Search
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Way Down Dark (The Australia Trilogy, #1) in Books
Dec 14, 2018
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.
Way Down Dark</i> is the first in the <i>Australia</i> trilogy by J.P. Smythe, a brand new dystopian series for young adult readers. The world has been destroyed and humans boarded space ships in order to find somewhere to live, however, generations later the passengers aboard <i>Australia</i> have not found anywhere. The years have taken their toll on the ship, which is slowly falling to pieces, it’s inhabitants reduced to scavengers.
Recently orphaned Chan is living alone and trying to fend for herself as the Lows, an ever-increasing band of murderous thugs, wage war on everyone else. Nowhere is safe and quite often Chan finds herself in a situation where it is either kill or be killed. When Chan’s mother died her last instructions were to stay out of trouble, be selfish and don’t die. Chan on the other hand finds it extremely difficult to be selfish when she sees other people in life threatening situations. Thankfully she has Angela, a fifty something woman, looking out for her. But then Angela introduces Chan to a part of the ship no one has ever been to before, a part that challenges the truth behind the stories believed by everyone about the destruction of Earth. This new knowledge fuels Chan’s determination to save the lives of as many she can, thus finding herself in perilous situations.
Despite being set in the distant future, the characters at the beginning are living lives similar to those of the past – making clothes, shoes and weapons from scratch, picking fruit in the arboretum in order to eat. So although many dystopian novels involve some kind of enhanced technology, <i>Way Down Dark</i> does not, which separates it from other books of the same genre.
As well as Chan’s narrative, the novel also contains Angela’s stories of the past when Chan’s mother was young. These help to explain some of the situations the characters find themselves in now. It is also through Angela that Chan begins to discover the truth about the ship <i>Australia</i> and the lies they have been led to believe.
The main characters are very likable and display a range of personalities, each adding something different to the story. Chan is quick thinking, strong-willed and unselfish whereas, although Angela cares and protects, she keeps more to herself rather than jump into the fight in order to be a hero. Finally, Jonah, a young man who teams up with Chan and Angela, is a mix of Chan’s personalities with a religious streak, or what passes as religious on the <i>Australia</i>.
Although it is less futuristic than other popular young adult novels such as <i>Divergent</i> or <i>The Hunger Games</i>, readers are bound to enjoy <i>Way Down Dark</i> and its sequels. It is full of action, violence and survival told from the point of view of a teenage girl. <i>Way Down Dark</i> is a highly recommended, gripping novel, which promises to satisfy the needs of dystopian lovers.
Way Down Dark</i> is the first in the <i>Australia</i> trilogy by J.P. Smythe, a brand new dystopian series for young adult readers. The world has been destroyed and humans boarded space ships in order to find somewhere to live, however, generations later the passengers aboard <i>Australia</i> have not found anywhere. The years have taken their toll on the ship, which is slowly falling to pieces, it’s inhabitants reduced to scavengers.
Recently orphaned Chan is living alone and trying to fend for herself as the Lows, an ever-increasing band of murderous thugs, wage war on everyone else. Nowhere is safe and quite often Chan finds herself in a situation where it is either kill or be killed. When Chan’s mother died her last instructions were to stay out of trouble, be selfish and don’t die. Chan on the other hand finds it extremely difficult to be selfish when she sees other people in life threatening situations. Thankfully she has Angela, a fifty something woman, looking out for her. But then Angela introduces Chan to a part of the ship no one has ever been to before, a part that challenges the truth behind the stories believed by everyone about the destruction of Earth. This new knowledge fuels Chan’s determination to save the lives of as many she can, thus finding herself in perilous situations.
Despite being set in the distant future, the characters at the beginning are living lives similar to those of the past – making clothes, shoes and weapons from scratch, picking fruit in the arboretum in order to eat. So although many dystopian novels involve some kind of enhanced technology, <i>Way Down Dark</i> does not, which separates it from other books of the same genre.
As well as Chan’s narrative, the novel also contains Angela’s stories of the past when Chan’s mother was young. These help to explain some of the situations the characters find themselves in now. It is also through Angela that Chan begins to discover the truth about the ship <i>Australia</i> and the lies they have been led to believe.
The main characters are very likable and display a range of personalities, each adding something different to the story. Chan is quick thinking, strong-willed and unselfish whereas, although Angela cares and protects, she keeps more to herself rather than jump into the fight in order to be a hero. Finally, Jonah, a young man who teams up with Chan and Angela, is a mix of Chan’s personalities with a religious streak, or what passes as religious on the <i>Australia</i>.
Although it is less futuristic than other popular young adult novels such as <i>Divergent</i> or <i>The Hunger Games</i>, readers are bound to enjoy <i>Way Down Dark</i> and its sequels. It is full of action, violence and survival told from the point of view of a teenage girl. <i>Way Down Dark</i> is a highly recommended, gripping novel, which promises to satisfy the needs of dystopian lovers.
Andy K (10823 KP) rated The Devil's Rejects (2005) in Movies
Oct 16, 2019
Chinese, Japanese, Dirty knees, look at these!
Shortly after the events of House of 1,000 Corpses, Sheriff Wydell and his band of deputies approach and surround the homestead occupied by everyone's favorite murderous, diabolical, psychotic family. Inside, lazy slumbering quickly turns to mounting a counter offensive when the family realizes what is about to happen. The ensuring shootout claims several victims before the aid of tear gas precedes a law enforcement home invasion. Unfortunately, only one family member is captured while Baby and Otis escape out the back. Baby calls their father, Captain Spaulding, to inform him of the pending doom on his way so he can meet up with them subsequently.
The two siblings arrive at a local motel only to perform their brand of debauchery on two couples and friends staying there. They are forced to be in constant fear for their lives whilst their kidnappers decide what to do with them while waiting on their matriarch. The torture endured by their victims is heinous, cruel and unnecessary, but is their way of life.
