Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Dark Tide (2012) in Movies
Aug 5, 2020
I always wonder what makes me not watch shark films, Dark Tide has Halle Berry, I like Halle Berry... so why have I never seen it?
Kate Mathieson has sworn off sharks ever since a dive went wrong and cost the life of one of her closest friends. Sharks were her life, and only doing tame tourist trips out on her boat means she's about to lose her business. Out of the blue, Kate's ex arrives with a man who's looking for more thrill than any regular dive can offer and he's convinced him that Kate is the only one who can do it. He's willing to pay big, but is the money worth reliving that memory?
Firstly, it was good to see a film with actual shark footage. I watch so many with terrible CGI that I sometimes forget that sharks aren't horribly pixelated and snarly. That is probably where the good comments end.
For a film with action in it I knew something was off almost instantly, there was no real hook into the film. It started out extremely calm and even the initial burst of energy didn't do anything to help and then almost as quickly we switch to present day and it's all calm again. Some might say that the up and down nature of the film reflects how quickly things can change at sea, I personally feel like saying they made a bad judgement call by giving it the pace of a terrible romance film.
Not helping the situation were the characters. Halle Berry always seems to have slightly brusk roles and although Kate doesn't start that way she certainly veers off when her ex shows up and the change in character is so sharp that it loses anything believable. Both Jeff (the ex) and Brady (the businessman) are unlikeable, one devious and the other arrogant, had they ditched some of the storyline between Kate and Jeff there might have been less tension and we'd have had something a little easier to watch. The few additional characters beyond these three were definitely light enough to lift parts of the film but they weren't in nearly enough to have a major effect.
The film was long, painfully long. It's not often I realise so early on that I'm struggling with a film, but for the entire length it felt like a slog. For some reason IMDb is listing 1 hour 34 (that would have been much better) but I checked the copy I watched and it says 1 hour 54. Perhaps 1,34 is how long we all wish it was. There was easily 20 minutes to shed from the runtime, but I don't know if it would have helped much without changes elsewhere too.
One last major change I would have like to have seen was to the whole ending. When things come to their climax it is almost impossible to tell what's going on, it doesn't make it anymore thrilling or intriguing, it's merely frustrating. A successful thriller can show me an almost pitch black scene and I'll be edging forward, eyes wide, waiting for whatever is going to make me jump out of my seat, but Dark Tide successfully bypasses that feeling in favour of leaving the viewer squinting at blackness.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/08/dark-tide-movie-review.html
Kate Mathieson has sworn off sharks ever since a dive went wrong and cost the life of one of her closest friends. Sharks were her life, and only doing tame tourist trips out on her boat means she's about to lose her business. Out of the blue, Kate's ex arrives with a man who's looking for more thrill than any regular dive can offer and he's convinced him that Kate is the only one who can do it. He's willing to pay big, but is the money worth reliving that memory?
Firstly, it was good to see a film with actual shark footage. I watch so many with terrible CGI that I sometimes forget that sharks aren't horribly pixelated and snarly. That is probably where the good comments end.
For a film with action in it I knew something was off almost instantly, there was no real hook into the film. It started out extremely calm and even the initial burst of energy didn't do anything to help and then almost as quickly we switch to present day and it's all calm again. Some might say that the up and down nature of the film reflects how quickly things can change at sea, I personally feel like saying they made a bad judgement call by giving it the pace of a terrible romance film.
Not helping the situation were the characters. Halle Berry always seems to have slightly brusk roles and although Kate doesn't start that way she certainly veers off when her ex shows up and the change in character is so sharp that it loses anything believable. Both Jeff (the ex) and Brady (the businessman) are unlikeable, one devious and the other arrogant, had they ditched some of the storyline between Kate and Jeff there might have been less tension and we'd have had something a little easier to watch. The few additional characters beyond these three were definitely light enough to lift parts of the film but they weren't in nearly enough to have a major effect.
