desk job. A recent book by a controversial author Kozlow (Csokas), describes a murder almost identical to the unsolved murder of a businessman Tadek was investigating and even contains details that mirror many he discovered in his original investigation. After pleading with his immediate superior to allow him to continue examining the case, Tadek begins to delve deeper into the incident re-visiting the location of the murder and interviewing possible witnesses and others who may have been present or involved in the murder.
Soon Tadek’s determination overshadows everything else. He becomes paranoid and obsessed to such severity that he alienates his family and crosses lines professionally and personally as a sort of madness begins to take over. The moment he believes he has figured out the solution to the case that has become his obsession and cost him everything he has and the person he is, it all slips away as the truth about Kozlow’s involvement in the crime becomes clear and Tadek’s only remaining option is the one you don’t see coming.
This film is DARK and not for the faint of heart. The world knows Jim Carrey for comedy and that’s what he’ll ALWAYS be known for. This film metaphorically takes all that, throws it right out the window, then proceeds to run downstairs and then outside and stomp on it. Prepare to be shocked as this was Carrey like I’ve never seen him before. The film is dark, gritty, serious, and will tempt you to keep your finger on the ‘off button’ all the way through the film. In that regard, it is indeed a great film. It’s like a modern take on a classic well-written murder mystery novel where even in the end, the outcome is sometimes equal to if not worse than the actual crime itself. The world knows Marton Csokas for his villainous roles where he typically portrays Russian or Eastern European madmen and once again he does the same in this film with great flair. The film is rated R for strong and disturbing content and runs about an hour and a half so it’s most definitely NOT one for young folks. Which it late at night when it’s dark if you’re looking for something scary that will keep you awake all night. I’m going to give the film 3 out of 5 stars. It’s okay to see once but in all honesty, it’s nothing original that hasn’t been done in other films with other actors. This one is just a variation on a theme with deferent players and different aspects and details
Today’s selection is a 2016 Polish-American dramatic-mystery film entitled ‘Dark Crimes’. The film is based upon an article published in ‘The New Yorker’ in 2008 entitled ‘True Crime:A Post-Modern Murder Mystery’ by David Grann about convicted Polish murderer, writer, and photographer Krystian Bala. Directed by Alexandros Avranas and written by Jeremey Brock, ‘Dark Crimes’ stars Jim Carrey, Marton Csokas, Agata Kulesza, Kati Outinen, Charlotte Gainsbourg, and Zbigniew Zamachowski. Jim Carrey is Detective Tadek. Formerly a highly decorated and respected detective, his recent work with the police department has been nothing more than administrative duties in the records department after a controversial case he was investigating involving an unsolved murder at a sex club was suddenly ‘shelved’ and he was relegated to his current desk job. A recent book by a controversial author Kozlow (Csokas), describes a murder almost identical to the unsolved murder of a businessman Tadek was investigating and even contains details that mirror many he discovered in his original investigation. After pleading with his immediate superior to allow him to continue examining the case, Tadek begins to delve deeper into the incident re-visiting the location of the murder and interviewing possible witnesses and others who may have been present or involved in the murder.
Soon Tadek’s determination overshadows everything else. He becomes paranoid and obsessed to such severity that he alienates his family and crosses lines professionally and personally as a sort of madness begins to take over. The moment he believes he has figured out the solution to the case that has become his obsession and cost him everything he has and the person he is, it all slips away as the truth about Kozlow’s involvement in the crime becomes clear and Tadek’s only remaining option is the one you don’t see coming.
This film is DARK and not for the faint of heart. The world knows Jim Carrey for comedy and that’s what he’ll ALWAYS be known for. This film metaphorically takes all that, throws it right out the window, then proceeds to run downstairs and then outside and stomp on it. Prepare to be shocked as this was Carrey like I’ve never seen him before. The film is dark, gritty, serious, and will tempt you to keep your finger on the ‘off button’ all the way through the film. In that regard, it is indeed a great film. It’s like a modern take on a classic well-written murder mystery novel where even in the end, the outcome is sometimes equal to if not worse than the actual crime itself. The world knows Marton Csokas for his villainous roles where he typically portrays Russian or Eastern European madmen and once again he does the same in this film with great flair. The film is rated R for strong and disturbing content and runs about an hour and a half so it’s most definitely NOT one for young folks. Which it late at night when it’s dark if you’re looking for something scary that will keep you awake all night. I’m going to give the film 3 out of 5 stars. It’s okay to see once but in all honesty, it’s nothing original that hasn’t been done in other films with other actors. This one is just a variation on a theme with deferent players and different aspects and details
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Us (2019) in Movies
Jul 6, 2020
Damn Good Horror Film - 9/10
Us is a 2019 horror movie written, directed, and co-produced by Jordan Peele. It was also produced by Jason Blum, Ian Cooper, and Sean McKittrick; through Monkeypaw Productions and distributed by Universal. It stars Lupita Nyong'o, Winston Duke, Shahadi Wright Joseph, and Evan Alex.