The law is tightly on their trail waiting for that lead which will lead them to the felons. This is growing personal for the sheriff as he discovers the "rejects" were responsible for the death of his brother. The sheriff decides to hire some disreputable men of his own to use whatever methods they can to acquire the location of his targets.
The inevitable stand off leaves other casualties and a position it will be difficult for the sheriff to return from. The "rejects" always seem to find a way to survive no matter their degree of peril.
This film takes a different direction than that of House of 1,000 Corpses. That film being more of a standard "teenagers wander into a house of horrors" situation, whereas this film feels more like a "Natural Born Killers" type.
The total lack of any sort of normal human decency for the family is truly revolting and is on display every time they interact with anyone including women and children. They even don't really like each other very much and are constantly arguing with one other; their visceral hatred always right on the edge of bubbling over.
The unspeakable cruelty they enact on their victims can seem excessive at times; however, if you have lived through the events of the first film, you know what you are getting into here. When they are attached to their motel guests, you are just waiting for the next moment of panic when their guests start to figure out exactly what type of monsters they are dealing with.
I loved the gritty look of the film along with the mostly 1970s classic rock soundtrack. The scenery and landscapes of the sparse countryside fit the film well as well.
Not too many sequels build or are as good or better than their predecessor, but this film could be one of those for sure.
The two siblings arrive at a local motel only to perform their brand of debauchery on two couples and friends staying there. They are forced to be in constant fear for their lives whilst their kidnappers decide what to do with them while waiting on their matriarch. The torture endured by their victims is heinous, cruel and unnecessary, but is their way of life.
The law is tightly on their trail waiting for that lead which will lead them to the felons. This is growing personal for the sheriff as he discovers the "rejects" were responsible for the death of his brother. The sheriff decides to hire some disreputable men of his own to use whatever methods they can to acquire the location of his targets.
The inevitable stand off leaves other casualties and a position it will be difficult for the sheriff to return from. The "rejects" always seem to find a way to survive no matter their degree of peril.
This film takes a different direction than that of House of 1,000 Corpses. That film being more of a standard "teenagers wander into a house of horrors" situation, whereas this film feels more like a "Natural Born Killers" type.
The total lack of any sort of normal human decency for the family is truly revolting and is on display every time they interact with anyone including women and children. They even don't really like each other very much and are constantly arguing with one other; their visceral hatred always right on the edge of bubbling over.
The unspeakable cruelty they enact on their victims can seem excessive at times; however, if you have lived through the events of the first film, you know what you are getting into here. When they are attached to their motel guests, you are just waiting for the next moment of panic when their guests start to figure out exactly what type of monsters they are dealing with.
I loved the gritty look of the film along with the mostly 1970s classic rock soundtrack. The scenery and landscapes of the sparse countryside fit the film well as well.
Not too many sequels build or are as good or better than their predecessor, but this film could be one of those for sure.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Peppermint (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
Tragedy strikes Riley North (Jennifer Garner) when her husband and young daughter are gunned down in a drive-by shooting. The shooters were all part of a local gang ran by Diego Garcia (Juan Pablo Raba). Garcia thought Riley’s husband, Chris (Jeff Hephner), was part of a plot to steal money from him. Chris had actually turned down the job but it was too late and Garcia ordered his henchmen to make a statement out of killing Chris. Riley despite being shot in the heard and unconscious she was still able to identify the murders of her husband and her daughter Carly (Cailey Fleming). Thinking she would get justice she testified at a preliminary hearing. But to her surprise the defense lawyer said due to being her injuries that she didn’t really know what she saw. Shockingly the prosecutor did nothing to help her and the judge declared there was not enough evidence to proceed. Feeling cheated and everyone was working against her Riley disappears. On the five year anniversary of the murder of her family the three men responsible are found hanging from a Ferris wheel. When Detective Beltran (John Ortiz) and Detective Carmichael (John Gallagher Jr.) show up to the crime scene the immediately wonder could Riley North be back and exacting vengeance.
This vigilante action film is pretty much what you think it will be. There is blood and a lot of action. The acting is okay but not really the focal point of the film. But one thing that is not in doubt is the ending, don’t worry I won’t spoil it I don’t need to. With the somewhat recent success of films like Taken, John Wick and The Equalizer, and their sequels, this genre is not lacking in content. For me this dilutes the quality and original story telling of this type of film. The director, Pierre Morel (Taken, The Gunman), seems at home in this film type and does a decent job here. Jennifer Garner comes off as a bad ass and I enjoyed her in this film. The rest of the cast is good but pretty stereotypical of the genre also. This is not a bad movie just one I feel I have seen before. I will say I enjoyed all three of the movies I mentioned above and that should speak well to this movie. I just wanted a little more. It is also worth mentioning that in many of the scenes where Garner was exacting her revenge the audience was prone to laugh as a bad guy was getting a bullet to the head or a file cabinet dropped on their head. That makes it hard to take the movie too seriously.
If you are a vigilante movie fan this is definitely one to check out. The action is good and there is definitely a good amount of it. A little over the top with the blood for me but not too bad. It is nice to see Garner back in the action world and I hope this leads to more from her. I would say save your theater money for another movie and stream this one when it hits your favorite service.
This vigilante action film is pretty much what you think it will be. There is blood and a lot of action. The acting is okay but not really the focal point of the film. But one thing that is not in doubt is the ending, don’t worry I won’t spoil it I don’t need to. With the somewhat recent success of films like Taken, John Wick and The Equalizer, and their sequels, this genre is not lacking in content. For me this dilutes the quality and original story telling of this type of film. The director, Pierre Morel (Taken, The Gunman), seems at home in this film type and does a decent job here. Jennifer Garner comes off as a bad ass and I enjoyed her in this film. The rest of the cast is good but pretty stereotypical of the genre also. This is not a bad movie just one I feel I have seen before. I will say I enjoyed all three of the movies I mentioned above and that should speak well to this movie. I just wanted a little more. It is also worth mentioning that in many of the scenes where Garner was exacting her revenge the audience was prone to laugh as a bad guy was getting a bullet to the head or a file cabinet dropped on their head. That makes it hard to take the movie too seriously.
