Search
Search results
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Pete's Dragon (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Lovely in every sense of the word
2016 really does belong to Disney. The House of Mouse has been churning out some incredible films this year with the live-action remake of The Jungle Book proving sceptical audiences (and critics) completely wrong.
The BFG was a pleasant and inoffensive adaptation of Roald Dahl’s wonderful novel and Finding Dory got Pixar back on the right track, and let’s not forget Captain America: Civil War, by far the best superhero film of the year.
Here, Disney continues its trend with recreating its classic cartoons in live-action; resurrecting Pete’s Dragon. But is this remake of the 1977 film of the same name as good as The Jungle Book?
Mr. Meacham (Robert Redford), a woodcarver, delights local children with stories of a mysterious dragon that lives deep in the woods of the Pacific Northwest. His daughter Grace (Bryce Dallas Howard) believes these are just tall tales, until she meets Pete (Oakes Fegley), a 10-year-old orphan who says he lives in the woods with a giant, friendly dragon called Elliot. With help from a young girl named Natalie (Oona Laurence), Grace sets out to investigate if this fantastic claim can be true.
Director David Lowery helms the film with a quiet subtlety that automatically makes Pete’s Dragon a very different adaptation to Jon Favreau’s stomping Jungle Book. Here, the joy is in the storytelling rather than popping on a set of nostalgia glasses and settling in for the journey.
Acting wise, it’s a pretty formulaic affair. Bryce Dallas Howard, in her first major role since last year’s smash hit Jurassic World, is as likeable as ever and like the film itself, commands the screen with an understated presence. Elsewhere, Oakes Fegley gives a cracking portrayal of Pete.
Naturally, the main character throughout is Elliot, the big friendly dragon. This bright green behemoth is rendered in wonderful CGI, with each gust of wind lifting his fur beautifully. Considering the film’s modest $65million budget, Elliot is utterly believable in each and every scene.
The lush forest landscape provides a mesmerising backdrop on which to construct a film and David Lowery takes the audience on sweeping journeys across the tree-tops, brilliantly juxtaposed with confined caves and the woodland floor.
Unfortunately, the deforestation side plot is never truly explored with Karl Urban’s underdeveloped “villain” proving to be a slight undoing in this near perfect remake.
Thankfully though, the themes of family, friendship and never giving up despite the odds are explored to their fullest – these are themes that Disney knows how to do better than any other studio and the emotional heart that brings to Pete’s Dragon ensures teary eyes are inevitable.
Overall, Disney has done it again. Just five months after the phenomenal Jungle Book remake, the studio has got it spot on with Pete’s Dragon. The two films couldn’t be further apart, with this one succeeding in its quiet dignity. It is in every sense of the word – lovely.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/08/16/lovely-in-every-sense-of-the-word-petes-dragon-review/
The BFG was a pleasant and inoffensive adaptation of Roald Dahl’s wonderful novel and Finding Dory got Pixar back on the right track, and let’s not forget Captain America: Civil War, by far the best superhero film of the year.
Here, Disney continues its trend with recreating its classic cartoons in live-action; resurrecting Pete’s Dragon. But is this remake of the 1977 film of the same name as good as The Jungle Book?
Mr. Meacham (Robert Redford), a woodcarver, delights local children with stories of a mysterious dragon that lives deep in the woods of the Pacific Northwest. His daughter Grace (Bryce Dallas Howard) believes these are just tall tales, until she meets Pete (Oakes Fegley), a 10-year-old orphan who says he lives in the woods with a giant, friendly dragon called Elliot. With help from a young girl named Natalie (Oona Laurence), Grace sets out to investigate if this fantastic claim can be true.
Director David Lowery helms the film with a quiet subtlety that automatically makes Pete’s Dragon a very different adaptation to Jon Favreau’s stomping Jungle Book. Here, the joy is in the storytelling rather than popping on a set of nostalgia glasses and settling in for the journey.
Acting wise, it’s a pretty formulaic affair. Bryce Dallas Howard, in her first major role since last year’s smash hit Jurassic World, is as likeable as ever and like the film itself, commands the screen with an understated presence. Elsewhere, Oakes Fegley gives a cracking portrayal of Pete.
Naturally, the main character throughout is Elliot, the big friendly dragon. This bright green behemoth is rendered in wonderful CGI, with each gust of wind lifting his fur beautifully. Considering the film’s modest $65million budget, Elliot is utterly believable in each and every scene.
The lush forest landscape provides a mesmerising backdrop on which to construct a film and David Lowery takes the audience on sweeping journeys across the tree-tops, brilliantly juxtaposed with confined caves and the woodland floor.
Unfortunately, the deforestation side plot is never truly explored with Karl Urban’s underdeveloped “villain” proving to be a slight undoing in this near perfect remake.
Thankfully though, the themes of family, friendship and never giving up despite the odds are explored to their fullest – these are themes that Disney knows how to do better than any other studio and the emotional heart that brings to Pete’s Dragon ensures teary eyes are inevitable.
Overall, Disney has done it again. Just five months after the phenomenal Jungle Book remake, the studio has got it spot on with Pete’s Dragon. The two films couldn’t be further apart, with this one succeeding in its quiet dignity. It is in every sense of the word – lovely.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/08/16/lovely-in-every-sense-of-the-word-petes-dragon-review/
BookblogbyCari (345 KP) rated The News: A User's Manual in Books
Aug 5, 2018
I believe this book has the wrong title. Let me explain.
Despite having the title “The News: A User’s Manual”, the book reads like a wish-list of how de Botton wants news journalists and media editors to present and publish the news. Furthermore, if it was intended to be read by the layperson, de Botton must have had the dual intention of increasing the lay reader’s vocabulary. Several of the words I looked up in my offline dictionary app weren’t to be found.
