Saint Maud is a movie that requires you to really pay attention, and not only because some of the dialogue can be very quiet. It is a movie with a message, albeit a messed up one, and it is also the kind of movie that is fun to dissect and talk about for hours after viewing. The subject matter is something that can be easily based in reality, and that makes it all the more horrific. The visuals are beautiful. The acting is good. Morfydd Clark (Maud) was amazing at playing the creepy quiet type. The volume drove me a little bit crazy. During moments of dialogue it would be very quiet, than the next scene would have a BOOMING score. Overall the movie was good, not great, and is definitely one for those people who love to really analyze the meanings behind movies.
Reviews
53 Reviews
Birds of Prey
(2020)
DC's best movie yet
7 February 2020
The title is not an exaggeration. I think most will agree that, even though not all the DC movies are bad, most of them are. Birds of Prey is over the top, fun, funny, and just such a fun watch.
The movie is very similar to the Deadpool movie. They are both told through a nonlinear narrative; both movies are over the top violent; both movies break the fourth wall in spots; and both movies will have you laughing at the crazy things you're seeing on screen.
Margot Robbie was born to play this character. The way she portrays Harley is exactly how you would expect a live action version of the character to be.
All the actors and actresses do phenomenal jobs portraying their respective characters, except for Victor Zsazz. This interpretation was just weird.
Don't be thrown off by all the bad reviews. This movie is a genuine good time.
The movie is very similar to the Deadpool movie. They are both told through a nonlinear narrative; both movies are over the top violent; both movies break the fourth wall in spots; and both movies will have you laughing at the crazy things you're seeing on screen.
Margot Robbie was born to play this character. The way she portrays Harley is exactly how you would expect a live action version of the character to be.
All the actors and actresses do phenomenal jobs portraying their respective characters, except for Victor Zsazz. This interpretation was just weird.
Don't be thrown off by all the bad reviews. This movie is a genuine good time.
The Nun
(2018)
Not the "Darkest Chapter" they promised
7 September 2018
Advertised as the "darkest chapter in the Conjuring series", the movie didn't deliver on that promise.
The story was good, but the execution was poor. This movie failed to find a balance between having subtle scares and jump scares. The subtle scares, the ones that really build tension, were few and in between. They were scary, but the scenes didn't last long enough to leave any lasting tension. The jump scares happened way to often, and it's one of the bullets in the gun that killed this movie. A character like The Nun needs to stay in the shadows, creep behind your back, and be the presence that you feel less than you see.
Movies like this also need some sort of comic relief, but the comedy was just a tad too much. It released too much tension. If you want to make a true scary movie, don't give people time to recover from one scene to another. Or, give people false hope and then lay it on them again. This movie felt like it was made for people who want to see a scary movie, but don't love being scared.
The acting was good, and so was the story. In the end though it failed to deliver the one major thing it was supposed to: Scares.
The story was good, but the execution was poor. This movie failed to find a balance between having subtle scares and jump scares. The subtle scares, the ones that really build tension, were few and in between. They were scary, but the scenes didn't last long enough to leave any lasting tension. The jump scares happened way to often, and it's one of the bullets in the gun that killed this movie. A character like The Nun needs to stay in the shadows, creep behind your back, and be the presence that you feel less than you see.
Movies like this also need some sort of comic relief, but the comedy was just a tad too much. It released too much tension. If you want to make a true scary movie, don't give people time to recover from one scene to another. Or, give people false hope and then lay it on them again. This movie felt like it was made for people who want to see a scary movie, but don't love being scared.
The acting was good, and so was the story. In the end though it failed to deliver the one major thing it was supposed to: Scares.
I Feel Pretty
(2018)
Surprisingly watchable.
9 May 2018
I never thought I would say this about this movie, but I really enjoyed it. It was funny, and it had a great message in the end.
This is not typical Amy Schumer, because she's not screaming profanities and making sexual jokes. I didn't know she could play this type of character, and the fact that she could shows that she is must more than just a dirty comedian. A lot of her jokes in the movie weren't really that funny, but the jokes that involved other people that she played into were funny. Her character pissed me off a lot throughout the movie, because her narcissistic attitude was sometimes a little too much to take, but the end result and message was a fabulous one.
The supporting actors and actresses were great, especially the ones who played her friends, and Michelle Williams. The movie has no real antagonist (except for Renee during certain parts), and it works.
This isn't a repeater, but it's definitely worth a view.
This is not typical Amy Schumer, because she's not screaming profanities and making sexual jokes. I didn't know she could play this type of character, and the fact that she could shows that she is must more than just a dirty comedian. A lot of her jokes in the movie weren't really that funny, but the jokes that involved other people that she played into were funny. Her character pissed me off a lot throughout the movie, because her narcissistic attitude was sometimes a little too much to take, but the end result and message was a fabulous one.
The supporting actors and actresses were great, especially the ones who played her friends, and Michelle Williams. The movie has no real antagonist (except for Renee during certain parts), and it works.
This isn't a repeater, but it's definitely worth a view.
Traffik
(2018)
BORING!!!
30 April 2018
I really do like the idea behind the movie, and the fact that it is "based on" true events brings a chilling factor; however, the movie's quality was definitely lacking.
The only good actors were Omar Epps and Luke Goss, everyone was just plain awful. You're going to hear this a lot, and it's true, but Paula Patton is so scandalously clad that her nipples make more of an appearance than she does. I was honestly hoping for all other characters to die off because they were just awful to watch.
The cinematography at some points were just weird. There is no need to show someone running, and then show the same shot but upside-down.
The movie is only horrifying in the fact that this kind of thing actually happens. Other than that, the movie is not thrilling. The movie is boring.
The only good actors were Omar Epps and Luke Goss, everyone was just plain awful. You're going to hear this a lot, and it's true, but Paula Patton is so scandalously clad that her nipples make more of an appearance than she does. I was honestly hoping for all other characters to die off because they were just awful to watch.
The cinematography at some points were just weird. There is no need to show someone running, and then show the same shot but upside-down.
The movie is only horrifying in the fact that this kind of thing actually happens. Other than that, the movie is not thrilling. The movie is boring.
Truth or Dare
(I) (2018)
I dare you to watch this bad movie
16 April 2018
Truth or Dare may bring a unique take to the horror genre; however, it's still not a very good movie.
The characters are annoying. I know some of them are meant to be annoying, but they were literally all annoying. When every single character is like that, it's hard to have sympathy when something awful happens to them.
The acting was really bad, except for maybe a few scenes.
That creepy smile was only scary the first time I saw it, and that was during the trailer. Seeing it in the movie was just laughable. It looks more goofy than scary.
Towards the end of the movie things stopped making sense. It felt like the film makers were just trying to wrap things up, so things like how long it takes to actually be forced to take your turn gets thrown out the window.
The movie was bad, and I wouldn't recommend it to anybody.
The characters are annoying. I know some of them are meant to be annoying, but they were literally all annoying. When every single character is like that, it's hard to have sympathy when something awful happens to them.
The acting was really bad, except for maybe a few scenes.
That creepy smile was only scary the first time I saw it, and that was during the trailer. Seeing it in the movie was just laughable. It looks more goofy than scary.
Towards the end of the movie things stopped making sense. It felt like the film makers were just trying to wrap things up, so things like how long it takes to actually be forced to take your turn gets thrown out the window.
The movie was bad, and I wouldn't recommend it to anybody.
Rings
(2017)
A slap in the face to the series
10 August 2017
Some movies just do not need to be made, and that is the case with Rings. I loved the first Ring movie, and the second one was good as well. I even loved Ringu, the Japanese film that inspired the American version.
Rings has no idea what it wants to be. The first part – a part that is too reminiscent of Final Destination – very weakly sets up the next part, which after only a few scenes, very weakly set up the third, longest, and final part.
