Search
Search results
JT (287 KP) rated The Wolfman (2010) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
As what we would describe as the classic monster horror, this remake of the 1941 black and white picture in some way does itself and the original some justice.
Back then horror was starting to carve itself out to a market of film goers who really didn’t have much of an idea as to how film could and would change their lives. The likes of Dracula and Frankenstein had also achieved great historic status.
The plot of the story stays true, man is bitten, man becomes werewolf, all hell breaks loose and it is the efforts of a love interest that tries in vein to break the curse. Something which not even the gypsies could achieve.
Special effects wise its impressive, Del Toro went through make up hell in order to gain the look, some three hours to apply and one to remove so his dedication must be applauded. As to whether he was the right choice for the part is another question, in some parts, in human form he loodke out of place with his foreign slightly merged American accent.
The original film ultimately was basic, a drama that based itself around a werewolf, there was no gore and hardly any blood. So of course it was only fitting that this film should contain both, and vast quantities of flying limbs and spouting red stuff. Did it need it? It surely must have only been there too satisfy an age where any lack of these effects would seem a disappointment.
The supporting cast ranging from Anthony Hopkins as Sir John Talbot, Hugo Weaving as Inspector Abberline and the beautiful Emily Blunt as Gwen all do a wonderful job adding their talents to the narrative. Hopkins especially was his usual dark, sinister and composed self.
There are some truly scary scenes, and some fantastic shots of a Gothic London but the film tends to drift off in places. Overall its a worthwhile watch but doesn’t do enough to really make it one of standouts of 2010.
Back then horror was starting to carve itself out to a market of film goers who really didn’t have much of an idea as to how film could and would change their lives. The likes of Dracula and Frankenstein had also achieved great historic status.
The plot of the story stays true, man is bitten, man becomes werewolf, all hell breaks loose and it is the efforts of a love interest that tries in vein to break the curse. Something which not even the gypsies could achieve.
Special effects wise its impressive, Del Toro went through make up hell in order to gain the look, some three hours to apply and one to remove so his dedication must be applauded. As to whether he was the right choice for the part is another question, in some parts, in human form he loodke out of place with his foreign slightly merged American accent.
The original film ultimately was basic, a drama that based itself around a werewolf, there was no gore and hardly any blood. So of course it was only fitting that this film should contain both, and vast quantities of flying limbs and spouting red stuff. Did it need it? It surely must have only been there too satisfy an age where any lack of these effects would seem a disappointment.
The supporting cast ranging from Anthony Hopkins as Sir John Talbot, Hugo Weaving as Inspector Abberline and the beautiful Emily Blunt as Gwen all do a wonderful job adding their talents to the narrative. Hopkins especially was his usual dark, sinister and composed self.
There are some truly scary scenes, and some fantastic shots of a Gothic London but the film tends to drift off in places. Overall its a worthwhile watch but doesn’t do enough to really make it one of standouts of 2010.
MzCourtney82 (3 KP) rated Magnum P.I. in TV
Sep 26, 2018
Pilot Episode
I was both excited and weary of watching the new remake of Magnum P.I. I remember the original series from my childhood days and I am a huge fan of Tom Selleck. I have to be honest, I was really worried about Jay Hernandez in the title role. Those are some really big shoes to feel. In my opinion, so far he has done phenomenal. He was giving me all the Thomas Magnum feels and his narrating was on point! The rest of the cast was giving me all the feels of the original series also from TC, to Rick, and even down to the two dogs that love to make Magnum's life at home pure hell. My biggest worry was when I found out Higgins was being played by a woman. As a woman, I love to see more roles being offered to us, but any other Magnum fans who are like me loved the arrogant little British man that is Jonathan Higgins. I worry that this casting of Higgins, now Juliet Higgins played by Perdita Weeks, will lead to the stereotypical man and woman working closely together so they must fall in love. She does absolutely nail the arrogance so that is promising! All in all I am very excited to see what they do with this series.
Beth Ditto recommended Graceland by Paul Simon in Music (curated)
Scott Tostik (389 KP) rated A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) in Movies
Sep 5, 2017
Most of the cast (1 more)
Jackie Earl Haley
Reimaging folk, not remake
I know I'm probably going to catch heat for this from self proclaimed horror movie God's. But, I enjoyed this movie.
