Search
Search results
iYoga - Premium - iPhone
Health & Fitness and Medical
App
This app will not run on 3GS iPhones. This app is for users that are looking for the very best...
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated The Mandalorian in TV
Jan 22, 2021 (Updated Jan 22, 2021)
Being a child of Star Wars, born in ’73, whose first memory of a cinema was A New Hope in ’77, of course the entire franchise is still close to my heart. I am no superfan, however. I do not need to remember every name of every character, or know the obscure names of planets to enjoy it. I remember that deeply competitive nature back in the playground – how important it was to prove Star Wars was yours by knowing more than any other kid! Fortunately I managed to let that go shortly after The Return of the Jedi. Ok, maybe 1995.
The Mandalorian is definitely for all Star Wars fans, but it is mostly for the kids that never grew up and need those details of “the canonical Star Wars” universe in their lives. And there are plenty of them. It is a geek’s wet dream! With chat rooms and fan sites going wild in debate and argument over the smallest of Easter eggs and hints to connections across the medium. As if this is a lost historical document that sheds light on the truth of many characters and events, that until now were shrouded in darkness and speculation only.
I find that phenomenon weird and a little creepy, but I do appreciate where it comes from. For me, I am merely glad it isn’t crap. It is nice to be in the Star Wars universe without holding your face in your hands for shame of lazy storytelling and moments that shit on the spirit of the original trilogy. The first thing that pleased me about The Mandolorian is how close it is in feel to the old school trilogy. In fact it surprised me, because, despite the very modern effects and full budget of Disney behind it, it feels very old fashioned, like a TV show from around 1986, maybe. And I wonder how they have achieved that every time I watch it. It has an intangible magic about it.
In fact, the feel of the show as a whole is often a little cheap, shockingly – the posters and toys and all associated media is as glossy and crisp as all money can afford, creating an image of the show that isn’t actually what the show is. In reality it is a cross between old spaghetti westerns, with The Mandalorian cast as The Man With No Name, and episodes of The A-Team or Knightrider. I kinda like it; very nostalgic, and a smart move by Jon Favreau and the other show-runners. It appeals to middle aged audiences and new alike, because it is a knowing hybrid of all things cool and nerdy!
Design-wise, the look of The Mandalorian himself is perfect fan bait and very cool. The music goes a long way to drawing you in – Ludwig Göransson, known for his work on Black Panther and Tenet, has hit on a career defining theme that blends Clint Eastwood and Star Wars in perfect harmony. I can’t imagine the show working half as well without that theme music! The spaceships and detail of every alien and weapon and costume is meticulous (if at times a little wobbly or cheap looking), and the wider feel of background and tertiary characters is pretty damn good.
But, let’s face it… The Mandalorian is the success it has been predominantly for one reason. I could give him his real name, but if you haven’t finished it yet that would count as a huge spoiler, so I will refer to him as The Child. The temptation to use the phrase Baby Yoda is hard to resist, and has been a cultural phenomenon that only comes along once or twice in a decade, but on this I agree with the fans: it is inaccurate and misleading. The Child is fine. It’ll do until you learn his true moniker.
In season one, where the build up of story, character and mystery is superb, we see very little of The Child at first. But we cannot take our eyes off him for every second he is on screen. The whole concept is so beyond cute and incredibly strong as a hook for a Star Wars story it is almost impossible not to squeal out loud at everything he does. Who is he? Why is he? What is he capable of? How will he fit in to the longterm idea for the story? So exciting, and total genius to keep everyone watching.
It isn’t all about The Child on his own though. It is about the unlikely symbiotic bond, like father and son, that develops between the tiny, vulnerable and childlike focal point, and the increasingly confident and loyal antihero, who will stop at nothing to protect his ward, as he struggles to find his own place in the universe. After a very short time, we care more about this relationship than 90% of all romances in all of TV history.
