Search
Search results
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Bird Box (2018) in Movies
Feb 1, 2019
Almost a good movie
One of my favorite films of 2018 is A QUIET PLACE where aliens with extreme hearing can get you if you make a noise. It is a quite interesting and well made film (with a bravura performance by Emily Blunt), so when I heard there was a variant of this theme (this time you can't use your eyes), I decided to check it out and to see if Sandra Bullock could pull off the same sort of bravura performance as Blunt.
And, that's too bad, for by comparison the Netflix flick BIRD BOX is no A QUIET PLACE, but if I don't try to compare it to A QUIET PLACE, BIRD BOX is a very entertaining film, indeed.
The story follows Bullock as Malorie a pregnant single woman who holds no "maternal instinct" towards her unborn child. Malorie is devoid of emotion and compassion and is dreading the day that her child will be born. Enter into this an "end of world event" where unseen aliens show up and, if you look at them, you go insane and try to commit suicide. Amidst this chaos, Malorie and a ragtag assortment of survivors find shelter in the house of Douglas (John Malkovich). Can this disparate group of strangers find a way to survive in this insane new world?
Well...the fun in this kind of movie is in the characters trapped together and the "10 Little Indians" style of demise as the house guests are picked off one by one by the aliens (or each other). It is the drama of these trapped individuals, and the surprise and the ingenuity of how they are killed off that makes or breaks these types of films.
And in this way, this film succeeds very well for besides Bullock and Malkovich, the housemates are filled with (for the most part) a strong grouping of actors led, most notably, by Trevante Rhodes (MOONLIGHT) and Jacki Weaver (ANIMAL KINGDOM). They are strong presences in this household and are interesting to watch. Good ol' B.D. Wong (JURASSIC PARK among many, many credits) brings his usual, solid game and Lil Rey Howery (GET OUT) brings much needed energy and humor to the proceedings. Add to this the usual, creepy Tom Hollander (IN THE LOOP) as a mysterious houseguest who is...creepy...and there is enough going on to keep my interest.
Add to this the always intriguing work of Malkovich as the paranoid, "me first" homeowner and Bullock underplaying her emotions as a counterbalance to Malkovich overplaying his emotions and the scenes in the house were interesting and (at times) gripping.
The problem I have with this film is that it inter cuts these scenes with scenes of Bullock (and a few other survivors from the house) "5 years later" - so, you already know who makes it and who doesn't - which takes away the tension of the house scenes. It also has an ending that, quite frankly, I saw coming a mile off and so it was not a satisfying conclusion to the proceedings for the ending was uneventful and unsurprising. A poor way to end this sort of film.
Don't get me wrong, the scenes in the house of the initial group of survivors is well worth viewing this film, I just wish Director Susanne Bier (THE NIGHT MANAGER) didn't dilute these scenes by bringing us forward in time too soon. I wonder how much better this film could have been had we just watched the events of the film (including all of the "5 years later scenes") in chronological order, I gotta think it would have been a better film.
This is, by every definition of the term, a "B" film, perfect for a snow, rain or cold-bound afternoon at home.
Letter Grade: B
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And, that's too bad, for by comparison the Netflix flick BIRD BOX is no A QUIET PLACE, but if I don't try to compare it to A QUIET PLACE, BIRD BOX is a very entertaining film, indeed.
The story follows Bullock as Malorie a pregnant single woman who holds no "maternal instinct" towards her unborn child. Malorie is devoid of emotion and compassion and is dreading the day that her child will be born. Enter into this an "end of world event" where unseen aliens show up and, if you look at them, you go insane and try to commit suicide. Amidst this chaos, Malorie and a ragtag assortment of survivors find shelter in the house of Douglas (John Malkovich). Can this disparate group of strangers find a way to survive in this insane new world?
Well...the fun in this kind of movie is in the characters trapped together and the "10 Little Indians" style of demise as the house guests are picked off one by one by the aliens (or each other). It is the drama of these trapped individuals, and the surprise and the ingenuity of how they are killed off that makes or breaks these types of films.
And in this way, this film succeeds very well for besides Bullock and Malkovich, the housemates are filled with (for the most part) a strong grouping of actors led, most notably, by Trevante Rhodes (MOONLIGHT) and Jacki Weaver (ANIMAL KINGDOM). They are strong presences in this household and are interesting to watch. Good ol' B.D. Wong (JURASSIC PARK among many, many credits) brings his usual, solid game and Lil Rey Howery (GET OUT) brings much needed energy and humor to the proceedings. Add to this the usual, creepy Tom Hollander (IN THE LOOP) as a mysterious houseguest who is...creepy...and there is enough going on to keep my interest.
Add to this the always intriguing work of Malkovich as the paranoid, "me first" homeowner and Bullock underplaying her emotions as a counterbalance to Malkovich overplaying his emotions and the scenes in the house were interesting and (at times) gripping.
The problem I have with this film is that it inter cuts these scenes with scenes of Bullock (and a few other survivors from the house) "5 years later" - so, you already know who makes it and who doesn't - which takes away the tension of the house scenes. It also has an ending that, quite frankly, I saw coming a mile off and so it was not a satisfying conclusion to the proceedings for the ending was uneventful and unsurprising. A poor way to end this sort of film.
Don't get me wrong, the scenes in the house of the initial group of survivors is well worth viewing this film, I just wish Director Susanne Bier (THE NIGHT MANAGER) didn't dilute these scenes by bringing us forward in time too soon. I wonder how much better this film could have been had we just watched the events of the film (including all of the "5 years later scenes") in chronological order, I gotta think it would have been a better film.
This is, by every definition of the term, a "B" film, perfect for a snow, rain or cold-bound afternoon at home.
Letter Grade: B
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Roanoke Girls in Books
Feb 1, 2018
Lane Roanoke is just a teenager when her mother commits suicide, and Lane is sent to live with her grandparents in Kansas. While Lane lived a sad life with her depressed, volatile mother, her wealthy grandparents represent a chance for a new start - and Lane can meet her cousin, Allegra, who is close to her age. But when Lane arrives in Kansas, while she quickly befriends Allegra and is amazed by the kindness of her grandfather, she also realizes not everything is as it seems.
Eleven years later, after Lane has fled the farm (and left her family there behind), Lane receives a call from her grandfather: Allegra is missing. Can she please come home? Reluctantly Lane returns to a place she vowed she'd never see again to search for her cousin, whom she has always felt bad about leaving behind. But returning only brings up bad memories, and Lane quickly worries that something terrible has happened to Allegra. Can Lane face her fears and figure out what happened to her cousin?
This book, oh this book. Wow. This is quite the novel! The story alternates between the present-day and that fateful summer (from Lane's point of view), with a few snippets from earlier generations of the other Roanoke girls thrown in. It's slightly confusing at first (you'll need easy access to the family tree at the beginning of the book), but quickly pulls you in and never lets you go. I was immediately captivated by this novel and read it in less than 24 hours. It's not some "feel good" novel, but it's amazingly well-written and just spellbinding. It starts off with a bombshell and then hooks you from there with the dark story of the twisted Roanoke family.