If you are a vigilante movie fan this is definitely one to check out. The action is good and there is definitely a good amount of it. A little over the top with the blood for me but not too bad. It is nice to see Garner back in the action world and I hope this leads to more from her. I would say save your theater money for another movie and stream this one when it hits your favorite service.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated The Last Changeling (The Last Changeling, #1) in Books
Jan 23, 2020
The worst I thought would happen to The Last Changeling is an exact replica of The Iron Fey, only a much darker version.
Thankfully, that isn't the case.
In actuality, The Last Changeling is a talking book. Chelsea Pitcher's latest work certainly didn't sprout a mouth and start speaking to me. Although it would be really cool to have a talking book. "Morning, Last Changeling! Please summarize what I read three weeks ago. Thank you!"
(Should that actually happen, I would probably use it a lot. For the books whose sequels I read years later. *cough* Matched *cough*)
See, one of our main characters, Elora, is a Dark Faery Princess on a quest for the Bright/Seelie Queen. Our other main character is a dude by the name of Taylor who is a soccer player and has great morality, but the guy honestly puts himself down far too much. They meet... at a swing set, and because "Lora" doesn't seem to have a place to go, Taylor offers to let her stay at his house.
Thus begins the talking. And more talking. About faery history, which essentially leads to well... Elora's history (always a great idea for us to know the characters of course, especially the main ones). By the end of the book, you'll know Elora pretty well, and meanwhile... it's pretty much expected Taylor and Elora will fall heads over heels in love from their first meeting. The characters just don't admit it (not that any pair of fictional characters ever do).
Plus, Taylor and I are distant buddies. Quite distant, because it seems as though Pitcher focuses a little too much on Elora and the reader knowing Elora yet neglecting Taylor.
So basically my biggest question is this: Is Elora's quest just talking, trying to acclimate to the mortal world, while trying to figure out the answer to the Bright Queen's riddle which was off the charts wrong? I was sort of expecting adventure. Fireballs! Or... shadowballs in this case...
But I most certainly did not expect talking. Lots and lots of talking.
I guess I'm the reader who prefers the blood and gore. Occasionally, the fluffy, bunny book (NOT like eating bunny tails, as Ella likes to say. Though I suppose that's accurate as well.) is enjoyable.
On the bright side, I do think Elora and Taylor go well together. By the end of the story, Taylor seems much more confident and seems to stand up for himself rather than letting others push him around. And Elora, despite the fact her lack of knowledge of the mortal world is hilarious, makes a great impact to those who would rather be a doormat and not stand up for themselves. I personally think Chelsea Pitcher's latest novel sends a strong message across to readers, even though there's far too much talking than "questing."
----------------------
Advanced copy provided by Flux for review (and the blog tour)
Original Rating: 3.5 out of 5
Original Review posted at <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2014/11/blog-tour-the-last-changeling-by-chelsea-pitcher-arc-review-and-giveaway.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cG5gfBqJVzk/VA5BIojjZ9I/AAAAAAAAD1g/7srLUfpAGEU/s1600/banner.png"; /></a>
Thankfully, that isn't the case.
In actuality, The Last Changeling is a talking book. Chelsea Pitcher's latest work certainly didn't sprout a mouth and start speaking to me. Although it would be really cool to have a talking book. "Morning, Last Changeling! Please summarize what I read three weeks ago. Thank you!"
(Should that actually happen, I would probably use it a lot. For the books whose sequels I read years later. *cough* Matched *cough*)
See, one of our main characters, Elora, is a Dark Faery Princess on a quest for the Bright/Seelie Queen. Our other main character is a dude by the name of Taylor who is a soccer player and has great morality, but the guy honestly puts himself down far too much. They meet... at a swing set, and because "Lora" doesn't seem to have a place to go, Taylor offers to let her stay at his house.
Thus begins the talking. And more talking. About faery history, which essentially leads to well... Elora's history (always a great idea for us to know the characters of course, especially the main ones). By the end of the book, you'll know Elora pretty well, and meanwhile... it's pretty much expected Taylor and Elora will fall heads over heels in love from their first meeting. The characters just don't admit it (not that any pair of fictional characters ever do).
Plus, Taylor and I are distant buddies. Quite distant, because it seems as though Pitcher focuses a little too much on Elora and the reader knowing Elora yet neglecting Taylor.
So basically my biggest question is this: Is Elora's quest just talking, trying to acclimate to the mortal world, while trying to figure out the answer to the Bright Queen's riddle which was off the charts wrong? I was sort of expecting adventure. Fireballs! Or... shadowballs in this case...
But I most certainly did not expect talking. Lots and lots of talking.
I guess I'm the reader who prefers the blood and gore. Occasionally, the fluffy, bunny book (NOT like eating bunny tails, as Ella likes to say. Though I suppose that's accurate as well.) is enjoyable.
On the bright side, I do think Elora and Taylor go well together. By the end of the story, Taylor seems much more confident and seems to stand up for himself rather than letting others push him around. And Elora, despite the fact her lack of knowledge of the mortal world is hilarious, makes a great impact to those who would rather be a doormat and not stand up for themselves. I personally think Chelsea Pitcher's latest novel sends a strong message across to readers, even though there's far too much talking than "questing."
