Search
Search results
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated Blast from the Past (Where Are They Now? #3) in Books
Feb 15, 2019
In this third entry into the Where Are They Now? series, Tilda Harper finds herself doubting her abilities as a journalist after two unfortunate incidents go awry. Invited to meet and interview the star of the movie, which itself is based on a comic from the eighties that is now a cult classic, Tilda sets off. As she interviews the star, John Laryea, who was also in a musical-adventure television show as a teen, and various others involved with the film project, she witnesses the hit-and-run of Laryea and his assistant. While she discovers who was behind that "accident" and works to clear the main suspect's name, she also is hired to find out who Leviathan, the mysterious creator of the classic comic book series, Pharos, actually is.
A smart main character, Tilda may make some mistakes but she's never dumb and never annoying. She goes about her work in a very professional way even if she may have some sarcastic thoughts about someone or something. I really do like her, she's not a silly nitwit who gets by on luck or relies on a guy. The cast of characters are, as usual, interesting and incorporated very well into the plot. Along with the new faces, some familiar ones are here as well. Cooper, Tilda's best friend who always brings some lightheartedness, isn't as prominent in this book as he has been in the others, I believe it's only through phone conversations, but luckily the book doesn't suffer because of this. Tilda's sister, June is in it for a short amount of time that doesn't diminish her repartee with Tilda. Nick (Tilda's former and maybe future love interest) and his dad, Dom, are the two who feature predominantly since Dom's company is in charge of the film's security. Following the pattern of each book, a new roommate is introduced, though I'm sure she'll be gone by the next outing, this time the roommate is an animal collector, the latest being a snake Tilda's not too fond of.
The two plots are well-paced and complement each other nicely. Pretty much every page of the book was interesting, with clues so subtly embedded I didn't always pick up on them, that it held my attention to the very end. I love the concept of this series and while I liked the previous books, I believe this may just be the best one to date and hope there are many more to come.
Series order:
[b:Curse of the Kissing Cousins|2384227|Curse of the Kissing Cousins (Where are They Now?, #1)|Toni L.P. Kelner|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1266777949s/2384227.jpg|2391239]
[b:Who Killed the Pinup Queen?|7518303|Who Killed the Pinup Queen? (Where are They Now?, #2)|Toni L.P. Kelner|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1277167352s/7518303.jpg|9733117]
[b:Blast from the Past|8592435|Blast from the Past (Where Are They Now? #3)|Toni L. P. Kelner|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1327922876s/8592435.jpg|13462058]
A smart main character, Tilda may make some mistakes but she's never dumb and never annoying. She goes about her work in a very professional way even if she may have some sarcastic thoughts about someone or something. I really do like her, she's not a silly nitwit who gets by on luck or relies on a guy. The cast of characters are, as usual, interesting and incorporated very well into the plot. Along with the new faces, some familiar ones are here as well. Cooper, Tilda's best friend who always brings some lightheartedness, isn't as prominent in this book as he has been in the others, I believe it's only through phone conversations, but luckily the book doesn't suffer because of this. Tilda's sister, June is in it for a short amount of time that doesn't diminish her repartee with Tilda. Nick (Tilda's former and maybe future love interest) and his dad, Dom, are the two who feature predominantly since Dom's company is in charge of the film's security. Following the pattern of each book, a new roommate is introduced, though I'm sure she'll be gone by the next outing, this time the roommate is an animal collector, the latest being a snake Tilda's not too fond of.
The two plots are well-paced and complement each other nicely. Pretty much every page of the book was interesting, with clues so subtly embedded I didn't always pick up on them, that it held my attention to the very end. I love the concept of this series and while I liked the previous books, I believe this may just be the best one to date and hope there are many more to come.
Series order:
[b:Curse of the Kissing Cousins|2384227|Curse of the Kissing Cousins (Where are They Now?, #1)|Toni L.P. Kelner|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1266777949s/2384227.jpg|2391239]
[b:Who Killed the Pinup Queen?|7518303|Who Killed the Pinup Queen? (Where are They Now?, #2)|Toni L.P. Kelner|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1277167352s/7518303.jpg|9733117]
[b:Blast from the Past|8592435|Blast from the Past (Where Are They Now? #3)|Toni L. P. Kelner|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1327922876s/8592435.jpg|13462058]
<i>This eBook was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review</i>
Many people in Britain may have recently watched the drama series <i>Our Zoo</i> on BBC1 about the Mottershead family who moved to Oakfield, Upton in 1930 with the aim of building a zoo without bars. Based on a true story the drama over exaggerated the difficulties the family faced in developing what became to be the famous Chester Zoo. Until 2010 when TV producer Adam Kemp approached her, June Mottershead had never thought about making her history available to the public. As the truth had to be bent slightly for the television production with the removal of certain characters and added romance, and, of course, the laws preventing chimpanzees from being filmed, June Mottershead has penned the true story, also called <i>Our Zoo</i>, which is just as fascinating as what was shown on screen.
