Search
Search results
Hadley (567 KP) rated Handbook of Paranormal Powers in Books
Jun 2, 2019
I have always believed in the paranormal, but I am careful not to take everything at face value. When I picked up this book, I unfortunately took it at its face value, thinking that it was about how people developed these paranormal abilities and the things that they achieved with them.
But this book seems to have been written by a skeptic that disguised it as a book from a believer in the paranormal, which to say is a pretty clever way to sell a book when the belief in the paranormal is at an all time high. The author spends much of the book detailing people who have exhibited paranormal abilities just to quickly tear them down. I will say that Brian Haughton did a wonderful job on researching for this book, bringing up not only the history of paranormal abilities, but also self proclaimed psychics that readers may not have even heard of, such as Florence Cook, who had her abilities tested by none other than William Crookes( the discoverer of the element thallium).
Haughton's 'Handbook of Paranormal Powers' should have been titled something else, mostly because it's a history lesson in ESP and also, obviously, from the point-of-view of a skeptic. Yet, it doesn't lack for reading by believers; one such part I found interesting was a part on dowsing- the supernatural ability to find hidden objects, substances, geographic features, or sometimes even people- which you may have seen someone doing by holding two rods to find underground water. This part was about when dowsing became popular in the seventeenth-century France, and was being considered 'evil': ". . .with the dowser Baroness de Beausoleil and her husband, a mining expert, journeying across Europe and allegedly locating ore deposits of iron, gold, and silver. The couple established a thriving mineral company, but when their methods of locating metal ores became known they were accused of practicing the 'black arts' and imprisoned for the rest of their lives. " Readers learn that it wasn't until the nineteenth century, with the rise of spiritualism, that dowsing was no longer considered 'evil.'
Another one that interested me concerned the comedian Andy Kaufman, and his pursuit to rid himself of a rare lung cancer with psychic healing: "In March 1984, US comedian Andy Kaufman traveled to the Philippines for a six- week course of psychic surgery after being diagnosed with a rare lung cancer. The surgeon, Jun Labo, performed the operation, and claimed that he had removed large cancerous tumors from Kaufman's body. On May 16, 1984, Kaufman died from renal failure as a consequence of a metastatic lung cancer. "
I hate, but also love this book, not because Haughton backs up all of the skeptic claims with scientific research and tests, but because he claimed this to be a handbook or paranormal powers. If you glance at the cover, just below the title is: 'discover the secrets of mind readers, mediums, and more' - this can be taken that it's written by someone who believes in the paranormal, as well as someone who may have had personal experiences with the unknown, but with that said, I did learn a lot about the history of paranormal powers as well as people I had never heard of.
To prove the skepticism in Haughton's writing, we can turn to page 173, where he writes about how to test whether or not a self-proclaimed psychic surgeon is real. But even before this page and throughout this book, Haughton explains someone doing an extraordinary thing only to quickly explain away why it was fake to begin with. The 'Handbook of Paranormal Powers' reads a lot like a college thesis, that I found myself getting bored with the matter-of-fact tone. Some readers may enjoy reading essay-type books, but for me, it becomes repetitive enough that I don't remember much of the information I had just read.
Also, readers may come away with the feeling that Haughton doesn't care about the slight chance that some paranormal powers may be real, but instead he'd rather read about the scientific facts. I would only recommend this book to people who want to do a light reading on paranormal history, meaning mostly what made headlines in the news. For believers, I would suggest you go elsewhere.
But this book seems to have been written by a skeptic that disguised it as a book from a believer in the paranormal, which to say is a pretty clever way to sell a book when the belief in the paranormal is at an all time high. The author spends much of the book detailing people who have exhibited paranormal abilities just to quickly tear them down. I will say that Brian Haughton did a wonderful job on researching for this book, bringing up not only the history of paranormal abilities, but also self proclaimed psychics that readers may not have even heard of, such as Florence Cook, who had her abilities tested by none other than William Crookes( the discoverer of the element thallium).
Haughton's 'Handbook of Paranormal Powers' should have been titled something else, mostly because it's a history lesson in ESP and also, obviously, from the point-of-view of a skeptic. Yet, it doesn't lack for reading by believers; one such part I found interesting was a part on dowsing- the supernatural ability to find hidden objects, substances, geographic features, or sometimes even people- which you may have seen someone doing by holding two rods to find underground water. This part was about when dowsing became popular in the seventeenth-century France, and was being considered 'evil': ". . .with the dowser Baroness de Beausoleil and her husband, a mining expert, journeying across Europe and allegedly locating ore deposits of iron, gold, and silver. The couple established a thriving mineral company, but when their methods of locating metal ores became known they were accused of practicing the 'black arts' and imprisoned for the rest of their lives. " Readers learn that it wasn't until the nineteenth century, with the rise of spiritualism, that dowsing was no longer considered 'evil.'
