Search
Hooked: How to Build Habit-Forming Products
Book
In Hooked, Nir Eyal reveals how successful companies create products people can't put down - and how...
Keith and The Girl comedy talk show
Podcast
If you're easily offended, this podcast is not for you. Keith and The Girl (KATG) is a fast-paced...
The Gift of Life: Behind the Scenes of Donor Organ Retrieval
Book
'Organ transplants are a very controversial and unique area of medicine. Those of us who work as...
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Love and Monsters (2021) in Movies
Apr 18, 2021
Contains spoilers, click to show
Love and monsters is quite a slow paced film about a journey and a character. Joel starts the film as a bit of a looser, he feels out of place and unneeded so he sets out to find the one person he thinks will appreciate him and, as he movers through the world he begins to find himself, a purpose and the meaning of family.
In some ways, Love and Monsters reminded me of 'Zombie land', we have some one who is just trying to find his place and his way in world that changed, he has to rely on the help of others whilst finding the right rules to help him survive. Of course the biggest difference is that there are monsters instead of Zombies.
Talking of the monsters, the effects are pretty good, the monsters are not all horrific and are pretty realistic. They help set the tone and pace in the film, providing threat, humour and atmosphere and it's nice to see that some of them just want to get on with their own lives.
Another thing that was nice to see was that (most of) the humans were also just trying to live, there weren't any 'Neagan's' or camps of overly aggressive thugs as you get used to seeing in a lot of post apocalyptic movies, which came as a bit as a surprise, I was expecting there to be something odd about the meeting between Joel and Aimee but, even though it doesn't necessarily go according to plan it still works out in a nice way.
And that's the thing, Love and Monsters is quite a nice film. The characters want to survive and even in a world populated by monsters that eat people the survivors find love and purpose, yes there are people who are just out for themselves, who are willing to steal and feed others to the monsters but they are in the minority.
The only really odd thing in this film are the Mav1s', there is not really anything to explain them.
Love and Monsters is no 'Godzilla', there are no monster v monster fights. and it's no 'A Quite Place' the monsters aren't necessarily hunting the survivors for anything other than food and this isn't a horror movie, it's a film about growth, love and family and man eating bugs.
In some ways, Love and Monsters reminded me of 'Zombie land', we have some one who is just trying to find his place and his way in world that changed, he has to rely on the help of others whilst finding the right rules to help him survive. Of course the biggest difference is that there are monsters instead of Zombies.
Talking of the monsters, the effects are pretty good, the monsters are not all horrific and are pretty realistic. They help set the tone and pace in the film, providing threat, humour and atmosphere and it's nice to see that some of them just want to get on with their own lives.
Another thing that was nice to see was that (most of) the humans were also just trying to live, there weren't any 'Neagan's' or camps of overly aggressive thugs as you get used to seeing in a lot of post apocalyptic movies, which came as a bit as a surprise, I was expecting there to be something odd about the meeting between Joel and Aimee but, even though it doesn't necessarily go according to plan it still works out in a nice way.
And that's the thing, Love and Monsters is quite a nice film. The characters want to survive and even in a world populated by monsters that eat people the survivors find love and purpose, yes there are people who are just out for themselves, who are willing to steal and feed others to the monsters but they are in the minority.
The only really odd thing in this film are the Mav1s', there is not really anything to explain them.
Love and Monsters is no 'Godzilla', there are no monster v monster fights. and it's no 'A Quite Place' the monsters aren't necessarily hunting the survivors for anything other than food and this isn't a horror movie, it's a film about growth, love and family and man eating bugs.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The Informer (2019) in Movies
Sep 26, 2019
Joel Kinnaman plays the good bad guy well, the inner battle his character has shows on his face throughout. Once Pete gets to prison and his story becomes one of survival I thought he was even better. Without such a good performance behind Pete I don't think this film would have held together at all.
When Common started appearing in things I was a little dubious but as time has gone on he's really developed and found himself the right little niche. As Grens he shows he's confident with what he's given and I can't wait to see his next role. (As it happens I didn't have to wait long as he was in The Kitchen and I had no idea.)
Rosamund Pike and Clive Owen are both generally solid actors to see on a movie poster but in this instance I found their characters to be frustrating and a little wooden. Pike is potentially part tree as I notice this in a few of her roles but it's usually perfectly suited, in this though, Wilcox's two different personas felt too different to be believable. Owen as her boss was fine but in a film with so many aggressive and combative characters it was just too much.