I liked how his views were presented though - this short book is split into 8 main topics: politics, world news, economics, celebrity, disaster, consumption and a conclusion. Each topic is split into further sub-topics, and each of the points being made in these sub-topics is numbered and lasts about a page. This organization doesn’t disrupt the fluidity, however, and the way that points are made in such small sections provides the perfect opportunity to pause and reflect on each point made.
It presents the author’s views on what the news should ideally be and how it can enrich us. He made numerous valid points, but for the purposes of this review, I will concentrate on those I consider to be the most important. The book is written for a British audience, using several British news story excerpts to highlight de Botton’s points. His points are all well put and I didn’t really want to have to paraphrase them for this review for that very reason.
Firstly, the perception that political news is boring is not a minor issue. Often there is an important matter which fails to engage us, and we can react more strongly to matters which affect very few people.
Another valid point is how the process of the reader developing views on serious issues on which so little information is actually conveyed, makes us feel like we are being ruled by crooks and idiots who seem to be ignoring logical solutions. The news fails to explain why difficult decisions are so difficult.
On celebrity news, de Botton portrays hero worship as childish and demeaning, a sign that we find ourselves inadequate. He argues that celebrity news should be used as a self-improvement tool, focusing on what we can learn from the individual.
De Botton believes that the purpose of dramatic tragedies should be so we can compare ourselves to the villain, that the stories read like fables and imparted a moral statement. We are a hideously flawed species, he says, and the criminals need to be humanized if we are to learn anything from these kinds of stories.
And on that note, I shall say I have learned something from this book. The contrast de Botton demonstrates between how the news is portrayed and how it ought to be to best enrich us, will ensure I will take his comments into consideration when I read/watch the news or am deciding on my personalization of news received on news apps. The purpose of the editors may be to sell advertising space, but my intention in perceiving the news is to obtain a fair and accurate perspective of the world around me.
Despite having the title “The News: A User’s Manual”, the book reads like a wish-list of how de Botton wants news journalists and media editors to present and publish the news. Furthermore, if it was intended to be read by the layperson, de Botton must have had the dual intention of increasing the lay reader’s vocabulary. Several of the words I looked up in my offline dictionary app weren’t to be found.
I liked how his views were presented though - this short book is split into 8 main topics: politics, world news, economics, celebrity, disaster, consumption and a conclusion. Each topic is split into further sub-topics, and each of the points being made in these sub-topics is numbered and lasts about a page. This organization doesn’t disrupt the fluidity, however, and the way that points are made in such small sections provides the perfect opportunity to pause and reflect on each point made.
It presents the author’s views on what the news should ideally be and how it can enrich us. He made numerous valid points, but for the purposes of this review, I will concentrate on those I consider to be the most important. The book is written for a British audience, using several British news story excerpts to highlight de Botton’s points. His points are all well put and I didn’t really want to have to paraphrase them for this review for that very reason.
Firstly, the perception that political news is boring is not a minor issue. Often there is an important matter which fails to engage us, and we can react more strongly to matters which affect very few people.
Another valid point is how the process of the reader developing views on serious issues on which so little information is actually conveyed, makes us feel like we are being ruled by crooks and idiots who seem to be ignoring logical solutions. The news fails to explain why difficult decisions are so difficult.
On celebrity news, de Botton portrays hero worship as childish and demeaning, a sign that we find ourselves inadequate. He argues that celebrity news should be used as a self-improvement tool, focusing on what we can learn from the individual.
De Botton believes that the purpose of dramatic tragedies should be so we can compare ourselves to the villain, that the stories read like fables and imparted a moral statement. We are a hideously flawed species, he says, and the criminals need to be humanized if we are to learn anything from these kinds of stories.
And on that note, I shall say I have learned something from this book. The contrast de Botton demonstrates between how the news is portrayed and how it ought to be to best enrich us, will ensure I will take his comments into consideration when I read/watch the news or am deciding on my personalization of news received on news apps. The purpose of the editors may be to sell advertising space, but my intention in perceiving the news is to obtain a fair and accurate perspective of the world around me.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Bad Times at the El Royale (2018) in Movies
Oct 24, 2018 (Updated Oct 24, 2018)
Good ensemble cast (2 more)
Cool set design and use of space
Nice cinematography
Enjoy Your Stay
In this day and age, it is becoming increasingly difficult to go into a movie without already knowing a bunch of information about it. Somehow Bad Times At The El Royale managed that. Even though I was a week late to seeing this movie, I was still able to go into it with very little knowledge about what was going to unfold. That in and of itself is an impressive feat in 2018.
I had a great time with this movie. I loved the cast here, Jeff Bridges and Jon Hamm are among my favourite actors working in Hollywood and I though that Chris Hemsworth did a fantastic job playing the villain for a change. The rest of the cast were fantastic too, other than Dakota Johnson, who was pretty wooden, (as we have come to expect from her.) As an aside, Cynthia Erivo's voice completely blew me away, I know that she has done some Broadway shows in the past, but she sounded incredible in this and I liked the way that her singing was tied in with the plot.
Bad Times is written and directed by Drew Goddard, who was also behind Cabin In The Woods and there are some similarities here, if you swap the horror elements out for mystery. I have also seen multiple reviews compare this to a Tarantino movie. There are obviously similarities in the structure that this film uses and the out-of-chronological-order structure that a Tarantino movie tends to follow, but I'd argue that Bad Times has it's own distinct and unique style.
I also thought that the cinematography was very effective throughout the film. The opening scene was very well shot, as was the scene when Hemsworth's character was introduced. The score also worked well with the plot and the dialogue and script were well written too.