Another one that interested me concerned the comedian Andy Kaufman, and his pursuit to rid himself of a rare lung cancer with psychic healing: "In March 1984, US comedian Andy Kaufman traveled to the Philippines for a six- week course of psychic surgery after being diagnosed with a rare lung cancer. The surgeon, Jun Labo, performed the operation, and claimed that he had removed large cancerous tumors from Kaufman's body. On May 16, 1984, Kaufman died from renal failure as a consequence of a metastatic lung cancer. "
I hate, but also love this book, not because Haughton backs up all of the skeptic claims with scientific research and tests, but because he claimed this to be a handbook or paranormal powers. If you glance at the cover, just below the title is: 'discover the secrets of mind readers, mediums, and more' - this can be taken that it's written by someone who believes in the paranormal, as well as someone who may have had personal experiences with the unknown, but with that said, I did learn a lot about the history of paranormal powers as well as people I had never heard of.
To prove the skepticism in Haughton's writing, we can turn to page 173, where he writes about how to test whether or not a self-proclaimed psychic surgeon is real. But even before this page and throughout this book, Haughton explains someone doing an extraordinary thing only to quickly explain away why it was fake to begin with. The 'Handbook of Paranormal Powers' reads a lot like a college thesis, that I found myself getting bored with the matter-of-fact tone. Some readers may enjoy reading essay-type books, but for me, it becomes repetitive enough that I don't remember much of the information I had just read.
Also, readers may come away with the feeling that Haughton doesn't care about the slight chance that some paranormal powers may be real, but instead he'd rather read about the scientific facts. I would only recommend this book to people who want to do a light reading on paranormal history, meaning mostly what made headlines in the news. For believers, I would suggest you go elsewhere.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Venom: Let There Be Carnage (2021) in Movies
Oct 7, 2021
Suffers from Sequel-itis
If you ever heard of the term “Sequel-itis” and wondered what a good example of film suffering from this malady would be, look no further than VENOM: LET THERE BE CARNAGE.
The sequel to the surprisingly well made - and well acted - 2018 VENOM that introduced audiences to the (sometimes) villain, (sometimes) anti-hero, VENOM and the human/symbiot that he has bonded to (it makes sense in the first film) - this sequel looks and feels like a quick “money-grab” that is keeping this character “warm” for bigger things (I hope) down the road.
Directed by famed motion capture expert, Andy Serkis, VENOM: LET THERE BE CARNAGE feels like a movie that was directed by a Special FX veteran for this film is long on special effects and short on what makes a film work - plot and character.
And that’s too bad for the 2018 VENOM film was a surprise in that while it had it’s CGI moments (and plenty of them), it also had interesting plot and characters and took full advantage of two of the better actors working today - Tom Hardy and Michelle Williams.
The sequel looked promising enough as both Hardy and Williams were back and Woody Harrelson was cast as the main villain (with Naomi Harris along as the villain’s sidekick) so some of the ingredients were there for a quality sequel.
Unfortunately, this sequel leaned heavily into the CGI-ness of the first film and made the CGI Alien Venom the focal point of the story, relegating the humans to the back. No actor was pushed further to the back than Williams who was stuck with a weak “damsel in distress” arc while Harrelson and Harris take turns over-acting the other making their pair of villains some of the weakest in recent comic-book movies memory.
And then there is the performance of Hardy as Eddie Brock. He is sleepwalking his way through this film, looking like he has very little interest in what is going on and just wants to grab his paycheck and get home.
Some of these sins could be forgiven if the CGI elements - and the battles between Venom and Carnage - are interesting. Unfortunately, they just are not - they are “fine”, but nothing interesting or original, so this film is destined to get washed off the shore (and memory) as quickly as a sandcastle is washed away on a beach.
If you are going to check out this flick, make sure you stay for the “end credits” scene (which is only, thankfully, about 2 minutes into the credits), it is the best part of this film.
Letter Grade: C+
5 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
The sequel to the surprisingly well made - and well acted - 2018 VENOM that introduced audiences to the (sometimes) villain, (sometimes) anti-hero, VENOM and the human/symbiot that he has bonded to (it makes sense in the first film) - this sequel looks and feels like a quick “money-grab” that is keeping this character “warm” for bigger things (I hope) down the road.
Directed by famed motion capture expert, Andy Serkis, VENOM: LET THERE BE CARNAGE feels like a movie that was directed by a Special FX veteran for this film is long on special effects and short on what makes a film work - plot and character.
