Search
Search results
Neil Goddard (3 KP) rated Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019) in Movies
Feb 27, 2020
No Actors Required
Contains spoilers, click to show
I have a theory about movies that are 100% CGI; when someone isn’t a great actor and they are required only to supply a voice and they still aren’t very good, it really stands out.
Now, imagine you’re watching a film. I don’t know, maybe a bit creature epic, larger than life with whole cities being destroyed. The creature’s look amazing and the carnage they are wreaking is fabulous; buildings, helicopters, cars, all flying around the screen with a swish of a mighty reptilian tale. Now imagine that the actors, real people, not CGI, are, at best, bland and in some instances just outright terrible.
Annoying isn’t it?
It would lead one to believe that the film makers didn’t really put any stock in the human interactions, rather just gave a huge wad of cash to an SFX company and said, “Fill your boots, the more the merrier, make everything f---ing enormous!”
Godzilla (2014) was the second time Hollywood has attempted to make a film featuring Japan’s kaiju supremo and it was the first successful attempt from Hollywood, given that the 1998 Roland Emmerich attempt was basically Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997) but with added daddy issues (Roland Emmerich’s trademark).
Gareth Edwards 2014 first entry in the MonsterVerse was a huge success, financially and artistically. We saw a Godzilla that was of a scale we’d always wanted, towering over buildings, a reptilian God and we’re just the ants trying to not get squished.
Godzilla: King of Monsters attempts to up the ante by throwing a dozen or so monsters at the story. “Godzilla fought two MUTO’s did he, well… hold my beer!” Yeah, we’ll hold your beer while you get Millie Bobby Brown to stand there teary eyed for most of the film (a waste), Vera Farmiga to go from bereaved workaholic, to eco-terrorist to pointless self-sacrifice (unfathomable), and for Kyle Chandler to… well, Christ knows what Kyle Chandler was doing, apart from spitting terrible dialogue badly and then standing/sitting/walking looking angry but unconvincingly. Bradley Whitford provided some nice comic relief, he does droll sarcasm immensely well, Charles Dance is underused (and then forgotten about) and Zhang Ziyi tries to out-Kyle-Chandler Kyle Chandler in the bland, borderline useless stakes.
Worse than any failing on the human emotion side of the story are the huge liberties they take with global travel, like, one of side of the world to the other in a very short space of time. I mean Godzilla can do it because of some tunnels under the sea that he uses, possible the ones used in the science-denying sci-fi car crash abomination The Core (2003), but for the humans to just pop to Venezuela or the Antarctic is unforgivable.
This kind of leaps of reality always leads me to lose interest in the events in a film and start thinking around the script. In a film where everything everyone says is of dire emergency or import and then we see them in another part of the world some time later, what have they been talking about for all that time. Have they been napping? If so, it’s hasn’t eased any of the pointless angry posturing. Have they been chatting about boring everyday stuff? There is no hint of a relationship between any of these people who are spending potentially their last moments on earth together with alarming regularity. The world is possible about to get destroyed and you are in direct harm’s way! Shut up and nut up.
Now, imagine you’re watching a film. I don’t know, maybe a bit creature epic, larger than life with whole cities being destroyed. The creature’s look amazing and the carnage they are wreaking is fabulous; buildings, helicopters, cars, all flying around the screen with a swish of a mighty reptilian tale. Now imagine that the actors, real people, not CGI, are, at best, bland and in some instances just outright terrible.
Annoying isn’t it?
It would lead one to believe that the film makers didn’t really put any stock in the human interactions, rather just gave a huge wad of cash to an SFX company and said, “Fill your boots, the more the merrier, make everything f---ing enormous!”
Godzilla (2014) was the second time Hollywood has attempted to make a film featuring Japan’s kaiju supremo and it was the first successful attempt from Hollywood, given that the 1998 Roland Emmerich attempt was basically Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997) but with added daddy issues (Roland Emmerich’s trademark).