Through danger, mayhem and a touch of comedy, we grow to adore the two of them together, and can’t bear to think of them being apart. Some trick when you realise The Child is as much a mini-muppet style prosthetic as it is added CGI for expression and detail. Perhaps another callback to our 80s sensibilities, when we accepted ETs and Gremlins and all of the residents of Mos Eisley’s cantina as real without hesitation. It doesn’t have to look real, is the point, as long as it fits the story, is cool and is fun! Which The Child totally is – for entertainment value they have got the tone of the show so right.
What doesn’t hold up that strongly to critical scrutiny though is quite a lot of the scripts, the repetitive nature of the context of many episodes and missions the duo find themselves on, the mismatch quality of the guest directors abilities, and quite a lot of the dodgy acting by supporting characters. It’s as if at some production meeting at one early point they all said, look it’s Star Wars, we make the aliens and the spaceships and the weapons look good and we can’t fail… plus we have The Child and Boba Fett’s (yes, I know) armour, we can’t fail!
The basic storyline is enough to hook it on, just about, it is the detail that sometimes feels weak and lazy. But don’t worry, any minute something cool to look at and a big fight will happen, so we’re all good! I’m sure Pedro Pascal (the actor under the armour) can’t believe his luck! He is one of the biggest stars in TV all of a sudden, for basically doing a fairly monotone voice-over performance of some seriously dodgy dialogue. That is the magic of Star Wars.
So, I came to season one late, having no access at that time to Disney plus. In fact, I watched all of season one in a day the day before the launch of season two, so the switch to a new episode to look forward to suited me well. It gave me something to look forward to on a Friday between Halloween and Christmas. Trouble was that, although still having fun with the exploits of The Kid, I was starting to weary of the plotlines, and put my viewing on hold after S2E4 in favour of the far superior scripting of His Dark Materials on BBC.
I must have needed the hiatus, because when I came back to mop it up and finish season two a few days ago I realised that I had in fact missed it. It also helped that episode 5 onwards is when the season gets really good again. Rosario Dawson as Ashoka Tano (known well by fans of The Clone Wars) was a truly great addition that the show much needed by that point.
I had no trouble after that in bingeing to the end. You could feel a climax and a revelation coming, and although the character of Moff Gideon (Giancarlo Esposito) crumbled disappointly away into nothing much, the last 15 minutes of the final episode had me slack jawed in fan wonderment. I felt 9 years old again, and I loved it! I had been amazingly lucky not to stumble upon spoilers, I guess. Amazing ending, and all faults forgiven for that unforgettable moment and feel. Wonderful stuff!
To say any more, again, is to spoil. So, let’s just talk about it privately, or, you know, in about a year when season 3 is over and it is old news. Hmmm, season 3…? I wonder where they will take that now…? Actually, properly exciting, in a back in the playground kind of way.
The Mandalorian is definitely for all Star Wars fans, but it is mostly for the kids that never grew up and need those details of “the canonical Star Wars” universe in their lives. And there are plenty of them. It is a geek’s wet dream! With chat rooms and fan sites going wild in debate and argument over the smallest of Easter eggs and hints to connections across the medium. As if this is a lost historical document that sheds light on the truth of many characters and events, that until now were shrouded in darkness and speculation only.
I find that phenomenon weird and a little creepy, but I do appreciate where it comes from. For me, I am merely glad it isn’t crap. It is nice to be in the Star Wars universe without holding your face in your hands for shame of lazy storytelling and moments that shit on the spirit of the original trilogy. The first thing that pleased me about The Mandolorian is how close it is in feel to the old school trilogy. In fact it surprised me, because, despite the very modern effects and full budget of Disney behind it, it feels very old fashioned, like a TV show from around 1986, maybe. And I wonder how they have achieved that every time I watch it. It has an intangible magic about it.
In fact, the feel of the show as a whole is often a little cheap, shockingly – the posters and toys and all associated media is as glossy and crisp as all money can afford, creating an image of the show that isn’t actually what the show is. In reality it is a cross between old spaghetti westerns, with The Mandalorian cast as The Man With No Name, and episodes of The A-Team or Knightrider. I kinda like it; very nostalgic, and a smart move by Jon Favreau and the other show-runners. It appeals to middle aged audiences and new alike, because it is a knowing hybrid of all things cool and nerdy!
