Search
Search results
The Wide Circumference of Love: A Novel
8.0
Rate It
Book
From acclaimed author Marita Golden comes a moving African-American family drama of love and...
Family
The Beach Club
8.0
Rate It
Book
In this juicy first novel by a talented newcomer, a series of personal dramas are played out during...
ClareR (5743 KP) rated Madgermanes in Books
Feb 20, 2022
This is a really interesting period of history (for me, anyway!) and I enjoyed finding out about the ‘Madgermanes” or the Mozambicans who went to work in East Germany. After the wall between East and West Germany was erected, East Germany realised that they’d lost a lot of their workers to the West. So East Germany chose Mozambique as a sister country, and workers were sent to the GDR with promises of education, good work and good wages. Whilst they did get some education (if they largely sorted it out for themselves), the work could be simple and repetitive. What’s more, they only received half of their wages. They never got the half that had been sent back to Mozambique for ‘safekeeping’.
Housing for these visiting workers was usually in basic hostels, shared rooms, and away from the East Germans. Mixing was discouraged, as were relationships. Pregnancies were either terminated or the woman was sent home.
The pictures in the book are a wonderful mix of African and European, and some really big feelings are clearly illustrated. I loved it. I’d be really interested to know how many Mozambicans were able to stay in Germany and become German citizens. The novel implies that life was difficult for those who returned to Mozambique, financially, socially and culturally.
It’s a fascinating read, and one I’d recommend.
Housing for these visiting workers was usually in basic hostels, shared rooms, and away from the East Germans. Mixing was discouraged, as were relationships. Pregnancies were either terminated or the woman was sent home.
The pictures in the book are a wonderful mix of African and European, and some really big feelings are clearly illustrated. I loved it. I’d be really interested to know how many Mozambicans were able to stay in Germany and become German citizens. The novel implies that life was difficult for those who returned to Mozambique, financially, socially and culturally.
It’s a fascinating read, and one I’d recommend.
Lilyn G - Sci-Fi & Scary (91 KP) rated The Mummy (2017) in Movies
Jun 19, 2018
Blech
The Mummy was a completely awesome movie! Filled with perfectly timed comedy, a strong female heroine, a somewhat sinister Mummy, and great lines! I’m talking, of course, about the 1999 version of The Mummy. The one starring Brendan Fraser and the wonderful Rachel Weisz.
The remake tried to be a great movie and slid in somewhere around “mediocre at best”. As one might expect, this was Tom Cruise playing Tom Cruise. (Does the man ever actually try to play someone other than himself? Serious question.) Sofia Boutella is blandly proficient as the scantily clad mummy who couldn’t ooze menace or evil if her life depended on it. Given that we’re supposed to accept that this chick killed her baby half-brother and her father, you’d think there’d be something in the way of evil there. Instead she just comes across as your typical vengeful, wanton female. Annabelle Wallis was about as good as Boutella was. And I did not buy Crowe’s Jekyll/Hyde at all.
Why was there a wet white t-shirt scene in The Mummy? Did not a single person making it go “You know, maybe we should have her put on a different color shirt?” Because it’s not like the wet white t-shirt is a blatant aim to give guys something to beat off to or anything. Between Boutella’s outfit and the “Lookit! Boobies!” of that particular scene, it was obvious that the film crew wasn’t exactly confident of their success in the movie being popular on it’s premise or the actors’ abilities alone.
Now, I do give them credit for the hiring of Sofia Boutella. She looked right for the role. However, why did we have to do the contrast of the evil foreign female against the stereotypical white female again. (Blonde hair, blue eyes, etc. etc. You really can’t get more white.) This is, admittedly, more predominant in my mind since seeing the criticism that Wonder Woman got for the very minor role African Americans played in the film. I couldn’t help but think “Really, how hard would it have been to hire an African American female for Jenny’s role?” And then it would have avoided the white girls vs the other girls thing. But, yeah, no, that’s too difficult a concept for the people making the casting decisions to understand.