Gareth Edwards 2014 first entry in the MonsterVerse was a huge success, financially and artistically. We saw a Godzilla that was of a scale we’d always wanted, towering over buildings, a reptilian God and we’re just the ants trying to not get squished.
Godzilla: King of Monsters attempts to up the ante by throwing a dozen or so monsters at the story. “Godzilla fought two MUTO’s did he, well… hold my beer!” Yeah, we’ll hold your beer while you get Millie Bobby Brown to stand there teary eyed for most of the film (a waste), Vera Farmiga to go from bereaved workaholic, to eco-terrorist to pointless self-sacrifice (unfathomable), and for Kyle Chandler to… well, Christ knows what Kyle Chandler was doing, apart from spitting terrible dialogue badly and then standing/sitting/walking looking angry but unconvincingly. Bradley Whitford provided some nice comic relief, he does droll sarcasm immensely well, Charles Dance is underused (and then forgotten about) and Zhang Ziyi tries to out-Kyle-Chandler Kyle Chandler in the bland, borderline useless stakes.
Worse than any failing on the human emotion side of the story are the huge liberties they take with global travel, like, one of side of the world to the other in a very short space of time. I mean Godzilla can do it because of some tunnels under the sea that he uses, possible the ones used in the science-denying sci-fi car crash abomination The Core (2003), but for the humans to just pop to Venezuela or the Antarctic is unforgivable.
This kind of leaps of reality always leads me to lose interest in the events in a film and start thinking around the script. In a film where everything everyone says is of dire emergency or import and then we see them in another part of the world some time later, what have they been talking about for all that time. Have they been napping? If so, it’s hasn’t eased any of the pointless angry posturing. Have they been chatting about boring everyday stuff? There is no hint of a relationship between any of these people who are spending potentially their last moments on earth together with alarming regularity. The world is possible about to get destroyed and you are in direct harm’s way! Shut up and nut up.
Lorey L. (3 KP) rated The Hazel Wood in Books
Mar 7, 2018
Loved! Would recommend for fans of chilling fairytales.
Immediately after finishing Albert's dark tale, I took to Goodread's knowing other's had been left with the same tingly sensation of bloody good wrongness. Unfortunately, I found for many this was not the case. The story was dark, creepy and had all the good bad things that make you listen too closely at bumps and stare too intensely at shadows.
First, the writing is completely breathtaking. The imagery in Albert's style is superb. It made me want to wrap up in a blanket with a hot cup of tea and a roaring fire and wish for her words to never end.
With that being said, I did find that at times it could get a little thick and hard to sludge through, but for me, that was infrequent enough to not give me too much of a bother. I felt there was a lot of backstory that could have been told in a more fluid manner, but nevertheless, it was (mostly) needed backstory.
The world Albert created in Hinterland... I need more. If more/most of the story had taken place in the Hinterland, I feel it would have been closer to 5 stars. But, being mostly set in New York it did still leave the storyline curious and mysterious enough to lure you in if given half a chance.
Secondly, the characters are... horrible and good and missing things. Personally, once I figured out who Alice was, I understood why she was written the way she was (more on that in a bit). Unfortunately, I felt most characters, outside of Alice, were mostly one-dimensional. More fully fleshed out and I may have found myself falling a little in love Finch, desperately wanting to know Ella, or even more curious about the mysterious Althea. They just needed a little... more.
Thirdly, the artwork. Oh good Lord in Heaven, I am in love with the cover art of this book. Dark and shiny and filled with images that beg to be understood. Jim Tierney should be praised almost as much as the author for lending the right mindset for this dark story.
Further, my favorite parts of this book were by far the snippets of Althea's Hinterland Stories. Even if you don't like the book- you will LOVE these stories. They are the perfect amounts of creepy, mysterious, weird, and wonderful.
