Search
Search results
Sensitivemuse (246 KP) rated Our Dark Duet in Books
Dec 13, 2017
Great Sequel !
***Possible spoilers below. You’ve been warned***
The plot was off to a pretty slow start in this one. Before I start, I’d have to recommend you read This Savage Song before going to this book. You would need the foundation that was set up in This Savage Song to really benefit and enjoy reading Our Dark Duet.
As mentioned before, the plot was off to a slow start. Kate and August are on both different ends of the spectrum but have changed drastically. They’ve definitely ‘grown up’ so to speak. Kate becomes monster hunter extraordinaire. August leads his own squad in the FTF. Kate’s part of the story was definitely more interesting. Despite trying hard not to warm up to people she manages to have her small group of friends (but of course, shuns them anyway despite one of them trying to reach out to her numerous times). I love this quality in Kate. It makes her so much more realistic and puts her way from the group of those ‘stone cold butt kickers that apparently have no soul’.
That being said about Kate. Oh. Lord. That ending. Kate dying with August nearby got my stomach into knots and twists. I can’t believe it. It was beautifully written though and a suitable ending for her. Kate was pretty much a pariah and a lone wolf. August was one of the few that was able to get to know Kate at a more deeper level. It was only fitting that she meets her end with that one person by her side. Beautifully done.
I didn’t really think the romance scene between Kate and August was necessary. It was a minor filler that didn’t need to be added. I never saw August and Kate that way. They were too different and didn’t have that nice ongoing chemistry together. Fighting partners, yes. Partners in love? No I don’t think so.
So more about characters dying. Am I the only one that felt a punch to the gut when Ilsa died? Ilsa was a character I really loved in these two books. She went down in a blaze of glory though (albeit, a shocked blaze of glory.)
You have to admit, Sloan is one of the better villains I have read in a long while. I like him teaming up with Alice even though villains they are, they are looking out for themselves. He’s creepy, malicious, calculating, and cunning. He’s a perfect villain.
The last half of the book, which was filled with action, blood, explosions and all the good stuff set the pace for the great ending to a wonderfully written duology. I know fans out there are asking for more, as it’s not the end of the adventures for August and Soro. For me, it’s just enough and it’s a perfect ending. Well done Ms Schwab! Now I’m off to read your other works!
The plot was off to a pretty slow start in this one. Before I start, I’d have to recommend you read This Savage Song before going to this book. You would need the foundation that was set up in This Savage Song to really benefit and enjoy reading Our Dark Duet.
As mentioned before, the plot was off to a slow start. Kate and August are on both different ends of the spectrum but have changed drastically. They’ve definitely ‘grown up’ so to speak. Kate becomes monster hunter extraordinaire. August leads his own squad in the FTF. Kate’s part of the story was definitely more interesting. Despite trying hard not to warm up to people she manages to have her small group of friends (but of course, shuns them anyway despite one of them trying to reach out to her numerous times). I love this quality in Kate. It makes her so much more realistic and puts her way from the group of those ‘stone cold butt kickers that apparently have no soul’.
That being said about Kate. Oh. Lord. That ending. Kate dying with August nearby got my stomach into knots and twists. I can’t believe it. It was beautifully written though and a suitable ending for her. Kate was pretty much a pariah and a lone wolf. August was one of the few that was able to get to know Kate at a more deeper level. It was only fitting that she meets her end with that one person by her side. Beautifully done.
I didn’t really think the romance scene between Kate and August was necessary. It was a minor filler that didn’t need to be added. I never saw August and Kate that way. They were too different and didn’t have that nice ongoing chemistry together. Fighting partners, yes. Partners in love? No I don’t think so.
So more about characters dying. Am I the only one that felt a punch to the gut when Ilsa died? Ilsa was a character I really loved in these two books. She went down in a blaze of glory though (albeit, a shocked blaze of glory.)
You have to admit, Sloan is one of the better villains I have read in a long while. I like him teaming up with Alice even though villains they are, they are looking out for themselves. He’s creepy, malicious, calculating, and cunning. He’s a perfect villain.
The last half of the book, which was filled with action, blood, explosions and all the good stuff set the pace for the great ending to a wonderfully written duology. I know fans out there are asking for more, as it’s not the end of the adventures for August and Soro. For me, it’s just enough and it’s a perfect ending. Well done Ms Schwab! Now I’m off to read your other works!
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated Fade to Black (Rojan Dizon, #1) in Books
Apr 27, 2018
Imagine a combination of 1984, The Hunger Games, and a James Patterson mystery novel. That is the best way I can sum up Fade to Black. A world so intriguing, mysterious, and exciting that you want to live in it, and yet then again, maybe you don’t. A plot that never stops moving and throwing stuff at you, and with every page you become more and more wrapped up in it. Characters that you want to be, or be friends with, or take a good swing at. I am so excited about this novel, guys. I can’t recommend it enough.
First, the characters/narrator. I love Jake. I love Pacha. I love Rojan. I love them all. I love the way they talk to each other (or don’t talk to each other) and argue with each other. And the narrator, Rojan, is awesome. There are three things that makes Rojan a fantastic character, and a new favorite of mine.
First, he’s different. He’s not the “guy who wants to be a hero,” or the “I want to prove myself” or “I’m looking for my one-true-love” kind of guy. No, Rojan just wants to finish his damn job and get on with his damn life. He doesn’t want to be a hero or a villain: he just wants to get paid, go home, and find a new girl to chase. He’s the reluctant hero.