(On a lighter note: A blonde-haired, blue-eyed Jenny meant every time she was on screen, I kept expecting Forest Gump to yell for her from off screen.)
The action was fine, with nothing new thrown in. Some of the scenes are recognizable from the better The Mummy. The dialogue was acceptable, but nothing to write home about.
Do yourself a favor and just watch The Mummy movie from 1999. It’s by far the better film experience. This one wasn’t bad, but it certainly wasn’t very good.
The remake tried to be a great movie and slid in somewhere around “mediocre at best”. As one might expect, this was Tom Cruise playing Tom Cruise. (Does the man ever actually try to play someone other than himself? Serious question.) Sofia Boutella is blandly proficient as the scantily clad mummy who couldn’t ooze menace or evil if her life depended on it. Given that we’re supposed to accept that this chick killed her baby half-brother and her father, you’d think there’d be something in the way of evil there. Instead she just comes across as your typical vengeful, wanton female. Annabelle Wallis was about as good as Boutella was. And I did not buy Crowe’s Jekyll/Hyde at all.
Why was there a wet white t-shirt scene in The Mummy? Did not a single person making it go “You know, maybe we should have her put on a different color shirt?” Because it’s not like the wet white t-shirt is a blatant aim to give guys something to beat off to or anything. Between Boutella’s outfit and the “Lookit! Boobies!” of that particular scene, it was obvious that the film crew wasn’t exactly confident of their success in the movie being popular on it’s premise or the actors’ abilities alone.
Now, I do give them credit for the hiring of Sofia Boutella. She looked right for the role. However, why did we have to do the contrast of the evil foreign female against the stereotypical white female again. (Blonde hair, blue eyes, etc. etc. You really can’t get more white.) This is, admittedly, more predominant in my mind since seeing the criticism that Wonder Woman got for the very minor role African Americans played in the film. I couldn’t help but think “Really, how hard would it have been to hire an African American female for Jenny’s role?” And then it would have avoided the white girls vs the other girls thing. But, yeah, no, that’s too difficult a concept for the people making the casting decisions to understand.
(On a lighter note: A blonde-haired, blue-eyed Jenny meant every time she was on screen, I kept expecting Forest Gump to yell for her from off screen.)
The action was fine, with nothing new thrown in. Some of the scenes are recognizable from the better The Mummy. The dialogue was acceptable, but nothing to write home about.
Do yourself a favor and just watch The Mummy movie from 1999. It’s by far the better film experience. This one wasn’t bad, but it certainly wasn’t very good.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated BlacKkKlansman (2018) in Movies
Aug 20, 2018
The first real Oscar contender of 2018
The first shot of the 2018 Oscar race has been fired and it is Spike Lee's BLACKkKLANSMAN. If you are an "Oscar completest" I highly recommend you check this film out as you will be hearing it's name called (probably many times) when the Oscar nominations are revealed.
But...is it a good film?
For the most part, yes.
Based on the incredible true story of Colorado Springs undercover office, Ron Stallworth, an African-American, who was able to infiltrate the KKK via the phone. He then needs a surrogate to keep the subterfuge up in face to face meetings.
In playing Stallworth, relative newcomer John David Washington (son of Denzel) shows that he has inherited at least some of his famous father's acting chops. His portrayal of Washington shows a conflicted man, determined to do his job while juggling his feelings and responsibilities of being a black man in early 1970's America.
Laura Harrier (Liz in SPIDERMAN: HOMECOMING) matches Washington beat for beat as Black activist - and potential love interest - Patrice Dumas who has razor-sharp focus on changing the plight of African Americans and drives Stallworth to thinking about more than just his job.
Other strong performances comes from Topher Grace (as KKK Head David Duke), Robert John Burke as Chief Bridges and Corey Hawkins in an extended cameo as Kwame Ture (aka 1960's Black Activist Stokely Carmichael). I really liked the passion and furvor Hawkins brought to this part.
