Search
Search results
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated My Dark Vanessa in Books
Mar 19, 2020
At fifteen, the very bright Vanessa Wye earns a scholarship position to boarding school. It's the year 2000. There she meets Jacob Strane, her English teacher, who is forty-two-years-old. Soon the two are involved in a powerful relationship--and one that quickly turns sexual. Seventeen years later, Vanessa is working as a concierge at a hotel, just another in a series of dead-end jobs. She hasn't had any real serious relationships. And now, Jacob Strane, has been accused of sexual abuse by a former student, Taylor Birch. Taylor tracks down Vanessa, wanting her to share her story, too. But Vanessa doesn't feel she was abused by Strane. In fact, her entire life is framed by her love story with Strane. As Taylor Birch's story gains traction in the press, Vanessa must confront her past and what it means to her.
"'I'm going to ruin you.' He says it with obvious torment, a glimpse into how much he's thought about it, wrestled with it."
This book...wow. I was absolutely captivated by Vanessa's story. She tells her tale in two parts: her adolescence, as she meets Jacob Strane at school and they begin their relationship; and then the present, as Taylor Birch's story hits the press and Vanessa must deal with the fact that her love for Jacob Strane is being portrayed as abuse and assault.
"It's strange to know that whenever I remember myself at fifteen, I'll think of this."
For a book with such dark subject matter, it's really beautiful. Russell is a wonderful writer, and this story unfolds almost lyrically. It's so well-done and completely mesmerizing. The sections featuring young Vanessa capture that early adolescent yearning and longing so perfectly--that deep desire to feel needed and wanted. To Vanessa, this is a love story, a romantic tale of a man needing and loving her. She blocks out and overlooks the parts of the story that don't fit. Understanding that some victims don't see abuse as abuse is key to the story, and Russell portrays the dynamic between Strane and Vanessa so well.
"'It's just my luck,' he said, 'that when I finally find my soul mate, she's fifteen years old.'"
As a result, we get a very thoughtful look at abuse, rape, and assault. And, yes, the sections of older Vanessa's story touch across the #metoo movement, as Taylor Birch and others want so desperately for Vanessa to join their side, to share her story. For them or for Vanessa, it's hard to say. This book is so dark, yet so insightful. Vanessa's inner struggle--basically she's having to re-look at the entire foundation upon which her life is built--is one of the most profoundly written and moving journeys I've seen in literature in quite some time. It's not easy to read about, certainly, and it's not always easy to understand her actions, of course. The story can make you uncomfortable; it can feel problematic. But it's an important read, and it's so beautifully and poetically written. I highly recommend it (taking into account the obvious trigger warnings, of course). 4.5+ stars.
"'I'm going to ruin you.' He says it with obvious torment, a glimpse into how much he's thought about it, wrestled with it."
This book...wow. I was absolutely captivated by Vanessa's story. She tells her tale in two parts: her adolescence, as she meets Jacob Strane at school and they begin their relationship; and then the present, as Taylor Birch's story hits the press and Vanessa must deal with the fact that her love for Jacob Strane is being portrayed as abuse and assault.
"It's strange to know that whenever I remember myself at fifteen, I'll think of this."
For a book with such dark subject matter, it's really beautiful. Russell is a wonderful writer, and this story unfolds almost lyrically. It's so well-done and completely mesmerizing. The sections featuring young Vanessa capture that early adolescent yearning and longing so perfectly--that deep desire to feel needed and wanted. To Vanessa, this is a love story, a romantic tale of a man needing and loving her. She blocks out and overlooks the parts of the story that don't fit. Understanding that some victims don't see abuse as abuse is key to the story, and Russell portrays the dynamic between Strane and Vanessa so well.
"'It's just my luck,' he said, 'that when I finally find my soul mate, she's fifteen years old.'"
As a result, we get a very thoughtful look at abuse, rape, and assault. And, yes, the sections of older Vanessa's story touch across the #metoo movement, as Taylor Birch and others want so desperately for Vanessa to join their side, to share her story. For them or for Vanessa, it's hard to say. This book is so dark, yet so insightful. Vanessa's inner struggle--basically she's having to re-look at the entire foundation upon which her life is built--is one of the most profoundly written and moving journeys I've seen in literature in quite some time. It's not easy to read about, certainly, and it's not always easy to understand her actions, of course. The story can make you uncomfortable; it can feel problematic. But it's an important read, and it's so beautifully and poetically written. I highly recommend it (taking into account the obvious trigger warnings, of course). 4.5+ stars.
Ronyell (38 KP) rated How the Grinch Stole Christmas (2000) in Movies
Jul 24, 2020
The Jim Carrey Grinch!
In the town of Whoville, all the Whos were getting ready it celebrate Christmas, but there was one Who that was curious about the true meaning of Christmas and that was Cindy Lou Who herself. Not only was Cindy Lou wondering about the true meaning of Christmas, but she was curious about one person who doesn't live in Whoville and that's the Grinch himself. The Whos almost never talk about the Grinch or want to be reminded of him, but Cindy Lou wanted to be friends with the Grinch and tried to invite him to the Whoville celebration. But, when the Grinch is humiliated at the celebration, he decided that he will steal all the Whos' presents on Christmas Eve.
Wow! I was actually pretty surprised that I enjoyed this movie! I never would have thought that Jim Carrey would do a great job at portraying the Grinch! Jim Carrey made the Grinch's character much more humorous and hammy, which made the film much funnier in tone and the Grinchs' jokes easily land at the right times. Taylor Momsen was fantastic as Cindy Lou Who as Cindy is shown as being a friendly and determined girl who only wanted to be friends with the Grinch and I liked the fact that she truly cares for the Grinch and only wanted to make him happy. James Horner's music was probably the highlight of this film as it surprisingly goes well with the emotional scenes in the movie, such as during the scene where we learn about the Grinch's tragic backstory. The special effects were surprisingly well done for the year 2000 and the film did a fantastic job at showcasing the bizarre yet beautiful world of Whoville and greatly captured the creative style from the original Dr. Seuss book.
