Change Your Image
jkentlayton
My particular favorite is film scores; I listen to everything from Mozart and Beethoven to Zimmer and Horner. I currently work as a piano tuner and technician.
Reviews
The Shelbourne Hotel (2014)
A fascinating look at a landmark Dublin hotel!
I stumbled across this series on Amazon Prime and decided to give it a try. I couldn't be happier that I found it. It is a wonderful behind-the-scenes glimpse at the inner workings of the Shelbourne Hotel, a Dublin icon for nearly 200 years. It is expertly done, and very engrossing. I am very much hoping that they will do a third series (or season, as we call them in America).
Pacific Rim Uprising (2018)
Worst sequel ever...!!!
Lame!!! Ruined the first movie (which was AWESOME). It felt like a Transformers rip-off, and felt nothing like the first one. Plot holes everywhere. Characters you couldn't care less about. The score was practically nonexistent, and didn't hold a candle to the first. I want those 2 hours of life back. Dumb, dumb, DUMB! Would've been better if it had never been made. I'd rather take a potato peeler to my groin than watch that nonsense again.
Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)
Daft editing, sadly lacking in explanations, but with a few highlights
I loved 'Man of Steel', and had high hopes for this film. I was not certain when I heard that Ben Affleck had been cast as Batman / Bruce Wayne, but he turned out to actually be a highlight of the film.
The beginning of the movie is excellent: the latest iteration of the Wayne family murder (what is this, the third generation of this in the last 25 years?), but nicely done... then a fantastic sequence of Wayne driving through Metropolis during the chaos that was the battle between Zod and Superman. Amazing. I was slack-jawed.
Then it all started to fall apart. Sequences with no explanations, very sloppy editing with jerky transitions between scenes... a comedic walk by Lex Luthor down a hallway paradoxically set to some super-serious Hans Zimmer music... stupid dream sequences that are way too long, out of place, not well explained... all silly and dreadfully stupid.
I was slack-jawed, but now for a different reason. This movie had gone from 'hero' to 'zero'.
What was worse was the ongoing use of bad CGI that did not obey the laws of physics. Not only was it easily identifiable as CGI (Chris Nolan would never have let that junk through, his CGI was always seamless), but the way things moved in reaction to the exertion of various forces never, ever looked right. Whoever did these effects had no clue how the laws of physics work. Again, I was horrified. Part of the allure of Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy was its incredible realism. Look as you might, nothing on screen really looked fake. Compare that with the car chase in the Batmobile, where nothing is moving the way it should when it gets hit by something else, and this just pales by comparison.
And then there is Lex Luthor, who is an absolute idiot until his very last scene. This take on the character is aberrant, bizarre, and stupid. They should just have brought in the guy from Smallville.
I thought that the bad blood between Batman and Superman was rather well explained; you could see their separate perspectives at least.
Now, on to a few positives: Wonder Woman was AMAZING. (Except, right before she comes on screen as Wonder Woman, she changes clothes and locations three times in about two minutes... again, bad, bad editing). Doomsday was also awesome, and when the three heroes take him on, it was spectacular.
Another positive was Ben Affleck in the role of Bruce Wayne / Batman. I know a lot of people just hate him; I've never actually hated him, I just take each performance on its own merits. I loved Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne / Batman. But this performance by Affleck was outstanding, in my opinion. There were a few moments when I actually thought he was better than Bale -- and that's something I never thought I'd say.
The positives, however, do not outweigh the negatives... I would have waited an extra year if it meant that the director and studio could put out something that was actually decent.
On top of everything else, there is very little 'fun' in the movie. It just comes off like it takes itself too seriously for its own bad CGI and bad editing. Almost as bad as a bad SNL 'spoof'.
Terrible job an what should have been an insanely awesome movie. Two stars. Change things up in the behind-the-scenes staff before the next installments in the series. Make the next ones more like 'Man of Steel', or the fun-loving, rather lighthearted Marvel movies will crush the DC franchise in its tracks.
Skyfall (2012)
"Badly done!"
I have been a James Bond fan for years, but this movie was just badly bolted together. Why?