But...the standout performance in this film comes from Adam Driver as the "white face" of Ron Stallworth to the KKK. He portrays Flip Zimmerman who has been constantly denying his Jewish heritage to pass as a WASP in this world and when he comes face to face with race hatred, he must confront his own inner feelings towards his own past. This is another strong performance by Driver (who is much, much more than just Kylo Ren) and I expect to hear his name called when Oscar nominations are announced.
But...good acting aside...this is a Spike Lee "joint" in all the ways (good and bad) that Spike Lee directs his films. There is a cleanliness in the way he drives the narrative never losing focus on what the main theme of the proceedings needs to be. He paints interesting pictures on the screen and crafts a strong, message picture that should be seen by all.
But...he does have a tendency to overplay his hand, hitting the audience over the head over and over again with his themes to the point of me wanting to say to the screen "all right already, I get it!". This knocks the film down just a hair.
But...that is the price of admission for a very good Spike Lee film, one that I highly recommend you see.
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
But...is it a good film?
For the most part, yes.
Based on the incredible true story of Colorado Springs undercover office, Ron Stallworth, an African-American, who was able to infiltrate the KKK via the phone. He then needs a surrogate to keep the subterfuge up in face to face meetings.
In playing Stallworth, relative newcomer John David Washington (son of Denzel) shows that he has inherited at least some of his famous father's acting chops. His portrayal of Washington shows a conflicted man, determined to do his job while juggling his feelings and responsibilities of being a black man in early 1970's America.
Laura Harrier (Liz in SPIDERMAN: HOMECOMING) matches Washington beat for beat as Black activist - and potential love interest - Patrice Dumas who has razor-sharp focus on changing the plight of African Americans and drives Stallworth to thinking about more than just his job.
Other strong performances comes from Topher Grace (as KKK Head David Duke), Robert John Burke as Chief Bridges and Corey Hawkins in an extended cameo as Kwame Ture (aka 1960's Black Activist Stokely Carmichael). I really liked the passion and furvor Hawkins brought to this part.
But...the standout performance in this film comes from Adam Driver as the "white face" of Ron Stallworth to the KKK. He portrays Flip Zimmerman who has been constantly denying his Jewish heritage to pass as a WASP in this world and when he comes face to face with race hatred, he must confront his own inner feelings towards his own past. This is another strong performance by Driver (who is much, much more than just Kylo Ren) and I expect to hear his name called when Oscar nominations are announced.
But...good acting aside...this is a Spike Lee "joint" in all the ways (good and bad) that Spike Lee directs his films. There is a cleanliness in the way he drives the narrative never losing focus on what the main theme of the proceedings needs to be. He paints interesting pictures on the screen and crafts a strong, message picture that should be seen by all.
But...he does have a tendency to overplay his hand, hitting the audience over the head over and over again with his themes to the point of me wanting to say to the screen "all right already, I get it!". This knocks the film down just a hair.
But...that is the price of admission for a very good Spike Lee film, one that I highly recommend you see.
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Story: 42 starts with the history of baseball and how after World War II there was 400 players in the MLB and they were all white, the black players had their own league until 1947 when the number dropped to 399. Branch Rickey (Ford) wants to bring the first black man to the major leagues for the Brooklyn Dodgers against everything the world at the time suggests, that player is Jackie Robinson (Boseman).
Jackie must start in a feeder team and must put aside the segregation issues that is still going through America, Jackie and his wife Rachel (Beharie) must show they have the thick skin to deal with the abuse from the crowd, other players attitude and prejudices going through America to become a trailblazer for the African American Baseball players.
Thoughts on 42
Characters – Looking at the characters we are looking at real people this time and one Jackie Robinson who would stand up for what he believed in while making his name on the baseball field, he becomes the trailblazer given the chance to become the first black major league baseball player defining all the segregation problems going through America. Branch Rickey was a bible loving owner of the Brooklyn Dodgers who wants to make a difference in the game giving Jackie a chance to change the game so he could be owning a victorious team. Rachel is Jackie’s wife that stands by him through the discrimination he experiences.