Second, the word “loyal” is not in Rojan’s repertoire. He specifically admits to enjoying the chase more than the catch, and for some reason, that’s really attractive! And of course, the girl he falls for is so perfect for him that it’s not even funny… in fact, if she’d come to terms with the idea, he might actually manage not to cheat on her. At the very end after he’s managed to kill the bad guys, save the planet, and rescue the girl, the only thing he was focused on was getting into the nurses pants.
Third, his personality is just fantastic. He’s such a pessimist, and admits to being a cynic. He makes the most absurdly snarky comments about everything, to the point that even in a tense scene there’s comic relief because he’s such a clever bastard (as a matter of fact, I think he actually calls himself that at least once).
The ending was wonderful, and left me feeling satisfied and complete, even though I can’t wait for the next book: not because it had a cliff-hanger, but because it was just so good!
Only thing I hate: It’s book 1 in a 3-book series, and the other two aren’t published… This happened to me while reading Daughter of Smoke and Bone, and The Better Part of Darkness. Gah! So annoying!
Content/Recommendation: Language and violence and dark humor. Mention of rape and sex. This is an adult book, maybe older teens, ages 18+. It’s totally worth the read. It’s also hilarious.
First, the characters/narrator. I love Jake. I love Pacha. I love Rojan. I love them all. I love the way they talk to each other (or don’t talk to each other) and argue with each other. And the narrator, Rojan, is awesome. There are three things that makes Rojan a fantastic character, and a new favorite of mine.
First, he’s different. He’s not the “guy who wants to be a hero,” or the “I want to prove myself” or “I’m looking for my one-true-love” kind of guy. No, Rojan just wants to finish his damn job and get on with his damn life. He doesn’t want to be a hero or a villain: he just wants to get paid, go home, and find a new girl to chase. He’s the reluctant hero.
Second, the word “loyal” is not in Rojan’s repertoire. He specifically admits to enjoying the chase more than the catch, and for some reason, that’s really attractive! And of course, the girl he falls for is so perfect for him that it’s not even funny… in fact, if she’d come to terms with the idea, he might actually manage not to cheat on her. At the very end after he’s managed to kill the bad guys, save the planet, and rescue the girl, the only thing he was focused on was getting into the nurses pants.
Third, his personality is just fantastic. He’s such a pessimist, and admits to being a cynic. He makes the most absurdly snarky comments about everything, to the point that even in a tense scene there’s comic relief because he’s such a clever bastard (as a matter of fact, I think he actually calls himself that at least once).
The ending was wonderful, and left me feeling satisfied and complete, even though I can’t wait for the next book: not because it had a cliff-hanger, but because it was just so good!
Only thing I hate: It’s book 1 in a 3-book series, and the other two aren’t published… This happened to me while reading Daughter of Smoke and Bone, and The Better Part of Darkness. Gah! So annoying!
Content/Recommendation: Language and violence and dark humor. Mention of rape and sex. This is an adult book, maybe older teens, ages 18+. It’s totally worth the read. It’s also hilarious.
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Wall Street (1987) in Movies
Feb 19, 2019
When looking to review a film like this, there are two distinct points of view to take in to a account:
The first being the contemporary context. That being that this was made in 1987, at the height of the Wall Street boom and that, at the time, this must have been a revelation for so many people, who still had either faith or ignorance about the financial institutions which had metamorphosed into the corrupt capitalist cancer which we all know today.
The later half of the 80’s was to herald the fall of the Gordon Gecco’s and this film, whilst reflecting its time, was also ushering in an era of doom for Wall Street, as well as the continuing propagation of this corruption which would lead to the 2008 crash which are still reeling from today.
So given that like so many films which have essentially whistle blown in there own time, Psycho (1960) also springs to mind, the impact is lessened by thirty years of dilution, in which case it would be unfair to judge the film harshly on the fact that it does not really tell us anything new today.
But when it comes to judging how well the film was made, that is surly timeless.
And considering that Oliver Stone put this together, I was disappointed. The characters where not only dislikable, which I am sure was intentional, they were also poorly written. People just come and go throughout and with the exceptions of Michael Douglas’ Gorden Gecco, Charlie Sheen’s Bud Fox and his real life father, Martin Sheen as Bud’s blue collar dad, the rest of the cast seemed to be wasted.
The plot was all over the place, inconstant and littered with goofs and continuity errors right from the get-go. In fact, it only took a few minutes before I was aghast that a film which begins in 1985 made a reference to Gecco’s ruthlessness by stating that he made money out of the Challenger disaster, which did not occur until January 1986!
Charlie Sheen’s character is difficult to sympathise with, not only because he is trying to be the villain, yet of course he finds his soul by the end, but that he is so utterly naive that it is beyond belief!
It is never clear how much money is being made, who has what or what the real gains or losses are by the end, to the point that whist it is implied that Sheen will be jailed for his insider trading, the film ends before he enters the court and Gecco, who has been recorded by Sheen confessing to his involvement, is never resolved at all!
By the end I was really annoyed by how shallow and lackadaisical the script was, seemingly only really interested in showing the power hungry greed of Wall Street traders at this time.
“Greed is good”.