The film was long, painfully long. It's not often I realise so early on that I'm struggling with a film, but for the entire length it felt like a slog. For some reason IMDb is listing 1 hour 34 (that would have been much better) but I checked the copy I watched and it says 1 hour 54. Perhaps 1,34 is how long we all wish it was. There was easily 20 minutes to shed from the runtime, but I don't know if it would have helped much without changes elsewhere too.
One last major change I would have like to have seen was to the whole ending. When things come to their climax it is almost impossible to tell what's going on, it doesn't make it anymore thrilling or intriguing, it's merely frustrating. A successful thriller can show me an almost pitch black scene and I'll be edging forward, eyes wide, waiting for whatever is going to make me jump out of my seat, but Dark Tide successfully bypasses that feeling in favour of leaving the viewer squinting at blackness.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/08/dark-tide-movie-review.html
Rachel King (13 KP) rated The Lightning Thief in Books
Feb 11, 2019
I decided to read this partly because I had just seen the movie and partly because I heard that it was a good series for fans of the Harry Potter series. Well, in regards to the movie, it's appalling how much the producers changed the book's plot to make the movie. If they make a second movie, I likely will not be interested, as I much more prefer the book's plot. In regards to the book's similarities to Harry Potter, they are vast, but really, who wouldn't aim to write something as popular and complex as the Harry Potter series? J.K. Rowling owns a castle! So, on to the actual book.
Years ago I thought that writing a fantasy series that uses Greek mythology would be a great idea, so I was excited when I heard of the Percy Jackson series. I love the modernized spin on the various good and bad characters, bringing them to life in both creative and believeable ways, such as Ares on a Harley and "Mr." Charon wearing Italian suits. The "Gods" of mythology at times seemed more like immature teenagers or work-aholic parents, with as much flaws as any normal human, and I really appreciated that they were differentiated from The GOD early on, and their place in the known universe was explained in the context of Percy's world. I especially like the scene of Hephaestus' trap that Percy and Annabeth get caught in. How the "normal" humans explained away the activities of the mythological characters was probably the most creative of the whole text, and at times rather humorous. It actually makes me wonder how much of what I see everyday is only a cover for what is really happening in the spiritual realm.
The only element that really bugged me about the text was how Percy changed from this moody, victimized pre-teen to a rather mature young man with almost no transition - emotional or otherwise. It almost felt like Percy possessed two different personalities that shared the same body. While Percy often says that he did not want to be the son of Poseidon, I found evidence of inner termoil strangely absent throughout the text. I also felt that there were smaller issues that could have been more detailed and developed, such as the characters of Grover and Annabeth. I will be continuing the series with The Sea of Monsters (Percy Jackson and the Olympians, Book 2) in the near future.
Years ago I thought that writing a fantasy series that uses Greek mythology would be a great idea, so I was excited when I heard of the Percy Jackson series. I love the modernized spin on the various good and bad characters, bringing them to life in both creative and believeable ways, such as Ares on a Harley and "Mr." Charon wearing Italian suits. The "Gods" of mythology at times seemed more like immature teenagers or work-aholic parents, with as much flaws as any normal human, and I really appreciated that they were differentiated from The GOD early on, and their place in the known universe was explained in the context of Percy's world. I especially like the scene of Hephaestus' trap that Percy and Annabeth get caught in. How the "normal" humans explained away the activities of the mythological characters was probably the most creative of the whole text, and at times rather humorous. It actually makes me wonder how much of what I see everyday is only a cover for what is really happening in the spiritual realm.
The only element that really bugged me about the text was how Percy changed from this moody, victimized pre-teen to a rather mature young man with almost no transition - emotional or otherwise. It almost felt like Percy possessed two different personalities that shared the same body. While Percy often says that he did not want to be the son of Poseidon, I found evidence of inner termoil strangely absent throughout the text. I also felt that there were smaller issues that could have been more detailed and developed, such as the characters of Grover and Annabeth. I will be continuing the series with The Sea of Monsters (Percy Jackson and the Olympians, Book 2) in the near future.
