Search
Search results
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated Heroes or Theives (Steps of Power #2) in Books
Nov 14, 2019
The second book of Sherwood's epic fantasy series picks up the threads from the first, Kings or Pawns, and follows various characters in the aftermath of Saebellus' victory. Some of these are familiar, such as the defeated general Jikun, others are less so and some are completely new.
Once again the story doesn't follow the usual fantasy template. Where in the first book Saebellus was depicted as the main enemy and villain of the piece here shades of grey are cast on his character and his actions. Jikun himself is struggling to come to terms with his situation and is seemingly willing to risk everything to have some sort of revenge. Selemar is playing a risky political game, trying to invoke unrest whilst also acting as the head of the corrupt council.
Sherwood performs a tricky balancing act well, with so many stories to move forward that are only tangentially connected but each is handled effectively and told with an eye to both detail and character that keeps the reader involved in each of the plot threads.
As with the previous book there is a fair amount of political intrigue, although most is away from the claustrophobic council but is just as deadly for whoever is going to be on the losing side. The characters are constantly developing and the new characters introduced are perfectly judged and naturally intertwine with the story as it moves forward.
With this second work continuing in the excellent style of the first this series is a must read for any lover of fantasy.
Content rating: Some sexual references and language and some violence
Once again the story doesn't follow the usual fantasy template. Where in the first book Saebellus was depicted as the main enemy and villain of the piece here shades of grey are cast on his character and his actions. Jikun himself is struggling to come to terms with his situation and is seemingly willing to risk everything to have some sort of revenge. Selemar is playing a risky political game, trying to invoke unrest whilst also acting as the head of the corrupt council.
Sherwood performs a tricky balancing act well, with so many stories to move forward that are only tangentially connected but each is handled effectively and told with an eye to both detail and character that keeps the reader involved in each of the plot threads.
As with the previous book there is a fair amount of political intrigue, although most is away from the claustrophobic council but is just as deadly for whoever is going to be on the losing side. The characters are constantly developing and the new characters introduced are perfectly judged and naturally intertwine with the story as it moves forward.
With this second work continuing in the excellent style of the first this series is a must read for any lover of fantasy.
Content rating: Some sexual references and language and some violence
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Frozen II (2019) in Movies
Dec 7, 2019 (Updated Jan 22, 2020)
Frozen II is a genuinely fantastic sequel that build on the original in every way.
It's feels more mature for a start. It's still a magical, kid friendly, animated adventure for sure, but the film manages to touch upon subjects such as death, loss, depression, how it's ok to feel angry, and all without veering too far away from a family feature.
The more mature tone comes with more mature animation - and it's really something. The animation is pretty much flawless. The contrasting colour pallets - the icy cold blues and white of Arendelle, to the autumnal greens and oranges of the forest - are all pleasing to look at.
I'm not one for musicals, and I wasn't keen on the songs from the original, but the music in Frozen II is way more tolerable. Well written, and sometimes epic, and that Lost in the Woods song is a banger - the fact that Weezer did a recording of it just earns the movie bonus points in my eyes.
The plot is easy to follow, whilst offering a twist here and there, but the overall message is once again, the importance of family, and the importance of writing wrongs from the last. Interestingly, there is no villain in Frozen II. The focus is purely on the good guys trying to make the world a better place for everyone. It's all rather wholesome.
The characters are all great in their own ways, and the creature designs are fantastic.
I have nothing bad to say about Frozen II. It's a damn solid sequel that easily surpasses the first film. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go and listen to Weezer all night.
It's feels more mature for a start. It's still a magical, kid friendly, animated adventure for sure, but the film manages to touch upon subjects such as death, loss, depression, how it's ok to feel angry, and all without veering too far away from a family feature.
The more mature tone comes with more mature animation - and it's really something. The animation is pretty much flawless. The contrasting colour pallets - the icy cold blues and white of Arendelle, to the autumnal greens and oranges of the forest - are all pleasing to look at.
I'm not one for musicals, and I wasn't keen on the songs from the original, but the music in Frozen II is way more tolerable. Well written, and sometimes epic, and that Lost in the Woods song is a banger - the fact that Weezer did a recording of it just earns the movie bonus points in my eyes.
The plot is easy to follow, whilst offering a twist here and there, but the overall message is once again, the importance of family, and the importance of writing wrongs from the last. Interestingly, there is no villain in Frozen II. The focus is purely on the good guys trying to make the world a better place for everyone. It's all rather wholesome.