In 1986, on vacation with her parents in Santa Cruz, one night Adelaide Thomas (Madison Curry) wanders off while at the boardwalk on the beach. Only a young girl at the time she enters a scary looking funhouse where she gets lost in the hall of mirrors. Panicking, afraid and looking for the exit, she encounters a doppelganger of herself, leaving her traumatized and unable to speak when she is reunited with her parents. Now an adult, Adelaide (Lupita Nyong'o) reluctantly heads with her family: husband Gabe Wilson (Winston Duke), daughter Zora Wilson (Shahadi Wright Joseph), and son Jason Wilson (Evan Alex) to their beach house in Santa Cruz. Adelaide is very apprehensive about the trip, remembering the traumatic incident from her youth, and becomes very discontent. Even during the day while meeting up with friends at the beach, she becomes very erratic for a moment when she cannot find her son who walked a way to use the restroom. She becomes increasingly concerned something bad is going to happen. Later that evening, back at the beach house, she confides in her husband the details of her childhood trauma, which he laughs off until four masked people storm the house forcing them to fight for their survival.
I cannot say how much I enjoyed this movie. It was an awesome horror movie. Jordan Peele knocked it out of the park with this film. It was masterfully done. I like how you can see a lot of the influences from other films yet it was still very original. This movie had me at the edge of my seat gripping the armrests of my chair with a lot of its scarier scenes. Yet it was still funny in a lot of parts. I thought the acting was great especially for so many actors playing duo roles, even the children. The cinematography was very good too with a lot of visuals that will stay with you and hidden meanings to things you will probably only notice or realize on your 2nd or 3rd viewing. I personally can't wait to watch it again. Another critic summed it up better than I ever could "originality in concept, physiological torment+twists, old-world suspense building, and one of the best scorings in modern Horror history"-(Cinema Lovers Club Gmail). I really loved the soundtrack and music in this movie. I give it a 9/10.
In 1986, on vacation with her parents in Santa Cruz, one night Adelaide Thomas (Madison Curry) wanders off while at the boardwalk on the beach. Only a young girl at the time she enters a scary looking funhouse where she gets lost in the hall of mirrors. Panicking, afraid and looking for the exit, she encounters a doppelganger of herself, leaving her traumatized and unable to speak when she is reunited with her parents. Now an adult, Adelaide (Lupita Nyong'o) reluctantly heads with her family: husband Gabe Wilson (Winston Duke), daughter Zora Wilson (Shahadi Wright Joseph), and son Jason Wilson (Evan Alex) to their beach house in Santa Cruz. Adelaide is very apprehensive about the trip, remembering the traumatic incident from her youth, and becomes very discontent. Even during the day while meeting up with friends at the beach, she becomes very erratic for a moment when she cannot find her son who walked a way to use the restroom. She becomes increasingly concerned something bad is going to happen. Later that evening, back at the beach house, she confides in her husband the details of her childhood trauma, which he laughs off until four masked people storm the house forcing them to fight for their survival.
I cannot say how much I enjoyed this movie. It was an awesome horror movie. Jordan Peele knocked it out of the park with this film. It was masterfully done. I like how you can see a lot of the influences from other films yet it was still very original. This movie had me at the edge of my seat gripping the armrests of my chair with a lot of its scarier scenes. Yet it was still funny in a lot of parts. I thought the acting was great especially for so many actors playing duo roles, even the children. The cinematography was very good too with a lot of visuals that will stay with you and hidden meanings to things you will probably only notice or realize on your 2nd or 3rd viewing. I personally can't wait to watch it again. Another critic summed it up better than I ever could "originality in concept, physiological torment+twists, old-world suspense building, and one of the best scorings in modern Horror history"-(Cinema Lovers Club Gmail). I really loved the soundtrack and music in this movie. I give it a 9/10.
Real Boxing 2 ROCKY
Games and Entertainment
App
"The boxing game we deserve." 8/10 – Gamezebo "A big, brash boxing game that's surprising tactical...
Place Finder - Search Places Around Me
Navigation and Travel
App
Place Finder - Search Places Around Me App is a special kind of app that searches ATM, Restaurants,...
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated I'll Take You There in Books
May 10, 2018
Felix Funicello is a film professor who lives in Connecticut. He is divorced and has one daughter, Eliza, who is currently working for New York Magazine. Felix also has two older sister, Simone and Frances who are an integral part of his life. Felix hold a movie club on Monday nights in the old Vaudeville theater in town. One night as he is setting up, he is visited by the ghost of Lois Weber, a renowned film director in her time. Lois shows Felix glimpses of his life along with the important women in it. Through these snapshots, Felix gains a greater understanding of the women in his life and women in general.
This book was reminiscent to A Christmas Carol, but he is visited by the same ghost, who brings three different visitors with her. Felix is first returned to his six year-old self. Where he and his sisters are helping their neighbor gather votes to become the next Rheingold Girl. Rheingold is a beer. This happens after his daughter tells him she has to write a piece about these girls.
The next transportation is a few years later when Felix is twelve. His mother and sister are talking in the kitchen about her boss being inappropriate with her at work. This part I heard just a few days after hearing day after day about a new man in a high position has been removed because of inappropriate behavior in the work place. Mind you, this is taking place in the early '60s and times were different, but some things never change. As Eliza, is telling her mother about what her boss has said, it's the mother's response that truly strikes me.
