Search
Search results
Pat Healy recommended Sweet Smell of Success (1957) in Movies (curated)
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Motherless Brooklyn (2019) in Movies
Mar 10, 2021 (Updated Mar 11, 2021)
A swing and a miss, to be sure - but boy do I admire what a wide fuckin' swing it is. Norton clearly loves and understands the mechanisms of film noir but translates them into a boiling hot mess. A baffling Frankenstein's monster of hokey performances, grotesque fakey-looking cinematography, trash editing, formless structure, and corny dialogue - you'd think no one here had ever been involved with the moviemaking process before, it's actually bewildering. The ever-dependable (and criminally underrated) Daniel Pemberton's score as well as some fine production are in direct conflict with its shit TV movie visuals - so there ends up being no actual mood here either. Its noble but muddled attempt at reviving the old-school prestige gumshoe epic make it at least mildly diverting oftentimes - but there's a whole lot of people explaining the plot to each other and not a lot of actual character on display. Nothing really feels lived-in, we're told time and time again how much we're supposed to feel for these relationships despite the fact that everyone just kind of bounces in and out only when they're needed to advance the plot with no further development - and its 50s setting it banks so hard on is mere window dressing to peddle the type of plot you've seen a hundred other times in these. Am I supposed to be shocked that urban renewal leaders are greedy, egotistical, and racist?
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Foodfight! (2012) in Movies
Sep 21, 2020
"๐๐จ๐ฐ๐ฏ๐บ, ๐ด๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐ช๐ด ๐ญ๐ช๐ฌ๐ฆ ๐ฎ๐บ ๐ญ๐ฐ๐บ๐ข๐ญ ๐ฃ๐ฆ๐ญ๐ฐ๐ท๐ฆ๐ฅ... ๐ข๐ญ๐ญ๐ฐ๐ธ ๐ฎ๐ฆ ๐ต๐ฐ ๐ช๐ฏ๐ต๐ณ๐ฐ๐ฅ๐ถ๐ค๐ฆ ๐บ๐ฐ๐ถ."
Anti-cinema. Furry propaganda that bastardizes random corporate logos into hideous background characters for a crude mixture of ripoff film noir, shit-looking ๐๐ฐ๐บ ๐๐ต๐ฐ๐ณ๐บ and... the Nazi Party? Sort of genius. But also the most compact measurable example of going through the Kรผbler-Ross five stages of grief. The best thing you can do with butt-ugly, endlessly questionable, ultra-filtered garbaggio like this is not to futilely attempt to reject its offerings into the minds of twisted, twisted individuals - but to fully embrace and accept it as a tonic, to make you feel better about yourself. One big hilariously bad sexual thrust of a children's film that isn't - in any capacity - suitable for children; at one point there's an extended 'steamy' dance routine where Dex Dogtective and Lady X strongly attempt to both fuck *and* kill each other at the same time. Horrible, half-finished food puns like "Let's strawberry jam outta here" and "Frankly my dear, I don't give a Spam" spin back into some kind of stupid subversion. Cold, lifeless, perturbing eyes staring back at you with an ominous silence that makes one want to crawl out of their own skin (pretty sure this triggered my fight-or-flight response multiple times over). Also the last 30 minutes is a sustained barrage of disgustingly rendered CGI puss. A closer experience to ๐๐ฉ๐ฆ๐ณ๐ฆ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐๐ฆ๐ข๐ฅ ๐๐ฐ ๐ต๐ฐ ๐๐ช๐ฆ than it thinks.
