Search
Search results
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) in Movies
May 10, 2019
“You said it yourself bitch, we’re the Guardians of the Galaxy”
The Marvel marathon continues. We started with the story of a soldier out of time. Now we move on to the tale of a group of losers having to learn not to kill each other and maybe, just maybe, becoming friends along the way. Guardians of the Galaxy I view as the movie that fully cemented Marvel Studios as the powerhouse we know today. The popularity of Iron Man and Thor spiked after their respective films, but I'm gonna guess if you pulled someone random off the street and asked them who either character was before their movies were released, they could probably at least tell you who they are. Now, not too far separated from the humongous success of The Avengers, here comes Marvel with a film about characters next to no one, not even some avid fans of comics, knew existed. And wouldn't you know, five years after Guardians came out and made Groot a household word, it's still one of their best films Marvel has made.
Guardians of the Galaxy almost off the bat confronts two major complaints I hear about Marvel flicks. First, that they don't look cinematic. Call it the "TV show aesthetic." Moderately flat shots, muted colors, forgettable music, etc. Second, that they're too heavy on witty banter and don't leave enough room for genuinely meaty substance. In regards to the first point, this film looks gorgeous. The color palette and cinematography are both creative and have an absolute blast with the concept of creating a grandiose space opera with equal parts charm and toilet humor. Each planet has its own distinct decor and aliens. Gunn managed to create a fleshed-out, lively, and unique galaxy. In regards to the second point, while there is all sorts of banter to be found throughout, including a Jackson Pollock cum joke, Guardians of the Galaxy has to have the biggest heart out of any film in the MCU. The movie is a full measured ton of fun, but it tugs at the heartstrings in a way few modern blockbusters have been able to achieve.
Four of the five Guardians have something in their life that lead to great tragedy. Peter and Drax lost family very close to them. Gamora and Rocket were tortured and bred to be bloodthirsty warriors. But then, there's Groot. Sweet, unassuming Groot. A beast in battle, but a gentle giant otherwise. His existence seems simple. He eats a leaf off of his shoulder, he drinks water straight from a fountain, and he's more than willing to grow and give a flower to a small girl. He's perhaps the closest we have to a lead character who is wholly happy. The Guardians all start off as renegades, loners, folks reasonably hardened by lives that have enjoyed fucking them over. We get to see them by the end of the film not just grow into heroes, but friends and good people. I am Groot. You are Groot. We are Groot.
Marvel took a big gamble with this movie, but it payed off so absurdly well. The humor is great, the characters even better, and the atmosphere equal parts fun and emotional. Guardians of the Galaxy stands out in the sea of superhero films as a movie that wears its heart on its sleeve. It's weird, but it's damn proud of the fact that it is. Maybe it's alright to be a loser. The world could use a few more losers to help us along the way of life. I think what I'm trying to get down to is this: It was polite of James Gunn to make a movie to go along with his sick mixtape.
Guardians of the Galaxy almost off the bat confronts two major complaints I hear about Marvel flicks. First, that they don't look cinematic. Call it the "TV show aesthetic." Moderately flat shots, muted colors, forgettable music, etc. Second, that they're too heavy on witty banter and don't leave enough room for genuinely meaty substance. In regards to the first point, this film looks gorgeous. The color palette and cinematography are both creative and have an absolute blast with the concept of creating a grandiose space opera with equal parts charm and toilet humor. Each planet has its own distinct decor and aliens. Gunn managed to create a fleshed-out, lively, and unique galaxy. In regards to the second point, while there is all sorts of banter to be found throughout, including a Jackson Pollock cum joke, Guardians of the Galaxy has to have the biggest heart out of any film in the MCU. The movie is a full measured ton of fun, but it tugs at the heartstrings in a way few modern blockbusters have been able to achieve.
Four of the five Guardians have something in their life that lead to great tragedy. Peter and Drax lost family very close to them. Gamora and Rocket were tortured and bred to be bloodthirsty warriors. But then, there's Groot. Sweet, unassuming Groot. A beast in battle, but a gentle giant otherwise. His existence seems simple. He eats a leaf off of his shoulder, he drinks water straight from a fountain, and he's more than willing to grow and give a flower to a small girl. He's perhaps the closest we have to a lead character who is wholly happy. The Guardians all start off as renegades, loners, folks reasonably hardened by lives that have enjoyed fucking them over. We get to see them by the end of the film not just grow into heroes, but friends and good people. I am Groot. You are Groot. We are Groot.