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated I'm Travelling Alone in Books
Mar 15, 2018
I read this novel as my BookBum Club book for November! Check out this page to find out more about my very own Book Club!
I had heard so many great things about this novel from family and online, it’s got a great average rating on Goodreads, so I thought I was going to really love it, unfortunately it didn’t do much for me. For me, this was nothing more than your standard police procedural, a sub-genre in crime that I’m not a huge fan of.
What drew me to this one other than the recommendations was the title. I really like how striking and eerie it is! This, obviously, lead me to read the synopsis and I definitely thought the plot was a unique one in a genre that’s so heavily populated. The storyline, in the end, didn’t live completely up to my expectations, but it was a great twisty and turny story. I did have my suspicions about the killer from quite early on, which turned out to be correct, so for that reason I can’t personally see why so many people are stunned by the conclusion. However, I didn’t have any theory as to why the killer was doing what they were doing so it was interesting to find out!
I liked the characters in this one, but sometimes they felt a little clunky and unbelievable, which might be down to translation issues or regional differences… I mean, do Norwegian people really wink at each other during every conversation? There was a lot of winking going on!
Personally, I felt more connected to Holger Munch in this one than I did with Mia Kruger. I understood her position in life, but sometimes I was sick of hearing how sorry for herself she felt. I really do hate the cliche police officer in these kinds of books and she really fit the part perfectly.
The writing for this one was good, but like I said earlier, maybe some of the thrill of it was lost in translation because I never got that heart-racing feeling I usually do with books about catching a killer. Some of the nail-biting conversations happening felt rushed and all bunched together at the end of a chapter which, for me, ruined any kind of atmosphere it was meant to have.
I seem to be swimming in a sea of mediocre books at the moment, and it sucks! I wish I had liked this one way more… my dad and nan will be disappointed when they see my review.
I had heard so many great things about this novel from family and online, it’s got a great average rating on Goodreads, so I thought I was going to really love it, unfortunately it didn’t do much for me. For me, this was nothing more than your standard police procedural, a sub-genre in crime that I’m not a huge fan of.
What drew me to this one other than the recommendations was the title. I really like how striking and eerie it is! This, obviously, lead me to read the synopsis and I definitely thought the plot was a unique one in a genre that’s so heavily populated. The storyline, in the end, didn’t live completely up to my expectations, but it was a great twisty and turny story. I did have my suspicions about the killer from quite early on, which turned out to be correct, so for that reason I can’t personally see why so many people are stunned by the conclusion. However, I didn’t have any theory as to why the killer was doing what they were doing so it was interesting to find out!
I liked the characters in this one, but sometimes they felt a little clunky and unbelievable, which might be down to translation issues or regional differences… I mean, do Norwegian people really wink at each other during every conversation? There was a lot of winking going on!
Personally, I felt more connected to Holger Munch in this one than I did with Mia Kruger. I understood her position in life, but sometimes I was sick of hearing how sorry for herself she felt. I really do hate the cliche police officer in these kinds of books and she really fit the part perfectly.
The writing for this one was good, but like I said earlier, maybe some of the thrill of it was lost in translation because I never got that heart-racing feeling I usually do with books about catching a killer. Some of the nail-biting conversations happening felt rushed and all bunched together at the end of a chapter which, for me, ruined any kind of atmosphere it was meant to have.
I seem to be swimming in a sea of mediocre books at the moment, and it sucks! I wish I had liked this one way more… my dad and nan will be disappointed when they see my review.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated The Daughter of the Sea and the Sky in Books
Dec 14, 2018
<i>This eBook was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review</i>
<i>The Daughter of the Sea and the Sky</i> by David Litwack is set in a world similar to our own, however there have been many wars as a result of religion and the people have separated themselves into believers and non-believers. Helena Brewster and Jason Adams live on the republic where the people rely heavy on reason and reject the supposedly irrational ramblings of the zealots who live on the “Blessed Lands”. One day a nine-year-old girl, Kailani, escapes from the Blessed Land and sails over to the republic where Helena and Jason find her. Kailani is immediately captured and questioned by the authorities that want to send her to a correctional facility to undo the brainwashing of the zealots.