----------------------
Advanced copy provided by Flux for review (and the blog tour)
Original Rating: 3.5 out of 5
Original Review posted at <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2014/11/blog-tour-the-last-changeling-by-chelsea-pitcher-arc-review-and-giveaway.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cG5gfBqJVzk/VA5BIojjZ9I/AAAAAAAAD1g/7srLUfpAGEU/s1600/banner.png"; /></a>
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated The Dragon Warrior in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<b><i>The author/publisher provided a free copy of the book for review purposes - thank you! Receiving a review copy does not guarantee a positive review and therefore do not affect the opinion or content of the review.</i></b>
<h2><strong><em>The Dragon Warrior</em> is such a fun and delightful read</strong></h2>
<strong>I'm 1000% sure the middle school me who got swallowed by </strong><em><strong>Percy Jackson & the Olympians</strong></em><strong> would devour this book</strong> as quickly as she inhales all the dumplings, stuffed buns and dim sum. (Look, they're comfort food.) <em>The Dragon Warrior</em> really brings back the nostalgia of those times. <strong>Katie Zhao wrote a beautiful novel that promises fun and adventure featuring Chinese mythology.</strong>
Zhao's debut novel follows twelve-year-old Faryn Liu as she is revealed to be the Heaven Breaker after she crosses paths with a demon during Lunar New Year Festivities. She and her companions set off on a quest across various Chinatowns to find the island of immortals so she can prove she is worthy to take on the role.
But both she and her brother are outcasts in the Jade Society and have been treated as such for years. To the members in her local Jade Society, she's not worthy of such an important role and it's not something she plans for either (does any twelve-year-old though?). But despite frequently thinking about ròu bāo zi (I don't blame her; meat dumplings are delicious), Faryn readily steps into the role even if she might know what she's doing or feel ready to potentially command an army.
<h2><strong>Full of adventure and humor</strong></h2>
<strong><em>The Dragon Warrior</em> is a huge nod to my childhood, featuring various deities and other well-known figures from Chinese mythology.</strong> They're full of wit and sass that brought a constant smile to my face as they aided or deterred Faryn and her companions in the quest. The novel brings in aspects of family, tradition and honor, all of which are important parts of Chinese culture. It's clear throughout the novel Faryn has a strong bond with not just her brother, but also her Ye Ye.
<strong>Zhao's debut novel is a fast-paced, page-turning adventure that is chock full of humor</strong>; it's easy to forget this is a debut as this is extremely well-written, and I loved every second of it. Honestly, the only thing I'm disappointed is there probably won't be any sequels. (Someone please tell me there will be one???) <strong><em>The Dragon Warrior</em> is an engrossing story featuring Chinese mythology and tying in various aspects of the culture; </strong>I highly recommend this to Chinese American readers who want to see themselves in a world where Chinese mythology clashes into the modern world.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/the-dragon-warrior-by-katie-zhao/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<h2><strong><em>The Dragon Warrior</em> is such a fun and delightful read</strong></h2>
<strong>I'm 1000% sure the middle school me who got swallowed by </strong><em><strong>Percy Jackson & the Olympians</strong></em><strong> would devour this book</strong> as quickly as she inhales all the dumplings, stuffed buns and dim sum. (Look, they're comfort food.) <em>The Dragon Warrior</em> really brings back the nostalgia of those times. <strong>Katie Zhao wrote a beautiful novel that promises fun and adventure featuring Chinese mythology.</strong>
Zhao's debut novel follows twelve-year-old Faryn Liu as she is revealed to be the Heaven Breaker after she crosses paths with a demon during Lunar New Year Festivities. She and her companions set off on a quest across various Chinatowns to find the island of immortals so she can prove she is worthy to take on the role.
But both she and her brother are outcasts in the Jade Society and have been treated as such for years. To the members in her local Jade Society, she's not worthy of such an important role and it's not something she plans for either (does any twelve-year-old though?). But despite frequently thinking about ròu bāo zi (I don't blame her; meat dumplings are delicious), Faryn readily steps into the role even if she might know what she's doing or feel ready to potentially command an army.
<h2><strong>Full of adventure and humor</strong></h2>
<strong><em>The Dragon Warrior</em> is a huge nod to my childhood, featuring various deities and other well-known figures from Chinese mythology.</strong> They're full of wit and sass that brought a constant smile to my face as they aided or deterred Faryn and her companions in the quest. The novel brings in aspects of family, tradition and honor, all of which are important parts of Chinese culture. It's clear throughout the novel Faryn has a strong bond with not just her brother, but also her Ye Ye.
<strong>Zhao's debut novel is a fast-paced, page-turning adventure that is chock full of humor</strong>; it's easy to forget this is a debut as this is extremely well-written, and I loved every second of it. Honestly, the only thing I'm disappointed is there probably won't be any sequels. (Someone please tell me there will be one???) <strong><em>The Dragon Warrior</em> is an engrossing story featuring Chinese mythology and tying in various aspects of the culture; </strong>I highly recommend this to Chinese American readers who want to see themselves in a world where Chinese mythology clashes into the modern world.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/the-dragon-warrior-by-katie-zhao/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Hitman's Wife's Bodyguard (2021) in Movies
Jun 22, 2021
No tension in the thriller elements (1 more)
Some shoddy special effects.
A movie that’s a pain in the A-double-dollar sign.
Struck-off bodyguard Michael Bryce (Ryan Reynolds) is plagued with nightmares about his failures, brought about by his nemesis Darius Kincaid (Samuel L Jackson) and his potty-mouthed wife Sonia (Salma Hayek). On doctor’s orders, he ‘retires’ from the business. But when Europe’s infrastructure is threatened by Greek megalomaniac Aristotle Papdopolous (Antonio Banderas) he is rudely dragged away from his briefly peaceful life and pitched back into utter mayhem.
Positives:
- As a comedy thriller, it does pass the '6 laughs test' in terms of the 'comedy' element. Some of these are minor chuckles. A few are really good belly laughs.
- Among these are some of the outrageous tirades of Salma Hayek: her accent makes some of the dialogue unintelligible, but given its X-rated nature, that's not necessarily a bad thing! As a mid-50's actress (Oh God - - don't tell her I mentioned her age!), Ms Hayek indeed has an arrestingly attractive form.
- Seeing Antonio Banderas and Morgan Freeman on the screen is never anything other than a positive. (Although Banderas is like Sean Connery in failing to tailor his natural accent to any role he's ever in!)