And that’s too bad for the 2018 VENOM film was a surprise in that while it had it’s CGI moments (and plenty of them), it also had interesting plot and characters and took full advantage of two of the better actors working today - Tom Hardy and Michelle Williams.
The sequel looked promising enough as both Hardy and Williams were back and Woody Harrelson was cast as the main villain (with Naomi Harris along as the villain’s sidekick) so some of the ingredients were there for a quality sequel.
Unfortunately, this sequel leaned heavily into the CGI-ness of the first film and made the CGI Alien Venom the focal point of the story, relegating the humans to the back. No actor was pushed further to the back than Williams who was stuck with a weak “damsel in distress” arc while Harrelson and Harris take turns over-acting the other making their pair of villains some of the weakest in recent comic-book movies memory.
And then there is the performance of Hardy as Eddie Brock. He is sleepwalking his way through this film, looking like he has very little interest in what is going on and just wants to grab his paycheck and get home.
Some of these sins could be forgiven if the CGI elements - and the battles between Venom and Carnage - are interesting. Unfortunately, they just are not - they are “fine”, but nothing interesting or original, so this film is destined to get washed off the shore (and memory) as quickly as a sandcastle is washed away on a beach.
If you are going to check out this flick, make sure you stay for the “end credits” scene (which is only, thankfully, about 2 minutes into the credits), it is the best part of this film.
Letter Grade: C+
5 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Judy (2019) in Movies
Dec 8, 2019
There's a definite fatigue now with films based on music stars and their works, I was already feeling it earlier in the year with Yesterday and Blinded By The Light. While I wasn't particularly enthusiastic about seeing Judy the trailer had me as soon as I heard "Somewhere over the rainbow".
Judy, once a household name, is short on money and her reputation is making it hard to get the work she needs. As her welcome at hotels is no longer guaranteed and her ex-husband's concern for what sort of life she's giving their children grows she realises she needs to find a way to make enough money to get them a proper home.
Her answer lies in England with nightly sellout performances to the crowds. But as the loneliness and isolation set in it might be that her not so glamorous lifestyle has caught up with her.
As with many real life depictions I came out wanting to know what was true to Garland's actual life and what was added with artistic license. Perhaps the worst thing about this film is just how accurate it is, the bullying, the abuse, the drugs, it shows a shocking side of Hollywood as it brought up its young stars. It was a little sad to find out that my two favourite bits of the film were probably the only bits in the whole thing that weren't based on actual events, but when you think about it that's not a bad statistic.
Renée Zellweger is outstanding. A year of vocal training before even getting to the set and being able to deliver such a stellar singing performance while simultaneously having to act like you're high on pills, exhaustion and drink... I'm genuinely amazed when I think back to some moments in the film.
I didn't get that same rush from listening to her singing in the film as I did in the trailer. She's wonderful performing the songs but I just felt that everything around the songs was too much of a distraction from it.
Yes, there are other people in Judy beyond Renée Zellweger but I'm not sure that there was anything to them that could shine as much as she did. Jessie Buckley felt underused, and after seeing Wild Rose earlier this year it was sad to see her so close to a stage without her getting to sing. I thought Andy Nyman made a good show as Dan, one half of the gay couple Judy befriends, the emotion that ran through his scenes with her had me wrecked.
I felt a little thrown by the flashbacks initially, but the drip feeding of scenes from her life as we progressed through the modern part of the story worked well. Each reveal would make you a little more heartbroken and concerned for adult Judy, the balance was perfect.
From the glamorous hotels to the dark night streets of London I thought all the settings were chosen well. The design overall with the costumes and sets felt spot on too. Seeing images of the cast against their real life counterparts really gives you pause to think about how hard everyone on that film worked to make the perfect shot.
There aren't all that many drawbacks here, apart from the fatigue for this sort of film that I mentioned earlier it felt very much like I've seen this film before. The recent biopic Stan & Ollie has so many similar features and scenarios that Judy ended up feeling like it wasn't such a new release. Despite that I did enjoy it, I just wish there had been more songs in it, I'm a sucker for a good tune.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/11/judy-movie-review.html
Judy, once a household name, is short on money and her reputation is making it hard to get the work she needs. As her welcome at hotels is no longer guaranteed and her ex-husband's concern for what sort of life she's giving their children grows she realises she needs to find a way to make enough money to get them a proper home.
Her answer lies in England with nightly sellout performances to the crowds. But as the loneliness and isolation set in it might be that her not so glamorous lifestyle has caught up with her.
