gnix1979 Reviews

The Last Voyage of the Demeter (2023)

The movie I was hoping for

[9/10 · 17 August 2023]

Having Dracula as my favourite book of all time, every version of Dracula is always under a microscope when it comes to movies and TV, similar to those who donthe same thing with comic book movies or franchises like Jack Reacher. I have to admit that most do ok, some clear use the material and make their own thing like with Hammer's version of Dracula, or spin offs like Renfield which I really liked as a fun element. Then there is the garbage like the FFC movie with Gary Oldman, (SORRY BUT DRACULA IS NOT A LOVE STORY).

Then we have Last Yoyage of the Demeter, which you could say is a story within a story. Many versions of Dracula either completely bypass this part of Stoker's book, or simply skim over it with a passing reference. If your like me and you have read the book multiple times or seen a version in other movies, this is like watching the Star Wars prequels, you know what's going to happen in the end. But like the SW prequels, seeing the events unfold can be (if done correctly or well) can be interesting and entertaining.

LVotD is just that, a well made movie that tells a version of a story you only read about in the Bram Stoker novel, and this is why it's so good. Using the source material, the screenwriter has expanded on this to make their own story of what happened and therefore its true and faithful to the source material. The movie is at time gut wrenching, at times suspenseful, and a good ole fashioned "its behind you " movie with a lot of jump scares.

It looses a few points here and there, but nothing that would make you want to switch off. Everything is explained, nothing is left to chance, and therefore a really great movie.

I highly recommend this movie.

Renfield (2023)

LOVE THIS MOVIE

[9/10 · 13 June 2023]

As a Dracula puritan, I was looking forward to this move as Renfield in Hollywood has never been done justice, and tends to be just a foot note character. Of course I was worried that this movie would be really silly and be added to the exhausted list of bad movies involving Dracula.

This movie turns out to be a lot of fun, and is quiet close to the source material even though its probably not meant to be. There are times this movie is OTT and Nic Cage does what Nic Cage does well, hams up his role quiet similar to that of his previous films like Face Off and The Rock. While at the same time turning in a convincing performance as the Prince of Darkness.

The central theme of this movie is manipulation which is exactly what Dracula is about, not the stupid love story made by FFC.

If you can overlook the at time OTT scenes, this movie is an absolute gem.

Dexter: New Blood: Sins of the Father (2022) Season 1, Episode 10

How could make the same mistake twice

[3/10 · 11 January 2022]

I was a huge fan of Dexter, and like most the ending of that series really sucked. So when this series was announced, I was excited but also skeptical.

Then they started to announce the cast, and the excitement grew, especially seeing John Lithgows name.

The show started, I blown away, 9th episode I was the edge of my seat.

Episode 10 and I was looking for the big payoff... nothing. Even the reveal of Dexter's past was not what I was looking for, and I expected so much more from Harrison in the end. Unless they continue the story with Harrison, this is worse than the original ending in the original series.

Dune (2021)

Awful

[4/10 · 4 November 2021]

I had been looking forward to this since I heard it was in production. Although not universally liked, the David Lynch adaptation was fairly spot on in recreating the source material, especially on a low budget and the technology of its day.

This version not only forgets a majority of the source material thats important to the overall plot of Dune, it makes stuff up to try and fill in the blanks.

As expected, the movie at times is visually stunning, and the sound excellent. And thats it, that's all the good I can say.

Some of the acting was poor, and characters that did feature didn't feel believable. The always dependable Stellen Starskard was good, although his version of the Baron was a little different.

Now 2 years to wait for part 2, not sure I am bothered about it.

Star Trek: Picard (2020–2023)

Two words "Blade Runner"

[3/10 · 30 January 2020]

I have not been looking forward to this show, not because I dislike Star Trek, nor because I dislike TNG or the actors involved, far from it. I felt that if they are bringing back loved characters it felt that the hate for shows like Discovery which I love by the way, was so great that the developers felt they had no choice but to spare no expense.

And yet I feel even as early as the first episode that they failed to spend enough money of good original writers and scripts that they have done a Star Wars "Force Awakens" and stolen from elsewhere.

The story picks up after the events of the J J Abrams Star Trek story of the destruction of Romulus. This was something I liked and could get behind, but then it goes into a Blade Runner themed naughty replicants/synthetic humans who for some reason are involved in the destruction of the Mars colony. It does not stop there, it then goes into a plot of a top of the range replicant which has links to Data, and if you are familiar with the story of Blade Runner, like me you might start rolling your eyes.