The main negative that affected my enjoyment of the movie, were the decisions made regarding the pacing. The movie is split up so that we see things happen out of sequence or they are seen more than once from a different perspective. We are introduced to each new character and then we are given their backstory via a flashback. The main issue with this structure is that the flashbacks break the momentum of the events happening in the current story. Without spoiling too much, towards the end of the movie, everything comes to a head and an intense fight/shootout breaks out. Then, for some unknown reason, the filmmakers decide to slam on the brakes and give us another arbitrary flashback. It totally broke the immersion and intensity of the shootout sequence for me.
Overall, I had a good time watching Bad Times. I had no expectations going in as I didn't know much about the movie other than what had been shown in the trailers and I enjoyed witnessing what the movie had to offer. If you are looking for an exciting, suspenseful thriller, then you could definitely do worse than spending a stay at The El Royale.
I had a great time with this movie. I loved the cast here, Jeff Bridges and Jon Hamm are among my favourite actors working in Hollywood and I though that Chris Hemsworth did a fantastic job playing the villain for a change. The rest of the cast were fantastic too, other than Dakota Johnson, who was pretty wooden, (as we have come to expect from her.) As an aside, Cynthia Erivo's voice completely blew me away, I know that she has done some Broadway shows in the past, but she sounded incredible in this and I liked the way that her singing was tied in with the plot.
Bad Times is written and directed by Drew Goddard, who was also behind Cabin In The Woods and there are some similarities here, if you swap the horror elements out for mystery. I have also seen multiple reviews compare this to a Tarantino movie. There are obviously similarities in the structure that this film uses and the out-of-chronological-order structure that a Tarantino movie tends to follow, but I'd argue that Bad Times has it's own distinct and unique style.
I also thought that the cinematography was very effective throughout the film. The opening scene was very well shot, as was the scene when Hemsworth's character was introduced. The score also worked well with the plot and the dialogue and script were well written too.
The main negative that affected my enjoyment of the movie, were the decisions made regarding the pacing. The movie is split up so that we see things happen out of sequence or they are seen more than once from a different perspective. We are introduced to each new character and then we are given their backstory via a flashback. The main issue with this structure is that the flashbacks break the momentum of the events happening in the current story. Without spoiling too much, towards the end of the movie, everything comes to a head and an intense fight/shootout breaks out. Then, for some unknown reason, the filmmakers decide to slam on the brakes and give us another arbitrary flashback. It totally broke the immersion and intensity of the shootout sequence for me.
Overall, I had a good time watching Bad Times. I had no expectations going in as I didn't know much about the movie other than what had been shown in the trailers and I enjoyed witnessing what the movie had to offer. If you are looking for an exciting, suspenseful thriller, then you could definitely do worse than spending a stay at The El Royale.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Big Hero 6 (2014) in Movies
Nov 5, 2018
Phenomenal
Big Hero 6 sits on top for me as probably the best under-the-radar film of all-time. No one talks about it or really brings it up. Anytime I mention its greatness, I get the typical response: “Well, yeah, I guess it was kind of awesome.” Not only is it one of the best under-the-radar films, but it’s the best film I have reviewed so far. Disagree all you want, but hear me out on my argument.
Set in the swanky, futuristic city of San Fransokyo, Big Hero 6 is the story of how young Hiro Hamada develops an unlikely friendship with his brother’s marshmallow-esque robot Baymax and they form an unlikely superhero team.
Acting: 10
Each voice actor does an excellent job capturing the essence of their character. Strong, emotional moments suck you into the film and keep you invested. As in most Disney films, there are no weaknesses from an acting standpoint. Damon Wayans Jr. was my personal favorite playing the role of Wasabi one of Hiro’s friends. He doesn’t dominate the scenes that he stars in, but definitely manages to make the most of his lines.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The animations are beautiful and crisp. The opening scene provides a breathtaking view of the city of San Fransokyo. Building lights pop against the night sky. Bay waters glimmer. Attention to detail is exquisite. There is one scene where Hiro and Baymax are falling through an open window in slow-motion. Bushes below rustle while glass flies past them. It only lasts for a couple of seconds, but it’s a testament to the solid work that went into the animation of this film.
The powers the team displayed added to the film’s visual prowess. I loved watching Fred breathe fire in his awful (and also hilarious) superhero costume. Their powers and team-ups made for some stunning battles against a unique villain.
Conflict: 10
I am amazed at the balance of story and action as a film typically has to sacrifice one over the other. Even during their earlier training phases, the action is both consistent and non-stop. It fills the entire landscape of the screen. From battles to car chases to harrowing escapes, Big Hero 6 establishes and maintains a high level of intensity.
Genre: 10
Not only does this film establish itself as one of the best animated films ever done, but it’s also one of the best superhero films ever made. The fact that it excels in both genres just speaks of the film’s overall greatness. I expected to like it, but I never expected to love it. Big Hero 6 is easily in the same class as The Incredibles.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
The ending is perfect. Sappy, yet believable. Great wrap-up of a great movie.
Overall: 100
A great family film with solid superhero action and a fun, meaningful story you can get behind. What more do you need? Loved this movie.
Set in the swanky, futuristic city of San Fransokyo, Big Hero 6 is the story of how young Hiro Hamada develops an unlikely friendship with his brother’s marshmallow-esque robot Baymax and they form an unlikely superhero team.
Acting: 10
Each voice actor does an excellent job capturing the essence of their character. Strong, emotional moments suck you into the film and keep you invested. As in most Disney films, there are no weaknesses from an acting standpoint. Damon Wayans Jr. was my personal favorite playing the role of Wasabi one of Hiro’s friends. He doesn’t dominate the scenes that he stars in, but definitely manages to make the most of his lines.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The animations are beautiful and crisp. The opening scene provides a breathtaking view of the city of San Fransokyo. Building lights pop against the night sky. Bay waters glimmer. Attention to detail is exquisite. There is one scene where Hiro and Baymax are falling through an open window in slow-motion. Bushes below rustle while glass flies past them. It only lasts for a couple of seconds, but it’s a testament to the solid work that went into the animation of this film.
