Search
Search results
Paul McGuigan recommended Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (1968) in Movies (curated)
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Firestarter (1984) in Movies
May 13, 2022
Firestarter is a relatively slow paced, sci-fi tinged thriller, with some nicely executed set pieces conservatively strewn throughout, and it works for the most part. The narrative is prone to drag on occasion, but it's pacing means that we get a host of characters that have room to breathe, and we can get to know. Whether it's Drew Barrymores adorable/unsettling protagonist (who straight up outshines the rest of the cast), David Keiths Roadhouse looking dad of the year, or George C. Scotts dodgy as hell orderly/assassin bastard, the characters are well realised and interesting to follow.
The effects work is top notch for the time, delighting in its multiple explosions and impressive fire stunts, and they make for some memorable moments, especially when Charlie goes full Carrie during the climax, all set to an 80s-as-fuck Tangerine Dream soundtrack
There are certainly better Stephen King adaptions out there, but Firestarter is a competent sci-fi horror that deserves its spot in amongst the big boys of the genre during this era. Interested to see how the upcoming remake holds up in comparison.
The effects work is top notch for the time, delighting in its multiple explosions and impressive fire stunts, and they make for some memorable moments, especially when Charlie goes full Carrie during the climax, all set to an 80s-as-fuck Tangerine Dream soundtrack
There are certainly better Stephen King adaptions out there, but Firestarter is a competent sci-fi horror that deserves its spot in amongst the big boys of the genre during this era. Interested to see how the upcoming remake holds up in comparison.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle (2017) in Movies
Feb 24, 2018 (Updated Feb 24, 2018)
Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle is a solid film-going experience, albeit a little cheesy at times. While its overdone ending keeps it just short of a being an action/adventure classic, I have to say I was impressed with how well they were able to take the source material of the original and truly make it something entirely new. In this newer version of the remake, four kids in detention get trapped inside a video game and have to play their way out. They are eached armed with a set of "lives" and, just like in a game, losing lives brings you closer to losing everything. They must rely on the skills of their avatars to traverse the dangerous jungle terrain.
Jumanji gives you conventional funny meaning it's not going to be one of those films where you spend half of it doubled over in laughter. When it comes to characteristics of a solid film, however, the film checks all the boxes. Solid, hilarious characters that make it easy to root for them. The Bethany/Jack Black role alone was enough to keep a smile on my face for the majority of the movie. He is the ringleader in a lot of the hilarious moments, but the other stars (Dwayne Johnson, Kevin Hart) provide plenty of comedy as well. While the comedy isn't side-splitting, I give it it's due respect for being consistent. A solid, flowing story gets the same recognition as it never lingers in one spot for too long. The action does a good job of connecting plot points while not being overbearing.
I thought that by the time I finally got around to writing this, I would be recommending Jumanji for a home viewing. However, due to some great box office success, it's still kicking in theaters. So....go see it if you haven't already! I give it a solid 90.
Jumanji gives you conventional funny meaning it's not going to be one of those films where you spend half of it doubled over in laughter. When it comes to characteristics of a solid film, however, the film checks all the boxes. Solid, hilarious characters that make it easy to root for them. The Bethany/Jack Black role alone was enough to keep a smile on my face for the majority of the movie. He is the ringleader in a lot of the hilarious moments, but the other stars (Dwayne Johnson, Kevin Hart) provide plenty of comedy as well. While the comedy isn't side-splitting, I give it it's due respect for being consistent. A solid, flowing story gets the same recognition as it never lingers in one spot for too long. The action does a good job of connecting plot points while not being overbearing.
I thought that by the time I finally got around to writing this, I would be recommending Jumanji for a home viewing. However, due to some great box office success, it's still kicking in theaters. So....go see it if you haven't already! I give it a solid 90.
Dianne Robbins (1738 KP) rated Blithe Spirit (2020) in Movies
Mar 31, 2021 (Updated Mar 31, 2021)
The women act like shrews. (6 more)
Cheap jokes.
Lack of class and style.
Poor character development.
No depth to the characters at all.
Unsophisticated.
Would have been funnier without the sex jokes.
No! No! No! This is not the way Noel Coward is meant to be seen. Avoid this!
Contains spoilers, click to show
I am a HUGE fan of Noel Coward and absolutely adore the original Blithe Spirit. I had high hopes for this version as I like all of the actors involved in the movie. Unfortunately, it was a complete disappointment. Judi Dench's Madame Arcati paled in the memory of Margaret Rutherford, though much of the dialogue and actions during the seance scene were the same. She tried her best but the script just wasn't any good. I did appreciate the backstory of her losing her husband in the Boer War and that being the reason she was interested in the occult. The significance of the song Always was not mentioned, though it was very important to the plot in the original and made the movie relatable. Gone was the ethereal, sweet, mischievous little minx Elvira, played by Kay Hammond in the original. Enter the selfish, unlovable shrew of a first wife, played by the usually lovable Leslie Mann in the remake. The relationship between Charles and Elvira does not make any sense to the viewer and there was no point for them to have been together or for her to have thought of her and to bring her forth in the present. This is a missed plot point. In the original, it is actually the maid who was thinking of Elvira, not Charles, but the maid is merely a go-between for props in this movie and has no reason for being there, nor the chef. The relationship between Ruth and Charles is also not a good one and they have no reason to be together in this remake, though in the original, they at least have a few things in common. They seem to have nothing but derision toward each other. Again, I don't see the point of them being together. All of them are miserable together. Even when Elvira and Charles are intimate, it is not for romance and love but for mere hatred, jealousy, and spite. There is even a cheap crotch shot joke that I was appalled to see in this work. And the ending of the movie makes little sense. It's hardly the charming farce Noel Coward intended. Oh, the horrors. Skip this version. Watch the original. Trust me on this. This movie is not the way Noel Coward is meant to be seen.
TC
The China Boom: Why China Will Not Rule the World
Book
Many thought China's rise would fundamentally remake the global order. Yet, much like other...
Remote Sensing for Landscape Ecology: Monitoring, Modeling, and Assessment of Ecosystems
Ricardo D. Lopez and Robert C. Frohn
Book
This book provides the practical basis for the use of remote sensing to accomplish landscape...
Image Eraser - Remove unwanted objects, watermark or pimples from photos and pictures
Photo & Video and Reference
App
Do you want to remove unwanted items from your photos? Then this app is for you. With Image Eraser,...