Search
Great, inspiring memoir
I'm not going to do my usual paragraph of description for Becoming, Michelle Obama's memoir, because, well, we all know who Michelle Obama is. This memoir is Mrs. Obama's reflection on her life to date, from her childhood in the South Side of Chicago, her time at Princeton, her work as a lawyer and executive, meeting Barack Obama and being introduced to politics through him, and their historic road to the White House.
"Your story is what you have, what you will always have. It is something to own."
I almost do not want to review this book, because I feel like I cannot do justice to the woman that is Michelle Obama. This is a really beautiful book, and it's also really informative. I learned so much about Mrs. Obama and her life, which I very much enjoyed.
First of all, she's a great storyteller. This is a big book, and it's a bit of an undertaking, but it's an easy read, and a really interesting one. I found myself completely immersed--I really loved learning about her childhood and her family. And, of course, it's fun to hear about how she met Barack (his marriage proposal is pretty amazing). Learning about both of their origins is fascinating, honestly. I mean, I knew that the Obamas weren't from the old-school political establishment, but it wasn't until I was reading about her life--and hearing more about the former President's--that it really hit home to me. It's amazing how much they have accomplished for our country.
Ms. Obama does a wonderful job of weaving her themes throughout her story--the power of education, of having an advocate, the importance of diversity and women's rights, and how vital children are in her life. She is honest about the realities of working motherhood: both for her life and for those of working Americans. It's also great to get little asides about her daughters (e.g., families at their schools sending in cupcakes for the Secret Service agents on birthdays); funny stories about meeting the Queen; and her mom sounds like a real trip.
"Kids made me feel like myself again. To them, I wasn't a spectacle. I was just a nice, kinda-tall lady."
She also talks about serious matters: race, education, and her reluctance about getting her family into politics. We see how importance her daughters are to her and how hard it was, knowing what they were sacrificing when her husband ran for President. We hear about her struggles being the first African American First Lady--the stings she felt from the racial insults aimed at both her and her husband, the fear she felt for her family's safety, and the attempts she made to find her place in Washington. I found myself copying quotes right and left, because she is so intelligent and profound and because, truly, as we all learned over eight years, she's such a relatable person.
"Kids wake up each day believing in the goodness of things, in the magic of what be. They're uncynical, believers at their core. We owe it to them to stay strong and keep working to create a more fair and humane world. For them, we need to remain both tough and hopeful, to acknowledge that there's more growing to be done."
Overall, this was a great memoir. It was informative, educational, and also inspiring and funny. It made me miss the Obama family all over again and appreciate so much their time in the Oval Office. It also gave me even more insight into Mrs. Obama, her life, and her feelings. I highly recommend it.
"Your story is what you have, what you will always have. It is something to own."
I almost do not want to review this book, because I feel like I cannot do justice to the woman that is Michelle Obama. This is a really beautiful book, and it's also really informative. I learned so much about Mrs. Obama and her life, which I very much enjoyed.
First of all, she's a great storyteller. This is a big book, and it's a bit of an undertaking, but it's an easy read, and a really interesting one. I found myself completely immersed--I really loved learning about her childhood and her family. And, of course, it's fun to hear about how she met Barack (his marriage proposal is pretty amazing). Learning about both of their origins is fascinating, honestly. I mean, I knew that the Obamas weren't from the old-school political establishment, but it wasn't until I was reading about her life--and hearing more about the former President's--that it really hit home to me. It's amazing how much they have accomplished for our country.
Ms. Obama does a wonderful job of weaving her themes throughout her story--the power of education, of having an advocate, the importance of diversity and women's rights, and how vital children are in her life. She is honest about the realities of working motherhood: both for her life and for those of working Americans. It's also great to get little asides about her daughters (e.g., families at their schools sending in cupcakes for the Secret Service agents on birthdays); funny stories about meeting the Queen; and her mom sounds like a real trip.
"Kids made me feel like myself again. To them, I wasn't a spectacle. I was just a nice, kinda-tall lady."
She also talks about serious matters: race, education, and her reluctance about getting her family into politics. We see how importance her daughters are to her and how hard it was, knowing what they were sacrificing when her husband ran for President. We hear about her struggles being the first African American First Lady--the stings she felt from the racial insults aimed at both her and her husband, the fear she felt for her family's safety, and the attempts she made to find her place in Washington. I found myself copying quotes right and left, because she is so intelligent and profound and because, truly, as we all learned over eight years, she's such a relatable person.
"Kids wake up each day believing in the goodness of things, in the magic of what be. They're uncynical, believers at their core. We owe it to them to stay strong and keep working to create a more fair and humane world. For them, we need to remain both tough and hopeful, to acknowledge that there's more growing to be done."
Overall, this was a great memoir. It was informative, educational, and also inspiring and funny. It made me miss the Obama family all over again and appreciate so much their time in the Oval Office. It also gave me even more insight into Mrs. Obama, her life, and her feelings. I highly recommend it.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Killers of the Flower Moon: The Osage Murder and the Birth of the FBI in Books
Dec 7, 2018
<I>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</I>
It is well known that throughout history, facts have been omitted from history books. Written accounts of events ostensibly make important figures and countries appear to be in the right, whereas reality reveals otherwise. One such exclusion is the fate of the Native Americans inhabiting the southern states at the beginning of the 1900s. Children are brought up to believe the stories that “Red Indians” are bad and the cowboys are good, but this was unlikely the case. David Grann has researched into a particular period of Native American history that most people may never have heard of.<I> Killers of the Flower Moon</I> reveals the horrors innocent people faced at the hands of perfidious criminals.
The majority of the book is written as a third person narrative, recounting the lives of some of the members of the Osage Indian Nation in Oklahoma. White people, believing themselves to be superior, had forced the natives off their homelands and onto rocky, unwanted ground. What they did not anticipate, however, was the abundance of oil residing beneath the surface. The Osage went from being oppressed to being the wealthiest people in the state. Full of avarice, the whites were not going to let them get away with this fortune for long.
David Grann takes a particular interest in Mollie Burkhart, an Osage member with a white husband. Mollie had three sisters, but within a few short years they were all dead, and so was her mother. Believing they had been murdered, Mollie fears for her life. Other Osage members were also being killed, as well as those who tried to investigate the spreading slaughter. However, the case remained stubbornly unsolved.
Nevertheless, there was still hope for Mollie after the arrival of Tom White, an agent of the soon to be known as Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Determined to get to the bottom of the so-called Reign of Terror, Tom and his team carefully analyse the behaviours and motives of the disingenuous citizens, narrowing down the suspects until eventually finding their duplicitous killer.
Learning about this unknown period of history is eye opening and offers a completely new view on the relations between whites and Native Americans. It was a time of prejudice and racism, not unlike the attitude towards black people emphasised with the civil rights movement in the mid-1900s. Greed was a significant motivator, particularly where making money was involved. But, David Grann does not stop here.
The final section of <i>Killers of the Flower Moon</i> is written from the author’s perspective. As a staff writer at <i>The New Yorker</i>, the evidence of the Osage murders case intrigued David Grann, but he was concerned about some unresolved holes in the story. Determined to uncover the truth, Grann conducted his own research to discover the culprits behind the undocumented murders unrelated to Mollie Burkhart’s family. What he stumbles on highlights the severity of the dark fate the Osage Indians were threatened with.