Negatives:
- A general problem I have with 'comedy thrillers' is that the comedy nearly always negates any of the thrills. Ryan Reynolds is not playing Deadpool in this one, although he might as well be doing so based on the number of times he is hit by cars and other solid objects. The result is that although it has the trappings of a Bond or a Bourne - exotic locations (here, mostly Italian ones) ; exotic woman; car chases; heavily-armed henchmen; huge explosions - it delivers none of the tension or excitement. When matched with some rather dodgy post-shoot special effects, the effect is generally underwhelming.
- If there was an award for the clumsiest movie title of 2021, we may already have a winner.
Summary Thoughts on "The Hitman's Wife's Bodyguard": Sequels are very occasionally better. Often they are much worse. This one, I have to say, delivers very much "more of the same". Given that the writer/director team of Tom O'Connor and Patrick Hughes are in the driving seat, that's not much of a surprise. The shtick is mildly diverting, occasionally downright funny, but quickly outstays its welcome. The 100 minute run time felt, for me, much longer.
Looking back at my 2017 review of the first film, I think I was being over-kind giving it 6/10. I think this is neither better nor worse. So if you want to average the two and give each 5/10, I wouldn't object! But, again, it's one I will struggle to remember much about in a few month's time.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/06/22/the-hitmans-wifes-bodyguard-a-movie-thats-a-pain-in-the-a-double-dollar-sign/. Thanks).
Positives:
- As a comedy thriller, it does pass the '6 laughs test' in terms of the 'comedy' element. Some of these are minor chuckles. A few are really good belly laughs.
- Among these are some of the outrageous tirades of Salma Hayek: her accent makes some of the dialogue unintelligible, but given its X-rated nature, that's not necessarily a bad thing! As a mid-50's actress (Oh God - - don't tell her I mentioned her age!), Ms Hayek indeed has an arrestingly attractive form.
- Seeing Antonio Banderas and Morgan Freeman on the screen is never anything other than a positive. (Although Banderas is like Sean Connery in failing to tailor his natural accent to any role he's ever in!)
Negatives:
- A general problem I have with 'comedy thrillers' is that the comedy nearly always negates any of the thrills. Ryan Reynolds is not playing Deadpool in this one, although he might as well be doing so based on the number of times he is hit by cars and other solid objects. The result is that although it has the trappings of a Bond or a Bourne - exotic locations (here, mostly Italian ones) ; exotic woman; car chases; heavily-armed henchmen; huge explosions - it delivers none of the tension or excitement. When matched with some rather dodgy post-shoot special effects, the effect is generally underwhelming.
- If there was an award for the clumsiest movie title of 2021, we may already have a winner.
Summary Thoughts on "The Hitman's Wife's Bodyguard": Sequels are very occasionally better. Often they are much worse. This one, I have to say, delivers very much "more of the same". Given that the writer/director team of Tom O'Connor and Patrick Hughes are in the driving seat, that's not much of a surprise. The shtick is mildly diverting, occasionally downright funny, but quickly outstays its welcome. The 100 minute run time felt, for me, much longer.
Looking back at my 2017 review of the first film, I think I was being over-kind giving it 6/10. I think this is neither better nor worse. So if you want to average the two and give each 5/10, I wouldn't object! But, again, it's one I will struggle to remember much about in a few month's time.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/06/22/the-hitmans-wifes-bodyguard-a-movie-thats-a-pain-in-the-a-double-dollar-sign/. Thanks).
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Prey (2022) in Movies
Aug 12, 2022
Less Is More - And It Works!
In 1987, at the height of the ‘80’s action movie craze with the likes of Stallone, Van Damme, Segal, Norris and Willis, Arnold Schwarzenegger came out with what on the surface looked like a throw away macho, sci-fi action flick, PREDATOR. What it turned out to be was one of the all-time classic action films.
It has taken 35 years for a sequel (in this case, a prequel) to be mentioned in the same stratosphere as the first.
While the other 5 sequels (if you count the Alien vs. Predator cross-over films) delve deeper and harder into the science fiction and macho-action of the first film, the straight-to-streaming prequel PREY (on Hulu and now on Disney+) decided to go in the other direction, it simplified the Predator/Prey dynamic, eschewing deep sci-fi mythology and settled on the “less is more” dictum of storytelling to great affect.
Set in the Midwestern Plains in the 1710’s, PREY follows a group of Comanches as they live their unassuming lifestyle - living off and giving back to the land. A lifestyle that is slowly being encroached upon by foreign entities. At first these “aliens” are terrestrial in nature (the approach of the White Man, in this case, they are in the guise of French Voyageurs), but later, in it takes the form of the extraterrestrial Predator. It’s an interesting juxtaposition of the duo forces outside of what this tribe of Native Americans know - and how they deal with it.
Leading us into the conflict are the main protagonists - the brother/sister combo of Naru (Amber Midthunder, HELL OR HIGHWATER) and her older brother, Taabe (Dakota Beavers, in what is his feature film debut). These 2 - along with their Comanche brethren track and then begin to understand what they are encountering and since they know they are out-gunned, they need to outsmart the Predator.
This could have devolved, quickly, into a gorey, CGI-fest of carnage, but in the careful hands of Director Dan Trachtenberg (10 CLOVERFIELD LANE) and with an interesting screenplay by Trachtenberg and Patrick Aison, this film becomes a thoughtful, intelligence game of wits that is satisfying on both sides.
Midthunder and Beavers are very strong in their roles of the brother and sister Comanches and they are 2 characters that you quickly start rooting for in their battle. These characters are drawn in an interesting, 3-dimensional, way and are a pair that you want to spend these 2 hours of struggle with.
Trachtenberg helps these 2 - and the story - by setting a deliberate pace, as if you the audience are thinking and encountering things along with these 2. There are long bits of thought and talk highlighted by spikes of action that are well choreographed and interesting, but really add to the depths of the characters.
