Search
Search results
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Jack Reacher: Never Go Back (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
As average as you can get
The lacklustre box-office performance of Jack Reacher in 2012 seemed to scupper plans for the film to become the first in a new Tom Cruise-led action franchise to rival the likes of Mission Impossible and its mixed critical response only added to its woes.
Fast forward four years and we’ve got the sequel that no-one was really asking for. But is Jack Reacher: Never Go Back the improvement that was so sorely needed and could it act as a catalyst to turn this popular novel series into a proper film franchise?
Investigator Jack Reacher (Tom Cruise) springs into action after the arrest of Susan Turner (Cobie Smulders), an Army major accused of treason. Suspecting foul play, Jack embarks on a mission to prove that the head of his old unit is innocent. After crossing paths with the law, Reacher must now go on the lam to uncover the truth behind a major government conspiracy that involves the death of U.S. soldiers.
Director Edward Zwick (Blood Diamond, The Last Samurai) shoots the action realistically but even a commanding turn from Tom Cruise can’t save a bland script, so-so special effects and a plot so unoriginal, it would be easy to swap out Cruise for Liam Neeson and call it Taken 4. Or Matt Damon and label it Bourne 6? You get where I’m going with this, right?
It’s all been done so many times before and there are no twists and turns or anything remotely unusual to give the film a USP. Instead, the scriptwriters, of which there are three here, force our two central characters into a game of cat and mouse so lazy, the bad guys show up literally minutes after our heroes, with no explanation whatsoever of how they came to be in the vicinity.
Surely it wouldn’t have been difficult to add some extra exposition into the script. Cyborg baddies with GPS tracking systems implanted into their brains perhaps? I’ll save that idea for another day.
Nevertheless, the action is confidently choreographed with a Halloween parade finale being utilised rather well and Cruise plays the titular role well, despite being 54 this year. However, the supporting cast are drowned out by some horrendous dialogue and a story that doesn’t really know what to do with anyone apart from Jack Reacher himself.
And that really is about it. Jack Reacher: Never Go Back is the most satisfactory film of the year by some margin. It’s not terrible by any means and it certainly isn’t fantastic, but it makes for a passable trip to the cinema, though one that you’ll probably have forgotten about by the time you get to your front door. It’s just that middle of the road.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/10/21/as-average-as-you-can-get-jack-reacher-never-go-back-review/
Fast forward four years and we’ve got the sequel that no-one was really asking for. But is Jack Reacher: Never Go Back the improvement that was so sorely needed and could it act as a catalyst to turn this popular novel series into a proper film franchise?
Investigator Jack Reacher (Tom Cruise) springs into action after the arrest of Susan Turner (Cobie Smulders), an Army major accused of treason. Suspecting foul play, Jack embarks on a mission to prove that the head of his old unit is innocent. After crossing paths with the law, Reacher must now go on the lam to uncover the truth behind a major government conspiracy that involves the death of U.S. soldiers.
Director Edward Zwick (Blood Diamond, The Last Samurai) shoots the action realistically but even a commanding turn from Tom Cruise can’t save a bland script, so-so special effects and a plot so unoriginal, it would be easy to swap out Cruise for Liam Neeson and call it Taken 4. Or Matt Damon and label it Bourne 6? You get where I’m going with this, right?
It’s all been done so many times before and there are no twists and turns or anything remotely unusual to give the film a USP. Instead, the scriptwriters, of which there are three here, force our two central characters into a game of cat and mouse so lazy, the bad guys show up literally minutes after our heroes, with no explanation whatsoever of how they came to be in the vicinity.
Surely it wouldn’t have been difficult to add some extra exposition into the script. Cyborg baddies with GPS tracking systems implanted into their brains perhaps? I’ll save that idea for another day.
Nevertheless, the action is confidently choreographed with a Halloween parade finale being utilised rather well and Cruise plays the titular role well, despite being 54 this year. However, the supporting cast are drowned out by some horrendous dialogue and a story that doesn’t really know what to do with anyone apart from Jack Reacher himself.
And that really is about it. Jack Reacher: Never Go Back is the most satisfactory film of the year by some margin. It’s not terrible by any means and it certainly isn’t fantastic, but it makes for a passable trip to the cinema, though one that you’ll probably have forgotten about by the time you get to your front door. It’s just that middle of the road.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/10/21/as-average-as-you-can-get-jack-reacher-never-go-back-review/
Dana (24 KP) rated Extraordinary Means in Books
Mar 23, 2018
To be completely honest, I didn't know how I would feel about this book. I am not normally into the contemporary type novels, but hold crap, this one was extraordinary. (See what I did there?)
I was lucky enough to get to meet the author at Yall West this year in Santa Monica. She is very nice and was kind enough to sign my book!! Yay!!!
Not only were the characters well drawn out, they felt very real in the way Robyn wrote them. They were the outcasts who didn't care about being different. They just were who they were and didn't let others control what they thought about themselves.
People will probably compare this to The Fault in Our Stars because both are about sick kids dealing with their disease, but in a way, I liked this book better. It felt more real and honest. I am not saying that I didn't like TFIOS, because I very much enjoyed it. But there is just something about the way this was written made me feel more of a connection to it.
