Search
Search results
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated FIRESTARTER (2022) in Movies
May 21, 2022
Commits the Biggest Film Crime - It's Boring
Sometimes, I watch a movie, so you don’t have to.
I watched the remake of the Stephen King novel FIRESTARTER, so you don’t have to.
The current “leader in the clubhouse” for the worst film of 2022, FIRESTARTER is based on the very good Stephen King novel that was published in 1980 and was made into a pretty cheesy, pretty ‘80s flick in 1984 that made Drew Barrymore (fresh off her work in ET) a bonafide movie star.
No such luck in this one.
Produced by Blum House, Directed by Keith Thomas (THE VIGIL) and adapted from King’s novel by Scott Teems (HALLOWEEN KILLS), this version of FIRESTARTER was dead on arrival, with a weak script, mediocre directing and less than stellar visual effects, consequently making a film that is the worst sort of film…boring. It doesn’t even have the ambition to be “so bad, it’s good”, it is just plodding and mediocre throughout.
But, at 1 hour 34 minutes, it is mercifully short, so it does have that going for it.
What it also has going for it is a “game” Zach Efron as “Firestarter’s Father” and he elevates the scenes he is in to something that comes close to watchable. And when Sydney Lemmon is along as “Firestarter’s Mom” the screen comes the closest to interesting. But the rest…”meh”.
Ryan Kiera Armstrong plays “Firestarter”, Charlie McGee - the young lady who can start fires with her telepathic powers - and she is “just fine”, but she does not have the star power or “it” factor that Barrymore brought to the proceedings previously. She is just not a compelling enough presence on screen to save this turkey. I don’t blame her, I blame the weak Direction by Thomas and the limp script by Teems.
The only other character/performance that sparks some interest in this film is Michael Grayeyes (TOGO) who plays a Native American tracker with his own telekinetic powers who is put on the trail of Charlie by the mysterious Institute (a shadowy Gov’t agency that chases after various “special” people - mostly kids - in quite a few Stephen King novels). Inexplicably, this role was played by an aging, pony-tailed George C. Scott (obviously chasing a paycheck) in the 1984 film. Grayeyes succeeds more.
But these glimmers of competence only aggravates more when the film bogs back down in cardboard villains (what has happened to your career, Gloria Ruben) and exposition spouting scientists (what a waste of Kurtwood Smith) and less than spectacular action sequences that, mostly, consist of Armstrong screaming while a wind machine blows her hair back while sub-par CGI flames engulf the screen.
And…adding insult to injury…the "guy in the asbestos suit” (a mainstay of any film involving fire) does not even get a day of stunt pay! It’s like going to see a Tom Cruise Mission Impossible film and Cruise doesn’t do some sort of crazy stunt!
After the success of IT, PART ONE in 2017, there was a renaissance, of sorts, of adaptations of Stephen King works and even though PET SEMATARY (2019) was pretty decent and IT, CHAPTER TWO and DOCTOR SLEEP (2019) were okay, THE DARK TOWER, the TV remake of THE STAND, LISEY’S STORY and now FIRESTARTER were all terrible, so maybe we’ve seen the end of this phase of King adaptations (I doubt it, but one can hope).
Save yourself and hour and a half of your life and skip this Firestarter. Instead, revisit the 1984 version - it plays like an Oscar-winner compared to this turkey. Or, better yet, read the original Stephen King work - it is the best of all of these.
Letter Grade: C- (and I’m being generous)
3 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis).
I watched the remake of the Stephen King novel FIRESTARTER, so you don’t have to.
The current “leader in the clubhouse” for the worst film of 2022, FIRESTARTER is based on the very good Stephen King novel that was published in 1980 and was made into a pretty cheesy, pretty ‘80s flick in 1984 that made Drew Barrymore (fresh off her work in ET) a bonafide movie star.
No such luck in this one.
Produced by Blum House, Directed by Keith Thomas (THE VIGIL) and adapted from King’s novel by Scott Teems (HALLOWEEN KILLS), this version of FIRESTARTER was dead on arrival, with a weak script, mediocre directing and less than stellar visual effects, consequently making a film that is the worst sort of film…boring. It doesn’t even have the ambition to be “so bad, it’s good”, it is just plodding and mediocre throughout.