<i>"Men are men. Shapely girls like you just have to put up with stuff like that in the working world or else quit. Those are your choices."</i>
Thank God, those are no longer our choices, and that shouldn't have been the mentality then, maybe we wouldn't have all these issues today.
Also during this trip, Felix is given some news about his family that will change the dynamic forever.
The final time Lois comes to visit, the guest she brings, gives Felix a testimony that he has wondered about in the back of his mind for most of his life. That helps to fill a missing piece. The story is sad and is a part of the two previous visits from Lois.
All of these visits help Felix to be a better man, brother and father to the women in his life.
I think this is a very important book for all women to read, especially with the things going on in our world today. Told from the male point of view, I think it helps to see that some men can be empathetic to the plights of women. And this books covers a lot of those plights, from feminism, to abortion, adoption and acceptance. Years ago, I read She's Come Undone by Wally Lamb and I remember feeling the same way after reading it. Read them both.
This book was reminiscent to A Christmas Carol, but he is visited by the same ghost, who brings three different visitors with her. Felix is first returned to his six year-old self. Where he and his sisters are helping their neighbor gather votes to become the next Rheingold Girl. Rheingold is a beer. This happens after his daughter tells him she has to write a piece about these girls.
The next transportation is a few years later when Felix is twelve. His mother and sister are talking in the kitchen about her boss being inappropriate with her at work. This part I heard just a few days after hearing day after day about a new man in a high position has been removed because of inappropriate behavior in the work place. Mind you, this is taking place in the early '60s and times were different, but some things never change. As Eliza, is telling her mother about what her boss has said, it's the mother's response that truly strikes me.
<i>"Men are men. Shapely girls like you just have to put up with stuff like that in the working world or else quit. Those are your choices."</i>
Thank God, those are no longer our choices, and that shouldn't have been the mentality then, maybe we wouldn't have all these issues today.
Also during this trip, Felix is given some news about his family that will change the dynamic forever.
The final time Lois comes to visit, the guest she brings, gives Felix a testimony that he has wondered about in the back of his mind for most of his life. That helps to fill a missing piece. The story is sad and is a part of the two previous visits from Lois.
All of these visits help Felix to be a better man, brother and father to the women in his life.
I think this is a very important book for all women to read, especially with the things going on in our world today. Told from the male point of view, I think it helps to see that some men can be empathetic to the plights of women. And this books covers a lot of those plights, from feminism, to abortion, adoption and acceptance. Years ago, I read She's Come Undone by Wally Lamb and I remember feeling the same way after reading it. Read them both.
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated City of Bones (The Mortal Instruments, #1) in Books
Oct 26, 2018
City of Bones by Cassandra Clare [BOOK REVIEW]
I have already read this book back in 2014. This time, I decided to go with the whole series, as I stopped reading them for some reason.
City of Bones is the first book from The Mortal Instrument Series by Cassandra Clare. This is a book that is really distinctive for the fact that it takes you to a whole new world instantly, and you immediately feel comfortable with it.
The story starts when Clary and her friend Simon are in a night club, and a boy is being attacked. When Clary calls out for help, it seems that only she can see the attackers. And immediately, within a few pages, we are introduced to a paranormal world that is not visible to mundanes, and we discover all sorts of creatures: angels, demons, fae, vampires, werewolves…
And when Clary discovers that her mother, who used to be a part of a society, and kept it all hidden from her goes missing - she is determined to find her, save her, and find out about her past.
I liked the fact that we have a world so wonderfully constructed, and so thoughtfully created, that drags you in immediately. I usually am the person that struggles with new worlds and incredible amounts of creatures, but this was a great exception.
The characters were well-developed, and I was impressed by how the author managed to present some of today’s taboo topics in this novel. I find it really courageous. I straight-out don’t like Simon. Like, at all… He is a wonderful friend, and Clary means a lot to him, but he was just so dull the whole book.
I liked Clary, and I loved how she slowly discovered everything, but I wasn’t really that involved with her.
On the other side, I loved Jace. He is such a hottie. Sarcastic little cutsie thing! I also adored his honesty. It is something that not everyone has these days…
‘’He’s not a liar at all. Not about important things. He’ll tell you horrible truths, but he won’t lie.’’ She paused before she added quietly, ‘’That’s why it’s certainly better not to ask him anything unless you know you can stand to hear the answer.’’
I liked Luke’s story, and he had an amazing cliff-hanger around the end of the book. But Magnus is one of the people I wanted to see more of, and I wish there two places were swapped.
Isabelle and Alec - I really loved them. We didn’t get to see too much of them, but they were both really important in some of the crucial moments in this book.
All in all, I really loved the story. And I am a bit sad that the couple I was shipping for can’t be together, but it is what it is. I am going to put a Lannister reference here, and if you have read the book, you will understand: ‘’Oh, the things we do for love…’’
‘’To love is to destroy, and to be loved is to be the one destroyed.’’