Anti-cinema. Furry propaganda that bastardizes random corporate logos into hideous background characters for a crude mixture of ripoff film noir, shit-looking ๐๐ฐ๐บ ๐๐ต๐ฐ๐ณ๐บ and... the Nazi Party? Sort of genius. But also the most compact measurable example of going through the Kรผbler-Ross five stages of grief. The best thing you can do with butt-ugly, endlessly questionable, ultra-filtered garbaggio like this is not to futilely attempt to reject its offerings into the minds of twisted, twisted individuals - but to fully embrace and accept it as a tonic, to make you feel better about yourself. One big hilariously bad sexual thrust of a children's film that isn't - in any capacity - suitable for children; at one point there's an extended 'steamy' dance routine where Dex Dogtective and Lady X strongly attempt to both fuck *and* kill each other at the same time. Horrible, half-finished food puns like "Let's strawberry jam outta here" and "Frankly my dear, I don't give a Spam" spin back into some kind of stupid subversion. Cold, lifeless, perturbing eyes staring back at you with an ominous silence that makes one want to crawl out of their own skin (pretty sure this triggered my fight-or-flight response multiple times over). Also the last 30 minutes is a sustained barrage of disgustingly rendered CGI puss. A closer experience to ๐๐ฉ๐ฆ๐ณ๐ฆ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐๐ฆ๐ข๐ฅ ๐๐ฐ ๐ต๐ฐ ๐๐ช๐ฆ than it thinks.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Grim Fandango Remastered in Video Games
May 7, 2020 (Updated May 7, 2020)
Classic: Land of the Dead
Grim Fandango- is a classic game, yes i know im reviewing the remastered, but its a remaster from the ground up. Its still a excellent game.
Grim Fandango - is 1998 adventure game directed by Tim Schafer and developed and published by LucasArts for Microsoft Windows. It is the first adventure game by LucasArts to use 3D computer graphics overlaid on pre-rendered static backgrounds. As with other LucasArts adventure games, the player must converse with characters and examine, collect, and use objects to solve puzzles.
Grim Fandango is set in the Land of the Dead, through which recently departed souls, represented as calaca-like figures, travel before they reach their final destination. The story follows travel agent Manuel "Manny" Calavera as he attempts to save new arrival Mercedes "Meche" Colomar, a virtuous soul, on her journey. The game combines elements of the Aztec belief of afterlife with film noir style, with influences including The Maltese Falcon, On the Waterfront and Casablanca.
Grim Fandango received praise for its art design and direction. It was selected for several awards and is often listed as one of the greatest video games of all time. However, it was a commercial failure and contributed towards LucasArts' decision to end adventure game development and the decline of the adventure game genre.
I remember playing this game on the computer when i was around age 7-9. Its a excellent game.
Grim Fandango - is 1998 adventure game directed by Tim Schafer and developed and published by LucasArts for Microsoft Windows. It is the first adventure game by LucasArts to use 3D computer graphics overlaid on pre-rendered static backgrounds. As with other LucasArts adventure games, the player must converse with characters and examine, collect, and use objects to solve puzzles.
Grim Fandango is set in the Land of the Dead, through which recently departed souls, represented as calaca-like figures, travel before they reach their final destination. The story follows travel agent Manuel "Manny" Calavera as he attempts to save new arrival Mercedes "Meche" Colomar, a virtuous soul, on her journey. The game combines elements of the Aztec belief of afterlife with film noir style, with influences including The Maltese Falcon, On the Waterfront and Casablanca.
Grim Fandango received praise for its art design and direction. It was selected for several awards and is often listed as one of the greatest video games of all time. However, it was a commercial failure and contributed towards LucasArts' decision to end adventure game development and the decline of the adventure game genre.
I remember playing this game on the computer when i was around age 7-9. Its a excellent game.
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2097 KP) rated Under the Paper Moon in Books
Apr 25, 2024 (Updated Apr 25, 2024)
I Wished Iโd Liked It Better
Not content to stay home during World War II, Evelyn Bishop went to Europe and joined the OSS. Now back in Los Angeles, she has settled into life as a PI. But when the target of her latest case is murdered, Evelyn must join forces with Nick Gallagher, the man who betrayed her, to figure out what is going on. Can they do it?
The premise and setting for this book intrigued me, and I dove in excited to see what would be happening. We get some flashbacks to the war, but most of the book is set in the โpresentโ of 1948. The story was good with plenty going on to keep us engaged and a climax that makes sense. But there are many things that didnโt work for me, including the relationship between the leads. I also feel like the author forced a certain ending on Evelynโs life. But maybe it was just that I was rooting for other things to happen. In the end, I was okay with the way Evelynโs life turned out. Maybe it was just that the film noir inspiration didnโt work for me here. The narration got a little awkward at times as well, but most of the time it worked. Iโm not sorry I read this book, and I got caught up in the story, but Iโll probably pass on anything else from the author.