But, at 1 hour 34 minutes, it is mercifully short, so it does have that going for it.
What it also has going for it is a “game” Zach Efron as “Firestarter’s Father” and he elevates the scenes he is in to something that comes close to watchable. And when Sydney Lemmon is along as “Firestarter’s Mom” the screen comes the closest to interesting. But the rest…”meh”.
Ryan Kiera Armstrong plays “Firestarter”, Charlie McGee - the young lady who can start fires with her telepathic powers - and she is “just fine”, but she does not have the star power or “it” factor that Barrymore brought to the proceedings previously. She is just not a compelling enough presence on screen to save this turkey. I don’t blame her, I blame the weak Direction by Thomas and the limp script by Teems.
The only other character/performance that sparks some interest in this film is Michael Grayeyes (TOGO) who plays a Native American tracker with his own telekinetic powers who is put on the trail of Charlie by the mysterious Institute (a shadowy Gov’t agency that chases after various “special” people - mostly kids - in quite a few Stephen King novels). Inexplicably, this role was played by an aging, pony-tailed George C. Scott (obviously chasing a paycheck) in the 1984 film. Grayeyes succeeds more.
But these glimmers of competence only aggravates more when the film bogs back down in cardboard villains (what has happened to your career, Gloria Ruben) and exposition spouting scientists (what a waste of Kurtwood Smith) and less than spectacular action sequences that, mostly, consist of Armstrong screaming while a wind machine blows her hair back while sub-par CGI flames engulf the screen.
And…adding insult to injury…the "guy in the asbestos suit” (a mainstay of any film involving fire) does not even get a day of stunt pay! It’s like going to see a Tom Cruise Mission Impossible film and Cruise doesn’t do some sort of crazy stunt!
After the success of IT, PART ONE in 2017, there was a renaissance, of sorts, of adaptations of Stephen King works and even though PET SEMATARY (2019) was pretty decent and IT, CHAPTER TWO and DOCTOR SLEEP (2019) were okay, THE DARK TOWER, the TV remake of THE STAND, LISEY’S STORY and now FIRESTARTER were all terrible, so maybe we’ve seen the end of this phase of King adaptations (I doubt it, but one can hope).
Save yourself and hour and a half of your life and skip this Firestarter. Instead, revisit the 1984 version - it plays like an Oscar-winner compared to this turkey. Or, better yet, read the original Stephen King work - it is the best of all of these.
Letter Grade: C- (and I’m being generous)
3 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis).
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Suspiria (2018) in Movies
Feb 19, 2020
What did I Just Watch?????
Suspiria- i forgot that this movie came out in 2018. I did watch the oringal film, i dont remember what happened but i watched it. So ill most likely i have to watch it again, at some point. In the meantime i watched the remake and it was something. It was something alright. I couldnt tell you what happen, but it was something. Something that i wont watch again, not for a long time or ever. Yes i did some of the psychological espects of the film and some of the horror was good, but overall it was whats that word im looking for, oh yea something.
The plot: Young American dancer Susie Bannion arrives in 1970s Berlin to audition for the world-renowned Helena Markos Dance Co. When she vaults to the role of lead dancer, the woman she replaces breaks down and accuses the company's female directors of witchcraft. Meanwhile, an inquisitive psychotherapist and a member of the troupe uncover dark and sinister secrets as they probe the depths of the studio's hidden underground chambers.
I have nothing else to say in the review but just this, skip it or watch it if you watched and liked the oringal. For me it was something.
The plot: Young American dancer Susie Bannion arrives in 1970s Berlin to audition for the world-renowned Helena Markos Dance Co. When she vaults to the role of lead dancer, the woman she replaces breaks down and accuses the company's female directors of witchcraft. Meanwhile, an inquisitive psychotherapist and a member of the troupe uncover dark and sinister secrets as they probe the depths of the studio's hidden underground chambers.
I have nothing else to say in the review but just this, skip it or watch it if you watched and liked the oringal. For me it was something.