Despite being written as a narrative, it is obvious that <i>Killers of the Flower Moon</i> is a work of non-fiction. It lacks emotion and character insight, however, since it is not meant to be a fabricated story, these elements are not required. Instead, it shocks and disturbs the reader with its unbelievable truths.
An extensive biography proves the authenticity of David Grann’s revelation. With the reinforcement of FBI files, jury testimonials, statements, court transcripts, letters, telegrams, diaries and confessions, Grann produces a strong historical record of events that should not be glossed over. Without authors and books such as <i>Killers of the Flower Moon</i>, people will blindly go around believing falsehoods. The truth needs to be discovered, and readers can start by reading this book.
It is well known that throughout history, facts have been omitted from history books. Written accounts of events ostensibly make important figures and countries appear to be in the right, whereas reality reveals otherwise. One such exclusion is the fate of the Native Americans inhabiting the southern states at the beginning of the 1900s. Children are brought up to believe the stories that “Red Indians” are bad and the cowboys are good, but this was unlikely the case. David Grann has researched into a particular period of Native American history that most people may never have heard of.<I> Killers of the Flower Moon</I> reveals the horrors innocent people faced at the hands of perfidious criminals.
The majority of the book is written as a third person narrative, recounting the lives of some of the members of the Osage Indian Nation in Oklahoma. White people, believing themselves to be superior, had forced the natives off their homelands and onto rocky, unwanted ground. What they did not anticipate, however, was the abundance of oil residing beneath the surface. The Osage went from being oppressed to being the wealthiest people in the state. Full of avarice, the whites were not going to let them get away with this fortune for long.
David Grann takes a particular interest in Mollie Burkhart, an Osage member with a white husband. Mollie had three sisters, but within a few short years they were all dead, and so was her mother. Believing they had been murdered, Mollie fears for her life. Other Osage members were also being killed, as well as those who tried to investigate the spreading slaughter. However, the case remained stubbornly unsolved.
Nevertheless, there was still hope for Mollie after the arrival of Tom White, an agent of the soon to be known as Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Determined to get to the bottom of the so-called Reign of Terror, Tom and his team carefully analyse the behaviours and motives of the disingenuous citizens, narrowing down the suspects until eventually finding their duplicitous killer.
Learning about this unknown period of history is eye opening and offers a completely new view on the relations between whites and Native Americans. It was a time of prejudice and racism, not unlike the attitude towards black people emphasised with the civil rights movement in the mid-1900s. Greed was a significant motivator, particularly where making money was involved. But, David Grann does not stop here.
The final section of <i>Killers of the Flower Moon</i> is written from the author’s perspective. As a staff writer at <i>The New Yorker</i>, the evidence of the Osage murders case intrigued David Grann, but he was concerned about some unresolved holes in the story. Determined to uncover the truth, Grann conducted his own research to discover the culprits behind the undocumented murders unrelated to Mollie Burkhart’s family. What he stumbles on highlights the severity of the dark fate the Osage Indians were threatened with.
Despite being written as a narrative, it is obvious that <i>Killers of the Flower Moon</i> is a work of non-fiction. It lacks emotion and character insight, however, since it is not meant to be a fabricated story, these elements are not required. Instead, it shocks and disturbs the reader with its unbelievable truths.
An extensive biography proves the authenticity of David Grann’s revelation. With the reinforcement of FBI files, jury testimonials, statements, court transcripts, letters, telegrams, diaries and confessions, Grann produces a strong historical record of events that should not be glossed over. Without authors and books such as <i>Killers of the Flower Moon</i>, people will blindly go around believing falsehoods. The truth needs to be discovered, and readers can start by reading this book.
Kayleigh (12 KP) rated The Hunger Games in Books
Jan 2, 2019
I finished this book for the second time around 15 minutes ago, and I’m still missing being part of its world. Yes, it’s that good. Actually, I read the whole book just today. The first time I read it, just before the film came out, I’d followed a friend’s recommendation to read the books first, and devoured all three in as many days. I then had to give up my Kindle for a few days so that my friend could read it, and she was just as enamoured. I know my American cousins loved it too. Safe to say, it was very popular in my circle of friends! I have heard a couple of dismissive comments saying it’s a rip-off of Battle Royale, but I haven’t read that yet, so I’ll reserve judgement.
Set in post-apocalyptic America, now known as Panem, the book very quickly sets Katniss, the protagonist, up as a fiercely protective older sister. <spoiler>So protective, she learnt to hunt, barter on the black market and generally help her family survive when their father dies and their mother is overcome by depression. So protective, she volunteers in her sister’s place for the practically suicidal Hunger Games.</spoiler> It’s not long into the book that the reaping takes place, but by the time it does, the reader knows all they need to about who Katniss is, where she’s coming from, and also sets the scene for her dilemma over the coming books. I was rooting for her all the way, and the way Suzanne Collins writes from Katniss’s perspective is extremely effective. I was constantly sympathising with her, while at the same time simply admiring how the cogs in her mind worked in helping her to survive. None of it seemed contrived.
I’m a really big fan of dystopias anyway, but I loved what this plot was based on. Collins has said that her idea for The Hunger Games came from reality TV, and what might happen if it got warped. In a society where it’s almost impossible to avoid reality television, the plot is really contemporary, whilst also having a definite mix of Orwell’s Big Brother in there. Having also read the next two stories before, I know it gets a lot darker, but I’ll review those another time. <spoiler>In the TV context, it’s also really easy to see how anything that boosted ratings (the “star-crossed lovers”) would be extremely powerful. It took me a while to get this, but actually, being torn between Gale and Peeta is quite understandable, given the different extremes she knows both under. I suppose comparisons could be made, but it’s definitely no Twilight.</spoiler>
The pacing of the book is done brilliantly (hence why I’ve read it twice, both taking less than a day!). Collins controls the twists and turns of the plot as adeptly as the gamemakers. The main characters are really multi-faceted, and the important themes – action, politics, and yes, even love – all come out in sometimes unexpected places.
Having also seen the film, I’m really impressed with how well it translated across. Obviously, no film can ever compete with the level of detail and the reader’s own imagination in a book, but it was good. I can’t remember what I thought of casting at the time, but I must admit, I did see Jennifer Lawrence and Josh Hutcherson in my mind when reading the book this time. This may come across as a backhanded compliment, but Jennifer Lawrence seems to have the right level of awkwardness/social unease in front of the cameras that I associated with Katniss, and also fits the book’s description.
This review is also on my <a href="http://awowords.wordpress.com">blog</a>; - if you liked it, please check it out!
Set in post-apocalyptic America, now known as Panem, the book very quickly sets Katniss, the protagonist, up as a fiercely protective older sister. <spoiler>So protective, she learnt to hunt, barter on the black market and generally help her family survive when their father dies and their mother is overcome by depression. So protective, she volunteers in her sister’s place for the practically suicidal Hunger Games.</spoiler> It’s not long into the book that the reaping takes place, but by the time it does, the reader knows all they need to about who Katniss is, where she’s coming from, and also sets the scene for her dilemma over the coming books. I was rooting for her all the way, and the way Suzanne Collins writes from Katniss’s perspective is extremely effective. I was constantly sympathising with her, while at the same time simply admiring how the cogs in her mind worked in helping her to survive. None of it seemed contrived.