With a few exceptions. ROONEY MARA WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU EVEN DOING IN THIS FILM!!!! Her dry and unimpressive portrayal of Nancy, a role made iconic by Heather Langenkamp, nearly destroyed this movie for me.
But along came Jackie Earl Haley. An amazing character actor who attacked the role of Freddy Krueger and honestly made him dark, destructive and truly demonic again. While he may not be Robert Englund, Haley made Freddy scary again. No more with the cracking jokes, no more fun. Just rage, destruction and murder.
And that's what you want in an iconic horror character.
Who cares if he's not 6ft 4.
Who cares if he's not funny.
That's the point of a reimagining.
Platinum Dunes did it well with Texas Chainsaw Massacre. As far as I'm concerned they did it fairly well with Friday the 13th.
And IMHO, they did it well with this movie.
Everything needs an update to evolve these days. And that includes even the most iconic horror movie characters.
With a few exceptions. ROONEY MARA WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU EVEN DOING IN THIS FILM!!!! Her dry and unimpressive portrayal of Nancy, a role made iconic by Heather Langenkamp, nearly destroyed this movie for me.
But along came Jackie Earl Haley. An amazing character actor who attacked the role of Freddy Krueger and honestly made him dark, destructive and truly demonic again. While he may not be Robert Englund, Haley made Freddy scary again. No more with the cracking jokes, no more fun. Just rage, destruction and murder.
And that's what you want in an iconic horror character.
Who cares if he's not 6ft 4.
Who cares if he's not funny.
That's the point of a reimagining.
Platinum Dunes did it well with Texas Chainsaw Massacre. As far as I'm concerned they did it fairly well with Friday the 13th.
And IMHO, they did it well with this movie.
Everything needs an update to evolve these days. And that includes even the most iconic horror movie characters.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The little mermaid (2023) in Movies
Sep 20, 2023
You Will Want To Go Under The Sea
Back in 2013, the Baltimore Ravens won the Super Bowl with a QB, Joe Flacco, who was a “game manager”. His reputation was that he was NOT spectacular and wouldn’t win a game for you, but he also wouldn’t take chances and LOSE a game for you.
Such the same can be said of newcomer Halle Bailey as Ariel in Disney’s Live Action remake of THE LITTLE MERMAID. She produces a competent, steady (but unspectacular) performance that doesn’t really add all that much to the film, but (more importantly) it doesn’t detract either.
And that is a GOOD (enough) thing as Director Rob Marshall (Chicago) populates this remake with some wonderful performers/performances to go along with better-than-average CGI and some new songs that actually work well (and don’t just seem like “add-ons”). All of this adds up to a very enjoyable family time at the movies.
Following the plot of the Disney Animated film from 1989, this Little Mermaid does not sway too far from the basic plot, though it does cut down (a bit) on the musical numbers. But when it swings big, it swings BIG and these swings connect.
Daveed Diggs (Broadway’s Hamilton) almost steals the film as the voice of Sebastian the Crab and his UNDER THE SEA number is a visual and audible delight while Awkwafina (CRAZY, RICH ASIANS) fills in very well in the Buddy Hackett role as the bird Scuttle. Surprisingly, young Jacob Trembley (ROOM) more than holds his own in this crazy trio of sidekicks as the young fish Flounder. These three work together quite a bit more in this film than in the previous, animated one and they work well together.
But, make no mistake, this film is Melissa McCarthy’s and as the evil Sea Witch Ursula, she demands you pay attention - and keep paying attention - to her. Her big number, POOR UNFORTUNATE SOULS is deep, rich and powerful while her performance throughout the film is just enough over-the-top to work. Credit needs to go to both McCarthy and Marshall to understand when enough was enough or when they went too far and reigned it in.
Javier Bardem (NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN) also populates this film as Ariel’s father, King Triton, and while it looks like Bardem is trying very, very hard to audition for a serious Shakespeare role, it works well here.