Marvel took a big gamble with this movie, but it payed off so absurdly well. The humor is great, the characters even better, and the atmosphere equal parts fun and emotional. Guardians of the Galaxy stands out in the sea of superhero films as a movie that wears its heart on its sleeve. It's weird, but it's damn proud of the fact that it is. Maybe it's alright to be a loser. The world could use a few more losers to help us along the way of life. I think what I'm trying to get down to is this: It was polite of James Gunn to make a movie to go along with his sick mixtape.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Pokémon the Movie: I Choose You! (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
20th Birthday Tribute
For the uninitiated, let’s start with some key facts: Pokémon has been entertaining kids and the young at heart for 20 years. A phenomenon like no other in the 90s, Nintendo’s award-winning franchise has been a worldwide smash, and despite a dip in the late 00s, it shows no signs of slowing down.
With 19 movies under its belt, dozens of video games including the ridiculously popular Pokémon Go, and countless TV series, Pokémon is an occurrence that doesn’t come around too often. Now, to celebrate the brand’s 20th anniversary, Nintendo has released this; Pokémon the Movie: I Choose You! But does being the 20th film in the franchise mean it’s not worth a watch?
Acting as a soft reboot of sorts, Pokémon: I Choose You! follows franchise hero, Ash Ketchum from Pallet Town, as he starts out on his journey to catch as many Pocket Monsters as he can. For fans of the brand, what follows next needs no introduction; he meets Pikachu and the rest as they say, is history.
Or is it? Well, in this case, not so much. The basic story that delighted kids in the 90s has been slightly reset as we are taken through the pairs journey, meeting people and Pokémon that weren’t in the original 1st television series. This has both positive and negative results on the finished product.
The plot is as simple as you would expect from a children’s film and it’s clear that Nintendo are out to make as much money from this as possible. Pre-film adverts were all Pokémon related and the cost of a ticket for this particular showing was double the normal price.
Why? Well, this is the first Pokémon film to be released in the UK in 15 years. That’s not a milestone to be sniffed at, and it’s clear the producers, animators and orchestras have gone all out for this instalment.
The film itself is beautiful to look at. Pokémon has always been criticised for its rather lacklustre animation compared to other Anime features like Spirited Away, but I Choose You is right up there with the very best. It’s colourful and drips with detail. From gorgeous sunsets to damp caves, the animation comes alive.
Elsewhere, the score is nicely integrated into the film with a single, haunting piano playing through much of the succinct 98-minute runtime. The familiar theme tune that kids and adults have come to know and love over the years is given a lovely instrumental upgrade and this is when the flutters of nostalgia start to kick in.
Unfortunately, the removal of Ash’s companions, Brock and Misty, from the film undoes some of the hard work for this 20th anniversary as they were such an integral role in the first films and television show. However, newcomers Sorell and Verity each provide the story with a couple of different layers.
I Choose You also tugs at the heartstrings more than previous instalments. As the title suggests, this is about Ash’s journey with Pikachu and that doesn’t just include the happy times. Younger viewers may find some of the imagery on screen a little disturbing as we’re taken through an at times, dark and menacing backstory.
Overall, Pokémon the Movie: I Choose You! is a film that absolutely represents 20 years of the beloved series. With gorgeous animation and an intriguing change to the story that kids and adults have come to know, it’s definitely the best Pokémon movie out there. Let’s be frank, each of the films has been made to sell Pokémon toys and games, but never has it been done so beautifully.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/11/05/pokemon-the-movie-i-choose-you-review/
With 19 movies under its belt, dozens of video games including the ridiculously popular Pokémon Go, and countless TV series, Pokémon is an occurrence that doesn’t come around too often. Now, to celebrate the brand’s 20th anniversary, Nintendo has released this; Pokémon the Movie: I Choose You! But does being the 20th film in the franchise mean it’s not worth a watch?
Acting as a soft reboot of sorts, Pokémon: I Choose You! follows franchise hero, Ash Ketchum from Pallet Town, as he starts out on his journey to catch as many Pocket Monsters as he can. For fans of the brand, what follows next needs no introduction; he meets Pikachu and the rest as they say, is history.
Or is it? Well, in this case, not so much. The basic story that delighted kids in the 90s has been slightly reset as we are taken through the pairs journey, meeting people and Pokémon that weren’t in the original 1st television series. This has both positive and negative results on the finished product.
The plot is as simple as you would expect from a children’s film and it’s clear that Nintendo are out to make as much money from this as possible. Pre-film adverts were all Pokémon related and the cost of a ticket for this particular showing was double the normal price.
Why? Well, this is the first Pokémon film to be released in the UK in 15 years. That’s not a milestone to be sniffed at, and it’s clear the producers, animators and orchestras have gone all out for this instalment.
The film itself is beautiful to look at. Pokémon has always been criticised for its rather lacklustre animation compared to other Anime features like Spirited Away, but I Choose You is right up there with the very best. It’s colourful and drips with detail. From gorgeous sunsets to damp caves, the animation comes alive.
Elsewhere, the score is nicely integrated into the film with a single, haunting piano playing through much of the succinct 98-minute runtime. The familiar theme tune that kids and adults have come to know and love over the years is given a lovely instrumental upgrade and this is when the flutters of nostalgia start to kick in.