Well, Mr Stone, so is some exposition.
The first being the contemporary context. That being that this was made in 1987, at the height of the Wall Street boom and that, at the time, this must have been a revelation for so many people, who still had either faith or ignorance about the financial institutions which had metamorphosed into the corrupt capitalist cancer which we all know today.
The later half of the 80’s was to herald the fall of the Gordon Gecco’s and this film, whilst reflecting its time, was also ushering in an era of doom for Wall Street, as well as the continuing propagation of this corruption which would lead to the 2008 crash which are still reeling from today.
So given that like so many films which have essentially whistle blown in there own time, Psycho (1960) also springs to mind, the impact is lessened by thirty years of dilution, in which case it would be unfair to judge the film harshly on the fact that it does not really tell us anything new today.
But when it comes to judging how well the film was made, that is surly timeless.
And considering that Oliver Stone put this together, I was disappointed. The characters where not only dislikable, which I am sure was intentional, they were also poorly written. People just come and go throughout and with the exceptions of Michael Douglas’ Gorden Gecco, Charlie Sheen’s Bud Fox and his real life father, Martin Sheen as Bud’s blue collar dad, the rest of the cast seemed to be wasted.
The plot was all over the place, inconstant and littered with goofs and continuity errors right from the get-go. In fact, it only took a few minutes before I was aghast that a film which begins in 1985 made a reference to Gecco’s ruthlessness by stating that he made money out of the Challenger disaster, which did not occur until January 1986!
Charlie Sheen’s character is difficult to sympathise with, not only because he is trying to be the villain, yet of course he finds his soul by the end, but that he is so utterly naive that it is beyond belief!
It is never clear how much money is being made, who has what or what the real gains or losses are by the end, to the point that whist it is implied that Sheen will be jailed for his insider trading, the film ends before he enters the court and Gecco, who has been recorded by Sheen confessing to his involvement, is never resolved at all!
By the end I was really annoyed by how shallow and lackadaisical the script was, seemingly only really interested in showing the power hungry greed of Wall Street traders at this time.
“Greed is good”.
Well, Mr Stone, so is some exposition.
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Battle in Seattle (2008) in Movies
Mar 7, 2019
Lefty cold
Contains spoilers, click to show
I caught this on the TV and was intrigued by the opening credits, always being one to be interested in real events and certainly ones in a recent political context. I admit that I was unaware of these events, but as the plot played out it left me feeling somewhat cold, always waiting for the hook that never came.
This was basically a docudrama which melded the real and the reenactment together to create an at times frightening and tense view of the riots. Though this could have been any riot, over any subject, which was kind of the point. I feel that this could easily have been a film focusing on the Poll Tax riots of 1990 and have lost nothing.
I feel that this needed to be more, in every area. More Seattle Riots, and I mean in a way that singled them out as such, and not just any riot. More character drama, with barely scratched the surface at most and more political. This attacks the WTO with the lowest common denominator, playing the emotional and reactionary left wing card, rather than a fully rounded balanced argument.
I have no doubt that the World Trade Organisation is evil, as are most capital institutions, but there was little to convict them here, except the strong implications that they are against free speech.
This was a film which was fair to it's characters; The riot cop just doing his job, the peaceful protesters, the anarchists and the forlorn Mayer. But there was a lack of a strong villain, as, as I've said, the WTO wasn't sufficiently justified.
Also, its historical integrity has to be questioned. Simply put, are any of the characters portrait here real? The protesters are fictional, as I understand, but the Mayer? The reporter? It's not clear and based on their actions within the film, I would really like to know.
*** SPOILER *** But finally, the most disturbing and probably the best, most compelling part of this film to me would be the what happens to Charlize Theron's character, a pregnant woman and wife of Woody Harleson's riot cop. As she is trying in vain to make her way home amidst the chaos of rioters clashing with police and in the confusion is treated as a rioter and is hit in the stomach with a baton. The result I'll leave in your imagination...
This was best moment in the film were the true horror of these clashes become prevalent as the moral lines are crossed and order breaks down.
************** In summation, this was worth a watch but will offer little in the way of clarification as to the motives of the events of that November, but maybe there are no more. Maybe it was a riot which stemmed from a protest against the capitalist machine. If you have strong lefty views then this is the film for you, if not, have a look but I doubt that you'll be blown away.
This was basically a docudrama which melded the real and the reenactment together to create an at times frightening and tense view of the riots. Though this could have been any riot, over any subject, which was kind of the point. I feel that this could easily have been a film focusing on the Poll Tax riots of 1990 and have lost nothing.
I feel that this needed to be more, in every area. More Seattle Riots, and I mean in a way that singled them out as such, and not just any riot. More character drama, with barely scratched the surface at most and more political. This attacks the WTO with the lowest common denominator, playing the emotional and reactionary left wing card, rather than a fully rounded balanced argument.
I have no doubt that the World Trade Organisation is evil, as are most capital institutions, but there was little to convict them here, except the strong implications that they are against free speech.
This was a film which was fair to it's characters; The riot cop just doing his job, the peaceful protesters, the anarchists and the forlorn Mayer. But there was a lack of a strong villain, as, as I've said, the WTO wasn't sufficiently justified.
Also, its historical integrity has to be questioned. Simply put, are any of the characters portrait here real? The protesters are fictional, as I understand, but the Mayer? The reporter? It's not clear and based on their actions within the film, I would really like to know.