In the meantime, as it is several months until her tribunal, Helena and Jason become Kailani’s legal guardians and take her to live at Glen Eagle Farm away from the main population of the busy towns. Kailani is loved and admired by the inhabitants on the farm, however there are people on the Blessed Land that want her back.
This is certainly an interesting story that explores a range of themes. For Helena there is the grief she is suffering as a result of the recent death of her father, and the feelings she has towards her mother whom she felt abandoned by. Between Jason and Helena there is also a developing romance as the two connect in their determination to protect Kailani. The most important theme, however, is that of the antagonism between the believers and non-believers. Those living on the Blessed Land want to indoctrinate everybody with their ideals about the soul whereas on the republic this is forbidden as they insist on living a life ruled through fact. As the story goes on certain characters begin to understand the need for both realism and religion. One person even suggests, “In our pursuit of reason, we’ve become as unreasonable as the other side.”
Kailani is a lovable character, which makes the novel a joy to read. It is interesting to compare how a child brought up under a strict religion innocently views the world in comparison with adults who have no faith what so ever. Although written for adults it is suitable for young teens to read too who, although may not understand the significance of the two different sides, are sure to love and enjoy reading about Kailani.
<i>The Daughter of the Sea and the Sky</i> by David Litwack is set in a world similar to our own, however there have been many wars as a result of religion and the people have separated themselves into believers and non-believers. Helena Brewster and Jason Adams live on the republic where the people rely heavy on reason and reject the supposedly irrational ramblings of the zealots who live on the “Blessed Lands”. One day a nine-year-old girl, Kailani, escapes from the Blessed Land and sails over to the republic where Helena and Jason find her. Kailani is immediately captured and questioned by the authorities that want to send her to a correctional facility to undo the brainwashing of the zealots.
In the meantime, as it is several months until her tribunal, Helena and Jason become Kailani’s legal guardians and take her to live at Glen Eagle Farm away from the main population of the busy towns. Kailani is loved and admired by the inhabitants on the farm, however there are people on the Blessed Land that want her back.
This is certainly an interesting story that explores a range of themes. For Helena there is the grief she is suffering as a result of the recent death of her father, and the feelings she has towards her mother whom she felt abandoned by. Between Jason and Helena there is also a developing romance as the two connect in their determination to protect Kailani. The most important theme, however, is that of the antagonism between the believers and non-believers. Those living on the Blessed Land want to indoctrinate everybody with their ideals about the soul whereas on the republic this is forbidden as they insist on living a life ruled through fact. As the story goes on certain characters begin to understand the need for both realism and religion. One person even suggests, “In our pursuit of reason, we’ve become as unreasonable as the other side.”
Kailani is a lovable character, which makes the novel a joy to read. It is interesting to compare how a child brought up under a strict religion innocently views the world in comparison with adults who have no faith what so ever. Although written for adults it is suitable for young teens to read too who, although may not understand the significance of the two different sides, are sure to love and enjoy reading about Kailani.
JT (287 KP) rated The Reef (2010) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
“You’re gonna need a bigger boat!” those few words struck terror into the hearts of cinema goers who got a first glimpse of Steven Spielberg’s monster rising out of the water in Jaws. Others have attempted to recreate that fear.
Open Water saw two divers float around for ages before finally becoming lunch for a pack of hunting tiger sharks. Deep Blue Sea used CGI technology to create massive predators with a smart enough brain to devour the hapless crew of a scientific research station. And Shark Night 3D gave us blood curdling horror with half naked women thrown in for good measure. The Reef, encompasses most of the above minus the CGI. Here it’s replaced with clever and careful editing of one of the most beautiful but sinister creatures of the ocean….the Great White Shark.