City of Bones is the first book from The Mortal Instrument Series by Cassandra Clare. This is a book that is really distinctive for the fact that it takes you to a whole new world instantly, and you immediately feel comfortable with it.
The story starts when Clary and her friend Simon are in a night club, and a boy is being attacked. When Clary calls out for help, it seems that only she can see the attackers. And immediately, within a few pages, we are introduced to a paranormal world that is not visible to mundanes, and we discover all sorts of creatures: angels, demons, fae, vampires, werewolves…
And when Clary discovers that her mother, who used to be a part of a society, and kept it all hidden from her goes missing - she is determined to find her, save her, and find out about her past.
I liked the fact that we have a world so wonderfully constructed, and so thoughtfully created, that drags you in immediately. I usually am the person that struggles with new worlds and incredible amounts of creatures, but this was a great exception.
The characters were well-developed, and I was impressed by how the author managed to present some of today’s taboo topics in this novel. I find it really courageous. I straight-out don’t like Simon. Like, at all… He is a wonderful friend, and Clary means a lot to him, but he was just so dull the whole book.
I liked Clary, and I loved how she slowly discovered everything, but I wasn’t really that involved with her.
On the other side, I loved Jace. He is such a hottie. Sarcastic little cutsie thing! I also adored his honesty. It is something that not everyone has these days…
‘’He’s not a liar at all. Not about important things. He’ll tell you horrible truths, but he won’t lie.’’ She paused before she added quietly, ‘’That’s why it’s certainly better not to ask him anything unless you know you can stand to hear the answer.’’
I liked Luke’s story, and he had an amazing cliff-hanger around the end of the book. But Magnus is one of the people I wanted to see more of, and I wish there two places were swapped.
Isabelle and Alec - I really loved them. We didn’t get to see too much of them, but they were both really important in some of the crucial moments in this book.
All in all, I really loved the story. And I am a bit sad that the couple I was shipping for can’t be together, but it is what it is. I am going to put a Lannister reference here, and if you have read the book, you will understand: ‘’Oh, the things we do for love…’’
‘’To love is to destroy, and to be loved is to be the one destroyed.’’
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Emma (2020) in Movies
Mar 1, 2020
Another classic novel that I have no knowledge of, I even own the BBC version on DVD, I'm really not sure how I haven't watched it.
In old English society what was a girl to do with her spare time to stay entertained? Read, learn the piano, paint... act as matchmaker to her friends. When Emma Woodhouse sees a flicker of promise or flirtation she jumps at the chance to fan the flames of romance between her friends and acquaintances, but when wires get crossed and misunderstandings occur, things begin to crack.
I always had the impression that Emma was a light comedy drama from hearing people talk about it, and while that did come across, I was surprised to come out feeling negatively towards my namesake. I had assumed that Emma was a delightful and whimsical character [as most Emmas are] and when I spent a lot of the film feeling like she was, frankly, a bit of a bitch, I wanted to banish her from the exclusive "Emma Club". Apart from besmirching the good name the attitude didn't seem to fit with the humour of the film.
Emma. is charming, but it didn't quite get me over the line. There seemed little reason for it to be over 2 hours long, while most of the film was engaging you could have taken out 15 minutes or so and tightened it up, I genuinely think that would have added a star to my rating.
Actually, hold off on that star for a moment, let's talk about the casting first.
Rupert Graves, yeeeeeeeeeeees. That's it for him, he's a delight, put him in everything.
Bill Night and Miranda Hart both gave great comedic performances, with Hart also getting an agonising scene that got me right in the feels. Their talent for humour added a great lightness to the film and was perfectly aligned to the period setting.
Johnny Flynn, or Mr Tasty Debrief for the Cineworld-goers out there. He was tastefully de-briefed, and the reason for the card warning: "Brief natural nudity". Flynn had some good moments, particularly around the picnic scene but for me this strong character becomes too sappy as we roll downhill to the ending.
Emma herself, Anya Taylor-Joy... I have already said that I found Emma to be a bit of a bitch, for the light-hearted nature of the film I really felt the time was off. I know there isn't a lot that would be different in this setting to modern day but I found the sly nature to feel far more modern than everything else. I think that is mainly down to the casting, Taylor-Joy's acting frequently has that vibe too it and it doesn't always endear me to her films, this makes me slightly nervous to see her in Radioactive and The New Mutants over the next couple of months.
The setting is of course as delightful as you would expect, grand houses and rolling hills. Paired with the costumes you have a wonderful overall feel of the era, though I would say that the costumes do have an almost modern touch to them that makes them very noticeable.
The charming base for Austen's novel has to battle with Emma's Mean Girl performance and the slightly overlong runtime, while it does give a mildly entertaining watch it's cowering in the shadow of Little Women and I don't think I'd need to see it again.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/03/emma-movie-review.html
In old English society what was a girl to do with her spare time to stay entertained? Read, learn the piano, paint... act as matchmaker to her friends. When Emma Woodhouse sees a flicker of promise or flirtation she jumps at the chance to fan the flames of romance between her friends and acquaintances, but when wires get crossed and misunderstandings occur, things begin to crack.