I’m a really big fan of dystopias anyway, but I loved what this plot was based on. Collins has said that her idea for The Hunger Games came from reality TV, and what might happen if it got warped. In a society where it’s almost impossible to avoid reality television, the plot is really contemporary, whilst also having a definite mix of Orwell’s Big Brother in there. Having also read the next two stories before, I know it gets a lot darker, but I’ll review those another time. <spoiler>In the TV context, it’s also really easy to see how anything that boosted ratings (the “star-crossed lovers”) would be extremely powerful. It took me a while to get this, but actually, being torn between Gale and Peeta is quite understandable, given the different extremes she knows both under. I suppose comparisons could be made, but it’s definitely no Twilight.</spoiler>
The pacing of the book is done brilliantly (hence why I’ve read it twice, both taking less than a day!). Collins controls the twists and turns of the plot as adeptly as the gamemakers. The main characters are really multi-faceted, and the important themes – action, politics, and yes, even love – all come out in sometimes unexpected places.
Having also seen the film, I’m really impressed with how well it translated across. Obviously, no film can ever compete with the level of detail and the reader’s own imagination in a book, but it was good. I can’t remember what I thought of casting at the time, but I must admit, I did see Jennifer Lawrence and Josh Hutcherson in my mind when reading the book this time. This may come across as a backhanded compliment, but Jennifer Lawrence seems to have the right level of awkwardness/social unease in front of the cameras that I associated with Katniss, and also fits the book’s description.
This review is also on my <a href="http://awowords.wordpress.com">blog</a>; - if you liked it, please check it out!
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Beautiful Creatures (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Hollywood has seemed to turn to books these days for inspiration to try and bring audiences the latest and greatest to the big screen. Has the industry turned to teen novels to solely follow in the footsteps of the widely known Twilight Saga success to in turn bring more money to the box office? It certainly wouldn’t be a bad idea to do so. With the success of the over saturated archetype of vampires and zombies, the path through the supernatural teen based stories has now led us to witches, or should I say casters. Based on the best selling American young adult series by Kami Garcia and Margaret Stohl, Beautiful Creatures is the first novel in the best selling series. The story is based in a small conservative town of Gatlin, South Carolina and is at first about Ethan Wate (Alden Ehrenreich) a seventeen year old young man who lives with his father that is stuck in morning over the death of his wife and the house keeper Amma (Viola Davis) who is also the towns all knowing librarian. Ethan dreams and hopes that one day he will break free of the small town of Gatlin and go to college far away. Lately though, he has been having a recurring dream of a young woman waiting for him on a Civil War battlefield. Every time he is close to reaching her a lightning bolt strikes just like a gunshot and he dies. Thankfully, it is only a dream but he doesn’t seem to be able to think about anything else other than the woman in his dreams and falls in love with this mystery woman, hoping one day he will be united with the girl of his dreams.
With the beginning of the first day of school a newcomer named Lena Duchannes (Alice Englert) seems to be an outcast because of her families history. Capturing the attention of Ethan he becomes more and more intrigued with her, despite the awful things that the other classmates are saying about her. Lena is the niece of Macon Ravenwood (Jeremy Irons), the owner of the one and only mysterious Gothic Ravenwood Manor. Lena has uncontrollable powers proving that some of what her classmates have been saying is true. Lena has until her sixteenth birthday to undergo the Claiming, a process that throughout the years makes a caster go to the light side or the dark side. The film also features an allstar cast such as: Alden Ehrenreich, (“Tetro”), Emmy Rossum, Thomas Mann, Emma Thompson, Rounding out the cast are Eileen Atkins, Margo Martindale, Zoey Deutch, Tiffany Boone, Rachel Brosnahan, Kyle Gallner, Pruitt Taylor Vince and Sam Gilroy.
The film Beautiful Creatures is a supernatural love story with some of the same ideas and themes as most of these supernatural teen movies based off of best selling novels. However, Beautiful Creatures was a refreshing take on the story of two young lovers, one who is human and the other who is a supernatural being. The scenery and use of the deep southern backdrops added to the mystery of the story. I have not read the book though I plan to, I am unable to comment on how close the movie was to the book. The special effects in the film were not overdone or out of place and were appropriate to each specific scene. Some comedic relief is found throughout the film and is not out of place. The flow of the story is also flawless including the music used for the soundtrack.
This film has been rated PG-13 for violence, scary images and some sexual material. I would recommend this to audiences of a variety of ages from young teen to older adult. Yes this film may have some similarities to other teen/supernatural films but all in all it is a film I definitely would recommend to our readers and I can’t wait for the second installment.
With the beginning of the first day of school a newcomer named Lena Duchannes (Alice Englert) seems to be an outcast because of her families history. Capturing the attention of Ethan he becomes more and more intrigued with her, despite the awful things that the other classmates are saying about her. Lena is the niece of Macon Ravenwood (Jeremy Irons), the owner of the one and only mysterious Gothic Ravenwood Manor. Lena has uncontrollable powers proving that some of what her classmates have been saying is true. Lena has until her sixteenth birthday to undergo the Claiming, a process that throughout the years makes a caster go to the light side or the dark side. The film also features an allstar cast such as: Alden Ehrenreich, (“Tetro”), Emmy Rossum, Thomas Mann, Emma Thompson, Rounding out the cast are Eileen Atkins, Margo Martindale, Zoey Deutch, Tiffany Boone, Rachel Brosnahan, Kyle Gallner, Pruitt Taylor Vince and Sam Gilroy.
The film Beautiful Creatures is a supernatural love story with some of the same ideas and themes as most of these supernatural teen movies based off of best selling novels. However, Beautiful Creatures was a refreshing take on the story of two young lovers, one who is human and the other who is a supernatural being. The scenery and use of the deep southern backdrops added to the mystery of the story. I have not read the book though I plan to, I am unable to comment on how close the movie was to the book. The special effects in the film were not overdone or out of place and were appropriate to each specific scene. Some comedic relief is found throughout the film and is not out of place. The flow of the story is also flawless including the music used for the soundtrack.
This film has been rated PG-13 for violence, scary images and some sexual material. I would recommend this to audiences of a variety of ages from young teen to older adult. Yes this film may have some similarities to other teen/supernatural films but all in all it is a film I definitely would recommend to our readers and I can’t wait for the second installment.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Power Rangers (2017) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
When I first heard that The Mighty Morphin Power Rangers would be getting a film adaptation, I was a bit apprehensive. Hollywood has had a bit of trouble converting many of the themes and issues brought up in a variety of shows into films that stay loyal to their respective franchises.
Fans on social media have often expressed their dissatisfaction with films not staying true to the origin stories or their inabil;ity to retain much of the character and charm that endeared them to their fans. Power Rangers does not suffer from this dilemma. As someone who watched the series as it first hit American markets in the 1990s, I was unsure of how this story would transfer onto the big screen.