Finally, a more in-depth look. I'd like to begin with Alice. I feel it's not that her character is "misunderstood" but that she is almost too understood. Mean, angry, violent. With little too no explanation for her outbursts... Except for the simple fact that many readers seem not to care about (and understandably, to a degree. She's not the most likable person). She was spun that way. With an icy core she is unable to control, a darkness she fears.
**"I'd let myself drift too close to the dark continent at the core of me, a lawless place I tried never to visit."**
*SPOILER* Alice Three Times is basically the villain of a dark fairytale. She is made up of rage and ice and blackness. The fact Ella helps her control it even a little is amazing. Understanding this allowed me to view Alice in a different way than I had other heroines. She was, in the end, simply trying to become an ex-Story. To try and be the normal girl she never had the chance of being. *END SPOILER* This made her annoying, unexplained, angry outbursts easier to understand and accept,
for me.
Finch, the only character we know to be a person of color (note: many characters within the book, as previously mentioned, are far from being fully-fleshed out. For most, ethnicity isn't even mentioned), is nerdy and verging-on-fierce, but kind-of, off-putting in some instances. For example, because he is such a "fan" there are several times he ignores the fact that he is making Alice uncomfortable, and especially *SPOILER* when he basically sells her to the Hinterland Stories for entry to their land*END SPOILER*
*SPOILER*I also wanted to quickly talk about the confrontation with the police that leads Finch to try and explain why he's mad, which in turn leads to Alice acting very Story-ish. I felt for Finch in a big way here. I was angry with her stupid, selfish reaction as well. I applauded him for standing up for her and got annoyed that she acted so irrationally and privileged. But, I realized after reading the section through again, Alice is not a person. She is a Story. And although she was raised a human, her "ice core" sometimes ruled her actions more than her mind- which seemed to agree with Finch, even though her actions, words, and anger said otherwise:
**"...You think rich matters in this situation? You think a cop looks at me and sees <i>rich?</i> You're pretending you don't get it, but you do."
<b>I did get it, I did. And the shame of it boiled into something darker.</b> Before my brain could catch up, I jerked the wheel and turned the car off the road, sending us rattling toward the trees."** *END SPOILER*
This isn't a book for everyone. I enjoy reading both the positive and negative reviews, as they shed new light on different aspects of the story! I loved it and I can't wait for Melissa Albert's book of Hinterland Stories- and maybe even a second Hazel Wood! If you do choose to give this book a try, go in with an open mind... and maybe a light on.
First, the writing is completely breathtaking. The imagery in Albert's style is superb. It made me want to wrap up in a blanket with a hot cup of tea and a roaring fire and wish for her words to never end.
With that being said, I did find that at times it could get a little thick and hard to sludge through, but for me, that was infrequent enough to not give me too much of a bother. I felt there was a lot of backstory that could have been told in a more fluid manner, but nevertheless, it was (mostly) needed backstory.
The world Albert created in Hinterland... I need more. If more/most of the story had taken place in the Hinterland, I feel it would have been closer to 5 stars. But, being mostly set in New York it did still leave the storyline curious and mysterious enough to lure you in if given half a chance.
Secondly, the characters are... horrible and good and missing things. Personally, once I figured out who Alice was, I understood why she was written the way she was (more on that in a bit). Unfortunately, I felt most characters, outside of Alice, were mostly one-dimensional. More fully fleshed out and I may have found myself falling a little in love Finch, desperately wanting to know Ella, or even more curious about the mysterious Althea. They just needed a little... more.
Thirdly, the artwork. Oh good Lord in Heaven, I am in love with the cover art of this book. Dark and shiny and filled with images that beg to be understood. Jim Tierney should be praised almost as much as the author for lending the right mindset for this dark story.
Further, my favorite parts of this book were by far the snippets of Althea's Hinterland Stories. Even if you don't like the book- you will LOVE these stories. They are the perfect amounts of creepy, mysterious, weird, and wonderful.