For me, the language of the story felt very organic as well. There weren't too many instances where it felt forced or like it was trying too hard to be more mature than it needed to be. It had a perfect balance for the kind of messages the story was trying to show the audience.
This story talked a lot about the fragility of life and how people shouldn't waste it. No matter what stage you are in at any point in your life, whether it be in high school studying to perfect your SAT scores or sitting in a forest contemplating life and existence, people shouldn't take what they have for granted. I think this was one of the most important messages in this story. To not waste your life studying, but to actually try to live it.
The story went by very quickly, but it was a good kind of quickly. It didn't drag on for too long, but it also didn't rush past important parts of the story. It had very good pacing to it.
I would recommend this to anyone. It doesn't matter if you absolutely love contemporary teen fiction or not, this is just an amazing novel that everyone should read.
I am going to put on one of my favorite quotations from the book now, so if you don't want to read it, stop reading this review now:
"There's a difference between being dead and dying. We're all dying. Some of us die for ninety years, and some of us die for nineteen. But each morning everyone on this planet wakes up one day closer to their death. Everyone. So living and dying are actually different words for the same thing, if you think about it."
I was lucky enough to get to meet the author at Yall West this year in Santa Monica. She is very nice and was kind enough to sign my book!! Yay!!!
Not only were the characters well drawn out, they felt very real in the way Robyn wrote them. They were the outcasts who didn't care about being different. They just were who they were and didn't let others control what they thought about themselves.
People will probably compare this to The Fault in Our Stars because both are about sick kids dealing with their disease, but in a way, I liked this book better. It felt more real and honest. I am not saying that I didn't like TFIOS, because I very much enjoyed it. But there is just something about the way this was written made me feel more of a connection to it.
For me, the language of the story felt very organic as well. There weren't too many instances where it felt forced or like it was trying too hard to be more mature than it needed to be. It had a perfect balance for the kind of messages the story was trying to show the audience.
This story talked a lot about the fragility of life and how people shouldn't waste it. No matter what stage you are in at any point in your life, whether it be in high school studying to perfect your SAT scores or sitting in a forest contemplating life and existence, people shouldn't take what they have for granted. I think this was one of the most important messages in this story. To not waste your life studying, but to actually try to live it.
The story went by very quickly, but it was a good kind of quickly. It didn't drag on for too long, but it also didn't rush past important parts of the story. It had very good pacing to it.
I would recommend this to anyone. It doesn't matter if you absolutely love contemporary teen fiction or not, this is just an amazing novel that everyone should read.
I am going to put on one of my favorite quotations from the book now, so if you don't want to read it, stop reading this review now:
"There's a difference between being dead and dying. We're all dying. Some of us die for ninety years, and some of us die for nineteen. But each morning everyone on this planet wakes up one day closer to their death. Everyone. So living and dying are actually different words for the same thing, if you think about it."
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Hot Pursuit (2015) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Combining various formulas is nothing new in Hollywood and the new film “Hot Pursuit”, tries very hard to be successful at doing so but has mixed results. The film stars Reese Witherspoon as Cooper, a police office in San Antonio who is trying to grow into the shoes her late father left behind. The fact that he was not only a great cop, but that Cooper is fairly small in stature has caused her to overcompensate through the years. So much so that she has had an epic blunder named after her and is relegated to the evidence room of her station. Cooper is a by the book cop whose social skills are very lacking as is proven by a recent dating disaster. Cooper is given the chance to redeem herself by travelling to escort the wife of a money launderer to court so they can both testify against a notorious drug lord.
When Cooper first meets her assignment Daniella (Sofia Vergera), they do not mix at all. Daniella is annoyed by Cooper’s by the book attitude and Cooper sees her task as nothing more than escorting a gold digging criminal to Dallas. When things go very wrong, the two end up framed and on the run with only each other for company and support. Naturally the duo begin to thaw to one another and there are a few good laughs along the way as they race to clear their names and stay ahead of the dangerous people chasing after them. The film has some fun moments, but the formula of the film can become a bit familiar.
We have seen this played out in numerous road trip and buddy cop segments so many times before that there is very little in the way of drama or surprise moments with the script. Witherspoon does well with her role and does take it away from being overly one dimensional but the jokes run a bit thin after a while. Vergera is good in small doses for me as she is very much the Charo of this generation. I am still wondering if she has been typecast in these shrill roles or if she is simply playing herself, but the over the top performance and her voice works better for me in smaller doses in Modern Family than it does over a full length feature. That being said, the two work well with one another and their scene with Jim Gaffigan is one of the funnier moments of the film. The pacing of the film is brisk, as Director Anne Fletcher has made a film that moves nicely and does not overstay its welcome. The biggest issue is a feeling that we have seen this all many times before and often in better movies, so despite the best efforts of those involved, this is one that never really gels the way that you would want a film to.
http://sknr.net/2015/05/08/hot-pursuit/
When Cooper first meets her assignment Daniella (Sofia Vergera), they do not mix at all. Daniella is annoyed by Cooper’s by the book attitude and Cooper sees her task as nothing more than escorting a gold digging criminal to Dallas. When things go very wrong, the two end up framed and on the run with only each other for company and support. Naturally the duo begin to thaw to one another and there are a few good laughs along the way as they race to clear their names and stay ahead of the dangerous people chasing after them. The film has some fun moments, but the formula of the film can become a bit familiar.