The movie had bad acting, horrible direction, and a story that literally had me screaming at my T.V. "WHY?!?!" Basically, someone loved the idea of riding the already successful Ring franchise like a cash cow. A person who has zero respect for the preceding movies. A person who thought they could put their own take on a series, while leaving out any sort of consistency with the original movies.
If you are a fan of horror, good movies, or good storytelling in general, then by all means avoid this movie.
Rings has no idea what it wants to be. The first part – a part that is too reminiscent of Final Destination – very weakly sets up the next part, which after only a few scenes, very weakly set up the third, longest, and final part.
The movie had bad acting, horrible direction, and a story that literally had me screaming at my T.V. "WHY?!?!" Basically, someone loved the idea of riding the already successful Ring franchise like a cash cow. A person who has zero respect for the preceding movies. A person who thought they could put their own take on a series, while leaving out any sort of consistency with the original movies.
If you are a fan of horror, good movies, or good storytelling in general, then by all means avoid this movie.
The Founder
(2016)
McFuriating
3 February 2017
If you are a fan of McDonalds, there is a chance that this film will change your view of the fast-food chain. I wouldn't say I was a fan of McDonalds before watching this film, but I wouldn't say I was Anti-McDonalds either. After watching it I can say I found myself cursing the fast food chain. When I went back for a second viewing I tried to keep an open mind; I kept telling myself that there are two sides to every story. I thought that during my second viewing I would be able to see a different perspective, and fully understand exactly what took place, but my feelings on the subject matter remain unchanged.
Even though the film is mostly one sided, showing the McDonalds brothers in the victim's spotlight, I would love to learn more about Ray's side. Ray Croc's tactics, personality, and overall selfishness was infuriating, but to play devil's advocate, he was excellent at what he did. Throughout the film, you will hear the term "persistence" often, and Ray is definitely the poster boy for the word.
Casting Michael Keaton as Ray was a smart move. He doesn't have the warm, charming face that Ray seems to have; however, the sharpness of his expressions and his attitude conveyed the underlying feeling of who Ray was.
The portrayal of the McDonald brothers was my favorite thing about the film. More particularly, I thought Nick Offerman shined in his role as Richard McDonald. He took a chance and strayed from comedy, retired his mustache, and showed us all that he can pull off serious rolls as well.
The film sticks with the early days of the company, staying away from the more modern things (1960s and on). It's less about the what the chain eventually became, and more about how it came to be.
The film matter is infuriating, but it's also an amazing biopic. Whether we like McDonalds or not, it's a piece of American history, and this is one history lesson I don't think anyone will forget.
Even though the film is mostly one sided, showing the McDonalds brothers in the victim's spotlight, I would love to learn more about Ray's side. Ray Croc's tactics, personality, and overall selfishness was infuriating, but to play devil's advocate, he was excellent at what he did. Throughout the film, you will hear the term "persistence" often, and Ray is definitely the poster boy for the word.
Casting Michael Keaton as Ray was a smart move. He doesn't have the warm, charming face that Ray seems to have; however, the sharpness of his expressions and his attitude conveyed the underlying feeling of who Ray was.
The portrayal of the McDonald brothers was my favorite thing about the film. More particularly, I thought Nick Offerman shined in his role as Richard McDonald. He took a chance and strayed from comedy, retired his mustache, and showed us all that he can pull off serious rolls as well.
The film sticks with the early days of the company, staying away from the more modern things (1960s and on). It's less about the what the chain eventually became, and more about how it came to be.
The film matter is infuriating, but it's also an amazing biopic. Whether we like McDonalds or not, it's a piece of American history, and this is one history lesson I don't think anyone will forget.
La La Land
(2016)
Blew me away
1 February 2017
I went and saw La La land without knowing much about it (I didn't know anything tbh), and I ended up falling in love with the film. The acting is amazing, the cinematography is spectacular, but the music is the lure. It's the backbone of the film, and it's also the glue that holds it together.
The movie is a love story, not only between the two main characters, but between them and their dreams as well. They are in a constant struggle between satisfying their relationships, and the music appropriately and beautifully reflects the constant shift in emotions. Ryan Gosling's Sebastian explained it perfectly when he talked about Jazz music speaking for those who can't fully express themselves through words. That's what the music in this movie does for the audience. It supports the telling of the story.
The dancing in the film is another excellent source to show where the characters emotionally. When they're happy, the choreography is fast. During the romantic scenes, the movement is more slow and flowing. Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone were phenomenal during the dance numbers, especially when you consider that some of them had long continuous shots.
Besides the music and dance numbers, I thought the acting was incredible. Ryan Gosling is perfect at being both smug and charming, while Emma Stone can put on an entire performance without uttering a word. The expression she can convey just in the movement of her eyes and brows is nothing short of amazing.
In the end, I fell in love with this movie, and hard. The story and acting opened my heart, but the music is what warms it.
The movie is a love story, not only between the two main characters, but between them and their dreams as well. They are in a constant struggle between satisfying their relationships, and the music appropriately and beautifully reflects the constant shift in emotions. Ryan Gosling's Sebastian explained it perfectly when he talked about Jazz music speaking for those who can't fully express themselves through words. That's what the music in this movie does for the audience. It supports the telling of the story.
The dancing in the film is another excellent source to show where the characters emotionally. When they're happy, the choreography is fast. During the romantic scenes, the movement is more slow and flowing. Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone were phenomenal during the dance numbers, especially when you consider that some of them had long continuous shots.
Besides the music and dance numbers, I thought the acting was incredible. Ryan Gosling is perfect at being both smug and charming, while Emma Stone can put on an entire performance without uttering a word. The expression she can convey just in the movement of her eyes and brows is nothing short of amazing.
In the end, I fell in love with this movie, and hard. The story and acting opened my heart, but the music is what warms it.
The Bye Bye Man
(2017)
Say bye bye to decent horror films
23 January 2017
There are moments when you watch a trailer for a movie and think to yourself "Well, the trailer is pretty bad, but maybe the movie is better." And, sometimes the movie does actually turn out to be better, making you pleasantly surprised. I did not have that feeling as I watched the trailer for the Bye Bye Man. After the trailer ended, there was not one ounce of me that thought "OK, maybe I should give it a shot.".
I watched this movie with my best friend, who also happens to be a horror fan, only because we have literally seen everything else that was out. I personally found three major issues with the movie.
1. The characters: Not one of the characters were particularly likable, so who really cares if any or all of them get hacked to bits? They don't really have any back story. The only one you feel any emotion towards at all is Elliot, and even those moments of emotion are sparse. Of course, he's the only one who has somewhat of a history to him.
2. The acting: To put it simply, the acting is horrendous. It's downright laughable. The writing can only be blamed for so long. It felt more like a high school stage production (and a bad one at that), than an actual movie. The women who played Kim, and Elliot's girlfriend, are by far the worst out of the whole movie, the latter being slightly worse than the former.
3. The worst thing about this movie is there is no mythology about the Bye Bye Man. There is zero backstory into who or what this creature is. All we know is that he is a creepy man with a creepy dog, and that's it. We don't know why he's terrorizing and killing these people, other than the fact that they say his name. WHY?! Where did that lore come from? Even the most psychotic icons of horror have some backstory into why they are that way. This movie offers you none of that.
I wouldn't recommend seeing this movie; I wouldn't recommend renting this movie; I wouldn't even recommend watching this movie for free on Netflix. This is one of the worst horror movies I have ever seen, and I've seen some very bad horror movies.
I watched this movie with my best friend, who also happens to be a horror fan, only because we have literally seen everything else that was out. I personally found three major issues with the movie.
1. The characters: Not one of the characters were particularly likable, so who really cares if any or all of them get hacked to bits? They don't really have any back story. The only one you feel any emotion towards at all is Elliot, and even those moments of emotion are sparse. Of course, he's the only one who has somewhat of a history to him.