My biggest issue with this movie is that the Whos seem to be portrayed in a negative way as they are much more cruel towards the Grinch in this version than in the original book and the 1960s cartoon special. Also, there were times where Jim Carrey's performance as the Grinch got so hammy that I couldn't take his more emotional scenes seriously, like he constantly gets upset whenever the Whos teased him. I also didn't like the fact that Martha, the Grinch's love interest, didn't have much of a role in the film other than just standing around and looking at the scenery and being a love interest.
I always have a problem with certain love interests not having much to do in the film other than just being defined as a love interest to the protagonist and not having a personality of their own. It would have been great if Martha had more scenes with the Grinch so that their relationship would be much more believable to me.
Overall, "How the Grinch Stole Christmas" is one of the most hilarious interpretations of the Grinch ever made on film and it is definitely worth the watch!
Originally posted on: https://surrealmoviesandtvblog.blogspot.com/2019/03/movie-review-how-grinch-stole-christmas.html
Wow! I was actually pretty surprised that I enjoyed this movie! I never would have thought that Jim Carrey would do a great job at portraying the Grinch! Jim Carrey made the Grinch's character much more humorous and hammy, which made the film much funnier in tone and the Grinchs' jokes easily land at the right times. Taylor Momsen was fantastic as Cindy Lou Who as Cindy is shown as being a friendly and determined girl who only wanted to be friends with the Grinch and I liked the fact that she truly cares for the Grinch and only wanted to make him happy. James Horner's music was probably the highlight of this film as it surprisingly goes well with the emotional scenes in the movie, such as during the scene where we learn about the Grinch's tragic backstory. The special effects were surprisingly well done for the year 2000 and the film did a fantastic job at showcasing the bizarre yet beautiful world of Whoville and greatly captured the creative style from the original Dr. Seuss book.
My biggest issue with this movie is that the Whos seem to be portrayed in a negative way as they are much more cruel towards the Grinch in this version than in the original book and the 1960s cartoon special. Also, there were times where Jim Carrey's performance as the Grinch got so hammy that I couldn't take his more emotional scenes seriously, like he constantly gets upset whenever the Whos teased him. I also didn't like the fact that Martha, the Grinch's love interest, didn't have much of a role in the film other than just standing around and looking at the scenery and being a love interest.
I always have a problem with certain love interests not having much to do in the film other than just being defined as a love interest to the protagonist and not having a personality of their own. It would have been great if Martha had more scenes with the Grinch so that their relationship would be much more believable to me.
Overall, "How the Grinch Stole Christmas" is one of the most hilarious interpretations of the Grinch ever made on film and it is definitely worth the watch!
Originally posted on: https://surrealmoviesandtvblog.blogspot.com/2019/03/movie-review-how-grinch-stole-christmas.html
Bong Mines Entertainment (15 KP) rated Rose Coloured - Single by Celine Love in Music
Jul 10, 2019
Celine Love is a London-based singer-songwriter from Hamburg. Not too long ago, she released a music video for her debut single, entitled, “Rose Coloured”.
“The music video (directed by Sylvia Hong) explores how that darkness we are shielded from as children were always there. A lot of us may think back to our childhood as perfect when truly we have blocked out the negative we might have seen or experienced. If we do not confront these issues from the past, it can drive you insane.” – Celine Love
‘Rose Coloured’ tells an interesting tale of a happy young girl who wants to use love to erase darkness.
Apparently, her caramel skin differs from her friends’ vanilla skin tone. But she doesn’t see the difference between her and them.
Even though they trust each other, she still has to look at life through a rose-colored filter.
‘Rose Coloured’ contains a relatable storyline, pleasing vocals, and lush instrumentation flavored with contemporary R&B and neo-soul elements.
“The idea behind ‘Rose Coloured’ was to capture memories, moments and situations that describe the blissful ignorance of my childhood. The desire to put a rose-colored filter on everything that is bad in the world. Before racism, insecurities, heartbreak, or stress became part of life. The world is not only on your side but shields you from the negativity.” – Celine Love
“The imagery in ‘Rose Coloured’ is taken directly from my childhood. The song describes both joy and pain in wanting to relive these moments. Not having to confront the real world with all its social pressures and evils. Growing up in Germany there was a time when I saw my skin color as nothing but ‘caramel’, everyone else was simply ‘vanilla’. The chorus goes ‘I wanna live in a fool’s paradise, show me what love is and we can erase all the darkness.’ The music video reflects this inner conflict.” – Celine Love
A few milestones in Celine Love’s young career include a full scholarship to the music school BIMM Berlin & London.
Not too long ago, she performed at the 2000 Trees in Cheltenham, Kings Jam in Gloucester, Deichbrand and Reeperbahn Festival in Germany, and supported the electro-pop band Years & Years in Hamburg for NRJ Radio.
She composes music with expressionism and self-discovery at its core with a hint of socio-critical commentary.
“The imagery within the song is directly taken from my memories. Writing and recording it left me feeling very nostalgic. So I dug out old photos and songs and reached out to my childhood best friend. It reminded me of a pivotal time as a child, before I became aware of the differences in skin color and hair structure. Not only did I look different from most of the German kids surrounding my life but I would be treated differently too. It wasn’t always negative, but always in a way that made me feel excluded. There was a time before I became aware that my skin color was nothing but ‘caramel’ and everyone else was simply ‘vanilla’. Nothing more. ‘Rose Coloured’ is an almost desperate wish to have that mindset back. The wish to live in a ‘fool’s paradise’. – Celine Love
“The music video (directed by Sylvia Hong) explores how that darkness we are shielded from as children were always there. A lot of us may think back to our childhood as perfect when truly we have blocked out the negative we might have seen or experienced. If we do not confront these issues from the past, it can drive you insane.” – Celine Love
‘Rose Coloured’ tells an interesting tale of a happy young girl who wants to use love to erase darkness.
Apparently, her caramel skin differs from her friends’ vanilla skin tone. But she doesn’t see the difference between her and them.
Even though they trust each other, she still has to look at life through a rose-colored filter.
‘Rose Coloured’ contains a relatable storyline, pleasing vocals, and lush instrumentation flavored with contemporary R&B and neo-soul elements.