We have seen this played out in numerous road trip and buddy cop segments so many times before that there is very little in the way of drama or surprise moments with the script. Witherspoon does well with her role and does take it away from being overly one dimensional but the jokes run a bit thin after a while. Vergera is good in small doses for me as she is very much the Charo of this generation. I am still wondering if she has been typecast in these shrill roles or if she is simply playing herself, but the over the top performance and her voice works better for me in smaller doses in Modern Family than it does over a full length feature. That being said, the two work well with one another and their scene with Jim Gaffigan is one of the funnier moments of the film. The pacing of the film is brisk, as Director Anne Fletcher has made a film that moves nicely and does not overstay its welcome. The biggest issue is a feeling that we have seen this all many times before and often in better movies, so despite the best efforts of those involved, this is one that never really gels the way that you would want a film to.
http://sknr.net/2015/05/08/hot-pursuit/
Hazel (1853 KP) rated The Followers in Books
Dec 17, 2018
My rating: 3.5
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.
The Followers</i> is the compelling second novel of the British author Rebecca Wait. Stephanie is living a mundane life with her daughter, making what little money she can at a local coffee shop. But then she meets Nathaniel, a man who says he wants to love her, look after her and make her happy. Stephanie and Judith move in with Nathaniel at a place known as the Ark, with a bunch of other people who are part of a religious cult. Nathaniel, who proclaims himself as a prophet, is determined for Stephanie to forget about her past and turn herself to God. Judith, however, is not so easy to persuade. However a turn of events raise questions as to whether Nathaniel should really be trusted.
The story begins with Stephanie in prison where she is serving her sentence for a crime the reader has no knowledge of. It then switches between “before” and “after” with “before” being when Stephanie meets Nathaniel and “after” involving the prison scenes. From the very start the reader knows something bad is going to happen, that Stephanie is going to break a law bad enough for her to be imprisoned. The following chapters keep readers guessing what exactly that offence would be.
The novel gets darker and darker as the truth about the running of the Ark is revealed. With violence and punishments being doled out, Nathaniel is no longer the man he originally appeared. As the book climaxes it is shocking when the reader realizes what it is that Stephanie is going to do.
As well as Judith there are other children living in the Ark, but the difference is they were born there and have known nothing else except doing things in the name of God. Judith on the other hand was not sheltered from the “evils” of the outside world and thus has a different opinion about the way Nathaniel treats his followers. As it turns out, Judith is right to distrust the ways of this man, but there is nothing she can do about her situation.
Although containing a strong religious theme, <i>The Followers</i> is not a piece of Christian fiction. The behaviour of Nathaniel and the members of the Ark does not reflect the average Christian, and everyone, whether religious or not, will be shocked by the happenings in this book.
It took a while to get into the storyline and the first few chapters did not feel particularly well written, however readers will quickly be sucked into the plot and will want to keep reading to find out what happens. <i>The Followers</i> is not a happy story and there are a few sad and distressing scenes, which make the reader really feel for some of the characters. Overall it is a very interesting read.
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.
The Followers</i> is the compelling second novel of the British author Rebecca Wait. Stephanie is living a mundane life with her daughter, making what little money she can at a local coffee shop. But then she meets Nathaniel, a man who says he wants to love her, look after her and make her happy. Stephanie and Judith move in with Nathaniel at a place known as the Ark, with a bunch of other people who are part of a religious cult. Nathaniel, who proclaims himself as a prophet, is determined for Stephanie to forget about her past and turn herself to God. Judith, however, is not so easy to persuade. However a turn of events raise questions as to whether Nathaniel should really be trusted.
The story begins with Stephanie in prison where she is serving her sentence for a crime the reader has no knowledge of. It then switches between “before” and “after” with “before” being when Stephanie meets Nathaniel and “after” involving the prison scenes. From the very start the reader knows something bad is going to happen, that Stephanie is going to break a law bad enough for her to be imprisoned. The following chapters keep readers guessing what exactly that offence would be.
The novel gets darker and darker as the truth about the running of the Ark is revealed. With violence and punishments being doled out, Nathaniel is no longer the man he originally appeared. As the book climaxes it is shocking when the reader realizes what it is that Stephanie is going to do.
As well as Judith there are other children living in the Ark, but the difference is they were born there and have known nothing else except doing things in the name of God. Judith on the other hand was not sheltered from the “evils” of the outside world and thus has a different opinion about the way Nathaniel treats his followers. As it turns out, Judith is right to distrust the ways of this man, but there is nothing she can do about her situation.
Although containing a strong religious theme, <i>The Followers</i> is not a piece of Christian fiction. The behaviour of Nathaniel and the members of the Ark does not reflect the average Christian, and everyone, whether religious or not, will be shocked by the happenings in this book.
