Search
Search results
Midge (525 KP) rated Buried Secrets in Books
Jan 31, 2019
Plenty of action (3 more)
Genius characterisation
Plenty of twists
Brilliant conclusion
An Action-Packed Thriller!
I picked up a copy of "Buried Secrets" as it was chosen for our Book Club monthly read and I am so glad that I did because it transpired to be an amazing roller-coaster read and I didn’t want it to end.
First, we meet Brett Larson and his wife Emily who have recently moved into their first home, a beautiful, rural, yellow, farmhouse. When Brett finds human remains on their property and a mysterious note hidden in a box, he immediately starts his own investigation with no thought about what he might be getting himself into, that soon starts to land him in a great deal of trouble. We are then introduced to James Russo who is in prison awaiting trial and his cell-mate, Nate Reuter, who appears to be obsessed with the developments in the local tabloids of the discovery of the remains on the Larson property. Told in alternating chapters, I couldn’t read this exciting novel fast enough, so keen was I to know how the two stories would relate to each other.
T.J. Brearton has done a fantastic job in "Buried Secrets" with the characters. Emily and Brett are just like any other newly-weds, having just moved into their first home together and the excitement of Emily discovering that she is pregnant. I can only imagine their unease at the discovery of the bones and yet Brett couldn’t just leave matters for the police to investigate. For his part, Russo, who was an equally important character in the story, is a likeable bad guy, trying to keep out of trouble but kept finding himself in desperate situations. I found myself continually rooting for him as he kept trying to do what he thought was the right thing. I was left wondering exactly what choices I would make if I were to ever find myself in similar situations to Russo. "Buried Secrets" is a thought-provoking book because of that.
In the second half of the book, Brearton really picks up the pace, and I was kept guessing what was going to happen next the whole time I was reading this crime novel. The twists kept on coming at me right until the very end.
The way in which T.J. Brearton brings everything to a conclusion is just fabulous and I haven’t got anything negative thing to say about this book. I loved it and it has left me eager to read more from this author. "Buried Secrets" is an exciting and action-packed thriller that I highly recommend.
First, we meet Brett Larson and his wife Emily who have recently moved into their first home, a beautiful, rural, yellow, farmhouse. When Brett finds human remains on their property and a mysterious note hidden in a box, he immediately starts his own investigation with no thought about what he might be getting himself into, that soon starts to land him in a great deal of trouble. We are then introduced to James Russo who is in prison awaiting trial and his cell-mate, Nate Reuter, who appears to be obsessed with the developments in the local tabloids of the discovery of the remains on the Larson property. Told in alternating chapters, I couldn’t read this exciting novel fast enough, so keen was I to know how the two stories would relate to each other.
T.J. Brearton has done a fantastic job in "Buried Secrets" with the characters. Emily and Brett are just like any other newly-weds, having just moved into their first home together and the excitement of Emily discovering that she is pregnant. I can only imagine their unease at the discovery of the bones and yet Brett couldn’t just leave matters for the police to investigate. For his part, Russo, who was an equally important character in the story, is a likeable bad guy, trying to keep out of trouble but kept finding himself in desperate situations. I found myself continually rooting for him as he kept trying to do what he thought was the right thing. I was left wondering exactly what choices I would make if I were to ever find myself in similar situations to Russo. "Buried Secrets" is a thought-provoking book because of that.
In the second half of the book, Brearton really picks up the pace, and I was kept guessing what was going to happen next the whole time I was reading this crime novel. The twists kept on coming at me right until the very end.
The way in which T.J. Brearton brings everything to a conclusion is just fabulous and I haven’t got anything negative thing to say about this book. I loved it and it has left me eager to read more from this author. "Buried Secrets" is an exciting and action-packed thriller that I highly recommend.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (2018) in Movies
Jun 21, 2019
Please stop now
Contains spoilers, click to show
Where to begin...
Fallen Kingdom is full to the brim with stupid.
It sort of imitates The Lost World - first half set on an island, second half set within human population - but it just falls on its face, especially in that second half.
We have a typical evil guy, with a ludicrous plan to use dinosaurs in modern war scenarios (again - for some absurd reason), we have a new "crazy" hybrid lab created dinosaur on the rampage (again!), And to top it all off, the writers decided to throw in a side plot about a little girl who actually a clone? What? Why?