A small group of friends, some with a past, get together on a yacht and hit the clear blue waters to deliver it to a waiting recipient. When it capsizes they are faced with the choice, swim for it to the nearest land miles away or wait it out on a potentially sinking vessel. Four members venture out leaving one behind, who after confessing he fishes the waters has no desire to get his feet wet, but excelling in scaring the shit out of his friends by telling them they all look like seals ready for the slaughter.
For any low budget indie film such as this creating tension when you have a location that looks exactly the same for miles in each direction is always going to be hard. But to his credit Andrew Traucki does extremely well in building up the entrance of our finned friend. Capturing the underwater viewpoint from Luke (the only one with a face mask) he dives down now and again to check the murky undertow for signs of life at the request of some very distressed friends. You’re always half expecting to see something but it never comes, until you finally catch a glimpse of the tail, and then your heart will race.
Of course this tension has to be sustained for the next forty-five minutes which is pretty hard. The acting is OK, made all the more effective by the fact that the cast is a bunch of relative unknowns. It’s hardly a surprise ending however, but given what Traucki has to work with he’s a produced good effort. There’s enough here to keep anyone happy, more so if you’re afraid of being left to die in miles of open water….oh, and you hate sharks!
Open Water saw two divers float around for ages before finally becoming lunch for a pack of hunting tiger sharks. Deep Blue Sea used CGI technology to create massive predators with a smart enough brain to devour the hapless crew of a scientific research station. And Shark Night 3D gave us blood curdling horror with half naked women thrown in for good measure. The Reef, encompasses most of the above minus the CGI. Here it’s replaced with clever and careful editing of one of the most beautiful but sinister creatures of the ocean….the Great White Shark.
A small group of friends, some with a past, get together on a yacht and hit the clear blue waters to deliver it to a waiting recipient. When it capsizes they are faced with the choice, swim for it to the nearest land miles away or wait it out on a potentially sinking vessel. Four members venture out leaving one behind, who after confessing he fishes the waters has no desire to get his feet wet, but excelling in scaring the shit out of his friends by telling them they all look like seals ready for the slaughter.
For any low budget indie film such as this creating tension when you have a location that looks exactly the same for miles in each direction is always going to be hard. But to his credit Andrew Traucki does extremely well in building up the entrance of our finned friend. Capturing the underwater viewpoint from Luke (the only one with a face mask) he dives down now and again to check the murky undertow for signs of life at the request of some very distressed friends. You’re always half expecting to see something but it never comes, until you finally catch a glimpse of the tail, and then your heart will race.
Of course this tension has to be sustained for the next forty-five minutes which is pretty hard. The acting is OK, made all the more effective by the fact that the cast is a bunch of relative unknowns. It’s hardly a surprise ending however, but given what Traucki has to work with he’s a produced good effort. There’s enough here to keep anyone happy, more so if you’re afraid of being left to die in miles of open water….oh, and you hate sharks!
Justin Young recommended track Who Are You? by Void in Side B by Void in Music (curated)
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Underwater (2020) in Movies
Oct 18, 2020
Better than expected
Underwater stars Kristen Stewart as an engineer working aboard a deep-sea laboratory, who must fend for her life alongside her crew when an earthquake devastates the station.
I’ll start by admitting that I’ve never been a big fan of Kristen Stewart, with Twilight to thank for this rather negative opinion. However I’ve come to realise she’s actually a decent actress, especially in action packed films, and this really helped me to enjoy Underwater a lot more than I was expecting.
The action in this is virtually nonstop. There’s no lengthy or drawn out introductions, we’re submerged (literally) into the main plot of this film less than 5 minutes in and it continues in this vein throughout. It’s an edge of your seat thrill ride that’s tense and gripping, and there isn’t a dull moment. The horror aspect is rather well done and paired with the unknown and often claustrophobic circumstances the characters find them in and the very good score, it becomes quite a scary and nerve wracking film. The plot is decent and whilst the reveal on the cause of the earthquake isn’t entirely unpredictable, it still proves to be great entertaining.