Design-wise, the look of The Mandalorian himself is perfect fan bait and very cool. The music goes a long way to drawing you in – Ludwig Göransson, known for his work on Black Panther and Tenet, has hit on a career defining theme that blends Clint Eastwood and Star Wars in perfect harmony. I can’t imagine the show working half as well without that theme music! The spaceships and detail of every alien and weapon and costume is meticulous (if at times a little wobbly or cheap looking), and the wider feel of background and tertiary characters is pretty damn good.
But, let’s face it… The Mandalorian is the success it has been predominantly for one reason. I could give him his real name, but if you haven’t finished it yet that would count as a huge spoiler, so I will refer to him as The Child. The temptation to use the phrase Baby Yoda is hard to resist, and has been a cultural phenomenon that only comes along once or twice in a decade, but on this I agree with the fans: it is inaccurate and misleading. The Child is fine. It’ll do until you learn his true moniker.
In season one, where the build up of story, character and mystery is superb, we see very little of The Child at first. But we cannot take our eyes off him for every second he is on screen. The whole concept is so beyond cute and incredibly strong as a hook for a Star Wars story it is almost impossible not to squeal out loud at everything he does. Who is he? Why is he? What is he capable of? How will he fit in to the longterm idea for the story? So exciting, and total genius to keep everyone watching.
It isn’t all about The Child on his own though. It is about the unlikely symbiotic bond, like father and son, that develops between the tiny, vulnerable and childlike focal point, and the increasingly confident and loyal antihero, who will stop at nothing to protect his ward, as he struggles to find his own place in the universe. After a very short time, we care more about this relationship than 90% of all romances in all of TV history.
Through danger, mayhem and a touch of comedy, we grow to adore the two of them together, and can’t bear to think of them being apart. Some trick when you realise The Child is as much a mini-muppet style prosthetic as it is added CGI for expression and detail. Perhaps another callback to our 80s sensibilities, when we accepted ETs and Gremlins and all of the residents of Mos Eisley’s cantina as real without hesitation. It doesn’t have to look real, is the point, as long as it fits the story, is cool and is fun! Which The Child totally is – for entertainment value they have got the tone of the show so right.
What doesn’t hold up that strongly to critical scrutiny though is quite a lot of the scripts, the repetitive nature of the context of many episodes and missions the duo find themselves on, the mismatch quality of the guest directors abilities, and quite a lot of the dodgy acting by supporting characters. It’s as if at some production meeting at one early point they all said, look it’s Star Wars, we make the aliens and the spaceships and the weapons look good and we can’t fail… plus we have The Child and Boba Fett’s (yes, I know) armour, we can’t fail!
The basic storyline is enough to hook it on, just about, it is the detail that sometimes feels weak and lazy. But don’t worry, any minute something cool to look at and a big fight will happen, so we’re all good! I’m sure Pedro Pascal (the actor under the armour) can’t believe his luck! He is one of the biggest stars in TV all of a sudden, for basically doing a fairly monotone voice-over performance of some seriously dodgy dialogue. That is the magic of Star Wars.
So, I came to season one late, having no access at that time to Disney plus. In fact, I watched all of season one in a day the day before the launch of season two, so the switch to a new episode to look forward to suited me well. It gave me something to look forward to on a Friday between Halloween and Christmas. Trouble was that, although still having fun with the exploits of The Kid, I was starting to weary of the plotlines, and put my viewing on hold after S2E4 in favour of the far superior scripting of His Dark Materials on BBC.
I must have needed the hiatus, because when I came back to mop it up and finish season two a few days ago I realised that I had in fact missed it. It also helped that episode 5 onwards is when the season gets really good again. Rosario Dawson as Ashoka Tano (known well by fans of The Clone Wars) was a truly great addition that the show much needed by that point.
I had no trouble after that in bingeing to the end. You could feel a climax and a revelation coming, and although the character of Moff Gideon (Giancarlo Esposito) crumbled disappointly away into nothing much, the last 15 minutes of the final episode had me slack jawed in fan wonderment. I felt 9 years old again, and I loved it! I had been amazingly lucky not to stumble upon spoilers, I guess. Amazing ending, and all faults forgiven for that unforgettable moment and feel. Wonderful stuff!