June was only four when she moved to Upton with her parents, grandparents, and her fourteen-year-old sister Muriel as well as a selection of animals. The BBC1 drama only showed up until the point that her father, George, had finally been given permission to build his zoo despite the petition against it. In the book, however, this occurs within the first few chapters and then continues on until June’s marriage to her husband Fred Williams in 1949. In fact the time period of the narrative jumps around depending on the animals or events that June is describing.
A large chunk of the book is focused on the effect the Second World War had on the zoo. As can be expected the rationings of vital products took its toll on the animals’ diets and, although the zoo never took a direct hit, the Liverpool blitz caused havoc by destroying the glass tanks in the aquarium. On the other hand, the amount of animals rapidly grew, as it was not just humans that became refugees during the war.
It was a delight to read about June’s relationships with some of the animals, particularly Mary the chimpanzee who was also June’s best friend as a child and behaved in a humanlike manner. Alas, as well as the happy moments there were the inevitable upsetting accounts of the deaths some of the animals, either from old age, illness or accidents.
While <i>Our Zoo</i> cannot be described as a novel, it neither has the feel of an autobiography. The conversational tone of the writing made it a pleasure to read and easy to visualize (admittedly watching the televised version had already provided a certain image).
This easy to read book is a strong recommendation for those who enjoyed the BBC adaptation and wish to find out what happened next. It does not matter if you have not watched the drama, as it is overall a fascinating story to read.
Many people in Britain may have recently watched the drama series <i>Our Zoo</i> on BBC1 about the Mottershead family who moved to Oakfield, Upton in 1930 with the aim of building a zoo without bars. Based on a true story the drama over exaggerated the difficulties the family faced in developing what became to be the famous Chester Zoo. Until 2010 when TV producer Adam Kemp approached her, June Mottershead had never thought about making her history available to the public. As the truth had to be bent slightly for the television production with the removal of certain characters and added romance, and, of course, the laws preventing chimpanzees from being filmed, June Mottershead has penned the true story, also called <i>Our Zoo</i>, which is just as fascinating as what was shown on screen.
June was only four when she moved to Upton with her parents, grandparents, and her fourteen-year-old sister Muriel as well as a selection of animals. The BBC1 drama only showed up until the point that her father, George, had finally been given permission to build his zoo despite the petition against it. In the book, however, this occurs within the first few chapters and then continues on until June’s marriage to her husband Fred Williams in 1949. In fact the time period of the narrative jumps around depending on the animals or events that June is describing.
A large chunk of the book is focused on the effect the Second World War had on the zoo. As can be expected the rationings of vital products took its toll on the animals’ diets and, although the zoo never took a direct hit, the Liverpool blitz caused havoc by destroying the glass tanks in the aquarium. On the other hand, the amount of animals rapidly grew, as it was not just humans that became refugees during the war.
It was a delight to read about June’s relationships with some of the animals, particularly Mary the chimpanzee who was also June’s best friend as a child and behaved in a humanlike manner. Alas, as well as the happy moments there were the inevitable upsetting accounts of the deaths some of the animals, either from old age, illness or accidents.
While <i>Our Zoo</i> cannot be described as a novel, it neither has the feel of an autobiography. The conversational tone of the writing made it a pleasure to read and easy to visualize (admittedly watching the televised version had already provided a certain image).
This easy to read book is a strong recommendation for those who enjoyed the BBC adaptation and wish to find out what happened next. It does not matter if you have not watched the drama, as it is overall a fascinating story to read.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Sherlock Holmes (2009) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
The stories of master detective Sherlock Holmes have delighted readers, listeners, and viewers for well over a century. The tales have grown from the stories by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle to include radio, television, and film. Director Guy Ritchie casts Robert Downey Jr. as a slightly dysfunctional but brilliant Holmes who, along with his partner Dr. Watson (Jude Law), have just stopped a bizarre ceremony and ended a murder spree in the process.
The people of London are grateful to be free of the terror induced by Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong), but solving the mystery leaves Holmes somewhat despondent and uninterested in solving other mysteries. Most likely because Watson is moving out of their home and office to complete his pending marriage plans. The lack of complexity in the cases Holmes is requested to take leaves him abundant time to sulk in his study and scare the housing staff with his bizarre behavior and inventions.
The monotony of Holmes’s life is abruptly ended when Blackwood summons him shortly before his scheduled execution for his crimes. Blackwood indicates that a dark plot is in the works and though his claims are dismissed by the authorities as the desperate ravings of a madman about to be executed, Holmes begins to think there is more to the case than meets the eye. Things take a bizarre turn when Blackwood appears to rise from the dead and starts a new wave of terror over the city. Pressed into action, Holmes and Watson uncover a series of clues that reveal a diabolic plot that will alter the balance of power in England.