Sadly despite my gushing, Underwater isn’t perfect. The biggest problem with it is the CGI and special effects. The props and set design themselves look good, but they’re let down when we’re shown these huge CGI underwater scenes that are meant to look impressive but instead look horrendous. I’d be interested to know how this looked on the big screen, but in a home setup it looks decidedly dodgy. And slow motion every time something explodes is cringeworthy.
Underwater also suffers from your typical survival film clichés. The plot itself is very typical of a survival film, and paired with ridiculous and predictable actions by underdeveloped characters, it lets it down. The cast too are also let down by the cliched characters, and even Vincent Cassel and John Gallagher Jnr are given little to work with. The only character that has had any development whatsoever is Stewart’s Nora, who is a decent and fairly likeable protagonist.
I really wish Underwater had a little more money thrown at it. If they had dramatically improved the CGI then I think this would’ve made for a cracking good sci-if/horror. The critical reception for this hasn’t been great, which surprises me as overall this is a very tense, nerve wracking and sometimes scary film that just falls short of being very good.
I’ll start by admitting that I’ve never been a big fan of Kristen Stewart, with Twilight to thank for this rather negative opinion. However I’ve come to realise she’s actually a decent actress, especially in action packed films, and this really helped me to enjoy Underwater a lot more than I was expecting.
The action in this is virtually nonstop. There’s no lengthy or drawn out introductions, we’re submerged (literally) into the main plot of this film less than 5 minutes in and it continues in this vein throughout. It’s an edge of your seat thrill ride that’s tense and gripping, and there isn’t a dull moment. The horror aspect is rather well done and paired with the unknown and often claustrophobic circumstances the characters find them in and the very good score, it becomes quite a scary and nerve wracking film. The plot is decent and whilst the reveal on the cause of the earthquake isn’t entirely unpredictable, it still proves to be great entertaining.
Sadly despite my gushing, Underwater isn’t perfect. The biggest problem with it is the CGI and special effects. The props and set design themselves look good, but they’re let down when we’re shown these huge CGI underwater scenes that are meant to look impressive but instead look horrendous. I’d be interested to know how this looked on the big screen, but in a home setup it looks decidedly dodgy. And slow motion every time something explodes is cringeworthy.
Underwater also suffers from your typical survival film clichés. The plot itself is very typical of a survival film, and paired with ridiculous and predictable actions by underdeveloped characters, it lets it down. The cast too are also let down by the cliched characters, and even Vincent Cassel and John Gallagher Jnr are given little to work with. The only character that has had any development whatsoever is Stewart’s Nora, who is a decent and fairly likeable protagonist.
I really wish Underwater had a little more money thrown at it. If they had dramatically improved the CGI then I think this would’ve made for a cracking good sci-if/horror. The critical reception for this hasn’t been great, which surprises me as overall this is a very tense, nerve wracking and sometimes scary film that just falls short of being very good.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Dogma (1999) in Movies
Jul 28, 2018
Funny and Deep
Talk about off the beaten path. Dogma is at weird as it comes. Offensive to some, hilarious to others, if you can take it for what it is and not get overly deep about it, you'll find yourself watching a quality comedy. The plot? A little complicated to explain without using more words than I would like. I will say that it involves two fallen angels who are looking for a way back into heaven.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 8
Characters: 10
You want characters? This film has them by the boatload. Outside of the fallen angels, you will meet the likes of a woman who is the savior of humanity, a messenger from heaven, and an apostle holding a grudge just to name a few. Dogma is a melting pot of personalities and temperament which is a huge part of what makes the film such a good one. You are going to love Jay the Prophet. He is just plain hilarious. And Alan Rickman's dry sarcasm always makes for a good laugh.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Conflict: 8
There are never any real lulls where the film gets boring. There is a lot of dialogue but the progression of the conflict keeps the film moving at a solid speed. I did dock a couple of point for a brief dead spot about an hour in, but there is pretty solid action and comedy throughout for the most part.
