Search
Search results
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
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Kingsman: The Golden Circle (2017) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Eggsy (Taron Egerton) is back in action for the ultra-secret Kingsman in the new film “Kingsman: The Golden Cirlce”. The film opens with a fantastic action and chase sequence through the London streets and shows a franticly paced mix of action and humor.
The film then shifts into setup mode and the next hour or so is very light on action and instead focuses on Eggsy and Merlin (Mark Strong), dealing with a devastating attack on the Kingsman from a drug dealer called Poppy (Julianne Moore), who runs her empire with a ruthless and manic style from a 50s themed lair complete with robotic guards and a retro diner and theater.
Poppy runs an organization called The Golden Circle and she has unleashed a devastating plague on the world in an attempt to force the U.S. President to legalize all drugs which would allow her unlimited power and money to further her global agenda.
With their ranks depleted, Eggsy and Merlin head to the states to enlist the help if their U.S. counterparts, the Statesman who while at first reluctant, soon accept the two into their confidence and plan a mission to end the threat Poppy presents once and for all.
Of course complications arise for Eggsy such as his girlfriend and her parents as well as the revelation that Harry (Colin Firth) is alive but suffering amnesia and thus having no memory of his past life and skills in the service of the Kingsman.
One would think that with this setup and cast including the arrivals of Channing Tatum, Jeff Bridges, and Halle Berry, the film would be a slam dunk to surpass the original. Sadly this is not the case. Writer/Director Matthew Vaughn has opted for a film that has a very large gap of it related to setup and exposition. The film opens and concludes with a nice action sequence, but there is really not much in between to get the adrenaline rush going. The original film had the fantastic church sequence that became one of the most talked about moments of the film and sadly the sequel offers nothing nearly as memorable.
The other issue is that the villain is not nearly as memorable nor interesting as Samuel L. Jackson was to say nothing of his sword footed henchman from the original.
There are some amusing moments in the film but It seems that the new cast was not used to their full potential and that the large gaps of the film that lacked any action was a real setback especially with how well the film opened.
In the end the film is an enjoyable but flawed effort that fails to live up to the original but does manage to offer some decent entertainment for those who set realistic expectations.
http://sknr.net/2017/09/20/kingsman-golden-circle/
The film then shifts into setup mode and the next hour or so is very light on action and instead focuses on Eggsy and Merlin (Mark Strong), dealing with a devastating attack on the Kingsman from a drug dealer called Poppy (Julianne Moore), who runs her empire with a ruthless and manic style from a 50s themed lair complete with robotic guards and a retro diner and theater.
Poppy runs an organization called The Golden Circle and she has unleashed a devastating plague on the world in an attempt to force the U.S. President to legalize all drugs which would allow her unlimited power and money to further her global agenda.
With their ranks depleted, Eggsy and Merlin head to the states to enlist the help if their U.S. counterparts, the Statesman who while at first reluctant, soon accept the two into their confidence and plan a mission to end the threat Poppy presents once and for all.
Of course complications arise for Eggsy such as his girlfriend and her parents as well as the revelation that Harry (Colin Firth) is alive but suffering amnesia and thus having no memory of his past life and skills in the service of the Kingsman.
One would think that with this setup and cast including the arrivals of Channing Tatum, Jeff Bridges, and Halle Berry, the film would be a slam dunk to surpass the original. Sadly this is not the case. Writer/Director Matthew Vaughn has opted for a film that has a very large gap of it related to setup and exposition. The film opens and concludes with a nice action sequence, but there is really not much in between to get the adrenaline rush going. The original film had the fantastic church sequence that became one of the most talked about moments of the film and sadly the sequel offers nothing nearly as memorable.
The other issue is that the villain is not nearly as memorable nor interesting as Samuel L. Jackson was to say nothing of his sword footed henchman from the original.
There are some amusing moments in the film but It seems that the new cast was not used to their full potential and that the large gaps of the film that lacked any action was a real setback especially with how well the film opened.