The characters are all great in their own ways, and the creature designs are fantastic.
I have nothing bad to say about Frozen II. It's a damn solid sequel that easily surpasses the first film. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go and listen to Weezer all night.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Captain America: The First Avenger (2011) in Movies
Apr 12, 2020
Our introduction to Captain America withing the MCU gets a bad wrap.
I see it labeled fairly regularly as weak entry into the ever expanding saga and I just don't think that's the case.
It's got a solid narrative for a start as we watch Steve Rogers go from frail Regular Joe to bonafide hero who truly believes in fighting for the good of humanity over the course of two hours.
The WWII setting provides a touch of historical reality, collided with the fantasy of the Tesseract, our first glimpse of the now infamous Infinity Stones, and in this narrative, providing Red Skull with cosmically charged weapons the gain the edge in the war with Allied Forces.
The First Avenger has a fantastic cast. Chris Evans is pretty much perfect in the titular role and has played the character solidly for the last 10 years.
Hugo Weaving as Red Skull is an undeniable highlight. He plays the villain with evil glee, and looks so comic book accurate that it hurts. It's a real shame that he has never returned to the role.
The supporting cast is strong as well. Hayley Atwell, Toby Jones, Tommy Lee Jones, Sebastian Stan, Dominic Cooper, and Stanley Tucci are all great, and relish in a tight screenplay.
I do think that the film feels over long at times, although the story being told is undeniably important in the run up to The Avengers.
The effects are mostly decent and still hold up, with an exception here and there, primarily before Steve Rogers goes all buff, but these are small gripes with an otherwise solid origin film.
I see it labeled fairly regularly as weak entry into the ever expanding saga and I just don't think that's the case.
It's got a solid narrative for a start as we watch Steve Rogers go from frail Regular Joe to bonafide hero who truly believes in fighting for the good of humanity over the course of two hours.
The WWII setting provides a touch of historical reality, collided with the fantasy of the Tesseract, our first glimpse of the now infamous Infinity Stones, and in this narrative, providing Red Skull with cosmically charged weapons the gain the edge in the war with Allied Forces.
The First Avenger has a fantastic cast. Chris Evans is pretty much perfect in the titular role and has played the character solidly for the last 10 years.
Hugo Weaving as Red Skull is an undeniable highlight. He plays the villain with evil glee, and looks so comic book accurate that it hurts. It's a real shame that he has never returned to the role.
The supporting cast is strong as well. Hayley Atwell, Toby Jones, Tommy Lee Jones, Sebastian Stan, Dominic Cooper, and Stanley Tucci are all great, and relish in a tight screenplay.
I do think that the film feels over long at times, although the story being told is undeniably important in the run up to The Avengers.
The effects are mostly decent and still hold up, with an exception here and there, primarily before Steve Rogers goes all buff, but these are small gripes with an otherwise solid origin film.
How to Eat Better: How to Shop, Store & Cook to Make Any Food a Superfood
Book
'James Wong brings some welcome sanity to the world of healthy eating...its genius is his advice on...
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated See No Evil (2006) in Movies
Feb 21, 2021
See No Evil is a whole big mixed bag of average. The first 20-25 minutes are abhorrently terrible. It manages to tick every mid-00s horror cliché in its opening scene. It introduces all of its eye rollingly awful characters with edgy freeze frames and name cards.
Beyond the opening third, the whole film is riddled with seizure inducing quick zoom edits, and music video quality effects, and the whole runtime is draped in a durgy shit-shaded sepia tone. The characters never become remotely likable and suffer through the cringey dialogue without any sort of reprieve, and the worst one of the bunch even survives to the end credits, which is deeply upsetting.
Despite all of this however, I don't completely hate it. The gore for one is pretty solid, and looks mostly practical which is a huge bonus considering the era (and if you completely ignore the gratuitous spaffing of atrocious CGI during the final sequence). Glenn Jacobs, better known as WWE's Kane, cuts an imposing figure as the brutal as fuck villain, and I enjoyed the plots obvious homage to Friday the 13th. It's also mercifully clocks in just shy of 90 minutes, which makes it ideal for a quick dose of bloody horror if that's what you're after.
There are a huge amount of piss poor elements to See No Evil but it's certainly not the worst slasher out there. It's very typical of it's time, so it delivers exactly what you would expect and is definitely the best WWE produced film I've seen - the other being Leprechaun Origins, so not exactly a huge feat, but hey, let's take the wins where we can...