Genre: 7
There is a special scene where the characters are discussing a John Hughes movie. The dialogue builds and, before you know it, you're cracking up at every word they're saying. It's scenes like these that contribute to making the film a pretty solid comedy. If the strip club scene doesn't make you laugh, I don't know what will!
Memorability: 10
The originality of the plot and the messaging help the film stand out in my mind among a sea of other movies I've seen. I appreciated the interesting introspection of faith and life. The Belief Vs. Ideas convo was another solid moment. Dogma is funny, but it gives you some things to digest as well.
Pace: 8
Plot: 5
While the plot is certainly intriguing, it was also a bit of a hindrance for me as it got confusing as all get out in certain spots. The struggle to find a short plot description above was real. Not sure what they could have done differently here, but there were certain spots where my experience was dampened by all the crazy stuff happening.
Resolution: 8
Overall: 82
With a solid cast (Ben Afleck and Matt Damon always work well together) and a number of memorable moments, Dogma is definitely worth a watch. Glad I can check this one off the list and add it to my favorites.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 8
Characters: 10
You want characters? This film has them by the boatload. Outside of the fallen angels, you will meet the likes of a woman who is the savior of humanity, a messenger from heaven, and an apostle holding a grudge just to name a few. Dogma is a melting pot of personalities and temperament which is a huge part of what makes the film such a good one. You are going to love Jay the Prophet. He is just plain hilarious. And Alan Rickman's dry sarcasm always makes for a good laugh.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Conflict: 8
There are never any real lulls where the film gets boring. There is a lot of dialogue but the progression of the conflict keeps the film moving at a solid speed. I did dock a couple of point for a brief dead spot about an hour in, but there is pretty solid action and comedy throughout for the most part.
Genre: 7
There is a special scene where the characters are discussing a John Hughes movie. The dialogue builds and, before you know it, you're cracking up at every word they're saying. It's scenes like these that contribute to making the film a pretty solid comedy. If the strip club scene doesn't make you laugh, I don't know what will!
Memorability: 10
The originality of the plot and the messaging help the film stand out in my mind among a sea of other movies I've seen. I appreciated the interesting introspection of faith and life. The Belief Vs. Ideas convo was another solid moment. Dogma is funny, but it gives you some things to digest as well.
Pace: 8
Plot: 5
While the plot is certainly intriguing, it was also a bit of a hindrance for me as it got confusing as all get out in certain spots. The struggle to find a short plot description above was real. Not sure what they could have done differently here, but there were certain spots where my experience was dampened by all the crazy stuff happening.
Resolution: 8
Overall: 82
With a solid cast (Ben Afleck and Matt Damon always work well together) and a number of memorable moments, Dogma is definitely worth a watch. Glad I can check this one off the list and add it to my favorites.
Blaine Harrison recommended track In the Aeroplane Over the Sea by Neutral Milk Hotel in In the Aeroplane Over the Sea by Neutral Milk Hotel in Music (curated)
9.0
Album
Favorite
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) in Movies
May 10, 2019
“You said it yourself bitch, we’re the Guardians of the Galaxy”
The Marvel marathon continues. We started with the story of a soldier out of time. Now we move on to the tale of a group of losers having to learn not to kill each other and maybe, just maybe, becoming friends along the way. Guardians of the Galaxy I view as the movie that fully cemented Marvel Studios as the powerhouse we know today. The popularity of Iron Man and Thor spiked after their respective films, but I'm gonna guess if you pulled someone random off the street and asked them who either character was before their movies were released, they could probably at least tell you who they are. Now, not too far separated from the humongous success of The Avengers, here comes Marvel with a film about characters next to no one, not even some avid fans of comics, knew existed. And wouldn't you know, five years after Guardians came out and made Groot a household word, it's still one of their best films Marvel has made.