*** SPOILER *** But finally, the most disturbing and probably the best, most compelling part of this film to me would be the what happens to Charlize Theron's character, a pregnant woman and wife of Woody Harleson's riot cop. As she is trying in vain to make her way home amidst the chaos of rioters clashing with police and in the confusion is treated as a rioter and is hit in the stomach with a baton. The result I'll leave in your imagination...
This was best moment in the film were the true horror of these clashes become prevalent as the moral lines are crossed and order breaks down.
************** In summation, this was worth a watch but will offer little in the way of clarification as to the motives of the events of that November, but maybe there are no more. Maybe it was a riot which stemmed from a protest against the capitalist machine. If you have strong lefty views then this is the film for you, if not, have a look but I doubt that you'll be blown away.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Fantastic Four (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
An absolute snooze
Here comes yet another superhero film. Ending Marvel’s year that has included the charming Big Hero 6, the overstuffed Avengers: Age of Ultron and the surprisingly excellent Ant-Man, the Fox produced Fantastic Four reboot has a tough job trying to get audiences to forget the horror that came before it.
It’s been a tough ride for the quartet of heroes, but does director Josh Trank’s modern day reimagining of Marvel’s first team do enough to change perceptions?
Not by a long shot. Despite some excellent special effects, this yawnfest of a film that was plagued by rumours of constant behind-the-scenes tension and last-minute editing doesn’t have an ounce of originality in its short 100 minute running time.
Miles Teller (Insurgent), Kate Mara (Transcendence), Michael B. Jordan (Chronicle) and Jamie Bell (Billy Elliot) take on the roles of Reed Richards, Sue Storm, Johnny Storm and Ben Grimm respectively and are fine, if lacking in any real chemistry.
Fantastic Four is above all, an origins story as the four young adults try to crack interdimensional travel. Naturally, things don’t go quite to plan and they, alongside fellow colleague Victor Von Doom end up with an unusual set of powers – with Doom becoming the main antagonist.
Unfortunately, the plot, devised by no less than three writers is a complete bore. There is hardly anything of interest throughout the entire film as Trank pushes his cast from one underwhelming set piece to another.
When things do get tense, it’s only for a five minute scene involving Doom breaking out of a research facility. This is when we get to see what Fantastic Four could’ve been, a dark and brooding film with a disturbing villain at its core.
However, it seems this has been pushed back to make way for an unusually flat sense of humour and an uninteresting origins story. Marvel films live and die on their comedic elements and unfortunately Fantastic Four is as poor as they come.
Nevertheless, the film’s special effects are on the whole, very good. The other dimension looks fantastic and The Thing in particular is rendered using excellent motion capture animation.
An underwhelming climax wraps up a bitterly disappointing outing for the four heroes. Most superhero films end with a spectacular showdown of good versus evil but Fantastic Four has none of this. The ending is clichéd, short and has no real payoff.
Overall, expectations were already low for this reboot and despite director Josh Trank’s obvious talent for direction, this talent is nowhere to be found in Fantastic Four.
A cast that doesn’t gel together, a poor soundtrack and a lack of tonal balance ensures it will rest alongside X-Men Origins: Wolverine as proof that Marvel Studios needs the rights to all of its heroes returning to it.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/08/09/an-absolute-snooze-fantastic-four-review/
It’s been a tough ride for the quartet of heroes, but does director Josh Trank’s modern day reimagining of Marvel’s first team do enough to change perceptions?
Not by a long shot. Despite some excellent special effects, this yawnfest of a film that was plagued by rumours of constant behind-the-scenes tension and last-minute editing doesn’t have an ounce of originality in its short 100 minute running time.
Miles Teller (Insurgent), Kate Mara (Transcendence), Michael B. Jordan (Chronicle) and Jamie Bell (Billy Elliot) take on the roles of Reed Richards, Sue Storm, Johnny Storm and Ben Grimm respectively and are fine, if lacking in any real chemistry.
Fantastic Four is above all, an origins story as the four young adults try to crack interdimensional travel. Naturally, things don’t go quite to plan and they, alongside fellow colleague Victor Von Doom end up with an unusual set of powers – with Doom becoming the main antagonist.
Unfortunately, the plot, devised by no less than three writers is a complete bore. There is hardly anything of interest throughout the entire film as Trank pushes his cast from one underwhelming set piece to another.
When things do get tense, it’s only for a five minute scene involving Doom breaking out of a research facility. This is when we get to see what Fantastic Four could’ve been, a dark and brooding film with a disturbing villain at its core.
However, it seems this has been pushed back to make way for an unusually flat sense of humour and an uninteresting origins story. Marvel films live and die on their comedic elements and unfortunately Fantastic Four is as poor as they come.
Nevertheless, the film’s special effects are on the whole, very good. The other dimension looks fantastic and The Thing in particular is rendered using excellent motion capture animation.
An underwhelming climax wraps up a bitterly disappointing outing for the four heroes. Most superhero films end with a spectacular showdown of good versus evil but Fantastic Four has none of this. The ending is clichéd, short and has no real payoff.
Overall, expectations were already low for this reboot and despite director Josh Trank’s obvious talent for direction, this talent is nowhere to be found in Fantastic Four.
