Search
Search results
p3anut (62 KP) rated Scream (2022) in Movies
Jan 16, 2022 (Updated Feb 13, 2022)
Prepare to scream again...or not
I was pretty excited to see this movie, and by the end I was only mildly disappointed. This movie had a few twists that I thought were enjoyable. But ultimately the movie falls flat because the main twist was weak and didn't matter overall in the scream universe. Some of the acting was terrible, and I can't tell if it was intentional for some of the character traits or if it was legit bad acting. The practical effects in this were really good and actually looked believable. I also enjoyed the update in the horror movie troupes and the way they incorporated newer technology into the movie. Overall this movie will fall flat unfortunately but it does open up the universe for another sequel.
David McK (3600 KP) rated Star Wars: Ahsoka in TV
Oct 8, 2023
Disney+ have really been pushing their connection to Star Wars as of late: The Mandalorian, The Book of Boba Fett, Obi-Wan, The Bad Batch.
All in the Disney+ era, as exclusives.
To this, we can now add Ahsoka.
Which is a strong contender for being the most 'Star Wars'y of the lot, if that makes sense.
It's also effectively a live-action sequel to perhaps one of the best Star Wars animations shows (Rebels), more or less picking up the plot lines from the end of that series after the disappearance of Thrawn and Ezra Bridger in the final episode of it.
So, in effect, we're also doing a live action "Heir to the Empire" (finallyl!!), with the return of Thrawn, alongside elements from the old E.U.: Zombie Stormtroopers, The Nightsisters of Dathomir, the Mortis Gods ...
*chefs kiss*
All in the Disney+ era, as exclusives.
To this, we can now add Ahsoka.
Which is a strong contender for being the most 'Star Wars'y of the lot, if that makes sense.
It's also effectively a live-action sequel to perhaps one of the best Star Wars animations shows (Rebels), more or less picking up the plot lines from the end of that series after the disappearance of Thrawn and Ezra Bridger in the final episode of it.
So, in effect, we're also doing a live action "Heir to the Empire" (finallyl!!), with the return of Thrawn, alongside elements from the old E.U.: Zombie Stormtroopers, The Nightsisters of Dathomir, the Mortis Gods ...
*chefs kiss*
Dean (6927 KP) rated Sonic the Hedgehog (2020) in Movies
Apr 2, 2022 (Updated Apr 2, 2022)
Good cast (1 more)
SFX
I feel the need for...
Well I still remember getting my Sega Megadrive in the early 90's and Sonic the Hedgehog came with it. It was a truly fast, fun colourful game. Not exactly the type of game you'd expect a live action film version of. Glad they redesigned the look of Sonic to suit the game more.
It's a pretty fun, light family action film. The friendship between Sonic and Doughnut Lord (James Marsden) was done nicely. It's fairly amusing at times and even has some big budget effects that look cool. Jim Carrey was made for this type of role of Dr Robotnik.
Whether you played the games back in the day or just need a fun family film this is one everyone should enjoy. The sequel out soon looks pretty good as well.
It's a pretty fun, light family action film. The friendship between Sonic and Doughnut Lord (James Marsden) was done nicely. It's fairly amusing at times and even has some big budget effects that look cool. Jim Carrey was made for this type of role of Dr Robotnik.
Whether you played the games back in the day or just need a fun family film this is one everyone should enjoy. The sequel out soon looks pretty good as well.
David McK (3600 KP) rated Chicken Run: Dawn of the Nugget (2023) in Movies
Aug 11, 2024 (Updated Aug 11, 2024)
Sequel to the late 90s/early noughties (edit: the year 2000, to be precise) family-friendly Aardman Animations flick, which itself was a riff on The Great Escape and starred a then-still-in-vogue Mel Gibson as the voice of Rocky the Rooster.
Here, Gibson is replaced by Zachary Levi, with the film set a good few years (decades?) on from the original, and with Rocky and Ginger now having a kid of their own and living - alongside the other escapees - on a remote island. Until such time as their kid goes exploring the mainland and has a run-in with a face from their past ...