I always had the impression that Emma was a light comedy drama from hearing people talk about it, and while that did come across, I was surprised to come out feeling negatively towards my namesake. I had assumed that Emma was a delightful and whimsical character [as most Emmas are] and when I spent a lot of the film feeling like she was, frankly, a bit of a bitch, I wanted to banish her from the exclusive "Emma Club". Apart from besmirching the good name the attitude didn't seem to fit with the humour of the film.
Emma. is charming, but it didn't quite get me over the line. There seemed little reason for it to be over 2 hours long, while most of the film was engaging you could have taken out 15 minutes or so and tightened it up, I genuinely think that would have added a star to my rating.
Actually, hold off on that star for a moment, let's talk about the casting first.
Rupert Graves, yeeeeeeeeeeees. That's it for him, he's a delight, put him in everything.
Bill Night and Miranda Hart both gave great comedic performances, with Hart also getting an agonising scene that got me right in the feels. Their talent for humour added a great lightness to the film and was perfectly aligned to the period setting.
Johnny Flynn, or Mr Tasty Debrief for the Cineworld-goers out there. He was tastefully de-briefed, and the reason for the card warning: "Brief natural nudity". Flynn had some good moments, particularly around the picnic scene but for me this strong character becomes too sappy as we roll downhill to the ending.
Emma herself, Anya Taylor-Joy... I have already said that I found Emma to be a bit of a bitch, for the light-hearted nature of the film I really felt the time was off. I know there isn't a lot that would be different in this setting to modern day but I found the sly nature to feel far more modern than everything else. I think that is mainly down to the casting, Taylor-Joy's acting frequently has that vibe too it and it doesn't always endear me to her films, this makes me slightly nervous to see her in Radioactive and The New Mutants over the next couple of months.
The setting is of course as delightful as you would expect, grand houses and rolling hills. Paired with the costumes you have a wonderful overall feel of the era, though I would say that the costumes do have an almost modern touch to them that makes them very noticeable.
The charming base for Austen's novel has to battle with Emma's Mean Girl performance and the slightly overlong runtime, while it does give a mildly entertaining watch it's cowering in the shadow of Little Women and I don't think I'd need to see it again.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/03/emma-movie-review.html
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Revived in Books
Jan 23, 2020
I must be the sad opposite corner of book club. NEARLY EVERYONE ELSE LOVED REVIVED AND I DIDN'T.
Oh wait. You guys totally feel my pain... right? At least, when it comes to bestselling novels and what not?
Here's my impression of this year's Gateway Readers Award nominees:
<b>2014-15 GATEWAY READERS AWARD NOMINEES</b>
Of Poseidon by Anna Banks Eh... sounds very romancy.
Croak by Gina Damico I have this book and wasn't able to read it last month. :(
Something Like Normal by Trish Doller Nope.
Don't Turn Around by Michelle Gagnon Consider me very interested.
The Fault in Our Stars by John Green Completed. Me thinks this is overrated. I'm sure Ella agrees.
Burning Blue by Paul Griffin Meh.
The Night She Disappeared by April Henry Meh.
Every Day by David Levithan Probably as overrated as TFIOS.
Revived by Cat Patrick I'm discussing this in the next few minutes. Go figure.
Starters by Lissa Price NOPE.
Trafficked by Kim Purcell My comment about this made favorite book club moment for one of my friends.
Boy21 by Matthew Quick ha. Ha. HA. Yeah... NO.
Dark Eyes by William Richter Meh.
Article 5 by Kristen Simmons Consider me a tad interested.
Breaking Beautiful by Jennifer Shaw Wolf Hello? Sophia + Contemporary = No, no, nooo, don't mess with my heart. Yes, that's a song.
I envy the middle schoolers. They have better nominees (Truman Readers Award). :p
I was overly hesitant with reading Revived. I mean, a girl dies at a really young age and became a guinea pig in this program that brings dead people back to life. Great! But honestly, do I care? No... not really. It's like Zach's Lie and Jack's Run with the name changes and "witness protection program" (not necessarily the latter, but it feels like it). It's like Falls the Shadow with the "experiment," and since the idea seems a little similar to that particular book (minus clones. That concept is used in Patrick's The Originals.), I pretty much knew I would be treading on thin ice if I read the book. Very thin ice, because this could go a few ways:
1. It would be absolutely magnifique! As a result, I'll be fangirling with Kahlan and Co.
2. I would find it predictable. But the thing is, most books ARE predictable to me. Lupe and Small Co. warned me of this.
3. WHYYYYY. *wails*
Here's the truth in paragraph format (oh, and technically, the review):
Revived wasn't a waste of my time, but I just don't like the book. I mainly don't like this entire analogy of "God" and "Jesus" and "Converts" and "Disciples" being used. I just don't. I get the analogy I mean, only someone as divine as God can actually bring back the "dead." Really, it's as bad as learning about the Puritans an absolute nightmare (even though Honors American Literature tests are the only reasons WHY my grade is climbing quickly). Plus, I try to tread very carefully with these topics.