I don't wish to be a cynic but I do fear that this could ruin the Star Trek franchise and it was the fan base who demanded a new Picard/TNG story to blame/

Dracula (2020)

BBC is dead to me now

[4/10 · 5 January 2020]

Dracula is my favourite book of all time so I tend to get a bit geeky and defensive when anyone makes an adaptation. Like anything these days the trailer really does over sell this mini series.

Before I say anything else the only reason I gave 4 stars is to reward the only good thing in this, and that's the actor who plays Dracula. He is really good and even gives Christopher Lee a run for his money.

But why is this series so bad? Ep1: In all honesty this episode is really good. It makes a number of changes from the book, but to a degree I preferred initially what they do here. It starts were Johnathan Hawker is recounting his experiences at castle Dracula. The first part of the book is specifically that, but instead of following his journal, he is telling a 1st hand verbal account. But the episode then looses me by converting a much loved and respected character of Van Helsing into a female nun. I don't really have a problem with this, but the whole scene at the convent is a mixture of horror and stupidity at the same time.

Ep2: follows Dracula aboard the Demeter, the ship that carries him from Varna to Whitby England. This episode is a mere foot note in the book and told from the perspective of newspaper article and the captain's log. To a point I actually liked this episode, as it shows more development of the character of Dracula, but also a kind of CSI of what happened on the doomed voyage. The episode is both scary and fun..... until the end. They decide to bring the series to modern times. WHY?

Ep3: At this point the series was either going well, or fixable by returning to the book. They chose neither and made it modern. The episode played like some bad vampire movie, Dracula is captured and brought to a research facility. And even though they try to introduce characters from the book again such as Dr Seward, and Quincy Morris and their love affairs with Lucy Westera. The triangle is pinnacle to the whole story and yet I felt nothing. Even the introduction of Renfield who was kind of funny felt pointless. About half way through I wanted to switch off, but I had invested already 4hrs of my time that I wanted to see it to the end. I wish I hadn't.

The death of Dracula I consider to be the final insult of the show. All I will say is poison.

The BBC has seriously lost it's way, There is no legitimate reason to change a classic book so much that it's almost unidentifiable. Even the Horror of Dracula with Chris Lee and Pete Cushing diverted from the book, but it kept itself as close as possible to the source material.

Midway (2019)

A remake that's sadly executed

[4/10 · 17 November 2019]

Having watched and come to love the original Midway movie starring some juggernauts of Hollywood history, I was really looking forward to a more modern version of the story of Midway.

However this movie suffers in the same way as Pearl Harbour was a bad movie, only this time there is no love story. My heading states badly executed, here is why.

Plot: The movie itself is overloaded with narrative, from the attack on Pearl Harbour, to the Doolittle raid over Tokyo then onto Midway. Everything moved so quickly that there is no real character development nor any real reason to invest any emotion in them.

Pace: Imagine having a DVD with the events of WW2 and then playing it on 10x speed, that's how this movie was. In my opinion the attack Pearl Harbour should have been left out, and start the movie with the Doolitle raid. At just over 2hrs, this movie was so overloaded that it missed key important and interesting elements of the events leading to the battle.

Cast: I love Woody Harrelson, and he looked and acted the part, but was so under used it was very disappointing. I also love Dennis Quaid, he was probably one of the standout actors on the movie playing Admiral Halsey. However I felt he had too much air time in the movie considering he wasn't involved in the battle due to being hospitalized. The two US admirals (Fletcher and Spruance) who were involved had very little to no airtime in the movie, this made no sense as they had to make on the spot decisions that helped turn the tide of the battle, specifically Spruance's decision to launch the first attack at max range which cost the lives of some airmen due to running out of fuel. The actors who played the Japanese were pretty solid, seeing a familiar and reliable face of the actor who played Admiral Yamaguchi. But again I felt they deserved more airtime.

Historically accurate?: For the most part I would say yes, but even some of that is given some of the typical Hollywood treatment. For instance when Torpedo 8 has an unsuccessful attack on a battleship at Corak Sea due to poor torpedoes, and when the squadron is wiped out at Midway is 100% accurate, even the comments made by the Japanese commanders about how bad the planes and crews were is true, because the planes were outdated and crew not experienced.

However there were some things they overlooked for instance the fact that a third of the Bombing 8 squadron had no bombs due to faulty equipment was missed out. The crucial role that fighting 8 played in the battle was cut. The invaluable role that the PBYs from Midway played in locating the Japanese fleet was cut (airgroup was called Strawberry) the movie suggested that it was Layton that put them on the right path, truth is that the Jap fleet were coming out of a big storm and it was unknown exactly where they would come out of.