Inoffensive stuff, by and large - although parts (specifically the 'Stepford Wives' collaring/mind control bits - might be a bit too strong for the younger ones in the audience!
Here, Gibson is replaced by Zachary Levi, with the film set a good few years (decades?) on from the original, and with Rocky and Ginger now having a kid of their own and living - alongside the other escapees - on a remote island. Until such time as their kid goes exploring the mainland and has a run-in with a face from their past ...
Inoffensive stuff, by and large - although parts (specifically the 'Stepford Wives' collaring/mind control bits - might be a bit too strong for the younger ones in the audience!
David McK (3600 KP) rated Elevation (2024) in Movies
Mar 9, 2025 (Updated Mar 9, 2025)
2024 post-apocalyptic action movie, that comes across as a hybrid of Aliens and (maybe) "A Quiet Place", and that stars Anthony Mackie in a post-Falcon, pre-Captain America (movie) role alongside Morena Baccarin and set in a not-too-distant future where creatures have emerged from underground, have more or less wiped out mankind yet will not - for some unknown reason - ever travel above a certain elevation.
With his son sick and running out of life-saving medicine, Mackie's character Will resolves to travel 'below the line' to the nearest hospital, alongside his now-deceased wife's best friend and the woman whom he blames for said wife's death, in an attempt to procure more medicine and return back home with the same.
Film has a mid-credit scene, that sets up where the sequel (if it comes!) will go!
With his son sick and running out of life-saving medicine, Mackie's character Will resolves to travel 'below the line' to the nearest hospital, alongside his now-deceased wife's best friend and the woman whom he blames for said wife's death, in an attempt to procure more medicine and return back home with the same.
Film has a mid-credit scene, that sets up where the sequel (if it comes!) will go!
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Iron Man 2 (2010) in Movies
May 9, 2019
"if you could make god bleed people would cease to believe in him"
What made Iron Man so great was its original story, exciting action, and stellar performances. But beneath all the spectacle was a heart, characters we cared about and a coherent story in which we watched a narsasistic asshole become a good guy. All of that has vanished in the rushed, noisy, but enjoyable sequel.
Tony Stark is now living the life of a rockstar, a superhero that everyone knows the identity of, enjoying a celebrity lifestyle. Meanwhile, a villain connected to Tony's past recreates his technology and seeks revenge. Tony also deals with the mystery of his dead parents, his relationship with Pepper, wards off government attempts to control his technology, rebuffs his corporate rival, and has to rework his technology that is slowly killing him. Oh, and The Avengers show up.
If that sounds like an overcrowded movie to you, that's because it is. Iron Man 2 acts as an Iron Man sequel and an Avengers prequel. The clashing of these two stories is due to an unfocused narrative trying to cram in ten different storylines. Half the stories don't conclude in a satisfying way, and we're left with a pretty looking movie.
Luckily the performances are still great, Robert Downey Jr. is again a delight to watch, Sam Rockwell is fun as his counterpart rival, and Don Cheadle replaces Terrence Howard as best friend Rhodes, a worthy replacement. Scarlett Johansson joins the cast as an Avengers refenerence, with very little to do other than look good and kick ass.
Jon Favreau seems much less interested in the project this time around, as he falls under the weight of the studio pushing for a sequel in two years as opposed to three. The script has a couple of witty highlights, mostly with Same Rockwell as Tony's business rival.
The action is thrilling and everything you'd want when it comes, but it doesn't show up often. The visual effects are improved, and the sound design is top notch. The score is mediocre, with a few notable exceptions.
There is too much going on for one movie, but by the end of the movie you're left wanting more. Not enough time was devoted to the different characters and plot lines, which results in a highly uneven movie with short bursts of excitement and a solid cast. Worth one watch.
Tony Stark is now living the life of a rockstar, a superhero that everyone knows the identity of, enjoying a celebrity lifestyle. Meanwhile, a villain connected to Tony's past recreates his technology and seeks revenge. Tony also deals with the mystery of his dead parents, his relationship with Pepper, wards off government attempts to control his technology, rebuffs his corporate rival, and has to rework his technology that is slowly killing him. Oh, and The Avengers show up.