A cast that doesn’t gel together, a poor soundtrack and a lack of tonal balance ensures it will rest alongside X-Men Origins: Wolverine as proof that Marvel Studios needs the rights to all of its heroes returning to it.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/08/09/an-absolute-snooze-fantastic-four-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Hitman: Agent 47 (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Clinical and incomprehensible
The transition from video game to movie is notoriously difficult to get right. From box-office disasters like Super Mario Bros. to the poorly received Resident Evil franchise, it appears no film is spared from either financial woe or critically panning.
Hitman has become one of the most popular game series’ ever but the 2007 film of the same name failed to kick-start the franchise’s transition to the silver screen. Now, eight years later, Rupert Friend stars as the red tie-wearing assassin in Hitman: Agent 47, but does it succeed as a reboot?
Friend stars as the titular character, an emotionless killer hell-bent on tracking down the creator of the ‘Agent Program’ from which he was created. Alongside him for the ride is Hannah Ware’s Katia Van Dees, a young fearful woman searching for a man she does not know.
The usually excellent Zachary Quinto (Star Trek) also stars as a clichéd villain in a thankless role blighted by stilted dialogue and cardboard emotions. This most certainly isn’t his finest work.
The story is incredibly simple, barely fitting into the film’s slender 96 minute running time and the clinical filming style of director Aleksander Bach really doesn’t help. Beautiful locations like Berlin and Singapore are wasted in favour of sleek office sets, populated by one-dimensional characters that we couldn’t care less about.
Nevertheless, Friend plays the emotionless Agent 47 with ease and is one of the highlights in a film lacking in any real punch – it’s all been done before, and better.
Ware is disappointingly wooden, though her veneer seems to crack towards the finale and we get to see the character she could have played. It’s a shame that for the majority of Hitman’s running time we see no real prowess in her performance.
The action sequences are slick and nicely choreographed but Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation did them only last month and in a more detailed and ultimately successful style.
However, clever gun-work is mixed nicely with the film’s 15 certificate and each barrel discharge feels much more real. It’s certainly more interesting than the two sequels to Taken and many other action thrillers that sport the 12A rating.
The climax leaves things wide open for a sequel, but the ending is incomprehensible to anyone who hasn’t played the games and leaves a bad taste in the mouth – probably not a great thing when trying to get audiences excited for a follow up.
Overall, Hitman: Agent 47 is much like its titular character. A slick outer shell hides not a lot underneath with a cast of wasted talent and a been-there-done-that attitude to the stunts. There’s some great sequences, but you’ll have to dig deep to find any real merit here.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/08/30/clinical-and-incomprehensible-hitman-agent-47-review/
Hitman has become one of the most popular game series’ ever but the 2007 film of the same name failed to kick-start the franchise’s transition to the silver screen. Now, eight years later, Rupert Friend stars as the red tie-wearing assassin in Hitman: Agent 47, but does it succeed as a reboot?
Friend stars as the titular character, an emotionless killer hell-bent on tracking down the creator of the ‘Agent Program’ from which he was created. Alongside him for the ride is Hannah Ware’s Katia Van Dees, a young fearful woman searching for a man she does not know.
The usually excellent Zachary Quinto (Star Trek) also stars as a clichéd villain in a thankless role blighted by stilted dialogue and cardboard emotions. This most certainly isn’t his finest work.
The story is incredibly simple, barely fitting into the film’s slender 96 minute running time and the clinical filming style of director Aleksander Bach really doesn’t help. Beautiful locations like Berlin and Singapore are wasted in favour of sleek office sets, populated by one-dimensional characters that we couldn’t care less about.
Nevertheless, Friend plays the emotionless Agent 47 with ease and is one of the highlights in a film lacking in any real punch – it’s all been done before, and better.
Ware is disappointingly wooden, though her veneer seems to crack towards the finale and we get to see the character she could have played. It’s a shame that for the majority of Hitman’s running time we see no real prowess in her performance.
The action sequences are slick and nicely choreographed but Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation did them only last month and in a more detailed and ultimately successful style.
However, clever gun-work is mixed nicely with the film’s 15 certificate and each barrel discharge feels much more real. It’s certainly more interesting than the two sequels to Taken and many other action thrillers that sport the 12A rating.
The climax leaves things wide open for a sequel, but the ending is incomprehensible to anyone who hasn’t played the games and leaves a bad taste in the mouth – probably not a great thing when trying to get audiences excited for a follow up.
Overall, Hitman: Agent 47 is much like its titular character. A slick outer shell hides not a lot underneath with a cast of wasted talent and a been-there-done-that attitude to the stunts. There’s some great sequences, but you’ll have to dig deep to find any real merit here.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/08/30/clinical-and-incomprehensible-hitman-agent-47-review/
Lee (2222 KP) rated The Incredibles 2 (2018) in Movies
Jul 16, 2018 (Updated Jul 17, 2018)
Worthy sequel, although a bit patchy in places
Contains spoilers, click to show
It's hard to believe that the original Incredibles movie is now 14 years old. It was, and still is, a fun, original and highly enjoyable superhero movie that was always deserving of a sequel. I re-watched it recently with my daughter who had never seen it, and despite it's age, and the fact that we've now had a decade of non-stop Marvel superhero movies since it was made, it still holds up 'incredibly' well.