There is something completely alluring about how messed up and sick the Roanokes are. I couldn't turn away from them. The book is great because you become quickly intrigued and invested in the story of what happened to Allegra, but there's also a bit of suspense to the "then" storyline as Lane finds out something terrible about her family. Engel is remarkably talented because we know the secret already, and Lane knows it in the present-day portion of the book, but it's still enthralling watching it unravel as she's a teen. There's also just a pure fascination and horror at this family. There are also periodic shockers throughout the entire novel and several "wow" and "didn't see that coming" moments for me. The whole thing is extremely well-done.
I was extremely expressed by Engel's characters. For instance, Lane is a broken and damaged person who cannot trust or love. As such, she is frustrating with her guarded heart but still sympathetic. She drove me crazy, but I loved her. Engel did an excellent job with all of these characters. Even those that seemed (or were) absolutely awful; they all seemed so real. She also did a great job at portraying small towns and their tangled web of secrets. The broken Kansas town where the Roanokes lived was expertly done, with all of its bit characters and the descriptions of its streets and happenings.
Overall, I was incredibly impressed with this book. Its entire plot was creepy and twisted, and it was compulsively readable, with plenty of shocking moments. Yet it also had empathetic, well-written characters. It was an amazing dark look at the power of childhood, your parents, and your past. It's a mean and twisted novel and impeccably written, because you feel such a range of emotions for its characters. Definitely recommend.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you!) in return for an unbiased review; it is available everywhere as of 03/07/2017.
Eleven years later, after Lane has fled the farm (and left her family there behind), Lane receives a call from her grandfather: Allegra is missing. Can she please come home? Reluctantly Lane returns to a place she vowed she'd never see again to search for her cousin, whom she has always felt bad about leaving behind. But returning only brings up bad memories, and Lane quickly worries that something terrible has happened to Allegra. Can Lane face her fears and figure out what happened to her cousin?
This book, oh this book. Wow. This is quite the novel! The story alternates between the present-day and that fateful summer (from Lane's point of view), with a few snippets from earlier generations of the other Roanoke girls thrown in. It's slightly confusing at first (you'll need easy access to the family tree at the beginning of the book), but quickly pulls you in and never lets you go. I was immediately captivated by this novel and read it in less than 24 hours. It's not some "feel good" novel, but it's amazingly well-written and just spellbinding. It starts off with a bombshell and then hooks you from there with the dark story of the twisted Roanoke family.
There is something completely alluring about how messed up and sick the Roanokes are. I couldn't turn away from them. The book is great because you become quickly intrigued and invested in the story of what happened to Allegra, but there's also a bit of suspense to the "then" storyline as Lane finds out something terrible about her family. Engel is remarkably talented because we know the secret already, and Lane knows it in the present-day portion of the book, but it's still enthralling watching it unravel as she's a teen. There's also just a pure fascination and horror at this family. There are also periodic shockers throughout the entire novel and several "wow" and "didn't see that coming" moments for me. The whole thing is extremely well-done.
I was extremely expressed by Engel's characters. For instance, Lane is a broken and damaged person who cannot trust or love. As such, she is frustrating with her guarded heart but still sympathetic. She drove me crazy, but I loved her. Engel did an excellent job with all of these characters. Even those that seemed (or were) absolutely awful; they all seemed so real. She also did a great job at portraying small towns and their tangled web of secrets. The broken Kansas town where the Roanokes lived was expertly done, with all of its bit characters and the descriptions of its streets and happenings.
Overall, I was incredibly impressed with this book. Its entire plot was creepy and twisted, and it was compulsively readable, with plenty of shocking moments. Yet it also had empathetic, well-written characters. It was an amazing dark look at the power of childhood, your parents, and your past. It's a mean and twisted novel and impeccably written, because you feel such a range of emotions for its characters. Definitely recommend.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you!) in return for an unbiased review; it is available everywhere as of 03/07/2017.
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated Little Bee in Books
Jun 20, 2018
Today, June 20, is World Refugee Day. First observed in 2001, it is dedicated to raising awareness of the plight of refugees all across the world. African Refugee Day had been observed in some countries prior to the UN declaring it World Refugee Day, but the Organization of African Unity agreed to have the two days coincide.
To honor World Refugee Day, today I'm going to talk about Little Bee. Little Bee is a Nigerian refugee in the United Kingdom. She and her sister witnessed the destruction of their village by an oil company's thugs, and were hunted down to eliminate the witnesses. In a chance encounter on a Nigerian beach, she met Sarah and Andrew, a couple from London trying to save their marriage by going on an exotic holiday. The encounter changes the lives of all three of them, and when Little Bee makes it to the United Kingdom, they are the only people she knows. She arrives at their home on the day of Andrew's funeral, and Sarah takes her in.
The book switches between the viewpoints of Sarah and Little Bee, and it does suffer from that, a bit. I couldn't wait for Sarah's chapters to be done so I could get back to Little Bee. Her viewpoint - her voice - was enthralling. Some first-person views are just the person thinking to themselves, while some first-person views are the person talking to the reader. Sarah was the first type, and Little Bee the second. Reading her explanations of the differences between her old life and her new life, and how the girls from her village wouldn't understand things, was amazing. I was hooked within the first ten pages of the book, specifically her note about scars:
"I ask you right here please to agree with me that a scar is never ugly. That is what the scar makers want us to think. But you and I, we must make an agreement to defy them. We must see all scars as beauty. Okay? This will be our secret. Because take it from me, a scar does not form on the dying. A scar means, I survived."
The events Little Bee talks about having witnessed are horrifying. And she recognizes that. She could be bitter, she could be depressed, she could be insane, but she is not. She manages to have hope, and even joy. She sees other refugees around her commit suicide, and in fact always has a plan for how to kill herself "if the men come." Because the stories of refugees always begin with "the men came and they..." and she'd rather kill herself than let herself be taken. Despite this, she has hope for a future. Or perhaps she simply takes joy in the present.
The book is not a happy one. Like Sing, Unburied, Sing, it's an important book but not exactly an enjoyable one. There are enjoyable parts. But there are very hard parts, too. (I should note, here, a TRIGGER WARNING for a graphic description of rape, when Little Bee tells Sarah what happened to Little Bee's older sister.) It did not end the way I wanted it to, though it ended in an unexpected way. I suppose it was too much to hope for a Happy Ever After when the vast majority of refugees don't get one.
