Search
Search results
Darren (1599 KP) rated A Million Ways to Die in the West (2014) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: Poking fun at the old west is fine, it should work and some of the jokes are acceptable. The endless toilet jokes make it feel like an Adam Sandler film and the poorly written sex jokes get boring quickly. You have the old storyline of trying to impress someone only to fall for the one helping you. It is advertised incorrectly as it makes out from the trailer that he is training to beat Clinch while in actual fact the training is for another dual all together. After watching and enjoying Ted I was expecting a lot better than this lazy comedy for someone with a good comic mind. (3/10)
Actor Reviews
Seth MacFarlane: Albert the cowardly sheep farmer from the Frontier who gets upset when his girlfriend dumps him and puts his life in danger because he is depressed only to discover he is brave deep down. Seth really doesn’t suit being a lead actor at all. (2/10)
seth
Charlize Theron: Anna the beautiful mysterious woman who comes to town and ends up becoming friends with Albert while training him to shot. Good performance from someone not known for comedy. (7/10)
theron
Amanda Seyfried: Louise the girl who dumps Albert and moves on, but looks like she could have changed her mind too late. Standard performance really, never gets given anything to do. (5/10)
Liam Neeson: Clinch the deadly gunslinger who wants revenge after Albert kisses his wife. We see what he is capable of and that he will cheat but we hardly see him considering he is meant to be the villain. (5/10)
neeson
Giovanni Ribisi: Edward Albert’s best friend who is very religious while his girlfriend is being a prostitute. Gets to have fun with the role and would be fair to say get most laughs.(6/10)
Director Review: Seth MacFarlane – With his history for good quality comedy I would expect to see a lot better than this from him. (3/10)
Comedy: Poor jokes throughout that get boring quickly but the few cameos will get most laughs. (4/10)
Settings: Good authentic western town created. (8/10)
Suggestion: Don’t bother, I think even the most diehard Seth MacFarlane fans will be disappointed. (Avoid)
Best Part: Cameos
Worst Part: The Jokes
Funniest Scene: Doc Brown
Kill Of The Film: The Ice Block
Believability: No just a spoof (0/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: Yes
Oscar Chances: No
Box Office: $35 Million (So Far)
Budget: N/A
Runtime: 1 Hour 50 Minutes
Tagline: Bring Protection
Overall: Lazy Comedy
https://moviesreview101.com/2014/06/07/a-million-ways-to-die-in-the-west-2014/
Actor Reviews
Seth MacFarlane: Albert the cowardly sheep farmer from the Frontier who gets upset when his girlfriend dumps him and puts his life in danger because he is depressed only to discover he is brave deep down. Seth really doesn’t suit being a lead actor at all. (2/10)
seth
Charlize Theron: Anna the beautiful mysterious woman who comes to town and ends up becoming friends with Albert while training him to shot. Good performance from someone not known for comedy. (7/10)
theron
Amanda Seyfried: Louise the girl who dumps Albert and moves on, but looks like she could have changed her mind too late. Standard performance really, never gets given anything to do. (5/10)
Liam Neeson: Clinch the deadly gunslinger who wants revenge after Albert kisses his wife. We see what he is capable of and that he will cheat but we hardly see him considering he is meant to be the villain. (5/10)
neeson
Giovanni Ribisi: Edward Albert’s best friend who is very religious while his girlfriend is being a prostitute. Gets to have fun with the role and would be fair to say get most laughs.(6/10)
Director Review: Seth MacFarlane – With his history for good quality comedy I would expect to see a lot better than this from him. (3/10)
Comedy: Poor jokes throughout that get boring quickly but the few cameos will get most laughs. (4/10)
Settings: Good authentic western town created. (8/10)
Suggestion: Don’t bother, I think even the most diehard Seth MacFarlane fans will be disappointed. (Avoid)
Best Part: Cameos
Worst Part: The Jokes
Funniest Scene: Doc Brown
Kill Of The Film: The Ice Block
Believability: No just a spoof (0/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: Yes
Oscar Chances: No
Box Office: $35 Million (So Far)
Budget: N/A
Runtime: 1 Hour 50 Minutes
Tagline: Bring Protection
Overall: Lazy Comedy
https://moviesreview101.com/2014/06/07/a-million-ways-to-die-in-the-west-2014/
Darren (1599 KP) rated From Dusk Till Dawn 3: The Hangman's Daughter (2000) in Movies
Sep 2, 2019
Thoughts on From Dusk till Dawn 3: The Hangman’s Daughter
Characters – Johnny Madrid is one of the most feared outlaws in the west, about to be executed, he is rescued and returns to his gang to continue his life of crime, he will kill some people, while protecting others, making him a morally confusing figure. Ambrose Bierce has come from America where he has survived a shooting, he wants peaceful life only to find himself in the middle of the battle. The Hangman is trying to eliminate the threats in the gang world including Johnny, mostly to protect his daughter, only it isn’t for him to choose. Esmeralda is his daughter that has been getting controlled for too long and is in love with Johnny, she goes on the run with him only to be left questioning his choices.