To say any more, again, is to spoil. So, let’s just talk about it privately, or, you know, in about a year when season 3 is over and it is old news. Hmmm, season 3…? I wonder where they will take that now…? Actually, properly exciting, in a back in the playground kind of way.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated After Life - Season 2 in TV
Aug 6, 2020
It’s difficult not to enjoy or at least admire anything Ricky Gervais writes for TV. His track record now speaks for itself. What you are going to get at the very minimum is a well thought out concept, some odd characters, mostly with their hearts in the right place, and a handful of irreverent jokes that will make you howl out loud and also have a little think.
I loved season one of this show about a man constantly on the edge of wondering whether to bother carrying on with life after the tragically early death of the wife he loved more than life itself. If you want to remind yourself what I said about it, please check the archives. Much of what I had to say then still applies – it is the same show, just six new episodes.
Which is both good and bad, I think. Good because it is good. It makes you think and care and respond humanely, but with lots of chuckles. Bad because it doesn’t do a lot to move things on. Tony, played pitch perfectly by Gervais is still depressed, of course he is, his wife is still dead. He is starting to try a bit more with people around him, and taking more risks with his own life. But the pills are still down the side of the sofa, the red wine is still flowing, and so are the snarky comments.
People like the dog. I can see why. Dog lovers know that bond all too well. The reason to get up in the morning is your best canine pal, and that is sometimes enough. Slowly, Tony is starting to find new reasons to get out of bed though; helping others be happy is given him reason to be. And that is the genius of it really – because he can be a bit of a prick, but you always forgive him when you see the kindness behind the wall of pain.
For me, this season isn’t better than the first one, it is about the same, which is no bad thing. To be at all critical, it seems to be relying too much on the same point being made over and over. Which may be why it wasn’t recently nominated for any Emmys, when it was touted to do quite well. Or is it because of Gervais’ last go at the Golden Globe elite in January?
Watch it. Enjoy it. Recommend it to friends who haven’t seen it. Just don’t get too carried away with it until season 3 proves it goes somewhere new and interesting that it didn’t already go to.
I loved season one of this show about a man constantly on the edge of wondering whether to bother carrying on with life after the tragically early death of the wife he loved more than life itself. If you want to remind yourself what I said about it, please check the archives. Much of what I had to say then still applies – it is the same show, just six new episodes.
Which is both good and bad, I think. Good because it is good. It makes you think and care and respond humanely, but with lots of chuckles. Bad because it doesn’t do a lot to move things on. Tony, played pitch perfectly by Gervais is still depressed, of course he is, his wife is still dead. He is starting to try a bit more with people around him, and taking more risks with his own life. But the pills are still down the side of the sofa, the red wine is still flowing, and so are the snarky comments.
People like the dog. I can see why. Dog lovers know that bond all too well. The reason to get up in the morning is your best canine pal, and that is sometimes enough. Slowly, Tony is starting to find new reasons to get out of bed though; helping others be happy is given him reason to be. And that is the genius of it really – because he can be a bit of a prick, but you always forgive him when you see the kindness behind the wall of pain.
For me, this season isn’t better than the first one, it is about the same, which is no bad thing. To be at all critical, it seems to be relying too much on the same point being made over and over. Which may be why it wasn’t recently nominated for any Emmys, when it was touted to do quite well. Or is it because of Gervais’ last go at the Golden Globe elite in January?
Watch it. Enjoy it. Recommend it to friends who haven’t seen it. Just don’t get too carried away with it until season 3 proves it goes somewhere new and interesting that it didn’t already go to.
Bullseye - TV Gameshow and Darts
Games and Entertainment
App
*************************************************** * Bullseye - The Official Gameshow App * ...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Copshop (2021) in Movies
Sep 15, 2021
Ludicrous plot points ruin a promising actioner.