“The idea behind ‘Rose Coloured’ was to capture memories, moments and situations that describe the blissful ignorance of my childhood. The desire to put a rose-colored filter on everything that is bad in the world. Before racism, insecurities, heartbreak, or stress became part of life. The world is not only on your side but shields you from the negativity.” – Celine Love
“The imagery in ‘Rose Coloured’ is taken directly from my childhood. The song describes both joy and pain in wanting to relive these moments. Not having to confront the real world with all its social pressures and evils. Growing up in Germany there was a time when I saw my skin color as nothing but ‘caramel’, everyone else was simply ‘vanilla’. The chorus goes ‘I wanna live in a fool’s paradise, show me what love is and we can erase all the darkness.’ The music video reflects this inner conflict.” – Celine Love
A few milestones in Celine Love’s young career include a full scholarship to the music school BIMM Berlin & London.
Not too long ago, she performed at the 2000 Trees in Cheltenham, Kings Jam in Gloucester, Deichbrand and Reeperbahn Festival in Germany, and supported the electro-pop band Years & Years in Hamburg for NRJ Radio.
She composes music with expressionism and self-discovery at its core with a hint of socio-critical commentary.
“The imagery within the song is directly taken from my memories. Writing and recording it left me feeling very nostalgic. So I dug out old photos and songs and reached out to my childhood best friend. It reminded me of a pivotal time as a child, before I became aware of the differences in skin color and hair structure. Not only did I look different from most of the German kids surrounding my life but I would be treated differently too. It wasn’t always negative, but always in a way that made me feel excluded. There was a time before I became aware that my skin color was nothing but ‘caramel’ and everyone else was simply ‘vanilla’. Nothing more. ‘Rose Coloured’ is an almost desperate wish to have that mindset back. The wish to live in a ‘fool’s paradise’. – Celine Love
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Bad Boys II (2003) in Movies
Feb 25, 2019
What ya gonna do
this time?
Contains spoilers, click to show
Whilst the first outing of the Bad Boys shocked me by how good it actually was, this one left me a little disappointed. I was hardly expecting an Oscar winning deal here, as this was always going to be a Michael Bay adrenalin rush, but for a film with a two and a half hour running time, the adrenalin came in too short a bursts.
Bad Boys was Bay's first film and was but a taster of his over the top film making, which first arrives in The Rock a year afterwards, but this made eight years later was obviously going to take this to the next level, if not several levels further than that. But to me, it didn't. Granted, the action was thrilling, outrageous and very enjoyable, but the character development was barely visible. They bicker, Lawrence moaned a lot and Smith was cool and likable but there was just a shell of what there should have been. The entire story, including what's left of their character dynamics are only present to set up the next great action sequence.
Then, the was the taste issue. The crux of the plot as it developed was that the drug dealing villains where using corpses to smuggle drugs, and this was used to "Comic Effect" in two major set-pieces. Though in the first, a car chase, it was black comedy as bodies came thick and fast from the back of a van to be run over by the pursuing cars, the second was pushing the boundaries in a to a more disturbing area.
A criticism levied at Michael Bay by British critic Mark Kermode has been that he is a filmmaker with "pornographic sensibilities". Not just in the literal sense, but in the way that he views everything from cars, women and explosions for example. But this was no more clearly re- enforced than in a scene about 90 minutes in, when our two 'bad boys' are searching a morgue and after pulling back the sheets on fat white guys, they reveal a large breasted young woman, who is refer to as "The Bimbo" if my memory serves. It's worrying because I don't know whether this was being played for laughs or was supposed to be a titillating shot of a well endowed woman? Is it right to show a dead woman, who looks to have been strangled to death and referred to a bimbo in a mainstream 15 certificated movie?
I don't want to sound like a prude but the tone of this and pretty much every scene with the bodies being used, seemed to be in plain Bad, BAD taste and though this humour can play well in the right genre of movie, this just simply wasn't the film to do it in, in my opinion. But, that criticism aside, my main issues are the pacing. It was just too hollow to sustain its running time and my mind was beginning to wander from time to time between the spectacular action and the few moments of decent comedy.
It just didn't have the magic of the 90′s actioner, a genre which had faded considerably by the early 2000′s, and without offering anything new besides improved action, which was worth the ticket or DVD price in its own right, or even retaining the original character of the original, this was a sequel failed to hold its own.
Bad Boys was Bay's first film and was but a taster of his over the top film making, which first arrives in The Rock a year afterwards, but this made eight years later was obviously going to take this to the next level, if not several levels further than that. But to me, it didn't. Granted, the action was thrilling, outrageous and very enjoyable, but the character development was barely visible. They bicker, Lawrence moaned a lot and Smith was cool and likable but there was just a shell of what there should have been. The entire story, including what's left of their character dynamics are only present to set up the next great action sequence.
Then, the was the taste issue. The crux of the plot as it developed was that the drug dealing villains where using corpses to smuggle drugs, and this was used to "Comic Effect" in two major set-pieces. Though in the first, a car chase, it was black comedy as bodies came thick and fast from the back of a van to be run over by the pursuing cars, the second was pushing the boundaries in a to a more disturbing area.
A criticism levied at Michael Bay by British critic Mark Kermode has been that he is a filmmaker with "pornographic sensibilities". Not just in the literal sense, but in the way that he views everything from cars, women and explosions for example. But this was no more clearly re- enforced than in a scene about 90 minutes in, when our two 'bad boys' are searching a morgue and after pulling back the sheets on fat white guys, they reveal a large breasted young woman, who is refer to as "The Bimbo" if my memory serves. It's worrying because I don't know whether this was being played for laughs or was supposed to be a titillating shot of a well endowed woman? Is it right to show a dead woman, who looks to have been strangled to death and referred to a bimbo in a mainstream 15 certificated movie?
I don't want to sound like a prude but the tone of this and pretty much every scene with the bodies being used, seemed to be in plain Bad, BAD taste and though this humour can play well in the right genre of movie, this just simply wasn't the film to do it in, in my opinion. But, that criticism aside, my main issues are the pacing. It was just too hollow to sustain its running time and my mind was beginning to wander from time to time between the spectacular action and the few moments of decent comedy.