There's also a bit with a velociraptor diving through a window, away from an explosion, like a dinosaur John McClane - we are so far away from the first movie now, is there any point in carrying on?
The first half of the film fairs slightly better, (the opening scene is a highlight for me) and the CGI is pretty solid throughout, but as soon as they leave the island, it's nosedives in spectacular fashion.
Bruce Dallas-Howard and Chris Pratt - again, both fine actors, bit here they are just there, not really adding or taking away from the whole experience.
And just like Jurassic World, it's full of silly plot points that I try not to think too hard about, bit in the end can't help myself such as:
Why is Claire not incarcerated for the events of the first film - she's definitely responsible for a lot of civilians being mailed by rampant dinosaurs.
How does the old guy have absolutely no idea that there is a massive lab/dinosaur prison below his house.
How did they get the T-Rex onto the boat into containment in the few minutes between the main characters jumping into the ocean to getting to the boat themselves?
Why does the Indoraptor happily eat everyone in sight, but then sneak up on the little girl... It's a kind of cool shit but still.
When the film reaches it's conclusion with dinosaurs roaming our everyday lives, you realise that most of the trailer is in the last minute of the film, and this was maybe all filler to reach the inevitable sequel, but to be honest, my interest is low at this point.
On a final note, I love Jeff Goldblum but what was the point of his appearance here? He literally says the name of the film out loud, and that's it. Jesus.
Fallen Kingdom is full to the brim with stupid.
It sort of imitates The Lost World - first half set on an island, second half set within human population - but it just falls on its face, especially in that second half.
We have a typical evil guy, with a ludicrous plan to use dinosaurs in modern war scenarios (again - for some absurd reason), we have a new "crazy" hybrid lab created dinosaur on the rampage (again!), And to top it all off, the writers decided to throw in a side plot about a little girl who actually a clone? What? Why?
There's also a bit with a velociraptor diving through a window, away from an explosion, like a dinosaur John McClane - we are so far away from the first movie now, is there any point in carrying on?
The first half of the film fairs slightly better, (the opening scene is a highlight for me) and the CGI is pretty solid throughout, but as soon as they leave the island, it's nosedives in spectacular fashion.
Bruce Dallas-Howard and Chris Pratt - again, both fine actors, bit here they are just there, not really adding or taking away from the whole experience.
And just like Jurassic World, it's full of silly plot points that I try not to think too hard about, bit in the end can't help myself such as:
Why is Claire not incarcerated for the events of the first film - she's definitely responsible for a lot of civilians being mailed by rampant dinosaurs.
How does the old guy have absolutely no idea that there is a massive lab/dinosaur prison below his house.
How did they get the T-Rex onto the boat into containment in the few minutes between the main characters jumping into the ocean to getting to the boat themselves?
Why does the Indoraptor happily eat everyone in sight, but then sneak up on the little girl... It's a kind of cool shit but still.
When the film reaches it's conclusion with dinosaurs roaming our everyday lives, you realise that most of the trailer is in the last minute of the film, and this was maybe all filler to reach the inevitable sequel, but to be honest, my interest is low at this point.
On a final note, I love Jeff Goldblum but what was the point of his appearance here? He literally says the name of the film out loud, and that's it. Jesus.
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated The Loch Ness Legacy (Tyler Locke #4) in Books
Nov 20, 2019
When Tyler Locke foils an attack on a summit of Middle Eastern leaders at the Eiffel Tower he suspects there is more going on than meets the eye. He is soon proved correct as delegates at the summit start to die of a mysterious disease and an old enemy breaks out of prison bent on revenge. In a race for survival Locke and his friends must find out the truth and prevent all out war.
This book immediately gripped me. I have picked up many adventure thriller type books from many authors and few have impressed me. However Boyd Morrison manages to avoid the usual pitfalls. His characters are likeable and share realistic dialogue and act according to their motivations - even the main villain who is just ever so slightly over the top but still manages to be realistic as a character.
The action scenes - and there are plenty featuring more chases and fight scenes than a whole franchise of movies - are extremely well handled. People tire during fight scenes, nobody is a crack shot with a gun, injuries are realistic.
