Search
Search results

Andy Meakin (5 KP) rated Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2018
Welcome back to Jumanji
How dare they make a sequel/remake/reboot of Jumanji? I mean that film was a classic. Admittedly a very average classic that doesn’t really live up to your childhood memory of it, but still. And, yeah, Zathura was a kind of remake given it was adapted from a book by the same writer and explored the same themes, but nobody watched that, so how dare they do a new Jumanji film? I mean it’s only 22 years since the original came out!
Do you find yourself agreeing with any of that little rant? If you do, then I have a few things to say. First, accept that for thousands of years similar tales have been retold to new generations to keep the spirit of a story alive. Second, why not actually wait to see what the new film has to offer before casting judgement as Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle actually serves well as a sequel to the first film, whilst doing something new with the idea.
Starting in the mid-90s, and the board game is unearthed on a beach. Given to a teenage kid by his father, the kid isn’t impressed as ‘nobody plays board games these days’, and he gets back to playing on his console. Overnight, reacting to the changes in gaming culture the box works some magic, and the next day the game has morphed to a video game format, to entice a new generation. Jump forward to present day and a group of unlikely teenagers are cast together in detention when they happen upon the abandoned game console. Taking a break from their junk-room sorting, they fire up the game and find themselves pulled into the game -world, each taking on the avatar of the character template they chose on load up. Presented with a quest in true video-game fashion, they set off to find a way to escape, whilst learning something about themselves in the process.
By transitioning to a video-game setting, the story allows for a great deal of fun to be had poking at the contrivances and conventions of the format, especially for games of the era in which the game was inspired. The characters all have strengths and weaknesses, the spawning of lives by dropping from the sky is so reminiscent of many a side-scrolling platform shooter of yesteryear. Even the behaviour of the NPC – I mean support cast – is perfectly drawn upon the mannerisms that game characters act, being there to spout random exposition to move you on your quest. As for the quests – yep, they are pointlessly complicated, filled with traps and red herrings.
But such pokes at video game culture would be wasted if the casting was wrong, but in the four main stars they have cast the perfect personae for each archetype. The heroic, strong and smouldering hero, who is being played by a soft heated geek – The Rock of course. You want a ‘Lara Croft’ style action heroine, albeit played by a socially awkward teen girl – enter Karen Gillan. Weak sidekick who is only there to carry equipment, but being played by a high school jock who thinks he can do anything – Kevin Hart is your man. Round that off with a studious professor type, being played by a female – that kind of comic role works well for Jack Black. Each of the stars cast has a lot of fun playing with there archetypes, and the film does them all justice to allow them to each have their moments to shine. Gillan, in particular, does a great job at looking entirely awkward yet confident at the same time, and her nerdy seduction scene showcases a comic timing ability equal to her action talents showcased in the GotG films.
The action is thrilling, the humour well placed, and the direction solid enough to bring this video game movie to life. In fact, this is one of the best video game movies to date, even though it isn’t even adapted from a real video game. A few nods to the original Jumanji are present, but without awkwardly placed. The end result is a fun family adventure with some great action set pieces and a wry humour, much like the original was. Don’t let nostalgia for the original put you off exploring the world of Jumanji once more.
Do you find yourself agreeing with any of that little rant? If you do, then I have a few things to say. First, accept that for thousands of years similar tales have been retold to new generations to keep the spirit of a story alive. Second, why not actually wait to see what the new film has to offer before casting judgement as Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle actually serves well as a sequel to the first film, whilst doing something new with the idea.
Starting in the mid-90s, and the board game is unearthed on a beach. Given to a teenage kid by his father, the kid isn’t impressed as ‘nobody plays board games these days’, and he gets back to playing on his console. Overnight, reacting to the changes in gaming culture the box works some magic, and the next day the game has morphed to a video game format, to entice a new generation. Jump forward to present day and a group of unlikely teenagers are cast together in detention when they happen upon the abandoned game console. Taking a break from their junk-room sorting, they fire up the game and find themselves pulled into the game -world, each taking on the avatar of the character template they chose on load up. Presented with a quest in true video-game fashion, they set off to find a way to escape, whilst learning something about themselves in the process.
By transitioning to a video-game setting, the story allows for a great deal of fun to be had poking at the contrivances and conventions of the format, especially for games of the era in which the game was inspired. The characters all have strengths and weaknesses, the spawning of lives by dropping from the sky is so reminiscent of many a side-scrolling platform shooter of yesteryear. Even the behaviour of the NPC – I mean support cast – is perfectly drawn upon the mannerisms that game characters act, being there to spout random exposition to move you on your quest. As for the quests – yep, they are pointlessly complicated, filled with traps and red herrings.