I am as surprised as you are that I encountered an interesting character study in disguise in an action-packed Predator film - but that is just what this is…and very well done to boot.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
It has taken 35 years for a sequel (in this case, a prequel) to be mentioned in the same stratosphere as the first.
While the other 5 sequels (if you count the Alien vs. Predator cross-over films) delve deeper and harder into the science fiction and macho-action of the first film, the straight-to-streaming prequel PREY (on Hulu and now on Disney+) decided to go in the other direction, it simplified the Predator/Prey dynamic, eschewing deep sci-fi mythology and settled on the “less is more” dictum of storytelling to great affect.
Set in the Midwestern Plains in the 1710’s, PREY follows a group of Comanches as they live their unassuming lifestyle - living off and giving back to the land. A lifestyle that is slowly being encroached upon by foreign entities. At first these “aliens” are terrestrial in nature (the approach of the White Man, in this case, they are in the guise of French Voyageurs), but later, in it takes the form of the extraterrestrial Predator. It’s an interesting juxtaposition of the duo forces outside of what this tribe of Native Americans know - and how they deal with it.
Leading us into the conflict are the main protagonists - the brother/sister combo of Naru (Amber Midthunder, HELL OR HIGHWATER) and her older brother, Taabe (Dakota Beavers, in what is his feature film debut). These 2 - along with their Comanche brethren track and then begin to understand what they are encountering and since they know they are out-gunned, they need to outsmart the Predator.
This could have devolved, quickly, into a gorey, CGI-fest of carnage, but in the careful hands of Director Dan Trachtenberg (10 CLOVERFIELD LANE) and with an interesting screenplay by Trachtenberg and Patrick Aison, this film becomes a thoughtful, intelligence game of wits that is satisfying on both sides.
Midthunder and Beavers are very strong in their roles of the brother and sister Comanches and they are 2 characters that you quickly start rooting for in their battle. These characters are drawn in an interesting, 3-dimensional, way and are a pair that you want to spend these 2 hours of struggle with.
Trachtenberg helps these 2 - and the story - by setting a deliberate pace, as if you the audience are thinking and encountering things along with these 2. There are long bits of thought and talk highlighted by spikes of action that are well choreographed and interesting, but really add to the depths of the characters.
I am as surprised as you are that I encountered an interesting character study in disguise in an action-packed Predator film - but that is just what this is…and very well done to boot.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Dark Tower (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
10 years in the making
A film adaptation of Stephen King’s wildly successful Dark Tower novels has been rumoured for over a decade. In 2007, J.J. Abrams was attached to direct the film but dropped out in December 2009.
Then, in 2010, veteran director Ron Howard was to head the project, but that fell through in 2015. Finally, by June 2015 the film entered full-steam ahead production with Danish filmmaker Nikolaj Arcel at the helm.
So, 10 years on from the first murmurings of a Dark Tower film were discovered, what is the finished product like? And does it capture the wonder of that eight-novel behemoth by King?Roland Deschain (Idris Elba), the last Gunslinger, is locked in an eternal battle with Walter O’Dim (Matthew McConaughey), also known as the Man in Black. The Gunslinger must prevent the Man in Black from toppling the Dark Tower, the key that holds the universe together. With the fate of worlds at stake, two men collide in the ultimate battle between good and evil.
Unfortunately, this troubled production has resulted in a film that’s biggest sin is its averageness. There’s not a single thing about The Dark Tower that stands out as unique, even with charismatic stars like Matthew McCounaughey and Idris Elba at the helm.
The two of them perform well with the overtly expositional dialogue and Elba just reeks of charisma, despite the dross he unfortunately has to spout from time to time. Newcomer Tom Taylor is fine, but it pains me to say it, just a little bit bland.
The plot is nigh on impossible to understand for those who haven’t read King’s books with a story that never fully explains what the titular tower even does. How on earth can a film enter production without a script that fully describes such a vital plot point? It’d be like Mad Max: Fury Road never actually featuring Max, just referencing him occasionally.
Elsewhere, Tom Holkenborg’s score is bland, the special effects just about as average as you can get and the cinematography uninspiring. This is such a shame, because moments of excellence shine through.
The action is choreographed to a good standard and the sequences in which Elba and Taylor visit Earth are an enjoyable fish-out-of-water style distraction from an otherwise disappointing script. Think Thor on Earth but in NYC rather than New Mexico.
Ultimately though, films like this get me a little angry and I feel frustrated just writing this review. With eight books in which to take nuggets of story from, the film just kind of plods along for 95 minutes. I’m not normally one for suggesting a movie be longer, but The Dark Tower really did need an extra 30 minutes at least to flesh out the characters and plot.
Overall, despite two commanding performances from its lead stars, The Dark Tower is a royal mess. In a year that has featured numerous disappointing sequels, Sony could’ve kicked things up a gear with something completely new. In the end, we’re left with a film as bland and average as you can possibly get. What a shame.
Let’s just hope that It is the King adaptation we’ve been waiting for.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/08/19/the-dark-tower-review-10-years-in-the-making/
Then, in 2010, veteran director Ron Howard was to head the project, but that fell through in 2015. Finally, by June 2015 the film entered full-steam ahead production with Danish filmmaker Nikolaj Arcel at the helm.
So, 10 years on from the first murmurings of a Dark Tower film were discovered, what is the finished product like? And does it capture the wonder of that eight-novel behemoth by King?Roland Deschain (Idris Elba), the last Gunslinger, is locked in an eternal battle with Walter O’Dim (Matthew McConaughey), also known as the Man in Black. The Gunslinger must prevent the Man in Black from toppling the Dark Tower, the key that holds the universe together. With the fate of worlds at stake, two men collide in the ultimate battle between good and evil.
Unfortunately, this troubled production has resulted in a film that’s biggest sin is its averageness. There’s not a single thing about The Dark Tower that stands out as unique, even with charismatic stars like Matthew McCounaughey and Idris Elba at the helm.