Performance – Chadwick Boseman is fantastic in this role showing that he was going to be a huge name in the future. Harrison Ford gives us one of his best performances of his elder career that is outside his known franchises, with Nicole Beharie doing well with the character she has to work with.
Story – The story of Jackie Robinson is the stuff of legends on America, the trailblazer for African America baseball players fight on and off the field against the discrimination he faces to become the star of the season. We get to see how the country of America was so far behind the times with their equality that is still happening without being as serious as it once was. This is an important history lesson if you are a fan of baseball, sport and history in general.
Biography/Sports – Jackie Robinson is an icon of the sport of baseball, this shows how he fought off everything to become that icon.
Settings – Each setting shows us the different worlds that Jackie must walk into with different opinions on the difference in race.
Scene of the Movie – The team standing up for Robinson against ben Chapman.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – I don’t understand baseball.
Final Thoughts – When you look at sports biopics you will always see an icon born and this shows just how Jackie Robinson became the legend the game knows and is a must watch.
Overall: Must watch for sports fans.
https://moviesreview101.com/2019/05/27/42-2013/
Jackie must start in a feeder team and must put aside the segregation issues that is still going through America, Jackie and his wife Rachel (Beharie) must show they have the thick skin to deal with the abuse from the crowd, other players attitude and prejudices going through America to become a trailblazer for the African American Baseball players.
Thoughts on 42
Characters – Looking at the characters we are looking at real people this time and one Jackie Robinson who would stand up for what he believed in while making his name on the baseball field, he becomes the trailblazer given the chance to become the first black major league baseball player defining all the segregation problems going through America. Branch Rickey was a bible loving owner of the Brooklyn Dodgers who wants to make a difference in the game giving Jackie a chance to change the game so he could be owning a victorious team. Rachel is Jackie’s wife that stands by him through the discrimination he experiences.
Performance – Chadwick Boseman is fantastic in this role showing that he was going to be a huge name in the future. Harrison Ford gives us one of his best performances of his elder career that is outside his known franchises, with Nicole Beharie doing well with the character she has to work with.
Story – The story of Jackie Robinson is the stuff of legends on America, the trailblazer for African America baseball players fight on and off the field against the discrimination he faces to become the star of the season. We get to see how the country of America was so far behind the times with their equality that is still happening without being as serious as it once was. This is an important history lesson if you are a fan of baseball, sport and history in general.
Biography/Sports – Jackie Robinson is an icon of the sport of baseball, this shows how he fought off everything to become that icon.
Settings – Each setting shows us the different worlds that Jackie must walk into with different opinions on the difference in race.
Scene of the Movie – The team standing up for Robinson against ben Chapman.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – I don’t understand baseball.
Final Thoughts – When you look at sports biopics you will always see an icon born and this shows just how Jackie Robinson became the legend the game knows and is a must watch.
Overall: Must watch for sports fans.
https://moviesreview101.com/2019/05/27/42-2013/
Cheetah Simulator
Games and Education
App
Enter into the wild savanna and live the life of a Cheetah! Explore a vast grassy plain filled with...
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Lethal Weapon 2 (1989) in Movies
Jul 9, 2020
Protect Joe Pesci
Lethal Weapon 2- adds more action, drama, suspense, thrills, comedy, lots of comedy and more chemistry.
The production:
Shane Black and Warren Murphy's original Play Dirty script:
Their original title for the script was Play Dirty. Although many people thought that their script was brilliant, it was rejected by Silver, studio and director Richard Donner for being too dark and bloody, and because in the ending of the script Riggs dies, while they wanted to keep him alive in case of further sequels. They also wanted the second film to focus more on comedy, while Black's draft focused more on courage and heroics, like Riggs willing to die to protect Murtaugh and his family, due to his love for them
When his script was rejected, Black felt that he had failed the producers. He initially offered to give his payment back, but his agent talked him out of it. Black also refused to re-write the script and quit from the project after working for six months on it. Black later said how the problem with the second film was that they did too much comedy, and how he dislikes the third and fourth films because of the way Riggs' character was changed.