It took a while to get into the storyline and the first few chapters did not feel particularly well written, however readers will quickly be sucked into the plot and will want to keep reading to find out what happens. <i>The Followers</i> is not a happy story and there are a few sad and distressing scenes, which make the reader really feel for some of the characters. Overall it is a very interesting read.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Smoke and Key in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<b><i>I received this book for free from Publisher in exchange for an honest review. This does not affect my opinion of the book or the content of my review.</i></b>
<h2><b>Kelsey Sutton sucked me right into <em>Smoke and Key</em>.</b></h2>
I thought <em>Smoke and Key</em> would be a fascinating murder mystery set underground with the dead. But as I got in the story, I discovered I was so <em>so</em> wrong. From early in the novel, Sutton sucks me into the world of Under. Key wakes up dead with no memories other than a key around her neck. Others who live in Under are the same as well, and like Key each of them has an item they came with they identify themselves with.
<h2><strong>Mysterious and creepy.</strong></h2>
<em>Smoke and Key</em> is everything I thought a world of dead people would be - mysterious and creepy. When Key awakens in Under, she has a feeling everyone around her is in the world for a reason - she just can't remember why. As she sets out to discover who she is, some of the residents are murdered brutally with no return. Key hopes that as she discovers the reason why everyone is there, she'll solve the cause as well before she is murdered.
Sutton creates an atmospheric world while building a mystery that kept me turning the pages. There were moments where I thought I would know how the story will play out in the end, but I would turn out to be entirely wrong. Sutton continues to do this until near the end when everything circles together.
<h2><strong>A little romance underneath.</strong></h2>
Sutton includes a good amount of romance in her latest novel developing throughout that I enjoyed. Despite the romance being a trope I normally have a dislike for, Sutton turns the tables and handles it nicely. There is also a good balance between the romance and everything else in the story, so it doesn't overshadow the plot despite ultimately being a love story.
<h2><strong>Superb character development.</strong></h2>
I adored all of the characters who made up the world of Under. Each of them has individual contributions to the society that is developed. What's neat about <em>Smoke and Key</em> is the story is in two timelines that come together in the end. One timeline is in the present in Under while the other as Key discovers her past that led them all to this world. Having the two timelines allows readers to see how the relationships have developed.
<h2><em><strong>Smoke and Key</strong></em><strong> is a beautifully written novel with magic and romance built with mysterious and creepy vibes.</strong></h2>
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/smoke-and-key-by-kelsey-sutton/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<h2><b>Kelsey Sutton sucked me right into <em>Smoke and Key</em>.</b></h2>
I thought <em>Smoke and Key</em> would be a fascinating murder mystery set underground with the dead. But as I got in the story, I discovered I was so <em>so</em> wrong. From early in the novel, Sutton sucks me into the world of Under. Key wakes up dead with no memories other than a key around her neck. Others who live in Under are the same as well, and like Key each of them has an item they came with they identify themselves with.
<h2><strong>Mysterious and creepy.</strong></h2>
<em>Smoke and Key</em> is everything I thought a world of dead people would be - mysterious and creepy. When Key awakens in Under, she has a feeling everyone around her is in the world for a reason - she just can't remember why. As she sets out to discover who she is, some of the residents are murdered brutally with no return. Key hopes that as she discovers the reason why everyone is there, she'll solve the cause as well before she is murdered.
Sutton creates an atmospheric world while building a mystery that kept me turning the pages. There were moments where I thought I would know how the story will play out in the end, but I would turn out to be entirely wrong. Sutton continues to do this until near the end when everything circles together.
<h2><strong>A little romance underneath.</strong></h2>
Sutton includes a good amount of romance in her latest novel developing throughout that I enjoyed. Despite the romance being a trope I normally have a dislike for, Sutton turns the tables and handles it nicely. There is also a good balance between the romance and everything else in the story, so it doesn't overshadow the plot despite ultimately being a love story.
<h2><strong>Superb character development.</strong></h2>
I adored all of the characters who made up the world of Under. Each of them has individual contributions to the society that is developed. What's neat about <em>Smoke and Key</em> is the story is in two timelines that come together in the end. One timeline is in the present in Under while the other as Key discovers her past that led them all to this world. Having the two timelines allows readers to see how the relationships have developed.
<h2><em><strong>Smoke and Key</strong></em><strong> is a beautifully written novel with magic and romance built with mysterious and creepy vibes.</strong></h2>
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/smoke-and-key-by-kelsey-sutton/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Richard Jewell (2019) in Movies
Feb 2, 2020
Mellow paced - nothing special
89 year old Director/Actor Clint Eastwood has mellowed with age. He seems at peace with himself and prefers to work at a pace that he sets. His latest Directing effort - RICHARD JEWELL - has that sort of mellowness. It takes it time to tell it's story with no real urgency to it.
It could have used some life to be injected in it.
Based on the true events of the pipe bombing in Centennial Park in Atlanta during the 1996 Summer Olympics, RICHARD JEWELL tells the story of...well...Richard Jewell - the Security Guard who was hailed as a hero for warning people about the bomb, saving many lives, while also being listed as the #1 suspect in the bombing.