It was paced quite well and the only reason I felt distracted at times was because of fellow cinemagoers. We were given a nice balance of action broken up by character pieces and there weren't any times that felt unnecessary or over the top. But then we get to the end of the film. I'd put money on the ending of that film being changed to cut the length and keep it under 2 hours. There was a perfect place to end the film, it would have left you with a "well what happened next" moment but I think that would have been preferable to what we got. We still get that "what's next" but it's much more anticlimactic and meant my last feeling wasn't one of anticipation but confusion. It took me a while to write up some note for this because I was pondering that ending, I'm certain that has changed the score this gets.
Read the review extras here: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/09/the-informer-movie-review.html
When Common started appearing in things I was a little dubious but as time has gone on he's really developed and found himself the right little niche. As Grens he shows he's confident with what he's given and I can't wait to see his next role. (As it happens I didn't have to wait long as he was in The Kitchen and I had no idea.)
Rosamund Pike and Clive Owen are both generally solid actors to see on a movie poster but in this instance I found their characters to be frustrating and a little wooden. Pike is potentially part tree as I notice this in a few of her roles but it's usually perfectly suited, in this though, Wilcox's two different personas felt too different to be believable. Owen as her boss was fine but in a film with so many aggressive and combative characters it was just too much.
It was paced quite well and the only reason I felt distracted at times was because of fellow cinemagoers. We were given a nice balance of action broken up by character pieces and there weren't any times that felt unnecessary or over the top. But then we get to the end of the film. I'd put money on the ending of that film being changed to cut the length and keep it under 2 hours. There was a perfect place to end the film, it would have left you with a "well what happened next" moment but I think that would have been preferable to what we got. We still get that "what's next" but it's much more anticlimactic and meant my last feeling wasn't one of anticipation but confusion. It took me a while to write up some note for this because I was pondering that ending, I'm certain that has changed the score this gets.
Read the review extras here: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/09/the-informer-movie-review.html
Dying Light
6.6
Rate It
Video Game
Dying Light is an open world first person survival horror action-adventure video game developed by...
Dying Light
Cricket Captain 2015
Games and Sports
App
As the Australians arrive on the shores of England ahead of the 2015 series, Cricket Captain is...
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated Cleopatra's Moon in Books
Feb 15, 2019
<i>Cleopatra's Moon</i> tells the childhood story of Cleopatra Selene, daughter of Marc Antony (Marcus Antonius) and the most famous Cleopatra (VII) in history. The story covers her life from ages six to sixteen, from her parents' fall from power to the capture of Cleopatra Selene and her brothers to their lives living in Rome.
Catered to the young adult market, <i>Cleopatra's Moon</i> has a lot to offer older readers as well. While there may not be as much meat on the bones as many adult historical fiction novels have, the history is plentiful and smoothly incorporated into the story. Aside from a few, minor instances, not much Cleopatra Selene said or did stood out as odd and the history seemed sound (though I am far from an expert). The author's writing style is easy to read, has a nice flow, and the descriptions are well-done; I could easily picture the surroundings, so the scenes came alive for me. She doesn't shy away from suggestive scenes, making the story feel more realistic, though nothing is described explicitly either. The author is up front about what is and is not fact in the six-page section at the end of book entitled "The Facts Within the Fiction," which gives the reader more information about the people mentioned within the book. If anyone goes into this book expecting more love story than historical fiction, they will be sadly disappointed. Any love story takes a back seat to Cleopatra Selene's struggle with both herself and her circumstances in life.
If I had one quibble with the book, it was the children's and Cleopatra Selene's voices. The children sounded a bit too mature at times, including Cleopatra Selene when young. Although in her case, it was more her voice didn't change much throughout the ten years the book covered and it was too familiar. I've come across other young adult protagonists that sounded very similar to her, both historical and contemporary, so I was hoping hers would be a bit more distinctive from the rest. Still, it's a very small thing and I did like Cleo Selene; she wasn't passive, but she wasn't aggressive either, she fell somewhere in between the two, which worked well for the book.
After all has been said, <i>Cleopatra's Moon</i> does what any (good) historical fiction novel should aspire to, it made me want to know more about the time, people, and places.
Catered to the young adult market, <i>Cleopatra's Moon</i> has a lot to offer older readers as well. While there may not be as much meat on the bones as many adult historical fiction novels have, the history is plentiful and smoothly incorporated into the story. Aside from a few, minor instances, not much Cleopatra Selene said or did stood out as odd and the history seemed sound (though I am far from an expert). The author's writing style is easy to read, has a nice flow, and the descriptions are well-done; I could easily picture the surroundings, so the scenes came alive for me. She doesn't shy away from suggestive scenes, making the story feel more realistic, though nothing is described explicitly either. The author is up front about what is and is not fact in the six-page section at the end of book entitled "The Facts Within the Fiction," which gives the reader more information about the people mentioned within the book. If anyone goes into this book expecting more love story than historical fiction, they will be sadly disappointed. Any love story takes a back seat to Cleopatra Selene's struggle with both herself and her circumstances in life.