In a race against time, Holmes and Watson must also deal with their unresolved issues regarding Watson’s pending marriage as well as a mysterious, seductive woman from Holmes’s past (Rachel Mc Adams). What follows is a winning combination of comedy, action, mystery, and a touch of romance Ritchie knows he has a strong cast and gives Downey, Law, and Mc Adams ample room to explore their characters yet keeps them within the story.
The plot of the film may be the weakest point and at times its uncertain if it is an action buddy film or a caper picture. It attempts to blend the two but often comes up short, lacking enough action for my taste. The plot may also be confusing to some as it lacks a cohesive structure and seems to be a free roaming entity that exists within a general framework.
Downey and Law work well with one another and Downey gives a strong, clever performance in a role that requires both physical and cerebral dexterity. Mc Adams is good as the love interest in the film but would have benefited from more time to better expand her character which I hope will happen in future films.
While the film may not come across as a traditional American studio film, there is a lot to like about this new Holmes and the new franchise it launches for fans old and new.
The people of London are grateful to be free of the terror induced by Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong), but solving the mystery leaves Holmes somewhat despondent and uninterested in solving other mysteries. Most likely because Watson is moving out of their home and office to complete his pending marriage plans. The lack of complexity in the cases Holmes is requested to take leaves him abundant time to sulk in his study and scare the housing staff with his bizarre behavior and inventions.
The monotony of Holmes’s life is abruptly ended when Blackwood summons him shortly before his scheduled execution for his crimes. Blackwood indicates that a dark plot is in the works and though his claims are dismissed by the authorities as the desperate ravings of a madman about to be executed, Holmes begins to think there is more to the case than meets the eye. Things take a bizarre turn when Blackwood appears to rise from the dead and starts a new wave of terror over the city. Pressed into action, Holmes and Watson uncover a series of clues that reveal a diabolic plot that will alter the balance of power in England.
In a race against time, Holmes and Watson must also deal with their unresolved issues regarding Watson’s pending marriage as well as a mysterious, seductive woman from Holmes’s past (Rachel Mc Adams). What follows is a winning combination of comedy, action, mystery, and a touch of romance Ritchie knows he has a strong cast and gives Downey, Law, and Mc Adams ample room to explore their characters yet keeps them within the story.
The plot of the film may be the weakest point and at times its uncertain if it is an action buddy film or a caper picture. It attempts to blend the two but often comes up short, lacking enough action for my taste. The plot may also be confusing to some as it lacks a cohesive structure and seems to be a free roaming entity that exists within a general framework.
Downey and Law work well with one another and Downey gives a strong, clever performance in a role that requires both physical and cerebral dexterity. Mc Adams is good as the love interest in the film but would have benefited from more time to better expand her character which I hope will happen in future films.
While the film may not come across as a traditional American studio film, there is a lot to like about this new Holmes and the new franchise it launches for fans old and new.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Gosford Park (2001) in Movies
Mar 24, 2020
Underneath it all...and Altman film
Do you like DOWNTON ABBEY? Do you like Agatha Christie Murder Mysteries? Do you like the 1970's British television series UPSTAIRS DOWNSTAIRS? If your answer to any of these questions is yes, then do I have a film for you.
GOSFORD PARK is an English Murder Mystery, set in the 1920's, featuring an All Star Cast, Directed by a 7 time Oscar nominee. It received critical acclaim in the year it was released (2001), earned 7 Oscar nominations (including Best Picture) and won the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay (Julian Fellowes...who would go on to create/write DOWNTON ABBEY).
Set in an English Country Manor, overseen by overbearing Lord William McCordle (Michael Gambon, the 2nd Albus Dumbledore in the Harry Potter films), GOSFORD PARK tells of the trials, tribulations, loves and death (yes, there's a murder) of a host of characters both Upstairs (the wealthy) and Downstairs (the servants).
And what a cast it is! Kristin Scott Thomas, Maggie Smith, Charles Dance, Jeremy Northam, Tom Hollander and Bob Balaban lead the group of the wealthy, while Helen Mirren, Alan Bates, Clive Owen, Kelly MacDonald, Eileen Atkins and Emily Watson head up the cast of servants below the stairs.
Both Maggie Smith and Helen Mirren were nominated for an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress for their work in this film (both losing to Jennifer Connelly for A BEAUTIFUL MIND).
Directed by Robert Altman (M*A*S*H, NASHVILLE), GOSFORD PARK is much of what you would expect from an Altman film...many, many people living their lives, sometimes intersecting with others, often times just going off on their own, tied together by the circumstances of being in this giant manor house on a weekend of a murder.
It is an ambitious, "Oscar bait" film that succeeds for the most part. And, if you are into the costumes, sets, Interior Design and intimate scenes of people talking, then you will be richly rewarded by this film.