I also found Revived pretty predictable. By page 88, there were two sentences that pretty much gave the entire plot away:
<blockquote>If God says we move, there's nothing Mason can do about it. If God says we move, we move.</blockquote>
Tell me that doesn't make you ask questions. The first comment I had? So basically if God says you die, you die? In treading very carefully on delicate topics, yes, this is true. In relation to the book, this so called God is what? A person! Tell me if you would actually be willing to die for a random stranger who you a) have no clue WHO it actually is, b) WHAT he looks like, and c) doesn't he sound like a person with an over-inflated ego?
I honestly didn't like the way the story would actually go from then on out. My second point bull's eye was the newspaper article Daisy shows Matt about what really happened to her and 20 others:
<blockquote> after a Brown Academy bus drove over Highway 13 bridge and plummeted into icy...</blockquote>
Heh. Sounds fishy. One does not simply drive over a highway bridge and "plummet" into a lake. True, true, there may have been a patch of ice, but here's the thing: snow plowers usually plow and salt highways first. So the chances of a bus just "driving" over a highway bridge sounds quite fishy unless it was done on purpose... by "God." Or, the bus driver was suicidal. But why kill a bunch of little kids?
Add to the fact that "police have not determined the cause of the collision..." Had there really been a patch of ice, it wouldn't just simply disappear right away. Or would it?
Finally, I don't get the end. Not really. I see some loopholes to the end here. What if Matt accidentally calls Daisy by her real name and not what everyone else knows her to be? (There was also one more question, but I can't post it without giving away HUGE spoilers.) I would actually love to see a second epilogue in regards to this to be honest.
But really. Had I been screeching about WHY I wasted my time, this wouldn't be called, "Review: Revived by Cat Patrick."
-------------------------
Original Rating: 2.5 out of 5
Original Review posted at <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2014/10/review-revived-by-cat-patrick.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cG5gfBqJVzk/VA5BIojjZ9I/AAAAAAAAD1g/7srLUfpAGEU/s1600/banner.png"; /></a>
Oh wait. You guys totally feel my pain... right? At least, when it comes to bestselling novels and what not?
Here's my impression of this year's Gateway Readers Award nominees:
<b>2014-15 GATEWAY READERS AWARD NOMINEES</b>
Of Poseidon by Anna Banks Eh... sounds very romancy.
Croak by Gina Damico I have this book and wasn't able to read it last month. :(
Something Like Normal by Trish Doller Nope.
Don't Turn Around by Michelle Gagnon Consider me very interested.
The Fault in Our Stars by John Green Completed. Me thinks this is overrated. I'm sure Ella agrees.
Burning Blue by Paul Griffin Meh.
The Night She Disappeared by April Henry Meh.
Every Day by David Levithan Probably as overrated as TFIOS.
Revived by Cat Patrick I'm discussing this in the next few minutes. Go figure.
Starters by Lissa Price NOPE.
Trafficked by Kim Purcell My comment about this made favorite book club moment for one of my friends.
Boy21 by Matthew Quick ha. Ha. HA. Yeah... NO.
Dark Eyes by William Richter Meh.
Article 5 by Kristen Simmons Consider me a tad interested.
Breaking Beautiful by Jennifer Shaw Wolf Hello? Sophia + Contemporary = No, no, nooo, don't mess with my heart. Yes, that's a song.
I envy the middle schoolers. They have better nominees (Truman Readers Award). :p
I was overly hesitant with reading Revived. I mean, a girl dies at a really young age and became a guinea pig in this program that brings dead people back to life. Great! But honestly, do I care? No... not really. It's like Zach's Lie and Jack's Run with the name changes and "witness protection program" (not necessarily the latter, but it feels like it). It's like Falls the Shadow with the "experiment," and since the idea seems a little similar to that particular book (minus clones. That concept is used in Patrick's The Originals.), I pretty much knew I would be treading on thin ice if I read the book. Very thin ice, because this could go a few ways:
1. It would be absolutely magnifique! As a result, I'll be fangirling with Kahlan and Co.
2. I would find it predictable. But the thing is, most books ARE predictable to me. Lupe and Small Co. warned me of this.
3. WHYYYYY. *wails*
Here's the truth in paragraph format (oh, and technically, the review):
Revived wasn't a waste of my time, but I just don't like the book. I mainly don't like this entire analogy of "God" and "Jesus" and "Converts" and "Disciples" being used. I just don't. I get the analogy I mean, only someone as divine as God can actually bring back the "dead." Really, it's as bad as learning about the Puritans an absolute nightmare (even though Honors American Literature tests are the only reasons WHY my grade is climbing quickly). Plus, I try to tread very carefully with these topics.
I also found Revived pretty predictable. By page 88, there were two sentences that pretty much gave the entire plot away:
<blockquote>If God says we move, there's nothing Mason can do about it. If God says we move, we move.</blockquote>
Tell me that doesn't make you ask questions. The first comment I had? So basically if God says you die, you die? In treading very carefully on delicate topics, yes, this is true. In relation to the book, this so called God is what? A person! Tell me if you would actually be willing to die for a random stranger who you a) have no clue WHO it actually is, b) WHAT he looks like, and c) doesn't he sound like a person with an over-inflated ego?
