Search
Search results
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated The Lion King (2019) in Movies
Jul 19, 2019 (Updated Jul 19, 2019)
If this is where the monarchy is headed Count me out!
Lion king 2019 is by far the worst of the Disney live action remakes & while newcomers/children will certainly love it many of the people that hold the original close to their hearts will leave wishing they had just stayed home with the far superior predecessor instead. Aladdin & The Lion King are two of the greatest animated feature films of all time & as I experienced them both in cinema on release they are very special to me. Now i loved the Aladdin remake & im not one for comparing these to the animated features but while I was watching this all i could think about was how much better the original is. While it looks absolutely gorgeous (until anything starts to move) the animation at times is so unnatural especially when animals are walking slowly that its constantly distracting & kills the illusion of these creatures being real. Voice work is bland/mediocre & delivered with almost no enthusiasm at all like the cast were more concerned with sounding different to the original than giving the characters charm & personality. Voices also dont feel connected to the characters like your watching a nature documentary thats been dubbed over. While Aladdin did its own thing & changed up the movie Lion King is practically & infuriatingly a scene for scene remake which would be ok if it had the charm, colour, grand scale, imagination, excitement, thrill, humour & emotional impact of the original but it doesnt. Songs are butchered/dull with seemingly no energy or spectacle to them at all feeling significantly toned down/grounded rather than fun & toe tapping (they have also ruined 'Be Prepared'). So whats new? theres new humour & yup you guessed it its really bad with awkward timing & dragged out jokes that just fall flat. I wanted so bad to love this movie but not even a scense of nostalgia kicked in either because the film is just soulless, unenthusiastic, boring, bland, lacking in excitement & magic. Kids will no doubt love it but for me its this years biggest let down. If it were a silent film with an epic score over the top it might of at least been unique/watchable & helped be bearable but as it is I just cant recomend seeing it. A big fat cash grab.
Madbatdan82 (341 KP) rated Child's Play (1988) in Movies
Mar 21, 2019
He'll be your friend till the end
Coming from the UK the childs play films are best remembered for the real life James Bulger murders where 2 evil shits kidnapped a young boy and killed him using scenes from the films as inspiration - particularly childs play 2. It was a horrible crime and I remember when i first watched the Childs Play films i expected gore galore but in all honesty there was never really that much gore in them until Bride of Chucky. It's been years since I've watched them and with the 'remake/reboot' out soon I thought I'd revisit the original. So being the film that started it all, the original childs play is far more a suspenseful horror than a gore flick. Tension is built up as chucky stalks his prey and then dispatches them using some good old fashioned jump scares. Some of the support acting is quite wooden but Andy and his mum are really good and the always impressive Chris Sarandon is excellent. A 'classic' that holds up ok still.
Reiko LJ (126 KP) rated Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle (2017) in Movies
Jul 23, 2018 (Updated Jul 23, 2018)
Great cast and chemistry (1 more)
A genuine message at the end of it all
Don't judge a game by its box
Contains spoilers, click to show
I can hold my hands up and genuinely say I was wrong about this film and all my pre-judgements of it.
When the initial trailers dropped I was appalled - not only had they besmirched the good Jumanji name with a cheap remake but it had tropes ahoy and fanservice nonsense with Karen Gillan running round in a skimpy outftit. Also the Jack Black playing a female character just felt like a dodgy observation on a man being funny pretending to speak like a woman.
Well. I was totally wrong.
It sold itself as good fun and it delivered with some actual depth bringing up the rear.
The tropes I was worried about were flipped on their head. The geeky guy didn't chase the popular girl and get her in the end - he always liked the geeky girl. The game gave them a platform to express their mutual feelings to each other and to gain confidence in general.
The jock learned about strengths outside of his physicality. The popular girl learned about being selfless and seeing the world outside of her phone.
The video game format was a great way to bring the film to the modern age and had some really smart nods to aspects within them.
Definitely not what I expected, pleasantly surprised. Hell, the ending even brought a tear to my eye! 100% glad I gave it a shot
When the initial trailers dropped I was appalled - not only had they besmirched the good Jumanji name with a cheap remake but it had tropes ahoy and fanservice nonsense with Karen Gillan running round in a skimpy outftit. Also the Jack Black playing a female character just felt like a dodgy observation on a man being funny pretending to speak like a woman.
Well. I was totally wrong.
It sold itself as good fun and it delivered with some actual depth bringing up the rear.
The tropes I was worried about were flipped on their head. The geeky guy didn't chase the popular girl and get her in the end - he always liked the geeky girl. The game gave them a platform to express their mutual feelings to each other and to gain confidence in general.
The jock learned about strengths outside of his physicality. The popular girl learned about being selfless and seeing the world outside of her phone.
The video game format was a great way to bring the film to the modern age and had some really smart nods to aspects within them.
Definitely not what I expected, pleasantly surprised. Hell, the ending even brought a tear to my eye! 100% glad I gave it a shot
Kevin Wilson (179 KP) rated Back to the Future (1985) in Movies
Jul 23, 2018
Amazing plot (3 more)
Fantastic cast
Lovable characters
Interesting take on a time machine
1 of my favourite movies of all time!