Director Eastwood and Writer Billy Ray do not spend much time making the audience guess at to whether or not they think that Jewell committed the crime (he did not - the real bomber was caught in 2006), rather they spend their time showing a person who's being railroaded by the FBI and who's life is caught up in the scramble by the press to "get the story." Again...this would be more interesting if Director Eastwood would show some sort of urgency to the proceedings, but this film is paced on an even keel from start to finish, and I never got caught up, emotionally, in the events that were transpiring in front of me.
Paul Walter Hauser (Shawn Eckhardt in I, TONYA) does a "fine enough" job as the titular character - but it isn't anything special and since the viewer is spending almost every scene with him "fine enough" isn't good enough. Adding to my disappointment are the portrayals by John Hamm (as an FBI Agent) and Olivia Wilde (as a Newspaper Reporter). Both of these performances border on caricature (especially Wilde's performance). I'm disappointed in Eastwood for letting this happen.
Injecting "some" life into this film is Kathy Bates - who was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress for her portrayal of Richard Jewell's mother - and she delivers better than the others...but not "Oscar Worthy". She does nail her "Oscar moment", but I don't think the script gives her much else to do.
The brightest spot in this film - by far - is the portrayal of Richard Jewell's lawyer, Watson Bryant, by Sam Rockwell and the performance of Nina Ariande as Bryant's Secretary/Girlfriend. If anyone should have been nominated for an Oscar for their performance in this film, it is Rockwell - his is the best one in the film and Ariande plays off him wonderfully well. I sat up a little taller in my seat whenever these two had a scene together.
But that's about it. It's a pretty "meh" movie - professionally made and paced deliberately and mellowly - like Clint Eastwood. But not like an Oscar contending film.
Letter Grade: B-
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
It could have used some life to be injected in it.
Based on the true events of the pipe bombing in Centennial Park in Atlanta during the 1996 Summer Olympics, RICHARD JEWELL tells the story of...well...Richard Jewell - the Security Guard who was hailed as a hero for warning people about the bomb, saving many lives, while also being listed as the #1 suspect in the bombing.
Director Eastwood and Writer Billy Ray do not spend much time making the audience guess at to whether or not they think that Jewell committed the crime (he did not - the real bomber was caught in 2006), rather they spend their time showing a person who's being railroaded by the FBI and who's life is caught up in the scramble by the press to "get the story." Again...this would be more interesting if Director Eastwood would show some sort of urgency to the proceedings, but this film is paced on an even keel from start to finish, and I never got caught up, emotionally, in the events that were transpiring in front of me.
Paul Walter Hauser (Shawn Eckhardt in I, TONYA) does a "fine enough" job as the titular character - but it isn't anything special and since the viewer is spending almost every scene with him "fine enough" isn't good enough. Adding to my disappointment are the portrayals by John Hamm (as an FBI Agent) and Olivia Wilde (as a Newspaper Reporter). Both of these performances border on caricature (especially Wilde's performance). I'm disappointed in Eastwood for letting this happen.
Injecting "some" life into this film is Kathy Bates - who was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress for her portrayal of Richard Jewell's mother - and she delivers better than the others...but not "Oscar Worthy". She does nail her "Oscar moment", but I don't think the script gives her much else to do.
The brightest spot in this film - by far - is the portrayal of Richard Jewell's lawyer, Watson Bryant, by Sam Rockwell and the performance of Nina Ariande as Bryant's Secretary/Girlfriend. If anyone should have been nominated for an Oscar for their performance in this film, it is Rockwell - his is the best one in the film and Ariande plays off him wonderfully well. I sat up a little taller in my seat whenever these two had a scene together.
But that's about it. It's a pretty "meh" movie - professionally made and paced deliberately and mellowly - like Clint Eastwood. But not like an Oscar contending film.
Letter Grade: B-
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Shazam! (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
Fun Filled Family Event
Shazam! is a 2019 superhero movie based on the DC Comics character. Produced by New Line Cinema and distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures, it is the first live-action film version of the character since 1941. The film is also directed by David F. Sandberg from a screenplay by Henry Gayden and story by Henry Hayden and Darren Lemke. Starring Zachary Levi, Asher Angel, Mark Strong, Jack Dylan Grazer, and Djimon Hounsou.
In 1974 Upstate New York, the ancient wizard Shazam magically transports Thaddeus Sivana (Ethan Pugiotto) to the Rock of Eternity, a hidden magical temple. Shazam, the last of the Council of Seven Wizards, explains that he has been searching for centuries for a champion who is "pure of heart". Released upon the ancient world, and now trapped in statues within the Rock, the Seven Deadly Sins tempt Thaddeus with promises of power. Banished back to Earth as unworthy of being a champion for succumbing to the sins, Thaddeus causes an accident while traveling with his family which leaves his father severely injured. Searching for his birth mother in present day Philadelphia, foster kid Billy Batson (Angel Asher) runs a foul of the law and is placed in a group home with 5 other foster kids run by Victor (Cooper Andrews) and Rosa Vasquez (Marta Milans). Freddy Freeman (Jack Dylan Frazer) is one of the five foster kids, an amateur superhero expert, and his new roommate. Now an adult Thaddeus (Mark Strong) discovers how to return to the Rock and acquire the power he was denied as a child.