Isle of Dogs (2018)

A beautiful and thought provoking movie

[10/10 · 16 April 2018]

A boys love for a dog is the central story here but this is more than a simple story of a boy looses dog, boy finds dog. This is a movie that takes you on a journey of love, honour and respect.

"Whatever happened to Man's best friend?"

I took my 8 year old son to see this thinking it was an animated comedy about a boy looking for his dog with humour. But the story transcends into a story about mans cruelty to animals, and the journey that in the beginning was fun, turned into something dark. I wish I had known that the story was going to make that dramatic turn because I may not have taken him to see the movie as the scenes showing the dogs that had been treated badly effected him in such a way that it upset him. Yet part of me is grateful for this as the movie also shows the love and compassion that man has, and my son was able to acknowledge that in the end good overcame evil.

If taking children to see this under the age of 10, I would recommend caution.

The storytelling is very well done and different, most of the spoken word is in Japanese but the way the translations are done are very clever. I would recommend this fil to anyone.

Darkest Hour (2017)

What do you get if you cross the movies Downfall and The Kings Speech?

[6/10 · 18 January 2018]

Like many people who have watched and reviewed this movie, I think there is one thing we can all agree on, we wanted to see Gary Oldman play Churchill.

However for me I struggled to love the film, and even tough there are some great moments, even to go so far as to say there are powerful moments, I was left a little disappointed.

Early on I felt like I had seen this movie before but perhaps in another format, you could easily relate to movies like Downfall, The King's Speech and even Lincoln which all portray specific periods in one person's life be it their moment of victory or triumph or their demise and compare it to Darkest Hour. In those kinds of comparisons the movie does excel. As a historical piece it shows the moment of Churchill's appointment to the background cries of defeatism to the rallying cries of "WE SHALL NOT SURRENDER", and if your into that kind of thing there is a lot to like about this film.

However that being said their are times when its unclear what this movie wants to be, is it about Churchill the man, Churchill the Prime Minister, or Churchill the family man? In my opinion the movie fails because it tries to be all three and it struggles to do it, even with the fine acting of Gary Oldman. I often wondered if the scenes with the excellent Kristian Scott Thomas were necessary? They were few and far between and in some scenes she is on her own listening to the radio broadcasts of Churchill's speeches. Waste of good talent in my opinion and not necessary, perhaps the exception to this would be early on when Churchill becomes PM, but the speech about family sacrifice didn't really add to the narrative of the movie.

I felt the scenes involving Ben Mendelsohn deserve a mention as he was great playing George VI, I immediately felt the connection between the two characters and he plays an important role in the movie, and indeed in real life. We have only really scratched the surface of his role in WW2 with this movie and that of The King's Speech as he as well as Churchill were the embodiment of defiance especially during the Blitz.

There is a side of me that thinks that this is sort of a natural sequel to last years Dunkirk movie, as they both are set during the same months in 1940. I particularly liked the scenes showing the difficult decisions and unpopular decisions Churchill had to make, such as the brigade at Calais who were told your not getting rescued. I would have liked to have seen more of this, but it was short lived.

I think 6 out of 10 is a strong review, I don't think it deserves any more than that, perhaps maybe a weak 7 given how Churchill's makeup was done.

The Walking Dead: The First Day of the Rest of Your Life (2017) Season 7, Episode 16

Leaving the best till last

[8/10 · 3 April 2017]

With the fallout of the finale last season, I wonder if the writers took on board the fans fury?

I would say for the most part, yes.

Considering the explosive first episode and then a disappointing season, the final episode brought back what drew me to The Walking Dead in the first place. This episode has great drama, edge of your seat tension and it also rips your heart out of your backside.

Highlights "Alexandria will not fall on this day" This episode had great drama, from the tortured soul of Morgan, to the war and merging of alliances with Negan, and finally the rational thinking of Sasha

"Your son is gonna die with one swing, because I actually like him" We are met with a similar scenario of last season when Negan is going to use Lucile. The tension in this scene before he swings it into Carl was superb. Even Rick had summed up that Carls death would not be the end, but more ammunition to fulfil the promise that he was going to kill Negan.

Anyone like tigers?

"Turncoats everywhere" One of the themes of this season has been "who do you trust?", we see Dwight make a play to come to Rick's aid, Eugine playing his part with Negan, and as for the scavengers, never saw that coming. I had sense that something would go wrong, but not what they did. I expected them to not turn up to battle, but they did, they just battled for the wrong side.