It just didn't have the magic of the 90′s actioner, a genre which had faded considerably by the early 2000′s, and without offering anything new besides improved action, which was worth the ticket or DVD price in its own right, or even retaining the original character of the original, this was a sequel failed to hold its own.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Greatest Love Story Ever Told in Books
Mar 12, 2019
Enjoyable book about two fun and interesting people.
In 2000, Megan Mullally and Nick Offerman meet on the set of a play. And the rest, as they say, is history. Their book is the story of their relationship--telling the story of how they met, from each's first impressions of one another and ranging across their courtship, wedding, work, and romance. The book covers such topics as family, past romances, religion, theater, and more.
I love both Megan and Nick immensely, so I was extremely excited when I saw they had a book coming out. My library copy arrived a day after publication, so I hadn't even had a chance to read many reviews. I didn't realize that most of the book is in interview/oral history-type format, so when you read the actual book, it just flips between Megan and Nick chatting back and forth. This takes a little getting used to and while I'm not a big audiobook fan (personal preference, my brain wanders too much), I think this is one that would be *fantastic* in audio form. I'm stalking our public library, waiting for them to get an audio copy for my wife. There are a few chapters that are written out, and I enjoyed those a bit more.
"To my way of thinking, it's an illustration of a relationship that the reader might find surprisingly normal. When all you have by which to judge a relationship are some grippingly cute Instagram videos, it might not occur to one that there's a lot of banal real life." ~Nick
So mostly, this book is just Nick and Megan talking. Because it's Nick and Megan, it's still pretty darn enjoyable. They cover certain topics in various chapters, so it can get a bit repetitive in places (we learn multiple times that Nick's family is salt of the earth and Megan's was, well, not). Still, it's fascinating to learn how the two met, a bit about their various careers (not as much as I would have liked--there are no funny Will and Grace or Parks and Recs anecdotes here), and a lot about their pasts.
The best part is that the book makes you smile--it's clearly apparent how much Nick and Megan love each other. I enjoyed learning more about both of them and how they spend their life together. Megan shares a fun Meryl Streep story, I loved her even more because apparently she's a hermit who loves to read (ME TOO MEGAN LET'S BE FRIENDS), and they are a couple who likes to hang out and do puzzles with their dogs. Life goals at its best.
"It's a wonder that I ever had a boyfriend in my entire life, because all I really like to do is read. I don't even know how I ever met another human."
"All I ever want to do is read. I only leave the house under duress."
Overall, this is fun book about two fun and interesting people. If you're an audiobook fan--even a little bit--I bet you'd enjoy it more in that format. If you like Megan or Nick, you'll find something to enjoy in this one. If you're looking for a chronological history with lots of tidbits about their careers, this isn't that book. But if you want some insight into Megan and Nick as people, this is a worthwhile read.
I love both Megan and Nick immensely, so I was extremely excited when I saw they had a book coming out. My library copy arrived a day after publication, so I hadn't even had a chance to read many reviews. I didn't realize that most of the book is in interview/oral history-type format, so when you read the actual book, it just flips between Megan and Nick chatting back and forth. This takes a little getting used to and while I'm not a big audiobook fan (personal preference, my brain wanders too much), I think this is one that would be *fantastic* in audio form. I'm stalking our public library, waiting for them to get an audio copy for my wife. There are a few chapters that are written out, and I enjoyed those a bit more.
"To my way of thinking, it's an illustration of a relationship that the reader might find surprisingly normal. When all you have by which to judge a relationship are some grippingly cute Instagram videos, it might not occur to one that there's a lot of banal real life." ~Nick
So mostly, this book is just Nick and Megan talking. Because it's Nick and Megan, it's still pretty darn enjoyable. They cover certain topics in various chapters, so it can get a bit repetitive in places (we learn multiple times that Nick's family is salt of the earth and Megan's was, well, not). Still, it's fascinating to learn how the two met, a bit about their various careers (not as much as I would have liked--there are no funny Will and Grace or Parks and Recs anecdotes here), and a lot about their pasts.
The best part is that the book makes you smile--it's clearly apparent how much Nick and Megan love each other. I enjoyed learning more about both of them and how they spend their life together. Megan shares a fun Meryl Streep story, I loved her even more because apparently she's a hermit who loves to read (ME TOO MEGAN LET'S BE FRIENDS), and they are a couple who likes to hang out and do puzzles with their dogs. Life goals at its best.
"It's a wonder that I ever had a boyfriend in my entire life, because all I really like to do is read. I don't even know how I ever met another human."
"All I ever want to do is read. I only leave the house under duress."
Overall, this is fun book about two fun and interesting people. If you're an audiobook fan--even a little bit--I bet you'd enjoy it more in that format. If you like Megan or Nick, you'll find something to enjoy in this one. If you're looking for a chronological history with lots of tidbits about their careers, this isn't that book. But if you want some insight into Megan and Nick as people, this is a worthwhile read.
My rating 3.5
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</i>
Written by the English Pen Award winner Laia Jufresa (and excellently translated by Sophie Hughes) <i>Umami</i> is a story of the troubled lives of a small community in Mexico as they go through various stages of grief. What this story reveals is that everyone deals with heartache in his or her own personal way, however the things they do can affect everyone around them.
Set in Belldrop Mews, Mexico City, five characters give an account of their own experiences over a five-year period, which when combined together produce an overview of life within the mews. Firstly there is Ana (2004), a preteen determined to plant her own garden in the depressing back yard of her family home. Despite her steps to do something positive, she and her family are still mourning the death of her little sister Luz who drowned a few years ago. The second perspective comes from Marina Mendoza (2003), a young adult artist suffering from an eating disorder whilst dealing with memories of her childhood.
Alfonso, the aging owner of the mews, begins his story in 2002 a couple of years after the death of his wife. Previously he was an anthropologist obsessed with the concept of <i>umami</i>, a Japanese word meaning <i>“a savory taste; one of the five basic tastes.”</i> He is an old soul that has fallen into depression, feeling, like Ana, a misfit. The final two narrators are young girls: Pina (2001) who is Ana’s best friend, and Luz (2000), Ana’s five year old sister shortly before she died. Both speak of loneliness as they look at the world through childishly naïve eyes. Pina is suffering the effects of her parents’ constant fighting, whereas Luz is crying out for attention from her family who will not let her join in the “big girl” activities.