The premise and setting for this book intrigued me, and I dove in excited to see what would be happening. We get some flashbacks to the war, but most of the book is set in the โpresentโ of 1948. The story was good with plenty going on to keep us engaged and a climax that makes sense. But there are many things that didnโt work for me, including the relationship between the leads. I also feel like the author forced a certain ending on Evelynโs life. But maybe it was just that I was rooting for other things to happen. In the end, I was okay with the way Evelynโs life turned out. Maybe it was just that the film noir inspiration didnโt work for me here. The narration got a little awkward at times as well, but most of the time it worked. Iโm not sorry I read this book, and I got caught up in the story, but Iโll probably pass on anything else from the author.
Nick Friesen (96 KP) rated Blade Runner (1982) in Movies
Jul 13, 2017
Dark and gorgeous setting (4 more)
Harrison Ford
Thought-provoking premise
That moody Vangelis score
Rutger Hauer
Best in Class Cyberpunk Neo-Noir
Most Sci-Fi fans these days probably rank Blade Runner somewhere in their top five favorites. Its status and influence on Sci-Fi, especially in the Cyberpunk sub-genre, is undeniable. When it was first released in 1982, however, it was not so well appreciated. It was met with polarized reviews and underwhelming domestic box office figures. This was probably due to some misplaced expectations of the movie. The studio erroneously marketed Blade Runner as an action/adventure, and not to mention, Harrison Ford was riding the fame of another Sci-Fi franchise that was much more action-oriented. It's no surprise then, that audiences and critics alike were initially turned off by the slow-burn pacing of detective noir that Blade Runner pulled into a science fiction setting. Today, Blade Runner is a celebrated masterpiece of filmmaking and adored by fans around the world. However, with a sequel coming soon, those new to the franchise might be a little confused due to the existence of multiple versions of the film. Let's clear that up a bit.
Fast-forward ten years to 1992, when the world received the Director's Cut of the film. At the time, Blade Runner had picked up in popularity through video rental and the international market, and the studio was prompted to release an official Director's Cut after an unofficial version was being made available from a workprint. The Director's Cut was the first introduction to Blade Runner for a whole new generation, including myself.
Fast-forward fifteen more years to 2007, when Ridley Scott brought Blade Runner fans his definitive version of the movie, the Final Cut. Blade Runner: The Final Cut was digitally remastered and reworked by Ridley Scott with complete artistic freedom, whereas the Director's Cut was created by the studio without his involvement. This version fixes some technical problems that persisted from the theatrical version to the Director's Cut, and adds back a little story to better fulfill Ridley Scott's original vision for the film.
If you're looking to get into Blade Runner before Blade Runner 2049 hits theatres in October, the Final Cut is probably the best place to start. It offers the most cohesive viewing experience, complete with restored visuals. Believe me when I tell you there is no movie quite like Blade Runner. Watching Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) track down and "retire" replicants on the streets of a dystopian Los Angeles awash in neon signs never ceases to fill me with awe. Rutger Hauer's performance as the main antagonist, Roy Batty, is both chilling and thought-provoking, making viewers question what being human truly means.
Blade Runner is now widely considered to be not just the first example of Cyberpunk in film, but also the best. And for good reason, as every frame is a work of art, and the philosophical questions it first posed 35 years ago are still being debated today. Us die-hard fans can only pray the upcoming sequel doesn't completely obliterate the mystery and pathos of the replicant condition.
Fast-forward ten years to 1992, when the world received the Director's Cut of the film. At the time, Blade Runner had picked up in popularity through video rental and the international market, and the studio was prompted to release an official Director's Cut after an unofficial version was being made available from a workprint. The Director's Cut was the first introduction to Blade Runner for a whole new generation, including myself.