2. The acting: To put it simply, the acting is horrendous. It's downright laughable. The writing can only be blamed for so long. It felt more like a high school stage production (and a bad one at that), than an actual movie. The women who played Kim, and Elliot's girlfriend, are by far the worst out of the whole movie, the latter being slightly worse than the former.
3. The worst thing about this movie is there is no mythology about the Bye Bye Man. There is zero backstory into who or what this creature is. All we know is that he is a creepy man with a creepy dog, and that's it. We don't know why he's terrorizing and killing these people, other than the fact that they say his name. WHY?! Where did that lore come from? Even the most psychotic icons of horror have some backstory into why they are that way. This movie offers you none of that.
I wouldn't recommend seeing this movie; I wouldn't recommend renting this movie; I wouldn't even recommend watching this movie for free on Netflix. This is one of the worst horror movies I have ever seen, and I've seen some very bad horror movies.
Assassin's Creed
(2016)
Does not do right by the game
27 December 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I guess my first clue that I wasn't going to like this movie would have been that the trailers did nothing to peak my interest. I'm a huge fan of the games, and I also have no problems with movies made from video games, but this movie crashed, and hard.
My first problem with this movie is the lack of character development. It's almost as if they gave up developing a character half way through. You get a little sense of who they are, but they never give you much of anything to go on. It's hard to feel anything for any of the characters. You don't know who they are, so you don't care if they live or die.
Another problem I had with this movie is the useless information they give to you throughout. Again, it's like they started with something, and then stopped before it was finished; or, like they want you to keep guessing. Even if you're a fan of the games, it's hard to piece together what they're trying to tell you.
The last issue I have with this movie is the lack of time spent in the past. I understand that part of the game takes place in the present, but a majority of it takes place in the past. I may be speaking only for myself here, but that's the best part of the game for me. When they do take you to the past, they plop you down in the middle of something that's already going on, so nothing is built up, and again, no character development for those characters either.
What the movie did right was the graphics. That deserves a gold star in my book. I also must say that the 'Leap of Faith' was pretty amazing as well. Other than that, this movie brings nothing to the successful game franchise that it's based upon.
My first problem with this movie is the lack of character development. It's almost as if they gave up developing a character half way through. You get a little sense of who they are, but they never give you much of anything to go on. It's hard to feel anything for any of the characters. You don't know who they are, so you don't care if they live or die.
Another problem I had with this movie is the useless information they give to you throughout. Again, it's like they started with something, and then stopped before it was finished; or, like they want you to keep guessing. Even if you're a fan of the games, it's hard to piece together what they're trying to tell you.
The last issue I have with this movie is the lack of time spent in the past. I understand that part of the game takes place in the present, but a majority of it takes place in the past. I may be speaking only for myself here, but that's the best part of the game for me. When they do take you to the past, they plop you down in the middle of something that's already going on, so nothing is built up, and again, no character development for those characters either.
What the movie did right was the graphics. That deserves a gold star in my book. I also must say that the 'Leap of Faith' was pretty amazing as well. Other than that, this movie brings nothing to the successful game franchise that it's based upon.
Suicide Squad
(2016)
A step in the right direction
5 August 2016
This movie is definitely not like Batman v. Superman, unlike what a lot of other reviews say. In fact, this movie is pretty much exactly what I thought it would be: Fun!
The three characters that were the driving force behind this movie are: Harley Quinn (no surprise there), Deadshot, and surprisingly El Diablo. From the get go it was a given that Harley Quinn was going to be a major factor for this movie doing well. Because she has such a following with fans, her big screen debut is a major deciding factor in which way this movie could turn; either horribly bad, or amazingly awesome. Thankfully, the latter is how it turned out. Margot Robbie was so perfect in the roll it's almost scary. The main thing the three characters have in common is the emotional back story they bring: Harley Quinn and her extreme love and devotion to Mr. J; Deadshot's love for his daughter; and the tragic story behind El Diablo's family. You connect with them, and even though they're bad guys you actually want them to win in a way.
Characters like Slipknot (very short screen time), Captain Boomerang, and Killer Croc, didn't really add much. I'm glad they were there because it added just a tiny more depth to the whole "team" thing, but if they were gone they wouldn't be missed.
I love Jared Leto, but I have to say I am not a fan of his Joker. Sure he looked cool, but he just didn't feel like a good Joker to me. The Joker is supposed to be a fun villain that you enjoy watching on screen because you don't know what he's going to do. I did not feel that way about Leto's version. The fact that he didn't have a lot of screen time was a good thing.
The small cameos made by certain Justice League members were done beautifully.
Overall I really did enjoy this movie, and I think this is definitely a great step in bringing this universe together.
The three characters that were the driving force behind this movie are: Harley Quinn (no surprise there), Deadshot, and surprisingly El Diablo. From the get go it was a given that Harley Quinn was going to be a major factor for this movie doing well. Because she has such a following with fans, her big screen debut is a major deciding factor in which way this movie could turn; either horribly bad, or amazingly awesome. Thankfully, the latter is how it turned out. Margot Robbie was so perfect in the roll it's almost scary. The main thing the three characters have in common is the emotional back story they bring: Harley Quinn and her extreme love and devotion to Mr. J; Deadshot's love for his daughter; and the tragic story behind El Diablo's family. You connect with them, and even though they're bad guys you actually want them to win in a way.
Characters like Slipknot (very short screen time), Captain Boomerang, and Killer Croc, didn't really add much. I'm glad they were there because it added just a tiny more depth to the whole "team" thing, but if they were gone they wouldn't be missed.
I love Jared Leto, but I have to say I am not a fan of his Joker. Sure he looked cool, but he just didn't feel like a good Joker to me. The Joker is supposed to be a fun villain that you enjoy watching on screen because you don't know what he's going to do. I did not feel that way about Leto's version. The fact that he didn't have a lot of screen time was a good thing.
The small cameos made by certain Justice League members were done beautifully.
Overall I really did enjoy this movie, and I think this is definitely a great step in bringing this universe together.
Watched it out of morbid curiosity
20 July 2016
Like a majority of people I am die-hard fan of the original Ghostbusters movie, and unlike a lot of people I have no problem with remaking movies, as long as they are remade well. From the get- go this movie did not sit well for me, and no, it's not because of the all-female cast. It's the fact that the trailers made the movie look bad. There was not one thing funny about the trailers, and it's sad because all four women are very funny otherwise.
The movie did have some funny parts, there is no denying that. Those moments however did not feel like they belonged in this movie. Even though the original Ghostbusters and let's say a movie like Bridesmaids are both comedies, they are not the same kind of comedy, and when you try to put jokes that belong in one movie into the other it just doesn't work. Aside from those very few funny moments the rest of the movie was just boring. The only character I really liked or felt any kind of anything for was Leslie Jones's character, and I absolutely HATED Kate McKinnon's character. The cameos were unexpected, fun, and well appreciated.
In the end this movie was exactly what I was expecting it to be, and I hope like hell they do not make a sequel. Some remakes just don't need to exist, and this is one of them.
The movie did have some funny parts, there is no denying that. Those moments however did not feel like they belonged in this movie. Even though the original Ghostbusters and let's say a movie like Bridesmaids are both comedies, they are not the same kind of comedy, and when you try to put jokes that belong in one movie into the other it just doesn't work. Aside from those very few funny moments the rest of the movie was just boring. The only character I really liked or felt any kind of anything for was Leslie Jones's character, and I absolutely HATED Kate McKinnon's character. The cameos were unexpected, fun, and well appreciated.
In the end this movie was exactly what I was expecting it to be, and I hope like hell they do not make a sequel. Some remakes just don't need to exist, and this is one of them.