Teddy Murretto (Frank Grillo) is arrested after deliberately punching dedicated rookie cop Valerie Young (Alexis Louder) and incarcerated within Gun Creek City police station. Soon after, Bob Viddick (Gerard Butler) is dumped in the opposite cell for drunk driving. It’s clear both men intended to end up there, but why?
The wheels come off the night big time though when the psychopathic Anthony Lamb (Toby Huss) arrives, having the same mission as Viddick.
Positives:
- While the three male leads have fun with their roles, the star of the show for me was the (unknown to me) Alexis Louder. She delivers a really strong performance here, with a confident stillness in some of her close-ups.
- There are a number of nice lines in the script, some of which made me laugh out loud, which I wasn't expecting to do.
- As a 'park your brain at the door' shoot-em-up, the ending is fun, similar in many ways I thought to the claustrophobic violence of "Free Fire".
Negatives:
- Here's YET another example of a script that is downright insulting to the audience's intelligence. There are some genuine "WTF" moments in this script. I can't go into details without dropping spoilers, but the biggest of these - you'll know it when you see it - is a genuine "HANG ON A MINUTE!!!" moment.
- The sound mix drowns out a lot of the (already drawly and indistinct) dialogue with the incessant music. It's really difficult to pick up on some of the lines.
- There's something surprisingly 'retro' about the whole movie, right down to the use of split-screen at the end. The titles feel as if they were from a 70's TV show like Kojak. I could imagine this would work well... if the movie had actually been set in the 70's!
Summary Thoughts on "Copshop": There's almost a good little action film buried in here struggling to get out. Alexis Louder makes a very positive impression with the best parts of the film happening when she is verbally sparring with Butler. But a good action movie needs to keep things credible, albeit on the edge of credibility (e.g. John McClane's lift shaft fall in "Die Hard" is very much on the boundary, if a little over it). Thanks to some ludicrous decisions within the script, this one lost all credibility for me and took me right out of the story.
(For the full graphical and video reviews, please check out onemannsmovies on the web, Facebook and Tiktok. Thanks).
The wheels come off the night big time though when the psychopathic Anthony Lamb (Toby Huss) arrives, having the same mission as Viddick.
Positives:
- While the three male leads have fun with their roles, the star of the show for me was the (unknown to me) Alexis Louder. She delivers a really strong performance here, with a confident stillness in some of her close-ups.
- There are a number of nice lines in the script, some of which made me laugh out loud, which I wasn't expecting to do.
- As a 'park your brain at the door' shoot-em-up, the ending is fun, similar in many ways I thought to the claustrophobic violence of "Free Fire".
Negatives:
- Here's YET another example of a script that is downright insulting to the audience's intelligence. There are some genuine "WTF" moments in this script. I can't go into details without dropping spoilers, but the biggest of these - you'll know it when you see it - is a genuine "HANG ON A MINUTE!!!" moment.
- The sound mix drowns out a lot of the (already drawly and indistinct) dialogue with the incessant music. It's really difficult to pick up on some of the lines.
- There's something surprisingly 'retro' about the whole movie, right down to the use of split-screen at the end. The titles feel as if they were from a 70's TV show like Kojak. I could imagine this would work well... if the movie had actually been set in the 70's!
Summary Thoughts on "Copshop": There's almost a good little action film buried in here struggling to get out. Alexis Louder makes a very positive impression with the best parts of the film happening when she is verbally sparring with Butler. But a good action movie needs to keep things credible, albeit on the edge of credibility (e.g. John McClane's lift shaft fall in "Die Hard" is very much on the boundary, if a little over it). Thanks to some ludicrous decisions within the script, this one lost all credibility for me and took me right out of the story.
(For the full graphical and video reviews, please check out onemannsmovies on the web, Facebook and Tiktok. Thanks).
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2434 KP) rated Murder She Wrote: Manuscript for Murder in Books
Feb 6, 2019
Is Jessica Reading a Motive for Murder?
When Thomas Rudd approaches Jessica Fletcher after one of her signings and accuses Lane Barfield, their mutual publisher, of skimming money from their royalties, Jessica can hardly believe it. Within a couple of days, both of the men are dead. However, Jessica begins to suspect that the political thriller Lane asked her to read was to blame. Is she correct? If so, is she the next target?