The plot cracks along as Locke and his team uncover the secrets one at a time. There are clues to solve and the whole time they are racing to beat the terrorists who always seem to be one step ahead.
I feel I must make special mention of the dialogue of the English and Scottish characters. A lot of American authors tend to assume everyone in the UK is either a 'cor blimey guv'nor' cockney or an 'I say old chap' aristocrat and so to my ears the dialogue always sounds phoney. Morrison does not fall into this trap and that really did enhance the immersion in the story.
Yes ultimately this is a hunt for the Loch Ness Monster but really that's just a McGuffin to drive the plot, and an ingenious one at that. I'm not aware of anyone else using Nessie in this kind of book and Morrison handles it well.
Overall a terrific book, well worth a read and would make a terrific holiday book. I've already got the first Tyle Locke novel lined up to read and am looking forward to it immensely. Morrison has immediately become on of my favourite authors. I noticed that he is credited as co-writer on the latest Clive Cussler Oregon Files book (Piranha) and will need to read that too, I suspect that he will inject some energy into the franchise and is a good choice as this book reads like one of Cussler's first novels - in fact I'd say even better.
This book immediately gripped me. I have picked up many adventure thriller type books from many authors and few have impressed me. However Boyd Morrison manages to avoid the usual pitfalls. His characters are likeable and share realistic dialogue and act according to their motivations - even the main villain who is just ever so slightly over the top but still manages to be realistic as a character.
The action scenes - and there are plenty featuring more chases and fight scenes than a whole franchise of movies - are extremely well handled. People tire during fight scenes, nobody is a crack shot with a gun, injuries are realistic.
The plot cracks along as Locke and his team uncover the secrets one at a time. There are clues to solve and the whole time they are racing to beat the terrorists who always seem to be one step ahead.
I feel I must make special mention of the dialogue of the English and Scottish characters. A lot of American authors tend to assume everyone in the UK is either a 'cor blimey guv'nor' cockney or an 'I say old chap' aristocrat and so to my ears the dialogue always sounds phoney. Morrison does not fall into this trap and that really did enhance the immersion in the story.
Yes ultimately this is a hunt for the Loch Ness Monster but really that's just a McGuffin to drive the plot, and an ingenious one at that. I'm not aware of anyone else using Nessie in this kind of book and Morrison handles it well.
Overall a terrific book, well worth a read and would make a terrific holiday book. I've already got the first Tyle Locke novel lined up to read and am looking forward to it immensely. Morrison has immediately become on of my favourite authors. I noticed that he is credited as co-writer on the latest Clive Cussler Oregon Files book (Piranha) and will need to read that too, I suspect that he will inject some energy into the franchise and is a good choice as this book reads like one of Cussler's first novels - in fact I'd say even better.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Just Mercy (2019) in Movies
Jan 22, 2020
Having seen Clemency in October I felt like I was prepared for what Just Mercy might throw at me. I was not. The two films handle the death row scenario in very different ways and the storyline that runs alongside it gives you two very different experiences.
Based on a true story - when it comes to history this phrase can be a horrible thing, and when you realise that the events of Just Mercy are only actually dating back to the late 80s/early 90s, well that's kind of sickening, it doesn't feel like this should be something from my own lifetime.
In the lead role of Bryan Stevenson we have Michael B. Jordan. We see Stevenson from intern to established lawyer and yet he doesn't really make any notable progression. The person he is at the beginning isn't all that changed by the end. Jordan's performance is fine, nothing felt technically wrong about it but the consistency was completely off. Every time the character was brought face to face with prejudice and high emotions he managed to knock it out of the park, he was nervous, he was scared, he was devastated. In between those moments he was just there, his performance didn't hold any weight against anyone else's.
Jamie Foxx shows us that missing consistency as Walter McMillan. It felt like he was fully immersed in his character the whole time. There are shots where we're focused on him while other characters are talking and he's always attentive to them, you can see him assessing Stevenson in their meetings and it was fascinating to watch. Every moment was strong without the need for any additional motivation.
When we're inside the prison there are so many different things going on. The tension between the guards and inmates, and that extending to Stevenson is powerful and it's development through the film and the change in attitude was a nice one to see. But the camaraderie between the inmates was probably the thing that was the most affecting, the execution in this was surprisingly subtle but very moving.