The sequel picks up right where the original finished off, with The Incredibles battling supervillain The Underminer. It's the first of many impressive battle sequence, and does a good job of reminding us of the skills and abilities of each individual family member, not to mention how well they all work together as a team. The advances in animation quality over the last 14 years are obvious, while still managing to retain the unique look and feel of the original.
Unfortunately, the Parr's attempts to save the city don't quite go to plan, leading once again to their helpfulness being questioned by the US Government. They find themselves in a motel, contemplating their futures, until they are approached by Winston Deavor (Bob Odenkirk). He claims that the public have only seen the negative side of superheroes that is portrayed by the government, and wants to provide microscopic cameras embedded within the superhero costumes so that they can capture what they see. By showing the hero's side of the story, Winston plans to generate enough good publicity to start winning over the general public once again and hopefully reverse the law that makes superheroes illegal. Elastigirl is chosen to kick things off, largely due to the minimal government damage she's likely to cause in comparison to her husband! As a result, Mr Incredible is left at home to care for the kids, while Elastigirl is out having fun and saving the world.
The domestic comedy with Mr Incredible stuck at home is just brilliant. Not only does he have to try and get to grips with 'New Math' homework for son Dash, but also with daughter Violet and her boyfriend trouble. Not to mention the discovery that baby Jack-Jack has a set of impressive and highly unpredictable superpowers of his own. Meanwhile, the plan involving Elastigirl is working so well, that plans to make superheroes legal again get underway. But then mysterious new villain Screenslaver begins causing hypnotic chaos around town, and the family must band together once again in order to save the day.
Aside from the impressive action, and the hilarious scenes involving Jack-Jack, the rest of the movie in comparison does feel a little flat in places. In my opinion it falls slightly short of matching the original, although still a highly enjoyable and worthy sequel.
The sequel picks up right where the original finished off, with The Incredibles battling supervillain The Underminer. It's the first of many impressive battle sequence, and does a good job of reminding us of the skills and abilities of each individual family member, not to mention how well they all work together as a team. The advances in animation quality over the last 14 years are obvious, while still managing to retain the unique look and feel of the original.
Unfortunately, the Parr's attempts to save the city don't quite go to plan, leading once again to their helpfulness being questioned by the US Government. They find themselves in a motel, contemplating their futures, until they are approached by Winston Deavor (Bob Odenkirk). He claims that the public have only seen the negative side of superheroes that is portrayed by the government, and wants to provide microscopic cameras embedded within the superhero costumes so that they can capture what they see. By showing the hero's side of the story, Winston plans to generate enough good publicity to start winning over the general public once again and hopefully reverse the law that makes superheroes illegal. Elastigirl is chosen to kick things off, largely due to the minimal government damage she's likely to cause in comparison to her husband! As a result, Mr Incredible is left at home to care for the kids, while Elastigirl is out having fun and saving the world.
The domestic comedy with Mr Incredible stuck at home is just brilliant. Not only does he have to try and get to grips with 'New Math' homework for son Dash, but also with daughter Violet and her boyfriend trouble. Not to mention the discovery that baby Jack-Jack has a set of impressive and highly unpredictable superpowers of his own. Meanwhile, the plan involving Elastigirl is working so well, that plans to make superheroes legal again get underway. But then mysterious new villain Screenslaver begins causing hypnotic chaos around town, and the family must band together once again in order to save the day.
Aside from the impressive action, and the hilarious scenes involving Jack-Jack, the rest of the movie in comparison does feel a little flat in places. In my opinion it falls slightly short of matching the original, although still a highly enjoyable and worthy sequel.
Lee (2222 KP) rated The Spy Who Dumped Me (2018) in Movies
Aug 21, 2018
Not enough comedy (1 more)
Drags on way too long
More action spy movie than comedy
In recent years, whenever I go to watch a comedy at the cinema, I come away totally disappointed, and end up going off on a rant about the state of movie comedies these days when I review them afterwards. Mostly, these movies have a very simple plot premise, which they then just try and plaster over with a tonne of gross out scenes or poorly written 'comedy' set-pieces. Other times they feature a bit more story and plot, with the humour being more of an add-on. The Spy Who Dumped Me veers more towards the latter, ending up as more of an above average action spy movie than a comedy.
Mila Kunis is Audrey, celebrating her birthday in a bar. Only her celebrations have been ruined somewhat by the fact that her boyfriend Drew (Justin Theroux) recently dumped her. By text! She's with best friend Morgan (Kate McKinnon), and as they complain about Drew, we see that he's in a spot of bother of his own over in Europe - taking out bad guys in a market shootout, getting chased through somebody's apartment while the owners watch TV, jumping out of a window onto a truck, and casually strolling out of a building as it explodes behind him. But when Audrey sends him yet another text, this time threatening to burn all of his stuff, Drew quickly gets in touch with her. Turns out that a small trophy in among his little box of dirty undies and other possessions is the key to saving a lot of people, and the bad guys want to get their hands on it at all costs. So, Audrey and Morgan unwittingly become involved in the world of spies and villains, traveling around Europe and bumbling their way through all manner of problems to ensure that the trophy finds its way into the right hands.