Fast-forward fifteen more years to 2007, when Ridley Scott brought Blade Runner fans his definitive version of the movie, the Final Cut. Blade Runner: The Final Cut was digitally remastered and reworked by Ridley Scott with complete artistic freedom, whereas the Director's Cut was created by the studio without his involvement. This version fixes some technical problems that persisted from the theatrical version to the Director's Cut, and adds back a little story to better fulfill Ridley Scott's original vision for the film.
If you're looking to get into Blade Runner before Blade Runner 2049 hits theatres in October, the Final Cut is probably the best place to start. It offers the most cohesive viewing experience, complete with restored visuals. Believe me when I tell you there is no movie quite like Blade Runner. Watching Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) track down and "retire" replicants on the streets of a dystopian Los Angeles awash in neon signs never ceases to fill me with awe. Rutger Hauer's performance as the main antagonist, Roy Batty, is both chilling and thought-provoking, making viewers question what being human truly means.
Blade Runner is now widely considered to be not just the first example of Cyberpunk in film, but also the best. And for good reason, as every frame is a work of art, and the philosophical questions it first posed 35 years ago are still being debated today. Us die-hard fans can only pray the upcoming sequel doesn't completely obliterate the mystery and pathos of the replicant condition.
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Blade Runner (1982) in Movies
Jul 24, 2019
Sci Fi Film Noir Masterpiece
When film scholars debate whether Alien or Blade Runner is director Ridley Scott's best film it is hard to make an argument against each as both are masterpieces It's funny that although they are both science fiction films, they are completely different in tone, style and action.
The art direction and cinematography are almost unmatched even under today's standards and then consider this movie is from 1982 and it is just astonishing. I won't argue with someone who says the film is slow developing or style or substance; however, I do not consider that a negative whatsoever. Consider it just another way to tell a story. Why do movies always have to follow the same formula to be considered a acceptable?
It is hard to believe the film only managed US box office of $27 million upon its original theatrical release. It's cult status was almost immediate along with the rise of home video and eventually DVD. The various cuts of the film and the vast and minor differences between them can make the meaning of the film quite different depending on how you interpret it.
The argument whether or not Deckard is a replicant could really depend on which version of the film you have seen or what you choose to believe.
Nevertheless, the film still stands the test of time as a sci fi classic and one of the most visually stunning films ever made!
The art direction and cinematography are almost unmatched even under today's standards and then consider this movie is from 1982 and it is just astonishing. I won't argue with someone who says the film is slow developing or style or substance; however, I do not consider that a negative whatsoever. Consider it just another way to tell a story. Why do movies always have to follow the same formula to be considered a acceptable?
It is hard to believe the film only managed US box office of $27 million upon its original theatrical release. It's cult status was almost immediate along with the rise of home video and eventually DVD. The various cuts of the film and the vast and minor differences between them can make the meaning of the film quite different depending on how you interpret it.
The argument whether or not Deckard is a replicant could really depend on which version of the film you have seen or what you choose to believe.
Nevertheless, the film still stands the test of time as a sci fi classic and one of the most visually stunning films ever made!
Kaz (232 KP) rated Shadows of the Wind in Books
Jul 28, 2019 (Updated Jul 28, 2019)
A fantastic Novel
I was recommended this book by a friend who has read this book, and its follow up books, many times.
When I first started reading this, I thought that it was going to be a fantasy novel. It's a lot more than that.
Firstly, I thought that the writing was fantastic. This novel was originally written in Spanish, but the English version I read was very well translated. It was poetic and beautiful. This story is a brilliant mixture of suspense, humour and intrigue, which has vivid, almost noir depictions of Barcelona which I loved. I loved how the plot weaved, twisted and turned and still remained understandable. Occasionally the plot slowed a little, but actually, I liked that, because it meant that you could really take in the atmosphere, the writer was creating. In fact, I slowed down whilst reading this, so that it wouldn't end.
I loved the characters in this novel. Even though Daniel is the main protagonist in this novel, for me Fermin, was better. I loved his humour and, even though he is a homeless person, he was still portrayed as incredibly intelligent.
I've read a lot of books in my time, but by far, I think this is the best book I've ever read. I think this is going to be a book that I'll read again and again. I am looking forward to reading the rest of the novels in this series.