Performances – The performances here are poor once again, Marco Leonardi overplays is role in the film, while Michael Parks does the best he can with his role. We do end up meeting too many random characters that just seems to make everything struggle to get going in the performance side of the film.
Story – The story does return to the original format only in the western era, we have the outlaws, the victims and the authorities all ending up in the bar which is crawling with vampires and must put their difference aside to survive. This style did work first time, it doesn’t fail this time, but it is hard to become invested in the characters. the build up before the bar is a lot of filler because we do have a lot of people to learn their place and mentality which makes it hard to figure out who is the good and bad guys for the piece. We try to have a connection to the original movie with the creation of one of the vampires which better than the last time out too.
Horror/Western – The horror involved in the film is returning to the vampire outlet which again doesn’t feel scary as it could have been. The western side of the film just uses the criminal side of the last one only making it a prequel to the original.
Settings – The film is set in the western area, we do eventually hit the saloon made famous from the first film and this time we get to dive into the larger scale of the building.
Special Effects – The effects in the film are not at the best, we do get a couple of good moments only nothing that reaches the levels of the first film.
Scene of the Movie – Escape.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – To many characters.
Final Thoughts – This is a solid enough prequel, at least it does feel connected to the previous film which helps build on the legacy of the bar.
Overall: Simple prequel.
Characters – Johnny Madrid is one of the most feared outlaws in the west, about to be executed, he is rescued and returns to his gang to continue his life of crime, he will kill some people, while protecting others, making him a morally confusing figure. Ambrose Bierce has come from America where he has survived a shooting, he wants peaceful life only to find himself in the middle of the battle. The Hangman is trying to eliminate the threats in the gang world including Johnny, mostly to protect his daughter, only it isn’t for him to choose. Esmeralda is his daughter that has been getting controlled for too long and is in love with Johnny, she goes on the run with him only to be left questioning his choices.
Performances – The performances here are poor once again, Marco Leonardi overplays is role in the film, while Michael Parks does the best he can with his role. We do end up meeting too many random characters that just seems to make everything struggle to get going in the performance side of the film.
Story – The story does return to the original format only in the western era, we have the outlaws, the victims and the authorities all ending up in the bar which is crawling with vampires and must put their difference aside to survive. This style did work first time, it doesn’t fail this time, but it is hard to become invested in the characters. the build up before the bar is a lot of filler because we do have a lot of people to learn their place and mentality which makes it hard to figure out who is the good and bad guys for the piece. We try to have a connection to the original movie with the creation of one of the vampires which better than the last time out too.
Horror/Western – The horror involved in the film is returning to the vampire outlet which again doesn’t feel scary as it could have been. The western side of the film just uses the criminal side of the last one only making it a prequel to the original.
Settings – The film is set in the western area, we do eventually hit the saloon made famous from the first film and this time we get to dive into the larger scale of the building.
Special Effects – The effects in the film are not at the best, we do get a couple of good moments only nothing that reaches the levels of the first film.
Scene of the Movie – Escape.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – To many characters.
Final Thoughts – This is a solid enough prequel, at least it does feel connected to the previous film which helps build on the legacy of the bar.
Overall: Simple prequel.
Laxmi Chalisa-Audio
Lifestyle and Entertainment
App
Chalisa - forty verses of lyrics. Verses that praise and plead with devotion. They are recited over...
Me. You. A Diary
9.0
Rate It
Book
This is Dawn French's fabulous new non-fiction book for 2017, and it's totally interactive: take a...
LL
Lucky Lupin: A Memoir
Book
Lucky Lupin is a poignant yet light-hearted story of survival against the odds, based on Charlie...