But such pokes at video game culture would be wasted if the casting was wrong, but in the four main stars they have cast the perfect personae for each archetype. The heroic, strong and smouldering hero, who is being played by a soft heated geek – The Rock of course. You want a ‘Lara Croft’ style action heroine, albeit played by a socially awkward teen girl – enter Karen Gillan. Weak sidekick who is only there to carry equipment, but being played by a high school jock who thinks he can do anything – Kevin Hart is your man. Round that off with a studious professor type, being played by a female – that kind of comic role works well for Jack Black. Each of the stars cast has a lot of fun playing with there archetypes, and the film does them all justice to allow them to each have their moments to shine. Gillan, in particular, does a great job at looking entirely awkward yet confident at the same time, and her nerdy seduction scene showcases a comic timing ability equal to her action talents showcased in the GotG films.
The action is thrilling, the humour well placed, and the direction solid enough to bring this video game movie to life. In fact, this is one of the best video game movies to date, even though it isn’t even adapted from a real video game. A few nods to the original Jumanji are present, but without awkwardly placed. The end result is a fun family adventure with some great action set pieces and a wry humour, much like the original was. Don’t let nostalgia for the original put you off exploring the world of Jumanji once more.

graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated Destiny (Rogue Angel, #1) in Books
Feb 15, 2019
Have you ever been reading a book when all of a sudden a turn of phrase, an offensive passage, or something altogether different pops up and it all comes to a screeching halt? Whatever it is, it bothered you so much that it colored the rest of your reading and you just couldn't go on, whether or not it was an irrational reaction. In my case it happened with the first paragraph, chapter two (pg. 26):
<blockquote>The rental Avery had arranged turned out to be an old Renault pickup truck. If Annja had been a layman, maybe she'd have mistakenly called it ancient. But she was a trained archaeologist and she knew what <i>ancient</i> meant.</blockquote>
Excuse me? One, I know what the heck ancient means - very old - and I'm pretty sure 99.9% of the Earth's population does too. Two, most people use ancient as an exaggeration, not as a "mistake." I see nothing wrong with that. Three, oh, ho-ho! so being a "trained archaeologist" makes someone that much better and smarter than the layman, eh? It just struck me the wrong way and I got a sense of smug superiority that irked me something fierce.
I had other problems before getting to this point as well, but even though I read about forty pages more, I couldn't get past this one little paragraph. Others problems: I could smell a Mary-Sue from a mile away. Apparently this Lara Croft (whom you couldn't help but think of) wannabe knows EVERYTHING at the ripe old age of - well somewhere in her twenties, it wasn't mentioned in what I read. Puh-lease. Also mentioned was her hour-glass figure, although not in so many words. Are you gagging yet? And she's an expert at some sort of martial arts, where get this, she was taught by a nun. Annja was an orphan or something, so she was raised by them. Something that strikes me as odd, she can spot someone tailing her. I'm not quite sure where or how she could have developed this skill in her line of work, but whatever. So basically, she's perfect at every single thing. Sorry, that doesn't work for me. I don't mind a brainless, action-packed read, but frankly, this wasn't a very well-written one as it was pretty flat and boring, and I couldn't even make it seventy pages.
<blockquote>The rental Avery had arranged turned out to be an old Renault pickup truck. If Annja had been a layman, maybe she'd have mistakenly called it ancient. But she was a trained archaeologist and she knew what <i>ancient</i> meant.</blockquote>
Excuse me? One, I know what the heck ancient means - very old - and I'm pretty sure 99.9% of the Earth's population does too. Two, most people use ancient as an exaggeration, not as a "mistake." I see nothing wrong with that. Three, oh, ho-ho! so being a "trained archaeologist" makes someone that much better and smarter than the layman, eh? It just struck me the wrong way and I got a sense of smug superiority that irked me something fierce.