Finally, the biggest surprise to me in this film is Jonah Hauer-King (he played Laurie in the Saoirse Ronan/Emma Watson/Florence Pugh LITTLE WOMEN) as Prince Eric. In the animated version of this film, poor Prince Eric has very little to do, except to be Ariel’s “Prince Charming”. In this version, writer David Magee (LIFE OF PI) turns Eric into a real character with some depth - and a song! The 2nd half of this film was as much about Prince Eric as it was about Ariel.
And, that is okay, for the ending of this film needed some energy in addition to Bailey’s to make it rise above the rest of film and with the help of all those other wonderful performers, it rises well above (and not under) the sea.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Such the same can be said of newcomer Halle Bailey as Ariel in Disney’s Live Action remake of THE LITTLE MERMAID. She produces a competent, steady (but unspectacular) performance that doesn’t really add all that much to the film, but (more importantly) it doesn’t detract either.
And that is a GOOD (enough) thing as Director Rob Marshall (Chicago) populates this remake with some wonderful performers/performances to go along with better-than-average CGI and some new songs that actually work well (and don’t just seem like “add-ons”). All of this adds up to a very enjoyable family time at the movies.
Following the plot of the Disney Animated film from 1989, this Little Mermaid does not sway too far from the basic plot, though it does cut down (a bit) on the musical numbers. But when it swings big, it swings BIG and these swings connect.
Daveed Diggs (Broadway’s Hamilton) almost steals the film as the voice of Sebastian the Crab and his UNDER THE SEA number is a visual and audible delight while Awkwafina (CRAZY, RICH ASIANS) fills in very well in the Buddy Hackett role as the bird Scuttle. Surprisingly, young Jacob Trembley (ROOM) more than holds his own in this crazy trio of sidekicks as the young fish Flounder. These three work together quite a bit more in this film than in the previous, animated one and they work well together.
But, make no mistake, this film is Melissa McCarthy’s and as the evil Sea Witch Ursula, she demands you pay attention - and keep paying attention - to her. Her big number, POOR UNFORTUNATE SOULS is deep, rich and powerful while her performance throughout the film is just enough over-the-top to work. Credit needs to go to both McCarthy and Marshall to understand when enough was enough or when they went too far and reigned it in.
Javier Bardem (NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN) also populates this film as Ariel’s father, King Triton, and while it looks like Bardem is trying very, very hard to audition for a serious Shakespeare role, it works well here.
Finally, the biggest surprise to me in this film is Jonah Hauer-King (he played Laurie in the Saoirse Ronan/Emma Watson/Florence Pugh LITTLE WOMEN) as Prince Eric. In the animated version of this film, poor Prince Eric has very little to do, except to be Ariel’s “Prince Charming”. In this version, writer David Magee (LIFE OF PI) turns Eric into a real character with some depth - and a song! The 2nd half of this film was as much about Prince Eric as it was about Ariel.
And, that is okay, for the ending of this film needed some energy in addition to Bailey’s to make it rise above the rest of film and with the help of all those other wonderful performers, it rises well above (and not under) the sea.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Taco Cleanse
Wes Allison, Stephanie Bogdanich, Molly R. Frisinger and Jessica Morris
Book
Tired of the same old cleanse? Instead of feeling rejuvenated are you feeling depleted, anxious, and...
JT (287 KP) rated Pet Sematary (2019) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
I've always said that the vast majority of horror remakes just don’t better the original, and this one can also join that list. Stephen King adaptations are a bit hit and miss and this new incarnation is no different.
Providing a few decent scares throughout it never quite lives up to the highs of King’s terrifying novel. The film follows the Creed family as they relocate to the outskirts of a quiet town in Maine, called Ludlow. Head of the family Louis (Jason Clarke), is starting a new job at the university hospital and their new home feels like the perfect place to settle.
But it doesn’t take long for things to go pear-shaped when daughter Ellie (Jeté Laurence) stumbles across a Pet Sematary (misspelt). There she meets neighbour Jud Crandall (John Lithgow) who warns her that it is not the place for a young girl to play – despite a procession of creepy children in masks walking through the woods. However, a family tragedy sparks Jud to reach out to Louis and offer him a way to resurrect the past.