The powers the team displayed added to the film’s visual prowess. I loved watching Fred breathe fire in his awful (and also hilarious) superhero costume. Their powers and team-ups made for some stunning battles against a unique villain.
Conflict: 10
I am amazed at the balance of story and action as a film typically has to sacrifice one over the other. Even during their earlier training phases, the action is both consistent and non-stop. It fills the entire landscape of the screen. From battles to car chases to harrowing escapes, Big Hero 6 establishes and maintains a high level of intensity.
Genre: 10
Not only does this film establish itself as one of the best animated films ever done, but it’s also one of the best superhero films ever made. The fact that it excels in both genres just speaks of the film’s overall greatness. I expected to like it, but I never expected to love it. Big Hero 6 is easily in the same class as The Incredibles.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
The ending is perfect. Sappy, yet believable. Great wrap-up of a great movie.
Overall: 100
A great family film with solid superhero action and a fun, meaningful story you can get behind. What more do you need? Loved this movie.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Marvel continues its cinematic dominance with their latest release, “The Avengers: Age of Ultron”. The film once again teams Iron Man (Robert Downey JR.), Captain America (Chris Evans), Thor (Chris Hemsworth), The Hulk (Mark Ruffalo), Black Window , (Scarlett Johannson), and Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner), as the deal with the fall of S.H.I.E.L.D. after the events of “Captain America: The Winter Soldier”.
The film opens with a visually amazing action sequence where the heroes raid a Hydra base as they attempt to retrieve Loki’s spear from the evil organization that is bent on world domination.
While researching the spoils of their raid, a pair of enhanced siblings, (Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Elizabeth Olson), have managed to exert their influence on one of the team which in turn leads to a bold experiment to create an ultimate guardian of humanity named Ultron who will protect the Earth from all manner of enemies from beyond.
Things do not go as planned s unbeknownst to the Avengers, the artificial A.I. they recovered from Hydra soon builds an army and declares an all-out war on the Avengers and eventually all of humanity.
Tasked with stopping a clever enemy who can switch his conscious to any number of bodies the world over, Ultron (James Spader) leads the team on a deadly game of cat and mouse with the fate of the human race hanging in the balance.
The film is darker and bolder than many of the previous Marvel films but still maintains plenty of humor to lighten the tension. The supporting cast is very good, especially Samuel L. Jackson who steals the scenes whenever he appears.
There were a few sub plots and romantic themes that seemed a bit muddled and some aspects of the story were not fully developed and came to conclusions fairly abruptly, but the film is a shining triumph despite the issues.
The leads work very well with one another though some characters such as Thor were given storylines that really never developed and the same goes for some of the questions left unanswered since the fall of S.H.I.E.L.D.
The visual FX were amazing as seeing it in IMAX 3D really made the action leap off the screen. Director Josh Wheedon paces the film well despite a few instances where things drag along.
The action sequences are the bread and butter of the film and they are frequent and truly spectacular to behold.
Spader does a great job bringing a depth to Ultron which helps him avoid being the stock super villain. He mixes the soul of a poet and scholar with the tantrums of a child which makes him a compelling, captivating, and downright deadly opponent.
The newer characters do well and hopefully we will see them developed more in “Avengers: Infinity War” which is currently in the early stages of development.
For now, Wheedon, Marvel, and the talented cast have created an epic summer action film which is everything you would expect from a super hero movie and more.
http://sknr.net/2015/04/30/avengers-age-of-ultron/
The film opens with a visually amazing action sequence where the heroes raid a Hydra base as they attempt to retrieve Loki’s spear from the evil organization that is bent on world domination.
While researching the spoils of their raid, a pair of enhanced siblings, (Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Elizabeth Olson), have managed to exert their influence on one of the team which in turn leads to a bold experiment to create an ultimate guardian of humanity named Ultron who will protect the Earth from all manner of enemies from beyond.
Things do not go as planned s unbeknownst to the Avengers, the artificial A.I. they recovered from Hydra soon builds an army and declares an all-out war on the Avengers and eventually all of humanity.
Tasked with stopping a clever enemy who can switch his conscious to any number of bodies the world over, Ultron (James Spader) leads the team on a deadly game of cat and mouse with the fate of the human race hanging in the balance.
The film is darker and bolder than many of the previous Marvel films but still maintains plenty of humor to lighten the tension. The supporting cast is very good, especially Samuel L. Jackson who steals the scenes whenever he appears.
There were a few sub plots and romantic themes that seemed a bit muddled and some aspects of the story were not fully developed and came to conclusions fairly abruptly, but the film is a shining triumph despite the issues.
The leads work very well with one another though some characters such as Thor were given storylines that really never developed and the same goes for some of the questions left unanswered since the fall of S.H.I.E.L.D.
The visual FX were amazing as seeing it in IMAX 3D really made the action leap off the screen. Director Josh Wheedon paces the film well despite a few instances where things drag along.
The action sequences are the bread and butter of the film and they are frequent and truly spectacular to behold.
Spader does a great job bringing a depth to Ultron which helps him avoid being the stock super villain. He mixes the soul of a poet and scholar with the tantrums of a child which makes him a compelling, captivating, and downright deadly opponent.
The newer characters do well and hopefully we will see them developed more in “Avengers: Infinity War” which is currently in the early stages of development.
For now, Wheedon, Marvel, and the talented cast have created an epic summer action film which is everything you would expect from a super hero movie and more.
http://sknr.net/2015/04/30/avengers-age-of-ultron/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Expendables 3 (2014) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Many times when a film series reaches it”s third installment, it is out of ideas and running on fumes. The idea that if a film has spawned a successful sequel it must have a trilogy is nothing new in Hollywood, but far too many times the third films loses momentum and goes through the motions for one last payday for the cast and studio.