<i>Umami</i> may not be a happy book but it has a very powerful voice. None of the characters have yet completely recovered from their experiences however they are all (barring Luz) making positive progress. Without knowing it, each member of the Belldrop Mews community is encouraging the rest as they drag themselves out from the depths of their despair – some by aspiring to be like another, and others listening to what their neighbours are telling them.
The message of this story is about the benefits of a community. Whether big or small, being within a group of people can prevent you from wallowing in your dark feelings and begin to continue with your life instead. This is something that the world at large would profit from.
The unconventional style of <i>Umami</i> may not be agreeable with some readers due to its lack of a clear beginning, middle and end. In fact it does not have a conclusion at all, leaving nothing fully resolved. Yet Jufresa did not intend it to end “happily ever after,” real life is not like that; but what is true is that with time and exposure to positive relationships things can get better.
The aspect preventing a higher rating is the occasional allusion to sexual content, especially from the mouths of girls too young to fully understand the concept. This was uncomfortable to read, however thankfully the majority of the novel was free of unpleasant imagery. <i>Umami</i> is down to earth, relatable and moving; Laia Jufresa is definitely an author to watch.
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</i>
Written by the English Pen Award winner Laia Jufresa (and excellently translated by Sophie Hughes) <i>Umami</i> is a story of the troubled lives of a small community in Mexico as they go through various stages of grief. What this story reveals is that everyone deals with heartache in his or her own personal way, however the things they do can affect everyone around them.
Set in Belldrop Mews, Mexico City, five characters give an account of their own experiences over a five-year period, which when combined together produce an overview of life within the mews. Firstly there is Ana (2004), a preteen determined to plant her own garden in the depressing back yard of her family home. Despite her steps to do something positive, she and her family are still mourning the death of her little sister Luz who drowned a few years ago. The second perspective comes from Marina Mendoza (2003), a young adult artist suffering from an eating disorder whilst dealing with memories of her childhood.
Alfonso, the aging owner of the mews, begins his story in 2002 a couple of years after the death of his wife. Previously he was an anthropologist obsessed with the concept of <i>umami</i>, a Japanese word meaning <i>“a savory taste; one of the five basic tastes.”</i> He is an old soul that has fallen into depression, feeling, like Ana, a misfit. The final two narrators are young girls: Pina (2001) who is Ana’s best friend, and Luz (2000), Ana’s five year old sister shortly before she died. Both speak of loneliness as they look at the world through childishly naïve eyes. Pina is suffering the effects of her parents’ constant fighting, whereas Luz is crying out for attention from her family who will not let her join in the “big girl” activities.
<i>Umami</i> may not be a happy book but it has a very powerful voice. None of the characters have yet completely recovered from their experiences however they are all (barring Luz) making positive progress. Without knowing it, each member of the Belldrop Mews community is encouraging the rest as they drag themselves out from the depths of their despair – some by aspiring to be like another, and others listening to what their neighbours are telling them.
The message of this story is about the benefits of a community. Whether big or small, being within a group of people can prevent you from wallowing in your dark feelings and begin to continue with your life instead. This is something that the world at large would profit from.
The unconventional style of <i>Umami</i> may not be agreeable with some readers due to its lack of a clear beginning, middle and end. In fact it does not have a conclusion at all, leaving nothing fully resolved. Yet Jufresa did not intend it to end “happily ever after,” real life is not like that; but what is true is that with time and exposure to positive relationships things can get better.
The aspect preventing a higher rating is the occasional allusion to sexual content, especially from the mouths of girls too young to fully understand the concept. This was uncomfortable to read, however thankfully the majority of the novel was free of unpleasant imagery. <i>Umami</i> is down to earth, relatable and moving; Laia Jufresa is definitely an author to watch.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
When we last saw former cop turned wasteland warrior Max, it was nearly 30 years ago. Writer/Director George Miller had envisioned a follow up back in 2000, but various factors delayed the film so much that star Mel Gibson believed he had become too old to play the character which opened the door for Tom Hardy to don the knee brace of the famous character.
In “Fury Road”, fans are given a lavish spectacle that is one non-stop ride of intensity that is as my wife put it, “pushing me so far back into my seat that I am almost in the row behind us”.
When Max is captured by a vicious group lead by Immortal Joe, he stumbles into a true hell on earth as Joe has legions of warriors, most of whom have various health issues, it is assumed from the post nuclear world in which they live. They use captured individuals as blood donors to help make the sick live longer and Joe himself controls a large supply of fresh water as well as oversees what he considers his breeding stock of women.
When Imperator Furiosa (Charlize Theron), goes rogue and abducts Joe’s harem, this begins a breakneck and deadly pursuit across the wastelands where Max finds himself literally chained to the front of a car as a blood bag for the driver.
Amidst the eventually carnage that follows, Max is able to free himself and forges an uneasy alliance with Furiosa as she is attempting to lead the women she has liberated from Joe to safety.
With Joe and his large band of followers hot on their heels, Max must once again face overwhelming odds to save the day.
The film does an amazing job of creating an intense visual spectacle as the car chases and combat take up a good half the film and they are absolutely breathtaking to watch. CGI is kept to a minimum and what you see on the screen is a clash of metal as vehicles flip through the air, crash, and explode in spectacular fashion.
The film though is light on details as much of the story is left for you to read between the lines and fill in the blanks. Theron has explained her characters motivations very well in interviews but in the film it is at times murky. The limited dialogue in the film can at times be hard to understand due to accent and a form of “New Speak” but it is Hardy himself who is most interesting. He plays Max as a strong and silent type who is haunted by ghosts of his past, the people he could not save are a constant presence in his life as he sees them in his dreams and when he is awake, this leads to a character who is reduced to little more than pure survival instinct and does not allow for much in the way of character development.
In many ways this is a reintroduction of Max to a new generation so much of the charisma and intensity that was a part of Gibson’s portrayal has been scaled back to a world weary individual who has pretty much given up on finding the better life that he lost many years ago.