I had a mixed reaction to this book. On the one hand, I got very caught up in the plot, and always had a hard time putting it down. There are twists and turns and plenty of danger, and I loved it. It would have worked better, however, if it weren’t a Murder, She Wrote book. It certainly doesn’t fit with the rest of the franchise in tone, with several events being several shades grayer than we got, at least on the TV show. (I’ve only read one other book, the previous one.) We see several of the regular side characters, but they and their relationship with Jessica was off. What I suspect was supposed to be funny came across as rather mean. These characters wouldn’t interact this way. There’s also the fact that one of the plots in the book gets dropped in favor of the other. Honestly, I think there are two good storylines here, and they should have gotten their own books. This is the second book that Jon Land has written in the franchise, and I’m wondering if his efforts to turn things darker are going to be a permanent thing or if he will adjust better to the light tone of this franchise.
I had a mixed reaction to this book. On the one hand, I got very caught up in the plot, and always had a hard time putting it down. There are twists and turns and plenty of danger, and I loved it. It would have worked better, however, if it weren’t a Murder, She Wrote book. It certainly doesn’t fit with the rest of the franchise in tone, with several events being several shades grayer than we got, at least on the TV show. (I’ve only read one other book, the previous one.) We see several of the regular side characters, but they and their relationship with Jessica was off. What I suspect was supposed to be funny came across as rather mean. These characters wouldn’t interact this way. There’s also the fact that one of the plots in the book gets dropped in favor of the other. Honestly, I think there are two good storylines here, and they should have gotten their own books. This is the second book that Jon Land has written in the franchise, and I’m wondering if his efforts to turn things darker are going to be a permanent thing or if he will adjust better to the light tone of this franchise.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Movie Star by Lizzie Pepper in Books
Feb 13, 2018
Lizzie Pepper became a famous actress as a teen -- growing up before America's eyes on her TV show. Eventually Lizzie meets America's most famous movie star, Rob Mars -- and quickly their courtship and marriage becomes tabloid fodder and her life changes forever. At first, Lizzie is head over heels in love with Rob and all that he brings: romance, lavish trips, and instant stardom. But soon, her life is taken over by Rob's wealth and fame -- his constant absences, a complete lack of privacy, and a world overshadowed by Rob's total commitment to One Cell Studio, a form of study and practice that nears cult status. Once they have children, Lizzie begins to doubt everything about their relationship -- and what her husband stands for.
This was a fun book. Written by Hilary Liftin, a celebrity ghostwriter, Lizzie is a really enjoyable and insightful character. The book is clearly supposed to be based on Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes. I kept imagining Rob Mars as a creepy twist between Tom Cruise and Rob Lowe, which was a little frightening. The One Cell piece is oddly disconcerting, as it's supposed to be, and made me want to delve more into the weirdness that is Scientology. Lizzie's evolution was fun to read about (I enjoyed, on a personal level, that she had twins) and she remained a realistic and relatable character, despite being elevated to movie star status. It truly makes you think about some of the insanity that movie stars have to go through, especially those that have children. It also gets you thinking about various religious cults and the power they have over people. In the end, probably a 3.5 star book, as it's a quick, fun read, but with a surprising depth behind it in places. After all, in the end, a marriage crumbling is a marriage crumbling, even in Hollywood.
This was a fun book. Written by Hilary Liftin, a celebrity ghostwriter, Lizzie is a really enjoyable and insightful character. The book is clearly supposed to be based on Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes. I kept imagining Rob Mars as a creepy twist between Tom Cruise and Rob Lowe, which was a little frightening. The One Cell piece is oddly disconcerting, as it's supposed to be, and made me want to delve more into the weirdness that is Scientology. Lizzie's evolution was fun to read about (I enjoyed, on a personal level, that she had twins) and she remained a realistic and relatable character, despite being elevated to movie star status. It truly makes you think about some of the insanity that movie stars have to go through, especially those that have children. It also gets you thinking about various religious cults and the power they have over people. In the end, probably a 3.5 star book, as it's a quick, fun read, but with a surprising depth behind it in places. After all, in the end, a marriage crumbling is a marriage crumbling, even in Hollywood.