Director Richard Donner said in the film's Blu-ray commentary that the film was shot in such a way that it could be edited with two different endings, one in which Riggs dies and one in which he lives. Audiences in test screenings responded well to Riggs' survival, and this was kept, though the last shot in the film with the camera moving away from Murtaugh holding Riggs was shot for the ending in which he dies.
Jeffrey Boam's final script:
Originally, the character of Rika was intended to survive, with the last scene in the film being Riggs and Rika eating Thanksgiving dinner with the Murtaughs, but the director decided to kill the character to increase Riggs' motivation to destroy the South African drug smugglers. The film was the debut of Leo Getz (Joe Pesci), a crooked but whistle-blowing CPA who is placed in protective custody by Riggs and Murtaugh, and makes the detectives' more difficult due to his neurotic behavior. The Getz character remained a regular throughout the remainder of the film series.
The plot: South African smugglers find themselves being hounded and harassed by Riggs and Murtaugh, two mismatched Los Angeles police officers. However, the South Africans are protected by diplomatic immunity, and so the two are assigned to witness-protection duty in an attempt by their captain to keep his job. It is only when this witness reveals to them that he has already dealt with the smugglers that the trouble really starts.
I love the chemistry between Mel and Danny and now adding Joe Pesci to the mix its perfect. The perfrct trio.
Lethal Weapon 2- is a good sequel to the first one, and adds more. Highly recordmend watching it.
The production:
Shane Black and Warren Murphy's original Play Dirty script:
Their original title for the script was Play Dirty. Although many people thought that their script was brilliant, it was rejected by Silver, studio and director Richard Donner for being too dark and bloody, and because in the ending of the script Riggs dies, while they wanted to keep him alive in case of further sequels. They also wanted the second film to focus more on comedy, while Black's draft focused more on courage and heroics, like Riggs willing to die to protect Murtaugh and his family, due to his love for them
When his script was rejected, Black felt that he had failed the producers. He initially offered to give his payment back, but his agent talked him out of it. Black also refused to re-write the script and quit from the project after working for six months on it. Black later said how the problem with the second film was that they did too much comedy, and how he dislikes the third and fourth films because of the way Riggs' character was changed.
Director Richard Donner said in the film's Blu-ray commentary that the film was shot in such a way that it could be edited with two different endings, one in which Riggs dies and one in which he lives. Audiences in test screenings responded well to Riggs' survival, and this was kept, though the last shot in the film with the camera moving away from Murtaugh holding Riggs was shot for the ending in which he dies.
Jeffrey Boam's final script:
Originally, the character of Rika was intended to survive, with the last scene in the film being Riggs and Rika eating Thanksgiving dinner with the Murtaughs, but the director decided to kill the character to increase Riggs' motivation to destroy the South African drug smugglers. The film was the debut of Leo Getz (Joe Pesci), a crooked but whistle-blowing CPA who is placed in protective custody by Riggs and Murtaugh, and makes the detectives' more difficult due to his neurotic behavior. The Getz character remained a regular throughout the remainder of the film series.
The plot: South African smugglers find themselves being hounded and harassed by Riggs and Murtaugh, two mismatched Los Angeles police officers. However, the South Africans are protected by diplomatic immunity, and so the two are assigned to witness-protection duty in an attempt by their captain to keep his job. It is only when this witness reveals to them that he has already dealt with the smugglers that the trouble really starts.
I love the chemistry between Mel and Danny and now adding Joe Pesci to the mix its perfect. The perfrct trio.
Lethal Weapon 2- is a good sequel to the first one, and adds more. Highly recordmend watching it.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The United States vs. Billie Holiday (2021) in Movies
Apr 17, 2021
Strong Central Performance...The Rest Of The Film Is A Scattered Mess
Lee Daniels is a passionate filmmaker and his passion for bringing the story of Billie Holiday to the screen as the embodiment of the African American struggle against White Officials who are trying to mute her is evident in every frame of THE UNITED STATES VS. BILLIE HOLIDAY.
