movieman6-413-929510
A rejoint juill. 2012
Bienvenue sur nouveau profil
Nos mises à jour sont toujours en cours d’élaboration. Bien que la version précédente de le profil ne soit plus accessible, nous travaillons activement à des améliorations, et certaines des fonctionnalités manquantes reviendront bientôt. Restez à l’écoute pour leur retour. En attendant, des notes est toujours disponible sur nos applications iOS et Android, qui se trouvent sur de profil. Pour voir votre ou vos distributions d’évaluation par année et genre, veuillez consulter notre nouvelle section Guide d’aide.
Badges5
Pour savoir comment gagner des badges, rendez-vous sur page d’aide sur les badges.
Commentaires564
Évaluation de movieman6-413-929510
I Know What You Did Last Summer is a "requel" of the original 1997 movie. This requel is directed, co-written, and produced by Jennifer Kaytin Robinson, known for Do Revenge and Someone Great.
Ava Brucks (Chase Sui Wonders) is celebrating both her wedding and Independence Day with her friend Danica Richards (Madelyn Cline). After the party, she and their group of friends cause an accident. They decide to keep it a secret and move on with their lives.
A year later, some of them are still haunted by guilt. When Danica receives a letter stating that someone knows what she and the others did last summer, they find themselves being hunted by a figure in a raincoat. As bodies start dropping, they turn to survivors Ray Bronson (Freddie Prinze Jr.) and Julie James (Jennifer Love Hewitt), who once went through something similar.
With this requel, the creators try to emulate the success of recent revivals like Halloween (2018) and Scream (2022). While those films managed to innovate while honoring their originals, this one mostly falls short. This new version feels more like a near-copy wrapped in a modern look. That can make it entertaining for a new generation, but for fans of the original, it mostly feels repetitive.
In addition to borrowing elements from the original film, many scenes also seem directly lifted from other well-known slasher films. For fans of the horror slasher genre, this may be disappointing: apart from some stalking, most of the kills are neither clearly nor creatively shown. Often, you're only shown the aftermath of the deaths.
The film also tries to recapture the vibe of 90s slasher films, but the characters are mostly portrayed as modern-day youths. They talk as if they're more concerned with social media than escaping a killer. This might feel relatable for today's audience but also makes the characters come off as not particularly smart or sympathetic. As a result, it's sometimes difficult to truly care about them.
The returning characters from the original film serve mostly as nostalgic nods and exposition devices, but sadly don't add much beyond that.
Ava Brucks (Chase Sui Wonders) is celebrating both her wedding and Independence Day with her friend Danica Richards (Madelyn Cline). After the party, she and their group of friends cause an accident. They decide to keep it a secret and move on with their lives.
A year later, some of them are still haunted by guilt. When Danica receives a letter stating that someone knows what she and the others did last summer, they find themselves being hunted by a figure in a raincoat. As bodies start dropping, they turn to survivors Ray Bronson (Freddie Prinze Jr.) and Julie James (Jennifer Love Hewitt), who once went through something similar.
With this requel, the creators try to emulate the success of recent revivals like Halloween (2018) and Scream (2022). While those films managed to innovate while honoring their originals, this one mostly falls short. This new version feels more like a near-copy wrapped in a modern look. That can make it entertaining for a new generation, but for fans of the original, it mostly feels repetitive.
In addition to borrowing elements from the original film, many scenes also seem directly lifted from other well-known slasher films. For fans of the horror slasher genre, this may be disappointing: apart from some stalking, most of the kills are neither clearly nor creatively shown. Often, you're only shown the aftermath of the deaths.
The film also tries to recapture the vibe of 90s slasher films, but the characters are mostly portrayed as modern-day youths. They talk as if they're more concerned with social media than escaping a killer. This might feel relatable for today's audience but also makes the characters come off as not particularly smart or sympathetic. As a result, it's sometimes difficult to truly care about them.
The returning characters from the original film serve mostly as nostalgic nods and exposition devices, but sadly don't add much beyond that.
Superman is the first film in the new DC superhero series led by James Gunn and Peter Safran. This film is directed, written, and co-produced by James Gunn, also known for Guardians of the Galaxy and Slither.
In this world, superheroes are already a familiar sight among humanity. When two countries are on the verge of war, Superman (David Corenswet) intervenes to keep the peace.
Only when Lex Luthor (Nicholas Hoult) reveals compelling evidence that Superman might not be so trustworthy after all does humanity slowly turn against him. As his human alter ego, Clark Kent, Superman must work with Lois Lane (Rachel Brosnahan) to restore his public image.