"Suicide is painless" In the first episode I was gutted that my favourite character Abraham was the first to die at the hands of Negan, so it was great to see him return if only briefly. The flashbacks of Sasha were done very well and given the final outcome it made a lot of sense even to the point of why she raided the Sanctuary on her own and left Rosita behind, ultimately Abraham was Sasha's companion, and it was her responsibility alone to seek vengeance, although she fails, her attempt was bold. It would have been interesting to have known what was supposed to have happened if Sasha hadn't killed herself, what was the purpose of the coffin?

"unanswered questions" As always there are a few questions left unanswered that are being left till next season such as what happened to Gregory? Did he make the trip to Sanctuary or did he plan something else?

Well now we have to wait till October to see what happens next.

Jack Reacher: Never Go Back (2016)

A good sequel

[8/10 · 1 November 2016]

Considering I gave the first Reacher film a 10, its the movie that got me hooked on the Jack Reacher books. This movie however was really good and really enjoyable, however the story is a little diluted/not as gripping as the first but non the less really good.

In spite of the Tom Cruise haters, he manages to pull of the character again very well, a lot of commentators criticise his height as Reacher is well over 6ft, were as Tom Cruise if roughly 5,6in, but they fail to recognise the fact that he plays the character fairly accurately such as his fallibility and his tenacity to get in and out of trouble, which he does on many occasions in this movie.

There were one or two bad points such as Aldis Hodge's character Espin, when he is initially introduced you would think he would play a bigger part, he is initially a likable character and acted very well, but his screen time is incredibly short and only ever serves as a character to help move the plot along, which isn't really a bad thing but would liked to have seen more. There was also a moment when he almost broke character or forgot he was playing an MP, but he can be forgiven for that.

Not familiar with Danika Yarosh's work but based on this movie, she has a lot going for her. She looks like sibling of Anna Paquin.

Moving forward with the Jack Reacher franchise I think they should consider stopping with this movie and consider turning it into a good replacement for 24. Considering there are over 20 books for source material (18 if you exclude the two movies, more as long as Lee Childs keeps writing) there are plenty of good books in the series to make a good TV series, this book wouldn't have been my choice for a sequel when there were slightly better choices. Cruise could even take a step back and simply produce the show and get another actor to play the Reacher role if he was happy with that. I am sure it would appease the haters anyway.

The Admiral (2015)

Shocking piece of history

[9/10 · 31 January 2016]

There is very little to fault in this movie, I love foreign subtitled movies and this is now in my top 5.

This is an abridged version of the Anglo/Dutch wars in the 1700s, a period I know little about. It shows the obvious bully tactics of the Royal Navy being superior, but it shows that means nothing with a good commander in charge. It also shows the political ramblings that went on behind the scenes, and although the movie tries its best to not go on an all gore quest, when it needs to the film is shocking. Specifically the assassinations of the Witt brothers, the scenes are extremely gruesome and it horrifies even more that this happened in real life.

A majority of the movie in in Dutch, but the few British scenes are in English, simply to set the tone of the movie.

The acting was flawless especially Frank Lammers who plays the title role. I would highly recommend this movie to anyone.

The only reason it looses one star is because at times the flow of the film seemed a little uneven, but for the most part extremely entertaining and insightful.

The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)

Rude and a bit funny, but actually boring

[4/10 · 15 January 2016]

I finally watched this movie on Netflix after years of people telling me to watch it, mainly specifically for the rude scenes. Those people who watch movies mainly for titillation movies may bring.

So when I got a chance I thought, "what the hell", its Scorsese, it has DiCaprio who I am starting to like especially after watching the Departed.

But my god this movie is awful, I mean if you take away the nude sequences and the comedic scenes following drug taking, this movie is actually boring. What is the movie's overall message? I don't think even Scorsese and DiCaprio knew either as it seemed that when stuck they through in more drug taking or nude scenes, probably to wake people up.

I get this movie may be about the limitations of excess, but so much of the movie made no sense and I am still scratching my head. The main one comes near the end of the movie when Naomi says she is filing for divorce. With this based on true events that moment had be bewildered. She knew him during his excessive moment, after all that's how they met. Yet once Jordan starts loosing it all she doesn't want to know even though he had gone clean for two years. Maybe it was the acting that made this scene poor but I couldn't get my head around what was being said.

Even the scenes with the FBI are dreadful, the acting is so poor that the actors especially Kyle Chandler look completely bored out of their minds. As for Jonah Hill, not a big fan but I felt like he was the idiot of the movie which may have been the point of his character, but he was more buffoon then a member of the professional guild of idiocy.

Over all I was extremely disappointed with this movie and I expected so much more. I was even enjoying the movie for the first 38mins or so but then it took a massive nose dive when it went farcical and then the constant introduction of naked women.