Unfortunately, the removal of Ash’s companions, Brock and Misty, from the film undoes some of the hard work for this 20th anniversary as they were such an integral role in the first films and television show. However, newcomers Sorell and Verity each provide the story with a couple of different layers.
I Choose You also tugs at the heartstrings more than previous instalments. As the title suggests, this is about Ash’s journey with Pikachu and that doesn’t just include the happy times. Younger viewers may find some of the imagery on screen a little disturbing as we’re taken through an at times, dark and menacing backstory.
Overall, Pokémon the Movie: I Choose You! is a film that absolutely represents 20 years of the beloved series. With gorgeous animation and an intriguing change to the story that kids and adults have come to know, it’s definitely the best Pokémon movie out there. Let’s be frank, each of the films has been made to sell Pokémon toys and games, but never has it been done so beautifully.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/11/05/pokemon-the-movie-i-choose-you-review/
Lee (2222 KP) rated Venom (2018) in Movies
Oct 5, 2018 (Updated Oct 16, 2018)
A bit rough around the edges, but pretty enjoyable overall
Contains spoilers, click to show
The run up to seeing Venom has followed what seems to be a bit of a growing trend for me recently - tickets go on sale for a movie that I'm very excited to see and despite the slightly average trailers, I grab a ticket and hope for the best. Then in the days beforehand, a load of negative reviews appear online and I really hope that they're all wrong, like they all were with Hereditary. Recently we've had The Nun, then The Predator, and now Venom. I was really hoping this wasn't going to be three in a row!
A space probe is returning to Earth. We hear the astronauts communicating with a team back home. They're talking about some 'specimens' that they're bringing back, and then something goes wrong onboard and the rocket crashes to Earth, landing somewhere in Malaysia. The probe belongs to bio-engineering company Life Foundation, and the specimens they're carrying are symbiotic lifeforms. Life Foundation are all over the crash site, with only one of the astronauts surviving, barely. Meanwhile, CEO Carlton Drake (Riz Ahmed) is very excited by the symbiotes and returns them to the lab, becoming obsessed with assimilating them into animals. Obviously he has plans to eventually (as quickly as possible) try this out on humans. Apparently, it's all for the good of the planet or some guff like that.
Meanwhile, we're introduced to investigative journalist Eddie Brock (Tom Hardy) and his girlfriend Anne (Michelle Williams). He's basically the most unconvincing journalist I've ever seen in a movie, but the montage of clips seems determined to tell us otherwise. He has his own TV show! It's great! He's helped to uncover injustice, righted wrongs, and is apparently a nice down to earth guy. When he secures an interview with Carlton Drake from Life Foundation, he's ready to uncover some dirt, but his boss warns him not to overstep the mark. Of course, he doesn't listen, stepping over the line and getting himself fired. He also manages to lose girlfriend Anne in the process.
The next chunk of the movie is just Tom Hardy moping around, and it's not that great. I don't know if it's the script, the acting, or both. It's interspersed occasionally with scenes involving Carlton Drake looking to expose the symbiotes to human subjects - the homeless, the poor or the just plain stupid - and you start wishing they'd just hurry up and bring Venom and Eddie together, in the hopes that things will pick up a bit. Luckily, once that does happen things do pick up considerably and Tom Hardy is so much better suited as the crazy man who's feeling a little bit unwell than the sad, boring journalist. There's a good level of humour from that point on too, along with some fairly decent action.
Unfortunately though, Venom suffers from some of the same dreadful editing that The Predator did. Scenes that seem to just prematurely end suddenly and successions of rapid cuts during some of the action, making it difficult to see just what the hell is going on. Overall it's a bit rough around the edges, and definitely not as slick as your standard Marvel movie (this one is just 'in association with Marvel'). That being said, this was in no way the car crash movie that many of the reviews had lead me to believe, and on the whole I actually really enjoyed it.
A decent mid credits scene sets up some exciting potential for a further movie, but I feel they really need to tighten things up a bit in order to make another one worth seeing.
A space probe is returning to Earth. We hear the astronauts communicating with a team back home. They're talking about some 'specimens' that they're bringing back, and then something goes wrong onboard and the rocket crashes to Earth, landing somewhere in Malaysia. The probe belongs to bio-engineering company Life Foundation, and the specimens they're carrying are symbiotic lifeforms. Life Foundation are all over the crash site, with only one of the astronauts surviving, barely. Meanwhile, CEO Carlton Drake (Riz Ahmed) is very excited by the symbiotes and returns them to the lab, becoming obsessed with assimilating them into animals. Obviously he has plans to eventually (as quickly as possible) try this out on humans. Apparently, it's all for the good of the planet or some guff like that.