In “The Expendables 3” Sylvester Stallone, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and company lead the all star cast with a mix of old and new in order to provide a more diverse yet not entirely satisfying third act of the retro action series.
Barney (Sylvester Stallone), leads the remains of his crew on a daring raid as the film opens to free one of his former members played by Wesley Snipes. The action is as intense as ever, but thanks to a PG-13 rating, is much more subdued than we have come to expect from the series.
As Barney and crew contend with age and injuries, it is leaned that a person long thought dead has become one of the biggest arms dealers in the world and has his own private army. What makes matters worse is that said dealer (Mel Gibson), has a very complicated history with Barney and The Expendables and as such this mission is very personal when he is hired to bring him to justice.
With a new crew in place, Barney sets out to settle the score, but soon finds out that complications arise, forcing the old and new crew to unite in a battle against overwhelming odds.
If this seems to be a fairly simplistic overview your right, as this is about as complex as this film gets. There is some effort to show chemistry between the players but backstories and character development are for the most part left out. Gibson on the other hand brings a great new dimension to the film as the backstory to his character as well as his motivations were very interesting and kept my attention in what otherwise could come off as a cartoony villain role.
Harrison Ford replaces Bruce Willis as their C.I.A. contact and brings gruff charm to the role of Drummer and seems to delight in being in on the action as do the new and returning cast.
The biggest issue was that it seemed more retrained than what we expect from the series. Part 2 had the epic airport battle and a great fistacuff finale. Part 3 lacks the intensity and urgency of previous films and the cast appears to be going through the motions, just happy for one more ride.
Stallone reportedly mentioned he had ideas for a 4th film which would be fine with me, but they need to get away from this PG 13 lite version and bring the swaggering, over the top action of the previous films back and fast as with an aging cast, this film seemed very out of date and lacking the retro nostalgia.
That being said, if you want some no-brainer fun, it is worthy of checking out.
http://sknr.net/2014/08/15/expendables-3/
In “The Expendables 3” Sylvester Stallone, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and company lead the all star cast with a mix of old and new in order to provide a more diverse yet not entirely satisfying third act of the retro action series.
Barney (Sylvester Stallone), leads the remains of his crew on a daring raid as the film opens to free one of his former members played by Wesley Snipes. The action is as intense as ever, but thanks to a PG-13 rating, is much more subdued than we have come to expect from the series.
As Barney and crew contend with age and injuries, it is leaned that a person long thought dead has become one of the biggest arms dealers in the world and has his own private army. What makes matters worse is that said dealer (Mel Gibson), has a very complicated history with Barney and The Expendables and as such this mission is very personal when he is hired to bring him to justice.
With a new crew in place, Barney sets out to settle the score, but soon finds out that complications arise, forcing the old and new crew to unite in a battle against overwhelming odds.
If this seems to be a fairly simplistic overview your right, as this is about as complex as this film gets. There is some effort to show chemistry between the players but backstories and character development are for the most part left out. Gibson on the other hand brings a great new dimension to the film as the backstory to his character as well as his motivations were very interesting and kept my attention in what otherwise could come off as a cartoony villain role.
Harrison Ford replaces Bruce Willis as their C.I.A. contact and brings gruff charm to the role of Drummer and seems to delight in being in on the action as do the new and returning cast.
The biggest issue was that it seemed more retrained than what we expect from the series. Part 2 had the epic airport battle and a great fistacuff finale. Part 3 lacks the intensity and urgency of previous films and the cast appears to be going through the motions, just happy for one more ride.
Stallone reportedly mentioned he had ideas for a 4th film which would be fine with me, but they need to get away from this PG 13 lite version and bring the swaggering, over the top action of the previous films back and fast as with an aging cast, this film seemed very out of date and lacking the retro nostalgia.
That being said, if you want some no-brainer fun, it is worthy of checking out.
http://sknr.net/2014/08/15/expendables-3/
<i>This eBook was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review
Before she was the Queen of Hearts she was just a girl who wanted to fall in love. </i>When Marissa Meyer finished writing <i>The Lunar Chronicles</i>, a series of books loosely based on fairytales, everyone wondered what she would do next. Continuing along the lines of using famous stories, Meyer has devoted an entire novel to Lewis Carroll’s <i>Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland</i>. With thousands of references to the original tale, and a couple of other works too, Heartless is perfect for fans of Carroll’s salient characters.
Unlike most retellings, Meyer has focused on events prior to Alice’s accidental discovery of Wonderland. The resulting novel is essentially a theory as to how the characters turned out the way they did in the original story published in 1865. Drawing attention to the predestined Queen of Hearts, a young woman named Catherine, readers discover a reason for her development into an infamous villain.
Lady Catherine Pinkerton is completely unlike the character she is fated to be. She is a kind, thoughtful girl whose greatest wish is to open her own bakery. Unfortunately, this dream is just that, a dream. With the asinine King of Hearts resolved to marry her, there is little Cath can do to avoid her royal future. At first it may appear odd that Cath is so against marrying the ruler of Hearts, but she soon makes it clear she would much rather marry for love. So, when the court joker, Jest – a similar character to the legendary Hatter – catches her eye, Catherine becomes determined to control her own future.
<i>Heartless</i> is a humorous, yet romantic, young adult novel, full of both well-known and new characters. Set in a world with morals similar to the Victorian era, it works extremely well as a prequel to <i>Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland</i>. Catherine is an admirable, feministic character who readers will struggle to believe will become such a notorious Queen. What could possibly happen to vastly alter her personality? Similarly, what is it that makes the Hatter go mad, and who is Jest? Being a character unique to this novel, there is a foreboding sense that this joker, and his poetry reciting raven – cue Edgar Allan Poe references – suffer a horrible demise.