X-Men: Apocalypse
(2016)
Averagocalypse
27 May 2016
Warning: Spoilers
It's hard to read all the negative hype a movie gets, and then go into the movie with a clear mind without being persuaded, even a little, by what you have read. That's why it's better (in my opinion) to stay clear of any sort of review linking to a movie you're about to see, especially one you are dying to see.
That was the case with X-Men: Apocalypse. Even though I don't necessarily agree with every negative review written about the movie, I will say that I agree that it's above "BVS", and below "CA: CW".
The biggest culprit for the movie being somewhat lousy is the acting. I didn't think any of the younger versions of the X-Men (Cyclops, Jean, Storm and Nightcrawler) did any particular good job, and in no way did any of them look like their older "movie" versions. Olivia Munn looks beautiful, but her acting was pretty bad, and the funny part is she didn't have many lines. Ben Hardy's "Angel" was very unlikable (for the wrong reasons), and added NOTHING to the movie, except a cool look. Even "X-Men" veterans, McAvoy and Lawrence, were not as good this time around. Their performances felt very forced, and just corny.
Oscar Isaac did an excellent job as Apocalypse. Even though I've only read a handful of comics, and I was a fan of the 1990's cartoon, I thought this version of Apocalypse carried through very well. The calm and subtle vibe he keeps through most of the movie is more frightening than anything. His powers are incredible, and I also love the explanation of how he received all his powers; it totally makes sense. His voice goes from being soft to booming, which is what everyone was hoping from the character. He's menacing, which is why it kind of sucked that they killed him off that easily. I was expecting a lot more fight than what we received.
Once more, Evan Peter's "Quicksilver", steals the show. From his very first scene he's amazing. The five minute "mansion scene", was incredible and hilarious. What's great this time around is he's not all humor. Sure, a majority of his part is comic relief; but he also has his serious moments which helped flesh out his character more.
Other small things I loved: Jackman's cameo, not as "Wolverine", but as "Weapon X". For the people who wanted the blood crazy, berserker Wolverine, this one is for you. The helmet he's wearing; his outfit of straps and nothing else; this felt like it was ripped right from the comics and cartoon and I freaking loved it. He has a total of zero lines, and his scene was bloody fun to watch.
Speaking of straight from the comics and cartoon: The costumes at the very end, Mystique's and Cyclops's, will make every X-Men fan happy. Even if their acting was sub-par, the homage to the costumes in the end was well appreciated.
Besides some un-impressing acting, some bad CGI, and some very corny dialogue, the movie is very fun otherwise. Enjoy the good moments, and try to bare through the bad ones.
That was the case with X-Men: Apocalypse. Even though I don't necessarily agree with every negative review written about the movie, I will say that I agree that it's above "BVS", and below "CA: CW".
The biggest culprit for the movie being somewhat lousy is the acting. I didn't think any of the younger versions of the X-Men (Cyclops, Jean, Storm and Nightcrawler) did any particular good job, and in no way did any of them look like their older "movie" versions. Olivia Munn looks beautiful, but her acting was pretty bad, and the funny part is she didn't have many lines. Ben Hardy's "Angel" was very unlikable (for the wrong reasons), and added NOTHING to the movie, except a cool look. Even "X-Men" veterans, McAvoy and Lawrence, were not as good this time around. Their performances felt very forced, and just corny.
Oscar Isaac did an excellent job as Apocalypse. Even though I've only read a handful of comics, and I was a fan of the 1990's cartoon, I thought this version of Apocalypse carried through very well. The calm and subtle vibe he keeps through most of the movie is more frightening than anything. His powers are incredible, and I also love the explanation of how he received all his powers; it totally makes sense. His voice goes from being soft to booming, which is what everyone was hoping from the character. He's menacing, which is why it kind of sucked that they killed him off that easily. I was expecting a lot more fight than what we received.
Once more, Evan Peter's "Quicksilver", steals the show. From his very first scene he's amazing. The five minute "mansion scene", was incredible and hilarious. What's great this time around is he's not all humor. Sure, a majority of his part is comic relief; but he also has his serious moments which helped flesh out his character more.
Other small things I loved: Jackman's cameo, not as "Wolverine", but as "Weapon X". For the people who wanted the blood crazy, berserker Wolverine, this one is for you. The helmet he's wearing; his outfit of straps and nothing else; this felt like it was ripped right from the comics and cartoon and I freaking loved it. He has a total of zero lines, and his scene was bloody fun to watch.
Speaking of straight from the comics and cartoon: The costumes at the very end, Mystique's and Cyclops's, will make every X-Men fan happy. Even if their acting was sub-par, the homage to the costumes in the end was well appreciated.
Besides some un-impressing acting, some bad CGI, and some very corny dialogue, the movie is very fun otherwise. Enjoy the good moments, and try to bare through the bad ones.
Captain America: Civil War
(2016)
Avengers: Civil War
17 May 2016
For the past eight years, and a combined total of thirteen movies, Marvel has been doing everything right for when it came to CBM's. Even their less than stellar films (Iron Man 3 and Age of Ultron) still managed to bring the fun, because in the end that's what we want: something fun and memorable.
I loved the new Captain America movie; however, I don't think the title is fitting. I think it should have been Avengers: Civil War, because honestly that's what it was. With Captain America in the title he should have the dominating presence of the whole film. Instead, each character has equal shared screen time.
One thing that this movie does well is it brings on the emotions, and hard. As a friend of mine said once we were done watching the movie, "I never expected to cry this much during a Marvel movie." That's one of the biggest driving factors the movie has. You feel for every single character for different reasons. It's not only emotional for the characters on screen, it's also emotional for the viewers watching, maybe even more so because we're connecting with them all.
The action and fight choreography is amazing. Watching Black Panther fight was like watching a ballet. Winter Soldier is an all-around badass. Everything he does (the good and the bad) leaves your mouth open in awe.
Finally, we have a great villain. This man isn't just evil for the sake of being evil. He has a backstory that justifies what he's doing. He has a motive, and his motive is actually pretty rational, even though it's not right. Plus, he actually pulled it off. When you start sympathizing with the enemy, the filmmakers are doing something right.
I had my reservations about the new Spiderman at first, but after watching him in action I can sigh with relief. Black Panther is hands down my favorite part of the movie. His character is strong- willed, he knows what he wants, and he sets out to do it no matter what. He's also very calm and rational in what he does. He's respectable, as he should be. Both Ant-man and Spiderman offer up some great comic relief.
The way this movie was made is how all movies should be made, not just CBM's.
I loved the new Captain America movie; however, I don't think the title is fitting. I think it should have been Avengers: Civil War, because honestly that's what it was. With Captain America in the title he should have the dominating presence of the whole film. Instead, each character has equal shared screen time.
One thing that this movie does well is it brings on the emotions, and hard. As a friend of mine said once we were done watching the movie, "I never expected to cry this much during a Marvel movie." That's one of the biggest driving factors the movie has. You feel for every single character for different reasons. It's not only emotional for the characters on screen, it's also emotional for the viewers watching, maybe even more so because we're connecting with them all.
The action and fight choreography is amazing. Watching Black Panther fight was like watching a ballet. Winter Soldier is an all-around badass. Everything he does (the good and the bad) leaves your mouth open in awe.
Finally, we have a great villain. This man isn't just evil for the sake of being evil. He has a backstory that justifies what he's doing. He has a motive, and his motive is actually pretty rational, even though it's not right. Plus, he actually pulled it off. When you start sympathizing with the enemy, the filmmakers are doing something right.
I had my reservations about the new Spiderman at first, but after watching him in action I can sigh with relief. Black Panther is hands down my favorite part of the movie. His character is strong- willed, he knows what he wants, and he sets out to do it no matter what. He's also very calm and rational in what he does. He's respectable, as he should be. Both Ant-man and Spiderman offer up some great comic relief.
The way this movie was made is how all movies should be made, not just CBM's.