Miller has said he has enough material for two more films and if they are in the same league as this one, I would love to see further adventures for Max, let us just hope the wait is not as long next time out.
http://sknr.net/2015/05/14/mad-max-fury-road/
In “Fury Road”, fans are given a lavish spectacle that is one non-stop ride of intensity that is as my wife put it, “pushing me so far back into my seat that I am almost in the row behind us”.
When Max is captured by a vicious group lead by Immortal Joe, he stumbles into a true hell on earth as Joe has legions of warriors, most of whom have various health issues, it is assumed from the post nuclear world in which they live. They use captured individuals as blood donors to help make the sick live longer and Joe himself controls a large supply of fresh water as well as oversees what he considers his breeding stock of women.
When Imperator Furiosa (Charlize Theron), goes rogue and abducts Joe’s harem, this begins a breakneck and deadly pursuit across the wastelands where Max finds himself literally chained to the front of a car as a blood bag for the driver.
Amidst the eventually carnage that follows, Max is able to free himself and forges an uneasy alliance with Furiosa as she is attempting to lead the women she has liberated from Joe to safety.
With Joe and his large band of followers hot on their heels, Max must once again face overwhelming odds to save the day.
The film does an amazing job of creating an intense visual spectacle as the car chases and combat take up a good half the film and they are absolutely breathtaking to watch. CGI is kept to a minimum and what you see on the screen is a clash of metal as vehicles flip through the air, crash, and explode in spectacular fashion.
The film though is light on details as much of the story is left for you to read between the lines and fill in the blanks. Theron has explained her characters motivations very well in interviews but in the film it is at times murky. The limited dialogue in the film can at times be hard to understand due to accent and a form of “New Speak” but it is Hardy himself who is most interesting. He plays Max as a strong and silent type who is haunted by ghosts of his past, the people he could not save are a constant presence in his life as he sees them in his dreams and when he is awake, this leads to a character who is reduced to little more than pure survival instinct and does not allow for much in the way of character development.
In many ways this is a reintroduction of Max to a new generation so much of the charisma and intensity that was a part of Gibson’s portrayal has been scaled back to a world weary individual who has pretty much given up on finding the better life that he lost many years ago.
Miller has said he has enough material for two more films and if they are in the same league as this one, I would love to see further adventures for Max, let us just hope the wait is not as long next time out.
http://sknr.net/2015/05/14/mad-max-fury-road/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Vice (2018) in Movies
Jan 21, 2019
Good movie with 2 GREAT performances
Writer/Director Adam McKay was known for years as the writing partner/director of Will Ferrell, having written and directed such comedy gems as ANCHORMAN, TALLADEGA NIGHTS and STEP BROTHERS and then, in 2015, he stepped out of Ferrell's shadow - and the comedy world - and delivered the multi-Oscar nominated film THE BIG SHORT, a fascinating, terrifying and (at times) funny look at the financial crisis of the mid-2000's.
His follow-up to this film is another fascinating, terrifying and (at times) funny look at a serious subject - the life and career of former Vice President Dick Cheney, an unassuming bureaucrat that wields much power in the George W. Bush White House. I thought THE BIG SHORT worked on every level so was looking forward to this follow-up and this one works on MOST levels.
So..what does work? Let's start with the acting of the top-notch cast. Steve Carrell, Sam Rockwell, Lily Rabe, Justin Kirk and Tyler Perry all are terrific in smaller, supporting roles that depict real people (like Donald Rumsfeld, George W. Bush, Liz Cheney, Scooter LIbbey and Colin Powell, respectively). They all bring the necessary level of gravitas and ironic humor to their parts.
But...make no mistake...this film stars and IS ABOUT Lynne and Dick Cheney (Amy Adams and Christian Bale) and both of these two stars SHINE BRIGHTLY in their portrayal of a a Washington DC power couple who are always calculating the political angle of any issue and how they can benefit from it. I expect both of these two actors to get Oscar nominations.
What also works is the pseduo-documentary style that McKay brings to the screen (similar to THE BIG SHORT), the characters, at times, speak directly to the camera to explain something or (at one time) breaks into a Shakespearean scene to emphasize what's going on.
So...what doesn't work? I'm going to start with the Narrator of this piece, Jesse Plemons. He is a solid actor who can bring a wry sense of humor - or gravitas - to the proceedings. But, to be plain about it, Plemons narrator character (who we come to find out has a VERY big role in Cheney's life) is just not interesting enough to follow or listen to. In THE BIG SHORT, this role was filled by the charm and charisma of Ryan Gosling and, I'm afraid, Plemons just doesn't have that same level of charm and charisma.
Secondly, what didn't work for me was the people/events that were unfolding in front of me. There was NOT ONE character to root for on the screen. Every politician seen upon the screen was just out for themselves and were willing to screw (or stab in the back) anyone that is no longer any use for them. These are not very likable characters and I longed for someone to root for, which made this film fall short of "GREAT" status for me. It is a very good film - strongly acted - but not a GREAT film.
If you haven't seen it, I would recommend VICE to all if, for nothing else, the performances of Adams and Bale, they are mesmerizing, just don't expect to root for anyone.
Letter Grade B+
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
His follow-up to this film is another fascinating, terrifying and (at times) funny look at a serious subject - the life and career of former Vice President Dick Cheney, an unassuming bureaucrat that wields much power in the George W. Bush White House. I thought THE BIG SHORT worked on every level so was looking forward to this follow-up and this one works on MOST levels.
So..what does work? Let's start with the acting of the top-notch cast. Steve Carrell, Sam Rockwell, Lily Rabe, Justin Kirk and Tyler Perry all are terrific in smaller, supporting roles that depict real people (like Donald Rumsfeld, George W. Bush, Liz Cheney, Scooter LIbbey and Colin Powell, respectively). They all bring the necessary level of gravitas and ironic humor to their parts.
But...make no mistake...this film stars and IS ABOUT Lynne and Dick Cheney (Amy Adams and Christian Bale) and both of these two stars SHINE BRIGHTLY in their portrayal of a a Washington DC power couple who are always calculating the political angle of any issue and how they can benefit from it. I expect both of these two actors to get Oscar nominations.