I loved this film when it first came out and was anxiously looking forward to re-visiting it.
While I still liked it during this viewing, I did find the pacing to be languid and I started finding myself being frustrated by threads and character direction that just sort of petered out or ended all together with no real resolution. I know this was on purpose, for Altman would argue that this is what happens in real life, but I found this frustrating.
But this film has much, much going for it and if you haven't seen this - or haven't seen this in awhile - and are a fan of these types of films, then GOSFORD PARK will be a very rewarding 2 hours and 11 minutes of a movie going experience.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
GOSFORD PARK is an English Murder Mystery, set in the 1920's, featuring an All Star Cast, Directed by a 7 time Oscar nominee. It received critical acclaim in the year it was released (2001), earned 7 Oscar nominations (including Best Picture) and won the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay (Julian Fellowes...who would go on to create/write DOWNTON ABBEY).
Set in an English Country Manor, overseen by overbearing Lord William McCordle (Michael Gambon, the 2nd Albus Dumbledore in the Harry Potter films), GOSFORD PARK tells of the trials, tribulations, loves and death (yes, there's a murder) of a host of characters both Upstairs (the wealthy) and Downstairs (the servants).
And what a cast it is! Kristin Scott Thomas, Maggie Smith, Charles Dance, Jeremy Northam, Tom Hollander and Bob Balaban lead the group of the wealthy, while Helen Mirren, Alan Bates, Clive Owen, Kelly MacDonald, Eileen Atkins and Emily Watson head up the cast of servants below the stairs.
Both Maggie Smith and Helen Mirren were nominated for an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress for their work in this film (both losing to Jennifer Connelly for A BEAUTIFUL MIND).
Directed by Robert Altman (M*A*S*H, NASHVILLE), GOSFORD PARK is much of what you would expect from an Altman film...many, many people living their lives, sometimes intersecting with others, often times just going off on their own, tied together by the circumstances of being in this giant manor house on a weekend of a murder.
It is an ambitious, "Oscar bait" film that succeeds for the most part. And, if you are into the costumes, sets, Interior Design and intimate scenes of people talking, then you will be richly rewarded by this film.
I loved this film when it first came out and was anxiously looking forward to re-visiting it.
While I still liked it during this viewing, I did find the pacing to be languid and I started finding myself being frustrated by threads and character direction that just sort of petered out or ended all together with no real resolution. I know this was on purpose, for Altman would argue that this is what happens in real life, but I found this frustrating.
But this film has much, much going for it and if you haven't seen this - or haven't seen this in awhile - and are a fan of these types of films, then GOSFORD PARK will be a very rewarding 2 hours and 11 minutes of a movie going experience.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Pride and Prejudice and Zombies (2016) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
As a fan of the Pride and Prejudice book by Jane Austen, I thought it was all kinds of wrong when I came across the parody novel Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, by Seth Grahame-Smith, that essentially Austen’s classic novel with elements of modern zombie fiction. Mainly because I’m not a fan of horror movies. So as we approached the theater where we were screening Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, I told my husband, “I really don’t want to watch this. I hate zombies.” He just laughed. “You hate zombies, but you watch Walking Dead. Just pretend it’s an episode of Walking dead. Just set near the Victorian era.” I admit, I do watch the Walking Dead but it’s the most stressful hour of television for me, and there are commercial breaks. This movie has a running time for this move was almost 2 hrs with no commercials.
But the movie got a giggle out of me in the first 5 minutes. And of course it made me gasp not long after. But Walking Dead has trained me well, and it wasn’t too long ago that I watched Hateful Eight, so I think I’m quite desensitized to blood and gore now, and in comparison, PPZ was relatively mild in that regard. It also had enough of the elements of the original story that fighting zombies actually became an entertaining digression. You know – beautiful young ladies, dashing young men, ballroom dancing, budding romance, zombie attack.
“To succeed in polite society, a young woman must be many things. Kind… well-read… and accomplished. But to survive in the world as WE know it, you’ll need… other qualities.” Those qualities include being skilled in the martial arts and weapons training, while wearing a corset –essentially making them Regency era bad-asses.
Because I don’t watch Downton Abbey, the last time I saw Lily James, who plays Elizabeth Bennett, she was brilliantly blond and sweetly keeping her promise to her mother to “have courage and be kind.” as Cinderella. In PPZ, she’s a fierce brunette who doesn’t take too kindly to Fitzwilliam Darcy, played by a sullen and haughty Sam Riley – another Disney alum, last seen as Diaval, Maleficent’s companion raven.
Where the Jane Austen’s Mr. Darcy is won over by Elizbeth’s charm and wit, PPZ’s Darcy is slowly won over by Elizabeth’s aggressive and bold battle skills. Adding the alternate history of how zombies came to be a part of Regency era England hurried the story along, so the romantic developments felt a bit rushed, but Riley’s Darcy was quite believable in his reluctant but growing admiration of Elizabeth.