Just Mercy has a strong message about the divide and prejudice in southern America and the justice system, it's a very strong reminder of how much has changed because of strong-willed people and how much still needs to change. While I might not watch this film again it was certainly something I enjoyed watching, as much as "enjoyed" feels like the wrong word to use.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/01/just-mercy-movie-review.html
Based on a true story - when it comes to history this phrase can be a horrible thing, and when you realise that the events of Just Mercy are only actually dating back to the late 80s/early 90s, well that's kind of sickening, it doesn't feel like this should be something from my own lifetime.
In the lead role of Bryan Stevenson we have Michael B. Jordan. We see Stevenson from intern to established lawyer and yet he doesn't really make any notable progression. The person he is at the beginning isn't all that changed by the end. Jordan's performance is fine, nothing felt technically wrong about it but the consistency was completely off. Every time the character was brought face to face with prejudice and high emotions he managed to knock it out of the park, he was nervous, he was scared, he was devastated. In between those moments he was just there, his performance didn't hold any weight against anyone else's.
Jamie Foxx shows us that missing consistency as Walter McMillan. It felt like he was fully immersed in his character the whole time. There are shots where we're focused on him while other characters are talking and he's always attentive to them, you can see him assessing Stevenson in their meetings and it was fascinating to watch. Every moment was strong without the need for any additional motivation.
When we're inside the prison there are so many different things going on. The tension between the guards and inmates, and that extending to Stevenson is powerful and it's development through the film and the change in attitude was a nice one to see. But the camaraderie between the inmates was probably the thing that was the most affecting, the execution in this was surprisingly subtle but very moving.
Just Mercy has a strong message about the divide and prejudice in southern America and the justice system, it's a very strong reminder of how much has changed because of strong-willed people and how much still needs to change. While I might not watch this film again it was certainly something I enjoyed watching, as much as "enjoyed" feels like the wrong word to use.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/01/just-mercy-movie-review.html
JT (287 KP) rated Killer Elite (2011) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Just another mindless Statham master-class of ass kicking? Think again people, this one is a whole different ball game, and one that sets this easily one of the Stath’s best to date. Paired alongside Robert De Niro would be an honour in itself for any actor and the rapport between the two was like they had been lifelong friends.
Despite De Niro’s relatively smallish part he still gets his moment in the limelight, and makes the most of the opportunity, with a few witty pieces of dialogue thrown in, we all know he can handle an automatic weapon.
It’s more than just an action film though, it’s part drama part spy thriller
This is all about Danny (Jason Statham) and his group of deadly assassins, Davies, played by Prison Break’s Dominic Purcell and Meier (Aden Young) who set out to take down three former SAS soldiers who are alleged to have killed a dying Sheik’s three sons. All this in return for the release of Hunter, simply put “You do this job, or Hunter’s a dead man.”
Set in the 80s it gives the film a real retro feel to it, and the action is balls and all, there is no CGI here. From an opening sequence centred on a assassination attempt to close hand to hand combat, director McKendry goes a little Bourne-esque with his sharp direction and tight camera shots.
Clive Owen sporting the film’s dodgiest tash is ultra slick and uber cool as the dogsbody of a secret society called The Feather Men which is actually a book by Ranulph Fiennes to which the film is based. Why The Feather Men? Because they have the lightest touch, apt really when Owen goes about his business heavy handed.
It’s more than just an action film though, its part drama part spy thriller. The script is extremely well written with intricate characters that you can care about, rather than go to watch kick the shit out of each other.
The film does jump from a variety of locations, from the Middle East to London to Paris to the outback bush of Australia, it can be hard to follow and keep up with just where they are. But a close eye will leave no confusion whatsoever.
It’s a great debut feature from McKendry and will do his stock no harm at all, and for Statham fans this one has got a bit more meat on it to chew through.
Despite De Niro’s relatively smallish part he still gets his moment in the limelight, and makes the most of the opportunity, with a few witty pieces of dialogue thrown in, we all know he can handle an automatic weapon.
It’s more than just an action film though, it’s part drama part spy thriller
This is all about Danny (Jason Statham) and his group of deadly assassins, Davies, played by Prison Break’s Dominic Purcell and Meier (Aden Young) who set out to take down three former SAS soldiers who are alleged to have killed a dying Sheik’s three sons. All this in return for the release of Hunter, simply put “You do this job, or Hunter’s a dead man.”