What also works is the pseduo-documentary style that McKay brings to the screen (similar to THE BIG SHORT), the characters, at times, speak directly to the camera to explain something or (at one time) breaks into a Shakespearean scene to emphasize what's going on.
So...what doesn't work? I'm going to start with the Narrator of this piece, Jesse Plemons. He is a solid actor who can bring a wry sense of humor - or gravitas - to the proceedings. But, to be plain about it, Plemons narrator character (who we come to find out has a VERY big role in Cheney's life) is just not interesting enough to follow or listen to. In THE BIG SHORT, this role was filled by the charm and charisma of Ryan Gosling and, I'm afraid, Plemons just doesn't have that same level of charm and charisma.
Secondly, what didn't work for me was the people/events that were unfolding in front of me. There was NOT ONE character to root for on the screen. Every politician seen upon the screen was just out for themselves and were willing to screw (or stab in the back) anyone that is no longer any use for them. These are not very likable characters and I longed for someone to root for, which made this film fall short of "GREAT" status for me. It is a very good film - strongly acted - but not a GREAT film.
If you haven't seen it, I would recommend VICE to all if, for nothing else, the performances of Adams and Bale, they are mesmerizing, just don't expect to root for anyone.
Letter Grade B+
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Memento (2000) in Movies
Nov 29, 2020
One of my favourite films
Film #5 on the 100 Movies Bucket List: Memento
I have to admit, I may be a little biased when it comes to Memento. Christopher Nolan is my favourite director and Memento is both one of my favourite films of his and one of my favourite films of all time. For me, this undoubtedly deserves its place on this bucket list.
Memento is a 2000 psychological thriller starring Guy Pearce as Leonard Shelby, a man suffering from anterograde amnesia searching for the person responsible for the death of his wife, using notes and tattoos to organise his thoughts.
One of the most noticeable features of Memento is the fact that half of the narrative is told backwards. The movie begins at the end, focusing on a rather gruesome Polaroid photograph that fades rather than develops and a victim of a shooting coming back to life. The rest of the film jumps backwards a few minutes at a time, each scene ending where the last one started. For a film about memory loss and amnesia, this mechanism of telling the story really helps put us in Leonard’s shoes. It makes you feel as confused as he is. On the original dvd release, there was a hidden feature that allowed you to play the film in chronological order and this just didn’t have the same impact. These reverse scenes are interspersed with black and white flashbacks of Leonard earlier in his wife’s murder investigation and his life as an insurance investigator, which really help with the exposition. These paired together alongside a haunting score make for an intriguing and not your run of the mill murder mystery.
There are some great performances in this that also help increase the intrigue. Carrie-Anne Moss as the apparently helpful Natalie and Joe Pantoliano as the questionable sidekick appear new to Leonard every time they meet yet their loyalties and motives waver for us as the viewers throughout the film. And Guy Pearce manages to portray the frustrated and not as innocent as he first appears Leonard incredibly well, and holds this film on his own for most of the run time. They’re helped by a clever and smart script that flawlessly blends the sinister and rather dark criminal aspects of this with some surprisingly funny lines.
This story starts at the end so you don’t have to worry about how it turns out, but despite this Memento still comes up with a rather cracking twist and denouement. This entire film is about time and memory and how unreliable it is, and the lies we tell ourselves about our own identities. Even during this, what we thought we knew about Leonard as the black and white flashback meets the backwards story, is revealed to be completely unreliable and quite shocking. Without revealing too much, the outcome of this film is both surprising, sinister and rather emotional, and features some of the best dialogue of the entire movie. Leonard’s actions and motives revealed here and the final voiceover as he drives off makes for a hugely satisfying ending.
I first watched Memento in a psychology class at college around 17 years ago. I loved it then and in the years since, it hasn’t lost its appeal. Watching it back now still evokes the same emotion and feelings when the credits roll as it did all those years ago and will always be one of my favourite films, even possibly my all time favourite.
I have to admit, I may be a little biased when it comes to Memento. Christopher Nolan is my favourite director and Memento is both one of my favourite films of his and one of my favourite films of all time. For me, this undoubtedly deserves its place on this bucket list.
Memento is a 2000 psychological thriller starring Guy Pearce as Leonard Shelby, a man suffering from anterograde amnesia searching for the person responsible for the death of his wife, using notes and tattoos to organise his thoughts.
One of the most noticeable features of Memento is the fact that half of the narrative is told backwards. The movie begins at the end, focusing on a rather gruesome Polaroid photograph that fades rather than develops and a victim of a shooting coming back to life. The rest of the film jumps backwards a few minutes at a time, each scene ending where the last one started. For a film about memory loss and amnesia, this mechanism of telling the story really helps put us in Leonard’s shoes. It makes you feel as confused as he is. On the original dvd release, there was a hidden feature that allowed you to play the film in chronological order and this just didn’t have the same impact. These reverse scenes are interspersed with black and white flashbacks of Leonard earlier in his wife’s murder investigation and his life as an insurance investigator, which really help with the exposition. These paired together alongside a haunting score make for an intriguing and not your run of the mill murder mystery.
There are some great performances in this that also help increase the intrigue. Carrie-Anne Moss as the apparently helpful Natalie and Joe Pantoliano as the questionable sidekick appear new to Leonard every time they meet yet their loyalties and motives waver for us as the viewers throughout the film. And Guy Pearce manages to portray the frustrated and not as innocent as he first appears Leonard incredibly well, and holds this film on his own for most of the run time. They’re helped by a clever and smart script that flawlessly blends the sinister and rather dark criminal aspects of this with some surprisingly funny lines.
This story starts at the end so you don’t have to worry about how it turns out, but despite this Memento still comes up with a rather cracking twist and denouement. This entire film is about time and memory and how unreliable it is, and the lies we tell ourselves about our own identities. Even during this, what we thought we knew about Leonard as the black and white flashback meets the backwards story, is revealed to be completely unreliable and quite shocking. Without revealing too much, the outcome of this film is both surprising, sinister and rather emotional, and features some of the best dialogue of the entire movie. Leonard’s actions and motives revealed here and the final voiceover as he drives off makes for a hugely satisfying ending.