As with many real life depictions I came out wanting to know what was true to Garland's actual life and what was added with artistic license. Perhaps the worst thing about this film is just how accurate it is, the bullying, the abuse, the drugs, it shows a shocking side of Hollywood as it brought up its young stars. It was a little sad to find out that my two favourite bits of the film were probably the only bits in the whole thing that weren't based on actual events, but when you think about it that's not a bad statistic.
Renée Zellweger is outstanding. A year of vocal training before even getting to the set and being able to deliver such a stellar singing performance while simultaneously having to act like you're high on pills, exhaustion and drink... I'm genuinely amazed when I think back to some moments in the film.
I didn't get that same rush from listening to her singing in the film as I did in the trailer. She's wonderful performing the songs but I just felt that everything around the songs was too much of a distraction from it.
Yes, there are other people in Judy beyond Renée Zellweger but I'm not sure that there was anything to them that could shine as much as she did. Jessie Buckley felt underused, and after seeing Wild Rose earlier this year it was sad to see her so close to a stage without her getting to sing. I thought Andy Nyman made a good show as Dan, one half of the gay couple Judy befriends, the emotion that ran through his scenes with her had me wrecked.
I felt a little thrown by the flashbacks initially, but the drip feeding of scenes from her life as we progressed through the modern part of the story worked well. Each reveal would make you a little more heartbroken and concerned for adult Judy, the balance was perfect.
From the glamorous hotels to the dark night streets of London I thought all the settings were chosen well. The design overall with the costumes and sets felt spot on too. Seeing images of the cast against their real life counterparts really gives you pause to think about how hard everyone on that film worked to make the perfect shot.
There aren't all that many drawbacks here, apart from the fatigue for this sort of film that I mentioned earlier it felt very much like I've seen this film before. The recent biopic Stan & Ollie has so many similar features and scenarios that Judy ended up feeling like it wasn't such a new release. Despite that I did enjoy it, I just wish there had been more songs in it, I'm a sucker for a good tune.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/11/judy-movie-review.html
Natasha Khan recommended Covers Record by Cat Power in Music (curated)
Lee (2222 KP) rated War for the Planet of the Apes (2017) in Movies
Jul 19, 2017
Strong ending to a fantastic trilogy
Finally, after a recent lengthy spell of average or just plain disappointing blockbusters, along comes War for the Planet of the Apes to show them how it's done. The first two movies in this new trilogy have been consistently strong and enjoyable and War continues to deliver on that high quality, proving itself to be the best of the trilogy.
Despite it's name, there's not really a huge amount of war on show here. Unless of course we're referring to the inner conflict and turmoil experienced by Caesar. The movie begins with some human soldiers sneaking through the woods to try and take out the apes. They get their asses kicked and Caesar lets a few of them go in the hope that their crazed colonel (Woody Harrelson) will see just how merciful the apes are and understand that they just want to live their lives in peace and harmony. Unfortunately, things don't quite go to plan and the colonel returns later that night with a surprise attack on the apes home while they're sleeping. Some heavy ape casualties are sustained, and Caesar is pissed. Grief stricken, and out for revenge, he wants to go in search of the colonel while the rest of the apes head off to a potential new home out in the desert.
From there our story shifts down a gear, as Caesar and a small number of his trusted allies set off on horseback to track down the colonel. By this point though, you've already forgotten that these are not real apes, such is the exceptional quality of the effects on display here. The emotions are all there and the detail is perfect, totally believable. To all intents and purposes, these are real apes, and what they're experiencing feels real.
Along the way they manage pick up a young orphan mute girl and a former zoo ape called 'Bad Ape', who manages to provide much of the scarce humour found throughout the movie. When they do find the colonel and his base, the movie becomes more a prisoner of war, great escape style story rather than all out war. Yet it still manages to be extremely intense, highly emotional and hugely enjoyable.
By now, Andy Serkis and his team of performers are experts at bringing these apes to life and Caesar has now developed further than any other character in the trilogy. Serkis portrays equal amounts of rage and compassion beautifully, aided by the pixel perfect rendering of Caesar. Harrelson is the only human of any real note here, despite the large number of human soldiers under his command, and he manages to bring just the right amount of intense crazy and depth to the role.
The trilogy comes to a pretty satisfying and emotional close, with potential for further Apes movies. Overall though this has proved to be one of the strongest trilogies I've seen in a long time.
Despite it's name, there's not really a huge amount of war on show here. Unless of course we're referring to the inner conflict and turmoil experienced by Caesar. The movie begins with some human soldiers sneaking through the woods to try and take out the apes. They get their asses kicked and Caesar lets a few of them go in the hope that their crazed colonel (Woody Harrelson) will see just how merciful the apes are and understand that they just want to live their lives in peace and harmony. Unfortunately, things don't quite go to plan and the colonel returns later that night with a surprise attack on the apes home while they're sleeping. Some heavy ape casualties are sustained, and Caesar is pissed. Grief stricken, and out for revenge, he wants to go in search of the colonel while the rest of the apes head off to a potential new home out in the desert.