Keanu
(2016)
Not enough Keanu
5 May 2016
I am a huge fan of Key and Peele. I think their first season on Comedy Central was amazing, and even though the second season kind of died down a little, it still had its very funny moments. Keanu looks and feels like an hour and a half long episode of the star's main show, and sadly after a while it got a little old.
My biggest problem with the movie, and this saddens me to say, is that a lot of the jokes were not funny, even by Key and Peele standards. Not only were they not funny, but the non-funny jokes were repeated constantly. That's not to say that all the jokes were un-funny, because there were some freaking hilarious ones too. I just expected more.
My other problem was that I don't feel like they showed Keanu enough. Through the middle of the movie they are focusing on something else entirely. It was a part that was essential for the movie moving forward, but they went way to long with it, imo, and the cat was nowhere to be seen, heard, or even talked about in that period of time.
I did love all the George Michael songs in the movie, and in fact a majority of the funniest moments from the movie had to do with him. Even though a lot of were not funny, the truly funny ones were hilarious, and overshadowed the un-funny ones.
I would recommend this to anyone who is a fan of Key and Peele's humor. I still have much respect for those two, and though I wasn't a fan of the movie, I am still a fan of them.
My biggest problem with the movie, and this saddens me to say, is that a lot of the jokes were not funny, even by Key and Peele standards. Not only were they not funny, but the non-funny jokes were repeated constantly. That's not to say that all the jokes were un-funny, because there were some freaking hilarious ones too. I just expected more.
My other problem was that I don't feel like they showed Keanu enough. Through the middle of the movie they are focusing on something else entirely. It was a part that was essential for the movie moving forward, but they went way to long with it, imo, and the cat was nowhere to be seen, heard, or even talked about in that period of time.
I did love all the George Michael songs in the movie, and in fact a majority of the funniest moments from the movie had to do with him. Even though a lot of were not funny, the truly funny ones were hilarious, and overshadowed the un-funny ones.
I would recommend this to anyone who is a fan of Key and Peele's humor. I still have much respect for those two, and though I wasn't a fan of the movie, I am still a fan of them.
Green Room
(2015)
Good premise poorly executed
22 April 2016
Green Room combines both a used idea and a fresh one, and even though I think the concept is very interesting, the movie itself was not.
The premise following a group of "survivors", who must survive a night as monsters of every kind continuously try to kill them, is the used idea. A lot of horror/thriller movies use that concept in one variation of another. It's a great idea, and it definitely works for most movies. The fresh idea is that the survivors are members of a punk band, who are fighting their way out of a run-down punk venue in the middle of nowhere, while be hunted by white supremacists led by Patrick Stewart.
The movie's problems begin with the characters themselves. In horror/thriller movies some sort sympathy for the victim(s) needs to be there, because if you don't care about them, why would you care if they die? The band members were so unlikable that I actually found myself hoping they would die.
Aside from a handful of people, the acting was pretty bad. Patrick Stewart did a good job as the leader of the skinheads, and Imojen Poots did a fair job as well, even though I was trying to figure out if her character was stoned or in shock. Some of the actors had their moments, but for the most part the talent in the movie was scarce. On a related note, Anton Yelchin has one of the worst cries/screams ever.
Parts of the story either didn't make sense, or didn't lead to anything. The sharpie camouflage scene was one scene in particular that just seemed to add nothing. All it managed to accomplish was make the characters look mentally challenged, and not in the way I think they were going for.
The characters also die way too quick in this movie for me. A good horror/thriller movie should pace out their kills, not kill two people in two minutes, and then make you wait thirty or so more minutes for the next death.
The movie definitely had potential; however, in my opinion it fell pretty flat.
The premise following a group of "survivors", who must survive a night as monsters of every kind continuously try to kill them, is the used idea. A lot of horror/thriller movies use that concept in one variation of another. It's a great idea, and it definitely works for most movies. The fresh idea is that the survivors are members of a punk band, who are fighting their way out of a run-down punk venue in the middle of nowhere, while be hunted by white supremacists led by Patrick Stewart.
The movie's problems begin with the characters themselves. In horror/thriller movies some sort sympathy for the victim(s) needs to be there, because if you don't care about them, why would you care if they die? The band members were so unlikable that I actually found myself hoping they would die.
Aside from a handful of people, the acting was pretty bad. Patrick Stewart did a good job as the leader of the skinheads, and Imojen Poots did a fair job as well, even though I was trying to figure out if her character was stoned or in shock. Some of the actors had their moments, but for the most part the talent in the movie was scarce. On a related note, Anton Yelchin has one of the worst cries/screams ever.
Parts of the story either didn't make sense, or didn't lead to anything. The sharpie camouflage scene was one scene in particular that just seemed to add nothing. All it managed to accomplish was make the characters look mentally challenged, and not in the way I think they were going for.
The characters also die way too quick in this movie for me. A good horror/thriller movie should pace out their kills, not kill two people in two minutes, and then make you wait thirty or so more minutes for the next death.
The movie definitely had potential; however, in my opinion it fell pretty flat.
Hardcore Henry
(2015)
An over the top, insane, fun action movie
15 April 2016
This movie is insane. First person shooter mixed with deafening techno music, combined with over the top meaningless gore and violence, with just a sprinkle of drugs and a dusting of sex. It's as insane as it sounds and looks, and I loved every freaking second of it.
Within ten minutes the movie starts with a bang, shoving you head first into action filled insanity. The action happening is very fast paced, and some of the moves Henry performs you can't help but laugh while your jaw hangs open, mentally telling yourself "Holy crap, did he just do that?"
The gore is just as over the top as the action is. A big part of what I loved about the gore is that it wasn't comical. No fountains of blood spraying from a recently severed necks. Instead, the gore is on a real level, where if someone were to actually perform some of the sick things that happen, the outcome would most likely be what we saw.
The first person shooter POV is not the only thing that reminded me of a video game. The villain reminded me of villains I've fought in video games, more specifically Metal Gear Solid, and Final Fantasy.
The acting was actually pretty great. It felt like I was watching people cosplay/roleplay to the extreme, and it totally worked for the movie.
The shaky cam was a little nauseating at times, but not enough to take me out of the movie. It came and went in just seconds. The graphics were awesome throughout except for a brief scene towards the end that just looked like they got a little sloppy or lazy.
This movie is no masterpiece, but it's fun. It's exactly what I expected, and exactly what I wanted.
Within ten minutes the movie starts with a bang, shoving you head first into action filled insanity. The action happening is very fast paced, and some of the moves Henry performs you can't help but laugh while your jaw hangs open, mentally telling yourself "Holy crap, did he just do that?"
The gore is just as over the top as the action is. A big part of what I loved about the gore is that it wasn't comical. No fountains of blood spraying from a recently severed necks. Instead, the gore is on a real level, where if someone were to actually perform some of the sick things that happen, the outcome would most likely be what we saw.
The first person shooter POV is not the only thing that reminded me of a video game. The villain reminded me of villains I've fought in video games, more specifically Metal Gear Solid, and Final Fantasy.
The acting was actually pretty great. It felt like I was watching people cosplay/roleplay to the extreme, and it totally worked for the movie.
The shaky cam was a little nauseating at times, but not enough to take me out of the movie. It came and went in just seconds. The graphics were awesome throughout except for a brief scene towards the end that just looked like they got a little sloppy or lazy.
This movie is no masterpiece, but it's fun. It's exactly what I expected, and exactly what I wanted.
The Jungle Book
(2016)
A movie made with obvious love for the original
15 April 2016
I grew up watching the original 1967 version that Disney made. I not only loved it, I was obsessed with it. John Favreau managed to take a beloved childhood classic and breathe new life into it.