When I first started reading this, I thought that it was going to be a fantasy novel. It's a lot more than that.
Firstly, I thought that the writing was fantastic. This novel was originally written in Spanish, but the English version I read was very well translated. It was poetic and beautiful. This story is a brilliant mixture of suspense, humour and intrigue, which has vivid, almost noir depictions of Barcelona which I loved. I loved how the plot weaved, twisted and turned and still remained understandable. Occasionally the plot slowed a little, but actually, I liked that, because it meant that you could really take in the atmosphere, the writer was creating. In fact, I slowed down whilst reading this, so that it wouldn't end.
I loved the characters in this novel. Even though Daniel is the main protagonist in this novel, for me Fermin, was better. I loved his humour and, even though he is a homeless person, he was still portrayed as incredibly intelligent.
I've read a lot of books in my time, but by far, I think this is the best book I've ever read. I think this is going to be a book that I'll read again and again. I am looking forward to reading the rest of the novels in this series.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Logan (2017) in Movies
Sep 20, 2019 (Updated Sep 20, 2019)
The crown jewel in Fox's X-Men saga
Logan is easily one of the best comic book movies out there.
This is the third solo outing for Wolverine (following one garbage pile attempt, and one annoyingly average attempt), James Mangold really pulled it out of the bag for this one.
The characters are great - Hugh Jackman at the top of his game for his final performance as Logan. He's a grizzled and pain ridden man, in this bleak, mutantless future.
Patrick Stewart is also at his best here as Charles Xavier. The two of them are the beating heart of this movie.
We're introduced to Dafne Keen (playing a young X-23) who rounds out the small cast nicely.
As Logan fights a shadowy organization to keep her safe, the stakes have never been higher, and no one feels safe at any point - something that has never really been explored in the X-Men franchise.
Logan is a hard film to watch, it's bleak, its gritty, it's not particularly colourful (especially if you opt for the brilliant Noir version), and it's brutally violent in parts.
The set pieces are nasty in places, and sometimes pretty shocking, but it all aids the narrative here - the narrative that Wolverine is an ailing old man, who is struggling against all odds to do one last good deed, and protect the few people that still mean something to him.
It's an emotional and powerful film, that deserves all the praise bestowed upon it - amazing work from everyone involved .
This is the third solo outing for Wolverine (following one garbage pile attempt, and one annoyingly average attempt), James Mangold really pulled it out of the bag for this one.
The characters are great - Hugh Jackman at the top of his game for his final performance as Logan. He's a grizzled and pain ridden man, in this bleak, mutantless future.
Patrick Stewart is also at his best here as Charles Xavier. The two of them are the beating heart of this movie.
We're introduced to Dafne Keen (playing a young X-23) who rounds out the small cast nicely.
As Logan fights a shadowy organization to keep her safe, the stakes have never been higher, and no one feels safe at any point - something that has never really been explored in the X-Men franchise.
Logan is a hard film to watch, it's bleak, its gritty, it's not particularly colourful (especially if you opt for the brilliant Noir version), and it's brutally violent in parts.
The set pieces are nasty in places, and sometimes pretty shocking, but it all aids the narrative here - the narrative that Wolverine is an ailing old man, who is struggling against all odds to do one last good deed, and protect the few people that still mean something to him.
It's an emotional and powerful film, that deserves all the praise bestowed upon it - amazing work from everyone involved .
Fred (860 KP) rated the PlayStation 4 version of LEGO Marvel Super Heroes 2 in Video Games
Jul 12, 2018
Tons of characters from the Marvel comics (2 more)
Cool story
Cool locales
Voice acting is meh (1 more)
Lots of glitches
More of the same, but different & glitchy
I've played all of the Lego games & I've seen some good ones, like the Star Wars one & I've seen some bad ones. (Looking at you Indiana Jones) I'm a fan of these games, as they're mindless fun, plus they're easy platinum trophies.
Lego Marvel Superheroes 2 is one of those good ones, although it does have some problems.