As mentioned earlier, every effort has been made to make sure that this is a high action spy movie along the lines of the Bourne and Mission Impossible movies. The aforementioned escape from the bad guys, a huge restaurant shootout, a deadly villain, a high speed street chase involving cars, motorbikes and guns, not to mention almost as much double crossing/who can you trust shenanigans than MI: Fallout recently, are all present and presented really well. All the while, Audrey and Morgan bring lighthearted relief and humour to it all. Kunis and McKinnon doing exactly what we're used to from their separate movie comedies but coming together here as a really likeable team and with a good supporting cast too.
Overall, The Spy Who Dumped Me isn't too bad, but it isn't too great either. It also seemed to drag on way too much for my liking and I would have preferred a much tighter movie, with a few more laughs. Still fairly enjoyable though.
Mila Kunis is Audrey, celebrating her birthday in a bar. Only her celebrations have been ruined somewhat by the fact that her boyfriend Drew (Justin Theroux) recently dumped her. By text! She's with best friend Morgan (Kate McKinnon), and as they complain about Drew, we see that he's in a spot of bother of his own over in Europe - taking out bad guys in a market shootout, getting chased through somebody's apartment while the owners watch TV, jumping out of a window onto a truck, and casually strolling out of a building as it explodes behind him. But when Audrey sends him yet another text, this time threatening to burn all of his stuff, Drew quickly gets in touch with her. Turns out that a small trophy in among his little box of dirty undies and other possessions is the key to saving a lot of people, and the bad guys want to get their hands on it at all costs. So, Audrey and Morgan unwittingly become involved in the world of spies and villains, traveling around Europe and bumbling their way through all manner of problems to ensure that the trophy finds its way into the right hands.
As mentioned earlier, every effort has been made to make sure that this is a high action spy movie along the lines of the Bourne and Mission Impossible movies. The aforementioned escape from the bad guys, a huge restaurant shootout, a deadly villain, a high speed street chase involving cars, motorbikes and guns, not to mention almost as much double crossing/who can you trust shenanigans than MI: Fallout recently, are all present and presented really well. All the while, Audrey and Morgan bring lighthearted relief and humour to it all. Kunis and McKinnon doing exactly what we're used to from their separate movie comedies but coming together here as a really likeable team and with a good supporting cast too.
Overall, The Spy Who Dumped Me isn't too bad, but it isn't too great either. It also seemed to drag on way too much for my liking and I would have preferred a much tighter movie, with a few more laughs. Still fairly enjoyable though.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937) in Movies
Oct 6, 2018
Still the "Fairest of Them All"
It's always a fear of mine when I go back to visit a beloved film of mine - especially a film that was beloved to me in my childhood. Will it hold up? Is it as good as I remember it? Will the re-visitation tarnish the precious memory of this film that I have?
I am happy to report that, upon a fresh viewing of the first full length animated film every, that I can still declare SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS "the fairest of them all".
Made in 1937, by the visionary Walt Disney, this film defies the odds - many calling it "Walt's Folly". No one had attempted a full length animated film before and the skeptics were many, but what Walt knew is that he had all the standard elements of a good story - a heroine we can root for, an evil villain, some comic characters that can help us laugh (and cry) and, more importantly, he had the skillful craftsmen of the Walt Disney Studios that can pull off such a feat.
And...pull it off they did! This film is gorgeous and lush to look at. Upon this viewing, I was drawn to the background, and the edges of the frame, marveling at the detail that was interwoven into each, hand drawn imagery - giving this tapestry a lushness and thickness heretofore unseen on the screen.
As for the story of the film - and the film itself - Disney was smart enough to know that "less is more". The film is compact - running a relatively quick 83 minutes - this was a two-fold solution. (1) It helped move the film along at a sprightly pace, never once resting or losing energy and (2) this means that the artists only had to draw what was necessary for this streamlined story.
The music, of course, is wonderful and important part of this film. This was one of the first movie musicals, and was the first film to release a Soundtrack Album. From "Some Day My Prince Will Come" to "I'm Wishing" to "Heigh-Ho" and "Whistle While You Work", the songs moved the story forward and added depth to the characters portrayed on the screen.
If you haven't caught this film in awhile, I heartily recommend you check it out - it works for young and old alike. A good film to share with children of today, to show them what lush, hand drawn animation looks like. Come for the fun of the Dwarfs and the Villainy of the Evil Queen, stay for the richness of the tapestry and the attention to detail that a true classic film portrays.
Letter Grade: A+
10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Next Month: WRECK-IT RALPH and (of course) the sequel RALPH BREAKS THE INTERNET (coming to theaters in November).
I am happy to report that, upon a fresh viewing of the first full length animated film every, that I can still declare SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS "the fairest of them all".
Made in 1937, by the visionary Walt Disney, this film defies the odds - many calling it "Walt's Folly". No one had attempted a full length animated film before and the skeptics were many, but what Walt knew is that he had all the standard elements of a good story - a heroine we can root for, an evil villain, some comic characters that can help us laugh (and cry) and, more importantly, he had the skillful craftsmen of the Walt Disney Studios that can pull off such a feat.
And...pull it off they did! This film is gorgeous and lush to look at. Upon this viewing, I was drawn to the background, and the edges of the frame, marveling at the detail that was interwoven into each, hand drawn imagery - giving this tapestry a lushness and thickness heretofore unseen on the screen.
As for the story of the film - and the film itself - Disney was smart enough to know that "less is more". The film is compact - running a relatively quick 83 minutes - this was a two-fold solution. (1) It helped move the film along at a sprightly pace, never once resting or losing energy and (2) this means that the artists only had to draw what was necessary for this streamlined story.