1. How did Eve, who was chasing the train in the truck and barely keeping up, suddenly get two or three minutes ahead of the train in time to set up for when it emerged from the tunnel? The timing simply doesn't work. 2. M orders Eve to "take the shot" three times. Bond heard them, and Eve's complaint that the shot wasn't clean. So why didn't Bond simply drop to the roof of the car and let her have the shot? If she missed, he could easily resume his fight in the next tunnel. 3. Why didn't Eve take a second shot at the henchman on the roof of the train after she shot Bond? The henchman had enough time to turn to her and all but wave a 'thank you', yet she didn't bother. 4. Bond survives the fall from the train
how exactly? He is on the roof of a train moving at approximately 40mph when he is shot, catapulted backward, and falls hundreds of feet into a river. Because he is unconscious, he can not enter the water at a safe angle, and should have been killed. As if this isn't bad enough, the unconscious Bond is then swept over a high waterfall. The title sequences explain nothing of his escape, and when they end, Bond is in a hut on the beach bedding some girl. Not explaining his survival is a critical error which borders on ludicrous, yet somehow the audience is meant to take it all seriously. 5. It is clear that Eve is a poor field agent. Later, Bond suggests that she simply doesn't belong in the field. However, this raises the question: how did she acquire field agent status to begin with? 6. Bond always attempts to keep collateral damage amongst civilians to a minimum, and protects the defenseless. However in this film, he allows the villains to do their dirty work before he intervenes. 7. To this Bond, as developed in the last two films, women quickly became anything but 'disposable pleasures'. The death of Vesper Lynd in Casino Royale was a terrific trauma; when Ms. Fields is killed in Quantum, he is again visibly angry. However, in Skyfall Bond not only makes no attempt to save Sévérine (not even attempting to fight the henchmen to provide a distraction until the backup he knows is en route arrives), but he shows absolutely no glimmer of distress over her death. In fact, his first response is a fast, and badly delivered, quip about it being a 'waste of good Scotch.' 8. Silva had tried to take his own life by a hydrogen cyanide pill. Instead of killing him, he merely felt a burning sensation and had most of his teeth and jaw fell off. Such 'suicide pills' kill; they do not merely give one a little heartburn and bad teeth. 9. What was the point of Silva setting up his own arrest? Ostensibly, it is so that he can talk to M one last time. But why not just travel to London, abduct M from the hearing, and talk to her before doing her in? 10. If Q was good enough to have invented the security on Silva's computer, how was it that he was unable to stop it from freeing Silva? 11. How did Silva know that within just a few seconds of the blast an empty train would be coming through to conveniently fall on and crush Bond, allowing him to escape? 12. The 1964 Aston Martin made its triumphant return in this film, but unfortunately it did so in a way that created continuity errors and glaring reboot issues. It is not a 'company car,' so it must be the same Aston Martin that Bond won from Dimitrios playing cards in Casino Royale. However, it has all of the Q-branch add-ons from Goldfinger
If this had been Dimitrios' car, why did it have the Goldfinger configuration from Q Branch? This thoroughly wrecked the film's continuity with the reboot. 13. What was the purpose of taking M to Skyfall? In the film, it is openly suggested that the plan is a trap to catch Silva, with M serving as the bait. However, if it is a trap, one would expect Bond to create a scenario where they would have a significant advantage. It is poorly explained why he doesn't want backup (he depended on them for extraction from Silva's island); he also takes no weaponry with them. Instead, the unlikely trio is forced to create a "Home Alone" style defense of Skyfall which is doomed to failure before it even begins 14. Why did the monk's tunnel lead, not all the way to the chapel, but into the middle of the moor? A half-tunnel is barely worth the effort to build. 15. When M and Kincade enter the tunnel to leave the house, Kincade closes and locks the door from the other side. Yet, when Bond decides to leave, he has no difficulty simply opening the door. 16. Why would M and Kincade, while secretly fleeing the attack through the moor in the middle of the night, use a flashlight to illuminate their path? This could only be a dead giveaway of their position to Silva and his henchmen. Why not just pull out a Las Vegas-style neon sign and have M cry out from the moor: "Oh, Silva, come and get us!" 17. Silva's death scene was preposterous, and very nearly Monty Python-esque. Bond stabs Silva in mid-back with a blade; it would have severed the spinal cord, causing instant paralysis before death. Yet Silva bizarrely laughs and staggers toward Bond. 18. There were many continuity mistakes introduced into the film through sloppy editing (such as M's handbag in Mallory's office).
Very badly done film.
Poseidon (2006)
An Excellent Remake, Excellent Film - And Very Accurate
As a maritime historian and enthusiast, as well as a film-buff and fan of the original POSEIDON ADVENTURE, I was eager to see the new remake, and went twice. One of these outings was to an IMAX screen, and it was well worth the trip.
If you're a purist who loved the '72 version, but whose universe is threatened by a remake, then you're guaranteed to hate this film... don't bother seeing it, because no one wants to hear you whine about it - but that's your loss.
Going in with an open mind, this is what I found (and I HATED the TV remake last fall): As a movie, it's very well done. The cast is fantastic, the writing is good and well adapted to the circumstances the characters find themselves in. The special effects are out of this world. It is also brilliantly directed; the tension is downright stomach-churning the first time you see it. In fact, if you have a real fear of heights, drowning, fire or claustrophobia, think twice before seeing the film.
Everything that was not explained in the first film (like, for example, what on earth was causing those numerous underwater explosions?) is explained in this, and you actually get to see how the sinking is progressing, and how the characters are affecting the ship as they go. It's also a far more realistic depiction of the amount of time that the ship would stay afloat after capsizing than the original film and its (hideous) sequel.
Additionally, the depiction of the rogue wave striking the POSEIDON is not only visually stunning, but scientifically accurate to what we now know about rogue waves. The director actually re-created a known rogue wave for this film. Other cruise ships in recent years have been struck by these waves (head on, not broadside) and have only managed to survive with significant damage.
One of these days, in the not-too-distant future, a big cruise ship will get hit with a rogue wave and capsize... what will it be like? Go see the movie for an idea.
Sahara (2005)
A great flick!
After being a Clive Cussler/Dirk Pitt novel fan for twenty years, and with memories of the pitiful adaptation of his book RAISE THE TITANIC still fresh in mind, I did not know what to expect from this adaptation.
I have now seen the movie three times this weekend, and I go to movies maybe a half-dozen times a year on average. It is an excellent adaptation from the original novel. It is fast-paced and filled with banter just as the books are. Dirk Pitt, Al Giordino, Admiral Sandecker and Eva Rojas are all faithful to the original characters, as are Yves Massarde and Zateb Kazim. The plot remains essentially unchanged with only minor alterations to keep the movie moving quickly.
I am duly impressed, and hope to see the three main actors re-appear in the next Dirk Pitt flick!