I had other problems before getting to this point as well, but even though I read about forty pages more, I couldn't get past this one little paragraph. Others problems: I could smell a Mary-Sue from a mile away. Apparently this Lara Croft (whom you couldn't help but think of) wannabe knows EVERYTHING at the ripe old age of - well somewhere in her twenties, it wasn't mentioned in what I read. Puh-lease. Also mentioned was her hour-glass figure, although not in so many words. Are you gagging yet? And she's an expert at some sort of martial arts, where get this, she was taught by a nun. Annja was an orphan or something, so she was raised by them. Something that strikes me as odd, she can spot someone tailing her. I'm not quite sure where or how she could have developed this skill in her line of work, but whatever. So basically, she's perfect at every single thing. Sorry, that doesn't work for me. I don't mind a brainless, action-packed read, but frankly, this wasn't a very well-written one as it was pretty flat and boring, and I couldn't even make it seventy pages.

Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated The Upside (2019) in Movies
May 8, 2019 (Updated May 8, 2019)
On The Up and Up
This movie had a bit of a strange release, at least in my area. It was one of those movies that only had two showings a day on it's opening weekend and they were both at really obscure times like 10:30am and 2:40pm, - times that would suggest that this movie was being put out to die. This was disappointing as, after seeing the trailers, I was looking forward to seeing it and never got the chance while it was in cinemas. Anyway, I finally got around to seeing it upon it's home release and I really enjoyed it.
Although I did like the look of this project from the trailer and I am a big fan of Bryan Cranston, I was wary of Kevin Hart starring opposite him in this role. It looked like a role that would require a more serious actor than Kevin Hart and I was concerned that Hart had been miscast and only chosen because of the recognition of his name rather than whether or not he was the right actor for the part.
Surprisingly and thankfully, I was proven entirely wrong. Hart shows here that he is in fact very capable in a more serious role such as this and doesn't just have to resort to screaming in every film he is in. I hope that he takes on more serious stuff following this as I much prefer it to any of his 'comedic,' roles. The rest of the cast are also great, Cranston gives a sublime performance as he always does and Nicole Kidman works well as Cranston's character's secretary/ potential love interest.
This film is a remake of a French film called The Intouchables and there are other elements of it that bear similarities to other movies that we have seen before, but it is a well told story that has various worthwhile messages littered throughout it. The script is witty and snappy enough that the film never feels slow or boring.
Overall, I really enjoyed my time with this one. It isn't the most original thing I have ever seen, but it was entertaining and it had heart. The script was well written and the direction was solid. The performances from the entire cast also help elevate the already funny script even further.
Although I did like the look of this project from the trailer and I am a big fan of Bryan Cranston, I was wary of Kevin Hart starring opposite him in this role. It looked like a role that would require a more serious actor than Kevin Hart and I was concerned that Hart had been miscast and only chosen because of the recognition of his name rather than whether or not he was the right actor for the part.
Surprisingly and thankfully, I was proven entirely wrong. Hart shows here that he is in fact very capable in a more serious role such as this and doesn't just have to resort to screaming in every film he is in. I hope that he takes on more serious stuff following this as I much prefer it to any of his 'comedic,' roles. The rest of the cast are also great, Cranston gives a sublime performance as he always does and Nicole Kidman works well as Cranston's character's secretary/ potential love interest.
This film is a remake of a French film called The Intouchables and there are other elements of it that bear similarities to other movies that we have seen before, but it is a well told story that has various worthwhile messages littered throughout it. The script is witty and snappy enough that the film never feels slow or boring.
Overall, I really enjoyed my time with this one. It isn't the most original thing I have ever seen, but it was entertaining and it had heart. The script was well written and the direction was solid. The performances from the entire cast also help elevate the already funny script even further.

Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated Dread Nation in Books
Jul 24, 2018
So, as a general rule, I don't read zombie stories. Zombies are the one monster that will almost invariably give me nightmares. This book, however, had such hype built up around it that I decided to bend my rule.
I should not have.
Before I start in on this, let me say it's a good story. It's well-written, the plot is paced nicely, and it's entertaining. All that said, it's quite problematic in many ways. I knew some of this before I read it; there was a Twitter thread about some of the issues, namely that in the Author's Note she describes the Native American boarding schools (where the government forced Native American children to go, and tried to destroy their heritage and culture in the name of "civilizing" them) as "well-meaning." The Twitter thread does an excellent job of dissecting that passage, and it's worth reading.
There's also the incredibly unrealistic scene where Jane gets flogged eleven times, walks back to where she's staying, has a coherent conversation where she lays out a plan she has formed, and then puts a shirt on. That last part especially got me. Like, what? You're going to be in more pain than that! Being flogged barely seems to slow Jane down. She asks for laudanum - for her plan. Not to take for the pain.