James Gunn brings this first new film, and indeed the entire DC series, to the world in his own unique, fresh style. Gunn has extensive knowledge of the Superman comics and therefore knows how to incorporate appropriate elements into the film, which fans will certainly recognize. At the same time, he sometimes chooses to interpret things in his own way, to surprise even those who know him. He often opts for a humorous approach, which sometimes results in dramatic and emotional moments being somewhat lost.
Because the concept of superheroes is already well-known in this world, origin stories are largely omitted. After all, most people already know these stories. For viewers less familiar with Superman, this can sometimes be unclear or difficult to follow. Furthermore, not all questions are immediately answered in this first film in the new series.
Visually, Gunn makes the film feel like a comic book, which is well-suited to a comic book adaptation. However, this can sometimes lead to a loss of realism, which may take some getting used to for some viewers or even be disturbing, as the CGI or green screen finish becomes visible.
David Corenswet portrays Superman in both a familiar and unique way. However, there seems to be less room for his alter ego, Clark Kent. Rachel Brosnahan convincingly portrays Lois Lane as a journalist who actively searches for evidence. Together, the two actors have excellent romantic chemistry; they complement and challenge each other. Nicholas Hoult portrays Lex Luthor as a self-interested, evil villain. However, he sometimes makes illogical or foolish choices, which doesn't always fit the image of a brilliant, shady businessman.
Despite the film's lack of background or origin stories, it features a diverse cast of characters. Not all of them receive equal attention or development. With the members of the Justice Gang, you learn briefly about their powers, but little else about their backgrounds. This sometimes makes it difficult to truly empathize with or become interested in all the characters. Furthermore, Gunn also tries to emphasize the comedic side of many characters, making the film feel more like a comedy than a superhero film.
In this world, superheroes are already a familiar sight among humanity. When two countries are on the verge of war, Superman (David Corenswet) intervenes to keep the peace.
Only when Lex Luthor (Nicholas Hoult) reveals compelling evidence that Superman might not be so trustworthy after all does humanity slowly turn against him. As his human alter ego, Clark Kent, Superman must work with Lois Lane (Rachel Brosnahan) to restore his public image.
James Gunn brings this first new film, and indeed the entire DC series, to the world in his own unique, fresh style. Gunn has extensive knowledge of the Superman comics and therefore knows how to incorporate appropriate elements into the film, which fans will certainly recognize. At the same time, he sometimes chooses to interpret things in his own way, to surprise even those who know him. He often opts for a humorous approach, which sometimes results in dramatic and emotional moments being somewhat lost.
Because the concept of superheroes is already well-known in this world, origin stories are largely omitted. After all, most people already know these stories. For viewers less familiar with Superman, this can sometimes be unclear or difficult to follow. Furthermore, not all questions are immediately answered in this first film in the new series.
Visually, Gunn makes the film feel like a comic book, which is well-suited to a comic book adaptation. However, this can sometimes lead to a loss of realism, which may take some getting used to for some viewers or even be disturbing, as the CGI or green screen finish becomes visible.
David Corenswet portrays Superman in both a familiar and unique way. However, there seems to be less room for his alter ego, Clark Kent. Rachel Brosnahan convincingly portrays Lois Lane as a journalist who actively searches for evidence. Together, the two actors have excellent romantic chemistry; they complement and challenge each other. Nicholas Hoult portrays Lex Luthor as a self-interested, evil villain. However, he sometimes makes illogical or foolish choices, which doesn't always fit the image of a brilliant, shady businessman.
Despite the film's lack of background or origin stories, it features a diverse cast of characters. Not all of them receive equal attention or development. With the members of the Justice Gang, you learn briefly about their powers, but little else about their backgrounds. This sometimes makes it difficult to truly empathize with or become interested in all the characters. Furthermore, Gunn also tries to emphasize the comedic side of many characters, making the film feel more like a comedy than a superhero film.
28 Years Later is the third film in the 28 Later series. This part is partly written, directed, and produced by Danny Boyle, who also directed the first film, 28 Days Later.... The screenplay is once again by Alex Garland, who also wrote the story for the first film.
Almost thirty years after the outbreak of the rage virus in the United Kingdom, survivors have managed to adapt in order to stay safe, even near the infected. However, over the years, the virus has evolved, leading to different types of infected now existing.