Unlike Marissa Meyer’s previous books where the fairytales were not so obvious, the storyline in <i>Heartless</i> perfectly joins up with Lewis Carroll’s imagination. With references to mock turtles, the Jabberwock and other minor characters, there is so much to discover in Meyer’s interpretation of Wonderland – it even clears up a couple of scenarios from the original tale that may have bamboozled readers initially.
Admittedly, <i>Heartless</i> takes a little while to get going, but once it has, it is difficult to put down. Fans of Marissa Meyer may be disappointed that she did not stick to her futuristic storytelling, however all Alice enthusiasts will fall in love with this book – and probably with Jest as well. Overall, <i>Heartless</i> is a delightful book that reignites our inner childish imagination.
Before she was the Queen of Hearts she was just a girl who wanted to fall in love. </i>When Marissa Meyer finished writing <i>The Lunar Chronicles</i>, a series of books loosely based on fairytales, everyone wondered what she would do next. Continuing along the lines of using famous stories, Meyer has devoted an entire novel to Lewis Carroll’s <i>Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland</i>. With thousands of references to the original tale, and a couple of other works too, Heartless is perfect for fans of Carroll’s salient characters.
Unlike most retellings, Meyer has focused on events prior to Alice’s accidental discovery of Wonderland. The resulting novel is essentially a theory as to how the characters turned out the way they did in the original story published in 1865. Drawing attention to the predestined Queen of Hearts, a young woman named Catherine, readers discover a reason for her development into an infamous villain.
Lady Catherine Pinkerton is completely unlike the character she is fated to be. She is a kind, thoughtful girl whose greatest wish is to open her own bakery. Unfortunately, this dream is just that, a dream. With the asinine King of Hearts resolved to marry her, there is little Cath can do to avoid her royal future. At first it may appear odd that Cath is so against marrying the ruler of Hearts, but she soon makes it clear she would much rather marry for love. So, when the court joker, Jest – a similar character to the legendary Hatter – catches her eye, Catherine becomes determined to control her own future.
<i>Heartless</i> is a humorous, yet romantic, young adult novel, full of both well-known and new characters. Set in a world with morals similar to the Victorian era, it works extremely well as a prequel to <i>Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland</i>. Catherine is an admirable, feministic character who readers will struggle to believe will become such a notorious Queen. What could possibly happen to vastly alter her personality? Similarly, what is it that makes the Hatter go mad, and who is Jest? Being a character unique to this novel, there is a foreboding sense that this joker, and his poetry reciting raven – cue Edgar Allan Poe references – suffer a horrible demise.
Unlike Marissa Meyer’s previous books where the fairytales were not so obvious, the storyline in <i>Heartless</i> perfectly joins up with Lewis Carroll’s imagination. With references to mock turtles, the Jabberwock and other minor characters, there is so much to discover in Meyer’s interpretation of Wonderland – it even clears up a couple of scenarios from the original tale that may have bamboozled readers initially.
Admittedly, <i>Heartless</i> takes a little while to get going, but once it has, it is difficult to put down. Fans of Marissa Meyer may be disappointed that she did not stick to her futuristic storytelling, however all Alice enthusiasts will fall in love with this book – and probably with Jest as well. Overall, <i>Heartless</i> is a delightful book that reignites our inner childish imagination.
Darren (1599 KP) rated CHIPS (2017) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
Story: CHIPS starts as an undercover FBI agent Ponch (Pena) must joining the California Highway Patrol undercover with rookie officers Jon (Shepard) being his partner as Ponch must discover who is the dirty cop in the unit.
As the two are clearly complete opposites and Jon is the only one in the department that Ponch could trust to uncover the truth about the string of robberies.
Thoughts on CHIPS
Characters – Ponch is the FBI agent that is known for getting the cases closed even if the methods go across the lines, his latest case is becoming part of CHIPS to uncover a string of robberies that is believed to involve the members in the force. Joon is the former stunt man that wants to fix his marriage by joining the CHIPS team, he has had multiply injuries and will do anything to try and keep the job proving his worth to the force. These two are both very different and must put aside their difference to solve the crime. Ray Kruz is the main villain running the operation from within the force. We get plenty of different officers or agents from different levels of the police system which shows us who we will be dealing with through the film.
Performances – This is hard because saying anything bad about Michael Pena is upsetting, here he doesn’t hit the comedy we know he can and as for Dax Shepard we must be blaming him more because he wrote, directed and starred in this insulting comedy, we know he is good when given the right material, here he only lets us down. The rest of the cast just don’t get any moments to shine.
Story – The story here follows two unlikely cops that must work together to uncover who is behind a string of crimes from within the force. This is the simple part of the film, the problems start mounting up easily and quickly, first the humour is insulting for anything that happens as the characters are left doing sex, poop and more lazy sexist jokes. Considering this was a popular TV shows, I feel the creator must feel insulted with what we are given, this fails on capturing any of the Starsky and Hutch or 21 Jump Street humour we enjoyed and just becomes boring quickly, not adding any mystery to who is behind the crimes either.
Action/Comedy/Crime – The action in this film is lazy even if it is the only highlight of the film with a couple of the chases being the most interesting part of the film. the comedy is an insult to comedy while the crime world shows us only police corruption.
Settings – The film is set in LA, I think mostly to use the sewer system for the chases otherwise it could have been any city.
Scene of the Movie – Bike chase.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The comedy.
Final Thoughts – This is one of the comedy movies you really should never be watching, it doesn’t get any laughs and just ends up being left feeling insulting.
Overall: This is why we don’t have comedy hits anymore.
As the two are clearly complete opposites and Jon is the only one in the department that Ponch could trust to uncover the truth about the string of robberies.