I first watched Memento in a psychology class at college around 17 years ago. I loved it then and in the years since, it hasn’t lost its appeal. Watching it back now still evokes the same emotion and feelings when the credits roll as it did all those years ago and will always be one of my favourite films, even possibly my all time favourite.
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Snatch (2001) in Movies
Dec 20, 2020
Hilarious
Film #7 on the 100 Movies Bucket List: Snatch
Snatch (2000) is Guy Ritchie’s second film following on from his hugely successful debut, Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (1998). Critically Snatch wasn’t quite as well received as it’s predecessor but the general movie going public found it a lot more enjoyable, and personally I agree with the public. I’ve always loved Snatch and prefer it over Lock, Stock.
Snatch tells a rather convoluted and twisting tale about gangsters, diamonds and unlicensed boxing. In a number of intersecting storylines, we see unlicensed boxing promoters Turkish (Jason Statham) and Tommy (Stephen Graham) get pulled into the world of match fixing with violent bookmaker Brick Top (Alan Ford), recruiting Brad Pitt’s gypsy Mickey along the way. And then you have inept criminals Sol (Lennie James), Vinny (Robbie Gee) and Tyrone (Ade) as they attempt to steal a valuable diamond from Franky Four Fingers (Benicio Del Toro) on behalf of Russian Boris the Blade (Rade Serbedzija), also involving Vinnie Jones’s Bullet-Tooth Tony, Mike Reid’s Doug the Head and Dennis Farina’s Cousin Avi along the way. As you can see, the plot isn’t exactly straight forward but despite it’s complexity, it’s a fun and entertaining watch to see all of these separate storylines come together.
What makes this complex and quite frankly bonkers story so good to watch is the script and absolutely superb dialogue. Considering this isn’t what you’d class as a typical comedy fun, it is downright hilarious. No matter how many times I’ve seen this film, it still makes me laugh every time with it’s smart, witty and funny dialogue. From Turkish’s narration to Cousin Avi’s scathing remarks about London and pretty much every interaction between Sol, Vinny and Tyrone, Snatch is extremely amusing. Admittedly there are some lines and exchanges that feel a little too forced and staged, and I think this may be due to some questionable acting and the sometimes unnatural sounding London accents.
Guy Ritchie has undoubtedly put together a stylish and slick film, and Snatch definitely encompasses the dark and gritty feel of London. Maybe a little too much as it can feel a bit gloomy at times. It has a great soundtrack and this really works with Ritchie’s directing style for the most part. There are some questionable camera angles and not all of these work – the most grating for me was in the opening scenes with Franky Four Finger’s heist where the camera jumped around far too much.
Despite this, his style works well in general and is aided by the fantastic cast that has been assembled. I’ve never been a fan of Jason Statham, but this is by far his best work, although the star of Snatch is certainly Brad Pitt, who is virtually unrecognisable as gypsy Mickey, both in looks and with his purposely indecipherable Irish accent. Snatch came out the year after Fight Club at a time that would likely be classed as the peak of Pitt’s career, so to see him play a character like Mickey was surprising to say the least. But the entire cast shine with the material they’ve got to work with.
Snatch isn’t a film for everyone and definitely not for the easily offended. For me, I could watch this repeatedly and still laugh every time, and it’s absolutely deserving of a place on this list.
Snatch (2000) is Guy Ritchie’s second film following on from his hugely successful debut, Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (1998). Critically Snatch wasn’t quite as well received as it’s predecessor but the general movie going public found it a lot more enjoyable, and personally I agree with the public. I’ve always loved Snatch and prefer it over Lock, Stock.
Snatch tells a rather convoluted and twisting tale about gangsters, diamonds and unlicensed boxing. In a number of intersecting storylines, we see unlicensed boxing promoters Turkish (Jason Statham) and Tommy (Stephen Graham) get pulled into the world of match fixing with violent bookmaker Brick Top (Alan Ford), recruiting Brad Pitt’s gypsy Mickey along the way. And then you have inept criminals Sol (Lennie James), Vinny (Robbie Gee) and Tyrone (Ade) as they attempt to steal a valuable diamond from Franky Four Fingers (Benicio Del Toro) on behalf of Russian Boris the Blade (Rade Serbedzija), also involving Vinnie Jones’s Bullet-Tooth Tony, Mike Reid’s Doug the Head and Dennis Farina’s Cousin Avi along the way. As you can see, the plot isn’t exactly straight forward but despite it’s complexity, it’s a fun and entertaining watch to see all of these separate storylines come together.
What makes this complex and quite frankly bonkers story so good to watch is the script and absolutely superb dialogue. Considering this isn’t what you’d class as a typical comedy fun, it is downright hilarious. No matter how many times I’ve seen this film, it still makes me laugh every time with it’s smart, witty and funny dialogue. From Turkish’s narration to Cousin Avi’s scathing remarks about London and pretty much every interaction between Sol, Vinny and Tyrone, Snatch is extremely amusing. Admittedly there are some lines and exchanges that feel a little too forced and staged, and I think this may be due to some questionable acting and the sometimes unnatural sounding London accents.
Guy Ritchie has undoubtedly put together a stylish and slick film, and Snatch definitely encompasses the dark and gritty feel of London. Maybe a little too much as it can feel a bit gloomy at times. It has a great soundtrack and this really works with Ritchie’s directing style for the most part. There are some questionable camera angles and not all of these work – the most grating for me was in the opening scenes with Franky Four Finger’s heist where the camera jumped around far too much.
Despite this, his style works well in general and is aided by the fantastic cast that has been assembled. I’ve never been a fan of Jason Statham, but this is by far his best work, although the star of Snatch is certainly Brad Pitt, who is virtually unrecognisable as gypsy Mickey, both in looks and with his purposely indecipherable Irish accent. Snatch came out the year after Fight Club at a time that would likely be classed as the peak of Pitt’s career, so to see him play a character like Mickey was surprising to say the least. But the entire cast shine with the material they’ve got to work with.
Snatch isn’t a film for everyone and definitely not for the easily offended. For me, I could watch this repeatedly and still laugh every time, and it’s absolutely deserving of a place on this list.