It wasn’t something that I was too personally invested in. It was a series in which I considered myself to be a casual fan understanding the background, characters, and general direction of the show. I wasn’t prepared for what the film version offered.
This adaptation is near perfect in the way that it is able to create a modern, mature version that incorporates many aspects into weaving their story.
The basics of the film are roughly the same as the show: it is based in Angel Grove, there are five teenagers serving the role of rangers whose goal is to save the world, and all the complexities that come with being a superhero who has a “real life.”
One of the more remarkable issues related to the film is how the writers and director are able to be inclusive with their characters without being condescending to their audiences old and new. We get a glimpse of a team that is more colorful and diverse. Where the original crew showed a group of youths of different races, the film version does not stop with race as demonstrating the variety that exists within our world. The film allows for the inclusion of people on the autism spectrum, as well as, allowing for the inclusion of the LGBT community. The film shows audiences that there are people just like them or people that they know in the superhero realm. It is not limited by race, gender, sexual orientation, or cognitive development.
Power Rangers itself is a fun movie with depth. As the film continued, I tried to look for areas to pick it apart and find those pieces that really detracted from the story. The film has its faults in a simply developing storyline, but that goes with the franchise. It isn’t supposed to be complex or overbearing. The humor ranges from sophomoric to sophisticated. The film is accessible to those who are new to the franchise and those who have been watching since its inception. Additionally, it is a superhero movie it is not insulting to its audience. It demonstrates the difficulties that exist with teen life, presents real problems that they have to deal with in contrast to the fantasy that they are living out as part of this team.
The film is beautifully shot and the CGI is nearly seamless (the film is not overly reliant on it, either). The fighting and action sequences are as much a part of the story as the characters themselves. Power Rangers allows for audiences to be entertained visually and comedically. Additionally, it allows for those of us who have not watched or followed the Power Rangers in a while to be a bit nostalgic and look back to when we ourselves could not get home quickly enough for “Morphin’ Time.” The film is updated, mature, and will have fans young and old beaming with delight.
Fans on social media have often expressed their dissatisfaction with films not staying true to the origin stories or their inabil;ity to retain much of the character and charm that endeared them to their fans. Power Rangers does not suffer from this dilemma. As someone who watched the series as it first hit American markets in the 1990s, I was unsure of how this story would transfer onto the big screen.
It wasn’t something that I was too personally invested in. It was a series in which I considered myself to be a casual fan understanding the background, characters, and general direction of the show. I wasn’t prepared for what the film version offered.
This adaptation is near perfect in the way that it is able to create a modern, mature version that incorporates many aspects into weaving their story.
The basics of the film are roughly the same as the show: it is based in Angel Grove, there are five teenagers serving the role of rangers whose goal is to save the world, and all the complexities that come with being a superhero who has a “real life.”
One of the more remarkable issues related to the film is how the writers and director are able to be inclusive with their characters without being condescending to their audiences old and new. We get a glimpse of a team that is more colorful and diverse. Where the original crew showed a group of youths of different races, the film version does not stop with race as demonstrating the variety that exists within our world. The film allows for the inclusion of people on the autism spectrum, as well as, allowing for the inclusion of the LGBT community. The film shows audiences that there are people just like them or people that they know in the superhero realm. It is not limited by race, gender, sexual orientation, or cognitive development.
Power Rangers itself is a fun movie with depth. As the film continued, I tried to look for areas to pick it apart and find those pieces that really detracted from the story. The film has its faults in a simply developing storyline, but that goes with the franchise. It isn’t supposed to be complex or overbearing. The humor ranges from sophomoric to sophisticated. The film is accessible to those who are new to the franchise and those who have been watching since its inception. Additionally, it is a superhero movie it is not insulting to its audience. It demonstrates the difficulties that exist with teen life, presents real problems that they have to deal with in contrast to the fantasy that they are living out as part of this team.
The film is beautifully shot and the CGI is nearly seamless (the film is not overly reliant on it, either). The fighting and action sequences are as much a part of the story as the characters themselves. Power Rangers allows for audiences to be entertained visually and comedically. Additionally, it allows for those of us who have not watched or followed the Power Rangers in a while to be a bit nostalgic and look back to when we ourselves could not get home quickly enough for “Morphin’ Time.” The film is updated, mature, and will have fans young and old beaming with delight.
Jamie (131 KP) rated The Shining Girls in Books
Jun 4, 2017
Ambitious & unique story line (1 more)
Handles the web of time paradoxes well
Mash-up of genres is disjointing (2 more)
Romance is distracting at best
Repeated murder scenes gets wearisome
A cool time travel thriller
The Shining Girls follows Harper, a crude serial killer from the 1930’s that can hop through time; and Kirby, the spunky young woman that got away. This book was incredibly ambitious in its premise and I spent a great deal of my time reading the book wondering if it could deliver and I can happily say that I wasn’t disappointed.
The story is a heavily character driven dive through recent American history, from the Great Depression in the 1930’s all the way up to the early 1990’s. I was impressed by the amount of research that was put into this book, each decade having enough detail to get a good feel for the era. Many of the characters were pretty well fleshed out for such short chapters, and I found myself liking many of them.
My favorite part of the story, though, was the tragedy that was Harper because of how very flawed and human he is. He views himself as commanding, charming, persuasive, but to many of his victims he’s just downright creepy. He thinks himself calculating yet he makes mistakes left and right. He has a drive to rise up from the trenches of poverty and starvation from his own era, to be powerful. His choice of victims are all women in a great act of femicide, because he has this dire need to feel masculine. He chooses women that he views as invincible, that shine with ambition in order to assert his dominance by snuffing them out. He thinks he has this divine purpose, a destiny to fulfill because he wants it so desperately, even though the reality is that it’s simply senseless violence with no real meaning. He obsesses over the murders, returning to the scene of the crimes over and over to get off. Harper is pathetic. It was a refreshing change from the stereotypical smooth, genius archetype that glorifies killers. I didn’t know right away that this book was meant to be a feminist novel, but that’s what I took away from not only Harper’s struggle with masculinity, but with the strong and fiercely independent female characters all throughout the book.
There were a couple of problems with the book, however, that I feel need to be addressed. The mash up of genres is both a good and bad aspect of the story. The middle chapters where romance comes into play to me was really distracting and feels out of place. The tagline describing the novel also states that “the girl who wouldn’t die hunts the killer who shouldn’t exist” but honestly, it didn’t feel much like Kirby was really hunting the killer. Looking for connections with other murder cases and investigating some wild hunches, yes, but really she spends most of the book developing her bond with Dan. I would have really liked for this to be more of a cat and mouse type of hunt between Kirby and Harper.
The chapters with Harper were much more interesting, but even those became a little repetitive. We as the reader follow Harper as he stalks his victims in childhood, waiting for the right time to strike when they reach adulthood. While it was necessary for the plot to detail the characters to both connect them to the greater chain of paradoxes and to show Harper’s descent, the violence is excessive and extremely detailed, and after a while it started to feel more like torture porn. It just got tiring after a while.
Despite its flaws, I thought this book was good, and I mean really good. I loved the way that the time paradoxes were handled, time travel stories tend to be tricky and usually end up with a couple of glaring loop holes. The loops are handled in a way that I found satisfying and this book is easily my favorite time travel novel I’ve ever read. It is truly unique and a story I won’t soon forget.