From there our story shifts down a gear, as Caesar and a small number of his trusted allies set off on horseback to track down the colonel. By this point though, you've already forgotten that these are not real apes, such is the exceptional quality of the effects on display here. The emotions are all there and the detail is perfect, totally believable. To all intents and purposes, these are real apes, and what they're experiencing feels real.
Along the way they manage pick up a young orphan mute girl and a former zoo ape called 'Bad Ape', who manages to provide much of the scarce humour found throughout the movie. When they do find the colonel and his base, the movie becomes more a prisoner of war, great escape style story rather than all out war. Yet it still manages to be extremely intense, highly emotional and hugely enjoyable.
By now, Andy Serkis and his team of performers are experts at bringing these apes to life and Caesar has now developed further than any other character in the trilogy. Serkis portrays equal amounts of rage and compassion beautifully, aided by the pixel perfect rendering of Caesar. Harrelson is the only human of any real note here, despite the large number of human soldiers under his command, and he manages to bring just the right amount of intense crazy and depth to the role.
The trilogy comes to a pretty satisfying and emotional close, with potential for further Apes movies. Overall though this has proved to be one of the strongest trilogies I've seen in a long time.
Mayhawke (97 KP) rated Ocean's Twelve (2004) in Movies
Feb 7, 2018
That moment when all the ingredients that should have made Cordon Bleu curdle and, instead, turn to liquid shit...
Contains spoilers, click to show
The follow up to the remake of 'Oceans Eleven' this is one of the best examples of Hollywood producers not knowing when to leave well enough alone, and trying to cash in on the success of an earlier film with trite rubbish.
It has all the technical quirks of the first that gave that film it's 'feel' but this is the proof that making a good film is like making a good quiche - you can have all the right ingredients but if you don't do it properly you just end up with a plate full of sludge.
It also helps to have a plot. What passes for the plot in this film is so absurd that it can't sustain a film even as lightweight as this.
Don Cheadle is still speaking his rather quaint Dick-Van-Dykelish, and the two brothers are still squabbling, but the other characters all seem to have undergone a peculiar metamorphosis. They appear to have been written by someone lacking descriptive skill, who has drawn clumsily on second-hand clichés. Damon has become the weak-kneed, over-eager social conscience of the group; Gould has become bland; the Chinese acrobat still can't speak English but everyone else can understand him. Worst of all, Andy Garcia who was so wonderfully, and chillingly menacing in the first has become a joke of a bad-guy: a cane-carrying renaissance man who can tinkle the ivories, speak fluent Chinese and illogically doesn't kill the Eleven when finds them - because a total stranger asked him not to. They are no longer characters but caricatures.
Then there's Catherine Zeta-Jones. She plays the beautiful (naturally) daughter-of-a-thief cop who specialises in 'master thieves', and has previously been involved with Pitt's character [yawwwwwn]....
You would have thought it would be impossible for a cast like this to make something so dire. Apparently it isn't.
Tediously predictable ending.
What a waste of time, money, effort and people.
It has all the technical quirks of the first that gave that film it's 'feel' but this is the proof that making a good film is like making a good quiche - you can have all the right ingredients but if you don't do it properly you just end up with a plate full of sludge.
It also helps to have a plot. What passes for the plot in this film is so absurd that it can't sustain a film even as lightweight as this.
Don Cheadle is still speaking his rather quaint Dick-Van-Dykelish, and the two brothers are still squabbling, but the other characters all seem to have undergone a peculiar metamorphosis. They appear to have been written by someone lacking descriptive skill, who has drawn clumsily on second-hand clichés. Damon has become the weak-kneed, over-eager social conscience of the group; Gould has become bland; the Chinese acrobat still can't speak English but everyone else can understand him. Worst of all, Andy Garcia who was so wonderfully, and chillingly menacing in the first has become a joke of a bad-guy: a cane-carrying renaissance man who can tinkle the ivories, speak fluent Chinese and illogically doesn't kill the Eleven when finds them - because a total stranger asked him not to. They are no longer characters but caricatures.
Then there's Catherine Zeta-Jones. She plays the beautiful (naturally) daughter-of-a-thief cop who specialises in 'master thieves', and has previously been involved with Pitt's character [yawwwwwn]....
You would have thought it would be impossible for a cast like this to make something so dire. Apparently it isn't.
Tediously predictable ending.
What a waste of time, money, effort and people.