This movie was a ton of fun. I don't think I've laughed out loud in a comic book movie this much since Ant-Man. This movie was really good. It had its silliness in certain parts but still did well in building tension and having its serious parts. Also it was well done on how the story played on your emotions for a lot of the different characters. I love the way the foster family and siblings came into play throughout the film. The special effects were really good, especially the monsters and even though you know Zachary Levi is in a muscle suit (which i initially disliked) it didn't even matter. The plot was good although some of it seemed recycled which bothered me slightly. The dialogue was good, some of it silly, which seemed appropriate for the character being younger than he looks when he is Shazam. But I didn't have much to complain about. I never saw one of the major twists coming at the end, so that really surprised me. If you're looking for a fun movie to watch, with family or friends or a superhero movie that will also make you laugh, Shazam is the one to choose. I give this movie a 8/10.
In 1974 Upstate New York, the ancient wizard Shazam magically transports Thaddeus Sivana (Ethan Pugiotto) to the Rock of Eternity, a hidden magical temple. Shazam, the last of the Council of Seven Wizards, explains that he has been searching for centuries for a champion who is "pure of heart". Released upon the ancient world, and now trapped in statues within the Rock, the Seven Deadly Sins tempt Thaddeus with promises of power. Banished back to Earth as unworthy of being a champion for succumbing to the sins, Thaddeus causes an accident while traveling with his family which leaves his father severely injured. Searching for his birth mother in present day Philadelphia, foster kid Billy Batson (Angel Asher) runs a foul of the law and is placed in a group home with 5 other foster kids run by Victor (Cooper Andrews) and Rosa Vasquez (Marta Milans). Freddy Freeman (Jack Dylan Frazer) is one of the five foster kids, an amateur superhero expert, and his new roommate. Now an adult Thaddeus (Mark Strong) discovers how to return to the Rock and acquire the power he was denied as a child.
This movie was a ton of fun. I don't think I've laughed out loud in a comic book movie this much since Ant-Man. This movie was really good. It had its silliness in certain parts but still did well in building tension and having its serious parts. Also it was well done on how the story played on your emotions for a lot of the different characters. I love the way the foster family and siblings came into play throughout the film. The special effects were really good, especially the monsters and even though you know Zachary Levi is in a muscle suit (which i initially disliked) it didn't even matter. The plot was good although some of it seemed recycled which bothered me slightly. The dialogue was good, some of it silly, which seemed appropriate for the character being younger than he looks when he is Shazam. But I didn't have much to complain about. I never saw one of the major twists coming at the end, so that really surprised me. If you're looking for a fun movie to watch, with family or friends or a superhero movie that will also make you laugh, Shazam is the one to choose. I give this movie a 8/10.
BookInspector (124 KP) rated A Spark Of Light in Books
Sep 24, 2020
Wow, this book does have a good punch to throw, and I absolutely loved it. The main topic discussed in this book – abortions. This book tells multiple stories from multiple perspectives. One of few abortion clinics in Mississippi has a man entering the clinic, who starts shooting, remaining alive are being kept as hostages. Jodi tells the stories of everybody inside, plus few extra characters, who are very related to the story itself.
This book has a very wide and diverse variety of characters, and they all have an amazing story to tell. I really liked all the characters, I think they were very well developed and incredibly gripping. I thoroughly enjoyed their stories and all the emotions which they brought to this book. I really liked, that the characters kept travelling back to when they were little, that allowed me to connect with the characters even more, and I loved to see what were their values in life, or how life shaped them to be the people they were now.
The narrative was incredibly indulging, and I always wanted to find out, what is going to happen next. The book is written backwards, and even though it was a unique experience and it made perfect sense while reading, I am not sure I really liked this type of writing. I did find it confusing sometimes because there were quite a lot of characters, and their stories kind of mixed up for me sometimes. There were plenty of important topics discussed in this novel, such as single parenthood, father’s love for their daughters, abortions, religion, teenage pregnancies, rapes and many more. One thing for sure, the research was done for this book was impeccable. You can feel the real stories breathing through the experiences of the characters, and it really got me thinking. I wasn’t expecting any twists in this story to be honest, but I can promise you, this book brings some very unexpected turns and surprises. 🙂
Jodi’s writing style is absolutely incredible, she delivered such a sensitive topic while stating facts and points of view but not being judgmental. She states pro-choice point of view as well as pro-life and allows the reader to make a decision. The chapters were quite long, but they were divided into small parts, so it did not drag for me at all, and it was quite a page-turner. I really liked how the book ended, I think it rounded up the story very nicely. So, to conclude, this book is very powerful and deep, but at the same time and incredibly interesting read. It does require an open mind and ability to look at the things from different angles. I do think this book is a brilliant read, with amazingly crafted characters and very absorbing plot, and I do strongly recommend to read it.