Providing a few decent scares throughout it never quite lives up to the highs of King’s terrifying novel
Co-directed by Kevin Kölsch and Dennis Widmyer Pet Sematary skims over family relationships and races right to the tragedy (which was blatantly given away in the trailer) to satisfy the audience by giving them what they want. However, there is not enough time for Kölsch and Widmyer to delve deeper into the pages of King’s novel to extract parts that could have enhanced the narrative even further.
The ending is unsatisfactory and the directors, looking to impart their take on the story, change and leave out significant parts of King’s book. This is both annoying and surprising. That said, the film is not without the odd positive, despite falling just short of being a decent horror remake.
Providing a few decent scares throughout it never quite lives up to the highs of King’s terrifying novel. The film follows the Creed family as they relocate to the outskirts of a quiet town in Maine, called Ludlow. Head of the family Louis (Jason Clarke), is starting a new job at the university hospital and their new home feels like the perfect place to settle.
But it doesn’t take long for things to go pear-shaped when daughter Ellie (Jeté Laurence) stumbles across a Pet Sematary (misspelt). There she meets neighbour Jud Crandall (John Lithgow) who warns her that it is not the place for a young girl to play – despite a procession of creepy children in masks walking through the woods. However, a family tragedy sparks Jud to reach out to Louis and offer him a way to resurrect the past.
Providing a few decent scares throughout it never quite lives up to the highs of King’s terrifying novel
Co-directed by Kevin Kölsch and Dennis Widmyer Pet Sematary skims over family relationships and races right to the tragedy (which was blatantly given away in the trailer) to satisfy the audience by giving them what they want. However, there is not enough time for Kölsch and Widmyer to delve deeper into the pages of King’s novel to extract parts that could have enhanced the narrative even further.
The ending is unsatisfactory and the directors, looking to impart their take on the story, change and leave out significant parts of King’s book. This is both annoying and surprising. That said, the film is not without the odd positive, despite falling just short of being a decent horror remake.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Cube Zero (2004) in Movies
Jan 19, 2021
Somewhere between the competent tightness of Cube and the rancid excrement of Cube 2: Hypercube, lies the average but relatively entertaining Cube Zero. Cube.
I was honestly expecting some flaming garbage at this point, but this prequel to the series improves on Cube 2 in every way. Its characters are either more compelling or more schlocky, the design of the rooms and traps are much better and less bland, the godawful CGI has been switched out for a mostly practical effort, and it's gory again! Like the first one, the gore is fairly seldom, but it's pretty grim when it hits. The opening kill (again, like the first movie) is a doozy.
It doesn't just ape the first film however, as Cube Zero actually attempts to do something different with the narrative. Whilst a chunk of the plot follows a group of people once again stuck in the trap filled maze, trying to figure out how to leave, the other half takes place outside of the Cube, more specifically, in a place where engineers work, and monitor the test subjects progress. It holds back on telling us too much, which is a wise move, and changes up what has already become a stale formula. However, this is also a big negative as it's just a bit boring.... When the film kept cutting back to the people inside the Cube, I found myself engaged way more, before swiftly being back to watching some dude playing chess... It just drags.
The last third is a bit more interesting, and kind of links back to the first film (I think? The last scene was really confusing) and overall, doesn't over complicate things to the point of extreme boredom like the second film.
Overall, Cube Zero is a perfectly watchable bit of fluff. Its never going to set anyone's world on fire but it's serviceable in what it does, and is entertaining enough to warrant one last dip into this series before an inevitable remake surfaces at somepoint.
I was honestly expecting some flaming garbage at this point, but this prequel to the series improves on Cube 2 in every way. Its characters are either more compelling or more schlocky, the design of the rooms and traps are much better and less bland, the godawful CGI has been switched out for a mostly practical effort, and it's gory again! Like the first one, the gore is fairly seldom, but it's pretty grim when it hits. The opening kill (again, like the first movie) is a doozy.
It doesn't just ape the first film however, as Cube Zero actually attempts to do something different with the narrative. Whilst a chunk of the plot follows a group of people once again stuck in the trap filled maze, trying to figure out how to leave, the other half takes place outside of the Cube, more specifically, in a place where engineers work, and monitor the test subjects progress. It holds back on telling us too much, which is a wise move, and changes up what has already become a stale formula. However, this is also a big negative as it's just a bit boring.... When the film kept cutting back to the people inside the Cube, I found myself engaged way more, before swiftly being back to watching some dude playing chess... It just drags.