I don't know. There's a lot about the book that set my teeth on edge. There's the absurd amount of racism, but the protagonist is a black woman and it's civil war era, so that's to be expected. And it's coming from characters, not from narration. Jane lies. A lot. So it's hard to trust that she's even a reliable narrator.
I guess it's okay. I didn't care for it. I found it really hard to get past the author's "well-meaning" comment about the Native American boarding schools. And the plot of "as soon as they're old enough, black children get sent to combat schools." Especially with what's going on lately with the jailing of migrant children, it feels tone-deaf, ignorant, and genocidal.
One good point was the oh-so-casual mention of bisexuality (a female friend taught her "everything she knows about kissing") but it was only two sentences and never mentioned again. Not nearly enough to make up for the rest of the book.
You can find all my review at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com
I should not have.
Before I start in on this, let me say it's a good story. It's well-written, the plot is paced nicely, and it's entertaining. All that said, it's quite problematic in many ways. I knew some of this before I read it; there was a Twitter thread about some of the issues, namely that in the Author's Note she describes the Native American boarding schools (where the government forced Native American children to go, and tried to destroy their heritage and culture in the name of "civilizing" them) as "well-meaning." The Twitter thread does an excellent job of dissecting that passage, and it's worth reading.
There's also the incredibly unrealistic scene where Jane gets flogged eleven times, walks back to where she's staying, has a coherent conversation where she lays out a plan she has formed, and then puts a shirt on. That last part especially got me. Like, what? You're going to be in more pain than that! Being flogged barely seems to slow Jane down. She asks for laudanum - for her plan. Not to take for the pain.
I don't know. There's a lot about the book that set my teeth on edge. There's the absurd amount of racism, but the protagonist is a black woman and it's civil war era, so that's to be expected. And it's coming from characters, not from narration. Jane lies. A lot. So it's hard to trust that she's even a reliable narrator.
I guess it's okay. I didn't care for it. I found it really hard to get past the author's "well-meaning" comment about the Native American boarding schools. And the plot of "as soon as they're old enough, black children get sent to combat schools." Especially with what's going on lately with the jailing of migrant children, it feels tone-deaf, ignorant, and genocidal.
One good point was the oh-so-casual mention of bisexuality (a female friend taught her "everything she knows about kissing") but it was only two sentences and never mentioned again. Not nearly enough to make up for the rest of the book.
You can find all my review at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com

BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Equalizer 2 (2018) in Movies
Jul 29, 2018
Smart action flick with a tremendous Denzel performance
I really enjoyed the first EQUALIZER film. Based on the TV show of the same name, it followed the exploits of Denzel Washington as he "righted wrongs". I nicknamed this film "how to kill bad guys with things you find at your local Home Depot", for that is what happens. Denzel's character improvises traps and weapons to dispatch the evil-doers.
So...I was "all in" when they announced a sequel to this flick. I figured that Washington and his frequent collaborator, Director Antoine Fuqua (both Equalizer's as well as helming Denzel's Oscar winning performance in TRAINING DAY) would make things "bigger and badder" as often happens in sequels - bigger stakes, more bad guys, bigger - and trickier - improvisations - this time, perhaps at a Walmart!
But I was wrong - they didn't go bigger, they went smaller and smarter - and the movie is better for it.
In EQUALIZER 2, we get more personal with Denzel's character, Robert McCall. There still are plenty of bad guys getting the punishment they deserve, but it is the toll on McCall and the reasoning behind why he is doing what he is doing that is at center stage in this film, putting the weight of this film, rightfully so, on Denzel's more than capable shoulders. He comes through - as he always does - tremendously well. There is one scene where Denzel is trying to get a teenage boy to walk away from a gang. I was amazed that I was watching an "Academy Award" level scene in the middle of an action flick, but that is absolutely what it is.
Now...make no mistake...there is plenty of action, chases and violence in this film, but Fuqua shows great restraint, giving the violence a purpose instead of being gratuitous. Even when they have a final battle in the middle of a hurricane-level storm, Fuqua rightfully focuses on the people element of things - and not the spectacle of the elements and circumstances.
Both Fuqua and Washington make some smart choices in this film, which makes it a smart movie, well made with just enough action to please all.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
So...I was "all in" when they announced a sequel to this flick. I figured that Washington and his frequent collaborator, Director Antoine Fuqua (both Equalizer's as well as helming Denzel's Oscar winning performance in TRAINING DAY) would make things "bigger and badder" as often happens in sequels - bigger stakes, more bad guys, bigger - and trickier - improvisations - this time, perhaps at a Walmart!