The story is a heavily character driven dive through recent American history, from the Great Depression in the 1930’s all the way up to the early 1990’s. I was impressed by the amount of research that was put into this book, each decade having enough detail to get a good feel for the era. Many of the characters were pretty well fleshed out for such short chapters, and I found myself liking many of them.
My favorite part of the story, though, was the tragedy that was Harper because of how very flawed and human he is. He views himself as commanding, charming, persuasive, but to many of his victims he’s just downright creepy. He thinks himself calculating yet he makes mistakes left and right. He has a drive to rise up from the trenches of poverty and starvation from his own era, to be powerful. His choice of victims are all women in a great act of femicide, because he has this dire need to feel masculine. He chooses women that he views as invincible, that shine with ambition in order to assert his dominance by snuffing them out. He thinks he has this divine purpose, a destiny to fulfill because he wants it so desperately, even though the reality is that it’s simply senseless violence with no real meaning. He obsesses over the murders, returning to the scene of the crimes over and over to get off. Harper is pathetic. It was a refreshing change from the stereotypical smooth, genius archetype that glorifies killers. I didn’t know right away that this book was meant to be a feminist novel, but that’s what I took away from not only Harper’s struggle with masculinity, but with the strong and fiercely independent female characters all throughout the book.
There were a couple of problems with the book, however, that I feel need to be addressed. The mash up of genres is both a good and bad aspect of the story. The middle chapters where romance comes into play to me was really distracting and feels out of place. The tagline describing the novel also states that “the girl who wouldn’t die hunts the killer who shouldn’t exist” but honestly, it didn’t feel much like Kirby was really hunting the killer. Looking for connections with other murder cases and investigating some wild hunches, yes, but really she spends most of the book developing her bond with Dan. I would have really liked for this to be more of a cat and mouse type of hunt between Kirby and Harper.
The chapters with Harper were much more interesting, but even those became a little repetitive. We as the reader follow Harper as he stalks his victims in childhood, waiting for the right time to strike when they reach adulthood. While it was necessary for the plot to detail the characters to both connect them to the greater chain of paradoxes and to show Harper’s descent, the violence is excessive and extremely detailed, and after a while it started to feel more like torture porn. It just got tiring after a while.
Despite its flaws, I thought this book was good, and I mean really good. I loved the way that the time paradoxes were handled, time travel stories tend to be tricky and usually end up with a couple of glaring loop holes. The loops are handled in a way that I found satisfying and this book is easily my favorite time travel novel I’ve ever read. It is truly unique and a story I won’t soon forget.
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated Running on the Cracks in Books
Apr 27, 2018
Rating: 3-ish/5
<b> My Summary: </b> Leo is scared. She’s not quite sure what to think of her kooky uncle anymore, and she doesn’t want to take chances. What if he does something to her… Leo runs away. She goes in search of her grandparents, her only living relatives. She accidently gets her photo in the newspaper, and had to hide. She meets a boy named Finlay, who seems to be the one who’s going to put an end to her new freedom… at first anyway. But then Finlay becomes a friend to Leo, and he becomes her key to staying away from her uncle. Leo will do anything to keep from being found and being sent back there. She ends up staying with a crazy lady who is hospitable enough, but refuses to take her medication and whose friends aren’t much better. Then she realizes that her Uncle is on her tail. How will she stay away?
<b> What I thought: </b> Running on the Cracks was an enjoyable read. When I first saw the cover, I imagined an action filled YA novel with a lot of suspense. Although there was suspense, it wasn’t anything that got your blood racing. I thoroughly enjoyed this book when I sat down to read it, but I had to be in the right mood to do it.
<b> The Writing: </b> The format of writing was different than I’d read before, but it was very engaging. It switched viewpoints, had pieces of the story in written-story form (meaning a whole chapter was just a letter or a newspaper article or an e-mail), had whole sections where it was just dialogue (those were my favorite sections—mostly it was when characters were on the phone, and they were all very funny) and even had a few chapters from the “crazy” person’s perspective (it’s always interesting being inside the head of a madman…). Also, the writer has written the book in an accent, meaning that some of the words are spelled wrong so that you can hear it pronounced with an accent in your head—quite engaging and welcoming. The writing was good, but as it was foreign it was a little odd (i.e. “lead” instead of “leash” etc), but not in a bad way.
<b> The Characters: </b> The characters were pretty relatable. I felt scared for Leo when she was running from her Uncle, and sorry for Finlay when we was stressed about lying to his mom. The characters were really cool, well developed, and some of them were kooky. I really liked Leo and Finlay. They had such cool names! I loved the “President”, but the “Godfather” was my favorite. He was just so… weirdly cool… (I don’t know, maybe that’s because I’m a little insane myself). Not too much, I rather enjoyed it actually. It’s always fun to read something a little different.
<b> The Plot: </b> The plot was pretty believable, and I know that (sadly) there are true stories like this all the time. I don’t know how the police are over in Scotland but I doubt very seriously that Leo would have gotten away with hiding from the American police for as long as she did from the Scottish police (but that’s my opinion as a police and spy novel writer). Although there was suggestion of the Uncle trying to sexually abuse women in the book, it never actually happened, and it was very age appropriate.
<b> My Recommendation: </b> I would recommend it to a friend ages 11-15, maybe even a little younger, but not older than that. Again, I enjoyed it when I sat down to read it, but it wasn’t quite my personal attention level (I’m 18). All in all, I enjoyed this book a lot.
<i> Thank you to Henry Holt In Group for supplying my review copy of this book! </i>
For more reviews and giveaways,, please visit haleymathiot.blogspot.com
~Haleyknitz
<a href="http://haleymathiot.blogspot.com/2009/09/win-lockdown.html">PS- don’t forget—enter my giveaway for LOCKDOWN before October 20!
</a>
<b> My Summary: </b> Leo is scared. She’s not quite sure what to think of her kooky uncle anymore, and she doesn’t want to take chances. What if he does something to her… Leo runs away. She goes in search of her grandparents, her only living relatives. She accidently gets her photo in the newspaper, and had to hide. She meets a boy named Finlay, who seems to be the one who’s going to put an end to her new freedom… at first anyway. But then Finlay becomes a friend to Leo, and he becomes her key to staying away from her uncle. Leo will do anything to keep from being found and being sent back there. She ends up staying with a crazy lady who is hospitable enough, but refuses to take her medication and whose friends aren’t much better. Then she realizes that her Uncle is on her tail. How will she stay away?
<b> What I thought: </b> Running on the Cracks was an enjoyable read. When I first saw the cover, I imagined an action filled YA novel with a lot of suspense. Although there was suspense, it wasn’t anything that got your blood racing. I thoroughly enjoyed this book when I sat down to read it, but I had to be in the right mood to do it.