The music, of course, is wonderful and important part of this film. This was one of the first movie musicals, and was the first film to release a Soundtrack Album. From "Some Day My Prince Will Come" to "I'm Wishing" to "Heigh-Ho" and "Whistle While You Work", the songs moved the story forward and added depth to the characters portrayed on the screen.
If you haven't caught this film in awhile, I heartily recommend you check it out - it works for young and old alike. A good film to share with children of today, to show them what lush, hand drawn animation looks like. Come for the fun of the Dwarfs and the Villainy of the Evil Queen, stay for the richness of the tapestry and the attention to detail that a true classic film portrays.
Letter Grade: A+
10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Next Month: WRECK-IT RALPH and (of course) the sequel RALPH BREAKS THE INTERNET (coming to theaters in November).
Cassie Osbourne (6 KP) rated The Secret Countess in Books
Nov 9, 2018
Countess Anna Grazinsky had it all: riches, jewels, palaces, English nannies, everything. And then the Russian revolution came along. Now in 1919, Anna and her family are penniless in London so she decides to get a job as a housemaid to the newly engaged Earl of Mersham.
This is the third Eva Ibbotson book that IÕve read this year and, whilst I have enjoyed them all, I canÕt help noticing that the characters are basically all the same. Heroine who seems completely perfect and has no flaws, love interest who is complex and often broody (also the most well rounded character in the book) and the obvious villain who spends the whole book being obviously villainous. All that being said, I do really like these characters. I could relate to Anna despite her perfectness, I understood RupertÕs problems regardless of how blind he was being at times and I enjoyed just how horrible and ruthless Muriel could be. I also loved the side characters. Ollie was adorable, Lavinia was hilarious and Baskerville was strangely well fleshed out for a dog (seriously, Ibbotson gives him a whole personality where most authors wouldnÕt have bothered). Yes most of the characters were simple without huge character arcs but I liked them all the same.
IbbotsonÕs writing style is easy to slip into and nice to read, if a little over fond of commas. However it is the atmosphere that really lets this book down Ñ there isnÕt really too much of it. There are a moments where a small amount is created, and those passages are certainly the most memorable, but there are unfortunately few and far between. ThatÕs not to say that the general feeling is bad or uncomfortable to read when it shouldnÕt be, but I would liked to have seen more of...well, something.
In a similar vein to what I said about the characters earlier, most of IbbotsonÕs young adult literature seems to follow a similar structure. Girl leaves family to do something or be someone that they often donÕt approve of, meets a misunderstood man, they fall in love but he is unavailable (or she thinks he is) and she leaves him without a word but donÕt worry, they are reunited and they all live happily ever after. However, if it ainÕt broke, donÕt fix it. While the main skeleton structure is used for most of her work, each of IbbotsonÕs books have a difference and a charm that stays with you and is memorable. There are plenty of little surprises and some twists and turns.
While this review may seem mixed and sound negative, I did really enjoy this book. I have kept it on my shelves with my other Eva Ibbotson novels for a reason and IÕm sure I will return to it.
Character: 7.5
Atmosphere: 5.5
Writing Style: 9
Plot: 8
Intrigue: 8
Logic: 8
Enjoyment: 8
This is the third Eva Ibbotson book that IÕve read this year and, whilst I have enjoyed them all, I canÕt help noticing that the characters are basically all the same. Heroine who seems completely perfect and has no flaws, love interest who is complex and often broody (also the most well rounded character in the book) and the obvious villain who spends the whole book being obviously villainous. All that being said, I do really like these characters. I could relate to Anna despite her perfectness, I understood RupertÕs problems regardless of how blind he was being at times and I enjoyed just how horrible and ruthless Muriel could be. I also loved the side characters. Ollie was adorable, Lavinia was hilarious and Baskerville was strangely well fleshed out for a dog (seriously, Ibbotson gives him a whole personality where most authors wouldnÕt have bothered). Yes most of the characters were simple without huge character arcs but I liked them all the same.
IbbotsonÕs writing style is easy to slip into and nice to read, if a little over fond of commas. However it is the atmosphere that really lets this book down Ñ there isnÕt really too much of it. There are a moments where a small amount is created, and those passages are certainly the most memorable, but there are unfortunately few and far between. ThatÕs not to say that the general feeling is bad or uncomfortable to read when it shouldnÕt be, but I would liked to have seen more of...well, something.
In a similar vein to what I said about the characters earlier, most of IbbotsonÕs young adult literature seems to follow a similar structure. Girl leaves family to do something or be someone that they often donÕt approve of, meets a misunderstood man, they fall in love but he is unavailable (or she thinks he is) and she leaves him without a word but donÕt worry, they are reunited and they all live happily ever after. However, if it ainÕt broke, donÕt fix it. While the main skeleton structure is used for most of her work, each of IbbotsonÕs books have a difference and a charm that stays with you and is memorable. There are plenty of little surprises and some twists and turns.
While this review may seem mixed and sound negative, I did really enjoy this book. I have kept it on my shelves with my other Eva Ibbotson novels for a reason and IÕm sure I will return to it.
Character: 7.5
Atmosphere: 5.5
Writing Style: 9
Plot: 8
Intrigue: 8
Logic: 8
Enjoyment: 8