The two of them perform well with the overtly expositional dialogue and Elba just reeks of charisma, despite the dross he unfortunately has to spout from time to time. Newcomer Tom Taylor is fine, but it pains me to say it, just a little bit bland.
The plot is nigh on impossible to understand for those who haven’t read King’s books with a story that never fully explains what the titular tower even does. How on earth can a film enter production without a script that fully describes such a vital plot point? It’d be like Mad Max: Fury Road never actually featuring Max, just referencing him occasionally.
Elsewhere, Tom Holkenborg’s score is bland, the special effects just about as average as you can get and the cinematography uninspiring. This is such a shame, because moments of excellence shine through.
The action is choreographed to a good standard and the sequences in which Elba and Taylor visit Earth are an enjoyable fish-out-of-water style distraction from an otherwise disappointing script. Think Thor on Earth but in NYC rather than New Mexico.
Ultimately though, films like this get me a little angry and I feel frustrated just writing this review. With eight books in which to take nuggets of story from, the film just kind of plods along for 95 minutes. I’m not normally one for suggesting a movie be longer, but The Dark Tower really did need an extra 30 minutes at least to flesh out the characters and plot.
Overall, despite two commanding performances from its lead stars, The Dark Tower is a royal mess. In a year that has featured numerous disappointing sequels, Sony could’ve kicked things up a gear with something completely new. In the end, we’re left with a film as bland and average as you can possibly get. What a shame.
Let’s just hope that It is the King adaptation we’ve been waiting for.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/08/19/the-dark-tower-review-10-years-in-the-making/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Independence Day: Resurgence (2016) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Good sci-fi, but a poor sequel
Independence Day: Resurgence has a lot in common with last year’s Jurassic World. They both are long-awaited sequels to fan-favourite blockbusters, bringing a new generation the same thrills and spills of their forbearers.
Unfortunately, it just so happens that they share the same pitfalls too. But is Independence Day: Resurgence a match for its 1996 predecessor? Or does it crash and burn?
Roland Emmerich returns to the director’s chair, bringing the same breadth of destruction he’s brought to all of his films. The Day After Tomorrow, 2012 and White House Down all prove he’s the master of the apocalypse and Resurgence is no exception.
As the Fourth of July nears, satellite engineer David Levinson (Jeff Goldblum) investigates a 3,000-mile-wide mother ship that’s approaching Earth. Fortunately, 20 years earlier, nations across the world started to use recovered extra-terrestrial technology to develop an immense defence program. When the alien invaders attack with unprecedented force, the U.S. president, teams of scientists and brave fighter pilots spring into action to save the planet from a seemingly invincible enemy.
Emmerich throws everything he can at the screen in a film just shy of two hours. The pace rarely lets up and it’s a rollercoaster ride to watch. Dozens of global landmarks are destroyed as our characters race to stop the new alien invasion.
Liam Hemsworth (The Hunger Games), Sela Ward (Gone Girl) and Jessie Usher make up the majority of the new cast with Bill Pullman and Judd Hirsch providing a warm sense of nostalgia from the first film. There’s no return for Will Smith, with Jessie Usher playing his step-son and his character is conveniently written out.
Unfortunately, despite the talents of the new cast, the script doesn’t really give them anything to sink their teeth into and the overabundance of, admittedly breath-taking CGI, means there’s nothing there for them to react to – and it shows. Nevertheless, it’s nice to see Jeff Goldblum front and centre after nearly a decade of small film roles.
It’s just a shame that the script is wholly unoriginal. We saw most of it done in 1996, and frankly done better. Since then, there have been countless generic sci-fi flicks that have pushed the same simple premise on their audience and Resurgence suffers due to its timing more than anything else.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s all good fun IF you’re a fan of the genre, and there are some nice references to the first film. The aliens themselves look fantastic and the cinematography is generally very impressive, especially during the aerial bound action sequences.
However, things unravel at the finale. With what is undoubtedly one of the most stupid endings ever put to film, it’s hard not to laugh in amazement as you ponder just what was said around the production table to end up with a final act as ill-advised as this.
Overall, Independence Day: Resurgence has a lot going for it. A likeable new and returning cast is bolstered by brilliant, if overused, CGI and a frantic pace. Unfortunately, it’s a victim of its timing and as such is a decent sci-fi flick, but a poor sequel to its fantastic predecessor.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/06/24/good-sci-fi-but-a-poor-sequel-independence-day-resurgence-review/
Unfortunately, it just so happens that they share the same pitfalls too. But is Independence Day: Resurgence a match for its 1996 predecessor? Or does it crash and burn?
Roland Emmerich returns to the director’s chair, bringing the same breadth of destruction he’s brought to all of his films. The Day After Tomorrow, 2012 and White House Down all prove he’s the master of the apocalypse and Resurgence is no exception.
As the Fourth of July nears, satellite engineer David Levinson (Jeff Goldblum) investigates a 3,000-mile-wide mother ship that’s approaching Earth. Fortunately, 20 years earlier, nations across the world started to use recovered extra-terrestrial technology to develop an immense defence program. When the alien invaders attack with unprecedented force, the U.S. president, teams of scientists and brave fighter pilots spring into action to save the planet from a seemingly invincible enemy.
Emmerich throws everything he can at the screen in a film just shy of two hours. The pace rarely lets up and it’s a rollercoaster ride to watch. Dozens of global landmarks are destroyed as our characters race to stop the new alien invasion.
Liam Hemsworth (The Hunger Games), Sela Ward (Gone Girl) and Jessie Usher make up the majority of the new cast with Bill Pullman and Judd Hirsch providing a warm sense of nostalgia from the first film. There’s no return for Will Smith, with Jessie Usher playing his step-son and his character is conveniently written out.