<b> The Writing: </b> The format of writing was different than I’d read before, but it was very engaging. It switched viewpoints, had pieces of the story in written-story form (meaning a whole chapter was just a letter or a newspaper article or an e-mail), had whole sections where it was just dialogue (those were my favorite sections—mostly it was when characters were on the phone, and they were all very funny) and even had a few chapters from the “crazy” person’s perspective (it’s always interesting being inside the head of a madman…). Also, the writer has written the book in an accent, meaning that some of the words are spelled wrong so that you can hear it pronounced with an accent in your head—quite engaging and welcoming. The writing was good, but as it was foreign it was a little odd (i.e. “lead” instead of “leash” etc), but not in a bad way.
<b> The Characters: </b> The characters were pretty relatable. I felt scared for Leo when she was running from her Uncle, and sorry for Finlay when we was stressed about lying to his mom. The characters were really cool, well developed, and some of them were kooky. I really liked Leo and Finlay. They had such cool names! I loved the “President”, but the “Godfather” was my favorite. He was just so… weirdly cool… (I don’t know, maybe that’s because I’m a little insane myself). Not too much, I rather enjoyed it actually. It’s always fun to read something a little different.
<b> The Plot: </b> The plot was pretty believable, and I know that (sadly) there are true stories like this all the time. I don’t know how the police are over in Scotland but I doubt very seriously that Leo would have gotten away with hiding from the American police for as long as she did from the Scottish police (but that’s my opinion as a police and spy novel writer). Although there was suggestion of the Uncle trying to sexually abuse women in the book, it never actually happened, and it was very age appropriate.
<b> My Recommendation: </b> I would recommend it to a friend ages 11-15, maybe even a little younger, but not older than that. Again, I enjoyed it when I sat down to read it, but it wasn’t quite my personal attention level (I’m 18). All in all, I enjoyed this book a lot.
<i> Thank you to Henry Holt In Group for supplying my review copy of this book! </i>
For more reviews and giveaways,, please visit haleymathiot.blogspot.com
~Haleyknitz
<a href="http://haleymathiot.blogspot.com/2009/09/win-lockdown.html">PS- don’t forget—enter my giveaway for LOCKDOWN before October 20!
</a>
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Vice (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
A patronising mess of a film
If you want to learn how to completely and utterly fail at satire, look no further than Adam McKay’s Vice. It honestly does pain me to say this was one of the worst experiences I’ve ever had in the cinema. As a matter of fact, I was seconds away from walking out at one point. But, like any good critic, I stayed in my seat. I hoped and prayed it would get better… but it didn’t. If anything, it snowballed.
Vice is a ‘comedy’ (I’ve put this in quotation marks because there’s nothing funny about it) biopic about former American Vice President, Dick Cheney. The film attempts to give us further insight into his life, and how he got away with all the horrible things he did whilst in office. On paper, it actually sounds pretty appealing, especially for someone like me who knows very little about the man. On screen, it is an entirely different experience. 24 hours later, I’m still shocked by how appalling it was.
So, what has Vice done to receive such a scathing review from me? First and foremost, the dialogue is horrendously condescending and talks to the audience like they’re complete idiots. I have never seen such a patronising and immature biopic in my entire life. I’m not sure what’s more obnoxious: Cheney himself or the tone of the film. Maybe they’re on par with each other. I was barely half an hour into this when I was already starting to feel angry about the way they addressed things. You can give your audience context without talking down to them. The film did everything it could to seem edgy and like it was giving the audience the finger, but I just sat there cringing the whole time. It failed.
Secondly, the narrative is all over the place. I’m perfectly fine with non-linear stories, provided they actually make sense. Vice doesn’t know whether it’s coming or going, and changes between the past and future constantly. The pacing is an absolute shambles and makes the film feel longer than it actually is. It runs at just over 2 hours, but feels so much longer than that. I have never wanted a film to end so badly. In fact, I was ready to get up and leave when they decided to throw in a fake ending in an attempt to be funny. Yes, that actually happens. No, I didn’t laugh.
Don’t even get me started on the way it sloppily splices random pictures and video clips throughout the film, making me wonder who on earth nominated this for Best Editing. Are they okay? Without spoiling this too much, Vice’s editing is incredibly jarring and decides to patronise the audience even further by giving visual aids to the idioms that are described by the narrator. At one point it even tries to condescendingly explain Guantanamo Bay, which just caused me to facepalm. What were you thinking guys?
Having said all of this, does the film have some redeeming features? Sure. The quality of the acting is good, I enjoyed Christian Bale as Cheney and Amy Adams as his equally awful wife, Lynne. I also enjoyed Steve Carell as Donald Rumsfeld and Sam Rockwell as George W Bush. It is a shame to waste such great talent on a script as weak as this one. If someone had written this better, maybe I would’ve enjoyed it a lot more. Sadly, I’m stuck with this one. I’m baffled by how anyone can consider this to be a well written script. If anyone wants to enlighten me, by all means, try.
If I never have to watch Vice again, I’ll be fine with that. I feel completely let down by McKay, and this hurts more considering I like some of his other films such as Anchorman and Step Brothers. He’s better than this, and I hope he can redeem himself with whatever he creates next.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2019/02/03/a-patronising-mess-of-a-film-my-review-of-vice/
Vice is a ‘comedy’ (I’ve put this in quotation marks because there’s nothing funny about it) biopic about former American Vice President, Dick Cheney. The film attempts to give us further insight into his life, and how he got away with all the horrible things he did whilst in office. On paper, it actually sounds pretty appealing, especially for someone like me who knows very little about the man. On screen, it is an entirely different experience. 24 hours later, I’m still shocked by how appalling it was.
So, what has Vice done to receive such a scathing review from me? First and foremost, the dialogue is horrendously condescending and talks to the audience like they’re complete idiots. I have never seen such a patronising and immature biopic in my entire life. I’m not sure what’s more obnoxious: Cheney himself or the tone of the film. Maybe they’re on par with each other. I was barely half an hour into this when I was already starting to feel angry about the way they addressed things. You can give your audience context without talking down to them. The film did everything it could to seem edgy and like it was giving the audience the finger, but I just sat there cringing the whole time. It failed.
Secondly, the narrative is all over the place. I’m perfectly fine with non-linear stories, provided they actually make sense. Vice doesn’t know whether it’s coming or going, and changes between the past and future constantly. The pacing is an absolute shambles and makes the film feel longer than it actually is. It runs at just over 2 hours, but feels so much longer than that. I have never wanted a film to end so badly. In fact, I was ready to get up and leave when they decided to throw in a fake ending in an attempt to be funny. Yes, that actually happens. No, I didn’t laugh.
Don’t even get me started on the way it sloppily splices random pictures and video clips throughout the film, making me wonder who on earth nominated this for Best Editing. Are they okay? Without spoiling this too much, Vice’s editing is incredibly jarring and decides to patronise the audience even further by giving visual aids to the idioms that are described by the narrator. At one point it even tries to condescendingly explain Guantanamo Bay, which just caused me to facepalm. What were you thinking guys?
Having said all of this, does the film have some redeeming features? Sure. The quality of the acting is good, I enjoyed Christian Bale as Cheney and Amy Adams as his equally awful wife, Lynne. I also enjoyed Steve Carell as Donald Rumsfeld and Sam Rockwell as George W Bush. It is a shame to waste such great talent on a script as weak as this one. If someone had written this better, maybe I would’ve enjoyed it a lot more. Sadly, I’m stuck with this one. I’m baffled by how anyone can consider this to be a well written script. If anyone wants to enlighten me, by all means, try.