Meanwhile, we're introduced to investigative journalist Eddie Brock (Tom Hardy) and his girlfriend Anne (Michelle Williams). He's basically the most unconvincing journalist I've ever seen in a movie, but the montage of clips seems determined to tell us otherwise. He has his own TV show! It's great! He's helped to uncover injustice, righted wrongs, and is apparently a nice down to earth guy. When he secures an interview with Carlton Drake from Life Foundation, he's ready to uncover some dirt, but his boss warns him not to overstep the mark. Of course, he doesn't listen, stepping over the line and getting himself fired. He also manages to lose girlfriend Anne in the process.
The next chunk of the movie is just Tom Hardy moping around, and it's not that great. I don't know if it's the script, the acting, or both. It's interspersed occasionally with scenes involving Carlton Drake looking to expose the symbiotes to human subjects - the homeless, the poor or the just plain stupid - and you start wishing they'd just hurry up and bring Venom and Eddie together, in the hopes that things will pick up a bit. Luckily, once that does happen things do pick up considerably and Tom Hardy is so much better suited as the crazy man who's feeling a little bit unwell than the sad, boring journalist. There's a good level of humour from that point on too, along with some fairly decent action.
Unfortunately though, Venom suffers from some of the same dreadful editing that The Predator did. Scenes that seem to just prematurely end suddenly and successions of rapid cuts during some of the action, making it difficult to see just what the hell is going on. Overall it's a bit rough around the edges, and definitely not as slick as your standard Marvel movie (this one is just 'in association with Marvel'). That being said, this was in no way the car crash movie that many of the reviews had lead me to believe, and on the whole I actually really enjoyed it.
A decent mid credits scene sets up some exciting potential for a further movie, but I feel they really need to tighten things up a bit in order to make another one worth seeing.
LilyLovesIndie (123 KP) rated Innocence (A Forbidden Love, #1) in Books
Nov 5, 2018
Well firstly, it's no secret that I LOVE anything to do with history, and secondly, it's also a badly kept secret that I have a serious 'thing' for men in floaty shirts, tight breeches and a mop of aristocratic hair. Yep, you've got it, I've got it real bad for Regency men just like Mr Darcy in his wet shirt..... Well, at least I did until dear old Nathaniel came along, and boy did he knock Darcy off his perch! In fact, our author knocked many things off their perches during her fabulously compulsive book. Let me elucidate further as there were so many things I LOVED (capitals completely necessary) about this book that I had to make a list as I was reading so I didn't forget things. Needless to say, Nathaniel, aka the delightfully cheeky Lord Marsden is on there multiple times.
Elise de Sallier has written an absolutely AMAZING storyline. I'm often disappointed by Regency Romance books as they regularly fail to stick to societal norms of the time, or even the basic history, but our author manages this with incredible panache. The story line, as summarised above, contains intrigue, drama, romance, and many other aspects which are all weaved together with great skill and lots of twists and turns. It's incredibly well done and I truly believe it is this which makes this book so brilliantly addictive to read. Honestly, I stayed up many nights well past my bedtime reading into the wee small hours on more than one occasion!
Another thing that needs mentioning (again) are the characters. I've already suggested that I have developed an unhealthy obsession with Nathaniel (he's starred in my dreams many a time since finishing this book). He's the perfect society gentleman, in public, but in the bedroom, well, he's quite the little charmer! I shan't say any more, but honestly, he's the most captivating character I've read in a while. And then we have his partner in crime, his other half, Lisa (Anneliese) or Miss Brown as he seems to prefer. A very innocent, naive young women from the middling levels of society forced to run because if the incredibly repulsive Lord Copeland. Lisa is such a fabulous character to read. She's a damsel in distress, but one with a lot more sass about her than your average kind. She's full of determination and strength, which was delightful to read and really pulled you into her plight. You got behind her, much like you would a character in your favourite tv show, and it's great to see a book do this. As a side night, they're fabulous together, and watching them develop was pure delight in a book.
Second side note, that sort of leads onto my next thing I need to say, 'cause things just keep popping into my head, it was excellent to read a book from this time period which avoids all the obvious Austen traps. There's honestly nothing worse than reading an author of this genre trying to be Austen, but Elise de Sallier completely avoids this. Everything in this story is completely unique, I've honestly never read anything like it, and it was delightfully refreshing for me. It's incredibly imaginative in the ways it portrays the norm for both sexes, as well as the dramatic flair and tweaks, but they all make it so darned interesting to read!
Finally, I have to finish by making it perfectly clear, just in case you didn't get the gist, I ADORED this book. It's incredibly difficult to put down, so I have to warn you, make sure you have the next book ready to go straight onto it, because it's so darned hard to wait even the few seconds it takes to load.
Review first posted as part of a mini feature on Lily Loves Indie, for which an ARC was provided in return for an honest review - http://lilylovesindie.co.uk/?p=477
Elise de Sallier has written an absolutely AMAZING storyline. I'm often disappointed by Regency Romance books as they regularly fail to stick to societal norms of the time, or even the basic history, but our author manages this with incredible panache. The story line, as summarised above, contains intrigue, drama, romance, and many other aspects which are all weaved together with great skill and lots of twists and turns. It's incredibly well done and I truly believe it is this which makes this book so brilliantly addictive to read. Honestly, I stayed up many nights well past my bedtime reading into the wee small hours on more than one occasion!