Beyond the opening third, the whole film is riddled with seizure inducing quick zoom edits, and music video quality effects, and the whole runtime is draped in a durgy shit-shaded sepia tone. The characters never become remotely likable and suffer through the cringey dialogue without any sort of reprieve, and the worst one of the bunch even survives to the end credits, which is deeply upsetting.
Despite all of this however, I don't completely hate it. The gore for one is pretty solid, and looks mostly practical which is a huge bonus considering the era (and if you completely ignore the gratuitous spaffing of atrocious CGI during the final sequence). Glenn Jacobs, better known as WWE's Kane, cuts an imposing figure as the brutal as fuck villain, and I enjoyed the plots obvious homage to Friday the 13th. It's also mercifully clocks in just shy of 90 minutes, which makes it ideal for a quick dose of bloody horror if that's what you're after.
There are a huge amount of piss poor elements to See No Evil but it's certainly not the worst slasher out there. It's very typical of it's time, so it delivers exactly what you would expect and is definitely the best WWE produced film I've seen - the other being Leprechaun Origins, so not exactly a huge feat, but hey, let's take the wins where we can...
Ross (3284 KP) rated The Harrowing of Doom in Books
Jan 7, 2021
Good book, but no real insight to Doom
As I am currently wading my way through the early 90s Infinity Gauntlet/War saga and all the crossover issues of comics, I was intrigued at the sometime villain, complex character that is Victor Von Doom. This book seemed to be the perfect chance to put some meat on the bones of this intriguing powerful character.
The book starts on Walpurgis night, as Doom looks towards the coming midsummer and his annual battle with Mephisto's forces of Hell as he tries to reclaim his mother's soul. Beaten once more, Doom hits on a plan to take the fight to Hell on his own terms.
Meanwhile, Doom's mother's previously defeated foe, a prince, seeks to take back control of the country, using terror attacks while Doom is distracted with his Hellish fight.
The story has some good characters, in the few people trusted with helping Doom to accomplish his plan (his mother's former ally and now recluse, a priest with heretical powers and his security chief) which help to tell the story. However, throughout the book we are treated to the same sense of mystery of the insides of Doom's mind that we see in the comics.
The book is good, an interesting one where an over-powered character is undone by refusing to delegate or being too egotistical, and it is something of a page-turner. But as a Doom-focused book, it left me wanting more.
I received an advance eARC of this book from the publishers and NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.
The book starts on Walpurgis night, as Doom looks towards the coming midsummer and his annual battle with Mephisto's forces of Hell as he tries to reclaim his mother's soul. Beaten once more, Doom hits on a plan to take the fight to Hell on his own terms.
Meanwhile, Doom's mother's previously defeated foe, a prince, seeks to take back control of the country, using terror attacks while Doom is distracted with his Hellish fight.
The story has some good characters, in the few people trusted with helping Doom to accomplish his plan (his mother's former ally and now recluse, a priest with heretical powers and his security chief) which help to tell the story. However, throughout the book we are treated to the same sense of mystery of the insides of Doom's mind that we see in the comics.
The book is good, an interesting one where an over-powered character is undone by refusing to delegate or being too egotistical, and it is something of a page-turner. But as a Doom-focused book, it left me wanting more.
I received an advance eARC of this book from the publishers and NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.
Erika (17789 KP) rated Mortal Kombat (2021) in Movies
May 8, 2021
You know when you watch a movie, and you're completely entertained during it, but afterwards, all you remember is the action portions, and none of the plot? That's me right now, after watching this movie just a little less than three hours ago.
I'll get this out of the way, the plot was obviously forgettable. Now, if this was a dramatic film, this would be a huge issue, but, this is a movie based on the first insanely violent video game ever produced. I was there for the fighting, and not the plot. The main focus was Cole, and sorry, but he was kind of a yawn until he got his stuff together.
Now, let's get into why I saw this movie. The action, the fighting, the gore. This earned its R-rating. The fighting choreography was great, and I loved that they used the some of the same moves from the video games. Also - the fact that some of the characters quipped with the closing fight messages was hilarious. The best placed one was 'Flawless Victory', after a kill.
Sub-Zero has always been one of my favorite characters, so I was glad he got the most screen time, out of the villain squad.. I have to say, as the movie was nearing the end, I was wondering when Scorpion would make his grand entrance. Finally, the pay dirt came at the very end, and yes, the 'Get Over Here' line did make an appearance.