Our Latest Longest War: Losing Hearts and Minds in Afghanistan
Book
The first rule of warfare is to know one's enemy. The second is to know thyself. More than fifteen...
Lee (2222 KP) rated The One and Only Ivan (2020) in Movies
Sep 2, 2020
Better than most CGI talking animal Disney movies
Originally scheduled for a cinematic release, but now arriving on Disney+ instead, The One and Only Ivan is the latest in a long line of stories involving CGI animals who can talk, banding together to outsmart us humans in order to escape captivity. Only this one is actually based on a true story.
There were no talking animals in the real version of events this is based on, but there was a silverback gorilla named Ivan,
Stolen as an infant from the rainforests of Congo and made to live in a tiny cage, while regularly putting on a show for visitors to a shopping centre for 27 years in total. This being a Disney movie though, the cruelty of that is glossed over somewhat, with funny animal friends with wacky voices aiming to brighten things up. Although, the message that his captivity was wrong is certainly there for all to see, and hopefully to be appreciated.
Bryan Cranston is Mack, the showman responsible for raising Ivan and making him a star, bristling when enthusiasm and “the show must go on” spirit, despite dwindling audiences and occasional animal illness. From flashbacks, it’s clear that Mack loves Ivan, his passion for raising him having cost him his marriage. But now that Ivan is the star of the show at the mini circus in the mall, complacency has set in, and Mack cannot see that all Ivan now truly wants is his freedom.
In an attempt to try and bring in the crowds, Mack brings in a baby elephant, which takes over top billing status from Ivan, much to his disappointment. Elderly elephant Stella (Angelina Jolie) takes the new baby under her wing, and during some late night storytelling sessions between the animals, we learn that Ivan had a sister back in the jungle, and was actually a budding artist, using mud to paint on rocks. When Julia, young daughter of one of the helping hands at the circus, gives Ivan some of her old crayons and finger paints, Ivan begins drawing again, and is soon moved back up to top billing in the show.
When I first saw the trailer for The One and Only Ivan, I was totally on board. That is, until the animals started talking. I thought the CGI remake of The Lion King last year was just terrible, and the Lady and the Tramp remake which landed on Disney+ earlier this year was even worse. Realistic looking animals simply cannot convey emotions like their traditionally animated counterparts, while retaining their realistic looks. But The One and Only Ivan thankfully feels so different, much better than those movies do. And a lot of that is down to the voice cast.
Sam Rockwell is Ivan. Perfectly cast, he brings a real much needed gravitas to the sombre silverback. Along with the stray dog (Danny DeVito) that visits Ivan’s cage and sleeps on his belly at night, they form a delightful double act, discussing freedom, and the fortunes of the circus. With a lot of time being spent with the animals in their cages, the movie does drag a little at times, but then maybe that’s the whole idea – portraying the solitude and boredom experienced when you do not have your freedom.
As if it wasn’t already clear enough, The One and Only Ivan nicely drives home the important message that animals really shouldn’t be kept in pokey cages for long periods of time, and certainly not for decades either. The end of the movie reminds us that Ivan’s story is actually based on truth, as we’re shown photos of the real Ivan, who stayed with a family before becoming a circus act. Seeing the photos of his eventual release to the vastly improved setting of Atlanta zoo, where he lived out the rest of his days, certainly proves to be very emotional, and a fitting end to a surprisingly enjoyable family movie.
There were no talking animals in the real version of events this is based on, but there was a silverback gorilla named Ivan,
Stolen as an infant from the rainforests of Congo and made to live in a tiny cage, while regularly putting on a show for visitors to a shopping centre for 27 years in total. This being a Disney movie though, the cruelty of that is glossed over somewhat, with funny animal friends with wacky voices aiming to brighten things up. Although, the message that his captivity was wrong is certainly there for all to see, and hopefully to be appreciated.
Bryan Cranston is Mack, the showman responsible for raising Ivan and making him a star, bristling when enthusiasm and “the show must go on” spirit, despite dwindling audiences and occasional animal illness. From flashbacks, it’s clear that Mack loves Ivan, his passion for raising him having cost him his marriage. But now that Ivan is the star of the show at the mini circus in the mall, complacency has set in, and Mack cannot see that all Ivan now truly wants is his freedom.