Something that I was a little weary at first about, and what essentially turned into one of the best parts of the movie, are the animals and the way they're animated. Before the movie came out I was trying to picture how the animals would look when speaking. I didn't want to see the constantly used, over the top, obnoxious looking animation that I sadly sort of expect. What was shown, however, was nowhere near obnoxious. Instead, the animation when the animals speak is very clean and smooth.
The young actor, Neel Sethi, was simply amazing. It's hard to believe he's so young because his performance is 100 times better than even the more seasoned actors. He really embodied the roll of Mowgli, and I doubt anyone else could have pulled it off as well.
All the actors were cast perfectly in their respective rolls. Even the ones I was a little weary about at first (Scarlett Johansen as Kaa, and Christopher Watkins as King Louie) did amazing. Watkins King Louie scene was easily one of my favorite parts of the entire movie. What he brought to the character is nothing short of pure awesome.
The one very small criticism I have would be some of the consistency when it came to the animal's animation. For the most part the animation is so life-like it's insane. But some of the animals looked a little too "cartoony" to really flow with the rest. They were very few and between, and definitely not something that ruins the movie.
The graphics are not just beautiful, they're stunning. Watching it in 3D enhanced the beauty, and also added more depth to the film, making you feel like you're right there in the jungle (3D doing what it's supposed to do).
If you're a fan of the 67' version, I can guarantee you that you will come away from this movie very pleased. Also, stay through the credits. Even though there is no post-credits scene, the credits themselves continue the fun.
Something that I was a little weary at first about, and what essentially turned into one of the best parts of the movie, are the animals and the way they're animated. Before the movie came out I was trying to picture how the animals would look when speaking. I didn't want to see the constantly used, over the top, obnoxious looking animation that I sadly sort of expect. What was shown, however, was nowhere near obnoxious. Instead, the animation when the animals speak is very clean and smooth.
The young actor, Neel Sethi, was simply amazing. It's hard to believe he's so young because his performance is 100 times better than even the more seasoned actors. He really embodied the roll of Mowgli, and I doubt anyone else could have pulled it off as well.
All the actors were cast perfectly in their respective rolls. Even the ones I was a little weary about at first (Scarlett Johansen as Kaa, and Christopher Watkins as King Louie) did amazing. Watkins King Louie scene was easily one of my favorite parts of the entire movie. What he brought to the character is nothing short of pure awesome.
The one very small criticism I have would be some of the consistency when it came to the animal's animation. For the most part the animation is so life-like it's insane. But some of the animals looked a little too "cartoony" to really flow with the rest. They were very few and between, and definitely not something that ruins the movie.
The graphics are not just beautiful, they're stunning. Watching it in 3D enhanced the beauty, and also added more depth to the film, making you feel like you're right there in the jungle (3D doing what it's supposed to do).
If you're a fan of the 67' version, I can guarantee you that you will come away from this movie very pleased. Also, stay through the credits. Even though there is no post-credits scene, the credits themselves continue the fun.
Worth the $3.99 I paid to see it
14 April 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I sat through two viewings of Batman v. Superman, not because I loved it so much the first time that I couldn't wait to see it again, but quite the opposite; I read from multiple people that their second viewing was better. I agree that it was better on my second viewing because I was able to concentrate more on all the different things that was happening; however, in the end the movie still was plain not good. Here's why:
The plot is a major downfall for the movie. The reason why, in my opinion, is because there is too much going on. Things that could have taken place over a series of movies, was instead jammed into one, two and a half hour long movie. This movie should have taken place after a Batman stand-alone movie was made, and maybe even another Superman movie. The Justice League cameos (Flash, Aquaman, and Cyborg) would have been perfect for a post credits scene, along with the last shot of Bruce and Diana at the cemetery.
On my first viewing I hated Ben Affleck as Bruce and Bats. He wasn't believable as either in my opinion, and it may not be Ben's fault, but more the writing. We get very little insight into his mind and why he is the way he is, and instead we have to rely on just kind of knowing what he's going through, or has gone through. Again, this would have been something that could have been set up if he had his own movie to start with. During my second viewing I actually liked the character, but only in the beginning. He took a quick left turn downhill very early on.
There are certain aspects of Jesse Eisenberg's Lex Luthor that I liked, but for the most part I found him annoying. I liked that he is a strong willed, intelligent person, who knows what he wants and seeks it out. The things that he said I could actually go along with and sort of relate to. His high-pitched voice, his jokes, and his spontaneous behavior reminded me of a child on a sugar high.
I found Amy Adam's Louis Lane boring, and I thought her acting was extremely forced.
Even though Gal Gaddot is beautiful, I don't think she's a very good actress. When I think of wonder woman I think of an Amazon woman, who has great muscle tone, yet still very feminine. Gal did not portray any of those aside from being feminine.
Finally, the so called biggest match of the century doesn't even happen until about the two hour mark. If it were a big battle of sorts I could understand that; however, until that point the two rarely even interacted with each other, let alone throw a punch or two. Plus, the fight takes place over ten minutes, and ends with the now infamous "Martha" line, which let's be honest was lame.
I didn't completely, 100 percent hate the movie either. I did find some good things in it.
I did like Superman, and I thought Henry Cavil did an amazing job. He really captured the spirit of the Superman I know, while also bringing his own subtle version to screen. He still feels like the true American superhero, but with a little bit of angst that Henry provides and overall makes for a well-rounded character.
The score was good, especially the opening them and Lex Luthor's theme.
I did like the opening credits showing the all too familiar Death of the Waynes, and even though it's in almost every Batman movie to date, it's one of the best done in my opinion.
Finally, Jeremy Irons was AWESOME. His roll was very small, and unlike other Alfred rolls we've seen to date. He is the most relatable and the most likable character of the whole movie.
The movie has its good moments, and really delivers in the bad ones. In the end, it was definitely worth the $3.99 I paid to see it; $8.00 if you count both viewings.
The plot is a major downfall for the movie. The reason why, in my opinion, is because there is too much going on. Things that could have taken place over a series of movies, was instead jammed into one, two and a half hour long movie. This movie should have taken place after a Batman stand-alone movie was made, and maybe even another Superman movie. The Justice League cameos (Flash, Aquaman, and Cyborg) would have been perfect for a post credits scene, along with the last shot of Bruce and Diana at the cemetery.
On my first viewing I hated Ben Affleck as Bruce and Bats. He wasn't believable as either in my opinion, and it may not be Ben's fault, but more the writing. We get very little insight into his mind and why he is the way he is, and instead we have to rely on just kind of knowing what he's going through, or has gone through. Again, this would have been something that could have been set up if he had his own movie to start with. During my second viewing I actually liked the character, but only in the beginning. He took a quick left turn downhill very early on.
There are certain aspects of Jesse Eisenberg's Lex Luthor that I liked, but for the most part I found him annoying. I liked that he is a strong willed, intelligent person, who knows what he wants and seeks it out. The things that he said I could actually go along with and sort of relate to. His high-pitched voice, his jokes, and his spontaneous behavior reminded me of a child on a sugar high.
I found Amy Adam's Louis Lane boring, and I thought her acting was extremely forced.
Even though Gal Gaddot is beautiful, I don't think she's a very good actress. When I think of wonder woman I think of an Amazon woman, who has great muscle tone, yet still very feminine. Gal did not portray any of those aside from being feminine.
Finally, the so called biggest match of the century doesn't even happen until about the two hour mark. If it were a big battle of sorts I could understand that; however, until that point the two rarely even interacted with each other, let alone throw a punch or two. Plus, the fight takes place over ten minutes, and ends with the now infamous "Martha" line, which let's be honest was lame.
I didn't completely, 100 percent hate the movie either. I did find some good things in it.
I did like Superman, and I thought Henry Cavil did an amazing job. He really captured the spirit of the Superman I know, while also bringing his own subtle version to screen. He still feels like the true American superhero, but with a little bit of angst that Henry provides and overall makes for a well-rounded character.