For all that there were very tough scenes to get through in this book, I'm still putting it on my Best of 2018 list. Little Bee's voice and viewpoint is amazing, the story is well researched, and the plot absorbing. This is a book I'd like to have on my shelf.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com
To honor World Refugee Day, today I'm going to talk about Little Bee. Little Bee is a Nigerian refugee in the United Kingdom. She and her sister witnessed the destruction of their village by an oil company's thugs, and were hunted down to eliminate the witnesses. In a chance encounter on a Nigerian beach, she met Sarah and Andrew, a couple from London trying to save their marriage by going on an exotic holiday. The encounter changes the lives of all three of them, and when Little Bee makes it to the United Kingdom, they are the only people she knows. She arrives at their home on the day of Andrew's funeral, and Sarah takes her in.
The book switches between the viewpoints of Sarah and Little Bee, and it does suffer from that, a bit. I couldn't wait for Sarah's chapters to be done so I could get back to Little Bee. Her viewpoint - her voice - was enthralling. Some first-person views are just the person thinking to themselves, while some first-person views are the person talking to the reader. Sarah was the first type, and Little Bee the second. Reading her explanations of the differences between her old life and her new life, and how the girls from her village wouldn't understand things, was amazing. I was hooked within the first ten pages of the book, specifically her note about scars:
"I ask you right here please to agree with me that a scar is never ugly. That is what the scar makers want us to think. But you and I, we must make an agreement to defy them. We must see all scars as beauty. Okay? This will be our secret. Because take it from me, a scar does not form on the dying. A scar means, I survived."
The events Little Bee talks about having witnessed are horrifying. And she recognizes that. She could be bitter, she could be depressed, she could be insane, but she is not. She manages to have hope, and even joy. She sees other refugees around her commit suicide, and in fact always has a plan for how to kill herself "if the men come." Because the stories of refugees always begin with "the men came and they..." and she'd rather kill herself than let herself be taken. Despite this, she has hope for a future. Or perhaps she simply takes joy in the present.
The book is not a happy one. Like Sing, Unburied, Sing, it's an important book but not exactly an enjoyable one. There are enjoyable parts. But there are very hard parts, too. (I should note, here, a TRIGGER WARNING for a graphic description of rape, when Little Bee tells Sarah what happened to Little Bee's older sister.) It did not end the way I wanted it to, though it ended in an unexpected way. I suppose it was too much to hope for a Happy Ever After when the vast majority of refugees don't get one.
For all that there were very tough scenes to get through in this book, I'm still putting it on my Best of 2018 list. Little Bee's voice and viewpoint is amazing, the story is well researched, and the plot absorbing. This is a book I'd like to have on my shelf.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated An Anonymous Girl in Books
Aug 20, 2018
The story line has been done, but this makes it feel original (3 more)
The characters are very fleshed out
The authors have done their research about therapists
The world building is fantastic
Intriguing Plot
I had read The Wife Between Us by Greer Hendricks and Sarah Pekkanen and loved it. When I heard that the same authors were releasing another book, I became giddy and knew I had to read it. Luckily, An Anonymous Girl was a good read.
The pacing for An Anonymous Girl started off very fast which is what I like. I read a quarter of the book right before bed, and I only stopped because I had to go to sleep. I would have read more had I not been so tired. However, once I found out what the motive was behind Dr. Shield's study, the pacing slowed down, and I found myself not being drawn to the book as much although it still held my attention.
I started off enjoying the plot very much. I loved reading about Jess' participation in this strange study. However, like I felt about the pacing, once I learned the true motive behind the study, the plot wasn't as interesting. I don't want to elaborate on the plot because I don't want to give the motive behind the study away in my review. I will say the plot for An Anonymous Girl was well executed. It is an idea that's been written about so many times, but the way Hedricks and Pekkanen wrote about it was very original. There is one plot twists involving the study, but I felt like their aren't any more major plot twists. I kept waiting for more to happen, but they never came. I was left a little confused about the ending. I'm not sure if it was meant to be a plot twist or not.
The world building was written so amazingly! Everything about An Anonymous Girl felt real. It was obvious that the authors had done their research when it came to therapy and how a therapist would act. I felt as if I were watching everything unfold right in front of me. I was constantly worried for Jess, and I wanted to be her friend and help her with what she was going through.
I felt like the characters were very well written. I felt they were fleshed out enough to be enjoyable. It was hard to not like Jess and want to help her. She was an amazing character. Dr. Shields was also well written. As I've stated about the plot, it is obvious that Hendricks and Pekkanen had done their research on how a therapist might act by analyzing situations. I thoroughly enjoyed the character of Dr. Shields. I thought Thomas was well written. I kept wondering what Thomas' motives were, and I was constantly left guessing if he was bad or good. Luckily the ending of the book makes it clear.
Trigger warnings include possible suicide/murder, alcohol (the characters drink wine throughout the book), prescription drugs (Vicodin is mentioned), one count of sexual abuse, swearing, cheating, blackmail, and manipulation.
All in all, An Anonymous Girl is a good read. The plot takes an idea that's been done numerous times and changes it so it feels different. The characters are fleshed out, and the world building is amazing. I would definitely recommend An Anonymous Girl by Greer Hendricks and Sarah Pekkanen to those aged 16 and above.
(I received an ecopy of An Anonymous Girl by Greer Hendricks and Sarah Pekkanen through Netgalley in exchange for an unbiased review. All opinions are my own).
The pacing for An Anonymous Girl started off very fast which is what I like. I read a quarter of the book right before bed, and I only stopped because I had to go to sleep. I would have read more had I not been so tired. However, once I found out what the motive was behind Dr. Shield's study, the pacing slowed down, and I found myself not being drawn to the book as much although it still held my attention.
I started off enjoying the plot very much. I loved reading about Jess' participation in this strange study. However, like I felt about the pacing, once I learned the true motive behind the study, the plot wasn't as interesting. I don't want to elaborate on the plot because I don't want to give the motive behind the study away in my review. I will say the plot for An Anonymous Girl was well executed. It is an idea that's been written about so many times, but the way Hedricks and Pekkanen wrote about it was very original. There is one plot twists involving the study, but I felt like their aren't any more major plot twists. I kept waiting for more to happen, but they never came. I was left a little confused about the ending. I'm not sure if it was meant to be a plot twist or not.
The world building was written so amazingly! Everything about An Anonymous Girl felt real. It was obvious that the authors had done their research when it came to therapy and how a therapist would act. I felt as if I were watching everything unfold right in front of me. I was constantly worried for Jess, and I wanted to be her friend and help her with what she was going through.
I felt like the characters were very well written. I felt they were fleshed out enough to be enjoyable. It was hard to not like Jess and want to help her. She was an amazing character. Dr. Shields was also well written. As I've stated about the plot, it is obvious that Hendricks and Pekkanen had done their research on how a therapist might act by analyzing situations. I thoroughly enjoyed the character of Dr. Shields. I thought Thomas was well written. I kept wondering what Thomas' motives were, and I was constantly left guessing if he was bad or good. Luckily the ending of the book makes it clear.