The last third is a bit more interesting, and kind of links back to the first film (I think? The last scene was really confusing) and overall, doesn't over complicate things to the point of extreme boredom like the second film.
Overall, Cube Zero is a perfectly watchable bit of fluff. Its never going to set anyone's world on fire but it's serviceable in what it does, and is entertaining enough to warrant one last dip into this series before an inevitable remake surfaces at somepoint.
Marylegs (44 KP) rated The Walking Dead: v. 1: Days Gone Bye in Books
Aug 14, 2019
So I have finally got started on reading these graphic novels. I have been an avid fan of the TV remake and am fully aware that the series and graphic novels do not run exactly scene for scene. Some characters have had longer roles or shorter roles, other characters added or omitted. That is not what I am concerning myself with whilst reading this novel.
What I am concerned with is how the book felt as I read it. I thought the frames were well drawn, if you take the time to look over each picture you really feel the emotions of each of the characters. At no point does it feel lacking from the sole use of greyscale, colour is unnecessary in this story. Considering there is limited writing used, the conversations between characters have been orchestrated to portray all the information and emotions needed.
It always takes me a few pages to get into a graphic novel, the switch to reading pictures and not written descriptions takes some getting used to, but this story is so gripping that it isn’t hard to get lost in it. Nothing is too gruesome or overdone (not that I mind gruesome) but some people may be put off as it is a tale set in a zombie ridden world, but actually this is a story about the effect on the people left standing. How they cope in this new harsh existence, and how they decide to make a new future for themselves. This is a great start to a series and I will be carrying on gladly and with a great deal of enthusiasm.
What I am concerned with is how the book felt as I read it. I thought the frames were well drawn, if you take the time to look over each picture you really feel the emotions of each of the characters. At no point does it feel lacking from the sole use of greyscale, colour is unnecessary in this story. Considering there is limited writing used, the conversations between characters have been orchestrated to portray all the information and emotions needed.
It always takes me a few pages to get into a graphic novel, the switch to reading pictures and not written descriptions takes some getting used to, but this story is so gripping that it isn’t hard to get lost in it. Nothing is too gruesome or overdone (not that I mind gruesome) but some people may be put off as it is a tale set in a zombie ridden world, but actually this is a story about the effect on the people left standing. How they cope in this new harsh existence, and how they decide to make a new future for themselves. This is a great start to a series and I will be carrying on gladly and with a great deal of enthusiasm.
Andy Meakin (5 KP) rated Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2018
Welcome back to Jumanji
How dare they make a sequel/remake/reboot of Jumanji? I mean that film was a classic. Admittedly a very average classic that doesn’t really live up to your childhood memory of it, but still. And, yeah, Zathura was a kind of remake given it was adapted from a book by the same writer and explored the same themes, but nobody watched that, so how dare they do a new Jumanji film? I mean it’s only 22 years since the original came out!
Do you find yourself agreeing with any of that little rant? If you do, then I have a few things to say. First, accept that for thousands of years similar tales have been retold to new generations to keep the spirit of a story alive. Second, why not actually wait to see what the new film has to offer before casting judgement as Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle actually serves well as a sequel to the first film, whilst doing something new with the idea.
Starting in the mid-90s, and the board game is unearthed on a beach. Given to a teenage kid by his father, the kid isn’t impressed as ‘nobody plays board games these days’, and he gets back to playing on his console. Overnight, reacting to the changes in gaming culture the box works some magic, and the next day the game has morphed to a video game format, to entice a new generation. Jump forward to present day and a group of unlikely teenagers are cast together in detention when they happen upon the abandoned game console. Taking a break from their junk-room sorting, they fire up the game and find themselves pulled into the game -world, each taking on the avatar of the character template they chose on load up. Presented with a quest in true video-game fashion, they set off to find a way to escape, whilst learning something about themselves in the process.
By transitioning to a video-game setting, the story allows for a great deal of fun to be had poking at the contrivances and conventions of the format, especially for games of the era in which the game was inspired. The characters all have strengths and weaknesses, the spawning of lives by dropping from the sky is so reminiscent of many a side-scrolling platform shooter of yesteryear. Even the behaviour of the NPC – I mean support cast – is perfectly drawn upon the mannerisms that game characters act, being there to spout random exposition to move you on your quest. As for the quests – yep, they are pointlessly complicated, filled with traps and red herrings.