If that sounds like an overcrowded movie to you, that's because it is. Iron Man 2 acts as an Iron Man sequel and an Avengers prequel. The clashing of these two stories is due to an unfocused narrative trying to cram in ten different storylines. Half the stories don't conclude in a satisfying way, and we're left with a pretty looking movie.
Luckily the performances are still great, Robert Downey Jr. is again a delight to watch, Sam Rockwell is fun as his counterpart rival, and Don Cheadle replaces Terrence Howard as best friend Rhodes, a worthy replacement. Scarlett Johansson joins the cast as an Avengers refenerence, with very little to do other than look good and kick ass.
Jon Favreau seems much less interested in the project this time around, as he falls under the weight of the studio pushing for a sequel in two years as opposed to three. The script has a couple of witty highlights, mostly with Same Rockwell as Tony's business rival.
The action is thrilling and everything you'd want when it comes, but it doesn't show up often. The visual effects are improved, and the sound design is top notch. The score is mediocre, with a few notable exceptions.
There is too much going on for one movie, but by the end of the movie you're left wanting more. Not enough time was devoted to the different characters and plot lines, which results in a highly uneven movie with short bursts of excitement and a solid cast. Worth one watch.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Shaft (2019) in Movies
Jun 18, 2019
Bland, boring and uninteresting
Were you the one clamoring for a sequel to the year 2000 Samuel L. Jackson SHAFT (the sequel to the original 1971 Richard Roundtree SHAFT)? Did you remember there WAS a 2000 version of SHAFT? Do you remember the 1971 SHAFT?
Doesn't matter.
The makers of this film certainly don't remember those films for - besides casting Jackson and Roundtree - there is no similarity to either of these films.
The first SHAFT was a Blacksploitation film starring Roundtree with mucho gunfire and bloodshed and SHAFT 2000 (as I'll call it) is a full on action flick with Jackson as Roundtree's nephew fighting crime. SHAFT 2019 is none of these - the Samuel L. Jackson Shaft is now the SON of Richard Roundtree and partners with his son JJ ,John Shaft, Jr. (played by Jessie T. Usher) to investigate the death of his friend.
Okay...fine. I can forgive the change in tone and the "tweak" (I'm being generous) to the timeline. What I can't forgive is the weak script (why write any good, or interesting, dialogue when we can have all of the characters say Samuel L. Jackson's signature motherf*^#er over and over) by 3 different writers (never a good sign) that were all, clearly, just in it for the paycheck.
Jessie T. Usher (he played Will Smith's son in the also ill-advised sequel to INDEPENDENCE DAY) is a bland lead with no gravitas and no swagger that starts out young and naive and is supposed to develop (under the tutelage of his father) street smarts but, really, just becomes annoying.
Regina Hall (GIRLS TRIP), Titus Welliver (BOSCH), Method Man (!) and Luna Lauren Velez (DEXTER) are all sleepwalking through underwritten roles just counting the minutes until they can take their paychecks to the bank.
At the heart of all of this "missed opportunities" is Director Tim Story (RIDE ALONG) he directs this film like he has someplace else to be, never missing an opportunity to be obvious (for example, JJ's friend - Karim - who's death sparks what passes for a plot in this film - might as well be walking around with a "Dead Man Walking" sign on him). Story's direction is lazy (and that's doing injustice to the word lazy) and obvious with no spark of ingenuity or imagination to be found.
And then there's Samuel L. Jackson as SHAFT. He defines the term "sleepwalking through the picture" looking bored and uninterested throughout and HE'S THE BEST THING IN THE FILM! Thank goodness his charisma and charm ooze out of him without really trying - for he didn't really try here.
Save 2 hours of your life - skip SHAFT - you'll be glad you did.
Letter Grade: C
4 Stars (out of 10) and you can take this to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Doesn't matter.
The makers of this film certainly don't remember those films for - besides casting Jackson and Roundtree - there is no similarity to either of these films.