This is a masterpiece and a classic.
The writing is spot on, the acting and cast are perfect and could never be replaced if there was ever talk of a remake (please dont)
The idea to have the time machine as a car was genius. I know the initial idea was a refrigerator which would have been weird so I'm happy they changed their mind. The effects of going up to 88 miles per hour and see the light flash in front of the delorian before it speeds through time was impressive. They got the look of the 50s spot on.
Michael j fox and Christopher lloyd give excellent performances. Their characters are lovable, fun and just perfect. Crispin Glover is as weird as ever but great as George while lea Thompson was also great Lorraine but not as believable as an older version of herself.Tom Wilson was perfect as the bully biff and was shocked not to see him in more stuff afterwards.
The plot is great. Go back in time, make sure your parents get together to make sure your born. This was great chance for many funny scenes involving Marty and his parents. But this is where the logic didn't make sense. He went through all this so why don't his parents remember him from when they were younger.
If you ain't seen this before, where have you been? It's a classic and a must see for anyone. It's funny, it's charming and it's geeky at times.
The writing is spot on, the acting and cast are perfect and could never be replaced if there was ever talk of a remake (please dont)
The idea to have the time machine as a car was genius. I know the initial idea was a refrigerator which would have been weird so I'm happy they changed their mind. The effects of going up to 88 miles per hour and see the light flash in front of the delorian before it speeds through time was impressive. They got the look of the 50s spot on.
Michael j fox and Christopher lloyd give excellent performances. Their characters are lovable, fun and just perfect. Crispin Glover is as weird as ever but great as George while lea Thompson was also great Lorraine but not as believable as an older version of herself.Tom Wilson was perfect as the bully biff and was shocked not to see him in more stuff afterwards.
The plot is great. Go back in time, make sure your parents get together to make sure your born. This was great chance for many funny scenes involving Marty and his parents. But this is where the logic didn't make sense. He went through all this so why don't his parents remember him from when they were younger.
If you ain't seen this before, where have you been? It's a classic and a must see for anyone. It's funny, it's charming and it's geeky at times.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Edge of Darkness (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
Mel Gibson is back on the screen in the winter thriller “Edge of Darkness”. Boston cop Thomas Craven (Gibson) is excited about his daughter Emma’s (Bojana Novakovic) visit home from her first post college employment position. Yet from the very start something seems wrong. Before dinner is even served a masked assailant kills Emma in cold blood on the porch of her father’s house leaving Officer Craven determined to figure out who killed his daughter and why which requires Craven to do this with or without the help of the law.
This is not a mystery but rather the story of a cop’s determination to avenge his daughter against impossible odds which are stacked with numerous shady characters that Craven must deal with to solve the murder, including senators, businessmen, and one title-less problem solver. Moreover, the flick walks directly into the muddy waters of morality, the law, business, and politics.
Tightly packed with characters, “Edge of Darkness” leaves little room for character development, thereby loosing much of the emotional response it seeks to create. However, the standout performance by Ray Winstone, who plays the insightful but questionably aligned Jedburgh, did lighten what otherwise is a dark and densely packed tale.
Further frustrating the viewer, the film’s ending is expected and not at all as dramatic as the buildup demanded. I left wondering why Gibson would remake the original award winning BBC-miniseries into a boring film that is ripe with undeveloped characters.
This thriller lacks the inventiveness or conclusion to make it worthy of Mel Gibson’s return. There were a couple of mildly tense moments and few well executed scenes but overall “Edge of Darkness” is really more of a substandard drama than an engaging thriller. The 117 minutes spent watching the “Edge of Darkness” was slightly enjoyable, but the story really is nothing new.
This is not a mystery but rather the story of a cop’s determination to avenge his daughter against impossible odds which are stacked with numerous shady characters that Craven must deal with to solve the murder, including senators, businessmen, and one title-less problem solver. Moreover, the flick walks directly into the muddy waters of morality, the law, business, and politics.
Tightly packed with characters, “Edge of Darkness” leaves little room for character development, thereby loosing much of the emotional response it seeks to create. However, the standout performance by Ray Winstone, who plays the insightful but questionably aligned Jedburgh, did lighten what otherwise is a dark and densely packed tale.
Further frustrating the viewer, the film’s ending is expected and not at all as dramatic as the buildup demanded. I left wondering why Gibson would remake the original award winning BBC-miniseries into a boring film that is ripe with undeveloped characters.
This thriller lacks the inventiveness or conclusion to make it worthy of Mel Gibson’s return. There were a couple of mildly tense moments and few well executed scenes but overall “Edge of Darkness” is really more of a substandard drama than an engaging thriller. The 117 minutes spent watching the “Edge of Darkness” was slightly enjoyable, but the story really is nothing new.