I honestly didn't like the way the story would actually go from then on out. My second point bull's eye was the newspaper article Daisy shows Matt about what really happened to her and 20 others:
<blockquote> after a Brown Academy bus drove over Highway 13 bridge and plummeted into icy...</blockquote>
Heh. Sounds fishy. One does not simply drive over a highway bridge and "plummet" into a lake. True, true, there may have been a patch of ice, but here's the thing: snow plowers usually plow and salt highways first. So the chances of a bus just "driving" over a highway bridge sounds quite fishy unless it was done on purpose... by "God." Or, the bus driver was suicidal. But why kill a bunch of little kids?
Add to the fact that "police have not determined the cause of the collision..." Had there really been a patch of ice, it wouldn't just simply disappear right away. Or would it?
Finally, I don't get the end. Not really. I see some loopholes to the end here. What if Matt accidentally calls Daisy by her real name and not what everyone else knows her to be? (There was also one more question, but I can't post it without giving away HUGE spoilers.) I would actually love to see a second epilogue in regards to this to be honest.
But really. Had I been screeching about WHY I wasted my time, this wouldn't be called, "Review: Revived by Cat Patrick."
-------------------------
Original Rating: 2.5 out of 5
Original Review posted at <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2014/10/review-revived-by-cat-patrick.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cG5gfBqJVzk/VA5BIojjZ9I/AAAAAAAAD1g/7srLUfpAGEU/s1600/banner.png"; /></a>
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Eurovision Song Contest: The Story of Fire Saga (2020) in Movies
Jun 27, 2020
Rachel McAdams and Dan Stevens steal most of the scenes (1 more)
A real feelgood movie that spoofs the unspoofable pretty well
My lovely farce
Will Ferrell's output over the last few years has been decidedly patchy. I have to go back to "Get Hard" to find one of his movies that really got to my funny bone. But this latest Netflix offering hits the spot for me.
We start with the song recently voted the number one Eurovision song of all time by UK viewers: "Waterloo" by Abba. Young Lars Erickssong (LOL) (Alfie Melia) is transfixed watching the 1974 Eurovision winner with his recently bereaved father and local Lothario Erick (Pierce Brosnan). (Mental note to women: never marry Brosnan on screen... he gets through wives faster than you can murder "S.O.S."). Also present are his friends and young Sigrit ("probably not by sister") Ericksdottir (Sophia-Grace Donnelly). Lars vows to one day stand on that stage and make his father and his remote Icelandic fishing village proud.
Now all grown up, Lars (now Will Ferrell) and Sigrit (now Rachel McAdams) are still pursuing their dream of representing Iceland in the upcoming Eurovision Song Contest. They are, of course, dreadful - - so they should fit right in! But their way is blocked by the immensely talented Katiana (Demi Lovato) and all seems hopeless. Will Sigrit's faith in the power of the Elves see them through?
There's an obvious problem here. The Eurovision Song Contest is in itself so bat-s**t bonkers that it is almost impossible to spoof. (If anyone is not on this wavelength, checkout the genuine Russian entry in this year's (cancelled) contest on Youtube). But the team here (writers Will Ferrell and Andrew Steele and director David "The Judge" Dobkin) do a really great job. I'd love to know what a US audience - who I guess will mostly be unfamiliar with Eurovision - make of this. Since Australia are now honorary Europeans in the contest.... wouldn't it be great if there was a Mexican mariachi band attending and a country and western act from the States? (Brits would love the US to be involved.... as spoofed in the film, there's only one country European's hate more than the UK.... be nice to have someone else to join us in the "nul points" club!)
Wherever you may be on the "Ferrell-funny-or-not-ometer", there's one thing I hope we can all agree on here, and that is that Rachel McAdams continues to shine as a comic lead. She was fantastic in "Game Night" - one of my favourite comedies of recent years - and here she is both gorgeous and hilarious. She knocks it out of the park playing the elf-loving Icelandic pixie with the golden voice. (McAdams "sings" but is significantly "helped" in the mix by Swedish pop star Molly Sandén (aka My Marianne)).
Here she even gets to almost reprise her wonderful "YEESSSSS! Oh no, he died!" line from "Game Night".
Almost matching her in the scene-stealing stakes though is Downton's Dan Stevens as Lemtov: a Russian 'Tom Jones'-like contestant singing "Lion of Love" ("Let's get together; I'm a lion lover; And I hunt for love!"). He's DEFINITELY not gay ("There are no gays in Russia") but are his multi-millions enough to turn Sigrit's head?
For those who love their annual Eurovision parties, there are also an impressive array of nice cameos that will delight.
But where the film-makers really score (no pun intended) is making the music so fitting. Some of the tracks make you think "Yeah, if this was the real content, this might have got my vote". Director Dobkin is quoted as saying "It's okay if it's funny, but it has to be really good music. It has to still be great and just kitschy enough to be Eurovision, because that's part of what's fun about Eurovision" (Source: Vulture). Very true. This success is down to the involvement of pop writer/producer Savan Kotecha on the project: the man behind hits by Katy Petty, Ariana Grande and Ellie Goulding.