If you want a movie involving no brains and buffoonery and rude scenes to remove the boredom, this is for you. If you want a movie about excess that you want to concentrate on, then watch Wall Street with Michael Douglas, that movie is far superior.

Bridge of Spies (2015)

Interesting movie but no longer relevant

[8/10 · 14 January 2016]

As a historian, I thought this movie was excellent and covered a time of extreme secrecy and mistrust. Its good that movies of this nature and subject still get made.

However this movie presents a problem, its about a subject that is no longer relevant in the modern age, sure there will always be mutual mistrust of both East (Russia, China, N Korea) and West (NATO Countries) but the art of human espionage is over. This is not a critical analysis of the movie, but considering an article I read about 18 months ago when Spielberg was criticising Hollywood and the movie industry as a whole for releasing too many sequels and CGI blockbusters, does he really think there is a market for movies like this? There was an interesting post about a 20+ year old who took his girlfriend to see this movie and they enjoyed it, he commented everyone else in the audience was older. This is great to hear and read because it proves that there IS still an audience for this kind of subject.

That being said, as much as this story was interesting and the acting good by the always dependable Tom Hanks as well as it being nice to see the excellent Sebastian Koch, I felt the movie dragged so much that I kept looking at my watch wondering when it was over. I have noticed that I have done this for the last few of Spielberg's movies. There is no doubt that he was once a great filmmaker but his editing has become appalling. I would have liked to have seen more of the conditions faced by the citizens of East Germany and less about the US pilot and the training he went through as that didn't really add to the movie.

I think if in future Spielberg is going to make further movies like this he need to make sure he edits carefully, make the story entertaining and not long and boring. Unfortunately in my opinion with the exception of the Martian, this is where we now find Ridley Scott, making long and boring movies when really they are exceptional movies just poorly edited.

Spotlight (I) (2015)

Outstanding movie

[8/10 · 13 January 2016]

First of all I would like to comment on the dreadful negative troll comments that have been said about this film. They have no place on websites like IMDb. Troll comments are part of the reason why hidden gems like Spotlight never get he time of day they deserve. Too many people are still hyped up over Star Wars that they never want to return to reality.

Now my thoughts on the movie.

I remember the day almost when stories about abuse in the church were starting to come out in the UK. In so many ways this story isn't new as abuse goes back further than the highlighted piece in this movie, follow up on abuse in Ireland with women and young girls dating back to the 1800s.

The film is in most parts unrelenting and when you hear the stories, horrific. Certain parts of the film take time to really spout but with superb performances from the as always reliable Stanley Tucci as well as Ruffalo and Keaton things move along well. I felt Live Schreiber was under used but his role was pivotal.

Rachel McAdams character in some ways was the soul of the team, as we see her as a church goer with her nan, to her showing the printed article about the abuse. She covered things very well.

This movie deserves peoples attention but I must admit its not for everyone. The movie is well acted but not entertaining due to its subject line, and in some ways that makes this movie very important. In some ways without direct comparison this is like watching Schindler's List for the very first time, we knew about the holocaust but learning about the graphic details brought home the reality. Spotlight doesn't need to show the graphic details of what went on, but listening to the stories of the victims makes you sit up and remember that this is based on a true story.

Well done to team who made this movie.

Concussion (2015)

Outstanding movie

[9/10 · 12 January 2016]

So far I think I have seen one of the best movies I will see in 2016, outstanding performances from Will Smith (possible the best acting I have seen from him in a long time), Alex Baldwin and even David Morse.

Being from the UK I don't follow the NFL or any type of American Football, but I found this movie fascinating and in some respects the story could represent any sport such as boxing.

I think the contents of the movie are shocking, but are not surprising as large organisations hate to say their product is bad or that there are risks.

The story is easy to follow and even the science is explained in such a way to make it understandable to a basic layman, and as such it made the stories basis more entertaining and more interesting.

My only complaint and the reason it didn't get 10/10 was that at times it felt the editing of the movie was questionable, scenes seemed either rushed or poorly put together, clearly there are time gaps to move the story along, but the gaps seem unexplained and you have to manage this yourself.

Overall I highly recommend this movie.

The Big Short (2015)

Well acted, but added nothing new

[7/10 · 12 January 2016]

There should have been a good story here but the main problem is that it offered nothing new that the audience didn't already know. I wasn't personally directly effected by the crash, as I don't own a mortgage, that being said it effected everything else such as the economy after the bailouts so effected me in that way. In some way it was interesting to see a different perspective on the causes of the crash and see it all play out.