If I had one quibble with the book, it was the children's and Cleopatra Selene's voices. The children sounded a bit too mature at times, including Cleopatra Selene when young. Although in her case, it was more her voice didn't change much throughout the ten years the book covered and it was too familiar. I've come across other young adult protagonists that sounded very similar to her, both historical and contemporary, so I was hoping hers would be a bit more distinctive from the rest. Still, it's a very small thing and I did like Cleo Selene; she wasn't passive, but she wasn't aggressive either, she fell somewhere in between the two, which worked well for the book.
After all has been said, <i>Cleopatra's Moon</i> does what any (good) historical fiction novel should aspire to, it made me want to know more about the time, people, and places.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated The Dirt (2019) in Movies
Apr 4, 2019 (Updated Apr 4, 2019)
Brainless Fun
The Dirt is a Motley Crue biopic that debuted on Netflix last month. It is Jeff Tremaine's, (the director of the Jackass movies,) first narrative feature film. This should maybe give you some idea of what to expect within the movie. If Bohemian Rhapsody, Wayne's World and Jackass had a baby, this would most likely be the result.
Your enjoyment of this movie will probably depend on what you are wanting out of it going in. I am a casual Motely Crue fan, I only know a few of their songs and have a very surface level knowledge of their history. I was watching this movie for a bit of dumb fun after I had seen the trailer and it delivered exactly what I expected it to. If however, you are a die hard Motley Crue fan looking for an in-depth biopic with a sense of grit and realism, you will most likely be sorely disappointed.
The plot to this thing plays out like a Wikipedia article, in the sense that it hits all of the major beats of the band's history, but glosses over so much more and leaves any sense of nuance at the door. It is also incredibly cartoonish and cheesy, at no point in the film do you ever feel that you are watching the actual members of Motley Crue and it is always painfully clear that you are watching a group of actors in bad wigs playing faux, characterture versions of real people.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think that the cast have anything to do with how shallow or glossy this thing is. I think that Daniel Webber did a decent job as Vince Neil and Douglas Booth is okay as Nikki Sixx. For some reason, Machine Gun Kelly plays Tommy Lee as a goofy, lovable rogue, as apposed to the aggressive violent abuser he is in real life. Iwan Rheon is by far the stand out as Mick Mars, the older, more jaded member of the group who totally dismisses the immature 'sex drugs and rock and roll,' bullshit mentality of his band-mates and comes away with some of the driest, funniest lines in the movie.
Overall, I gave this a 7 based on the brainless fun I had watching it, but it by no means feels accurate or realistic, nor does it feel like it's trying to be. Hardcore Motely Crue fans will probably feel like they were let down by this biopic, but I got exactly what I wanted out of it and enjoyed it for what it was.
Your enjoyment of this movie will probably depend on what you are wanting out of it going in. I am a casual Motely Crue fan, I only know a few of their songs and have a very surface level knowledge of their history. I was watching this movie for a bit of dumb fun after I had seen the trailer and it delivered exactly what I expected it to. If however, you are a die hard Motley Crue fan looking for an in-depth biopic with a sense of grit and realism, you will most likely be sorely disappointed.
The plot to this thing plays out like a Wikipedia article, in the sense that it hits all of the major beats of the band's history, but glosses over so much more and leaves any sense of nuance at the door. It is also incredibly cartoonish and cheesy, at no point in the film do you ever feel that you are watching the actual members of Motley Crue and it is always painfully clear that you are watching a group of actors in bad wigs playing faux, characterture versions of real people.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think that the cast have anything to do with how shallow or glossy this thing is. I think that Daniel Webber did a decent job as Vince Neil and Douglas Booth is okay as Nikki Sixx. For some reason, Machine Gun Kelly plays Tommy Lee as a goofy, lovable rogue, as apposed to the aggressive violent abuser he is in real life. Iwan Rheon is by far the stand out as Mick Mars, the older, more jaded member of the group who totally dismisses the immature 'sex drugs and rock and roll,' bullshit mentality of his band-mates and comes away with some of the driest, funniest lines in the movie.
Overall, I gave this a 7 based on the brainless fun I had watching it, but it by no means feels accurate or realistic, nor does it feel like it's trying to be. Hardcore Motely Crue fans will probably feel like they were let down by this biopic, but I got exactly what I wanted out of it and enjoyed it for what it was.