Ross (3284 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
Aug 7, 2018
A rushed DC version of Infinity Wars
This film just missed the mark on so many different aspects. It had high ambitions but just let itself down pretty much everywhere. It felt like a panicked, rushed answer to Infinity Wars, but without taking the time to embed the characters and storyline first. I thought with hits like The Flash and Arrow TV series the DC world may have been fighting back against Marvel's dominance, but I guess for every "Arrow" there is a "Legends of Tomorrow" cheese-fest.
The CGI is truly awful. Massive, expensive battle scenes looked clunky and dated. Steppenwolf is so badly animated as to be ludicrous, especially noticeable as he looks like one of Thanos' minions (I genuinely think you'd see better animated facial movements in mid-noughties PS games). And lets not overlook the dodgy attempt at using CGI to remove Henry Cavill's moustache (some scenes had to be re-shot after he had already started filming Mission Impossible and his moustache had to be removed by CGI!).
I had no feelings towards any of the characters. Whereas the new Spiderman was an immediate hit in Civil War, here The Flash is just annoying and his chirpy geekiness does not contrast well with Batfleck's grumpiness. Cyborg was totally redundant except to solve a plot point. And Aquaman did nothing of note and was not likeable at all.
This should have been a big-hitting blockbuster with edge-of-the-seat tension, laugh-out-loud banter and head-scratching plot twists (and any more hyphenated adjectives I can think of), instead it was a mediocre action film with none of the character of the DC universe on show.
The CGI is truly awful. Massive, expensive battle scenes looked clunky and dated. Steppenwolf is so badly animated as to be ludicrous, especially noticeable as he looks like one of Thanos' minions (I genuinely think you'd see better animated facial movements in mid-noughties PS games). And lets not overlook the dodgy attempt at using CGI to remove Henry Cavill's moustache (some scenes had to be re-shot after he had already started filming Mission Impossible and his moustache had to be removed by CGI!).
I had no feelings towards any of the characters. Whereas the new Spiderman was an immediate hit in Civil War, here The Flash is just annoying and his chirpy geekiness does not contrast well with Batfleck's grumpiness. Cyborg was totally redundant except to solve a plot point. And Aquaman did nothing of note and was not likeable at all.
This should have been a big-hitting blockbuster with edge-of-the-seat tension, laugh-out-loud banter and head-scratching plot twists (and any more hyphenated adjectives I can think of), instead it was a mediocre action film with none of the character of the DC universe on show.
Larry Eisner (2082 KP) rated Maniac in TV
Oct 3, 2018
Realistic views of mental illness (4 more)
So much vision in the palette and visual storytelling
The acting is top-notch!
Retro-Futurism!!!
Such creativity!
A beautiful, creative series about mental illness
Absurdism at its finest. Full stop.
Maniac is a beautifully written, beautifully shot and masterfully acted work of art. Taking a 70s-80s retro idea of future technology, and making it real, making it believable and all the while throwing crazy funny oddity at the same time is an insane balancing act and it works! My god, it works!
It is episodic and works as such, but it could also very well have been an excellent 5-6 hour film. Every scene is necessary. Every frame is intentional. The jokes hit, the visual universe is consistent, and the whole thing tugs on you like very little film does these days. In fact I hesitate to call it TV. Because while it is indeed episodic, it’s not serialized. It’s one long and perfectly crafted story. It winds and twists and it jumps at the sky but it always has a reason to do so.
And all I can say is that every damn time I forget how great Sally Field is, she kills it. She absolutely kills it. I wouldn’t have cast her or Jonah Hill, but they are PERFECT. I can not recommend this show enough. Honestly it’s the best original content I’ve seen this year. Hands down.
It’s funny, it’s bizarre, and it’s emotional. It gets, via sideways and transverse angles, what it means to be a broken and fragile human, when everyone around you seems to have it together but you.