If I never have to watch Vice again, I’ll be fine with that. I feel completely let down by McKay, and this hurts more considering I like some of his other films such as Anchorman and Step Brothers. He’s better than this, and I hope he can redeem himself with whatever he creates next.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2019/02/03/a-patronising-mess-of-a-film-my-review-of-vice/
Darren (1599 KP) rated Knives Out (2019) in Movies
Nov 26, 2019
Verdict: Pure Fun
Story: Knives Out starts with the apparent suicide of Harlan Thrombey (Plummer) on his 85th birthday, the family Linda (Curtis), Walt (Shannon), Richard (Johnson), Joni (Collette) Meg (Langford), Jacob (Martell) and Ransom (Evans) were all in attendance along with Harlan’s nurse Marta (Armas).
Lieutenant Elliott (Stanfield) lets private investigator Benoit Blanc (Craig) look at the events of the night after he gets an anonymous request to investigate the death believing it was murder, with the whole family have cause to potentially murder.
Thoughts on Knives Out
Characters – Benoit Blanc is a private investigator that has a connection to the family and has been given an anonymous letter to investigate the death, he has his way which unlike the normal police will push the family for the truth, knowing most are lying when they talk to him. Marta Cabrera is the nurse to Harlan, she has the closest relationship to him, knowing most of the family secrets, while just working to make sure her family is secure. Harlan is the self-made millionaire author that has started to get disappointed by the behaviour of his own children. Linda is the eldest daughter who has her own real estate business that she is proud of her work, believing she has done better than the other siblings. Walt is the youngest son who runs the publication of the books, which has always seen him try to push his father into selling the rights to entertainment sources. Richard is the husband to Linda that has been caught by Harlan being forced into telling the truth or being exposed. Joni is the daughter in the law of the deceased son that is an influencer and has been getting an allowance since her husband’s death. Ransom is the black sheep of the family, son of Linda and Richard, he has always lived the life of luxury never having to work on anything himself. Meg is the daughter of Joni that is the closest of any of the younger family members to Marta, she has seen herself be put through school but Harlan. LT Elliott is leading the investigation to the death, he is happy to put it down as suicide, but will let Benoit lead his own investigate.
Performances – The performances here are a pure joy, Daniel Craig gives us a career best, Ana De Armas continues to rise up the Hollywood name list, proving herself with a sweet innocent figure, Chris Evans brings to light a character complete against the type we are used to seeing form him. Jamie Lee Curtis, Michael Shannon, Don Johnson and Toni Collette are wonderful too showing they can become anybody like we know from them. Everybody in this film is wonderful to watch.
Story – The story here follows a private investigator who decides to investigate an apparent suicide where he will dig up the family secrets to learn there might have been foul play. This story is a who-dun-it where everybody could be a suspect as nobody wants to tell the truth and everybody is hiding the truth too. There is a unique way of telling the story that will surprise you and turn the usual flow on its head, almost pointing out just how predictable certain TV shows involving a murder are. We do have plenty to unpack through the story, though there is a slight drag through the middle of the film.
Comedy/Crime/Mystery – The comedy comes from the colourful characters we get to meet and their actions, while the crime mystery mix together to keep us guessing to the complete truth of what happened, we get plenty of references to other crime stories too.
Settings – The film is mostly set on the grounds of the death, we have the luxury mansion, when we stay in this location everything does feel like ‘Clue’ but whether we leave it does take a little bit away from the quirky style.
Scene of the Movie – Ambulance arrives.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We never learn where Marta is from, with the on running joke she is South American, each character claims she is from a different country.
Final Thoughts – This is a quirky joyful comedy that leaves you guessing to the truth with performances that shine throughout the film.
Overall: Entertaining Mystery.
Story: Knives Out starts with the apparent suicide of Harlan Thrombey (Plummer) on his 85th birthday, the family Linda (Curtis), Walt (Shannon), Richard (Johnson), Joni (Collette) Meg (Langford), Jacob (Martell) and Ransom (Evans) were all in attendance along with Harlan’s nurse Marta (Armas).
Lieutenant Elliott (Stanfield) lets private investigator Benoit Blanc (Craig) look at the events of the night after he gets an anonymous request to investigate the death believing it was murder, with the whole family have cause to potentially murder.
Thoughts on Knives Out
Characters – Benoit Blanc is a private investigator that has a connection to the family and has been given an anonymous letter to investigate the death, he has his way which unlike the normal police will push the family for the truth, knowing most are lying when they talk to him. Marta Cabrera is the nurse to Harlan, she has the closest relationship to him, knowing most of the family secrets, while just working to make sure her family is secure. Harlan is the self-made millionaire author that has started to get disappointed by the behaviour of his own children. Linda is the eldest daughter who has her own real estate business that she is proud of her work, believing she has done better than the other siblings. Walt is the youngest son who runs the publication of the books, which has always seen him try to push his father into selling the rights to entertainment sources. Richard is the husband to Linda that has been caught by Harlan being forced into telling the truth or being exposed. Joni is the daughter in the law of the deceased son that is an influencer and has been getting an allowance since her husband’s death. Ransom is the black sheep of the family, son of Linda and Richard, he has always lived the life of luxury never having to work on anything himself. Meg is the daughter of Joni that is the closest of any of the younger family members to Marta, she has seen herself be put through school but Harlan. LT Elliott is leading the investigation to the death, he is happy to put it down as suicide, but will let Benoit lead his own investigate.
Performances – The performances here are a pure joy, Daniel Craig gives us a career best, Ana De Armas continues to rise up the Hollywood name list, proving herself with a sweet innocent figure, Chris Evans brings to light a character complete against the type we are used to seeing form him. Jamie Lee Curtis, Michael Shannon, Don Johnson and Toni Collette are wonderful too showing they can become anybody like we know from them. Everybody in this film is wonderful to watch.
Story – The story here follows a private investigator who decides to investigate an apparent suicide where he will dig up the family secrets to learn there might have been foul play. This story is a who-dun-it where everybody could be a suspect as nobody wants to tell the truth and everybody is hiding the truth too. There is a unique way of telling the story that will surprise you and turn the usual flow on its head, almost pointing out just how predictable certain TV shows involving a murder are. We do have plenty to unpack through the story, though there is a slight drag through the middle of the film.
Comedy/Crime/Mystery – The comedy comes from the colourful characters we get to meet and their actions, while the crime mystery mix together to keep us guessing to the complete truth of what happened, we get plenty of references to other crime stories too.
Settings – The film is mostly set on the grounds of the death, we have the luxury mansion, when we stay in this location everything does feel like ‘Clue’ but whether we leave it does take a little bit away from the quirky style.
Scene of the Movie – Ambulance arrives.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We never learn where Marta is from, with the on running joke she is South American, each character claims she is from a different country.
Final Thoughts – This is a quirky joyful comedy that leaves you guessing to the truth with performances that shine throughout the film.