But such pokes at video game culture would be wasted if the casting was wrong, but in the four main stars they have cast the perfect personae for each archetype. The heroic, strong and smouldering hero, who is being played by a soft heated geek – The Rock of course. You want a ‘Lara Croft’ style action heroine, albeit played by a socially awkward teen girl – enter Karen Gillan. Weak sidekick who is only there to carry equipment, but being played by a high school jock who thinks he can do anything – Kevin Hart is your man. Round that off with a studious professor type, being played by a female – that kind of comic role works well for Jack Black. Each of the stars cast has a lot of fun playing with there archetypes, and the film does them all justice to allow them to each have their moments to shine. Gillan, in particular, does a great job at looking entirely awkward yet confident at the same time, and her nerdy seduction scene showcases a comic timing ability equal to her action talents showcased in the GotG films.
The action is thrilling, the humour well placed, and the direction solid enough to bring this video game movie to life. In fact, this is one of the best video game movies to date, even though it isn’t even adapted from a real video game. A few nods to the original Jumanji are present, but without awkwardly placed. The end result is a fun family adventure with some great action set pieces and a wry humour, much like the original was. Don’t let nostalgia for the original put you off exploring the world of Jumanji once more.
Do you find yourself agreeing with any of that little rant? If you do, then I have a few things to say. First, accept that for thousands of years similar tales have been retold to new generations to keep the spirit of a story alive. Second, why not actually wait to see what the new film has to offer before casting judgement as Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle actually serves well as a sequel to the first film, whilst doing something new with the idea.
Starting in the mid-90s, and the board game is unearthed on a beach. Given to a teenage kid by his father, the kid isn’t impressed as ‘nobody plays board games these days’, and he gets back to playing on his console. Overnight, reacting to the changes in gaming culture the box works some magic, and the next day the game has morphed to a video game format, to entice a new generation. Jump forward to present day and a group of unlikely teenagers are cast together in detention when they happen upon the abandoned game console. Taking a break from their junk-room sorting, they fire up the game and find themselves pulled into the game -world, each taking on the avatar of the character template they chose on load up. Presented with a quest in true video-game fashion, they set off to find a way to escape, whilst learning something about themselves in the process.
By transitioning to a video-game setting, the story allows for a great deal of fun to be had poking at the contrivances and conventions of the format, especially for games of the era in which the game was inspired. The characters all have strengths and weaknesses, the spawning of lives by dropping from the sky is so reminiscent of many a side-scrolling platform shooter of yesteryear. Even the behaviour of the NPC – I mean support cast – is perfectly drawn upon the mannerisms that game characters act, being there to spout random exposition to move you on your quest. As for the quests – yep, they are pointlessly complicated, filled with traps and red herrings.
But such pokes at video game culture would be wasted if the casting was wrong, but in the four main stars they have cast the perfect personae for each archetype. The heroic, strong and smouldering hero, who is being played by a soft heated geek – The Rock of course. You want a ‘Lara Croft’ style action heroine, albeit played by a socially awkward teen girl – enter Karen Gillan. Weak sidekick who is only there to carry equipment, but being played by a high school jock who thinks he can do anything – Kevin Hart is your man. Round that off with a studious professor type, being played by a female – that kind of comic role works well for Jack Black. Each of the stars cast has a lot of fun playing with there archetypes, and the film does them all justice to allow them to each have their moments to shine. Gillan, in particular, does a great job at looking entirely awkward yet confident at the same time, and her nerdy seduction scene showcases a comic timing ability equal to her action talents showcased in the GotG films.
The action is thrilling, the humour well placed, and the direction solid enough to bring this video game movie to life. In fact, this is one of the best video game movies to date, even though it isn’t even adapted from a real video game. A few nods to the original Jumanji are present, but without awkwardly placed. The end result is a fun family adventure with some great action set pieces and a wry humour, much like the original was. Don’t let nostalgia for the original put you off exploring the world of Jumanji once more.