But I was wrong - they didn't go bigger, they went smaller and smarter - and the movie is better for it.
In EQUALIZER 2, we get more personal with Denzel's character, Robert McCall. There still are plenty of bad guys getting the punishment they deserve, but it is the toll on McCall and the reasoning behind why he is doing what he is doing that is at center stage in this film, putting the weight of this film, rightfully so, on Denzel's more than capable shoulders. He comes through - as he always does - tremendously well. There is one scene where Denzel is trying to get a teenage boy to walk away from a gang. I was amazed that I was watching an "Academy Award" level scene in the middle of an action flick, but that is absolutely what it is.
Now...make no mistake...there is plenty of action, chases and violence in this film, but Fuqua shows great restraint, giving the violence a purpose instead of being gratuitous. Even when they have a final battle in the middle of a hurricane-level storm, Fuqua rightfully focuses on the people element of things - and not the spectacle of the elements and circumstances.
Both Fuqua and Washington make some smart choices in this film, which makes it a smart movie, well made with just enough action to please all.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)

Fred (860 KP) rated The Haunting of Hill House in TV
Oct 24, 2018
Genuinely creepy (2 more)
The tall man
The amazing 6th episode
Horror done right
What is the chance that I would watch the original "The Haunting" movie, only to see that the following day, a TV show based on the book that spawned the original movie, would appear on Netflix? Well, this is what happened to me. I'll start by saying I love the original movie. I love the psychological aspect of the horror. Sounds & shapes can be so much more terrifying that gore & jump-scares. When I saw the show under my recommendations, I couldn't wait, so I just jumped in.
I am not one to binge watch shows. My time is limited & I watch lots of stuff. But I was immediately hooked on this show. I watched half the season in one day & the rest the following.
The show does a very good job in taking the original movie's plot, changing things around & creating a terrifying tale that takes the psychological horror of the original, mixes it with some minor jump-scares & a compelling story of a family dealing with it's own demons as well as the spirits that live within Hell House. Yes, that was a very long sentence, which reminds me of the 6th episode, which is filled with long shots. The camera spins around, while things change around them. in fact, throughout the series, things change all the time. Sometimes statues turn their heads, ghosts appear in the background, faces appear in the furniture. Once I noticed one of these faces, just there, staring at the family. My fiance didn't even notice. I backed it up to show her. She went "Ooh! How did I not see that?"
The story does jump around in time, showing when the family first moved into the house, with 5 children & their parents & then in current day, still being haunted & compelled by the house. Every actor in the show is fantastic. Even the children really pull it off.
The ghosts in the show are creepy as all hell. My favorite is the tall man. I haven't been freaked out by a movie or TV show in decades, but I held my breath & stared as he...well, just watch.
I have recommended this to all my friends & those who watched it all got back to me to thank me. So, I'm recommending it to all of you too.
I am not one to binge watch shows. My time is limited & I watch lots of stuff. But I was immediately hooked on this show. I watched half the season in one day & the rest the following.
The show does a very good job in taking the original movie's plot, changing things around & creating a terrifying tale that takes the psychological horror of the original, mixes it with some minor jump-scares & a compelling story of a family dealing with it's own demons as well as the spirits that live within Hell House. Yes, that was a very long sentence, which reminds me of the 6th episode, which is filled with long shots. The camera spins around, while things change around them. in fact, throughout the series, things change all the time. Sometimes statues turn their heads, ghosts appear in the background, faces appear in the furniture. Once I noticed one of these faces, just there, staring at the family. My fiance didn't even notice. I backed it up to show her. She went "Ooh! How did I not see that?"
The story does jump around in time, showing when the family first moved into the house, with 5 children & their parents & then in current day, still being haunted & compelled by the house. Every actor in the show is fantastic. Even the children really pull it off.
The ghosts in the show are creepy as all hell. My favorite is the tall man. I haven't been freaked out by a movie or TV show in decades, but I held my breath & stared as he...well, just watch.
I have recommended this to all my friends & those who watched it all got back to me to thank me. So, I'm recommending it to all of you too.

Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Black Panther (2018) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
The latest film in the Marvel Universe has arrived with “Black Panther” and it continues the tradition of big budgeted event films from Marvel. The film follows T’Challa (Chadwick Bodeman), as he prepares to assume the throne of the country of Wakanda after the death of his father. He is destined to lead over a nation that to the outside world seems impoverished and rural, but is secretly a very technologically advanced society thanks to their Vibranium resources. The resources allow them to keep their capitol city hidden from the world.