In an attempt to try and bring in the crowds, Mack brings in a baby elephant, which takes over top billing status from Ivan, much to his disappointment. Elderly elephant Stella (Angelina Jolie) takes the new baby under her wing, and during some late night storytelling sessions between the animals, we learn that Ivan had a sister back in the jungle, and was actually a budding artist, using mud to paint on rocks. When Julia, young daughter of one of the helping hands at the circus, gives Ivan some of her old crayons and finger paints, Ivan begins drawing again, and is soon moved back up to top billing in the show.
When I first saw the trailer for The One and Only Ivan, I was totally on board. That is, until the animals started talking. I thought the CGI remake of The Lion King last year was just terrible, and the Lady and the Tramp remake which landed on Disney+ earlier this year was even worse. Realistic looking animals simply cannot convey emotions like their traditionally animated counterparts, while retaining their realistic looks. But The One and Only Ivan thankfully feels so different, much better than those movies do. And a lot of that is down to the voice cast.
Sam Rockwell is Ivan. Perfectly cast, he brings a real much needed gravitas to the sombre silverback. Along with the stray dog (Danny DeVito) that visits Ivan’s cage and sleeps on his belly at night, they form a delightful double act, discussing freedom, and the fortunes of the circus. With a lot of time being spent with the animals in their cages, the movie does drag a little at times, but then maybe that’s the whole idea – portraying the solitude and boredom experienced when you do not have your freedom.
As if it wasn’t already clear enough, The One and Only Ivan nicely drives home the important message that animals really shouldn’t be kept in pokey cages for long periods of time, and certainly not for decades either. The end of the movie reminds us that Ivan’s story is actually based on truth, as we’re shown photos of the real Ivan, who stayed with a family before becoming a circus act. Seeing the photos of his eventual release to the vastly improved setting of Atlanta zoo, where he lived out the rest of his days, certainly proves to be very emotional, and a fitting end to a surprisingly enjoyable family movie.
JT (287 KP) rated Child's Play (2019) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Re-imagining of classic horror films can go either way. They can stick close to the original while giving it a fresh injection of gore to satisfy the bloodthirsty millennials. Or deviate it from the storyline altogether to put its own spin on the narrative.
In the Child’s Play remake the original ‘Good Guy’ dolls have been replaced by 21st-century technology in the form of ‘Buddi’ dolls which, have been produced by Kaslan Industries. And instead of a psychotic serial killer transferring his soul to the body of a doll, Buddi has all of his safety features disabled by a disgruntled Kaslan employee. The change from possession to A.I. fits perfectly within the modern world where people rely heavily on their phones and various voice-activated gadgets.
The gore levels should more than satisfy horror fans with death scenes ranging from tillers, saws and self-driving cars
Best friends, Chucky and Andy (Gabriel Bateman) share a moment
Chucky, as he will inevitably call himself, makes his way to Chicago and into the home of the Barclay’s, where mum Karen (Aubrey Plaza) gets her hands on the defective doll as an early birthday present for son Andy (Gabriel Bateman). After a few small glitches (eyes turning red) Andy and Chucky start to form a close bond. But the bond takes a sinister turn when Chucky starts to act differently in his pursuit of the ultimate friendship.
One of the highlights of the film is the brilliant casting of Mark Hamill as the voice of the murderous doll. Hamill (outside of Star Wars) is well known as a talented voice actor, having provided the voice of the Joker in the animated series. Hamill uses his full range of softly spoken innocence and demented rage to portray a character who is influenced by everything around him (there are blatant references to E.T.) and then uses it to the best of his ability in killing off people in a range of horrific (and comical) ways.
The gore levels should more than satisfy horror fans with death scenes ranging from tillers, saws and self-driving cars. It’s not without its faults but this satirical take on the slasher genre is certainly B-movie levels at best.