Liftoff: Start and Sustain Successful Agile Teams
Diana Liftoff and Ainsley Nies
Book
Ready, set, liftoff! Align your team to one purpose: successful delivery. Learn new insights and...
Letters to Strabo
Book
Set in the late 1970s, Letters to Strabo is the fictional autobiography of Adam Finnegan Black, or...
Inky Books (3 KP) rated Eona: The Last Dragoneye (Eon, #2) in Books
Jun 21, 2018
When I was young, well, younger, I was obsessed with dragons. I would read anything with dragons in it. So when I found Eon, and saw that there was another book in the series I was so happy.
Back in that time when all I had to worry about was getting good grades and reading books, I would have given this book five stars. Now, however, that I’ve come to read some of the finer offerings this genre has to give, I find myself disappointed. Let this be a lesson to anyone: never re-read your favorite childhood book series (unless it’s Harry Potter or Eragon).
To be 100% honest, this book was a mess from start to finish. I found that the writing wasn’t descriptive enough for me to fully appreciate what the author was trying to do. There was also a lot of world building in a small space, and it didn’t work at all. There needed to be more time for that. I felt that 80% of the book was action. Yes, action is good, but there was too much and not enough time left for characters to develop.
Now my major problem is the main character, Eona. She continues to lie and deceive and deny that she’s doing it throughout the book. It’s very annoying and the author should have been able to come up with other events to keep me interested. Also, bringing all those lies out at the end? Yeah, well, that didn’t work for as much as a shock factor as intended. It was easy to see the outcome.
There are only two things going for this book. The first being the overall plot with the dragons. I won’t say more because I don’t want to spoil it, but I think that was a good way to get the book to end. The second is all the mythology and the world history that was weaved into the plot. I really liked learning about those pieces of the world.
All of that being said, I’ve finally decided on just 3 stars. While I did like it at one point in my life, I don’t as much now. I like parts of the book, but it overall lost all importance in my opinion. I won’t be reading it again unless I forget, for some reason, about how confusing the plot ended up being.
Back in that time when all I had to worry about was getting good grades and reading books, I would have given this book five stars. Now, however, that I’ve come to read some of the finer offerings this genre has to give, I find myself disappointed. Let this be a lesson to anyone: never re-read your favorite childhood book series (unless it’s Harry Potter or Eragon).
To be 100% honest, this book was a mess from start to finish. I found that the writing wasn’t descriptive enough for me to fully appreciate what the author was trying to do. There was also a lot of world building in a small space, and it didn’t work at all. There needed to be more time for that. I felt that 80% of the book was action. Yes, action is good, but there was too much and not enough time left for characters to develop.
Now my major problem is the main character, Eona. She continues to lie and deceive and deny that she’s doing it throughout the book. It’s very annoying and the author should have been able to come up with other events to keep me interested. Also, bringing all those lies out at the end? Yeah, well, that didn’t work for as much as a shock factor as intended. It was easy to see the outcome.
There are only two things going for this book. The first being the overall plot with the dragons. I won’t say more because I don’t want to spoil it, but I think that was a good way to get the book to end. The second is all the mythology and the world history that was weaved into the plot. I really liked learning about those pieces of the world.
All of that being said, I’ve finally decided on just 3 stars. While I did like it at one point in my life, I don’t as much now. I like parts of the book, but it overall lost all importance in my opinion. I won’t be reading it again unless I forget, for some reason, about how confusing the plot ended up being.
Feierabend
Tabletop Game
Welcome to Feierabend, a.k.a. Finishing Time, the after-worker placement game for 1-6 players. In...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Killer (2023) in Movies
Nov 18, 2023
Interesting...but ends with a "thud"
Director David Fincher has a strong track record of interesting films…SE7EN, FIGHT CLUB, THE SOCIAL NETWORK (to name a few). Michael Fassbender is one of the more interesting actors working today…HUNGER, INGLORIOUS BASTERDS, PROMETHEUS (to name a few). So when these 2 got together to make a film of the graphic novel THE KILLER, anticipation was high.
Lower those expectations just a bit and you’ll be rewarded by an enteraning (enough) film/character study that is…interesting, but lands with a “thud”.
Based on the aforementioned graphic novel that was written by Alexis Nolent and illustrated by Luc Jacamon, THE KILLER follows the titular character after a hit has gone wrong and he must fight to save his life, while seeking vengeance on those that wronged him.