The first SHAFT was a Blacksploitation film starring Roundtree with mucho gunfire and bloodshed and SHAFT 2000 (as I'll call it) is a full on action flick with Jackson as Roundtree's nephew fighting crime. SHAFT 2019 is none of these - the Samuel L. Jackson Shaft is now the SON of Richard Roundtree and partners with his son JJ ,John Shaft, Jr. (played by Jessie T. Usher) to investigate the death of his friend.
Okay...fine. I can forgive the change in tone and the "tweak" (I'm being generous) to the timeline. What I can't forgive is the weak script (why write any good, or interesting, dialogue when we can have all of the characters say Samuel L. Jackson's signature motherf*^#er over and over) by 3 different writers (never a good sign) that were all, clearly, just in it for the paycheck.
Jessie T. Usher (he played Will Smith's son in the also ill-advised sequel to INDEPENDENCE DAY) is a bland lead with no gravitas and no swagger that starts out young and naive and is supposed to develop (under the tutelage of his father) street smarts but, really, just becomes annoying.
Regina Hall (GIRLS TRIP), Titus Welliver (BOSCH), Method Man (!) and Luna Lauren Velez (DEXTER) are all sleepwalking through underwritten roles just counting the minutes until they can take their paychecks to the bank.
At the heart of all of this "missed opportunities" is Director Tim Story (RIDE ALONG) he directs this film like he has someplace else to be, never missing an opportunity to be obvious (for example, JJ's friend - Karim - who's death sparks what passes for a plot in this film - might as well be walking around with a "Dead Man Walking" sign on him). Story's direction is lazy (and that's doing injustice to the word lazy) and obvious with no spark of ingenuity or imagination to be found.
And then there's Samuel L. Jackson as SHAFT. He defines the term "sleepwalking through the picture" looking bored and uninterested throughout and HE'S THE BEST THING IN THE FILM! Thank goodness his charisma and charm ooze out of him without really trying - for he didn't really try here.
Save 2 hours of your life - skip SHAFT - you'll be glad you did.
Letter Grade: C
4 Stars (out of 10) and you can take this to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Ronyell (38 KP) rated Pinocchio and the Emperor of the Night (1987) in Movies
Jul 24, 2020
That Creepy Version of Pinocchio
This movie is basically a sequel to the original “Pinocchio” and the movie starts off with Gepetto giving Pinocchio a jewel box to take to the Mayor. As Pinocchio goes to town to deliver the jewel box, he meets up with Igor and Scalawag, two con artists who eventually convince Pinocchio to give them the jewel box, which ends up getting Pinocchio into trouble with Gepetto. Pinocchio was so upset about disappointing his father that he decided to run away and get the jewel box back. It was then that Pinocchio ended up getting into all kinds of strange and frightening situations such as meeting the frightening Puppetino at the circus and eventually meeting up with the Emperor of the Night!
Now, when I heard that Filmation was making a sequel to the famous Italian classic "Pinocchio," I was quite surprised and satisfied with the results! I loved the fact that there was a sequel to "Pinocchio" to begin with since I did wonder what Pinocchio's adventures would be like after he was transformed into a real boy and we managed to get one in this movie! I honestly like the dark and edgy feel of this film as it really grabbed my interest and some scenes (like the infamous puppet transformation scene) had really stayed with me ever since I was little! The voice acting was fantastic in this film as all the voice actors really gave everything they got for this film. Probably my favorite voice acting was from James Earl Jones as the Emperor of the Night as he made the character extremely scary and mysterious and I was really interested in the character! The animation is surprisingly better than what we usually get with Filmation as the characters move much fluidly and the action sequences were quite well done!
The only problem with this film was that it seemed like the plot was a rehash of the original Pinocchio story as we still get a storyline about Pinocchio trying to figure out what is right and wrong, having a conscience who would guide him and having two con artists scam him and get him into more trouble. The only thing that was actually different in this story was the Emperor of the Night as he proved to be scarier than the previous villains in "Pinocchio."
Overall, "Pinocchio and the Emperor of the Night" is a great film for anyone who is a huge fan of Filmation's works and who wants to see how the story of "Pinocchio" would continue.