Unfortunately, despite the talents of the new cast, the script doesn’t really give them anything to sink their teeth into and the overabundance of, admittedly breath-taking CGI, means there’s nothing there for them to react to – and it shows. Nevertheless, it’s nice to see Jeff Goldblum front and centre after nearly a decade of small film roles.
It’s just a shame that the script is wholly unoriginal. We saw most of it done in 1996, and frankly done better. Since then, there have been countless generic sci-fi flicks that have pushed the same simple premise on their audience and Resurgence suffers due to its timing more than anything else.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s all good fun IF you’re a fan of the genre, and there are some nice references to the first film. The aliens themselves look fantastic and the cinematography is generally very impressive, especially during the aerial bound action sequences.
However, things unravel at the finale. With what is undoubtedly one of the most stupid endings ever put to film, it’s hard not to laugh in amazement as you ponder just what was said around the production table to end up with a final act as ill-advised as this.
Overall, Independence Day: Resurgence has a lot going for it. A likeable new and returning cast is bolstered by brilliant, if overused, CGI and a frantic pace. Unfortunately, it’s a victim of its timing and as such is a decent sci-fi flick, but a poor sequel to its fantastic predecessor.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/06/24/good-sci-fi-but-a-poor-sequel-independence-day-resurgence-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Scream 4 (2011) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Horror films have been in a steady decline for the past few years with countless remakes and sequels to some of the most loved horror franchises. After an 8 year hiatus, Wes Craven resurrects the seemingly dead Scream series with some fantastic results. Scream 4 does for horror what the original did way back in 1996; it carves out a new direction for what has been a lifeless genre.
Scre4m sees Neve Campbell return as Sidney Prescott alongside the much loved Courtney Cox and David Arquette as Gale Riley (previously Weathers) and Dewey Riley respectively. This time, the story focuses on Sidney Prescott returning to her hometown of Woodsboro promoting a book about her life. Of course, this is Scream; so it’s not all plain sailing and her arrival beckons the return of ‘Ghostface’ and his (or her) grisly murders.
The first Scream was well-known for poking fun at the genre and the latest instalment is no exception. It wraps a sublime mix of comedy and self-awareness with the sharp horror which made the first trilogy such a hit. The success in this film is that it never takes itself too seriously, and neither do the cast who look like they’re having a bloody good time. 8 years on and they don’t look like they’re too long in the tooth for this kind of madness, which is an unusual thing. By far the standout performance is from Courtney Cox who slips seamlessly back into the role of Gale and shows the audience why she was the perfect choice for her part.
However, it isn’t all about the veteran stars, some new talent joins the ranks and what better place to start than in a film which has the opportunity of revitalising a tarnished and battered genre. Nico Torterella joins the franchise as Trevor Sheldon, playing a similar part to that of Skeet Ulrich as Billy Loomis in the original. Torterella, with his limited characterisation does very well and steps into the shoes of the creepy ex-boyfriend role exceptionally. But who is he the ex-boyfriend of I hear you cry? Well, Emma Roberts comes to the series for the first time as Jill Roberts, Sidney Prescott’s cousin. Emma plays the part well and in fact provides some of the standout lines throughout the entire film.
Anna Paquin also gets a short cameo in the introduction of the film; much like Drew Barrymore did in the first.
Scream 4 is much like the first with its comedic timing and as such is one of the better instalments in the series, stopping short of being the best. It has been directed very well but is slightly too long and the constant guessing game of who is to blame for the murders can wear thin if you’re not in the mood for Cluedo. The fantastic characters, portrayed brilliantly by their real-life counterparts and the excellent story really are the highlights of a film which has succeeded in what it set out to achieve. Here, 8 years on from Scream 3 and 15 years; yes 15 years on from the original, Scream 4 revitalises the horror genre and is in every respect, brilliant.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2011/04/30/scream-4-2011/
Scre4m sees Neve Campbell return as Sidney Prescott alongside the much loved Courtney Cox and David Arquette as Gale Riley (previously Weathers) and Dewey Riley respectively. This time, the story focuses on Sidney Prescott returning to her hometown of Woodsboro promoting a book about her life. Of course, this is Scream; so it’s not all plain sailing and her arrival beckons the return of ‘Ghostface’ and his (or her) grisly murders.
The first Scream was well-known for poking fun at the genre and the latest instalment is no exception. It wraps a sublime mix of comedy and self-awareness with the sharp horror which made the first trilogy such a hit. The success in this film is that it never takes itself too seriously, and neither do the cast who look like they’re having a bloody good time. 8 years on and they don’t look like they’re too long in the tooth for this kind of madness, which is an unusual thing. By far the standout performance is from Courtney Cox who slips seamlessly back into the role of Gale and shows the audience why she was the perfect choice for her part.
However, it isn’t all about the veteran stars, some new talent joins the ranks and what better place to start than in a film which has the opportunity of revitalising a tarnished and battered genre. Nico Torterella joins the franchise as Trevor Sheldon, playing a similar part to that of Skeet Ulrich as Billy Loomis in the original. Torterella, with his limited characterisation does very well and steps into the shoes of the creepy ex-boyfriend role exceptionally. But who is he the ex-boyfriend of I hear you cry? Well, Emma Roberts comes to the series for the first time as Jill Roberts, Sidney Prescott’s cousin. Emma plays the part well and in fact provides some of the standout lines throughout the entire film.
Anna Paquin also gets a short cameo in the introduction of the film; much like Drew Barrymore did in the first.
Scream 4 is much like the first with its comedic timing and as such is one of the better instalments in the series, stopping short of being the best. It has been directed very well but is slightly too long and the constant guessing game of who is to blame for the murders can wear thin if you’re not in the mood for Cluedo. The fantastic characters, portrayed brilliantly by their real-life counterparts and the excellent story really are the highlights of a film which has succeeded in what it set out to achieve. Here, 8 years on from Scream 3 and 15 years; yes 15 years on from the original, Scream 4 revitalises the horror genre and is in every respect, brilliant.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2011/04/30/scream-4-2011/