Guardians of the Galaxy almost off the bat confronts two major complaints I hear about Marvel flicks. First, that they don't look cinematic. Call it the "TV show aesthetic." Moderately flat shots, muted colors, forgettable music, etc. Second, that they're too heavy on witty banter and don't leave enough room for genuinely meaty substance. In regards to the first point, this film looks gorgeous. The color palette and cinematography are both creative and have an absolute blast with the concept of creating a grandiose space opera with equal parts charm and toilet humor. Each planet has its own distinct decor and aliens. Gunn managed to create a fleshed-out, lively, and unique galaxy. In regards to the second point, while there is all sorts of banter to be found throughout, including a Jackson Pollock cum joke, Guardians of the Galaxy has to have the biggest heart out of any film in the MCU. The movie is a full measured ton of fun, but it tugs at the heartstrings in a way few modern blockbusters have been able to achieve.
Four of the five Guardians have something in their life that lead to great tragedy. Peter and Drax lost family very close to them. Gamora and Rocket were tortured and bred to be bloodthirsty warriors. But then, there's Groot. Sweet, unassuming Groot. A beast in battle, but a gentle giant otherwise. His existence seems simple. He eats a leaf off of his shoulder, he drinks water straight from a fountain, and he's more than willing to grow and give a flower to a small girl. He's perhaps the closest we have to a lead character who is wholly happy. The Guardians all start off as renegades, loners, folks reasonably hardened by lives that have enjoyed fucking them over. We get to see them by the end of the film not just grow into heroes, but friends and good people. I am Groot. You are Groot. We are Groot.
Marvel took a big gamble with this movie, but it payed off so absurdly well. The humor is great, the characters even better, and the atmosphere equal parts fun and emotional. Guardians of the Galaxy stands out in the sea of superhero films as a movie that wears its heart on its sleeve. It's weird, but it's damn proud of the fact that it is. Maybe it's alright to be a loser. The world could use a few more losers to help us along the way of life. I think what I'm trying to get down to is this: It was polite of James Gunn to make a movie to go along with his sick mixtape.
Guardians of the Galaxy almost off the bat confronts two major complaints I hear about Marvel flicks. First, that they don't look cinematic. Call it the "TV show aesthetic." Moderately flat shots, muted colors, forgettable music, etc. Second, that they're too heavy on witty banter and don't leave enough room for genuinely meaty substance. In regards to the first point, this film looks gorgeous. The color palette and cinematography are both creative and have an absolute blast with the concept of creating a grandiose space opera with equal parts charm and toilet humor. Each planet has its own distinct decor and aliens. Gunn managed to create a fleshed-out, lively, and unique galaxy. In regards to the second point, while there is all sorts of banter to be found throughout, including a Jackson Pollock cum joke, Guardians of the Galaxy has to have the biggest heart out of any film in the MCU. The movie is a full measured ton of fun, but it tugs at the heartstrings in a way few modern blockbusters have been able to achieve.
Four of the five Guardians have something in their life that lead to great tragedy. Peter and Drax lost family very close to them. Gamora and Rocket were tortured and bred to be bloodthirsty warriors. But then, there's Groot. Sweet, unassuming Groot. A beast in battle, but a gentle giant otherwise. His existence seems simple. He eats a leaf off of his shoulder, he drinks water straight from a fountain, and he's more than willing to grow and give a flower to a small girl. He's perhaps the closest we have to a lead character who is wholly happy. The Guardians all start off as renegades, loners, folks reasonably hardened by lives that have enjoyed fucking them over. We get to see them by the end of the film not just grow into heroes, but friends and good people. I am Groot. You are Groot. We are Groot.
Marvel took a big gamble with this movie, but it payed off so absurdly well. The humor is great, the characters even better, and the atmosphere equal parts fun and emotional. Guardians of the Galaxy stands out in the sea of superhero films as a movie that wears its heart on its sleeve. It's weird, but it's damn proud of the fact that it is. Maybe it's alright to be a loser. The world could use a few more losers to help us along the way of life. I think what I'm trying to get down to is this: It was polite of James Gunn to make a movie to go along with his sick mixtape.