This book has a very wide and diverse variety of characters, and they all have an amazing story to tell. I really liked all the characters, I think they were very well developed and incredibly gripping. I thoroughly enjoyed their stories and all the emotions which they brought to this book. I really liked, that the characters kept travelling back to when they were little, that allowed me to connect with the characters even more, and I loved to see what were their values in life, or how life shaped them to be the people they were now.
The narrative was incredibly indulging, and I always wanted to find out, what is going to happen next. The book is written backwards, and even though it was a unique experience and it made perfect sense while reading, I am not sure I really liked this type of writing. I did find it confusing sometimes because there were quite a lot of characters, and their stories kind of mixed up for me sometimes. There were plenty of important topics discussed in this novel, such as single parenthood, father’s love for their daughters, abortions, religion, teenage pregnancies, rapes and many more. One thing for sure, the research was done for this book was impeccable. You can feel the real stories breathing through the experiences of the characters, and it really got me thinking. I wasn’t expecting any twists in this story to be honest, but I can promise you, this book brings some very unexpected turns and surprises. 🙂
Jodi’s writing style is absolutely incredible, she delivered such a sensitive topic while stating facts and points of view but not being judgmental. She states pro-choice point of view as well as pro-life and allows the reader to make a decision. The chapters were quite long, but they were divided into small parts, so it did not drag for me at all, and it was quite a page-turner. I really liked how the book ended, I think it rounded up the story very nicely. So, to conclude, this book is very powerful and deep, but at the same time and incredibly interesting read. It does require an open mind and ability to look at the things from different angles. I do think this book is a brilliant read, with amazingly crafted characters and very absorbing plot, and I do strongly recommend to read it.
Darren (1599 KP) rated The Pining (2019) in Movies
Sep 26, 2019
Characters – Joe is a disabled photographer, he used to be an athlete before his accident too, this saw his life change overnight with him still feeling the effects of what happened to him, he has built up a reputation for his skills with a camera too and just when he starts getting help, he starts to see unusual things happen to him too. Father William is the man that held the support group meeting, he is trying to help people get over the trauma in their lives, but he becomes one of the suspects when the bodies start piling up. Detective Harris has been investigating the bodies, some seem like clear murders, others look like accidents, she believes there is a connection between the support group meeting and wants to get to the bottom of it.
Performances – Diogo Hausen is the best of the performers, he does show us how the character does feel like he has been a victim and showing the strength to carry on. Tom Sizemore is an actor we expect so much more from, he doesn’t get a chance to shine in this one, while Jackie Dallas does well with her scenes.
Story – The story here follows a string of cases that involve the members of a support group being involved in murders or strange accidents, we see how one detective is trying put the pieces together, while trying to save one of the final living members of the group. This is an interesting spin on the idea of victim selection, it does work for making the characters seem like they have been selected to play into their strengths and weaknesses. With this strong idea, comes a weaker way of telling the story, which doesn’t seem to make many of the scenes feel connected, or get to a targeting moments, which could bring about motivation to light until way too late in the film. This is a story that could be a lot more intense only it fails to capture the moments well enough.
Thriller – This film does try to keep us guessing to what will happen next, the problems comes with the fact we only have one scene that feels unpredictable with most just being a cut and dry version of the incidents.
Settings – This film is set in one city where the victims have all been around one locations which could make them the potential latest victim to what is going on, it shows how people don’t know everybody’s stories in life.
Scene of the Movie – Grace’s bad date.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The film spends too much time on Joe, when it seems like we should be investigating the murders.
Final Thoughts – This is a thriller that doesn’t manage to hit the levels it could do, it has an interesting idea, only it never gives it the full focus it should.
Overall: Thriller that misses the edgy side.
Performances – Diogo Hausen is the best of the performers, he does show us how the character does feel like he has been a victim and showing the strength to carry on. Tom Sizemore is an actor we expect so much more from, he doesn’t get a chance to shine in this one, while Jackie Dallas does well with her scenes.
Story – The story here follows a string of cases that involve the members of a support group being involved in murders or strange accidents, we see how one detective is trying put the pieces together, while trying to save one of the final living members of the group. This is an interesting spin on the idea of victim selection, it does work for making the characters seem like they have been selected to play into their strengths and weaknesses. With this strong idea, comes a weaker way of telling the story, which doesn’t seem to make many of the scenes feel connected, or get to a targeting moments, which could bring about motivation to light until way too late in the film. This is a story that could be a lot more intense only it fails to capture the moments well enough.
Thriller – This film does try to keep us guessing to what will happen next, the problems comes with the fact we only have one scene that feels unpredictable with most just being a cut and dry version of the incidents.
Settings – This film is set in one city where the victims have all been around one locations which could make them the potential latest victim to what is going on, it shows how people don’t know everybody’s stories in life.
Scene of the Movie – Grace’s bad date.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The film spends too much time on Joe, when it seems like we should be investigating the murders.
Final Thoughts – This is a thriller that doesn’t manage to hit the levels it could do, it has an interesting idea, only it never gives it the full focus it should.