Another thing that needs mentioning (again) are the characters. I've already suggested that I have developed an unhealthy obsession with Nathaniel (he's starred in my dreams many a time since finishing this book). He's the perfect society gentleman, in public, but in the bedroom, well, he's quite the little charmer! I shan't say any more, but honestly, he's the most captivating character I've read in a while. And then we have his partner in crime, his other half, Lisa (Anneliese) or Miss Brown as he seems to prefer. A very innocent, naive young women from the middling levels of society forced to run because if the incredibly repulsive Lord Copeland. Lisa is such a fabulous character to read. She's a damsel in distress, but one with a lot more sass about her than your average kind. She's full of determination and strength, which was delightful to read and really pulled you into her plight. You got behind her, much like you would a character in your favourite tv show, and it's great to see a book do this. As a side night, they're fabulous together, and watching them develop was pure delight in a book.
Second side note, that sort of leads onto my next thing I need to say, 'cause things just keep popping into my head, it was excellent to read a book from this time period which avoids all the obvious Austen traps. There's honestly nothing worse than reading an author of this genre trying to be Austen, but Elise de Sallier completely avoids this. Everything in this story is completely unique, I've honestly never read anything like it, and it was delightfully refreshing for me. It's incredibly imaginative in the ways it portrays the norm for both sexes, as well as the dramatic flair and tweaks, but they all make it so darned interesting to read!
Finally, I have to finish by making it perfectly clear, just in case you didn't get the gist, I ADORED this book. It's incredibly difficult to put down, so I have to warn you, make sure you have the next book ready to go straight onto it, because it's so darned hard to wait even the few seconds it takes to load.
Review first posted as part of a mini feature on Lily Loves Indie, for which an ARC was provided in return for an honest review - http://lilylovesindie.co.uk/?p=477
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Velvet Buzzsaw (2019) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Ever since Netflix have proven themselves as a fantastic streaming platform, everyone gets hyped about their ‘Originals’. Velvet Buzzsaw was no exception, and when the first trailer dropped I was so excited to watch it. Everything about it seemed great; it was written and directed by Dan Gilroy (the guy who gave us the fantastic Nightcrawler), and the cast was incredible. Who could say no to Jake Gyllenhaal, Rene Russo AND Toni Collette? Not me. Unfortunately, this wonderful mix didn’t live up to my expectations at all and left me feeling very disappointed.
The main issue I had with Velvet Buzzsaw is that the pacing is horrendously slow. The first 45 minutes felt like nothing but exposition, when it was a relatively simple concept for the audience to grasp. The film follows a bunch of art critics, artists and patrons of the arts as they uncover a series of paintings from an unknown artist. However, they’re not your normal paintings because a supernatural force lurks within them waiting to enact revenge. That’s it, that’s the synopsis. So why waste so much screen time dragging things out? The trailer made this look like a fast paced, intense thriller, but the reality is nothing like that.
It’s a shame the pacing and screenplay is so weak, because Velvet Buzzsaw does have a few redeeming features. The quality of acting is very good, and visually it’s beautiful to look at, particularly the locations and the paintings that appear throughout. I especially enjoyed the characters Rhodora Haze (Rene Russo) and Gretchen (Toni Collette), as they embody the typically powerful, ruthless and bitchy personas one would expect from this industry. They satirise art lovers perfectly, which is partially why I haven’t rated this film lower. In all honesty, these actors deserved better than the script they were dealt, and it’s a shame such talent was wasted here. I’m having trouble understanding how you can take such an interesting concept and brilliant actors, and make it so boring.
Even the inevitable death scenes are pretty dull, and play like a straight to TV horror film that doesn’t quite hit the mark. Velvet Buzzsaw fails to execute any sort of suspense, or even terror, so when people eventually die you’re just sat there like “Huh, is that it?”. After such a slow first act, you expect some kind of payoff, but it never arrives. Again, the trailer had some pretty scary moments that made me expect a few jump scares or intense moments. I’m confused about why this was even marketed as a horror-thriller, when it lacks so many of the aspects that make both those genres great. I didn’t feel scared at all, and even when the characters we were supposed to hate met their demise, there was no morbid satisfaction in it. To be completely honest, I was apathetic towards the whole thing. I just wanted it to end.
If you are a fan of slow-burning films that take a while to get going, then you might enjoy Velvet Buzzsaw more than I did. I don’t necessarily have a problem with these types of films, but you still need to keep the audience gripped somehow. You need to give people a reason to keep watching.