Please watch it. You won’t regret it.
Maniac is a beautifully written, beautifully shot and masterfully acted work of art. Taking a 70s-80s retro idea of future technology, and making it real, making it believable and all the while throwing crazy funny oddity at the same time is an insane balancing act and it works! My god, it works!
It is episodic and works as such, but it could also very well have been an excellent 5-6 hour film. Every scene is necessary. Every frame is intentional. The jokes hit, the visual universe is consistent, and the whole thing tugs on you like very little film does these days. In fact I hesitate to call it TV. Because while it is indeed episodic, it’s not serialized. It’s one long and perfectly crafted story. It winds and twists and it jumps at the sky but it always has a reason to do so.
And all I can say is that every damn time I forget how great Sally Field is, she kills it. She absolutely kills it. I wouldn’t have cast her or Jonah Hill, but they are PERFECT. I can not recommend this show enough. Honestly it’s the best original content I’ve seen this year. Hands down.
It’s funny, it’s bizarre, and it’s emotional. It gets, via sideways and transverse angles, what it means to be a broken and fragile human, when everyone around you seems to have it together but you.
Please watch it. You won’t regret it.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Ninja Assassin (2009) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
The Ozunu Clan has long been secretly kidnapping and training children to become ninjas. But when a set of Europol agents get a little too close to discovering the secret, it is up to a former student of the Clan, Raizo (Rain), to defend the agents against the brutal ninjas’ attacks.
The film is loosely plotted at best, but it does manage to keep the viewer interested. Maybe it is the consistent comedy mixed with undeniable bloodshed. And there is bloodshed. “Ninja Assassin” is absolutely splattered with gore, weapons, and the unexpected attack that only ninjas can bring.
Joel Silver, of “Lethal Weapon”, “Die Hard”, and “Predator” fame, and the renowned Wachowski brothers, creators of “the Matrix”, are the producers behind “Ninja Assassin”. Therefore it should come as no surprise that the fight scenes are also engrossing in this ninja-tacular flick.
The international cast includes Korean superstar Rain as Raizo and martial arts regular Sho Kosugi, as the ninja master. The appearance of Ben Miles (from the hit British TV show “Coupling”) as Ryan Maslow, superior to the Europol officer and lead Mika Coretti (Naomie Harris), also enhances the casting of this one of kind film.
And it is one of a kind. What is most appealing about “Ninja Assassin” is that it truly displays ninjas in the way every child thinks about them; cunning, violent, and awesome. Somehow in a world full of films that feel like a new version of the same old thing, “Ninja Assassin” has… dare I write… a freshness.
Keeping you on the edge of your seat, focused on the nonstop 360 degree fight sequences and funny one-liners, “Ninja Assassin” brings more than expected to the big screen.
The film is loosely plotted at best, but it does manage to keep the viewer interested. Maybe it is the consistent comedy mixed with undeniable bloodshed. And there is bloodshed. “Ninja Assassin” is absolutely splattered with gore, weapons, and the unexpected attack that only ninjas can bring.
Joel Silver, of “Lethal Weapon”, “Die Hard”, and “Predator” fame, and the renowned Wachowski brothers, creators of “the Matrix”, are the producers behind “Ninja Assassin”. Therefore it should come as no surprise that the fight scenes are also engrossing in this ninja-tacular flick.
The international cast includes Korean superstar Rain as Raizo and martial arts regular Sho Kosugi, as the ninja master. The appearance of Ben Miles (from the hit British TV show “Coupling”) as Ryan Maslow, superior to the Europol officer and lead Mika Coretti (Naomie Harris), also enhances the casting of this one of kind film.
And it is one of a kind. What is most appealing about “Ninja Assassin” is that it truly displays ninjas in the way every child thinks about them; cunning, violent, and awesome. Somehow in a world full of films that feel like a new version of the same old thing, “Ninja Assassin” has… dare I write… a freshness.
Keeping you on the edge of your seat, focused on the nonstop 360 degree fight sequences and funny one-liners, “Ninja Assassin” brings more than expected to the big screen.