Another issues is that this movie is too complicated to understand for a layman, and the movie admits this itself by having those 2-3 minute moments when they get celebs like Margot Robbie trying to explain something while taking a bath, I mean come on that was just stupid. If a movie is that complicated, don't make it as the audience will become disinterested and less enjoyable.

Hollywood should never really complicate a story as it will capture a larger audience. One of the reasons I love the Other Guys with Will Farrell and Mark Walberg is that they covered the Wall Street Crash but made it simple to understand.

Yet I will say that some of the actors were excellent and I am starting to see the next Tom Hanks in Steve Carell, moving from comedy to drama. I was surprised with Christian Bale as he looked disinterested and not convincing is his role. But I think Carell deserves a shout at the Oscars even though he won't win, he deserves a nomination at least.

Trumbo (2015)

Was looking forward to this and was not disappointed

[10/10 · 9 January 2016]

As a movie fan of old and new, I was fully aware of the Blacklist and the role HUAC (House of Un-American Activities Committee)played in Hollywood. I was particularly interested in Dalton Trumbo and back in 2007 I completed a dissertation on Spartacus and one of the chapters was in relation to the comparison of strives of Spartacus in the movie sense and Dalton Trumbo.

The history is fascinating, and for those confused about the anti communist movement, this was more an anti Russia movement. If Soviet Russia had been of any other political denomination, that would have been the focus. True Communism as defined by Marx wasn't the secretive and harsh environment that Soviet Russia worked on, but more of a left wing human rights movement, something that the US bill of rights was meant to cover as well as the constitution. That the state should help and support its people more and make sure there was no want by any and no rich guy pulling the strings like in right wing circles could take it all away.

This movie portrays this notion very well, as we see at the beginning Trumbo being questioned about being on the picket line supporting low paid worker's rights.

This reminded me of the writers strike that kicked off not so many years ago which effectively killed off or damaged some major TV shows such as Heroes for example.

Yet the focus and goals of HUAC became lost and as the film shows it effected the lives of hundreds maybe thousands of people, some who even fought for the US in WW2.

The acting in this movie was exceptional, it would be hard to specifically single out as nobody put a foot wrong, but major praise MUST be heaped on the Trumbo portrayal by Bryan Cranston. My word he hit the nail, from his tone of voice, his personality as well as conviction, simply stunning.

The highlight moment for me was when the premier of Spartacus is being shown and Trumbo sees his name on the screen...... WOW, you could see the emotion.

Truly excellent filmmaking here, deserves more kudos then its getting. I think the problem however as to why its not is that reviewers do not like political movies anymore as you have to think. Most now just absorb and completely miss the point.

Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (2015)

A complete rip off

[3/10 · 23 December 2015]

Warning this DOES contain Spoilers, they are necessary to justify my score rating.

I paid £17.50 to watch this movie in Imax, after all that is the only way to watch a movie of this scale, right? Wrong!!!! Just because a movie breaks box office records does not necessary make them good movies, Titanic for example was a well made movie SFX wise, but ultimately it was rubbish.

This movie is a complete and utter rip off on a New Hope and in some respects Return of the Jedi. How so? Well here is a list...

There is a new Death Star of sorts, and it is destroyed in pretty much the same way as all the other movies, yes they use a trench. lol They are far too many references to those movies, although some are justified as part of a generalised recap as seen in the trailer, but it doesn't end there.

There is technically a new kind of Yoda and that is Maz Kanata. I actually liked this character in all honesty, but I didn't need another Yoda so soon.

Before I go into a further rant, I want to offer a gleaming of hope and talk about where the movie excels.

The opening 20-30mins were excellent, we get to meet Poe Dameron who in my opinion saves this movie with one other character. He comes across like a merger of Luke, Han and Wedge Antilles from the original movies in his character, he is both enjoyable to watch and someone you can get your love around. We also meet Finn, Kylo Ren and Lor San Tekka in a very gritty opening sequence. This was completely unforeseen and very refreshing. Captain Phasma seemed to fit the roll of commander of elite troops really well and execute in the literal sense orders without question.

However things start to tank very quickly and its here when the old references are used in overused quantities. Seeing the Falcon, Han and Chewie brought about a little cheer.

The dog fight sequences are exceptional and put together well.

As for the second character that saves this movie...... Chewbacca. My word does he kick ass in more ways then one. I felt in some respects that this was his movie in some cases as there was a lot of focus put on him at certain points and this was welcome. He is a favourite and sometimes deserved more screen time then he would normally have got. Here he does, and oh man he is amazing.

I don't want to rant to much, but here are three specific issues I have.