Gilroy’s attempt to show the horrors of the art world falls flat, and certainly doesn’t live up to the expectations based on the success of Nightcrawler. Part of me even wondered how this was the same man, it felt so vastly different to his other work. Netflix Originals rarely let me down, but this time, they really did.
https://jumpcutonline.co.uk/review-velvet-buzzsaw-2019/
The main issue I had with Velvet Buzzsaw is that the pacing is horrendously slow. The first 45 minutes felt like nothing but exposition, when it was a relatively simple concept for the audience to grasp. The film follows a bunch of art critics, artists and patrons of the arts as they uncover a series of paintings from an unknown artist. However, they’re not your normal paintings because a supernatural force lurks within them waiting to enact revenge. That’s it, that’s the synopsis. So why waste so much screen time dragging things out? The trailer made this look like a fast paced, intense thriller, but the reality is nothing like that.
It’s a shame the pacing and screenplay is so weak, because Velvet Buzzsaw does have a few redeeming features. The quality of acting is very good, and visually it’s beautiful to look at, particularly the locations and the paintings that appear throughout. I especially enjoyed the characters Rhodora Haze (Rene Russo) and Gretchen (Toni Collette), as they embody the typically powerful, ruthless and bitchy personas one would expect from this industry. They satirise art lovers perfectly, which is partially why I haven’t rated this film lower. In all honesty, these actors deserved better than the script they were dealt, and it’s a shame such talent was wasted here. I’m having trouble understanding how you can take such an interesting concept and brilliant actors, and make it so boring.
Even the inevitable death scenes are pretty dull, and play like a straight to TV horror film that doesn’t quite hit the mark. Velvet Buzzsaw fails to execute any sort of suspense, or even terror, so when people eventually die you’re just sat there like “Huh, is that it?”. After such a slow first act, you expect some kind of payoff, but it never arrives. Again, the trailer had some pretty scary moments that made me expect a few jump scares or intense moments. I’m confused about why this was even marketed as a horror-thriller, when it lacks so many of the aspects that make both those genres great. I didn’t feel scared at all, and even when the characters we were supposed to hate met their demise, there was no morbid satisfaction in it. To be completely honest, I was apathetic towards the whole thing. I just wanted it to end.
If you are a fan of slow-burning films that take a while to get going, then you might enjoy Velvet Buzzsaw more than I did. I don’t necessarily have a problem with these types of films, but you still need to keep the audience gripped somehow. You need to give people a reason to keep watching.
Gilroy’s attempt to show the horrors of the art world falls flat, and certainly doesn’t live up to the expectations based on the success of Nightcrawler. Part of me even wondered how this was the same man, it felt so vastly different to his other work. Netflix Originals rarely let me down, but this time, they really did.
https://jumpcutonline.co.uk/review-velvet-buzzsaw-2019/
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Unbreakable (The Legion, #1) in Books
Jan 23, 2020
Obviously choosing to dissect Kami Garcia's solo series as my next audiobook victim was a bad idea... a very bad idea...
Basically, I'm saying I give up on Kami Garcia. No offense, but after my horrid experience with the first couple of books of her <i>Beautiful Creatures</i> series she wrote with Margaret Stohl and then <i>Unbreakable</i>, I'm not sure I want to read another of her books (aside from maybe reading <i>Dangerous Creatures</i>).
<i>Unbreakable</i> sort of has a good idea – emphasis on sort of. Garcia's first debut solo novel follows Kennedy Waters, a girl who doesn't actually believe in ghosts until she finds her mother dead. Shortly after, a ghost makes an attempt to kill her as well, and is stopped by Lukas and Jared Lockhart, two brothers who are part of a centuries-old secret society made up of five members trying to stop a demon released by their ancestors hundreds of years ago. However, Kennedy isn't entirely too sure about whether or not she really belongs with this secret society called the Legion of the Black Dove.
For a person who doesn't watch <i>Supernatural</i> much, it's really weird when I get though, oh... 33 pages, that I realize a book is almost an exact carbon copy of the few episodes I watched.
For instance, there are two brothers in <i>Supernatural</i> and there are two brothers in <i>Unbreakable</i>. Are Sam and his brother identical? No.... not that I'm aware, which is only a small difference between the two books. Brother Pair 1 (<i>Supernatural</i>) and Brother Pair 2 (Unbreakable) apparently hunt demons for a living. At least, that's what I think Pair 1 did – correct me if I'm wrong, avid fans who are bound to be more accurate than me.
Oh, and there's a demon hunting around for a certain person... or a certain group of people. I'm pretty sure there was a demon hunting Brother Pair 1 for quite awhile in the episodes I actually watched (give me a break. I was bored. <i>Supernatural</i> just seemed interesting). Fun fact: possession involved in both TV show and book.