Trigger warnings include possible suicide/murder, alcohol (the characters drink wine throughout the book), prescription drugs (Vicodin is mentioned), one count of sexual abuse, swearing, cheating, blackmail, and manipulation.
All in all, An Anonymous Girl is a good read. The plot takes an idea that's been done numerous times and changes it so it feels different. The characters are fleshed out, and the world building is amazing. I would definitely recommend An Anonymous Girl by Greer Hendricks and Sarah Pekkanen to those aged 16 and above.
(I received an ecopy of An Anonymous Girl by Greer Hendricks and Sarah Pekkanen through Netgalley in exchange for an unbiased review. All opinions are my own).
Gareth von Kallenbach (968 KP) rated Constantine (2005) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
The battle between Heaven and Hell has been chronicled numerous times on film. Ranging from the “Omen” and “Exorcist” series to the recent “Hellboy” and “End of Days”, Hollywood has never shied away from the struggle between good and evil and audiences have usually responded by attending in droves.
The latest entry into the genre is Constantine, which chronicles the exploits of supernatural detective John Constantine (Keanu Reeves), who is tasked to walk the line between good and evil to make sure that balance is maintained. John is a very troubled individual and his transactions with angels and demons have warped his views on life, humanity, and the afterlife.
Due to things in his past, John is trying to right his wrongs so he can gain a place in heaven, toward that end, the forces of Hell are trying there best to ensure that John is unable to gain redemption so they will be able to collect his soul, and repay him for all of their minions that he has vanquished over the years.
As if this was not bad enough, the rules between Heaven and Hell seem to be blurring as there is a growing demon presence on Earth which does not bode well for the future of humanity. It is learned that there is an agreement in place that there can be no direct contact, only influence to humans giving them the freedom to pick between good and evil and thus the fate of ones soul.
When a local detective named Angela (Rachael Weisz), contacts John, she is desperate to learn the truth behind her twin sister’s apparent suicide. Although skeptical at first, John soon learns that he and Angela have become players in a much larger game with the very fate of humanity dependant upon their actions.
Before long, John and Angela are facing off against legions of Hell’s minions as they attempt to save the soul of Angela’s sister and save humanity.
The film will be different things to many viewers as on one hand; some many take exception to the story and the bland tone and mannerisms of Reeves, as well as some of the films theological stances.
That being said, the film works, the action is good without being in your face as the computer generated effects enhance the film, complimenting the story and actors rather than upstaging them. The film has a murky look to it which sets the tone perfectly as this is not a happy movie filled with lovable people, instead it is a tail of people trying to do what is right and staying true to their beliefs though surrounded by temptations and numerous chances to stray.
Reeves plays Constantine as a man who is dedicated to what he does, but also shows us that he is unhappy with his life and past choices as they have forever haunted him. John is forced to do things he would rather not do as it is the only chance he has left at redemption and this has seen him deteriorate as he feels he is a tool that is being used with no end in sight.
Weisz does a good job with a very limited role as she is able to keep up with the action without falling prey to the damsel in distress mode that haunted her character in the “Mummy Films”. Singer Gavin Rossdale does a good job as the smarmy demon Balthazar who is a constant bane to John.
Despite the occasional hiccups with the plot and Reeves inability to show range or expressions, for the most part Constantine works and looks to be a good starting point for what is likely to be a franchise series for Warner Bros.
The latest entry into the genre is Constantine, which chronicles the exploits of supernatural detective John Constantine (Keanu Reeves), who is tasked to walk the line between good and evil to make sure that balance is maintained. John is a very troubled individual and his transactions with angels and demons have warped his views on life, humanity, and the afterlife.
Due to things in his past, John is trying to right his wrongs so he can gain a place in heaven, toward that end, the forces of Hell are trying there best to ensure that John is unable to gain redemption so they will be able to collect his soul, and repay him for all of their minions that he has vanquished over the years.
As if this was not bad enough, the rules between Heaven and Hell seem to be blurring as there is a growing demon presence on Earth which does not bode well for the future of humanity. It is learned that there is an agreement in place that there can be no direct contact, only influence to humans giving them the freedom to pick between good and evil and thus the fate of ones soul.
When a local detective named Angela (Rachael Weisz), contacts John, she is desperate to learn the truth behind her twin sister’s apparent suicide. Although skeptical at first, John soon learns that he and Angela have become players in a much larger game with the very fate of humanity dependant upon their actions.
Before long, John and Angela are facing off against legions of Hell’s minions as they attempt to save the soul of Angela’s sister and save humanity.
The film will be different things to many viewers as on one hand; some many take exception to the story and the bland tone and mannerisms of Reeves, as well as some of the films theological stances.
That being said, the film works, the action is good without being in your face as the computer generated effects enhance the film, complimenting the story and actors rather than upstaging them. The film has a murky look to it which sets the tone perfectly as this is not a happy movie filled with lovable people, instead it is a tail of people trying to do what is right and staying true to their beliefs though surrounded by temptations and numerous chances to stray.
Reeves plays Constantine as a man who is dedicated to what he does, but also shows us that he is unhappy with his life and past choices as they have forever haunted him. John is forced to do things he would rather not do as it is the only chance he has left at redemption and this has seen him deteriorate as he feels he is a tool that is being used with no end in sight.
Weisz does a good job with a very limited role as she is able to keep up with the action without falling prey to the damsel in distress mode that haunted her character in the “Mummy Films”. Singer Gavin Rossdale does a good job as the smarmy demon Balthazar who is a constant bane to John.
Despite the occasional hiccups with the plot and Reeves inability to show range or expressions, for the most part Constantine works and looks to be a good starting point for what is likely to be a franchise series for Warner Bros.
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated You Are Not Alone in Books
Dec 29, 2019
I've been a fan of Greer Hendricks and Sarah Pekkanen since I read their novel The Wife Between Us as well as their other book An Anonymous Girl. Hendricks and Pekkanen are definitely a force to be reckoned with when it comes to writing. When I was offered a chance to read their new book You Are Not Alone, I didn't even have to think twice about saying yes!
The plot of You Are Not Alone sounded intriguing. Shay Miller is just existing. Through witnessing a tragic event, Shay meets the Moore sisters - Cassandra and Jane who are extremely glamorous. Shay is beyond thrilled to be friends with these two amazing women. However, things aren't always what they seem, and this is what puts Shay's life in immediate danger.