Thoughts on CHIPS
Characters – Ponch is the FBI agent that is known for getting the cases closed even if the methods go across the lines, his latest case is becoming part of CHIPS to uncover a string of robberies that is believed to involve the members in the force. Joon is the former stunt man that wants to fix his marriage by joining the CHIPS team, he has had multiply injuries and will do anything to try and keep the job proving his worth to the force. These two are both very different and must put aside their difference to solve the crime. Ray Kruz is the main villain running the operation from within the force. We get plenty of different officers or agents from different levels of the police system which shows us who we will be dealing with through the film.
Performances – This is hard because saying anything bad about Michael Pena is upsetting, here he doesn’t hit the comedy we know he can and as for Dax Shepard we must be blaming him more because he wrote, directed and starred in this insulting comedy, we know he is good when given the right material, here he only lets us down. The rest of the cast just don’t get any moments to shine.
Story – The story here follows two unlikely cops that must work together to uncover who is behind a string of crimes from within the force. This is the simple part of the film, the problems start mounting up easily and quickly, first the humour is insulting for anything that happens as the characters are left doing sex, poop and more lazy sexist jokes. Considering this was a popular TV shows, I feel the creator must feel insulted with what we are given, this fails on capturing any of the Starsky and Hutch or 21 Jump Street humour we enjoyed and just becomes boring quickly, not adding any mystery to who is behind the crimes either.
Action/Comedy/Crime – The action in this film is lazy even if it is the only highlight of the film with a couple of the chases being the most interesting part of the film. the comedy is an insult to comedy while the crime world shows us only police corruption.
Settings – The film is set in LA, I think mostly to use the sewer system for the chases otherwise it could have been any city.
Scene of the Movie – Bike chase.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The comedy.
Final Thoughts – This is one of the comedy movies you really should never be watching, it doesn’t get any laughs and just ends up being left feeling insulting.
Overall: This is why we don’t have comedy hits anymore.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Camelot Burning (Metal & Lace, #1) in Books
Jan 23, 2020
I don't know much about Arthurian Lore it's probably one of the only story I've never read in it's original form aside from the original Grimm Brothers' Fairy Tales (but those are horrifying, so I'm not even going to bother). I somehow doubt that Magic Tree House who made Morgan LeFay a harmless fly or Wizard101's Avalonian world even counts, except for maybe the latter being used as visual aid. :p
But personally that's sort of the thrill in reading a retelling without reading the original one: no judging or comparing it's a mostly complete blank slate.
Camelot Burning follows Vivienne, a lady-in-waiting and Merlin's Apprentice, who wants a way out of Camelot's way of life. She even has a plan hatched at least until Morgan Le Fay enters the picture and she has to stay to build a weapon that could ultimately save Camelot.
Merlin is actually a fun character am I weird to say that I found him drunk yet wise? It's not an easy combo since most drunk people act... well, not wise at all. While I'm not exactly warm and fuzzy with the other characters yet, Merlin is a winner.
There's a very interesting way with magic Rose introduces. Usually when it comes to magic, the price is something minor or huge, depending on whatever is asked very similar to karma (or fate or etc.). Here though... it's the ultimate price if you use magic too much: *cues ominous music* your soul. That's like selling your soul to the devil! Unless you're a creepy villain who wants to take over the world, that's not usually the ultimate price. Minor = minor payback. Major = major payback. No ifs buts or wait, what's after that? o_O
<img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-dV7rlbVhpPk/UyjGVWubEkI/AAAAAAAACyA/ngeF1DAiEmk/s1600/tumblr_m5x9n1xf3D1rqfhi2o1_500.gif"; height="143" width="200">
Behind the Blog Tidbit: Camelot Burning was one of those novels who got a neutral rating (rawly speaking). I would have rounded up to a 4.5 rather than a 4, but I chose not to for a few reasons:
~ Too predictable It could just be me, but I guessed that <spoiler>Vivienne was the coordinates to Avalon and Morgan Le Fay was acting innocent as a distraction.</spoiler>
~ Too much technicalities I felt like I was reading a foreign language, and that was not the words used in magic. It all felt really confusing.
~ It said The End.
<img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lsFMKEdcrBc/UyjG4_6Sj3I/AAAAAAAACyM/Q0tKlJ9xOLw/s1600/th.jpg"; height="155" width="200">
That last bullet didn't play a major impact. It's just a minor peeve, especially when it's the first novel in the series.
I fully enjoyed reading Kathryn Rose's debut novel. Camelot Burning takes a refreshing and unique spin on Arthurian lore, or more accurately Arthurian + Fantasy + Steampunk.
-----------------
Advance Review Copy provided by Flux for review
Original Review posted at <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2014/05/arc-review-camelot-burning-by-kathryn-rose.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Gi5Rk5yLloA/UtliaUbdL3I/AAAAAAAACbE/J27z92_qrYU/s1600/Official+Banner.png"; /></a>
But personally that's sort of the thrill in reading a retelling without reading the original one: no judging or comparing it's a mostly complete blank slate.
Camelot Burning follows Vivienne, a lady-in-waiting and Merlin's Apprentice, who wants a way out of Camelot's way of life. She even has a plan hatched at least until Morgan Le Fay enters the picture and she has to stay to build a weapon that could ultimately save Camelot.
Merlin is actually a fun character am I weird to say that I found him drunk yet wise? It's not an easy combo since most drunk people act... well, not wise at all. While I'm not exactly warm and fuzzy with the other characters yet, Merlin is a winner.
There's a very interesting way with magic Rose introduces. Usually when it comes to magic, the price is something minor or huge, depending on whatever is asked very similar to karma (or fate or etc.). Here though... it's the ultimate price if you use magic too much: *cues ominous music* your soul. That's like selling your soul to the devil! Unless you're a creepy villain who wants to take over the world, that's not usually the ultimate price. Minor = minor payback. Major = major payback. No ifs buts or wait, what's after that? o_O
<img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-dV7rlbVhpPk/UyjGVWubEkI/AAAAAAAACyA/ngeF1DAiEmk/s1600/tumblr_m5x9n1xf3D1rqfhi2o1_500.gif"; height="143" width="200">
Behind the Blog Tidbit: Camelot Burning was one of those novels who got a neutral rating (rawly speaking). I would have rounded up to a 4.5 rather than a 4, but I chose not to for a few reasons:
~ Too predictable It could just be me, but I guessed that <spoiler>Vivienne was the coordinates to Avalon and Morgan Le Fay was acting innocent as a distraction.</spoiler>
~ Too much technicalities I felt like I was reading a foreign language, and that was not the words used in magic. It all felt really confusing.