I was pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed this movie, zombies and all. When you can get guys to cheer for some undead’s head getting blown off, and still make the ladies sigh for the romance, you have a pretty perfect date movie. It may very well be my favorite period costume romantic zombie action film.
But the movie got a giggle out of me in the first 5 minutes. And of course it made me gasp not long after. But Walking Dead has trained me well, and it wasn’t too long ago that I watched Hateful Eight, so I think I’m quite desensitized to blood and gore now, and in comparison, PPZ was relatively mild in that regard. It also had enough of the elements of the original story that fighting zombies actually became an entertaining digression. You know – beautiful young ladies, dashing young men, ballroom dancing, budding romance, zombie attack.
“To succeed in polite society, a young woman must be many things. Kind… well-read… and accomplished. But to survive in the world as WE know it, you’ll need… other qualities.” Those qualities include being skilled in the martial arts and weapons training, while wearing a corset –essentially making them Regency era bad-asses.
Because I don’t watch Downton Abbey, the last time I saw Lily James, who plays Elizabeth Bennett, she was brilliantly blond and sweetly keeping her promise to her mother to “have courage and be kind.” as Cinderella. In PPZ, she’s a fierce brunette who doesn’t take too kindly to Fitzwilliam Darcy, played by a sullen and haughty Sam Riley – another Disney alum, last seen as Diaval, Maleficent’s companion raven.
Where the Jane Austen’s Mr. Darcy is won over by Elizbeth’s charm and wit, PPZ’s Darcy is slowly won over by Elizabeth’s aggressive and bold battle skills. Adding the alternate history of how zombies came to be a part of Regency era England hurried the story along, so the romantic developments felt a bit rushed, but Riley’s Darcy was quite believable in his reluctant but growing admiration of Elizabeth.
I was pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed this movie, zombies and all. When you can get guys to cheer for some undead’s head getting blown off, and still make the ladies sigh for the romance, you have a pretty perfect date movie. It may very well be my favorite period costume romantic zombie action film.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated The Boys in TV
Jul 7, 2020
A Gritty Superhero Drama With Equal Parts Dark Comedy, Blood And Violence
The Boys is a 2019 black comedy/action/superhero/drama web tv series developed by Eric Kripke for Amazon. It was produced by Sony Pictures Television, Amazon Studios, Kripke Enterprises, Point Grey Pictures, Original Film, Kickstart Entertainment and KFL Knightsky Productions. Executive producters on the show include Erick Kripke, Seth Rogen, Evan Goldberg, James Weaver, Neal H. Moritz, Pavun Shetty, Ori Marmur, Dan Trachtenberg, Ken. F. Levin and Jason Netter. The series stars actors Karl Urban, Jack Quaid, Anthony Starr, Erin Moriarty, Dominique McElligot and Jessie T. Usher.
Hugh "Hughie" Campbell (Jack Quaid) is a regular guy living in a city where superpowered people are recognized as heroes by the general public and owned by a powerful corporation Vought International, which markets and monetizes them. Outside of their heroic personas, these heroes are arrogant and corrupt, none more so than the Seven, Vought's premier superhero team. After his girlfriend is killed by A-Train (Jessie T. Usher), one of the Seven, Hughie is sought out by Billy Butcher (Karl Urban), a man who despises all superpowered people, and whose goal is to "spank the bastards when they get out of line".
This show is awesome. I was blown away by how much I liked it and binged watched it in one day. It reminded me of Watchmen a little bit in how it was a darker version of a superhero world. I really liked how it balanced the dark comedy with the violence and pacing of the plot. It was incredibly violent though, with lots of blood and gore. The acting was really good too with the actors being believable in their roles. I enjoyed the character development from several of the characters like Hughie and Starlight. Even the Deep, who I disliked was able to make me feel sorry for him in a couple of parts. The special effects were pretty top notch and I hardly noticed anything I didn't think fit or stuck out in a wrong way. The twists in the plot as the story progressed really kept me into it. It also had a lot of emotional scenes that I didn't think it would. There were a couple of things that bothered me like when a character acted out of character or did something that I didn't understand their motivations, and also the weird relationship between Homelander and Madelynn Stillwell. The latter of which you have more understanding towards the end. The only thing that really disappointed me was that there were only 8 episodes for the season. I almost gave this show a 9 but like I said there were a couple of things that I didn't like with it, still I give this show a 8/10. It also gets my "Must See Seal Of Approval". You really got to check this show out if you haven't seen it.