Overall: Entertaining Mystery.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Mauritanian (2021) in Movies
Apr 14, 2021
Great acting from all four leads, especially Tahar Rahim (2 more)
Great use of screen ratios for flashbacks
Very thought provoking
War crimes don't just happen on the battlefield
It’s 2001. Bush and Rumsfeld seek vengeance on the perpetrators of 9/11. Quite right too. But rounding up hundreds of suspects and incarcerating them for years, without charge, in Guantánamo Bay in Cuba was an appalling act for a supposedly first-world country.
“The Mauritanian” then is the true story of one such unfortunate – Mohamedou Ould Slahi, played by Tahar Rahim. We first join Slahi at a family wedding in Nouakchott (good “Pointless” answer for the capital of Mauritania people!). ‘Invited for questioning’ by the American authorities, we next see Slahi in the Cuban stronghold.
Pro-bono lawyer Nancy Hollander (Jodie Foster) becomes a pariah by picking up his defence. Supporting her is assistant Teri Duncan (Shailene Woodley). Hollander is very formal and professionally aloof, not assuming his guilt or innocence. After meeting the man, and assuming his innocence, Duncan though is more emotionally involved. The man opposing them at trial is US Army prosecutor Stuart Couch (Benedict Cumberbatch). Couch, having lost one of his best friends aboard the South Tower plane, has an axe to grind.
As the pair battle unseen forces for access to documentation, they uncover more and more of the truth about life in Guantánamo Bay.
Positives:
- I've not read the book so I found the story gripping. As the related legal information is divulged, the movie drip-feeds flashbacks of Slahia's story, which is clever.
- Acting wise, "The Mauritanian" has top notch stuff. Tahir Rahim is excellent as Slahia. He portrays charismatic and confident businessman, brought down to earth with a bump. Not recognizing him with an Oscar nomination feels like a minor crime. He will have to make do with the BAFTA nomination. Also brilliant is Jodie Foster. As the illustrious Mrs Movie Man pointed out, it's so nice to see an actress acting her age with confidence. The ever-watchable Shailene Woodley is also great, especially in a dramatic 'dismissal' scene. She adds some much needed warmth to the legal team. The southern drawl from Cumberbatch is a bit of a surprise and takes some getting used to. But it's still a strong performance from him.
- After ranting on last time at Zack Snyder's use of 4:3 screen ratios in "Justice League", here is an intelligent use of the technique. The film is in 16:9 ratio, but then pivots to 4:3 for all of the Guantanamo flashback scenes, reflecting the claustrophobia of Slahia's position.
- Real-life footage over the closing titles is absolutely fascinating.
Negatives:
- I personally didn't find this a particular negative, but I went into the film knowing it to be a "legal drama". So there would be lots of scenes, as in "The Trial of the Chicago 7", with courtroom debate and gavel-banging, right? Actually, there is almost none of that. Most of the legal action is in terms of the preparation of the case and the paperwork involved. (If this makes the movie sound excruciatingly dull... think again!)
- The Guantanamo story ends quite abruptly (with the above-mentioned jolt), and left me wanting to see more of the intervening time. It's not often that I complain about a film running too short, but here is one where just a little of "the Snyder treatment" might have been welcomed!
Additional Note for the squeamish: For those worried about seeing distressing scenes of torture (e.g. Fingernail extraction, etc), these are - although disturbing - more of the "psychological torment" type. So those of a squeamish disposition can still watch this one.
Summary Thoughts:
The fact that "The Mauritanian" is a true story hammers home just what the US has been up to over the last 20 years. War crimes are not only committed on the battlefield.
Director Kevin Macdonald is no stranger to documentaries ("Touching the Void", "Whitney"). He's also proved adept at bringing gripping true stories to the screen (having previously given us "The Last King of Scotland"). Here, the emotional journeys of the key characters are well observed making the movie 'highly recommended'.
For the full One Mann's Movies review see here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/04/09/the-mauritanian-america-are-you-squirming-with-embarrassment/
“The Mauritanian” then is the true story of one such unfortunate – Mohamedou Ould Slahi, played by Tahar Rahim. We first join Slahi at a family wedding in Nouakchott (good “Pointless” answer for the capital of Mauritania people!). ‘Invited for questioning’ by the American authorities, we next see Slahi in the Cuban stronghold.
Pro-bono lawyer Nancy Hollander (Jodie Foster) becomes a pariah by picking up his defence. Supporting her is assistant Teri Duncan (Shailene Woodley). Hollander is very formal and professionally aloof, not assuming his guilt or innocence. After meeting the man, and assuming his innocence, Duncan though is more emotionally involved. The man opposing them at trial is US Army prosecutor Stuart Couch (Benedict Cumberbatch). Couch, having lost one of his best friends aboard the South Tower plane, has an axe to grind.
As the pair battle unseen forces for access to documentation, they uncover more and more of the truth about life in Guantánamo Bay.
Positives:
- I've not read the book so I found the story gripping. As the related legal information is divulged, the movie drip-feeds flashbacks of Slahia's story, which is clever.
- Acting wise, "The Mauritanian" has top notch stuff. Tahir Rahim is excellent as Slahia. He portrays charismatic and confident businessman, brought down to earth with a bump. Not recognizing him with an Oscar nomination feels like a minor crime. He will have to make do with the BAFTA nomination. Also brilliant is Jodie Foster. As the illustrious Mrs Movie Man pointed out, it's so nice to see an actress acting her age with confidence. The ever-watchable Shailene Woodley is also great, especially in a dramatic 'dismissal' scene. She adds some much needed warmth to the legal team. The southern drawl from Cumberbatch is a bit of a surprise and takes some getting used to. But it's still a strong performance from him.
- After ranting on last time at Zack Snyder's use of 4:3 screen ratios in "Justice League", here is an intelligent use of the technique. The film is in 16:9 ratio, but then pivots to 4:3 for all of the Guantanamo flashback scenes, reflecting the claustrophobia of Slahia's position.
- Real-life footage over the closing titles is absolutely fascinating.
Negatives:
- I personally didn't find this a particular negative, but I went into the film knowing it to be a "legal drama". So there would be lots of scenes, as in "The Trial of the Chicago 7", with courtroom debate and gavel-banging, right? Actually, there is almost none of that. Most of the legal action is in terms of the preparation of the case and the paperwork involved. (If this makes the movie sound excruciatingly dull... think again!)
- The Guantanamo story ends quite abruptly (with the above-mentioned jolt), and left me wanting to see more of the intervening time. It's not often that I complain about a film running too short, but here is one where just a little of "the Snyder treatment" might have been welcomed!
Additional Note for the squeamish: For those worried about seeing distressing scenes of torture (e.g. Fingernail extraction, etc), these are - although disturbing - more of the "psychological torment" type. So those of a squeamish disposition can still watch this one.
Summary Thoughts:
The fact that "The Mauritanian" is a true story hammers home just what the US has been up to over the last 20 years. War crimes are not only committed on the battlefield.
Director Kevin Macdonald is no stranger to documentaries ("Touching the Void", "Whitney"). He's also proved adept at bringing gripping true stories to the screen (having previously given us "The Last King of Scotland"). Here, the emotional journeys of the key characters are well observed making the movie 'highly recommended'.
For the full One Mann's Movies review see here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/04/09/the-mauritanian-america-are-you-squirming-with-embarrassment/