1: Kylo Ren didn't the fear of god into me like Vader did in the original movies, in fact I would go as far as to say he is actually incompetent. The acting of Adam Driver is appalling and very hammed out, much to what people hated Hayden Christensen for in eps 2 and 3.

General Hux however was a much more dislikeable character and very evil, and well acted by Domhnall Gleeson. Potentially another saviour of the movie, although in fairness he was surrounded by poor actors.

2: Captain Phasma is hardly in it and in principle is a really poor character and in spite how good she might be in GoT Gwendoline Christie did not convince me at all.

3: Luke Skywalker - OK the good news is he hasn't turned to the dark side, but his screen time is two minutes, and the amount of dialogue? Zero. The man fans turned up to see doesn't even speak. This was the biggest let down ever after all the hype about why he isn't in the trailer or the movie posters he doesn't even speak.

OK rant over.

I think this may need to be watched at least twice to perhaps get some love but I am in no desperate need to watch it now.

Thanks for reading.

Jessica Jones (2015–2019)

Know your stuff before you watch

[4/10 · 23 November 2015]

I have watched the first few episodes of this on Netflix and I must say I am not impressed at all. Unlike Daredevil which I really liked, Jessica Jones does not offer a sufficient back story to make newbies to the series become fully acquainted with the character. I find this pretty typical of Marvel however as their shows and movies rely on the audience too much to know their stuff unlike DC who are happy to help the newbies come new fans like with Arrow and The Flash.

Initially I liked the idea behind the PI aspect, but then the superpowers got in the way, and then it because one prolonged sex fest with the Luke Cage character. Although I so far have not seen much of the Cage character, he seems like a character I would like to see more of, but he also seems a bit of a rip off on Wolverine without the wolf element.

I am not even feeling the David Tennent character Kilgrave either, and I am a big fan of David too. Perhaps the pace of this show is a little too slow for my liking, so gonna give the rest a miss.

Arrow: Green Arrow (2015) Season 4, Episode 1

Early days

[5/10 · 8 October 2015]

I struggled with this episode because it was pure cheese. If started and ended pretty much where my hatred for the 3rd series lays. Way too much Olicity for my liking, but it is the first episode so I won't be too negative.

It was great seeing the team back together, and as always its always a pleasure seeing Neal McDonough as he is an underrated actor, can't wait to see more of him.

I all looking forward to the continuation of the back story of Oliver and the situation at the end of the episode.

Well roll on next week.

R.I.P.D. (2013)

A really really fun film

[9/10 · 20 September 2015]

Just watched this movie on Netflix and baring in mind I heard it bombed at the cinema, I can understand why but not in the way I would have expected.

Although in some ways the movie plays out like an alternative version of Men in Black, I actually found this movie a lot more fun especially the roll played by the legend Jeff Bridges.

The chemistry between Bridges and Reynolds is pretty good and in my opinion more stand out than the relationship between Will Smith and TL Jones in MiB.

If you are looking for a fun film to watch but struggling for choice, look no further, highly recommended.

Maggie (I) (2015)

Not bad for a first time director

[7/10 · 29 May 2015]

Considering previous movies were Arnie has played a serious role, I was very much looking forward to this movie.

I love the zombie horror genre and with the popularity of the Walking Dead ever increasing (myself being a fan) I kind of hoped to look upon this movie as a kind of an origins style film.

Clearly this movie is an indie movie made on a shoestring budget, and it shows, but not that the movie was trying to be anything else other than an indie movie. Also this was the directors first movie and it showed in many areas.

There were several good things about this movie such as the story of the struggle of a parent deciding what's best when their child who is dying a horrible death almost like Cancer, unable to decide their child's fate should they follow the rules and admit them to a hospital, or kill their own child, being a parent I can feel the pain of having to make that decision myself. The acting was also good too, especially from Abigail Breslin as you see her transformation throughout the film. I particularly liked the moment when Maggie was taken away on a brief camping trip of sorts with old school friends, one of which is also infected. This showed the human side of relationships and the effects of an epidemic on other people who are not affected.

However the movie had many holes, such as the reasons why the father Wade (Arnie) had such a sway on people that he was able to protect Maggie longer than any other person probably could have, in particular Ray the sheriff. Although his deputy was insistent that Maggie should be taken away, it was never made clear as to why the Sheriff was holding back. Especially in consideration to the way Trent was taken away, Maggie seemed worse off. Another thing was the fact that there seemed to be a working infrastructure that gas stations were stocked up on gas and general supplies and the telephones were working. Yet a radio broadcast seemed to suggest the country was on its knees and there were orders to destroy crops etc, yet there was food on the table in almost every scene in the kitchen, where did that come from? This may seem trivial but it made the back story of the movie (the virus/contagion) almost forgotten about and the only reference was the constant reminder that Maggie was infected.