~ It said The End.
<img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lsFMKEdcrBc/UyjG4_6Sj3I/AAAAAAAACyM/Q0tKlJ9xOLw/s1600/th.jpg"; height="155" width="200">
That last bullet didn't play a major impact. It's just a minor peeve, especially when it's the first novel in the series.
I fully enjoyed reading Kathryn Rose's debut novel. Camelot Burning takes a refreshing and unique spin on Arthurian lore, or more accurately Arthurian + Fantasy + Steampunk.
-----------------
Advance Review Copy provided by Flux for review
Original Review posted at <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2014/05/arc-review-camelot-burning-by-kathryn-rose.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Gi5Rk5yLloA/UtliaUbdL3I/AAAAAAAACbE/J27z92_qrYU/s1600/Official+Banner.png"; /></a>
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Brightburn (2019) in Movies
Jan 9, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
Brightburn is a mostly solid 'superhero' horror that sets out what it means to do. The narrative plays out a bit like an issue of Marvel's What If? - in this case, what if an alien baby crashed to earth, much like Superman, but grew up to be a danger to mankind.
One of the main issues I had with Brightburn rears it head pretty early on - it doesn't spend a huge amount of time establishing 12 year old Brandon (Jackson A. Dunn) before hurtling straight into his turn to evil. It's not the biggest deal I guess, the movie does enough to set up the main bulk of the plot, but I can't help but feel that the execution would have been more effective if the set up had been a bit more drawn out.
We're also introduced to Brandon's parents, the people who found him when he was a baby and raised him as their own, Tori and Kyle, played by Elizabeth Banks and David Denman. Both actors are great throughout, but their characters are a bit iffy. There's a lot silliness going on - Tori takes an abnormally long time to accept that Brandon in dangerous, even when loved ones are being murdered around her - she purposefully keeps information from Kyle about Brandon nearly stumbling across the spaceship he arrived in, even though that should really be something shared considering how Brandon is an alien and all that - at one point, Kyle tries to get one over on Brandon by shooting him in the head when he's not looking, despite clearly stating earlier on in the movie that Brandon has never even bled throughout his whole life...
It sounds like nitpicking, but it's just silliness that is very obviously included to easily advance the plot, and it's a little distracting.
The special effects used are mostly good, but they are purposely done quickly to avoid much room for scrutiny, however, there are some really great shots throughout Brightburn, especially in the third act. Brandon's costume design is suitably creepy, his mask looks almost Mothman-esque, and his glowing red eyes make him a genuinely sinister looking villain.
The violence in Brightburn really packs a punch as well... It doesn't happen often, but when it does, it's creative, and brutal. The movie leans a little into jump scare territory, but just about toes the line, and provides a decent enough unsettling atmosphere to justify it.
On a final note, it always refreshing when a Hollywood film like this has the balls to end in the way it does. The movie sets up Brandon for defeat and failure, and it just doesn't happen. The bad guys win and that's that. The ending credits feature news reports showing Brandon in the following weeks wreaking havoc all over the place, and it sets up a sequel which I don't think will happen due to box office reasons. Which is a shame, because even though Brightburn has its flaws, it still kept me involved.
Worth checking out for superhero and horror fans alike.
One of the main issues I had with Brightburn rears it head pretty early on - it doesn't spend a huge amount of time establishing 12 year old Brandon (Jackson A. Dunn) before hurtling straight into his turn to evil. It's not the biggest deal I guess, the movie does enough to set up the main bulk of the plot, but I can't help but feel that the execution would have been more effective if the set up had been a bit more drawn out.
We're also introduced to Brandon's parents, the people who found him when he was a baby and raised him as their own, Tori and Kyle, played by Elizabeth Banks and David Denman. Both actors are great throughout, but their characters are a bit iffy. There's a lot silliness going on - Tori takes an abnormally long time to accept that Brandon in dangerous, even when loved ones are being murdered around her - she purposefully keeps information from Kyle about Brandon nearly stumbling across the spaceship he arrived in, even though that should really be something shared considering how Brandon is an alien and all that - at one point, Kyle tries to get one over on Brandon by shooting him in the head when he's not looking, despite clearly stating earlier on in the movie that Brandon has never even bled throughout his whole life...
It sounds like nitpicking, but it's just silliness that is very obviously included to easily advance the plot, and it's a little distracting.
The special effects used are mostly good, but they are purposely done quickly to avoid much room for scrutiny, however, there are some really great shots throughout Brightburn, especially in the third act. Brandon's costume design is suitably creepy, his mask looks almost Mothman-esque, and his glowing red eyes make him a genuinely sinister looking villain.
The violence in Brightburn really packs a punch as well... It doesn't happen often, but when it does, it's creative, and brutal. The movie leans a little into jump scare territory, but just about toes the line, and provides a decent enough unsettling atmosphere to justify it.
On a final note, it always refreshing when a Hollywood film like this has the balls to end in the way it does. The movie sets up Brandon for defeat and failure, and it just doesn't happen. The bad guys win and that's that. The ending credits feature news reports showing Brandon in the following weeks wreaking havoc all over the place, and it sets up a sequel which I don't think will happen due to box office reasons. Which is a shame, because even though Brightburn has its flaws, it still kept me involved.
Worth checking out for superhero and horror fans alike.