Hugh "Hughie" Campbell (Jack Quaid) is a regular guy living in a city where superpowered people are recognized as heroes by the general public and owned by a powerful corporation Vought International, which markets and monetizes them. Outside of their heroic personas, these heroes are arrogant and corrupt, none more so than the Seven, Vought's premier superhero team. After his girlfriend is killed by A-Train (Jessie T. Usher), one of the Seven, Hughie is sought out by Billy Butcher (Karl Urban), a man who despises all superpowered people, and whose goal is to "spank the bastards when they get out of line".
This show is awesome. I was blown away by how much I liked it and binged watched it in one day. It reminded me of Watchmen a little bit in how it was a darker version of a superhero world. I really liked how it balanced the dark comedy with the violence and pacing of the plot. It was incredibly violent though, with lots of blood and gore. The acting was really good too with the actors being believable in their roles. I enjoyed the character development from several of the characters like Hughie and Starlight. Even the Deep, who I disliked was able to make me feel sorry for him in a couple of parts. The special effects were pretty top notch and I hardly noticed anything I didn't think fit or stuck out in a wrong way. The twists in the plot as the story progressed really kept me into it. It also had a lot of emotional scenes that I didn't think it would. There were a couple of things that bothered me like when a character acted out of character or did something that I didn't understand their motivations, and also the weird relationship between Homelander and Madelynn Stillwell. The latter of which you have more understanding towards the end. The only thing that really disappointed me was that there were only 8 episodes for the season. I almost gave this show a 9 but like I said there were a couple of things that I didn't like with it, still I give this show a 8/10. It also gets my "Must See Seal Of Approval". You really got to check this show out if you haven't seen it.
Ian Broudie recommended track Psycho Killer by Talking Heads in Stop Making Sense by Talking Heads in Music (curated)
9.0
Album
Favorite
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Mortal Kombat (2021) in Movies
Apr 22, 2021
Fans of the Mortal Kombat series have known that the path to bringing the violent and controversial game to live-action formats has been a mixed bag. While the first film in 1995 was a decent hit; the follow-up in 1997 disappointed fans who had grown weary of the PG-13 take on the series.
Subsequent efforts such as the 2011 television series also left fans wanting more; especially since the game series had become even more graphic and violent.
An animated film released in 2020 gave fans a taste of what they wanted as it featured graphical violence which many fans believed was essential to properly catch the spirit and action of the series.
The latest offering in the series “Mortal Kombat”; reboots the cinematic universe and gives fans the intense, brutal, and graphic violence that they have demanded. The film keeps the basic premise that the Outworld realm has won nine tournaments in a row, and based on the ancient laws; one more victory would allow them to take control of the Earth.
Raiden the Thunder God (Tadanobu Asano); who has been tasked with protecting Earth looks to assemble and train a band of champions to save Earth. Naturally, this is not going to be easy as Shang Tsung (Chin Han); is not willing to follow the rules of the tournament and dispatches his top fighter (Sub Zero (Joe Taslim) to dispatch the champions of Earth before the tournament in a clear violation of the rules in order to ensure total victory.
What follows is solid and very graphic action which contains gore and brutality on a level that almost kept the film from earning an R-rating. The action sequences are well-choreographed and there were some great recreations of classic moves by characters from the game series which were really well utilized and did not seem like gratuitous pandering.
While the plot is fairly simplistic and does not deviate greatly from the source material; it does give a larger backstory to the universe. It was really enjoyable to see many nods to the franchise throughout both subtle and overt and while some characters were glaringly absent which was a surprise; the characters that were included were really solid to see and the door was wide open for their inclusion at a later date.
While the cast does not contain any star power in terms of what Western audiences might expect from a major studio release; the ensemble works well and do a great job in bringing their characters to life.
The film leaves sequels wide open and teases a character that in my opinion was a glaring omission from the film. That being said; “Mortal Kombat” gives fans a solid adaptation that does not shy away from gore and violence and gives fans the cinematic experience that they have wanted.
3.5 stars out of 5
Subsequent efforts such as the 2011 television series also left fans wanting more; especially since the game series had become even more graphic and violent.
An animated film released in 2020 gave fans a taste of what they wanted as it featured graphical violence which many fans believed was essential to properly catch the spirit and action of the series.
The latest offering in the series “Mortal Kombat”; reboots the cinematic universe and gives fans the intense, brutal, and graphic violence that they have demanded. The film keeps the basic premise that the Outworld realm has won nine tournaments in a row, and based on the ancient laws; one more victory would allow them to take control of the Earth.
Raiden the Thunder God (Tadanobu Asano); who has been tasked with protecting Earth looks to assemble and train a band of champions to save Earth. Naturally, this is not going to be easy as Shang Tsung (Chin Han); is not willing to follow the rules of the tournament and dispatches his top fighter (Sub Zero (Joe Taslim) to dispatch the champions of Earth before the tournament in a clear violation of the rules in order to ensure total victory.