It is a “thinking man’s” hit-man film set in the seedy underground of a high-priced assassin. In lesser hands this could be a lesser John Wick knock-off, but in Fincher’s skilled fingers, THE KILLER is an intriguing character study.
It helps that the central figure of this film is portrayed by Michael Fassbender who is fascinating to watch even if he is just sitting around looking out a window. And this is good…for he spends the first 20 minutes of this film…sitting around looking out a window (waiting for his target to show up). It is a unique choice in a film such as this and with Fincher’s direction and Fassbender’s performance, it works more often than it doesn’t.
After the initial hit goes awry, sending Fassbender’s character on a global manhunt, the rest of the film is a series of one-on-one scenes with THE KILLER versus THE LAWYER (Charles Parnell - who is turning into a pretty reliable “that guy” character actor). THE KILLER versus THE BEAST (in what is the best action scene in the film) and THE KILLER versus THE CLIENT (portrayed by Arliss Howard in another portrayal of an “a-hole rich guy”). All of these scenes work for the most part, but none of them “knock it out of the park”.
The only scene that comes close to knocking it out of the park is THE KILLER versus THE EXPERT and that is because The Expert is played by Tilda Swinton and has 90% of the dialogue in the scene. It is always exciting to see 2 marvelous performers sitting across a table, playing off each other and Fassbender and Swinton (especially) shine in this portion of the film.
The problem with THE KILLER is that the separate scenes do not add up to a cohesive whole - and certainly the parts are more interesting than the final procduct and that blame needs to be placed at the feet of Director Fincher who should have been able to blend these scenes together better. He isn’t helped by a finale scene that lands with a thud…on purpose. But a “thud” is a “thud” and that is a tricky way to end the film.
And…in the case of THE KILLER…Fincher (and Fassbender) did not build up enough equity heading into the final scene that one can forgive “the thud”….though it is still a pretty good film. The “thud” pulls this film down from “really good” (not great) to just…”good”.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis).
Lower those expectations just a bit and you’ll be rewarded by an enteraning (enough) film/character study that is…interesting, but lands with a “thud”.
Based on the aforementioned graphic novel that was written by Alexis Nolent and illustrated by Luc Jacamon, THE KILLER follows the titular character after a hit has gone wrong and he must fight to save his life, while seeking vengeance on those that wronged him.
It is a “thinking man’s” hit-man film set in the seedy underground of a high-priced assassin. In lesser hands this could be a lesser John Wick knock-off, but in Fincher’s skilled fingers, THE KILLER is an intriguing character study.
It helps that the central figure of this film is portrayed by Michael Fassbender who is fascinating to watch even if he is just sitting around looking out a window. And this is good…for he spends the first 20 minutes of this film…sitting around looking out a window (waiting for his target to show up). It is a unique choice in a film such as this and with Fincher’s direction and Fassbender’s performance, it works more often than it doesn’t.
After the initial hit goes awry, sending Fassbender’s character on a global manhunt, the rest of the film is a series of one-on-one scenes with THE KILLER versus THE LAWYER (Charles Parnell - who is turning into a pretty reliable “that guy” character actor). THE KILLER versus THE BEAST (in what is the best action scene in the film) and THE KILLER versus THE CLIENT (portrayed by Arliss Howard in another portrayal of an “a-hole rich guy”). All of these scenes work for the most part, but none of them “knock it out of the park”.
The only scene that comes close to knocking it out of the park is THE KILLER versus THE EXPERT and that is because The Expert is played by Tilda Swinton and has 90% of the dialogue in the scene. It is always exciting to see 2 marvelous performers sitting across a table, playing off each other and Fassbender and Swinton (especially) shine in this portion of the film.
The problem with THE KILLER is that the separate scenes do not add up to a cohesive whole - and certainly the parts are more interesting than the final procduct and that blame needs to be placed at the feet of Director Fincher who should have been able to blend these scenes together better. He isn’t helped by a finale scene that lands with a thud…on purpose. But a “thud” is a “thud” and that is a tricky way to end the film.
And…in the case of THE KILLER…Fincher (and Fassbender) did not build up enough equity heading into the final scene that one can forgive “the thud”….though it is still a pretty good film. The “thud” pulls this film down from “really good” (not great) to just…”good”.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis).