Search
Search results
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2395 KP) rated Poirot: Hallowe'en Party in Books
Feb 2, 2023
Drowned in the Apple Bobbing Tub
Poirot is called to a small British village after a tragedy at a Hallowe’en party takes place. Someone used the tub that the guests had bobbed for apples in to drown Joyce, a thirteen year old girl who was helping with the event. Earlier in the evening, she had bragged that she had witnessed a murder, however the residents of the village didn’t take her seriously since she was always embellishing if not outright lying about things. If that wasn’t the motive, what happened to her?
Yes, I picked this particular book to read this year because of the upcoming movie “inspired” by it. I suspect the movie will be vastly different, but we will see. The book originally came out in 1969, and you can tell with some of the theories that Poirot hears about what happened. It was interesting to see how society was thinking about some of these issues back then. My biggest issue was the victim’s age, it’s just not something I’m used to. However, I was drawn into the story, interested in finding out exactly what happened. The characters could have been a little sharper, but they did help make me care about the story. I was on the right track, but didn’t have everything pieced together when we reached the climax, which was pretty thrilling. It’s easy to see why this is a lesser-known book from Agatha Christie, but it is definitely enjoyable.
Yes, I picked this particular book to read this year because of the upcoming movie “inspired” by it. I suspect the movie will be vastly different, but we will see. The book originally came out in 1969, and you can tell with some of the theories that Poirot hears about what happened. It was interesting to see how society was thinking about some of these issues back then. My biggest issue was the victim’s age, it’s just not something I’m used to. However, I was drawn into the story, interested in finding out exactly what happened. The characters could have been a little sharper, but they did help make me care about the story. I was on the right track, but didn’t have everything pieced together when we reached the climax, which was pretty thrilling. It’s easy to see why this is a lesser-known book from Agatha Christie, but it is definitely enjoyable.
Sun of Blood and Ruin
6.0
Rate It
Book
Mexican history and Mesoamerican mythology meet in this thrilling historical fantasy with magic,...
Assassin's Heart: Black Ops Former Military Romantic Suspense Novel (Agents of Command)
8.0
Rate It
Book
Can love save a tortured assassin? Finn Kingsley was molded to be the perfect weapon: a ruthless...
Silent as the Grave
5.0
Rate It
Book
Retired Detective Molly Murphy Sullivan goes undercover in the next book in the New York Times...
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Incredibles 2 (2018) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Was it worth the wait?
It’s been fourteen years since Pixar introduced the likes of Violet, Dash, Robert and Helen Parr onto unsuspecting audiences across the globe. The quartet of superheroes swiftly became one of the studio’s best and most profitable films, with a loyal legion of fans begging for a sequel soon after.
Nevertheless, Pixar went on to create some of the greatest animated films of all time. Then the slump came. After Cars and its dreadful sequel came and went and The Good Dinosaur reminded us that not even Pixar was immune from the movie critic curse, they swiftly regrouped and brought us the thrilling Coco and new classic, Inside Out. Now, 14 years later, Mr Incredible and the team are back. But are we looking at a classic Pixar, or a sequel that is too little too late?
Everyone’s favourite family of superheroes is back, but this time Helen (Holly Hunter) is in the spotlight, leaving Bob (Craig T. Nelson) at home with Violet (Sarah Vowell) and Dash (Huck Milner) to navigate the day-to-day heroics of normal life. It’s a tough transition for everyone, made tougher by the fact that the family is unaware of Jack-Jack’s superpowers. When a new villain hatches a dangerous plot, the family and Frozone (Samuel L. Jackson) must find a way to work together again.
Picking up immediately after the events of its predecessor, Incredibles 2 is a thrilling and entertaining sequel that reeks of quality. Everything from the voice acting to the animation is leaps and bounds ahead of the first film and this is testament to the incredible technological gains Pixar has made over the last decade.
Brad Bird is once again in the director’s chair and that familiarity lends it the same heart and emotional engagement of its predecessor. We, as the audience, feel truly invested in the characters again, as we did all that time ago. This time however, the action is dialled up to 11 with some truly exceptional set-pieces.
Thankfully, this is not at the cost of what made The Incredibles such a hit, family drama. The central family unit remains as prevalent as it did before, but this time we have Jack-Jack’s powers thrown into the mix with Elastigirl taking centre stage over Mr. Incredible. This new dynamic is a welcome change from the very male-centric blockbusters we’ve had over the last few years; Wonder Woman being the obvious exception.
The animation is, well incredible. While the quirky character designs never let you forget you’re watching an animated feature, the over-the-top set design means it sits perfectly together. Where The Good Dinosaur went wrong was in its presentation of photo-realistic visuals paired with cartoon-like characters; it simply didn’t work.
Incredibles 2 is a sequel that was absolutely worth the wait
We also have a very interesting villain to contend with. The Screenslaver is pure popcorn wickedness at its very best. It’s amazing that The Incredibles series has scored 2/2 when it comes to their antagonists, yet Marvel still manages to struggle with its bad guys. The Screenslaver may not quite match up the brilliance of Syndrome from its predecessor, but it comes pretty close.
There’s also the welcome return of Edna Mode (voiced by director Brad Bird). Her part is perhaps a little too short, but maintaining her cameo status means she doesn’t feel as overcooked as the minions did after their first solo outing. In the end, we want more Edna, rather than having too much and this is a good thing.
Plot wise, it’s fantastic. With a central storyline about a changing family dynamic, it’s sure to resonate with both children and adults. There are plot twists that wouldn’t look out of place in a live-action feature and some great voice acting by all of the cast.
Negatives? Well it’s hard to think of any whatsoever. This is a much more engaging film than its predecessor but at 118 minutes, it’s long by animation standards. The pacing is a little off just before the finale kicks off, but this is my main and only complaint.
Overall, Incredibles 2 is a sequel that was absolutely worth the wait. It’s filled with sparkling dialogue and great voice acting as well as superb animation and a thrilling plot that all combines to make it one of the year’s best films.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/07/15/incredibles-2-review-was-it-worth-the-wait/
Nevertheless, Pixar went on to create some of the greatest animated films of all time. Then the slump came. After Cars and its dreadful sequel came and went and The Good Dinosaur reminded us that not even Pixar was immune from the movie critic curse, they swiftly regrouped and brought us the thrilling Coco and new classic, Inside Out. Now, 14 years later, Mr Incredible and the team are back. But are we looking at a classic Pixar, or a sequel that is too little too late?
Everyone’s favourite family of superheroes is back, but this time Helen (Holly Hunter) is in the spotlight, leaving Bob (Craig T. Nelson) at home with Violet (Sarah Vowell) and Dash (Huck Milner) to navigate the day-to-day heroics of normal life. It’s a tough transition for everyone, made tougher by the fact that the family is unaware of Jack-Jack’s superpowers. When a new villain hatches a dangerous plot, the family and Frozone (Samuel L. Jackson) must find a way to work together again.
Picking up immediately after the events of its predecessor, Incredibles 2 is a thrilling and entertaining sequel that reeks of quality. Everything from the voice acting to the animation is leaps and bounds ahead of the first film and this is testament to the incredible technological gains Pixar has made over the last decade.
Brad Bird is once again in the director’s chair and that familiarity lends it the same heart and emotional engagement of its predecessor. We, as the audience, feel truly invested in the characters again, as we did all that time ago. This time however, the action is dialled up to 11 with some truly exceptional set-pieces.
Thankfully, this is not at the cost of what made The Incredibles such a hit, family drama. The central family unit remains as prevalent as it did before, but this time we have Jack-Jack’s powers thrown into the mix with Elastigirl taking centre stage over Mr. Incredible. This new dynamic is a welcome change from the very male-centric blockbusters we’ve had over the last few years; Wonder Woman being the obvious exception.
The animation is, well incredible. While the quirky character designs never let you forget you’re watching an animated feature, the over-the-top set design means it sits perfectly together. Where The Good Dinosaur went wrong was in its presentation of photo-realistic visuals paired with cartoon-like characters; it simply didn’t work.
Incredibles 2 is a sequel that was absolutely worth the wait
We also have a very interesting villain to contend with. The Screenslaver is pure popcorn wickedness at its very best. It’s amazing that The Incredibles series has scored 2/2 when it comes to their antagonists, yet Marvel still manages to struggle with its bad guys. The Screenslaver may not quite match up the brilliance of Syndrome from its predecessor, but it comes pretty close.
There’s also the welcome return of Edna Mode (voiced by director Brad Bird). Her part is perhaps a little too short, but maintaining her cameo status means she doesn’t feel as overcooked as the minions did after their first solo outing. In the end, we want more Edna, rather than having too much and this is a good thing.
Plot wise, it’s fantastic. With a central storyline about a changing family dynamic, it’s sure to resonate with both children and adults. There are plot twists that wouldn’t look out of place in a live-action feature and some great voice acting by all of the cast.
Negatives? Well it’s hard to think of any whatsoever. This is a much more engaging film than its predecessor but at 118 minutes, it’s long by animation standards. The pacing is a little off just before the finale kicks off, but this is my main and only complaint.
Overall, Incredibles 2 is a sequel that was absolutely worth the wait. It’s filled with sparkling dialogue and great voice acting as well as superb animation and a thrilling plot that all combines to make it one of the year’s best films.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/07/15/incredibles-2-review-was-it-worth-the-wait/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Ant-Man (2015) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Paul Rudd like you've never seen him before
You can almost hear the groans, yet another superhero film bulldozes its way into cinemas. Sandwiched between the ambitious Avengers: Age of Ultron and the Fantastic Four reboot, Marvel’s Ant-Man is the first of this year’s summer superheroes.
However, numerous setbacks that included a director walking out halfway through filming meant that Ant-Man would be haunted by the action behind-the-scenes, rather than that on it. But what is the finished product like?
Peyton Reed took over from Edgar Wright after some “creative differences” and directs one of the best films to come out of Marvel studios, despite a few issues.
The film follows the story of former criminal Scott Lang, played by Paul Rudd, as he is tasked with becoming the mightily tiny superhero and stop a dangerous form of weaponry falling into the wrong hands – notably those of Darren Cross.
Helping him along the way is scientist Hank Pym, Michael Douglas, and his daughter Hope – played by the wonderful Evangeline Lilly.
Rudd’s casting raised a few eyebrows during the films pre-production but he is as charming as ever and really gets stuck into the role of a superhero. Michael Douglas and Evangeline Lilly are both more than a match for Rudd’s charisma and play their roles well.
What sets Ant-Man apart from the plethora of other big-budget superhero movies is the unique way the titular character utilises the environments around him. Summoning a host of ants to infiltrate buildings adds a new dimension to the genre that is much needed.
The CGI during these sequences is absolutely top-notch. When Rudd shrinks down we are drawn into a whole new world of giant carpet pile and huge ants and it’s hard not to get involved with the insects – you’ll never look at them in the same way again.
Marvel’s usual sense of humour is also in fine form, but again taking a different approach. This is a film well aware of the fact that Ant-Man is a ridiculous character, one of the most bizarre creations to ever come out of the studio.
Thankfully, this doesn’t stop Ant-Man from being ridiculously good fun. The action sequences are thrilling and beautifully choreographed throughout the film and on the whole show that the change in director hasn’t harmed the finished product.
However, like the titular character, the film feels ultimately, very small. After the city-levelling antics of Avengers: Age of Ultron and all the previous Marvel movies, Ant-Man comes across a little lightweight and lacking in substance.
Overall, Paul Rudd’s first foray into the superhero genre is highly commendable. Peyton Reed has managed to overcome near constant bad publicity to create a film that’s funny, thrilling and a little different.
Marvel will continue to churn out these movies until audiences are fed up with the genre, and if the quality remains at this level, it may be a while yet.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/07/19/paul-rudd-like-youve-never-seen-him-ant-man-review/
However, numerous setbacks that included a director walking out halfway through filming meant that Ant-Man would be haunted by the action behind-the-scenes, rather than that on it. But what is the finished product like?
Peyton Reed took over from Edgar Wright after some “creative differences” and directs one of the best films to come out of Marvel studios, despite a few issues.
The film follows the story of former criminal Scott Lang, played by Paul Rudd, as he is tasked with becoming the mightily tiny superhero and stop a dangerous form of weaponry falling into the wrong hands – notably those of Darren Cross.
Helping him along the way is scientist Hank Pym, Michael Douglas, and his daughter Hope – played by the wonderful Evangeline Lilly.
Rudd’s casting raised a few eyebrows during the films pre-production but he is as charming as ever and really gets stuck into the role of a superhero. Michael Douglas and Evangeline Lilly are both more than a match for Rudd’s charisma and play their roles well.
What sets Ant-Man apart from the plethora of other big-budget superhero movies is the unique way the titular character utilises the environments around him. Summoning a host of ants to infiltrate buildings adds a new dimension to the genre that is much needed.
The CGI during these sequences is absolutely top-notch. When Rudd shrinks down we are drawn into a whole new world of giant carpet pile and huge ants and it’s hard not to get involved with the insects – you’ll never look at them in the same way again.
Marvel’s usual sense of humour is also in fine form, but again taking a different approach. This is a film well aware of the fact that Ant-Man is a ridiculous character, one of the most bizarre creations to ever come out of the studio.
Thankfully, this doesn’t stop Ant-Man from being ridiculously good fun. The action sequences are thrilling and beautifully choreographed throughout the film and on the whole show that the change in director hasn’t harmed the finished product.
However, like the titular character, the film feels ultimately, very small. After the city-levelling antics of Avengers: Age of Ultron and all the previous Marvel movies, Ant-Man comes across a little lightweight and lacking in substance.
Overall, Paul Rudd’s first foray into the superhero genre is highly commendable. Peyton Reed has managed to overcome near constant bad publicity to create a film that’s funny, thrilling and a little different.
Marvel will continue to churn out these movies until audiences are fed up with the genre, and if the quality remains at this level, it may be a while yet.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/07/19/paul-rudd-like-youve-never-seen-him-ant-man-review/
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The Hummingbird Project (2018) in Movies
Jun 24, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
The trailer for this offered a glimpse at something that looked intriguing but the final result wasn't quite as impactful as you might have imagined.
Vincent has the drive and cunning to launch a project that could make them millions, Anton is the brains to make it a success. In investment you have to be a step ahead of the competition, so the competition is where you'll get the best deal on the next big thing. When they both quit with immediate effect their boss is suspicious does everything to find out what they're up to. She eventually gets a break and is soon hot on their heels to come up with something bigger and better. The stakes are high and the game is dirty, but someone has to win.
The Hummingbird Project certainly didn't lack acting talent. While I've not seen much from Jesse Eisenberg apart from Lex Luthor in the DCEU I was impressed with what he gives in this, there are a lot of powerful moments as we get towards the end of the film and he treats them well. Alexander Skarsgård plays Anton, the awkward genius cousin who spends most of his time with his eyes glued to a computer screen. His role is heavy on physical acting rather than dialogue and it's very effective against the pushy characters around him.
The duo are pitted against their ex-boss, Eva Torres, beautifully brought to life as a ruthless villain by Salma Hayek. Hayek has the bitchy boss thing down and had she been talking at me with heavily threatening undertones I think I'd have just started crying.
I found the story easy to get along with, the script wasn't overly complicated which was nice considering it could have been with all the technical things going on. As the story overall is about them fulfilling their project it means that at several points we get reminders about what's going on, and that probably helps it because every so often they get out some plans and go "this is what we're doing and this is the problem" so you don't have to really remember much as we progress.
At points it seems like it's a little rushed, which is intriguing because it feels like it's longer than billed. I assumed that some scenes are included because they're a nod to the real-life story... but it isn't a real-life story... and that in itself should be the most confusing thing about this film. I genuinely went in thinking it was "history", but it's not history, so why did they bother making it? It's just not thrilling enough to hold up as a new story. If I'm honest, finding out it's fictional after thinking it was real has knocked off some star rating.
What you should do
There are much more thrilling tales out there for this sort of story, despite the good acting I would suggest seeing something else. Seeing something else would also preserve the beautiful image of Alexander Skarsgård from being tarnished.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
A multi-million dollar idea would be quite nice.
Vincent has the drive and cunning to launch a project that could make them millions, Anton is the brains to make it a success. In investment you have to be a step ahead of the competition, so the competition is where you'll get the best deal on the next big thing. When they both quit with immediate effect their boss is suspicious does everything to find out what they're up to. She eventually gets a break and is soon hot on their heels to come up with something bigger and better. The stakes are high and the game is dirty, but someone has to win.
The Hummingbird Project certainly didn't lack acting talent. While I've not seen much from Jesse Eisenberg apart from Lex Luthor in the DCEU I was impressed with what he gives in this, there are a lot of powerful moments as we get towards the end of the film and he treats them well. Alexander Skarsgård plays Anton, the awkward genius cousin who spends most of his time with his eyes glued to a computer screen. His role is heavy on physical acting rather than dialogue and it's very effective against the pushy characters around him.
The duo are pitted against their ex-boss, Eva Torres, beautifully brought to life as a ruthless villain by Salma Hayek. Hayek has the bitchy boss thing down and had she been talking at me with heavily threatening undertones I think I'd have just started crying.
I found the story easy to get along with, the script wasn't overly complicated which was nice considering it could have been with all the technical things going on. As the story overall is about them fulfilling their project it means that at several points we get reminders about what's going on, and that probably helps it because every so often they get out some plans and go "this is what we're doing and this is the problem" so you don't have to really remember much as we progress.
At points it seems like it's a little rushed, which is intriguing because it feels like it's longer than billed. I assumed that some scenes are included because they're a nod to the real-life story... but it isn't a real-life story... and that in itself should be the most confusing thing about this film. I genuinely went in thinking it was "history", but it's not history, so why did they bother making it? It's just not thrilling enough to hold up as a new story. If I'm honest, finding out it's fictional after thinking it was real has knocked off some star rating.