I felt that the world building of You Are Not Alone was done beautifully. The novel takes place in New York, and although I've never been, Hendricks and Pekkanen made me feel like I was instantly transported to that setting every time I started reading. The pacing is a bit up and down throughout the book though. However, this wasn't that fast paced thriller I was expecting it to be. I felt as if there was something missing overall from You Are Not Alone. I felt satiated with Hendricks and Pekkanen's last two novels, but there was something that felt a bit flat in this new novel. I felt as if the big unpredictable plot twist was also missing. Yes, there are a few plot twists throughout You Are Not Alone, but the actual plot twist didn't wow me like in the authors' previous books. Don't get me wrong, You are Not Alone is not a horrible read. In fact, it is quite interesting. I just felt as if Hendricks and Pekkanen rushed through You Are Not Alone. I will say that I admired all the statistics throughout the book. Hendricks and Pekkanen really did their research for this novel, and it shows.
I felt that some of the characters of You Are Not Alone lacked a bit of depth. The main character, Shay, felt a bit too one dimensional at times especially for the majority of the book. However, towards the end, she does become quite the character, and I enjoyed her tenacity to get to the bottom of what was happening. I did enjoy Cassandra and Jane, and I felt like they were fairly fleshed out, but I would have liked a bit more backstory on them such as how they rose to be such prominent adults. I would have liked to know about how they were able to become the perfect manipulators. I enjoyed the character of Daphne, but I would have liked to get to know her more. I would have also liked to read more about Stacey too. Valerie and Amanda were the only ones who felt the realest. They both seemed pretty fleshed out and realistic. I felt like I could relate to Amanda and her thought process.
Trigger warnings for You Are Not Alone include rape and attempted rape (not graphic), alcohol use, manipulation (including gaslighting), some violence, profanity (although not much), murder and attempted murder, and suicide.
Overall, You Are Not Alone is a decent read. Despite its flaws, the book does have some redeeming qualities such as an interesting plot and a fantastic background when it comes to the statistics mentioned in the book. I would still recommend You Are Not Alone by Greer Hendricks and Sarah Pekkanen to those aged 17+ who are fans of psychological thrillers.
--
(A special thank you to St. Martin's Press for providing me with an eBook of You Are Not Alone by Greer Hendricks and Sarah Pekkanen in exchange for an honest and unbiased review.)
The plot of You Are Not Alone sounded intriguing. Shay Miller is just existing. Through witnessing a tragic event, Shay meets the Moore sisters - Cassandra and Jane who are extremely glamorous. Shay is beyond thrilled to be friends with these two amazing women. However, things aren't always what they seem, and this is what puts Shay's life in immediate danger.
I felt that the world building of You Are Not Alone was done beautifully. The novel takes place in New York, and although I've never been, Hendricks and Pekkanen made me feel like I was instantly transported to that setting every time I started reading. The pacing is a bit up and down throughout the book though. However, this wasn't that fast paced thriller I was expecting it to be. I felt as if there was something missing overall from You Are Not Alone. I felt satiated with Hendricks and Pekkanen's last two novels, but there was something that felt a bit flat in this new novel. I felt as if the big unpredictable plot twist was also missing. Yes, there are a few plot twists throughout You Are Not Alone, but the actual plot twist didn't wow me like in the authors' previous books. Don't get me wrong, You are Not Alone is not a horrible read. In fact, it is quite interesting. I just felt as if Hendricks and Pekkanen rushed through You Are Not Alone. I will say that I admired all the statistics throughout the book. Hendricks and Pekkanen really did their research for this novel, and it shows.
I felt that some of the characters of You Are Not Alone lacked a bit of depth. The main character, Shay, felt a bit too one dimensional at times especially for the majority of the book. However, towards the end, she does become quite the character, and I enjoyed her tenacity to get to the bottom of what was happening. I did enjoy Cassandra and Jane, and I felt like they were fairly fleshed out, but I would have liked a bit more backstory on them such as how they rose to be such prominent adults. I would have liked to know about how they were able to become the perfect manipulators. I enjoyed the character of Daphne, but I would have liked to get to know her more. I would have also liked to read more about Stacey too. Valerie and Amanda were the only ones who felt the realest. They both seemed pretty fleshed out and realistic. I felt like I could relate to Amanda and her thought process.
Trigger warnings for You Are Not Alone include rape and attempted rape (not graphic), alcohol use, manipulation (including gaslighting), some violence, profanity (although not much), murder and attempted murder, and suicide.
Overall, You Are Not Alone is a decent read. Despite its flaws, the book does have some redeeming qualities such as an interesting plot and a fantastic background when it comes to the statistics mentioned in the book. I would still recommend You Are Not Alone by Greer Hendricks and Sarah Pekkanen to those aged 17+ who are fans of psychological thrillers.
--
(A special thank you to St. Martin's Press for providing me with an eBook of You Are Not Alone by Greer Hendricks and Sarah Pekkanen in exchange for an honest and unbiased review.)
Gareth von Kallenbach (968 KP) rated Curvature (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
If there’s any particular genre i’m particularly keen too, it’s science fiction. Books, movies, television, comics, you name it. I’ve been watching the old school versions of ‘The Twilight Zone’ and ‘The Outer Limits’ since I was like 5 years old (that could explain quite a few things actually). As far as movies? That’s going to lead only to the past, the future, other dimensions, etc. If you had to nail it down even further within the genre of science fiction, I’d have to go right to anything revolving around time travel. That’s where today’s film for your consideration comes in. This one in particular doesn’t seem to be getting the credit it deserves and although it’s a bit rough around the edges, I think it also deserves a shot.
‘Curvature’ is a 2017 science fiction/thriller film (released on February 23rd of this year) written by Brian DeLeeuw and directed by Diego Hallivis. The film stars Lyndsy Fonseca, Noah Bean, Glenn Morshower, Zach Avery, Alex Lanipekun, and Linda Hamilton (yes … THEE Linda Hamilton as in ‘Sarah Conner’).
Helen (Fonseca) is grieving the lose of her husband Wells (Bean) in the aftermath of his suicide. Not long after, Wells’s colleague Tomas (Morshower) seeks her out and asks for her blessing to continue the research project that he and Wells were involved in. Being an engineer and a scientist herself, she agrees and not long after returns to work trying to confront the grief as best she can with the guidance and help of her mentor Florence (Hamilton). Without warning, Helen succumbs to a blackout and awakens several days later. Upon awakening at home, she learns that several days have passed and receives a phone call …. from HERSELF. Helen warns herself to get out of the house as soon as possible as a man in a black BMW is coming to the house to kill her. In the confusion that follows, she manages to barely escape and seek out her friend Alex. What follows is a story of deceit, betrayal, and a conspiracy that goes beyond what Helen could imagine where she can’t trust anyone … not even her future self.