In the Child’s Play remake the original ‘Good Guy’ dolls have been replaced by 21st-century technology in the form of ‘Buddi’ dolls which, have been produced by Kaslan Industries. And instead of a psychotic serial killer transferring his soul to the body of a doll, Buddi has all of his safety features disabled by a disgruntled Kaslan employee. The change from possession to A.I. fits perfectly within the modern world where people rely heavily on their phones and various voice-activated gadgets.
The gore levels should more than satisfy horror fans with death scenes ranging from tillers, saws and self-driving cars
Best friends, Chucky and Andy (Gabriel Bateman) share a moment
Chucky, as he will inevitably call himself, makes his way to Chicago and into the home of the Barclay’s, where mum Karen (Aubrey Plaza) gets her hands on the defective doll as an early birthday present for son Andy (Gabriel Bateman). After a few small glitches (eyes turning red) Andy and Chucky start to form a close bond. But the bond takes a sinister turn when Chucky starts to act differently in his pursuit of the ultimate friendship.
One of the highlights of the film is the brilliant casting of Mark Hamill as the voice of the murderous doll. Hamill (outside of Star Wars) is well known as a talented voice actor, having provided the voice of the Joker in the animated series. Hamill uses his full range of softly spoken innocence and demented rage to portray a character who is influenced by everything around him (there are blatant references to E.T.) and then uses it to the best of his ability in killing off people in a range of horrific (and comical) ways.
The gore levels should more than satisfy horror fans with death scenes ranging from tillers, saws and self-driving cars. It’s not without its faults but this satirical take on the slasher genre is certainly B-movie levels at best.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Halloween II (2009) in Movies
Jun 12, 2021
The sequel to Rob Zombie's divisive Halloween remake suffers in the same way that it's predecessor did, in that when all is said and done, I'm just not a fan of his style within the Halloween template. This one actually doubles down on the nastiness, and is effectively one big misery simulation. None of the characters are likable, and yet, none of them deserve the horrible ways they are killed off (probably).
A huge BUT though...I actually think that Halloween II is slightly better... I will still stand by my opinion that this version of Michael Myers is the scariest. Even more so in this one. Rob Zombie's Myers is remorseless and brutal, and of course, absolutely fucking massive. There's some really nice shots of him as well, especially in the opening hospital scene.
I also quite liked the random music video-esque sequences. It's something different, which is usually cause for alarm bells in this franchise, but it kind of works here.
Halloween II is not even close to being in the top tier of the series, but it does feel like it carries more weight than its predecessor. The practical make up work is pretty outstanding (and grim) and it rounds off Zombie's duology well enough that a third was thankfully out of the question. Ultimately, it serves as yet another reminder of how messy and unsatisfactory this series can be when it strays too far from the original.
A huge BUT though...I actually think that Halloween II is slightly better... I will still stand by my opinion that this version of Michael Myers is the scariest. Even more so in this one. Rob Zombie's Myers is remorseless and brutal, and of course, absolutely fucking massive. There's some really nice shots of him as well, especially in the opening hospital scene.
I also quite liked the random music video-esque sequences. It's something different, which is usually cause for alarm bells in this franchise, but it kind of works here.
Halloween II is not even close to being in the top tier of the series, but it does feel like it carries more weight than its predecessor. The practical make up work is pretty outstanding (and grim) and it rounds off Zombie's duology well enough that a third was thankfully out of the question. Ultimately, it serves as yet another reminder of how messy and unsatisfactory this series can be when it strays too far from the original.
TG
The Great Demarcation: The French Revolution and the Invention of Modern Property
Book
The Great Demarcation explores how the French Revolution transformed the system of property-holding...
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Child's Play (1988) in Movies
Nov 13, 2019
Good Guy Doll
Childs Play- after the remake that came out early this year, i finally watched this one. Yes the remake was the first chucky movie that i watched, i wasnt really that intresting in the child's play franchise and still really not that intresting in it. But i wanted to watch the oringal one, i wanted to know where it all started from and what a start in a good way. This movie started Brad Drouif's iconic voice as chucky and went on to voice Chucky in the sequels followed. Also Chris Sarandon who started in Fright Night two years before star in this and Tom Holland, no not that one. The one who directed Fright Night directed this one. So lets talk about it...