What follows is solid and very graphic action which contains gore and brutality on a level that almost kept the film from earning an R-rating. The action sequences are well-choreographed and there were some great recreations of classic moves by characters from the game series which were really well utilized and did not seem like gratuitous pandering.
While the plot is fairly simplistic and does not deviate greatly from the source material; it does give a larger backstory to the universe. It was really enjoyable to see many nods to the franchise throughout both subtle and overt and while some characters were glaringly absent which was a surprise; the characters that were included were really solid to see and the door was wide open for their inclusion at a later date.
While the cast does not contain any star power in terms of what Western audiences might expect from a major studio release; the ensemble works well and do a great job in bringing their characters to life.
The film leaves sequels wide open and teases a character that in my opinion was a glaring omission from the film. That being said; “Mortal Kombat” gives fans a solid adaptation that does not shy away from gore and violence and gives fans the cinematic experience that they have wanted.
3.5 stars out of 5
Darren (1599 KP) rated Boonie Bears: To The Rescue (2019) in Movies
Oct 14, 2019
Characters – Logger Vick has been working on cutting down the trees in the forest, which has seen him become rivals with a couple of bears, his rivalry has seen him spending more time trying to allude the bears, than dealing with his actual job, when his latest equipment is take by the bears, he learns a new responsibility when he must take care of a baby who has become lost in the forest. Briar is the smarter of the two bears, he always has a plan in mind and lets Bramble learn his correct place in the couple’s plans. Bramble does focus on getting most the laughs between the bears, he is meant to be the dumber of the two which comes off clear, with how he deals with keep Lola happy. Lola is the baby that ends up under the care of the unlikely partnerships between bitter rivals.
Story – The story here follows the unlikely union of the television show character Logger Vick and the brother bears Briar and Bramble as they want to protect a little baby girl they find in the forest, who is being tracked down by criminals. If you have seen the TV show, you will enjoy seeing the unlikely union, think Bugs Bunny working with Elma Fudd. If you haven’t seen the TV show you will see how characters similar to Yogi Bear and Ranger Smith clash over certain things. Having this mixed together we do get a Monsters Inc environment, with the baby being thrown into the hands of people and animals with no idea how to raise them and them finding comical ways to make her happy. This is clearly marketed for a younger audience and you can see why they would be happy to sit and enjoy the characters adventures.
Adventure/Family – The adventure side of this film shows us just how far the unlikely group will go to save a baby, it has plenty of references to other adventure films too, while this might be one that is targeted more for the younger members of the family, parents could enjoy watching with their single figured aged children.
Settings – The film uses the settings to get an extra laugh here and there, as it shows us just how the three characters live with their own rivalry.
Animation – The animation in the film does look like it has come from a TV show, which still makes it look fantastic throughout.
Scene of the Movie – The bonding between the three.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Being unsure what the rivalry between Logger Vick and the bears really is.
Final Thoughts – This is a fun family comedy that will keep the younger audience happy throughout the film, it does have a big heart at the centre and could be compared to Monsters Inc and Yogi Bear with ease.
Overall: Fun family animation.
Story – The story here follows the unlikely union of the television show character Logger Vick and the brother bears Briar and Bramble as they want to protect a little baby girl they find in the forest, who is being tracked down by criminals. If you have seen the TV show, you will enjoy seeing the unlikely union, think Bugs Bunny working with Elma Fudd. If you haven’t seen the TV show you will see how characters similar to Yogi Bear and Ranger Smith clash over certain things. Having this mixed together we do get a Monsters Inc environment, with the baby being thrown into the hands of people and animals with no idea how to raise them and them finding comical ways to make her happy. This is clearly marketed for a younger audience and you can see why they would be happy to sit and enjoy the characters adventures.
Adventure/Family – The adventure side of this film shows us just how far the unlikely group will go to save a baby, it has plenty of references to other adventure films too, while this might be one that is targeted more for the younger members of the family, parents could enjoy watching with their single figured aged children.
Settings – The film uses the settings to get an extra laugh here and there, as it shows us just how the three characters live with their own rivalry.
Animation – The animation in the film does look like it has come from a TV show, which still makes it look fantastic throughout.
Scene of the Movie – The bonding between the three.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Being unsure what the rivalry between Logger Vick and the bears really is.
Final Thoughts – This is a fun family comedy that will keep the younger audience happy throughout the film, it does have a big heart at the centre and could be compared to Monsters Inc and Yogi Bear with ease.
Overall: Fun family animation.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Sing (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Fun for all the family
Talking animated animals are big business over in Hollywood. After all, Disney’s Zootopia was one of only a handful of films to gross over $1billion last year. Its competitor, The Secret Life of Pets performed well but wasn’t critically successful.
Here, the company behind that second film, Illumination Entertainment, try to get the genre right with Sing. But are we looking at the next superstar of the animated genre?
Koala Buster Moon (Matthew McConaughey) presides over a once-grand theatre that has recently fallen on hard times. An eternal optimist, he loves his work enormously and will do anything to preserve it. Facing the crumbling of his life’s ambition, he takes one final chance to restore his fading jewel to its former glory by producing a singing competition, with eternal glory facing the winner.
There’s an impressive roster of talent on offer in Sing, something that parents will no doubt enjoy slightly more than the offspring they no doubt have to bring with them. With Matthew McConaughey taking the lead role, Taron Egerton, Reese Witherspoon, Scarlett Johansson and Seth McFarlane to name a few all lend their voices. There’s even a role for Brit-favourite Jennifer Saunders as a grumpy old sheep, it’s not ground-breaking, but it’s immensely likeable stuff.
Illumination Entertainment has brought us the brilliant Despicable Me franchise as well as its ridiculously successful spin-off Minions, but they’ve been criticised heavily for relying too much on the funny yellow critters to cash their paycheques. Thankfully, bar the now infamous company logo, the tic-tac shaped creatures are nowhere to be found and Sing is a vastly entertaining movie, in spite of their absence.
Whilst it’s true that the animation lacks the depth or fluidity of offerings from Pixar, Disney, and Dreamworks, there is a certain charm to its simplistic colour palate that children will find endearing. The plot is woefully unoriginal but director Garth Jennings, in his first animated feature, utilises that well, cleverly referencing the many talent shows that feature on our television screens – including those we are sick of.
There are some moral lessons in here too. Tori Kelly’s stage-shy elephant Meena has a great story arc that sees her face her fears and embrace her talents, whilst Taron Egerton’s gorilla Johnny stands up to his criminal father and learns that a life of crime doesn’t always pay.
In fact, only Seth MacFarlane’s obnoxious mouse Mike fails to make an impact on the plot, with his berating of an asthmatic sheep in the cleverly produced opening sequence coming across a little crude in comparison to the rest of the script.
Overall, Sing is a great film to hold the kid’s attention as we approach the half-term holidays. It would be easy to criticise it for lacking an original story, but there’s more to offer here than a half-baked plot. It’s beautifully voiced and reasonably well animated. Illumination Entertainment may not have topped Zootopia, but this is their best offering outside of Despicable Me by a country mile.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/01/28/fun-for-all-the-family-sing-review/
Here, the company behind that second film, Illumination Entertainment, try to get the genre right with Sing. But are we looking at the next superstar of the animated genre?
Koala Buster Moon (Matthew McConaughey) presides over a once-grand theatre that has recently fallen on hard times. An eternal optimist, he loves his work enormously and will do anything to preserve it. Facing the crumbling of his life’s ambition, he takes one final chance to restore his fading jewel to its former glory by producing a singing competition, with eternal glory facing the winner.
There’s an impressive roster of talent on offer in Sing, something that parents will no doubt enjoy slightly more than the offspring they no doubt have to bring with them. With Matthew McConaughey taking the lead role, Taron Egerton, Reese Witherspoon, Scarlett Johansson and Seth McFarlane to name a few all lend their voices. There’s even a role for Brit-favourite Jennifer Saunders as a grumpy old sheep, it’s not ground-breaking, but it’s immensely likeable stuff.
Illumination Entertainment has brought us the brilliant Despicable Me franchise as well as its ridiculously successful spin-off Minions, but they’ve been criticised heavily for relying too much on the funny yellow critters to cash their paycheques. Thankfully, bar the now infamous company logo, the tic-tac shaped creatures are nowhere to be found and Sing is a vastly entertaining movie, in spite of their absence.
Whilst it’s true that the animation lacks the depth or fluidity of offerings from Pixar, Disney, and Dreamworks, there is a certain charm to its simplistic colour palate that children will find endearing. The plot is woefully unoriginal but director Garth Jennings, in his first animated feature, utilises that well, cleverly referencing the many talent shows that feature on our television screens – including those we are sick of.
There are some moral lessons in here too. Tori Kelly’s stage-shy elephant Meena has a great story arc that sees her face her fears and embrace her talents, whilst Taron Egerton’s gorilla Johnny stands up to his criminal father and learns that a life of crime doesn’t always pay.
In fact, only Seth MacFarlane’s obnoxious mouse Mike fails to make an impact on the plot, with his berating of an asthmatic sheep in the cleverly produced opening sequence coming across a little crude in comparison to the rest of the script.
Overall, Sing is a great film to hold the kid’s attention as we approach the half-term holidays. It would be easy to criticise it for lacking an original story, but there’s more to offer here than a half-baked plot. It’s beautifully voiced and reasonably well animated. Illumination Entertainment may not have topped Zootopia, but this is their best offering outside of Despicable Me by a country mile.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/01/28/fun-for-all-the-family-sing-review/