A comedy needs to make me laugh, and this one really did - numerous times. It's not just the dialogue. Some of the cut-away scenes are priceless and perfectly executed: jumping whales; a collapsing glacier; a small slamming door!
Sure, it borrows from a number of other sources in its plot: most notably THAT episode of "Father Ted" and the rap-battle scenes from "Pitch Perfect". And sure, some of the outRAGEOUS Icelandic accents sometimes swerve into an alarming mix of Indian, Welsh and Caribbean dialects! But above all, this is movie with real heart. The plot is pretty well signposted, but the finale still packs a (surprisingly) hefty emotional punch, and it leaves you with a really nice afterglow.
As we struggle out of Covid lockdown, it may not be a vaccine, but it is a pretty good medicine for the side-effects. Did I love this? Jaja Ding Dong!
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/06/27/one-manns-movies-film-review-eurovision-song-contest-the-story-of-fire-saga-2020/ ).
We start with the song recently voted the number one Eurovision song of all time by UK viewers: "Waterloo" by Abba. Young Lars Erickssong (LOL) (Alfie Melia) is transfixed watching the 1974 Eurovision winner with his recently bereaved father and local Lothario Erick (Pierce Brosnan). (Mental note to women: never marry Brosnan on screen... he gets through wives faster than you can murder "S.O.S."). Also present are his friends and young Sigrit ("probably not by sister") Ericksdottir (Sophia-Grace Donnelly). Lars vows to one day stand on that stage and make his father and his remote Icelandic fishing village proud.
Now all grown up, Lars (now Will Ferrell) and Sigrit (now Rachel McAdams) are still pursuing their dream of representing Iceland in the upcoming Eurovision Song Contest. They are, of course, dreadful - - so they should fit right in! But their way is blocked by the immensely talented Katiana (Demi Lovato) and all seems hopeless. Will Sigrit's faith in the power of the Elves see them through?
There's an obvious problem here. The Eurovision Song Contest is in itself so bat-s**t bonkers that it is almost impossible to spoof. (If anyone is not on this wavelength, checkout the genuine Russian entry in this year's (cancelled) contest on Youtube). But the team here (writers Will Ferrell and Andrew Steele and director David "The Judge" Dobkin) do a really great job. I'd love to know what a US audience - who I guess will mostly be unfamiliar with Eurovision - make of this. Since Australia are now honorary Europeans in the contest.... wouldn't it be great if there was a Mexican mariachi band attending and a country and western act from the States? (Brits would love the US to be involved.... as spoofed in the film, there's only one country European's hate more than the UK.... be nice to have someone else to join us in the "nul points" club!)
Wherever you may be on the "Ferrell-funny-or-not-ometer", there's one thing I hope we can all agree on here, and that is that Rachel McAdams continues to shine as a comic lead. She was fantastic in "Game Night" - one of my favourite comedies of recent years - and here she is both gorgeous and hilarious. She knocks it out of the park playing the elf-loving Icelandic pixie with the golden voice. (McAdams "sings" but is significantly "helped" in the mix by Swedish pop star Molly Sandén (aka My Marianne)).
Here she even gets to almost reprise her wonderful "YEESSSSS! Oh no, he died!" line from "Game Night".
Almost matching her in the scene-stealing stakes though is Downton's Dan Stevens as Lemtov: a Russian 'Tom Jones'-like contestant singing "Lion of Love" ("Let's get together; I'm a lion lover; And I hunt for love!"). He's DEFINITELY not gay ("There are no gays in Russia") but are his multi-millions enough to turn Sigrit's head?
For those who love their annual Eurovision parties, there are also an impressive array of nice cameos that will delight.
But where the film-makers really score (no pun intended) is making the music so fitting. Some of the tracks make you think "Yeah, if this was the real content, this might have got my vote". Director Dobkin is quoted as saying "It's okay if it's funny, but it has to be really good music. It has to still be great and just kitschy enough to be Eurovision, because that's part of what's fun about Eurovision" (Source: Vulture). Very true. This success is down to the involvement of pop writer/producer Savan Kotecha on the project: the man behind hits by Katy Petty, Ariana Grande and Ellie Goulding.
A comedy needs to make me laugh, and this one really did - numerous times. It's not just the dialogue. Some of the cut-away scenes are priceless and perfectly executed: jumping whales; a collapsing glacier; a small slamming door!
Sure, it borrows from a number of other sources in its plot: most notably THAT episode of "Father Ted" and the rap-battle scenes from "Pitch Perfect". And sure, some of the outRAGEOUS Icelandic accents sometimes swerve into an alarming mix of Indian, Welsh and Caribbean dialects! But above all, this is movie with real heart. The plot is pretty well signposted, but the finale still packs a (surprisingly) hefty emotional punch, and it leaves you with a really nice afterglow.
As we struggle out of Covid lockdown, it may not be a vaccine, but it is a pretty good medicine for the side-effects. Did I love this? Jaja Ding Dong!
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/06/27/one-manns-movies-film-review-eurovision-song-contest-the-story-of-fire-saga-2020/ ).