Set in the 80s it gives the film a real retro feel to it, and the action is balls and all, there is no CGI here. From an opening sequence centred on a assassination attempt to close hand to hand combat, director McKendry goes a little Bourne-esque with his sharp direction and tight camera shots.
Clive Owen sporting the film’s dodgiest tash is ultra slick and uber cool as the dogsbody of a secret society called The Feather Men which is actually a book by Ranulph Fiennes to which the film is based. Why The Feather Men? Because they have the lightest touch, apt really when Owen goes about his business heavy handed.
It’s more than just an action film though, its part drama part spy thriller. The script is extremely well written with intricate characters that you can care about, rather than go to watch kick the shit out of each other.
The film does jump from a variety of locations, from the Middle East to London to Paris to the outback bush of Australia, it can be hard to follow and keep up with just where they are. But a close eye will leave no confusion whatsoever.
It’s a great debut feature from McKendry and will do his stock no harm at all, and for Statham fans this one has got a bit more meat on it to chew through.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Dark Places (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Although it was exciting to hear “Dark Places” is based on a novel written by the same author who wrote “Gone Girl,” unfortunately it just doesn’t measure up.
Libby Day (Charlize Theron) is the sole survivor of a massacre in which her two sisters and mother (Christina Hendricks) were murdered. Her Satan worshipping brother (Corey Stoll), the most likely suspect, spends his life in prison for the murders.
After living most of her life believing the case is closed, one day Libby is contacted by a group called “The Kill Club.” The group is obsessed with her family’s case and swears they can prove her brother’s innocence.
As Libby goes on a cathartic journey into her own mind and into a case she hardly feels is worth looking into, scenes switch between her memories and her present experience. The plot execution is intricate, yet coherent.
However, the film’s slow pace and lack of climactic scenes frankly starts to become exhausting about midway through. It is a raw and suspenseful drama. But it falls disappointingly short of being a thriller – getting close but never quite finishing.
There are moments of genuine quality, mostly found in the skill of Theron and Hendricks’ acting.
We’ve already seen Theron in similar roles and know she really can do no wrong. She embodies her role as an emotionally charged heroin, and her expressions exude a past riddled with dark memories. It could be said she has been type cast for these roles. This makes it hard to tell if the film would be all that watchable without her in the cast.
Even Theron’s amazing acting isn’t enough to place this film on a glorious pedestal.
The story feels incomplete in many ways while at the same time being quite elaborate in some aspects.
One example – the scenes showing the mother’s experience of hardship provide good background for the main plotline. These scenes are raw and unsettling. Hendricks does an amazing job showing the emotion of a single mother who is continuously beaten down by life.
On the other hand – “The Kill Club,” which is a central part of the plot as it is the catalyst for Theron’s exploration of the case, is hardly elaborated on. This makes its members come off as unconvincing in their roles and the idea of the group becomes a hokey part of the plot. The lack of depth here takes away from Theron’s skillful performance just a bit.
Not a big thrill, I give “Dark Places” 2.5 out of 5 stars.
Libby Day (Charlize Theron) is the sole survivor of a massacre in which her two sisters and mother (Christina Hendricks) were murdered. Her Satan worshipping brother (Corey Stoll), the most likely suspect, spends his life in prison for the murders.
After living most of her life believing the case is closed, one day Libby is contacted by a group called “The Kill Club.” The group is obsessed with her family’s case and swears they can prove her brother’s innocence.
As Libby goes on a cathartic journey into her own mind and into a case she hardly feels is worth looking into, scenes switch between her memories and her present experience. The plot execution is intricate, yet coherent.
However, the film’s slow pace and lack of climactic scenes frankly starts to become exhausting about midway through. It is a raw and suspenseful drama. But it falls disappointingly short of being a thriller – getting close but never quite finishing.
There are moments of genuine quality, mostly found in the skill of Theron and Hendricks’ acting.
We’ve already seen Theron in similar roles and know she really can do no wrong. She embodies her role as an emotionally charged heroin, and her expressions exude a past riddled with dark memories. It could be said she has been type cast for these roles. This makes it hard to tell if the film would be all that watchable without her in the cast.