The Plot: Gunned down by Detective Mike Norris (Chris Sarandon), dying murderer Charles Lee Ray (Brad Dourif) uses black magic to put his soul inside a doll named Chucky -- which Karen Barclay (Catherine Hicks) then buys for her young son, Andy (Alex Vincent). When Chucky kills Andy's baby sitter, the boy realizes the doll is alive and tries to warn people, but he's institutionalized. Now Karen must convince the detective of the murderous doll's intentions, before Andy becomes Chucky's next victim.
Their are so many iconic scenes and iconic lines in this movie, that people remember till this day. Lines like...
"Well John it's been fun, but i gotta go, i have a date with a 6 year-old boy. ..."
"I bled and it hurt like a son of a bitch."
"We're friends 'til the end, remember?"
"This is the end, friend."
"Andy remember, friends stick together till the end".
"Hi, I'm Chucky wanna play?"
"I said talk to me, damn it. Or else I'll throw you in the fire."
"You stupid bitch! You filthy slut! I'll teach you to fuck with me!"
So many iconic lines and scenes, Child's play is a iconic late 80's horror movie that had many sequels afterwards.
If you havent seen child's play, than i highly recordmend watching this film.
The Plot: Gunned down by Detective Mike Norris (Chris Sarandon), dying murderer Charles Lee Ray (Brad Dourif) uses black magic to put his soul inside a doll named Chucky -- which Karen Barclay (Catherine Hicks) then buys for her young son, Andy (Alex Vincent). When Chucky kills Andy's baby sitter, the boy realizes the doll is alive and tries to warn people, but he's institutionalized. Now Karen must convince the detective of the murderous doll's intentions, before Andy becomes Chucky's next victim.
Their are so many iconic scenes and iconic lines in this movie, that people remember till this day. Lines like...
"Well John it's been fun, but i gotta go, i have a date with a 6 year-old boy. ..."
"I bled and it hurt like a son of a bitch."
"We're friends 'til the end, remember?"
"This is the end, friend."
"Andy remember, friends stick together till the end".
"Hi, I'm Chucky wanna play?"
"I said talk to me, damn it. Or else I'll throw you in the fire."
"You stupid bitch! You filthy slut! I'll teach you to fuck with me!"
So many iconic lines and scenes, Child's play is a iconic late 80's horror movie that had many sequels afterwards.
If you havent seen child's play, than i highly recordmend watching this film.
Hades Miller (2 KP) rated Mulan (2020) in Movies
Dec 13, 2020
Acting (1 more)
Fight scenes
Plot (1 more)
Liu Yifei
More like...Meh-lan
I have to admit, I am one of those people who doesn't really get why they are remaking animated Disney movies and not just...animating them again. Live action is fine, but animation, especially American animation, is just much more expressive. Mulan falls victim to this problem. If they didn't try to follow the original somewhat, it wouldn't be true to the source material & if they didn't try something new, it would just be a rehash. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed quite a bit of this movie, but the finished product didn't really feel like it had a purpose.
My biggest issue is that every new idea they added never felt like it went anywhere. "Here's another woman who is a powerful fighter like Mulan...oh wait she let's gone." "Mulan has a sister! She adds nothing to the plot." Nothing new is ever followed through in an interesting way and just seems half-heartedly thrown in. This basically just leaves the rehashed parts of Mulan which, outside of more serious fight scenes...isn't all that interesting
Is it worth watching once? Sure. Is it something worth watching over and over again like the original Mulan, or heck, even the straight to DVD sequel? Well, that's obviously up to you, but I likely won't be watching this again anytime soon.
Also, replacing hard-work, dedication, and a good old fashioned dose of pig-headedness with chi is a lazy way to try and separate a remake from it's source.