The mere fact that <i>Unbreakable</i> matched the few episodes (I believe they were reruns) I watched didn't bother me too much – it was a potential love triangle between Kennedy, Jared, and Lukas that eventually drove me up the wall. If Garcia isn't careful enough, the tension between Jared and Lukas could eventually set the book on fire – Lukas spends a good part of his time between fighting vengeful spirits and other things rubbing something that Jared did wrong in his face. It gets bad enough that both brothers reach the point of throttling each other's throats and Kennedy going between them and stopping them.
I felt like I was watching a scene from a <i>Twilight</i> (I'm starting to appreciate this series). <i>Lux</i> (because I totally snuck a few peeks in the third one), and pretty much any other book that has a love triangle in which 66% of them nearly start a brawl while the rest of the 33% pretty much yells, "STOP!"
By then, I was definitely not sticking around for five to go down to four just because of a mistake.
I did, however, like the world of Legion. It's certainly not a life I would want, but I definitely enjoyed the basic idea behind the series, Candice Accola's narration of <i>Unbreakable</i>, and the sound effects used in the audiobook.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/dnf-audiobook-review-unbreakable-by-kami-garcia/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Basically, I'm saying I give up on Kami Garcia. No offense, but after my horrid experience with the first couple of books of her <i>Beautiful Creatures</i> series she wrote with Margaret Stohl and then <i>Unbreakable</i>, I'm not sure I want to read another of her books (aside from maybe reading <i>Dangerous Creatures</i>).
<i>Unbreakable</i> sort of has a good idea – emphasis on sort of. Garcia's first debut solo novel follows Kennedy Waters, a girl who doesn't actually believe in ghosts until she finds her mother dead. Shortly after, a ghost makes an attempt to kill her as well, and is stopped by Lukas and Jared Lockhart, two brothers who are part of a centuries-old secret society made up of five members trying to stop a demon released by their ancestors hundreds of years ago. However, Kennedy isn't entirely too sure about whether or not she really belongs with this secret society called the Legion of the Black Dove.
For a person who doesn't watch <i>Supernatural</i> much, it's really weird when I get though, oh... 33 pages, that I realize a book is almost an exact carbon copy of the few episodes I watched.
For instance, there are two brothers in <i>Supernatural</i> and there are two brothers in <i>Unbreakable</i>. Are Sam and his brother identical? No.... not that I'm aware, which is only a small difference between the two books. Brother Pair 1 (<i>Supernatural</i>) and Brother Pair 2 (Unbreakable) apparently hunt demons for a living. At least, that's what I think Pair 1 did – correct me if I'm wrong, avid fans who are bound to be more accurate than me.
Oh, and there's a demon hunting around for a certain person... or a certain group of people. I'm pretty sure there was a demon hunting Brother Pair 1 for quite awhile in the episodes I actually watched (give me a break. I was bored. <i>Supernatural</i> just seemed interesting). Fun fact: possession involved in both TV show and book.
The mere fact that <i>Unbreakable</i> matched the few episodes (I believe they were reruns) I watched didn't bother me too much – it was a potential love triangle between Kennedy, Jared, and Lukas that eventually drove me up the wall. If Garcia isn't careful enough, the tension between Jared and Lukas could eventually set the book on fire – Lukas spends a good part of his time between fighting vengeful spirits and other things rubbing something that Jared did wrong in his face. It gets bad enough that both brothers reach the point of throttling each other's throats and Kennedy going between them and stopping them.
I felt like I was watching a scene from a <i>Twilight</i> (I'm starting to appreciate this series). <i>Lux</i> (because I totally snuck a few peeks in the third one), and pretty much any other book that has a love triangle in which 66% of them nearly start a brawl while the rest of the 33% pretty much yells, "STOP!"
By then, I was definitely not sticking around for five to go down to four just because of a mistake.
I did, however, like the world of Legion. It's certainly not a life I would want, but I definitely enjoyed the basic idea behind the series, Candice Accola's narration of <i>Unbreakable</i>, and the sound effects used in the audiobook.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/dnf-audiobook-review-unbreakable-by-kami-garcia/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Seven Psychopaths (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Unfamiliar with writer and director Martin McDonagh’s previous gangster film In Burges, I was not exactly sure what I was getting into when watching Seven Psychopaths. I had seen a few trailers and was looking forward to what looked like a quirky new movie that I hoped delivered at least a few solid one-liners but was not expecting much more. Well, I am delighted to say that McDonagh delivers a fantastic self-referential crime caper that is one part Pulp Fiction and one part a meta episode of NBC’s TV show Community.
This self-aware film has a story that is hilarious in its antics and creates a world where these characters come to life. Colin Farrell (In Burges) plays Marty, an alcoholic film writer suffering from a terrible case of writer’s block. He has the title for his next film Seven Psychopaths but little more. However in spite of what the title suggest, Marty does not want his film to be violent. He wants his main psychopath to love more than kill, whch is what appears to be giving Marty the writing block in the first place. Enter Marty’s good friend Bill played by Sam Rockwell (Iron Man 2). In an effort to help Marty find inspiration for the characters in his story, Billy encourages and informs Marty of various psychopathic stories he is aware of. He even goes so far as putting a “psycho story” want ad in the paper, asking psycho’s to come to Marty’s house and tell their story. This causes Marty to spend the length of the film trying to create the characters for his story from the crazy interactions going on around him.