Louise (64 KP) rated Blue Bottle Mystery - The Graphic Novel: An Asperger Adventure in Books
Jul 2, 2018
I was provided a copy of this book from Netgalley and the publishers in exchange for an honest opinion.
The artwork in this graphic novel is very simplistic and colourful, easy to follow as targeted for middle grade.
I enjoyed this Graphic Novel it was very informative on a basic level, it showed family dynamics and symptoms of aspergers. I believe this should be put in all schools for children to read, to recognise that there are illnesses out there that define people the way they are. I have only really learnt about AS in my adult life, this could be that it's more recognised and understood now.
There are several characters in this story that surround Ben and you get to see all their ways in which they communicate.
Grandma is around to look after Ben when his father is working, she is very supportive and understanding and is a go between Ben and his father.
The dad, is a stereotypical dad, wants his son to be good at sports and have a rough and tumble, he doesn't understand why Ben is the way he is and clearly gets frustrated when Ben can't explain himself.
Andy, Ben's best friend, is a decent kid and is very tolerant but he himself also gets frustrated with Ben on occasions but sticks with him, its great to see that true friends will stick around and keep coming back.
The teacher (I have forgotten her name.... it's something double-barreled) is very frustrated, she has her own problems too, but Ben can't read her emotions, he takes things too literally and is mistaken for being rude.
The blue bottle and the genie is just added to make the story interesting for the kids to read, It doesn't have any real relevance to AS.
This book looks at family dynamics, friendship, bullying and obviously Aspergers Syndrome.
This is such an easy read, definitely one to read with kids to make them more aware or anyone that has never heard of AS as it shows all they symptoms in Ben's character.
Overall I rated this 3.5 stars out of 5.
The artwork in this graphic novel is very simplistic and colourful, easy to follow as targeted for middle grade.
I enjoyed this Graphic Novel it was very informative on a basic level, it showed family dynamics and symptoms of aspergers. I believe this should be put in all schools for children to read, to recognise that there are illnesses out there that define people the way they are. I have only really learnt about AS in my adult life, this could be that it's more recognised and understood now.
There are several characters in this story that surround Ben and you get to see all their ways in which they communicate.
Grandma is around to look after Ben when his father is working, she is very supportive and understanding and is a go between Ben and his father.
The dad, is a stereotypical dad, wants his son to be good at sports and have a rough and tumble, he doesn't understand why Ben is the way he is and clearly gets frustrated when Ben can't explain himself.
Andy, Ben's best friend, is a decent kid and is very tolerant but he himself also gets frustrated with Ben on occasions but sticks with him, its great to see that true friends will stick around and keep coming back.
The teacher (I have forgotten her name.... it's something double-barreled) is very frustrated, she has her own problems too, but Ben can't read her emotions, he takes things too literally and is mistaken for being rude.
The blue bottle and the genie is just added to make the story interesting for the kids to read, It doesn't have any real relevance to AS.
This book looks at family dynamics, friendship, bullying and obviously Aspergers Syndrome.
This is such an easy read, definitely one to read with kids to make them more aware or anyone that has never heard of AS as it shows all they symptoms in Ben's character.
Overall I rated this 3.5 stars out of 5.
Lenard (726 KP) rated It: Chapter Two (2019) in Movies
Sep 9, 2019
It: Chapter Two continues the story of the malevolent cosmic being that appears mostly as a clown named Pennywise. In 1989, a group of seven friends nicknamed The Losers' Club ended the reign of terror of It, swearing a blood oath (seen in both chapters) that if It returned they would come back. They had an unearthed a twenty-year cycle of terror so one would assume that they would be extravigilent in 2016. But you know how it is. You move away from your hometown, you lose track of your friends, the horrible things that happened to you when you were 13 tend to take on a glossy foggy shade of its former memory. As an adult, you forget about some of the things you did when you were younger, keeping only the happier memories of your childhood unless you were mercilessly abused and keep hold on the childhood traumas you escaped. Bill, Stan, Eddie, Richie, Bev, and Ben have no memories of the weird events of that summer. But sometimes the past comes back to haunt you or in this case, your old friend from back then, Mike calls you up and reminds you that you made a pact.
Now, The Losers' Club reunite to defeat the evil force that overtakes their town of Derry, Maine. Like any good Stephen King adaptation, the supernatural being that terrorizes is not such a huge component. It is the story of friends and the way they are able to colloborate and grow. It: Chapter 2 is a sort of The Big Chill if a murderous clown connected the friends. Bev and Ben rediscover old feelings. Richie hides a secret from his friend, Eddie. Bill is a writer who can't write an ending until the novelization of his childhood traumas are written. Stan is (spoiler alert) Kevin Costner, but still serves an important purpose for the Club to triumph.