The score was good, especially the opening them and Lex Luthor's theme.
I did like the opening credits showing the all too familiar Death of the Waynes, and even though it's in almost every Batman movie to date, it's one of the best done in my opinion.
Finally, Jeremy Irons was AWESOME. His roll was very small, and unlike other Alfred rolls we've seen to date. He is the most relatable and the most likable character of the whole movie.
The movie has its good moments, and really delivers in the bad ones. In the end, it was definitely worth the $3.99 I paid to see it; $8.00 if you count both viewings.
10 Cloverfield Lane
(2016)
This is not Cloverfield 2
5 April 2016
The key to liking this film is to understand what you're watching. I did not go into this theater expecting a direct sequel to the original Cloverfield, just like I didn't watch Prometheus expecting an Alien prequel. You have to take it for what it is. When J.J. says that it's a "blood cousin" of Cloverfield, I interpreted that as meaning it's a part of a shared universe, or something along those lines; and that's really the best approach in my opinion to have.
One of the best things about this film is the trailer. It gives you nothing, and at the same time sucks you in. It sets up a mood instead of spoiling any scenes. During the trailer there is not dialogue, on the song "I think we're alone now" playing. It's the perfect song because it starts off on an upbeat; giving you sense of hope for a fun time, then the tone smoothly shifts in the opposite direction. In my opinion, the trailer is as well made as the film is.
What really made this film incredible for me was the tension it builds. The biggest key to that tension is John Goodman's portrayal of Howard. I spent the entire film trying to figure out "Is he insane; is he not insane; or is he a mixture of both?" I felt bad for him, and at the same time I feared him. His outbursts are almost immediately followed by a tender or quiet moment, which really screws with your mind.
Both Mary Elizabeth Winstead and John Gallagher Jr. did amazing jobs as well. The chemistry between them is incredible, and because this film has very few characters in it, the character development is equally incredible. You don't quite know where they are going, but you do get an understanding of where they've been, and of what they've been through. Their characters are relatable, and because of that you fear along with them.
Thankfully there are very few jump scares. Instead, as I've mentioned above, they rely heavily on the fear of the unknown. The film let's your imagination wander, and when you think you may have started to figure something out they throw you a curve-ball and mess with your mind some more.
Go see this film with the understanding that it's NOT A DIRECT Sequel OF ANY KIND to Cloverfield. That needs to be completely out of anyone's head before seeing this because you will be disappointed. If you pay attention you can spot some connections.
I've seen it twice now and I loved every second of it both times. In my opinion it's not only a really fun film, it's also a very well made film.
One of the best things about this film is the trailer. It gives you nothing, and at the same time sucks you in. It sets up a mood instead of spoiling any scenes. During the trailer there is not dialogue, on the song "I think we're alone now" playing. It's the perfect song because it starts off on an upbeat; giving you sense of hope for a fun time, then the tone smoothly shifts in the opposite direction. In my opinion, the trailer is as well made as the film is.
What really made this film incredible for me was the tension it builds. The biggest key to that tension is John Goodman's portrayal of Howard. I spent the entire film trying to figure out "Is he insane; is he not insane; or is he a mixture of both?" I felt bad for him, and at the same time I feared him. His outbursts are almost immediately followed by a tender or quiet moment, which really screws with your mind.
Both Mary Elizabeth Winstead and John Gallagher Jr. did amazing jobs as well. The chemistry between them is incredible, and because this film has very few characters in it, the character development is equally incredible. You don't quite know where they are going, but you do get an understanding of where they've been, and of what they've been through. Their characters are relatable, and because of that you fear along with them.
Thankfully there are very few jump scares. Instead, as I've mentioned above, they rely heavily on the fear of the unknown. The film let's your imagination wander, and when you think you may have started to figure something out they throw you a curve-ball and mess with your mind some more.
Go see this film with the understanding that it's NOT A DIRECT Sequel OF ANY KIND to Cloverfield. That needs to be completely out of anyone's head before seeing this because you will be disappointed. If you pay attention you can spot some connections.
I've seen it twice now and I loved every second of it both times. In my opinion it's not only a really fun film, it's also a very well made film.
Gods of Egypt
(2016)
Visually stunning POS
27 February 2016
Warning: Spoilers
"Gods of Egypt" had a few good things going for it. I thought the opening sequence was great; I thought some of the imagery was beautiful (mostly the beautiful colors); and I thought both Nikolaj Coaster- Waldau and Geoffry Rush were pretty good. Actually they were the only good source of acting in this movie, in my opinion. I also thought that Anubis was very well portrayed, and looked very good. On that thought, the entire after life setting was pretty great.
Even though the imagery look good, the CGI was way to over the top at points, and downright laughable at others. When a chase scene reminds you of a chase scene from a movie from the 20's (moving picture background), it's pretty bad. Other scenes just looked choppy, almost like they were rushing through and instead of cleaning up the shots they just went with it. Also, I totally understand the ratio of gods to humans; however, it only managed to look really ridiculous.
The acting was bad, like really, really, bad; overacting at it's prime. The dialogue is even worse than the acting, and the "humor" in the movie is incredibly unfunny. As I mentioned earlier only two actors really kept me somewhat interested in what was going on, and even after a while they got a little hard to bare.
I do love the story they were trying to tell, I just don't think they pulled it off well at all.
Even though the imagery look good, the CGI was way to over the top at points, and downright laughable at others. When a chase scene reminds you of a chase scene from a movie from the 20's (moving picture background), it's pretty bad. Other scenes just looked choppy, almost like they were rushing through and instead of cleaning up the shots they just went with it. Also, I totally understand the ratio of gods to humans; however, it only managed to look really ridiculous.
The acting was bad, like really, really, bad; overacting at it's prime. The dialogue is even worse than the acting, and the "humor" in the movie is incredibly unfunny. As I mentioned earlier only two actors really kept me somewhat interested in what was going on, and even after a while they got a little hard to bare.
I do love the story they were trying to tell, I just don't think they pulled it off well at all.
Deadpool
(2016)
Lives up to the hype
16 February 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Like many others I have been eagerly waiting for the Deadpool movie to arrive. I watched every trailer, signed up with the Deadpool corps, and happily gobbled up every bit of promotion they threw out. And did the movie live up to all the hype in the end? In my personal opinion, hell yes it did.
Straight out of the gates the movie propels you into the world of the Merc with the Mouth. The opening credits alone are as unique and hilarious as they come, having me (as well as the entire theater) in stitches. I'm sure we all knew exactly what we were getting into; however, I don't think we imagined it would start after only ten seconds.
I personally am a fan of how the movie was pieced together. Starting in the present and then having Deadpool tell the events leading up to his current predicament. In my opinion it didn't take away from the story at all; quite the opposite in fact. It really helped the story move along, and it also kept me interested with what was happening.
The love story that lay behind all the blood, violence, foul language, and crude humor was amazing. There is one line from the movie in particular, one of my favorites, which provide a good example. "While Vanessa is thinking of Plan A, B, all the way to Z, I'm trying to memorize the curves of her face.", or something like that.
I loved every character, even Aja I mean, Francis, and I thought every one of them was well acted. However, out of all of them Colossus has to be my favorite, besides señor Pool of course. Here is this giant, metal, Russian man, who also happens to be extremely polite, tries all he can to be helpful, and is just all around likable. He's like Deadpool's guardian angel, or at least he tries to be.
The humor in this movie is very smart. Nothing is off limits when it comes to who he pokes fun at: The studio; other characters in the shared universe; even directly at Reynolds himself. This humor truly captures exactly who and what Deadpool is.
Sadly the jokes that played during the trailers did not have the same effect in the movie itself. It's probably a case of being burnt out, because who didn't watch the trailers repeatedly? Even something as simple as changing a line of dialogue in a scene would have done wonders.