Even Theron’s amazing acting isn’t enough to place this film on a glorious pedestal.
The story feels incomplete in many ways while at the same time being quite elaborate in some aspects.
One example – the scenes showing the mother’s experience of hardship provide good background for the main plotline. These scenes are raw and unsettling. Hendricks does an amazing job showing the emotion of a single mother who is continuously beaten down by life.
On the other hand – “The Kill Club,” which is a central part of the plot as it is the catalyst for Theron’s exploration of the case, is hardly elaborated on. This makes its members come off as unconvincing in their roles and the idea of the group becomes a hokey part of the plot. The lack of depth here takes away from Theron’s skillful performance just a bit.
Not a big thrill, I give “Dark Places” 2.5 out of 5 stars.
City Squares: Eighteen Writers on the Spirit and Significance of Squares Around the World
Book
In this important collection, eighteen renowned writers, including David Remnick, Zadie Smith,...
Terminator Genisys: Guardian
Games and Entertainment
App
The year is 2028 and humanity is on the brink of extinction. Help John Connor in the war to save...
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated House of Frankenstein (1944) in Movies
Jun 18, 2020 (Updated Jun 18, 2020)
Get The Gang All Together: The Crossover
House of Frankenstein- is the ultimate monster crossover. It has Frankenstein, Dracula played by John Carradine, the Hunchback and the Wolf-Man played by Lon Chaney Jr. and a mad scientist played by Boris Karloff.
This "monster rally" approach would continue in the following film, House of Dracula, as well as the 1948 comedy Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein.
The plot: After escaping from prison, the evil Dr. Niemann (Boris Karloff) and his hunchbacked assistant, Daniel (J. Carrol Naish), plot their revenge against those who imprisoned them. For this, they recruit the powerful Wolf Man (Lon Chaney), Frankenstein's monster (Glenn Strange) and even Dracula himself (John Carradine). Niemann pursues those who wrong him, sending each monster out to do his dirty work. But his control on the monsters is weak at best and may prove to be his downfall.
Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man (1943) had been the first on-screen pairing of two Universal Studios monsters, but The House of Frankenstein was the first multi-monster movie. Early drafts of the story reportedly involved more characters from the Universal stable, including the Mummy, the Ape Woman, the Mad Ghoul, and possibly the Invisible Man. Working titles—which included Chamber of Horrors (a reference to Lampini's travelling horror show) and The Devil's Brood—emphasized the multi-monster nature of the story.
The multi-monster approach, which emphasized box office appeal over continuity, was used in House of Dracula the following year and later in Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein. The House of Frankenstein marked Glenn Strange's debut as the monster. Strange, a former cowboy, had been a minor supporting player in dozens of low-budget Westerns over the preceding 15 years. He reprised the role in House of Dracula and Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein, and cemented the popular image of the monster as shambling, clumsy, and inarticulate. Boris Karloff, who had moved on from playing the monster to playing the mad scientist, reportedly coached Strange on how to play the role.
Some continuity errors are evident in the finished film. After Dracula is thrown from the carriage, he looks over to where his coffin has landed; in a close-up, part of his mustache is gone. Also, when Talbot transforms into the Wolf Man for the final time, his hands lack fur.
Karloff's performance in this film is his last in Universal's classic horror cycle.
Its a fun entertaining movie starring the uninversal monsters.
This "monster rally" approach would continue in the following film, House of Dracula, as well as the 1948 comedy Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein.
The plot: After escaping from prison, the evil Dr. Niemann (Boris Karloff) and his hunchbacked assistant, Daniel (J. Carrol Naish), plot their revenge against those who imprisoned them. For this, they recruit the powerful Wolf Man (Lon Chaney), Frankenstein's monster (Glenn Strange) and even Dracula himself (John Carradine). Niemann pursues those who wrong him, sending each monster out to do his dirty work. But his control on the monsters is weak at best and may prove to be his downfall.
Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man (1943) had been the first on-screen pairing of two Universal Studios monsters, but The House of Frankenstein was the first multi-monster movie. Early drafts of the story reportedly involved more characters from the Universal stable, including the Mummy, the Ape Woman, the Mad Ghoul, and possibly the Invisible Man. Working titles—which included Chamber of Horrors (a reference to Lampini's travelling horror show) and The Devil's Brood—emphasized the multi-monster nature of the story.