My biggest issue is that every new idea they added never felt like it went anywhere. "Here's another woman who is a powerful fighter like Mulan...oh wait she let's gone." "Mulan has a sister! She adds nothing to the plot." Nothing new is ever followed through in an interesting way and just seems half-heartedly thrown in. This basically just leaves the rehashed parts of Mulan which, outside of more serious fight scenes...isn't all that interesting
Is it worth watching once? Sure. Is it something worth watching over and over again like the original Mulan, or heck, even the straight to DVD sequel? Well, that's obviously up to you, but I likely won't be watching this again anytime soon.
Also, replacing hard-work, dedication, and a good old fashioned dose of pig-headedness with chi is a lazy way to try and separate a remake from it's source.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare - Absolultion in Video Games
Jun 19, 2019
The third of a planned four content packs for Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare has arrived with Absolution. The collection was first available for the Playstation 4 system and was released for the Xbox One and PC platforms about five weeks later and contains the usual offerings of four new maps and a new chapter for the Zombie mode of the game.
The maps are as follows…
Ember
This is a remake of the classic map “Resistance” From the castle lined landscape to the close-quarters fighting in rooms like gallows or a torture area this is a great map for those looking to run and gun.
Bermuda
This is a fun map based on a Shanty Town fishing village. There are locales ranging from a Fish Market to a Lighthouse and the mix of colors and action make this one really enjoyable.
Permafrost
This is a frozen landscape set in the ruins of a city. The map has several open areas where players can attack from above thanks to holes in the roof and streets. The debris strewn map offers plenty of cover but also numerous places for enemies to attack from all angles.
Fore
This is a large map that is so much fun to play. Set in a mini-golf course, players can run into the arcade, putting areas, and props to attack the enemy. There is plenty of cover and also terrain that is uneven giving a new and diverse set of challenges to players.
While the new maps are lots of fun, the main draw of the collection was the latest chapter in the Zombie mode where four aspiring actors are drawn into actual horror films by a demented Director.
The previous chapters have given us an 80s theme park, a 90s Summer Camp, and a 70s Disco Infused Martial Arts setting. This time out, Attack of the Radioactive things lets players play with and interact with Elvira in a 1950s Atomic Monster setting. The mode starts in Black and White before moving to color and even allows for a red tint Chroma mode.
Of course waves of Zombies and other terrors await and players must run and fight to survive.
This has been another winning collection for Infinite Warfare. While it does not offer anything radically new or different, it does offer plenty of fun and will increase your enjoyment of the game.
I am looking forward to seeing the final pack, around October ahead of the new Call of Duty: World War 2.
http://sknr.net/2017/08/13/call-duty-infinite-warfare-absolution-dlc/
The maps are as follows…
Ember
This is a remake of the classic map “Resistance” From the castle lined landscape to the close-quarters fighting in rooms like gallows or a torture area this is a great map for those looking to run and gun.
Bermuda
This is a fun map based on a Shanty Town fishing village. There are locales ranging from a Fish Market to a Lighthouse and the mix of colors and action make this one really enjoyable.
Permafrost
This is a frozen landscape set in the ruins of a city. The map has several open areas where players can attack from above thanks to holes in the roof and streets. The debris strewn map offers plenty of cover but also numerous places for enemies to attack from all angles.
Fore
This is a large map that is so much fun to play. Set in a mini-golf course, players can run into the arcade, putting areas, and props to attack the enemy. There is plenty of cover and also terrain that is uneven giving a new and diverse set of challenges to players.
While the new maps are lots of fun, the main draw of the collection was the latest chapter in the Zombie mode where four aspiring actors are drawn into actual horror films by a demented Director.
The previous chapters have given us an 80s theme park, a 90s Summer Camp, and a 70s Disco Infused Martial Arts setting. This time out, Attack of the Radioactive things lets players play with and interact with Elvira in a 1950s Atomic Monster setting. The mode starts in Black and White before moving to color and even allows for a red tint Chroma mode.
Of course waves of Zombies and other terrors await and players must run and fight to survive.
This has been another winning collection for Infinite Warfare. While it does not offer anything radically new or different, it does offer plenty of fun and will increase your enjoyment of the game.
I am looking forward to seeing the final pack, around October ahead of the new Call of Duty: World War 2.
http://sknr.net/2017/08/13/call-duty-infinite-warfare-absolution-dlc/