In the end the film is an enjoyable but flawed effort that fails to live up to the original but does manage to offer some decent entertainment for those who set realistic expectations.
http://sknr.net/2017/09/20/kingsman-golden-circle/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Snowden (2016) in Movies
Jul 15, 2019
As with every Oliver Stone movie, you have to consider context while watching it. Snowden is a persuasive essay attempting to turn the focus from the crime committed by Edward Snowden to the mass surveillance practices of the US government during the Bush and Obama administration. This story was huge when the leaks began hitting the internet and so I was very familiar with the story through the media coverage ensued. Through that coverage it was made to seem as though Snowden, a low level contractor, stole data and was putting it on the internet to spite the American government.
Later more information came forth that he wasn’t as low level as we were led to believe and that Snowden was claiming that he performed the illegal act out of love for his country, not out of spite to harm it. But for a large portion of the country the original story has already been burned into their brain and nothing short of Ronald Reagan descending from heaven to tell them otherwise will change that. A few months ago Donald Trump even called for Snowden’s execution, if that helps paint a picture of the mindset of a portion of the US population about Edward Snowden.
This movie was made to convince you otherwise, that Snowden was and still is a brave American hero. It tells the story beginning with his Special Forces training and takes you all the way through the incident and up to present day, with the actual infamous Edward Snowden closing out the movie. I won’t go into too much detail here because I hate when reviews ruin a movie but I will say that it covers the whole story right down to the Ocean Eleven’s esque way that he got the files out of secured US spy facility.
This movie surprisingly also weaves a love story in and out of the technical background of the data release and while I enjoyed that aspect of the movie, some of it made me question its authenticity… it wasn’t realistic at times how the two reacted to different problems that arose in their relationship.
I left the movie thinking how strange it was that the espionage was the most believable part of the movie and the love story seemed contrived.
Joseph Gorden-Levitt was awesome. I’ve watched enough Snowden videos to know that he nailed it. The love interest was cute and likeable, but the primary antagonist was a bit over the top for a movie based on reality. But I guess that’s what this movie was trying to tell me… that there are some seriously evil people working for our government.
The pacing was good, acting was great, subject matter was insanely interesting and the love story humanized the hacker/criminal/hero. Go see it with an open mind, consider the context with which the film was created and come to your own conclusion. Snowden… hero or villain?
Later more information came forth that he wasn’t as low level as we were led to believe and that Snowden was claiming that he performed the illegal act out of love for his country, not out of spite to harm it. But for a large portion of the country the original story has already been burned into their brain and nothing short of Ronald Reagan descending from heaven to tell them otherwise will change that. A few months ago Donald Trump even called for Snowden’s execution, if that helps paint a picture of the mindset of a portion of the US population about Edward Snowden.
This movie was made to convince you otherwise, that Snowden was and still is a brave American hero. It tells the story beginning with his Special Forces training and takes you all the way through the incident and up to present day, with the actual infamous Edward Snowden closing out the movie. I won’t go into too much detail here because I hate when reviews ruin a movie but I will say that it covers the whole story right down to the Ocean Eleven’s esque way that he got the files out of secured US spy facility.
This movie surprisingly also weaves a love story in and out of the technical background of the data release and while I enjoyed that aspect of the movie, some of it made me question its authenticity… it wasn’t realistic at times how the two reacted to different problems that arose in their relationship.
I left the movie thinking how strange it was that the espionage was the most believable part of the movie and the love story seemed contrived.
Joseph Gorden-Levitt was awesome. I’ve watched enough Snowden videos to know that he nailed it. The love interest was cute and likeable, but the primary antagonist was a bit over the top for a movie based on reality. But I guess that’s what this movie was trying to tell me… that there are some seriously evil people working for our government.
The pacing was good, acting was great, subject matter was insanely interesting and the love story humanized the hacker/criminal/hero. Go see it with an open mind, consider the context with which the film was created and come to your own conclusion. Snowden… hero or villain?
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated Prince of Fools in Books
Nov 25, 2019
Mark Lawrence's previous Broken Empire trilogy was a terrific read, starring as it did an almost perfect anti-hero in shape of Jorg Ancrath, a character who in any other books would have been the major villain.