Unfortunately, he tries to do so much with this film, that he accomplishes very little.
Let’s start with what works in this film: the TERRIFIC performance of Andra Day as the titular character. Day embodies the troubled artist strongly and she does all of the singing of this world renowned performer. It is a superb performance and she rightfully deserves her Oscar nomination.
What doesn’t work? Pretty much the rest of the film.
Daniels has so much material to work with - and a terrific actress at the center of it - that he tried to cram EVERYTHING into this film, consequently, the film is scattered and doesn’t know what it wants to be.
Is it a biopic? A look at an artist who overcame a horrific childhood? A look at an artist that is battling demons? A look at an artist that has toxic relationships with men? Or…is it about the United States Government trying to suppress free speech in order to keep the African American from rising up in the 1950’s?
The answer is…it is all of that…and none of that. Just when you think the film has it’s footing in one direction, it pivots in another and rarely gets back to tie off the other.
For example, look at the title of the film - THE UNITED STATES VS. BILLIE HOLIDAY. So, it must be about the United States (in this instance, the Federal Drug Agents) trying to bring Billie Holiday to justice. And…at the beginning it IS about that…namely in the guise of stopping her from singing STRANGE FRUIT and trying to frame her for her drug use. So…you would think that the film will, eventually, get Holiday on stage to sing a triumphant FULL version of Strange Fruit.
You would think that, wouldn’t you.
Now…to be fair to Daniels and this film, there is about a 15 minute portion of this film in the middle that shows Holiday’s heartbreaking childhood, followed by a haunting song sung by Day. It is a very effective portion of the film, and that (and Day’s performance) are worth wading through the “highlights and lowlights” of Holiday’s life that is the rest of this film.
I have not seen the lauded 1972 LADY SINGS THE BLUES that is a more straightforward Bio-pic of the singer (starring Diana Ross), after watching this film, I think I will.
Letter Grade: B- (because of Day’s performance and that 15 minute segment)
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Unfortunately, he tries to do so much with this film, that he accomplishes very little.
Let’s start with what works in this film: the TERRIFIC performance of Andra Day as the titular character. Day embodies the troubled artist strongly and she does all of the singing of this world renowned performer. It is a superb performance and she rightfully deserves her Oscar nomination.
What doesn’t work? Pretty much the rest of the film.
Daniels has so much material to work with - and a terrific actress at the center of it - that he tried to cram EVERYTHING into this film, consequently, the film is scattered and doesn’t know what it wants to be.
Is it a biopic? A look at an artist who overcame a horrific childhood? A look at an artist that is battling demons? A look at an artist that has toxic relationships with men? Or…is it about the United States Government trying to suppress free speech in order to keep the African American from rising up in the 1950’s?
The answer is…it is all of that…and none of that. Just when you think the film has it’s footing in one direction, it pivots in another and rarely gets back to tie off the other.
For example, look at the title of the film - THE UNITED STATES VS. BILLIE HOLIDAY. So, it must be about the United States (in this instance, the Federal Drug Agents) trying to bring Billie Holiday to justice. And…at the beginning it IS about that…namely in the guise of stopping her from singing STRANGE FRUIT and trying to frame her for her drug use. So…you would think that the film will, eventually, get Holiday on stage to sing a triumphant FULL version of Strange Fruit.
You would think that, wouldn’t you.
Now…to be fair to Daniels and this film, there is about a 15 minute portion of this film in the middle that shows Holiday’s heartbreaking childhood, followed by a haunting song sung by Day. It is a very effective portion of the film, and that (and Day’s performance) are worth wading through the “highlights and lowlights” of Holiday’s life that is the rest of this film.
I have not seen the lauded 1972 LADY SINGS THE BLUES that is a more straightforward Bio-pic of the singer (starring Diana Ross), after watching this film, I think I will.
Letter Grade: B- (because of Day’s performance and that 15 minute segment)
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