The multi-monster approach, which emphasized box office appeal over continuity, was used in House of Dracula the following year and later in Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein. The House of Frankenstein marked Glenn Strange's debut as the monster. Strange, a former cowboy, had been a minor supporting player in dozens of low-budget Westerns over the preceding 15 years. He reprised the role in House of Dracula and Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein, and cemented the popular image of the monster as shambling, clumsy, and inarticulate. Boris Karloff, who had moved on from playing the monster to playing the mad scientist, reportedly coached Strange on how to play the role.
Some continuity errors are evident in the finished film. After Dracula is thrown from the carriage, he looks over to where his coffin has landed; in a close-up, part of his mustache is gone. Also, when Talbot transforms into the Wolf Man for the final time, his hands lack fur.
Karloff's performance in this film is his last in Universal's classic horror cycle.
Its a fun entertaining movie starring the uninversal monsters.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated The Kitchen (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
A Very Messy Kitchen: Good Ingredients But No Flavor
The Kitchen is a 2019 action crime movie written and directed by Andrea Berloff and producers Michael Dell Luca and Marcus Viscidi. It's based on the Vertigo comic created by Ollie Masters and Ming Doyle and produced by New Line Cinema, Bron Creative, D.C. Vertigo and Michael Dell Luca Productions with distribution by Warner Bros. Pictures. The film stars Melissa McCarthy, Tiffany Haddish, Elisabeth Moss and Common.
In 1978 Hell's Kitchen, 3 women married to husbands in the Irish mob face hardship as all 3 of their husbands are arrested and sentenced to 3 years in prison. The new head of the mob ensures that they will be taken care of financially but gives them each a tiny pittance. When they go to ask him for more they are aggressively refused. At a loss for what to do next the women seize an opportunity when they are told that despite local businesses paying protection fees, the mob has done little to help them. They themselves begin collecting protection fees and helping the neighborhood becoming beloved and making a huge profit as well as lots of enemies.
This movie was not what I expected. I was really let down, especially for it having a great cast of actors. I don't think it was over hyped either, I felt like it was false advertising. From the trailer it looked like it was supposed to be a gritty female led mob movie but didn't deliver. From the beginning and throughout the movie it felt really lackluster and didn't have enough going for it to remain interesting. I honestly don't know how I made it through the movie, I guess I just kept waiting for it to get better and it never really did. I did like certain things, Melissa McCarthy's acting was good for being a drama and Tiffany Haddish did a decent job, also Elisabeth Moss's character was probably the one that had the most character development, but even then, you'll see what I'm talking about if you ever decide to watch this movie. It also didn't have a very compelling plot, and with the girl's situation and what they were dealing with, you would think it would be more gripping but there was not enough tension for a movie dealing with the mob and the dangers of being killed. I would have to give this movie a 4/10 because I felt it was really below average.
In 1978 Hell's Kitchen, 3 women married to husbands in the Irish mob face hardship as all 3 of their husbands are arrested and sentenced to 3 years in prison. The new head of the mob ensures that they will be taken care of financially but gives them each a tiny pittance. When they go to ask him for more they are aggressively refused. At a loss for what to do next the women seize an opportunity when they are told that despite local businesses paying protection fees, the mob has done little to help them. They themselves begin collecting protection fees and helping the neighborhood becoming beloved and making a huge profit as well as lots of enemies.
This movie was not what I expected. I was really let down, especially for it having a great cast of actors. I don't think it was over hyped either, I felt like it was false advertising. From the trailer it looked like it was supposed to be a gritty female led mob movie but didn't deliver. From the beginning and throughout the movie it felt really lackluster and didn't have enough going for it to remain interesting. I honestly don't know how I made it through the movie, I guess I just kept waiting for it to get better and it never really did. I did like certain things, Melissa McCarthy's acting was good for being a drama and Tiffany Haddish did a decent job, also Elisabeth Moss's character was probably the one that had the most character development, but even then, you'll see what I'm talking about if you ever decide to watch this movie. It also didn't have a very compelling plot, and with the girl's situation and what they were dealing with, you would think it would be more gripping but there was not enough tension for a movie dealing with the mob and the dangers of being killed. I would have to give this movie a 4/10 because I felt it was really below average.