Obviously, i’m biased her being partial to the genre. That being said .. this movie is was, is, and will be excellent. 4 out of 5 stars. What impressed me about the film was how well the writing went with the talent of all the actors involved. My only real complaint, is that I wish they had incorporated more dialogue into the 90 minute movie. It’s almost like they sacrificed time between characters for the special effects which I will say, were absolutely awesome for an independent film. The film fell somewhere between a movie and a television episode as far as the experience. I would’ve preferred it to be one or the other and not in between if that makes any sense. However, I was still blown away by the film and will gladly watch it again and add it to my library at the first opportunity. Not to give too much of the film away, one thing I found unique about this particular time-travel film is how the writer came up with the concept that the nature of the ‘experiment’ allowed for someone to only go back so far into the past between a few hours and a few days limiting how far back you could alter history so-to-speak. The intent wasn’t necessarily to save because too much time had passed … but to ‘stop’. As for the ‘star power of the film’, I saw it as a tip of the hat to other films in the time travel genre. This film definitely deserves a place in the science fiction/time travel library. Take my suggestion and give it a look.
‘Curvature’ is a 2017 science fiction/thriller film (released on February 23rd of this year) written by Brian DeLeeuw and directed by Diego Hallivis. The film stars Lyndsy Fonseca, Noah Bean, Glenn Morshower, Zach Avery, Alex Lanipekun, and Linda Hamilton (yes … THEE Linda Hamilton as in ‘Sarah Conner’).
Helen (Fonseca) is grieving the lose of her husband Wells (Bean) in the aftermath of his suicide. Not long after, Wells’s colleague Tomas (Morshower) seeks her out and asks for her blessing to continue the research project that he and Wells were involved in. Being an engineer and a scientist herself, she agrees and not long after returns to work trying to confront the grief as best she can with the guidance and help of her mentor Florence (Hamilton). Without warning, Helen succumbs to a blackout and awakens several days later. Upon awakening at home, she learns that several days have passed and receives a phone call …. from HERSELF. Helen warns herself to get out of the house as soon as possible as a man in a black BMW is coming to the house to kill her. In the confusion that follows, she manages to barely escape and seek out her friend Alex. What follows is a story of deceit, betrayal, and a conspiracy that goes beyond what Helen could imagine where she can’t trust anyone … not even her future self.
Obviously, i’m biased her being partial to the genre. That being said .. this movie is was, is, and will be excellent. 4 out of 5 stars. What impressed me about the film was how well the writing went with the talent of all the actors involved. My only real complaint, is that I wish they had incorporated more dialogue into the 90 minute movie. It’s almost like they sacrificed time between characters for the special effects which I will say, were absolutely awesome for an independent film. The film fell somewhere between a movie and a television episode as far as the experience. I would’ve preferred it to be one or the other and not in between if that makes any sense. However, I was still blown away by the film and will gladly watch it again and add it to my library at the first opportunity. Not to give too much of the film away, one thing I found unique about this particular time-travel film is how the writer came up with the concept that the nature of the ‘experiment’ allowed for someone to only go back so far into the past between a few hours and a few days limiting how far back you could alter history so-to-speak. The intent wasn’t necessarily to save because too much time had passed … but to ‘stop’. As for the ‘star power of the film’, I saw it as a tip of the hat to other films in the time travel genre. This film definitely deserves a place in the science fiction/time travel library. Take my suggestion and give it a look.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Hellboy (2019) in Movies
Nov 14, 2019
This sort of soft reboot of Hellboy is a truly mixed bag. It's just about watchable, and there are some things I liked, and a whole heap of things I didn't like.
Let's start with the negatives - the absolute biggest problems with Hellboy is the editing and pacing.
The quick cuts and bizzarre transitions that happen often are incredibly jarring, and stops the narrative running smoothly for much of the duration.
It almost feels as if the film has been designed for someone who gets bored easily, and will shoehorn in a new scene before giving you the chance to take in the previous one.
It also plays havoc with a lot of the already mediocre (and sometimes cringe-worthy) script - a good example of this comes right at the beginning, as Hellboy is introduced us, searching for an MIA fellow agent.... Its here that Ian McShane's character explains to Hellboy over the phone, what this agent was doing when he went missing, only for Hellboy to himself repeat it to another character seconds later - it's weird and feels lazy.
Another issue is something I seem to complain about a lot recently - CGI. A lot of the CGI throughout is not great, and it's again, a complete mixed bag. Some of the practical effects look fine. The big demons glimpsed in the trailer look fine. And then everywhere else it just shits the bed, most glaringly when it comes to Ben Daimio, a character from the comics who should be an exciting inclusion, but is dragged down buy just how awful it looks.
Another thing I also disliked was the insistence of having 'cool' rock songs playing every two minutes, especially in fight scenes that would otherwise have been entertaining. At times, it felt like I was watching Suicide Squad all over again, which is never a good thing.
A lot of the acting throughout Hellboy is also stale and unenthused. Milla Jovovich is particularly uninspiring as The Blood Queen (a villain from the comics that never enthralled me in the first place), Daniel Dae Kim (Ben Daimio) and Sasha Lane (Alice Monaghan) just seem embarrassed to be involved at all.
This does bring me on to the things a liked about Hellboy though - David Harbour won me over pretty quickly as the titular half demon, he provides the movies sparse humour, and the make up work is great - he does his absolute best to hold it all together.
Ian McShane is good also, but come on, it's Ian McShane man.
Even if they aren't represented perfectly, I still liked seeing a lot of characters from the comic book, and my love for Lobster Johnson is strong.
The monster designs are pretty great for the most part, Baba Yaga looks skin crawling, and as I said, the big demons seen in the trailers are pretty horrifying.
The violence and gore is unfortunately, mostly CGI, but is pretty effective for the most part, even if it does feel like the movie is sometimes packing in an R rating to disguise the averageness of everything else.
As mentioned above, some of the action pieces are pretty fun, but I must say, the climax of the movie is pretty underwhelming.
I didn't find Hellboy as horrible as some people made it out to be - it's certainly not as good as the original two films (although I find the first one to be quite average as it is!) but it still has some credibility, even if it's a small amount.
Unfortunately, for every step Hellboy takes forward, it's takes two back, resulting in a messy and muddled film that struggles to find an identity, and it's reeks of studio meddling.
Still though, Big Mo Harris shooting an Uzi is always a pleasure 👍
Let's start with the negatives - the absolute biggest problems with Hellboy is the editing and pacing.
The quick cuts and bizzarre transitions that happen often are incredibly jarring, and stops the narrative running smoothly for much of the duration.
It almost feels as if the film has been designed for someone who gets bored easily, and will shoehorn in a new scene before giving you the chance to take in the previous one.
It also plays havoc with a lot of the already mediocre (and sometimes cringe-worthy) script - a good example of this comes right at the beginning, as Hellboy is introduced us, searching for an MIA fellow agent.... Its here that Ian McShane's character explains to Hellboy over the phone, what this agent was doing when he went missing, only for Hellboy to himself repeat it to another character seconds later - it's weird and feels lazy.
Another issue is something I seem to complain about a lot recently - CGI. A lot of the CGI throughout is not great, and it's again, a complete mixed bag. Some of the practical effects look fine. The big demons glimpsed in the trailer look fine. And then everywhere else it just shits the bed, most glaringly when it comes to Ben Daimio, a character from the comics who should be an exciting inclusion, but is dragged down buy just how awful it looks.