Originally posted on: http://surrealmoviesandtvblog.blogspot.com/2014/07/movie-review-pinocchio-and-emperor-of.html
Now, when I heard that Filmation was making a sequel to the famous Italian classic "Pinocchio," I was quite surprised and satisfied with the results! I loved the fact that there was a sequel to "Pinocchio" to begin with since I did wonder what Pinocchio's adventures would be like after he was transformed into a real boy and we managed to get one in this movie! I honestly like the dark and edgy feel of this film as it really grabbed my interest and some scenes (like the infamous puppet transformation scene) had really stayed with me ever since I was little! The voice acting was fantastic in this film as all the voice actors really gave everything they got for this film. Probably my favorite voice acting was from James Earl Jones as the Emperor of the Night as he made the character extremely scary and mysterious and I was really interested in the character! The animation is surprisingly better than what we usually get with Filmation as the characters move much fluidly and the action sequences were quite well done!
The only problem with this film was that it seemed like the plot was a rehash of the original Pinocchio story as we still get a storyline about Pinocchio trying to figure out what is right and wrong, having a conscience who would guide him and having two con artists scam him and get him into more trouble. The only thing that was actually different in this story was the Emperor of the Night as he proved to be scarier than the previous villains in "Pinocchio."
Overall, "Pinocchio and the Emperor of the Night" is a great film for anyone who is a huge fan of Filmation's works and who wants to see how the story of "Pinocchio" would continue.
Originally posted on: http://surrealmoviesandtvblog.blogspot.com/2014/07/movie-review-pinocchio-and-emperor-of.html
Aqua Moto Racing 2
Games and Entertainment
App
Dohi Entertainment is proud to present the sequel to it's widely popular and critically acclaimed...
Larry Eisner (2082 KP) rated Tomb Raider (2018) in Movies
Jul 18, 2018
Vikander. She is excellent and plays this two-dimensional character far beyond the script. (3 more)
The supernatural elements
Did I mention Vikander’s superb performance?
Damn, Vikander was spectacular!
The script (3 more)
The tropes
The characters’ lack of dimension
Low hope for a sequel
It’s action. It’s rife with plot holes. It’s got an AMAZING lead.
Note: I was given a copy by SmashBomb to review.
Note 2: I hate spoilers so you can count on this to have none as with all my reviews.
Tomb Raider, like all video game adaptations for the screen, tend to suck horribly (I’m looking directly at you, Street Fighter, and Mortal Kombat 2).
That said, the Angelina Jolie versions had huge budgets, large CGI setpieces to amaze and star power at the fairly flat lead role of Lara Croft. They were throwaway summer action fodder. They were fun and worth a watch, but never a second viewing.
Sadly, the new Tomb Raider won’t change anyone’s mind about the genre. It’s still mindless action throwaway, but this had a lot of potential for much much more.
Why? Because Alicia Vikander is SPECTACULAR and brings dimension, fragility, and a brutal ness to the action that you’d never see in the original sexually charged games, or the blockbuster megamillions Jolie versions.
The story itself is flat, full of holes (except the one that’s missing? I won’t say, but damn...) and contains the typical tropes of the lone hero in a jungle against baddies and nature. There’s booby traps, there’s danger at every corner, natural and man-made, and there’s intrigue behind the scenes. Nothing new there and sadly this script adds nothing at all (even an iota) to the genre. However, amazingly, Vikander’s subtle and fragile performance escalates the dull action into something believable. It takes the very false “high stakes” danger and makes it dangerous and raises the stakes because of the vulnerability and believability of this Lara Croft.
This is why I enjoyed the film. In the film world, everything is on Lara’s shoulders. And in reality, the film is carried SOLELY on Alicia Vikander’s shoulders. And she carries it well.
Lu Ren (Daniel Wu) is another great character played by a great actor, though he has far too little quality screen time. The relationship between them isn’t believable because of this lack of time spent in development, and therefore the stakes between them seem more false than they should. It is a lot of wasted potential.