Let's start with the good. There are tons & I mean TONS of characters to unlock in this one. Mostly based on the comic book versions of the characters, with some from the MCU of course. It was so fun to play some of my favorite lesser-known characters, like the Spider-Man Noir version or the Kronan in the Planet Hulk arena.
The story is an original, with Kang the Conqueror as the main villain of the story. Because he's altering lime-lines, along with different dimensions, we have a world mixed with different worlds. We have Asgard, Manhattan Noir (a 30s-40s version of New York), Wild West Town, Avenger's Mansion, & many many more. Just like the mall in the movie The Blues Brothers, this place has got everything. It's so much fun jumping around from place to place.
Now the bad. Let's start with the voice acting. There are no famous voices in the game & it shows. Supposedly, the game was made during an actor's strike & so we got what they can get. Now, not saying the voice acting is bad, but it's just so-so. Some voices seem out of place for some characters. Captain America doesn't sound like he should. Doctor Strange doesn't sound like he should. Now, I may be ruined by the actors from the movies, but if you hear them in the game, you'll agree. It has less to do with their live-action counterparts & more of "Yeah, I never pictured Tony Stark sounding like...that."
And now my main complaint. Lots of glitches. Even after the update, I find lots of glitches in the game. The most annoying one is finding one of your characters stuck in a spot, dying over & over in an endless loop, such as falling off a platform to his/her death or stuck on some radioactive material. I found myself more than a few times having to exit the level & start all over due to this happening. Another glitch was in the arena, where Hulk turned himself back to Bruce Banner & would not turn back into the Hulk. Now maybe this was meant to happen, like in the Infinity War movie, when he was scared to turn to the Hulk, but I don't think so. Reason being towards the end of the fight, they have Hulk talking, while he was still as Bruce Banner. Luckily I didn't need Hulk to beat the level, as I would have had to start over. Other glitches include characters switching by themselves & audio cutting out.
This being said, I still want to play this game. While not one of the best Lego games, it's still fun & it's very cool, especially if you're a comic book fan.
Lego Marvel Superheroes 2 is one of those good ones, although it does have some problems.
Let's start with the good. There are tons & I mean TONS of characters to unlock in this one. Mostly based on the comic book versions of the characters, with some from the MCU of course. It was so fun to play some of my favorite lesser-known characters, like the Spider-Man Noir version or the Kronan in the Planet Hulk arena.
The story is an original, with Kang the Conqueror as the main villain of the story. Because he's altering lime-lines, along with different dimensions, we have a world mixed with different worlds. We have Asgard, Manhattan Noir (a 30s-40s version of New York), Wild West Town, Avenger's Mansion, & many many more. Just like the mall in the movie The Blues Brothers, this place has got everything. It's so much fun jumping around from place to place.
Now the bad. Let's start with the voice acting. There are no famous voices in the game & it shows. Supposedly, the game was made during an actor's strike & so we got what they can get. Now, not saying the voice acting is bad, but it's just so-so. Some voices seem out of place for some characters. Captain America doesn't sound like he should. Doctor Strange doesn't sound like he should. Now, I may be ruined by the actors from the movies, but if you hear them in the game, you'll agree. It has less to do with their live-action counterparts & more of "Yeah, I never pictured Tony Stark sounding like...that."
And now my main complaint. Lots of glitches. Even after the update, I find lots of glitches in the game. The most annoying one is finding one of your characters stuck in a spot, dying over & over in an endless loop, such as falling off a platform to his/her death or stuck on some radioactive material. I found myself more than a few times having to exit the level & start all over due to this happening. Another glitch was in the arena, where Hulk turned himself back to Bruce Banner & would not turn back into the Hulk. Now maybe this was meant to happen, like in the Infinity War movie, when he was scared to turn to the Hulk, but I don't think so. Reason being towards the end of the fight, they have Hulk talking, while he was still as Bruce Banner. Luckily I didn't need Hulk to beat the level, as I would have had to start over. Other glitches include characters switching by themselves & audio cutting out.
This being said, I still want to play this game. While not one of the best Lego games, it's still fun & it's very cool, especially if you're a comic book fan.