What you should do
There are much more thrilling tales out there for this sort of story, despite the good acting I would suggest seeing something else. Seeing something else would also preserve the beautiful image of Alexander Skarsgård from being tarnished.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
A multi-million dollar idea would be quite nice.
Secrets of the Lost Tomb
9.0
Rate It
Tabletop Game
Secrets of the Lost Tomb is a cooperative game of thrilling action-adventure and discovery. Players...
Lee (2222 KP) rated Murder on the Orient Express (2017) in Movies
Nov 6, 2017 (Updated Nov 9, 2017)
Kenneth Branagh (1 more)
Stunning cinematography
Wasted all-star cast (1 more)
Not very interesting
All style, no substance
This review is possibly a little unfair, as I actually managed to fall asleep watching Murder On The Orient Express. In a busy cinema, early evening on a Sunday. I've only ever managed to do this a couple of times previously - once, while watching a midnight screening of Star Wars: The Force Awakens (I'm an old man, it was way past my bedtime). Another occasion was during the last Alvin and the Chipmunks movie while watching with my daughter (and I quite rightly got a dig in the ribs from her when she caught me out).
Unfortunately for me though, Kenneth Branaghs lavish retelling of this classic murder mystery is all style and no substance. Branagh himself is actually very good, and hugely entertaining as the worlds greatest detective, Hercule Poirot. However, most of the remaining all star cast just seem wasted in their roles and I just felt like I was watching a big, glossy BBC detective drama on a Sunday evening rather than a thrilling cinematic experience.
I made it through the setup and the murder itself. I also made it through some of the questioning of the many suspects too. But I think that's where my body gave up. I don't think I missed much though, and I was awake again in time for the ridiculous reveal and the explanation as to why whodunit actually dunit, but overall this was just a pretty big disappointment for me.
Unfortunately for me though, Kenneth Branaghs lavish retelling of this classic murder mystery is all style and no substance. Branagh himself is actually very good, and hugely entertaining as the worlds greatest detective, Hercule Poirot. However, most of the remaining all star cast just seem wasted in their roles and I just felt like I was watching a big, glossy BBC detective drama on a Sunday evening rather than a thrilling cinematic experience.
I made it through the setup and the murder itself. I also made it through some of the questioning of the many suspects too. But I think that's where my body gave up. I don't think I missed much though, and I was awake again in time for the ridiculous reveal and the explanation as to why whodunit actually dunit, but overall this was just a pretty big disappointment for me.
Ross (3284 KP) rated The Kid Who Would Be King (2019) in Movies
Feb 19, 2019
Great fun British film
This film seems pretty timely - the backdrop of the country being split and in turmoil with everyone miserable and/or arguing perfectly nails pre-Brexit Britain, without actually naming the cause of the upset. Seeing kids sensing their parents' and teachers' stress levels and looking to help really nails home how much we are all struggling with the current climate and need to think about the impact that has on our homelives.
The plot is fairly standard Arthurian legend - boy pulls sword from stone and seeks to unite his enemies behind him in battling against forces of evil. The film does this with full knowledge and gentle telling of the actual legend, and doesn't look to be a re-telling, rather a modern day "second coming of Arthur".
There are plenty of laughs throughout the film, with a typical British flavour.
There is also action aplenty with some really powerful battle scenes and excellent SFX.
Director Joe Cornish (of Adam & Joe fame - there is also a nice cameo from Adam Buxton in the film) does a fantastic job of telling the story through the eyes of a child but without it being patronising or twee.
The cast are superb, with the young Merlin really being a star (and creepily like a young Joe Cornish). While I enjoyed Patrick Stewart's role as Merlin, I felt it added less gravitas than I think was intended and wasn't really necessary, the young incarnation perfectly playing the role himself.
A great, fun and thrilling adventure.
The plot is fairly standard Arthurian legend - boy pulls sword from stone and seeks to unite his enemies behind him in battling against forces of evil. The film does this with full knowledge and gentle telling of the actual legend, and doesn't look to be a re-telling, rather a modern day "second coming of Arthur".
There are plenty of laughs throughout the film, with a typical British flavour.
There is also action aplenty with some really powerful battle scenes and excellent SFX.
Director Joe Cornish (of Adam & Joe fame - there is also a nice cameo from Adam Buxton in the film) does a fantastic job of telling the story through the eyes of a child but without it being patronising or twee.
The cast are superb, with the young Merlin really being a star (and creepily like a young Joe Cornish). While I enjoyed Patrick Stewart's role as Merlin, I felt it added less gravitas than I think was intended and wasn't really necessary, the young incarnation perfectly playing the role himself.
A great, fun and thrilling adventure.