The movie is a blueprint for horror movie direction. Andy is a master horror visual storyteller. The movie is not very scary if you are susceptible to that. It is more a terror than fearful. I thoroughly enjoyed the movie even if it did tend to drag in areas.
Now, The Losers' Club reunite to defeat the evil force that overtakes their town of Derry, Maine. Like any good Stephen King adaptation, the supernatural being that terrorizes is not such a huge component. It is the story of friends and the way they are able to colloborate and grow. It: Chapter 2 is a sort of The Big Chill if a murderous clown connected the friends. Bev and Ben rediscover old feelings. Richie hides a secret from his friend, Eddie. Bill is a writer who can't write an ending until the novelization of his childhood traumas are written. Stan is (spoiler alert) Kevin Costner, but still serves an important purpose for the Club to triumph.
The movie is a blueprint for horror movie direction. Andy is a master horror visual storyteller. The movie is not very scary if you are susceptible to that. It is more a terror than fearful. I thoroughly enjoyed the movie even if it did tend to drag in areas.
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated The Doll House in Books
May 15, 2018
Slowly but surely, I’m getting caught up on my NetGalley reviews. (I’m waaaay behind.) This time around, I finished reading The Doll House by Phoebe Morgan. It’s a slow simmer with a bit of predictability and a lot of unnecessary information, but in the end, Morgan manages to redeem the book through fast-paced, constant action.
The plot is a bit all over the place for the majority of the book, but, like The Roanoke Girls, this seems to be a technique used to drive the story forward. That said, the chapters end with a bit of suspense before the jump to another character. (Also, it should be mentioned that I HATE how Morgan switches between first and third person.) Unfortunately, the first 80% of the book feel like a drag. There’s little to no action, with the most exciting parts being an apparent flashback to the antagonist’s past. The last little bit of the book picks up drastically, which was a nice relief from what came before.
I said earlier that it’s a slow burn, and The Doll House really is. Morgan leaves enough clues throughout the book that a reader can pick up on something awful culminating at the end, but its done in a manner that is simply alright. For instance, the conflict between Ashley and her husband is unnecessary. The title, The Doll House, is a bit of a misnomer because aside from a few parts of the house showing up and a few references to it, the dollhouse is very rarely mentioned. (Also, let’s take a moment here to point out that the dollhouse on the cover of the book is white and it’s made extremely clear that the actual dollhouse is pink. That would have been a simple photoshop fix.)
Now, the characters in The Doll House are really something else. Personally, my favorite is Ashley, the self-conscious, overweight mom of three whom I feel is quite realistically depicted. Corinne is more skittish than my Dad’s dog, which is pretty impressive. Which… it amazes me that she keeps her job with how much she calls out in the book alone. The male characters are alright, albeit apparently quite handsome. Andy is a pig, but you’d have to read the book to see why.
Overall, I didn’t hate or love this book to death. It’s a pretty solid three out of five, which is better than some of the other stuff I’ve read lately. I’d like to thank NetGalley and the publisher for providing me with a copy of this book free of charge in exchange for an unbiased review.
The plot is a bit all over the place for the majority of the book, but, like The Roanoke Girls, this seems to be a technique used to drive the story forward. That said, the chapters end with a bit of suspense before the jump to another character. (Also, it should be mentioned that I HATE how Morgan switches between first and third person.) Unfortunately, the first 80% of the book feel like a drag. There’s little to no action, with the most exciting parts being an apparent flashback to the antagonist’s past. The last little bit of the book picks up drastically, which was a nice relief from what came before.
I said earlier that it’s a slow burn, and The Doll House really is. Morgan leaves enough clues throughout the book that a reader can pick up on something awful culminating at the end, but its done in a manner that is simply alright. For instance, the conflict between Ashley and her husband is unnecessary. The title, The Doll House, is a bit of a misnomer because aside from a few parts of the house showing up and a few references to it, the dollhouse is very rarely mentioned. (Also, let’s take a moment here to point out that the dollhouse on the cover of the book is white and it’s made extremely clear that the actual dollhouse is pink. That would have been a simple photoshop fix.)
Now, the characters in The Doll House are really something else. Personally, my favorite is Ashley, the self-conscious, overweight mom of three whom I feel is quite realistically depicted. Corinne is more skittish than my Dad’s dog, which is pretty impressive. Which… it amazes me that she keeps her job with how much she calls out in the book alone. The male characters are alright, albeit apparently quite handsome. Andy is a pig, but you’d have to read the book to see why.