As T’Challa attempts to assume the throne and rule over the various tribes of his country; a threat from his past both known and unknown arises. Ulysses Klaue (Andy Serkis) surfaces, T’Challa mounts and effort to bring him to justice which in turn sets a chain of events into motion. A mysterious and deadly figure known as Killmonger (Michael B. Jordan), plans to obtain the Vibranium to exact a plan of revenge so severe it will lead to the nations of the world being subjugated and will divide even the most loyal citizens of Wakanda.
T’Challa must use his powers as The Black Panther and guardian of Wakanda to save his people and the very world from a threat that holds the fate of the world in the balance.
The film takes a while to get going as Director/Co-Writer Ryan Coogler takes his time introducing audiences to the world of Black Panther and especially the various characters. The strong supporting cast features Lupita Nyong’o, Angela Bassett, Danai Gurira, Forest Whitaker, Martin Freeman, and so many others that it is great to see such well-rounded characters.
The film does take a while to get up to the action but when it arrives; it delivers making the wait worth it. What I really liked was that the characters were well-defined as were their motivations. You did not have some cartoon mega-villain with some insane scheme, but rather a realistic and believable threat whose motivations were understandable though misguided.
Marvel has again delivered a very thrilling story that fits well into their extended universe and you will want to make sure to stay through all the credits for the two additional scenes which sets up future events for the Marvel Universe. “Black Panther” is a rousing success all around continues Marvel’s Cinematic Universe in grand style.
http://sknr.net/2018/02/13/black-panther/
As T’Challa attempts to assume the throne and rule over the various tribes of his country; a threat from his past both known and unknown arises. Ulysses Klaue (Andy Serkis) surfaces, T’Challa mounts and effort to bring him to justice which in turn sets a chain of events into motion. A mysterious and deadly figure known as Killmonger (Michael B. Jordan), plans to obtain the Vibranium to exact a plan of revenge so severe it will lead to the nations of the world being subjugated and will divide even the most loyal citizens of Wakanda.
T’Challa must use his powers as The Black Panther and guardian of Wakanda to save his people and the very world from a threat that holds the fate of the world in the balance.
The film takes a while to get going as Director/Co-Writer Ryan Coogler takes his time introducing audiences to the world of Black Panther and especially the various characters. The strong supporting cast features Lupita Nyong’o, Angela Bassett, Danai Gurira, Forest Whitaker, Martin Freeman, and so many others that it is great to see such well-rounded characters.
The film does take a while to get up to the action but when it arrives; it delivers making the wait worth it. What I really liked was that the characters were well-defined as were their motivations. You did not have some cartoon mega-villain with some insane scheme, but rather a realistic and believable threat whose motivations were understandable though misguided.
Marvel has again delivered a very thrilling story that fits well into their extended universe and you will want to make sure to stay through all the credits for the two additional scenes which sets up future events for the Marvel Universe. “Black Panther” is a rousing success all around continues Marvel’s Cinematic Universe in grand style.
http://sknr.net/2018/02/13/black-panther/

Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood (2019) in Movies
Nov 28, 2019
When I first heard that Tom Hanks was playing Fred Rogers in a biopic, I was all on board. Who wouldn’t be? When I finally saw the film about a year and a half later, it was not the movie I was expecting. In such a fantastically good way.
A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood tells the story of the real life friendship between Fred Rogers (Tom Hanks) and journalist Lloyd Vogel (Matthew Rhys, character based on real life journalist Tom Junod). Vogel is an investigative reporter for Esquire magazine in the late nineties and he is assigned a “puff” piece. The magazine was doing an issue on heroes, and Vogel was assigned Mr. Rogers, and would be a story unlike any other that he has written. After meeting and talking to Mr. Rogers for the first time, he couldn’t believe that this person was… well, perfect. Let’s be clear, Mr. Rogers is not perfect, but probably as close to perfect as many can imagine. So Vogel did what he does best. He started investigating. And during the course of his discoveries, he started to make discoveries about himself, and the relationships in his life, specifically with that of his father, Jerry Vogel (Chris Cooper).
This movie was so much more than I expected going in. I expected to tear up, I didn’t expect it to hit home the way show used to as I was growing up and watch the show well into my twenties. The cinematography was excellent. Many times it felt like I was watching the show as the movie essentially played out like an episode. The transitions were amazing, and the music was fantastic as well. They didn’t try to do anything artsy or new age with anything. All of the original themes and music was there. It was one of the most nostalgic movie going experiences I have ever had.