Here’s my hope (though my expectations are low unless DVD/Blu-Ray sales/rentals skyrocket): this film demands a sequel. This flimsy summer fodder has what it takes to make a franchise and a lead that can become a true action icon, but it demands a better and more character-driven script.
The potential here is insane, but only time will tell if this mediocre (but fun) B-movie will get a serious sequel. It wouldn’t require so much money, as the strength of this Lara Croft is not in special effects and masculine explosions. This Croft is crafty, exudes strength in endurance rather than power, and has a realism to her that makes me believe she actually isn’t just a rich person with a privileged upbringing. She’s real, three-dimensional and you want her to succeed. Because of her, not because of the plot.
But put an actual plot and characters with depth and dialogue behind her? Wow. That would be amazing.
So, perhaps this review doesn’t seem like a 7/10. But here’s why: Wu brings the film to a 4-5, and Vikander makes this film every point above to the 7. In fact she had a 10 performance, but the script and direction just bring it down.
It’s a fun B-film. It’s summer action fodder. It’s worth a view, if not a purchase. And it is worth a sequel. Let’s hope and pray that Vikander’s Lara Croft returns to tell more tales.
Note 2: I hate spoilers so you can count on this to have none as with all my reviews.
Tomb Raider, like all video game adaptations for the screen, tend to suck horribly (I’m looking directly at you, Street Fighter, and Mortal Kombat 2).
That said, the Angelina Jolie versions had huge budgets, large CGI setpieces to amaze and star power at the fairly flat lead role of Lara Croft. They were throwaway summer action fodder. They were fun and worth a watch, but never a second viewing.
Sadly, the new Tomb Raider won’t change anyone’s mind about the genre. It’s still mindless action throwaway, but this had a lot of potential for much much more.
Why? Because Alicia Vikander is SPECTACULAR and brings dimension, fragility, and a brutal ness to the action that you’d never see in the original sexually charged games, or the blockbuster megamillions Jolie versions.
The story itself is flat, full of holes (except the one that’s missing? I won’t say, but damn...) and contains the typical tropes of the lone hero in a jungle against baddies and nature. There’s booby traps, there’s danger at every corner, natural and man-made, and there’s intrigue behind the scenes. Nothing new there and sadly this script adds nothing at all (even an iota) to the genre. However, amazingly, Vikander’s subtle and fragile performance escalates the dull action into something believable. It takes the very false “high stakes” danger and makes it dangerous and raises the stakes because of the vulnerability and believability of this Lara Croft.
This is why I enjoyed the film. In the film world, everything is on Lara’s shoulders. And in reality, the film is carried SOLELY on Alicia Vikander’s shoulders. And she carries it well.
Lu Ren (Daniel Wu) is another great character played by a great actor, though he has far too little quality screen time. The relationship between them isn’t believable because of this lack of time spent in development, and therefore the stakes between them seem more false than they should. It is a lot of wasted potential.
Here’s my hope (though my expectations are low unless DVD/Blu-Ray sales/rentals skyrocket): this film demands a sequel. This flimsy summer fodder has what it takes to make a franchise and a lead that can become a true action icon, but it demands a better and more character-driven script.
The potential here is insane, but only time will tell if this mediocre (but fun) B-movie will get a serious sequel. It wouldn’t require so much money, as the strength of this Lara Croft is not in special effects and masculine explosions. This Croft is crafty, exudes strength in endurance rather than power, and has a realism to her that makes me believe she actually isn’t just a rich person with a privileged upbringing. She’s real, three-dimensional and you want her to succeed. Because of her, not because of the plot.
But put an actual plot and characters with depth and dialogue behind her? Wow. That would be amazing.
So, perhaps this review doesn’t seem like a 7/10. But here’s why: Wu brings the film to a 4-5, and Vikander makes this film every point above to the 7. In fact she had a 10 performance, but the script and direction just bring it down.
It’s a fun B-film. It’s summer action fodder. It’s worth a view, if not a purchase. And it is worth a sequel. Let’s hope and pray that Vikander’s Lara Croft returns to tell more tales.