Overall, I didn’t hate or love this book to death. It’s a pretty solid three out of five, which is better than some of the other stuff I’ve read lately. I’d like to thank NetGalley and the publisher for providing me with a copy of this book free of charge in exchange for an unbiased review.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Flash (2023) in Movies
Jun 18, 2023
The Best DCEU Film Since the original WONDER WOMAN
At this point in time, the average movie-going public is suffering from “Super-Hero” fatigue, and (more than likely) “multi-verse” fatigue because the latest entries in this genre all are tapping the same type of experience (in order to pull in properties/characters from other films). It’s a smart strategy from a Movie Executive point-of-view as they can bring in other, generally liked/loved characters from previous films/entities.
Sometimes it works Excellently (SPIDER-MAN ACROSS THE SPIDER-VERSE), sometimes it works “Well Enough” (DR. STRANGE IN THE MULTI-VERSE OF MADNESS) and sometimes it is just plain boring (the latest ANT-MAN movie), so expectation is that the DCEU will find a way to screw this up and make dull and boring a premise (and characters) that should be exciting and fun.
And…with THE FLASH, the DCEU got it right (for once) and it is the most fun DCEU film since the first WONDER WOMAN film.
Based on the FLASHPOINT comics series and Directed by Andy Muschietti (IT and IT, Part II), THE FLASH Isn’t (really) a “multi-verse” story, it’s a time travel tale (that causes multi-verses). An important distinction for the Fanboy - but rather unimportant to the regular movie-going person. This tale brings a bunch of fun (and humor!) to the DCEU as well as touching on the fondness nerve for by-gone characters (and the actors who portrayed them).
Central to this film is, of course, THE FLASH, played by Ezra Miller. Your enjoyment of this film will swing on whether you find Miller’s performance “fun” or “annoying” for it strides that line between the two. For the BankofMarquis, Miller’s performance was a ton of fun - which added to the enjoyment rather than taking away from it.
He is joined by a bevy of cameo appearances - to name any would be to spoil them - but (since it is in the trailer), Miller does spend much of this film interacting with his younger self and he succeeds (more than he fails) during this part of the film. The 2 Millers are also joined by Michael Keaton, reprising his role as Batman from the 1980’s (again…not a spoiler - he’s in the trailer). Keaton brings starpower - and star energy - to this film and he lifts the middle portion of this movie.
Muschietti conducts this orchestra of multiple-cameos, multiple versions of the same character and multiple special effects professionally and cleanly, never letting the audience get lost and (most certainly) never letting the camera (or the film) linger too long on any plot device (which hides the holes that, inevitably, show up).
A fun, enough, installment in the DCEU - with some heart and a large portion of nostalgia - THE FLASH is a positive way to say goodbye to the DCEU.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Sometimes it works Excellently (SPIDER-MAN ACROSS THE SPIDER-VERSE), sometimes it works “Well Enough” (DR. STRANGE IN THE MULTI-VERSE OF MADNESS) and sometimes it is just plain boring (the latest ANT-MAN movie), so expectation is that the DCEU will find a way to screw this up and make dull and boring a premise (and characters) that should be exciting and fun.
And…with THE FLASH, the DCEU got it right (for once) and it is the most fun DCEU film since the first WONDER WOMAN film.
Based on the FLASHPOINT comics series and Directed by Andy Muschietti (IT and IT, Part II), THE FLASH Isn’t (really) a “multi-verse” story, it’s a time travel tale (that causes multi-verses). An important distinction for the Fanboy - but rather unimportant to the regular movie-going person. This tale brings a bunch of fun (and humor!) to the DCEU as well as touching on the fondness nerve for by-gone characters (and the actors who portrayed them).
Central to this film is, of course, THE FLASH, played by Ezra Miller. Your enjoyment of this film will swing on whether you find Miller’s performance “fun” or “annoying” for it strides that line between the two. For the BankofMarquis, Miller’s performance was a ton of fun - which added to the enjoyment rather than taking away from it.
He is joined by a bevy of cameo appearances - to name any would be to spoil them - but (since it is in the trailer), Miller does spend much of this film interacting with his younger self and he succeeds (more than he fails) during this part of the film. The 2 Millers are also joined by Michael Keaton, reprising his role as Batman from the 1980’s (again…not a spoiler - he’s in the trailer). Keaton brings starpower - and star energy - to this film and he lifts the middle portion of this movie.
Muschietti conducts this orchestra of multiple-cameos, multiple versions of the same character and multiple special effects professionally and cleanly, never letting the audience get lost and (most certainly) never letting the camera (or the film) linger too long on any plot device (which hides the holes that, inevitably, show up).
A fun, enough, installment in the DCEU - with some heart and a large portion of nostalgia - THE FLASH is a positive way to say goodbye to the DCEU.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)