It was hard to see where Lawrence could go from there. The answer is 'up'. Set in the same world as Broken Empire the events in Prince of Fools take place at roughly the same time as those of Prince of Thorns but following someone who is manipulated by a different set of players than Jorg.
Prince Jalan is the grandson of the Red Queen. He is too far from the throne to have to think seriously about ruling but close enough that he can rely on his rank to provide him a life of luxury - and to get him out of trouble if needs be. He is indolent, self-centered and vain and spends his time either drinking, gambling or trying to bed various women. He describes himself at the start of the book as 'A liar, a cheat and a coward' and he certainly always tries to take the easy path through anything and avoid any actual work or responsibilities.
But things are about to change. He ends up being forced to leave the comforts of court and city life and travel with a companion he doesn't care for on a quest he has no interest in. But he follows along, complaining all the way and plotting on ways to return to the life of leisure and pleasure that he craves.
Whereas Jorg's general reaction to someone in his way is to kill them, Jalan will wheedle, plead or just plain bribe them to get what he wants and on the rare occasions he has to wield a sword he is so shockingly incompetent he is actually dangerous.
The story is excellent; there is a definite impetus and personal reason for the quest and a final showdown in which a terrible truth is revealed. More of the fate of the Broken Empire is revealed as Jalan and his companion travel across it, as well as more of the geography. Jalan's dislike for travel is clear and the descriptions are coloured by his perceptions - it's always too wet or too cold or too flat or too mountainous.
There are some terrific scenes with Lawrence's black humour very much to the fore as in the previous books. There are meetings with characters from the previous trilogy that are like meeting old friends (and yes Jorg and Jalan do cross storylines at a crucial point for both of them).
I would absolutely recommend this book to anyone looking for a great story with absorbing characters, laugh out loud humour and great battle scenes. If you liked Jorg read this book. If you like zombies read this book. If you like vikings read this book. Actually, just read the book. You won't regret it.
It was hard to see where Lawrence could go from there. The answer is 'up'. Set in the same world as Broken Empire the events in Prince of Fools take place at roughly the same time as those of Prince of Thorns but following someone who is manipulated by a different set of players than Jorg.
Prince Jalan is the grandson of the Red Queen. He is too far from the throne to have to think seriously about ruling but close enough that he can rely on his rank to provide him a life of luxury - and to get him out of trouble if needs be. He is indolent, self-centered and vain and spends his time either drinking, gambling or trying to bed various women. He describes himself at the start of the book as 'A liar, a cheat and a coward' and he certainly always tries to take the easy path through anything and avoid any actual work or responsibilities.
But things are about to change. He ends up being forced to leave the comforts of court and city life and travel with a companion he doesn't care for on a quest he has no interest in. But he follows along, complaining all the way and plotting on ways to return to the life of leisure and pleasure that he craves.
Whereas Jorg's general reaction to someone in his way is to kill them, Jalan will wheedle, plead or just plain bribe them to get what he wants and on the rare occasions he has to wield a sword he is so shockingly incompetent he is actually dangerous.
The story is excellent; there is a definite impetus and personal reason for the quest and a final showdown in which a terrible truth is revealed. More of the fate of the Broken Empire is revealed as Jalan and his companion travel across it, as well as more of the geography. Jalan's dislike for travel is clear and the descriptions are coloured by his perceptions - it's always too wet or too cold or too flat or too mountainous.
There are some terrific scenes with Lawrence's black humour very much to the fore as in the previous books. There are meetings with characters from the previous trilogy that are like meeting old friends (and yes Jorg and Jalan do cross storylines at a crucial point for both of them).
I would absolutely recommend this book to anyone looking for a great story with absorbing characters, laugh out loud humour and great battle scenes. If you liked Jorg read this book. If you like zombies read this book. If you like vikings read this book. Actually, just read the book. You won't regret it.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Independent Study (The Testing, #2) in Books
Jan 23, 2020
I personally think <em><a title="The Testing review" href="http://www.bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-the-testing-by-joelle-charbonneau"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Testing</a></em> was better than <em>Independent Study</em>. The second book in Charbonneau's <em>Testing</em> trilogy is quite literally another testing with higher chances of survival, significantly less paper tests, and an induction to their major. It's really just more testing and then some more.