This is definitely a great movie to see, but do not mistake it for a children’s film, please. There are some very mature themes, language, and concepts. This is definitely meant to shine some light on the nature of human character versus the lessons taught by the legendary Mr. Rogers. That being said, go see it. It absolutely will not ruin your childhood.
A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood tells the story of the real life friendship between Fred Rogers (Tom Hanks) and journalist Lloyd Vogel (Matthew Rhys, character based on real life journalist Tom Junod). Vogel is an investigative reporter for Esquire magazine in the late nineties and he is assigned a “puff” piece. The magazine was doing an issue on heroes, and Vogel was assigned Mr. Rogers, and would be a story unlike any other that he has written. After meeting and talking to Mr. Rogers for the first time, he couldn’t believe that this person was… well, perfect. Let’s be clear, Mr. Rogers is not perfect, but probably as close to perfect as many can imagine. So Vogel did what he does best. He started investigating. And during the course of his discoveries, he started to make discoveries about himself, and the relationships in his life, specifically with that of his father, Jerry Vogel (Chris Cooper).
This movie was so much more than I expected going in. I expected to tear up, I didn’t expect it to hit home the way show used to as I was growing up and watch the show well into my twenties. The cinematography was excellent. Many times it felt like I was watching the show as the movie essentially played out like an episode. The transitions were amazing, and the music was fantastic as well. They didn’t try to do anything artsy or new age with anything. All of the original themes and music was there. It was one of the most nostalgic movie going experiences I have ever had.
This is definitely a great movie to see, but do not mistake it for a children’s film, please. There are some very mature themes, language, and concepts. This is definitely meant to shine some light on the nature of human character versus the lessons taught by the legendary Mr. Rogers. That being said, go see it. It absolutely will not ruin your childhood.

LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated American Horror Story - Season 6 in TV
Jan 16, 2020
Season 6 of AHS, subtitled Roanoke, may very well be my favourite season to date, if not it comes a very close second to Asylum.
The thing that really stands out for me is the pacing. It's pretty much perfect. The first half of Roanoke takes place in the form of a documentary, called My Roanoke Nightmare, where a young couple who moved into a run down house, recount their horrific experience of the spirits that haunted the ground, and endangered their lives. The documentary has a dramatisation of the events alongside the interviews, which effectively has the same AHS characters being played by two different people.
The build up is slow burning and hugely entertaining, as we know that these characters survive the ordeal, as they are involved in the documentary, so we can enjoy the ride without worrying about their fates.
In true AHS style though, the second half of the season takes place a few years after the documentary, and Roanoke truly kicks off in an epic fashion.
It's hard to properly describe the narrative, and it's really best experienced yourself. It's clever television.
The style of Roanoke is quite subtle, and gives the season a sort of old fashioned sense. It also experiments here and there with 'found footage', lending AHS a Blair Witch-esque edge.
All of the cast are once again great. Kathy Bates is a highlight, both her roles during the documentary, and after. Series regulars like Evan Peters, Angela Bassett and Lily Rabe are present and enjoyable, and it's awesome to see Cuba Gooding Jr. involved as well.
However this time around, AHS belongs to Sarah Paulson, who I thought really excelled during Roanoke, and Adina Porter, who gave the season it's more emotional moments. I think she's a fantastic actress, and was also a standout in her limited screentime during True Blood.
The gore and violence in Roanoke is probably at it's most visceral as far as AHS goes. There are some effectively gruesome moments littered throughout, and it's all looked like practical effects to me, which is how it should be! There are some really creepy shots as well, especially at the tail end of the season.
Roanoke is damn good. I'll be pleasantly surprised if AHS ever surpasses it.
The thing that really stands out for me is the pacing. It's pretty much perfect. The first half of Roanoke takes place in the form of a documentary, called My Roanoke Nightmare, where a young couple who moved into a run down house, recount their horrific experience of the spirits that haunted the ground, and endangered their lives. The documentary has a dramatisation of the events alongside the interviews, which effectively has the same AHS characters being played by two different people.
The build up is slow burning and hugely entertaining, as we know that these characters survive the ordeal, as they are involved in the documentary, so we can enjoy the ride without worrying about their fates.
In true AHS style though, the second half of the season takes place a few years after the documentary, and Roanoke truly kicks off in an epic fashion.
It's hard to properly describe the narrative, and it's really best experienced yourself. It's clever television.