The young Spike (Alfie Williams) lives with his parents on a small island, where the infected have a harder time reaching them. However, his mother Isla (Jodie Comer) is sick. In order to treat her or find medicine, Spike has to leave the safe island and venture into the dangerous, infected mainland.
With their first film, 28 Days Later, Danny Boyle and Alex Garland created a mainstream success. The film introduced zombie-like creatures that could run fast, something that was groundbreaking at the time. This idea was later copied in other zombie films, series, and video games, giving the subgenre of fast zombies a big boost in popular culture.
What stood out at the time in 28 Days Later was its unique style: it was filmed using cheap digital Canon XL1 cameras, which gave the film a raw, realistic look that perfectly matched the post-apocalyptic atmosphere. Moreover, filming was done during quiet moments in London, making the city appear truly abandoned. Visual effects were hardly used; makeup and fake blood brought the horror to life in a relatively inexpensive way.
For 28 Years Later, the budget was much bigger. More well-known actors were cast, and notably, the film was largely shot with iPhone 15 Pro Max devices. For explosive scenes and Matrix-like "bullet-time" effects, Boyle used a special rig with 8 to 20 iPhones mounted on cranes, dollies, or attached to actors and drones. Drones also provided impressive aerial shots. The makeup and practical effects still deliver effective zombie designs, although some digital effects stand out in contrast to the more realistic style of the rest of the film.
The story of this film, like the second part (28 Weeks Later), largely stands alone from the previous films. There are only a few subtle references for the fans. Because Boyle and Garland are already building ideas for potential sequels, this film sometimes feels like a setup for more, which causes the story to lose some of its own focus and impact. Some elements lack strength or meaning, as they are presumably intended to fully develop in future films.
For Alfie Williams, this is only his second film role, but he manages to carry the film surprisingly well, especially for such a young, inexperienced actor. Jodie Comer and Aaron Taylor-Johnson deliver solid performances as his parents, but due to the lack of backstory or character development, they come across as less strong than Alfie. Ralph Fiennes plays a mysterious and intriguing character, leaving viewers with the feeling that something is missing - likely intended as a setup for future developments.
Almost thirty years after the outbreak of the rage virus in the United Kingdom, survivors have managed to adapt in order to stay safe, even near the infected. However, over the years, the virus has evolved, leading to different types of infected now existing.
The young Spike (Alfie Williams) lives with his parents on a small island, where the infected have a harder time reaching them. However, his mother Isla (Jodie Comer) is sick. In order to treat her or find medicine, Spike has to leave the safe island and venture into the dangerous, infected mainland.
With their first film, 28 Days Later, Danny Boyle and Alex Garland created a mainstream success. The film introduced zombie-like creatures that could run fast, something that was groundbreaking at the time. This idea was later copied in other zombie films, series, and video games, giving the subgenre of fast zombies a big boost in popular culture.
What stood out at the time in 28 Days Later was its unique style: it was filmed using cheap digital Canon XL1 cameras, which gave the film a raw, realistic look that perfectly matched the post-apocalyptic atmosphere. Moreover, filming was done during quiet moments in London, making the city appear truly abandoned. Visual effects were hardly used; makeup and fake blood brought the horror to life in a relatively inexpensive way.
For 28 Years Later, the budget was much bigger. More well-known actors were cast, and notably, the film was largely shot with iPhone 15 Pro Max devices. For explosive scenes and Matrix-like "bullet-time" effects, Boyle used a special rig with 8 to 20 iPhones mounted on cranes, dollies, or attached to actors and drones. Drones also provided impressive aerial shots. The makeup and practical effects still deliver effective zombie designs, although some digital effects stand out in contrast to the more realistic style of the rest of the film.
The story of this film, like the second part (28 Weeks Later), largely stands alone from the previous films. There are only a few subtle references for the fans. Because Boyle and Garland are already building ideas for potential sequels, this film sometimes feels like a setup for more, which causes the story to lose some of its own focus and impact. Some elements lack strength or meaning, as they are presumably intended to fully develop in future films.
For Alfie Williams, this is only his second film role, but he manages to carry the film surprisingly well, especially for such a young, inexperienced actor. Jodie Comer and Aaron Taylor-Johnson deliver solid performances as his parents, but due to the lack of backstory or character development, they come across as less strong than Alfie. Ralph Fiennes plays a mysterious and intriguing character, leaving viewers with the feeling that something is missing - likely intended as a setup for future developments.
Sondages récemment effectués
Total de63 sondages effectués