They obviously left it open-ended for a sequel, which has been green-lit already. You can bet I'll be there on opening day for some big, dumb, gory fun.
I'll get this out of the way, the plot was obviously forgettable. Now, if this was a dramatic film, this would be a huge issue, but, this is a movie based on the first insanely violent video game ever produced. I was there for the fighting, and not the plot. The main focus was Cole, and sorry, but he was kind of a yawn until he got his stuff together.
Now, let's get into why I saw this movie. The action, the fighting, the gore. This earned its R-rating. The fighting choreography was great, and I loved that they used the some of the same moves from the video games. Also - the fact that some of the characters quipped with the closing fight messages was hilarious. The best placed one was 'Flawless Victory', after a kill.
Sub-Zero has always been one of my favorite characters, so I was glad he got the most screen time, out of the villain squad.. I have to say, as the movie was nearing the end, I was wondering when Scorpion would make his grand entrance. Finally, the pay dirt came at the very end, and yes, the 'Get Over Here' line did make an appearance.
They obviously left it open-ended for a sequel, which has been green-lit already. You can bet I'll be there on opening day for some big, dumb, gory fun.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Wishmaster (1997) in Movies
Sep 25, 2020
Robert Kurtzman, Wes Craven, and Greg Nicotero - a match made in heaven surely? Not quite it turns out, but almost. For all it's cheesiness and cheap jump scares, Wishmaster is still a load of fun, with some fantastic practical effects and a handful of big name horror cameos.
The effects are what stand out the most - there are some shitty CGI moments spread about but the majority of the gory moments are practical and rightly disgusting. A mere two minutes in, some poor fuckers skeleton becomes sentient and rips out from his body. It's glorious. Other than that, Wishmaster coasts along on the strength of its villain, The Djinn, played by Andrew Divoff. He's suitably creepy both in human form and in full make up, and gives the film a whole heap of credit, even if the way he pronounces stuff becomes a little grating after a while.
Having Wes Craven as a producer clearly pays off, as multiple horror stalwarts pop up throughout the runtime - Robert Englund, Tony Todd, Kane Hodder, Ted Raimi - some top tier cameos for sure. Even Angus Scrimm pops up to do a bit of narrating!
Everything else is a little lackluster. The premise is ok, but full of holes, and the ending feels like a bit of a cop out, and lead actress Tammy Lauren just seems like she's in the wrong film for the most part.
Wishmaster unfortunately never manages to excel above it's ridiculous opening scene, and is pretty mediocre overall, but it still has a lot to offer to horror fans, and I can't help but enjoy it.
The effects are what stand out the most - there are some shitty CGI moments spread about but the majority of the gory moments are practical and rightly disgusting. A mere two minutes in, some poor fuckers skeleton becomes sentient and rips out from his body. It's glorious. Other than that, Wishmaster coasts along on the strength of its villain, The Djinn, played by Andrew Divoff. He's suitably creepy both in human form and in full make up, and gives the film a whole heap of credit, even if the way he pronounces stuff becomes a little grating after a while.
Having Wes Craven as a producer clearly pays off, as multiple horror stalwarts pop up throughout the runtime - Robert Englund, Tony Todd, Kane Hodder, Ted Raimi - some top tier cameos for sure. Even Angus Scrimm pops up to do a bit of narrating!
Everything else is a little lackluster. The premise is ok, but full of holes, and the ending feels like a bit of a cop out, and lead actress Tammy Lauren just seems like she's in the wrong film for the most part.
Wishmaster unfortunately never manages to excel above it's ridiculous opening scene, and is pretty mediocre overall, but it still has a lot to offer to horror fans, and I can't help but enjoy it.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated 300 (2007) in Movies
Oct 3, 2020
There's a few Zack Snyder films that I genuinely like, and 300 is one of them. It's 100% style over substance, it's overly gratuitous in the sheer amount of slow motion, but it's pretty enjoyable.
Some of the shots are expertly crafted recreations of the graphic novel by Frank Miller and Lynn Varley, and as such, is a damn faithful adaption of a cult classic comic series.
The visual effects are stunning at times, and the sepia tone it's draped in lends a lot to its overall feel (even if it's a subject of criticism from many)
Gerard Butler takes the lead as King Leonidas of Sparta, in what has arguably become his most well known roll in the years following. It's easy to look over his thick Scottish accent (in ancient Greece...) when he's playing the character with such enthusiasm. Most of his lines have become highly quotable, even familiar to those who have never seen the film. 300 would be a much lesser film without his involvement.