Again I know the budget was small but its the little things that matter, again not wishing to compare but in the Walking Dead and other zombie movies, the world seems to struggle and there are food shortages and fuel only comes from abandoned vehicles, yet in Maggie that didn't seem to be a problem. Of course each version of a zombie apocalypse is always open to interpretation, and this is a decent attempt. There is nothing to hate about this movie that is for sure because when it was good it was really good and the bad stuff you can put down to inexperience from a first time director. All the best started somewhere and for a first attempt I think its a good movie.

Justified: The Promise (2015) Season 6, Episode 13

Best ending of a fantastic show

[10/10 · 15 April 2015]

I have loved this show from the pilot, I love it for a number of reasons, it hardly has a bad bone.

The final episode was a testament to the fans as well as to the cast, why ruin a great show for the fans who helped keep the show going when we can do some good writing and good acting. Although I was slightly disappointed that there wasn't a showdown between Raylan and Boyd, the final scene was much appreciated and a better and unexpected conclusion.

Like some shows like Dexter, Justified left no loose ends, although it never really explained how or why Raylan ended up alone in Florida and not in a relationship with Winona was a bit of a downer, but you could tell he was settled with his daughter in his life and happy.

Although some might think that really the finale was a loose end, I don't believe it is, because the ending told us one thing about the characters of Boyd and Raylan some may have forgotten from the Pilot, its that there were always two types in Harlan County, those who became criminals, and those who left. But at the end of the day, there was a mutual respect between the two protagonists, and it was their history digging for coal.

Also glad so see some of the more colourful characters live to see another day like Wynn Duffy and Ava.

Absolutely outstanding writing and not a disappointment, sad to see it come to an end. Long live Raylan Givens!!!!!

The Fisher King (1991)

A 90s movie for a modern audience

[10/10 · 19 January 2015]

The Fisher King is a movie that I have put off watching for such a long time, usual excuse was that it may not be my thing. With nothing else to what I said to myself "what the heck" and decided to watch it.

Right now I am injured after kicking myself so hard for not watching this movie sooner. Yet that being said I think now was the best time to watch it being older as I get the themes of the movie and understand it better then if I had watched it say 10 years ago.

This movie is a classic for a number of reasons, first the actors/actresses were fantastic, from Jeff Bridges self loathing narcissist to the Robin Williams's multitude of personalities for which we are taken on a roller-coaster of emotion and delight. The actresses such as Mercedes Ruehl who plays the doting girlfriend to Jack and the dependable Amanda Plummer playing her usual type of role of the shy nobody that catches the eye of Parry.

In my opinion this is Robin Williams's swan song, its easy to consider that the characters of Jack and Parry can be compared in some ways to the life of Robin Williams. This movie is an important movie about how people approached mental heath back in the 90s and maybe even today, how homeless people are somebody else's problem and not theirs, and also how people who suffer mental health issues may not simply be their fault but because the system failed to help them through a tragic circumstance which in this case is the death/murder of a man's wife. The movie shows that all it takes is one person to take notice and help if and when they can. Although the message may seem a little self centred after all the character of Jack felt someway responsible for the murder of Parry's wife, this is its own way is a mental health issue that is hidden as most of the limelight is take up on helping Parry.

How can one possibly deal with the notion that they may have been indirectly responsible for making someone go on a murder rampage? The character of Jack has to battle his own demons in order to help Parry, and when you watch the movie you are not sure who is suffering more. Its easy to think that Parry is suffering more as he actually lost his wife and is trying to piece together meaning of his life and uses dreams of King Arthur and a red knight to give meaning to his pain. You only realise at the end what those dreams are about and when its discovered it kind of makes sense. Jack on the other hand finally comes to terms that what happened to Parry's wife and all the other victims of the shooting were not his fault, but he feels that he must atone somehow to receive his own salvation for which he does.

I was pretty shocked to see that this movie wasn't up for many awards back in 91 although Mercedes Ruehl did win a deserved support Oscar, but considering the competition that year I can understand, but that being said when I reflect the movies that did do well to the Fisher King, I feel that the Fisher King was seriously overlooked. Perhaps its for the same reasons as I put earlier, back in 91, the movie may not have made sense yet today I wouldn't doubt it could clearly clear house in most movie awards. I was very surprised to see that only Robin Williams was nominated for an Actor Oscar and not Jeff Bridges also, I think if Williams had been nominated for a supporting role he might have won.