While based on “real life” people, these characters are introduced through individual dramatized stories about them complete with glorified over the top cartoon like violence that hits home as visual comedy. From the Quaker psychopath who stalks his daughter’s killer, to the psychopath who spent his youth killing other psycho killers, to the Vietnamese Psychopath who just seems crazy for most of the movie. These stories give us a glimpse into the psychopathic mind of Marty and friends and help create a visual world where anything seems possible from these characters.
In addition to these characters, Marty has to deal with a “real life” shih-tzu-loving psycho gangster Charlie played by Woody Harrelson (Natural Born Killers), when Billy and friend Hans (Christopher Walken, Poolhall Junkies) “accidently” kidnap Charlie’s dog in their regular dog-napping scheme to collect a found reward from owners. This interaction with Charlie helps Marty, Billy and Hans figure out the story to Seven Psychopaths that borrows from their own in-film “real life” experience.
The ensemble cast all hit their mark in his film. Each shows us enough of their characters to fit their quirky stereotypes but gives us something memorable about each. No more is this shown through Rockwell’s performance of Billy that builds on his lunacy throughout the film until his shining moment, a scene where he is telling Marty how he would finish his story. In addition, Walken delivers his best performance in years with his traditional over the top serious but hysterical Walken Style. Any fan of his should not miss this film.
Seven Psychopaths turned out to be an enjoyable experience and thrill ride from start to finish. The ensemble cast breathes life into the crazy characters that help move along the action. It is a film that is self-aware and does not take its self too seriously. As such, we are delivered an eccentric but entertaining film experience that anyone looking for a change of pace should not miss.
This self-aware film has a story that is hilarious in its antics and creates a world where these characters come to life. Colin Farrell (In Burges) plays Marty, an alcoholic film writer suffering from a terrible case of writer’s block. He has the title for his next film Seven Psychopaths but little more. However in spite of what the title suggest, Marty does not want his film to be violent. He wants his main psychopath to love more than kill, whch is what appears to be giving Marty the writing block in the first place. Enter Marty’s good friend Bill played by Sam Rockwell (Iron Man 2). In an effort to help Marty find inspiration for the characters in his story, Billy encourages and informs Marty of various psychopathic stories he is aware of. He even goes so far as putting a “psycho story” want ad in the paper, asking psycho’s to come to Marty’s house and tell their story. This causes Marty to spend the length of the film trying to create the characters for his story from the crazy interactions going on around him.
While based on “real life” people, these characters are introduced through individual dramatized stories about them complete with glorified over the top cartoon like violence that hits home as visual comedy. From the Quaker psychopath who stalks his daughter’s killer, to the psychopath who spent his youth killing other psycho killers, to the Vietnamese Psychopath who just seems crazy for most of the movie. These stories give us a glimpse into the psychopathic mind of Marty and friends and help create a visual world where anything seems possible from these characters.
In addition to these characters, Marty has to deal with a “real life” shih-tzu-loving psycho gangster Charlie played by Woody Harrelson (Natural Born Killers), when Billy and friend Hans (Christopher Walken, Poolhall Junkies) “accidently” kidnap Charlie’s dog in their regular dog-napping scheme to collect a found reward from owners. This interaction with Charlie helps Marty, Billy and Hans figure out the story to Seven Psychopaths that borrows from their own in-film “real life” experience.
The ensemble cast all hit their mark in his film. Each shows us enough of their characters to fit their quirky stereotypes but gives us something memorable about each. No more is this shown through Rockwell’s performance of Billy that builds on his lunacy throughout the film until his shining moment, a scene where he is telling Marty how he would finish his story. In addition, Walken delivers his best performance in years with his traditional over the top serious but hysterical Walken Style. Any fan of his should not miss this film.
Seven Psychopaths turned out to be an enjoyable experience and thrill ride from start to finish. The ensemble cast breathes life into the crazy characters that help move along the action. It is a film that is self-aware and does not take its self too seriously. As such, we are delivered an eccentric but entertaining film experience that anyone looking for a change of pace should not miss.
iKiosk ePaper
Magazines & Newspapers and News
App
More than 800 newspapers and magazines on your iPad or iPhone in one single app! Download the...
Fashion Makeup Salon Games 3D: Celebrity Makeover and Beauty Studio Game
Beauty, Games and Lifestyle
7.0
Rate It
App
***Are you tired of playing old and boring beauty salon makeover girl games that don’t offer the...
Sound Byte Cart Machine App
Music and Utilities
App
Looking for a way to play sound clips at a theater or sporting events, as a DJ, or at other events?...