Rodrigo Santoro carves a striking figure as primary antagonist Xerxes, his androgynous look and demonic-like voice providing a memorable villain.
The cast is rounded out by the likes of Lena Headey, David Wenham, Dominic West, and an early role for Michael Fassbender, a sturdy ensemble cast.
The set pieces are pretty thrilling, and results in a movie that blurs the fantastical, with a real life historic battle. It's an interesting mix that works well.
300 is a film that throws big sloppy buckets of testosterone at its audience, whilst simultaneously flaunting a silly amount of homoerotic undertones and CGI pectoral muscles, and it's great.
Some of the shots are expertly crafted recreations of the graphic novel by Frank Miller and Lynn Varley, and as such, is a damn faithful adaption of a cult classic comic series.
The visual effects are stunning at times, and the sepia tone it's draped in lends a lot to its overall feel (even if it's a subject of criticism from many)
Gerard Butler takes the lead as King Leonidas of Sparta, in what has arguably become his most well known roll in the years following. It's easy to look over his thick Scottish accent (in ancient Greece...) when he's playing the character with such enthusiasm. Most of his lines have become highly quotable, even familiar to those who have never seen the film. 300 would be a much lesser film without his involvement.
Rodrigo Santoro carves a striking figure as primary antagonist Xerxes, his androgynous look and demonic-like voice providing a memorable villain.
The cast is rounded out by the likes of Lena Headey, David Wenham, Dominic West, and an early role for Michael Fassbender, a sturdy ensemble cast.
The set pieces are pretty thrilling, and results in a movie that blurs the fantastical, with a real life historic battle. It's an interesting mix that works well.
300 is a film that throws big sloppy buckets of testosterone at its audience, whilst simultaneously flaunting a silly amount of homoerotic undertones and CGI pectoral muscles, and it's great.
Fred (860 KP) rated Spider-Man: Far From Home (2019) in Movies
Sep 18, 2019
Better than Spider-Verse
Now, this is a great Spider-Man movie!
So, ever since I was a kid, in the 70s, I've always wanted to see a Spider-Man movie featuring Mysterio. I mean, what better villain than the one who creates movie special-effects? However, I did know that the effects available weren't good enough to pull it off. I also knew they would eventually get there. It took a long time, but it was well worth the wait. This is what I wanted since I'm a kid. They pulled it off.
Tom Holland brings the usual to the role, which is perfect. I do love Jon Favreau's Happy, and he brings a lot of the humor to the film. In a way though, I wish Spider-Man was Spider-Man & not Iron-Spider-Man. I wish he was on his own, you know what I mean? But it's okay. It doesn't get in the way of the entertainment. And yes, this film is entertaining. There is no slow-down during this film. It's constantly moving. Not like Endgame, which only gets going at the end. Yes, this film is better than Endgame. It's better than Home Coming. And it's better than Spider-Verse.
Jake Gyllenhaal is great as Mysterio. I like the other co-stars too. The teachers are funny as hell. The Hawaiian kid is funny. MJ is okay. And Flash Thompson, well....he sucks. But anyway, the others are good.
And to finish off my review, I have to say, the secret cameo during the mid-credits made me jump with joy. Shocking to say the least. This is a definite must see!
So, ever since I was a kid, in the 70s, I've always wanted to see a Spider-Man movie featuring Mysterio. I mean, what better villain than the one who creates movie special-effects? However, I did know that the effects available weren't good enough to pull it off. I also knew they would eventually get there. It took a long time, but it was well worth the wait. This is what I wanted since I'm a kid. They pulled it off.
Tom Holland brings the usual to the role, which is perfect. I do love Jon Favreau's Happy, and he brings a lot of the humor to the film. In a way though, I wish Spider-Man was Spider-Man & not Iron-Spider-Man. I wish he was on his own, you know what I mean? But it's okay. It doesn't get in the way of the entertainment. And yes, this film is entertaining. There is no slow-down during this film. It's constantly moving. Not like Endgame, which only gets going at the end. Yes, this film is better than Endgame. It's better than Home Coming. And it's better than Spider-Verse.
Jake Gyllenhaal is great as Mysterio. I like the other co-stars too. The teachers are funny as hell. The Hawaiian kid is funny. MJ is okay. And Flash Thompson, well....he sucks. But anyway, the others are good.
And to finish off my review, I have to say, the secret cameo during the mid-credits made me jump with joy. Shocking to say the least. This is a definite must see!