With that one gripe aside the movie is great. It's EXACTLY what I wanted, and what I expected.
Also, this movie is rated R for a reason. To the people who think that it's a soft R, you really need to have your mental health checked.
Straight out of the gates the movie propels you into the world of the Merc with the Mouth. The opening credits alone are as unique and hilarious as they come, having me (as well as the entire theater) in stitches. I'm sure we all knew exactly what we were getting into; however, I don't think we imagined it would start after only ten seconds.
I personally am a fan of how the movie was pieced together. Starting in the present and then having Deadpool tell the events leading up to his current predicament. In my opinion it didn't take away from the story at all; quite the opposite in fact. It really helped the story move along, and it also kept me interested with what was happening.
The love story that lay behind all the blood, violence, foul language, and crude humor was amazing. There is one line from the movie in particular, one of my favorites, which provide a good example. "While Vanessa is thinking of Plan A, B, all the way to Z, I'm trying to memorize the curves of her face.", or something like that.
I loved every character, even Aja I mean, Francis, and I thought every one of them was well acted. However, out of all of them Colossus has to be my favorite, besides señor Pool of course. Here is this giant, metal, Russian man, who also happens to be extremely polite, tries all he can to be helpful, and is just all around likable. He's like Deadpool's guardian angel, or at least he tries to be.
The humor in this movie is very smart. Nothing is off limits when it comes to who he pokes fun at: The studio; other characters in the shared universe; even directly at Reynolds himself. This humor truly captures exactly who and what Deadpool is.
Sadly the jokes that played during the trailers did not have the same effect in the movie itself. It's probably a case of being burnt out, because who didn't watch the trailers repeatedly? Even something as simple as changing a line of dialogue in a scene would have done wonders.
With that one gripe aside the movie is great. It's EXACTLY what I wanted, and what I expected.
Also, this movie is rated R for a reason. To the people who think that it's a soft R, you really need to have your mental health checked.
Put your expectations away for this one
11 February 2016
Warning: Spoilers
The trick with watching this movie is to not take it serious; in fact, leave all your expectations at the door and just have fun. If you loved the first movie, you will most likely watch this and ask yourself "Why?" Not why you watched it, but more why they even made it.
The trilogy started its decline with the second film. The first one was fun, had an interesting idea, and was pretty well executed; the second one went in a completely different way, leaving the intellect out of it and going with a straight up gore-fest. Take it for what it is and it could be a fun film, if you're into that sort of thing.
With the final sequence we see the return of both main actors from the previous films. Lawrence Harvey is a lot easier to look at this time around, and out of the two I found his obviously put on accent more realistic. His character was actually kind of fun, and I thought he put on the best performance in the film. Dieter Laser has an American accent for about the first half, and then somewhere around the middle he just drops it, probably as he got more and more into his insane character. He still has that creepy, strangely disproportionate face and smile of his, and his character is not only evil but disgusting as well.
Behind the over the top scenes, characters, and direction, there is a story there. Even though the centipede makes its debut towards the very end of the film, the story leading to it makes sense in some strange way. The gore is few and in between, but the scenes that do have it flaunt it. I like that Tom Six played himself in the movie. The previous films do play important roles to the development of this story, but the constant pushing of them on Blu-ray was obnoxious.
I'm not sure if this was the way Mr. Six wanted his films to go, or if he's just trying to constantly cash in on his original idea. In any case I will repeat my previous advice: Leave expectations at the door, and just enjoy this POS as is.
The trilogy started its decline with the second film. The first one was fun, had an interesting idea, and was pretty well executed; the second one went in a completely different way, leaving the intellect out of it and going with a straight up gore-fest. Take it for what it is and it could be a fun film, if you're into that sort of thing.
With the final sequence we see the return of both main actors from the previous films. Lawrence Harvey is a lot easier to look at this time around, and out of the two I found his obviously put on accent more realistic. His character was actually kind of fun, and I thought he put on the best performance in the film. Dieter Laser has an American accent for about the first half, and then somewhere around the middle he just drops it, probably as he got more and more into his insane character. He still has that creepy, strangely disproportionate face and smile of his, and his character is not only evil but disgusting as well.
Behind the over the top scenes, characters, and direction, there is a story there. Even though the centipede makes its debut towards the very end of the film, the story leading to it makes sense in some strange way. The gore is few and in between, but the scenes that do have it flaunt it. I like that Tom Six played himself in the movie. The previous films do play important roles to the development of this story, but the constant pushing of them on Blu-ray was obnoxious.
I'm not sure if this was the way Mr. Six wanted his films to go, or if he's just trying to constantly cash in on his original idea. In any case I will repeat my previous advice: Leave expectations at the door, and just enjoy this POS as is.
Pod
(I) (2015)
I have a theory
6 February 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I have a theory on why the credits went by at such incredible speed at the start of the movie: Everyone involved with this movie was embarrassed by it and didn't want their names mentioned more then they had to.
The characters: The constant arguing between the brother and sister was just irritating. From the beginning we get it that Ed is an asshole, obviously; and we also get that Lyla is very hard to get along with. For whatever reason these two have a horrible relationship. Fine. Got it. But the constant back and forth, the constant screaming, the constant bickering, the constant everything between the two just got down right annoying.
The only character I actually some what enjoyed for a brief second was Martin. At least that character was somewhat watchable. Yes, he want on tangent rants about god knows what; but he did it in a way that kept you focused and interested, at least for more than ten seconds.
The cast: Easily the worst cast I have ever seen together. Again, the only one who did a decent job was Brian Morvant playing Martin; but even he got hard to listen to after a while. He does play crazy well, and both his facial expressions, and his body language played into his character.
Lauren Ashley Carter has the worst scream, and the worst cry, EVER. They were both very monotone and obviously fake. Her crying scene played on way longer than it should have; however, even if the scene lasted two seconds, it would still sound obnoxious.
Both Dean Cates and Larry Fessenden put on horrible performances as well. There is a difference between acting and over acting, and they are prime examples of the latter.
The story: Seriously, what is POD about? I am all for not giving out all the information and leaving some things to the imagination; but, please, pleaseeeee, give us something. The poster makes it look like an alien movie; even the ending of the movie kind of alluded to that fact; but I need more than that. I need to be given something to at least point me in some kind of direction.
Maybe I'm a gluten for horrible movies on Netflix. I can't highly suggest against watching this movie enough.
The characters: The constant arguing between the brother and sister was just irritating. From the beginning we get it that Ed is an asshole, obviously; and we also get that Lyla is very hard to get along with. For whatever reason these two have a horrible relationship. Fine. Got it. But the constant back and forth, the constant screaming, the constant bickering, the constant everything between the two just got down right annoying.
The only character I actually some what enjoyed for a brief second was Martin. At least that character was somewhat watchable. Yes, he want on tangent rants about god knows what; but he did it in a way that kept you focused and interested, at least for more than ten seconds.
The cast: Easily the worst cast I have ever seen together. Again, the only one who did a decent job was Brian Morvant playing Martin; but even he got hard to listen to after a while. He does play crazy well, and both his facial expressions, and his body language played into his character.
Lauren Ashley Carter has the worst scream, and the worst cry, EVER. They were both very monotone and obviously fake. Her crying scene played on way longer than it should have; however, even if the scene lasted two seconds, it would still sound obnoxious.
Both Dean Cates and Larry Fessenden put on horrible performances as well. There is a difference between acting and over acting, and they are prime examples of the latter.
The story: Seriously, what is POD about? I am all for not giving out all the information and leaving some things to the imagination; but, please, pleaseeeee, give us something. The poster makes it look like an alien movie; even the ending of the movie kind of alluded to that fact; but I need more than that. I need to be given something to at least point me in some kind of direction.
Maybe I'm a gluten for horrible movies on Netflix. I can't highly suggest against watching this movie enough.
Tell Your Friends