Another thing I also disliked was the insistence of having 'cool' rock songs playing every two minutes, especially in fight scenes that would otherwise have been entertaining. At times, it felt like I was watching Suicide Squad all over again, which is never a good thing.
A lot of the acting throughout Hellboy is also stale and unenthused. Milla Jovovich is particularly uninspiring as The Blood Queen (a villain from the comics that never enthralled me in the first place), Daniel Dae Kim (Ben Daimio) and Sasha Lane (Alice Monaghan) just seem embarrassed to be involved at all.
This does bring me on to the things a liked about Hellboy though - David Harbour won me over pretty quickly as the titular half demon, he provides the movies sparse humour, and the make up work is great - he does his absolute best to hold it all together.
Ian McShane is good also, but come on, it's Ian McShane man.
Even if they aren't represented perfectly, I still liked seeing a lot of characters from the comic book, and my love for Lobster Johnson is strong.
The monster designs are pretty great for the most part, Baba Yaga looks skin crawling, and as I said, the big demons seen in the trailers are pretty horrifying.
The violence and gore is unfortunately, mostly CGI, but is pretty effective for the most part, even if it does feel like the movie is sometimes packing in an R rating to disguise the averageness of everything else.
As mentioned above, some of the action pieces are pretty fun, but I must say, the climax of the movie is pretty underwhelming.
I didn't find Hellboy as horrible as some people made it out to be - it's certainly not as good as the original two films (although I find the first one to be quite average as it is!) but it still has some credibility, even if it's a small amount.
Unfortunately, for every step Hellboy takes forward, it's takes two back, resulting in a messy and muddled film that struggles to find an identity, and it's reeks of studio meddling.
Still though, Big Mo Harris shooting an Uzi is always a pleasure 👍
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Knives Out (2019) in Movies
Dec 4, 2019
If they were to give it a go, this movie should justifiably be Rian's redemption from the harshest of his previous critics. For this is a really entertaining film. I found myself smiling with glee through a sizable proportion of the running time.
Multi-millionaire crime-fiction author Harlan Thrombey (the wonderful Christopher Plummer) is celebrating his 85th birthday with three generations of his family in his "Cludo-like" mansion. But all is not well with the family harmonic and the next morning Harlan is found dead in his room by his nurse Marta (Ana de Armas). Apparently, it's a suicide, but when private detective Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig) arrives on the scene he starts turning over stones "oin seearch ov tha troooth" (sic) and dark secrets begin to emerge.
Key to success of this Agatha Christie-style movie is a dense portmanteau cast and a well-plotted script. Both are here present.
In terms of the cast, this is another candidate for the SAG Ensemble Cast award. For the cast is suitably stellar with Chris "Cap" Evans, Toni Collette, Michael Shannon, Jamie Lee Curtis and Don Johnson vying for the top billing with Craig and Plummer. They bounce off each other joyously, with Collette taking my prize for top acting kudos. She's just deliciously over the top as the scheming hippy chick with the rasping voice and the cutting one-liners.
With a starring role is Cuban bombshell Ana de Armas, here notching down the glamour to play the plainly dressed nurse. But she has a magnetic screen presence and is perfectly cast as the girl at the heart of all the action. She has the doe-eyed innocence that Alfred Hitchcock was always looking for in his leading ladies. Interestingly, she is soon to appear with Craig again as Bond-girl Paloma in "No Time to Die".
Elsewhere in the cast are some interesting cameos: the family's lawyer is none other than Frank "Yoda" Oz; and the ancient security guard is M. Emmet Walsh, who has an amazing filmography going back to the late 60's.
Writer/director is clearly his 'thing'. But Rian Johnson here pulls off a neat trick with the script which is brilliantly twisty and turny and 100% entertaining. Although it's presented as cuts between the 'present time' and versions of the night in question, the whole doughnut is never entirely in view until the final reel. It's a satisfying story, and some of the dialogue is laugh-out-loud funny.
A nice plot point is the inability for young Marta to tell a lie without vomiting. Wouldn't the UK General Elections be Sooooo much more colourful if that was a general trait!!
I've only the one real criticism of the movie, and that's Daniel Craig's appalling Southern drawl. It's really quite distracting. Aside from some witty lines of dialogue ("What is this? CSI KFC?") nothing would have been lost to cast him as an urbane English detective instead. They could have slipped in some Brexit jokes instead! I appreciate Craig wants to distance himself from Bond somewhat. He did the same thing as Joe Bang in "Logan Lucky". But - sorry - it didn't really work for me then and it doesn't work now either.
In summary, this is a really fun movie that a whole family with older children (the rating is 12+) can go and enjoy together. There's limited violence; limited swearing and sexual innuendo; and no sex (save for the Hitler youth in the bathroom!). But there is a whole lot of sleuthing fun to be had. Bravo Mr Johnson, bravo! For that reason it comes with a bob-the-movie-man "Highly recommended" tag.
(For the full graphical review please check out https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2019/12/04/one-manns-movies-film-review-knives-out-2019/).
Multi-millionaire crime-fiction author Harlan Thrombey (the wonderful Christopher Plummer) is celebrating his 85th birthday with three generations of his family in his "Cludo-like" mansion. But all is not well with the family harmonic and the next morning Harlan is found dead in his room by his nurse Marta (Ana de Armas). Apparently, it's a suicide, but when private detective Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig) arrives on the scene he starts turning over stones "oin seearch ov tha troooth" (sic) and dark secrets begin to emerge.
Key to success of this Agatha Christie-style movie is a dense portmanteau cast and a well-plotted script. Both are here present.
In terms of the cast, this is another candidate for the SAG Ensemble Cast award. For the cast is suitably stellar with Chris "Cap" Evans, Toni Collette, Michael Shannon, Jamie Lee Curtis and Don Johnson vying for the top billing with Craig and Plummer. They bounce off each other joyously, with Collette taking my prize for top acting kudos. She's just deliciously over the top as the scheming hippy chick with the rasping voice and the cutting one-liners.
With a starring role is Cuban bombshell Ana de Armas, here notching down the glamour to play the plainly dressed nurse. But she has a magnetic screen presence and is perfectly cast as the girl at the heart of all the action. She has the doe-eyed innocence that Alfred Hitchcock was always looking for in his leading ladies. Interestingly, she is soon to appear with Craig again as Bond-girl Paloma in "No Time to Die".
Elsewhere in the cast are some interesting cameos: the family's lawyer is none other than Frank "Yoda" Oz; and the ancient security guard is M. Emmet Walsh, who has an amazing filmography going back to the late 60's.