Overall: Thriller that misses the edgy side.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Blockers (2018) in Movies
Apr 25, 2018
Decent
Blockers met my expectations and I'm not saying that's a good thing. Don't get me wrong, it's a decent film that might make you crack a smile or two while you fold a load of laundry. However, it just misses the mark of being in the upper echelon of comedies. Let's dive into this film about three parents trying to stop their kids from losing their virginity on prom night.
Acting: 8
The film revolved mostly around the parents who tested their range in spite of the film being a comedy. Even with less screen time, however, I thought the kids (probably adults in actuality) outshined their parental figures by far. Gideon Adlon was outstanding in her role as Sam, a girl trying to figure things out in her own life, but still keep up with her friends. Her performance allows you to empathize with her character and root for her story to end well. She gives me a bit of a Maika Monroe vibe and that's a good thing.
Beginning: 4
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
Butt chugging. I could just stop there really. The entire scene was shot in such an awkward way, it put you right there in the moment. There were a handful of other scenes that were captured perfectly as well, but I won't ruin the experience. Let's just say the gang goes on an adventure to remember and you're left with a few hilarious sequences as a result.
Conflict: 5
I just couldn't get on board with the mission here. It felt like the parents had worse things to worry about than following their kids on prom night. Even they questioned their own aims at times. If you're not on board, you can't really expect me to be.
There was another part of me that thought, "What's the big deal in the first place? Is all this really worth it?" Of course the parents end up asking themselves the same question, but not until they're way in too deep. There were definitely some ways they could have raised the stakes to give the conflict more meaning.
Genre: 7
Was it laugh out loud funny? At times, absolutely. There were certain moments that I definitely wished there were more of, but all in all, I felt the film tiptoed around being balls-to-the-wall hilarious. Sure the comedy lagged in some places, but when it was funny, it was really funny.
Memorability: 6
Pace: 6
When it wasn't funny, on the other hand, the film just dragged on, leaving for a pretty inconsistent pace. When you waste dialogue on jokes or scenes that aren't funny, the film slows way down as a whole. Definite room for improvement.
Plot: 9
The story takes you on a comedy adventure from one shenanigan to the next. Despite the weak conflict, I thought the story itself was fine. I never felt as if things just happened for the sake of advancing the plot (Pet Peeve #1). The story was far-fetched, but it works within its own realm.
Resolution: 9
Loved the resolution for the parents as they all came to terms with their own realities. There were some moments of mending, laughing, and true feel-good points. I especially enjoyed the resolution for Sam's character. This could have easily been a film about just her and it would have been just as enjoyable if not better.
Overall: 73
Blockers manages to rebound from its very slow start into a decent semblance of a movie. The characters are hilarious and the film can be just as sentimental as it is funny at times. See it...at home.
Acting: 8
The film revolved mostly around the parents who tested their range in spite of the film being a comedy. Even with less screen time, however, I thought the kids (probably adults in actuality) outshined their parental figures by far. Gideon Adlon was outstanding in her role as Sam, a girl trying to figure things out in her own life, but still keep up with her friends. Her performance allows you to empathize with her character and root for her story to end well. She gives me a bit of a Maika Monroe vibe and that's a good thing.
Beginning: 4
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
Butt chugging. I could just stop there really. The entire scene was shot in such an awkward way, it put you right there in the moment. There were a handful of other scenes that were captured perfectly as well, but I won't ruin the experience. Let's just say the gang goes on an adventure to remember and you're left with a few hilarious sequences as a result.
Conflict: 5
I just couldn't get on board with the mission here. It felt like the parents had worse things to worry about than following their kids on prom night. Even they questioned their own aims at times. If you're not on board, you can't really expect me to be.
There was another part of me that thought, "What's the big deal in the first place? Is all this really worth it?" Of course the parents end up asking themselves the same question, but not until they're way in too deep. There were definitely some ways they could have raised the stakes to give the conflict more meaning.
Genre: 7
Was it laugh out loud funny? At times, absolutely. There were certain moments that I definitely wished there were more of, but all in all, I felt the film tiptoed around being balls-to-the-wall hilarious. Sure the comedy lagged in some places, but when it was funny, it was really funny.
Memorability: 6
Pace: 6
When it wasn't funny, on the other hand, the film just dragged on, leaving for a pretty inconsistent pace. When you waste dialogue on jokes or scenes that aren't funny, the film slows way down as a whole. Definite room for improvement.
Plot: 9
The story takes you on a comedy adventure from one shenanigan to the next. Despite the weak conflict, I thought the story itself was fine. I never felt as if things just happened for the sake of advancing the plot (Pet Peeve #1). The story was far-fetched, but it works within its own realm.
Resolution: 9
Loved the resolution for the parents as they all came to terms with their own realities. There were some moments of mending, laughing, and true feel-good points. I especially enjoyed the resolution for Sam's character. This could have easily been a film about just her and it would have been just as enjoyable if not better.
Overall: 73
Blockers manages to rebound from its very slow start into a decent semblance of a movie. The characters are hilarious and the film can be just as sentimental as it is funny at times. See it...at home.