Malencia (Cia) Vale begins to realize failing isn't allowed, because failing means inevitable fate (but of course, that's been drilled since the first book – this time it's more along the lines of, "So much for relief. I still can't fail or I'm toast.") that she really doesn't want to find out. With the inability to remember to her Testing aside from what she recorded and beginning to question the University's selection process, Cia tries to find ways to take down the Testing peacefully without an all out "let's take down the entire government" rebellion.
At this point in the series, I'm not exactly a huge fan of the overly brilliant main character of the series. I adore Cia's brilliance, and while I think this might actually be Charbonneau's motive (because the series is based off the ACT/SAT), I feel Cia's been over-brillianted – Is that a word? No? I don't care. It is in this sense. – in the series. Cia is basically the only one excelling compared to the rest of her classmates – the average number of classes is six, Cia gets a whopping nine (and that's not counting internships). It's like Cia is set apart deliberately and from all of her classmates, which, of course, would no doubt attract the attention of Villain Squad (yes, <em>squad</em>).
Okay, I don't mind brilliant characters. It means more cruising for me and less of calling the character shallow, innocent, naïve, stupid – anything along those lines. Except...
Cia is a little whiny in <em>Independent Study</em>. She <em>wants</em> to take down the Testing and stop a rebellion, but at the same time, she doesn't want to (mainly because she doesn't want to get caught – she's already sticking out like a weed in a pretty flower garden). She's beginning to rely on Tomas a little too much – "I need to know Tomas's thoughts, I need his advice, I need his opinion on this...."
I don't like it. Even if I completely understand why Cia would do so in a place where every move and word is monitored and tracked by a group of people who can end lives within any reason.
I intend to read <em>Graduation Day</em> for the purposes of closure.
Maybe then I'll have a better understanding of Cia's excelled brilliance and a better understanding of why Cia is becoming reliant on Tomas (aside from the fact they grew up together in the same colony).
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-independent-study-by-joelle-charbonneau/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Malencia (Cia) Vale begins to realize failing isn't allowed, because failing means inevitable fate (but of course, that's been drilled since the first book – this time it's more along the lines of, "So much for relief. I still can't fail or I'm toast.") that she really doesn't want to find out. With the inability to remember to her Testing aside from what she recorded and beginning to question the University's selection process, Cia tries to find ways to take down the Testing peacefully without an all out "let's take down the entire government" rebellion.
At this point in the series, I'm not exactly a huge fan of the overly brilliant main character of the series. I adore Cia's brilliance, and while I think this might actually be Charbonneau's motive (because the series is based off the ACT/SAT), I feel Cia's been over-brillianted – Is that a word? No? I don't care. It is in this sense. – in the series. Cia is basically the only one excelling compared to the rest of her classmates – the average number of classes is six, Cia gets a whopping nine (and that's not counting internships). It's like Cia is set apart deliberately and from all of her classmates, which, of course, would no doubt attract the attention of Villain Squad (yes, <em>squad</em>).
Okay, I don't mind brilliant characters. It means more cruising for me and less of calling the character shallow, innocent, naïve, stupid – anything along those lines. Except...
Cia is a little whiny in <em>Independent Study</em>. She <em>wants</em> to take down the Testing and stop a rebellion, but at the same time, she doesn't want to (mainly because she doesn't want to get caught – she's already sticking out like a weed in a pretty flower garden). She's beginning to rely on Tomas a little too much – "I need to know Tomas's thoughts, I need his advice, I need his opinion on this...."
I don't like it. Even if I completely understand why Cia would do so in a place where every move and word is monitored and tracked by a group of people who can end lives within any reason.
I intend to read <em>Graduation Day</em> for the purposes of closure.
Maybe then I'll have a better understanding of Cia's excelled brilliance and a better understanding of why Cia is becoming reliant on Tomas (aside from the fact they grew up together in the same colony).
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-independent-study-by-joelle-charbonneau/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>