The style of Roanoke is quite subtle, and gives the season a sort of old fashioned sense. It also experiments here and there with 'found footage', lending AHS a Blair Witch-esque edge.
All of the cast are once again great. Kathy Bates is a highlight, both her roles during the documentary, and after. Series regulars like Evan Peters, Angela Bassett and Lily Rabe are present and enjoyable, and it's awesome to see Cuba Gooding Jr. involved as well.
However this time around, AHS belongs to Sarah Paulson, who I thought really excelled during Roanoke, and Adina Porter, who gave the season it's more emotional moments. I think she's a fantastic actress, and was also a standout in her limited screentime during True Blood.
The gore and violence in Roanoke is probably at it's most visceral as far as AHS goes. There are some effectively gruesome moments littered throughout, and it's all looked like practical effects to me, which is how it should be! There are some really creepy shots as well, especially at the tail end of the season.
Roanoke is damn good. I'll be pleasantly surprised if AHS ever surpasses it.

Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Angry Birds Movie (2016) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
The new kids’ movie Angry Birds is a joint venture between Columbia Pictures and Rovio Animation.
I did not hold high hopes for this movie when I went to screen it, and really only went because I knew my 7 year old son would want to see it.
It has a wide range of actors and actresses voicing the characters: Jason Sudeikis as Red, Josh Gad as Chuck, Danny McBride as Bomb, Maya Rudolph as Matilda, Bill Hader as Leonard, Peter Dinklage as Mighty Eagle, Sean Penn as Terence, and Blake Shelton as Earl Pig.
If you have ever played the game by the same name, you will recognize the characters, as well as the soundtrack music.
It was a decent (kids) story, and the movie is certainly colorful and fast paced. In my opinion, the 3-D aspect helped.
We follow the main character, Red, as he tried to fit into a happy, steady society, that frowns upon and even penalizes outburst of bad temper, whether they are warranted or not.
He blows up at a customer, and has to go to court, where he is sentenced to anger management classes. The instructor, Matilda, has a hard time getting through to him and gets frustrated with his inability to control his anger responses.
In the middle of Red’s classes, the Pigs show up, bearing “gifts” and acting as if they are the Birds best friends. Red is suspicious and tries to both investigate to find out more, as well as warn the other birds that the pigs are after more than being “best friends”, but is shut down time after time as his warnings fall on deaf ears.
In the end, Red is right, and must organize a rescue. Ironically, he must encourage the other Birds to harness their anger in order to use it to help rescue their eggs.
I thought the movie was cute, and fun for a family afternoon out. I probably would not take very very young kids to it, more in the age group of 6 or 7 and up, but for my son it was just fine, and it was fun for him because he recognized the characters both from the game as well as the cartoon shorts that are on the internet.
For a family movie, I would give Angry Birds 2.75 out of 5 stars.
I did not hold high hopes for this movie when I went to screen it, and really only went because I knew my 7 year old son would want to see it.
It has a wide range of actors and actresses voicing the characters: Jason Sudeikis as Red, Josh Gad as Chuck, Danny McBride as Bomb, Maya Rudolph as Matilda, Bill Hader as Leonard, Peter Dinklage as Mighty Eagle, Sean Penn as Terence, and Blake Shelton as Earl Pig.
If you have ever played the game by the same name, you will recognize the characters, as well as the soundtrack music.
It was a decent (kids) story, and the movie is certainly colorful and fast paced. In my opinion, the 3-D aspect helped.
We follow the main character, Red, as he tried to fit into a happy, steady society, that frowns upon and even penalizes outburst of bad temper, whether they are warranted or not.
He blows up at a customer, and has to go to court, where he is sentenced to anger management classes. The instructor, Matilda, has a hard time getting through to him and gets frustrated with his inability to control his anger responses.
In the middle of Red’s classes, the Pigs show up, bearing “gifts” and acting as if they are the Birds best friends. Red is suspicious and tries to both investigate to find out more, as well as warn the other birds that the pigs are after more than being “best friends”, but is shut down time after time as his warnings fall on deaf ears.
In the end, Red is right, and must organize a rescue. Ironically, he must encourage the other Birds to harness their anger in order to use it to help rescue their eggs.
I thought the movie was cute, and fun for a family afternoon out. I probably would not take very very young kids to it, more in the age group of 6 or 7 and up, but for my son it was just fine, and it was fun for him because he recognized the characters both from the game as well as the cartoon shorts that are on the internet.
For a family movie, I would give Angry Birds 2.75 out of 5 stars.