Lou Grande (148 KP) rated Monster: A Novel of Extreme Horror and Gore in Books
May 9, 2018
Long exposition (3 more)
Shifting narratives
Many typos
Anticlimactic Ending
The authors of MONSTER preface the book with a warning to the readers, cautioning them about the contents of the book. They really play it up: debating whether or not the story was too dark or too extreme and needed to be censored. It's ridiculous. If you've seen the first five minutes of the remake of The Hills Have Eyes 2, you've read this book. Matt Shaw really phones it in. He seems to be doing pretty well, popping out a book every month or so, and probably making a decent bit of cash too. So you'd think he'd be able to afford an editor. MONSTER is riddled with typos that should embarrass professional writers, like the misuse of "it's" and "its" in the same sentence, and a complete lack of knowledge on how quoting dialogue works. Also, it's almost impossible to get a sense of where this book is set until they explicitly tell you. All the characters use British slang and spellings, but it's set in Indiana. Okay.
Matt Shaw says in the introduction that he writes his endings to leave the audience reeling. That's true. Because I wasted three hours or so on one of the most underwhelming, anticlimactic, predictable endings I've ever read. It felt like he was written into a corner, so he just STOPPED. That's how abruptly it ends. And yeah, we all get it. "Who's the real monster?" Really original.
Also, it's Patrick Bateman in American Psycho, not NIcholas. Wikipedia is a thing. So is imdb. Do your research!
Matt Shaw says in the introduction that he writes his endings to leave the audience reeling. That's true. Because I wasted three hours or so on one of the most underwhelming, anticlimactic, predictable endings I've ever read. It felt like he was written into a corner, so he just STOPPED. That's how abruptly it ends. And yeah, we all get it. "Who's the real monster?" Really original.
Also, it's Patrick Bateman in American Psycho, not NIcholas. Wikipedia is a thing. So is imdb. Do your research!
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated 7 Days In Entebbe (2018) in Movies
Mar 22, 2018
Doesn't really work
Most of us (including me), when we heard about the new film 7 DAYS IN ENTEBBE, thought to themselves "didn't they just make this film a few years ago...?" The answer is yes. A similar film to this - RAID ON ENTEBBE - was a TV movie made a few years ago - 42 years ago, to be precise. It starred Peter Finch, Martin Balsam, Jack Warden and good ol' Charles Bronson. Made a mere few months after the true events, this slapped together movie was an old-fashioned "shoot 'em up."
This film is most definitely not.
7 DAYS IN ENTEBBE tells the true story of the 1976 Air France Hijacking of (mostly) Israeli citizens that settle in Entebbe, Uganda (under the leadership of crazed dictator Idi Amin) - refusing to negotiate with terrorists, the Israeli government plan, stage and execute a daring rescue mission.
Sounds like a pretty good plot for a Charles Bronson shoot-em-up.
In this version, Director Jose Padilha (the 2014 remake of ROBOCOP) decides to focus most of his attention not on the hijacked Israeli citizens, but rather, a pair of German hijackers juxtaposed against the political infighting in Israel between Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Defense Minister Shimon Peres. The Israeli governmental infighting was interesting to watch with intriguing characters and cat-and-mouse back-stabbing politics while the plight of the kidnappers was underwritten and underwhelming. Consequently, this film was "just okay".
Oh...and it had about an hour-fifteen minutes of content stretched over an hour-forty-five minutes, so to stretch things out, Padilha decided to cut back and forth between the action (what there was of it) and a modern dance recital. Clearly he was trying a metaphor of the dance punctuating the emotions and actions elsewhere. It just didn't work for me.
Neither did this film. Skip this one and check out the Charles Bronson shoot-em-up.
Letter Grade C+
5 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
This film is most definitely not.
7 DAYS IN ENTEBBE tells the true story of the 1976 Air France Hijacking of (mostly) Israeli citizens that settle in Entebbe, Uganda (under the leadership of crazed dictator Idi Amin) - refusing to negotiate with terrorists, the Israeli government plan, stage and execute a daring rescue mission.
Sounds like a pretty good plot for a Charles Bronson shoot-em-up.
In this version, Director Jose Padilha (the 2014 remake of ROBOCOP) decides to focus most of his attention not on the hijacked Israeli citizens, but rather, a pair of German hijackers juxtaposed against the political infighting in Israel between Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Defense Minister Shimon Peres. The Israeli governmental infighting was interesting to watch with intriguing characters and cat-and-mouse back-stabbing politics while the plight of the kidnappers was underwritten and underwhelming. Consequently, this film was "just okay".
Oh...and it had about an hour-fifteen minutes of content stretched over an hour-forty-five minutes, so to stretch things out, Padilha decided to cut back and forth between the action (what there was of it) and a modern dance recital. Clearly he was trying a metaphor of the dance punctuating the emotions and actions elsewhere. It just didn't work for me.
Neither did this film. Skip this one and check out the Charles Bronson shoot-em-up.
Letter Grade C+
5 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Not A Number: Patrick McGoohan: a Life
Book
When Patrick McGoohan first hit UK screens starring as the Danger Man in 1960 audiences were...
Where Are My Eggs?!
Games and Entertainment
App
"Where Are My Eggs?" is a remake of a classic handheld electronic game console "Elektronika IM-02"....