Writer/director is clearly his 'thing'. But Rian Johnson here pulls off a neat trick with the script which is brilliantly twisty and turny and 100% entertaining. Although it's presented as cuts between the 'present time' and versions of the night in question, the whole doughnut is never entirely in view until the final reel. It's a satisfying story, and some of the dialogue is laugh-out-loud funny.
A nice plot point is the inability for young Marta to tell a lie without vomiting. Wouldn't the UK General Elections be Sooooo much more colourful if that was a general trait!!
I've only the one real criticism of the movie, and that's Daniel Craig's appalling Southern drawl. It's really quite distracting. Aside from some witty lines of dialogue ("What is this? CSI KFC?") nothing would have been lost to cast him as an urbane English detective instead. They could have slipped in some Brexit jokes instead! I appreciate Craig wants to distance himself from Bond somewhat. He did the same thing as Joe Bang in "Logan Lucky". But - sorry - it didn't really work for me then and it doesn't work now either.
In summary, this is a really fun movie that a whole family with older children (the rating is 12+) can go and enjoy together. There's limited violence; limited swearing and sexual innuendo; and no sex (save for the Hitler youth in the bathroom!). But there is a whole lot of sleuthing fun to be had. Bravo Mr Johnson, bravo! For that reason it comes with a bob-the-movie-man "Highly recommended" tag.
(For the full graphical review please check out https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2019/12/04/one-manns-movies-film-review-knives-out-2019/).
Gareth von Kallenbach (968 KP) rated The Wolverine (2013) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
In 2009, we were treated to the origin story for one of Marvel’s most beloved characters: The Wolverine. Enthusiasm for the story turned to discord and malcontent for most, but if you had the ability to look past the inadequacies found in most Marvel silver-screen adaptations (as I did), then at least you would have enjoyed seeing the comic come to life.
Here in 2013, Hugh Jackman reprises his role for the 6th time, making his way to Japan to bring about one of the community’s favorite portions of the mythos: the way of the samurai, Muriko, and the Silver Samurai.
The story opens with the bombing of Nagasaki, and Logan’s survival of the atrocity. He saves a Japanese soldier from suicide, and then from the Atomic Bomb.
Fast forward to the present and we have a broken mountain man that was once Logan (Jackman). He lives in the hills, away from people, because he no longer wants to be a soldier. His immortality has become a curse.
After a rousing row with some local hunters, a representative for Yashida (the aforementioned Japanese soldier) talks Logan into going back to Japan to pay his respects to a dying man.
The story spins away from there on a turbulent ride that is equal parts drama and action.
Let’s get to my thoughts.
—————The good ———————-
The cinematography, script, acting, and editing was top-notch. The sets, costumes, effects, stunts and fight scenes were all pleasurably executed. This was a very well-made movie.
—————-The bad ————————
The plot holes were too numerous to be anything but amazingly distracting. Without giving too much away, here are just a few:
During a ceremony, in broad day light, on a huge roof, one of the main secondary characters is lurking. With as many people and security, this was HIGHLY implausible. Laughable, at best.
Ninjas are not a real thing, and they never were. They were a fable; a story told without any factual, historical basis, and their presence cheapened the film.
When the A-bomb was dropped, those who survived the actual explosion still died to the radiation within a certain range. There is no way Yashida would have survived Nagasaki the way the event was portrayed in the film.
At some point, Wolverine loses his ability to heal. It’s never clear if his regenerative powers are fully gone or just suppressed, but he can’t heal well enough to stop bleeding. With this in mind, his survival of so many shots to the body is extremely questionable.
On that same note: if he can’t heal, how did the holes made by the blades extruding from his hands heal up? After every scene in which the blades come out, his hands remain free of blood or marks.
Wolverine was clearly killing people with his claws, which I liked, but there should have been far more limb and torso severing, given how sharp his adamantium blades are and how overwhelmingly strong he is supposed to be.
The Wolverine character has an unmatched sense of smell, but it was never used in the movie, not even once. The opportunity presented itself multiple times.
These are just a few examples, and there were many more jarring discrepancies. There were so many that it detracted from the movie in an unforgivable way. Even this was totally separate from the comic-to-silver-screen transition, for which those remarks are better left to someone more learned in the comic realm.
The part I enjoyed the most came during the last 30 seconds of the film, as part of the credits. It sets up a future film. Enjoy.
All in all, The Wolverine was great. That said, if you have a critical eye, like myself, you will find many faults.
Here in 2013, Hugh Jackman reprises his role for the 6th time, making his way to Japan to bring about one of the community’s favorite portions of the mythos: the way of the samurai, Muriko, and the Silver Samurai.
The story opens with the bombing of Nagasaki, and Logan’s survival of the atrocity. He saves a Japanese soldier from suicide, and then from the Atomic Bomb.
Fast forward to the present and we have a broken mountain man that was once Logan (Jackman). He lives in the hills, away from people, because he no longer wants to be a soldier. His immortality has become a curse.
After a rousing row with some local hunters, a representative for Yashida (the aforementioned Japanese soldier) talks Logan into going back to Japan to pay his respects to a dying man.
The story spins away from there on a turbulent ride that is equal parts drama and action.
Let’s get to my thoughts.
—————The good ———————-
The cinematography, script, acting, and editing was top-notch. The sets, costumes, effects, stunts and fight scenes were all pleasurably executed. This was a very well-made movie.
—————-The bad ————————
The plot holes were too numerous to be anything but amazingly distracting. Without giving too much away, here are just a few:
During a ceremony, in broad day light, on a huge roof, one of the main secondary characters is lurking. With as many people and security, this was HIGHLY implausible. Laughable, at best.
Ninjas are not a real thing, and they never were. They were a fable; a story told without any factual, historical basis, and their presence cheapened the film.
When the A-bomb was dropped, those who survived the actual explosion still died to the radiation within a certain range. There is no way Yashida would have survived Nagasaki the way the event was portrayed in the film.
At some point, Wolverine loses his ability to heal. It’s never clear if his regenerative powers are fully gone or just suppressed, but he can’t heal well enough to stop bleeding. With this in mind, his survival of so many shots to the body is extremely questionable.
On that same note: if he can’t heal, how did the holes made by the blades extruding from his hands heal up? After every scene in which the blades come out, his hands remain free of blood or marks.
Wolverine was clearly killing people with his claws, which I liked, but there should have been far more limb and torso severing, given how sharp his adamantium blades are and how overwhelmingly strong he is supposed to be.
The Wolverine character has an unmatched sense of smell, but it was never used in the movie, not even once. The opportunity presented itself multiple times.
These are just a few examples, and there were many more jarring discrepancies. There were so many that it detracted from the movie in an unforgivable way. Even this was totally separate from the comic-to-silver-screen transition, for which those remarks are better left to someone more learned in the comic realm.
The part I enjoyed the most came during the last 30 seconds of the film, as part of the credits. It sets up a future film. Enjoy.
All in all, The Wolverine was great. That said, if you have a critical eye, like myself, you will find many faults.