Finally, a more in-depth look. I'd like to begin with Alice. I feel it's not that her character is "misunderstood" but that she is almost too understood. Mean, angry, violent. With little too no explanation for her outbursts... Except for the simple fact that many readers seem not to care about (and understandably, to a degree. She's not the most likable person). She was spun that way. With an icy core she is unable to control, a darkness she fears.
**"I'd let myself drift too close to the dark continent at the core of me, a lawless place I tried never to visit."**
*SPOILER* Alice Three Times is basically the villain of a dark fairytale. She is made up of rage and ice and blackness. The fact Ella helps her control it even a little is amazing. Understanding this allowed me to view Alice in a different way than I had other heroines. She was, in the end, simply trying to become an ex-Story. To try and be the normal girl she never had the chance of being. *END SPOILER* This made her annoying, unexplained, angry outbursts easier to understand and accept,
for me.
Finch, the only character we know to be a person of color (note: many characters within the book, as previously mentioned, are far from being fully-fleshed out. For most, ethnicity isn't even mentioned), is nerdy and verging-on-fierce, but kind-of, off-putting in some instances. For example, because he is such a "fan" there are several times he ignores the fact that he is making Alice uncomfortable, and especially *SPOILER* when he basically sells her to the Hinterland Stories for entry to their land*END SPOILER*
*SPOILER*I also wanted to quickly talk about the confrontation with the police that leads Finch to try and explain why he's mad, which in turn leads to Alice acting very Story-ish. I felt for Finch in a big way here. I was angry with her stupid, selfish reaction as well. I applauded him for standing up for her and got annoyed that she acted so irrationally and privileged. But, I realized after reading the section through again, Alice is not a person. She is a Story. And although she was raised a human, her "ice core" sometimes ruled her actions more than her mind- which seemed to agree with Finch, even though her actions, words, and anger said otherwise:
**"...You think rich matters in this situation? You think a cop looks at me and sees <i>rich?</i> You're pretending you don't get it, but you do."
<b>I did get it, I did. And the shame of it boiled into something darker.</b> Before my brain could catch up, I jerked the wheel and turned the car off the road, sending us rattling toward the trees."** *END SPOILER*
This isn't a book for everyone. I enjoy reading both the positive and negative reviews, as they shed new light on different aspects of the story! I loved it and I can't wait for Melissa Albert's book of Hinterland Stories- and maybe even a second Hazel Wood! If you do choose to give this book a try, go in with an open mind... and maybe a light on.
Connor Sheffield (293 KP) rated The Wolf Man (1941) in Movies
May 25, 2017
A classic Universal Monster Movie (2 more)
Lon Chaney Jr
Claude Rains
Even a Man who is pure of heart....
Even a man who is pure of heart, and says his prayers by night, may become a wolf when the wolfsbane blooms, and the Autumn moon is bright.
Heard that before in other werewolf movies, well this was it's origin. Created purely for the film, this poem even had some people believing it was an original folklore saying. If you have watched a handful of werewolf movies, then you will have noticed a lot of similarities;
- Silver bullets
- Wolfsbane
- Full Moon
- Not being able to retreat their acts from their loved ones
- Pentagrams
- Gypsies
- Gypsy Curses
- A Bite or scratch from the werewolf turns you
Some of these were originally created by the writers working on this film, and have become stereotypes that inspire many other werewolf films, TV Shows, Books, and Games etc.
The portrayal of Lawrence Talbot, by Lon Chaney Jr. is one that makes the classic Universal Monsters so special. Just like Frankenstein's Monster, the audiences of the 40's would have been frightened and horrified by these creatures, enough so that they wouldn't realise that they are in actual fact, suppose to sympathize with them, because when you watch the creatures being chased and hunted,the angry mobs fail to understand that these creatures never wanted this. Frankenstein's Monster never asked to be created, or to have the brain of a criminal mistakenly placed into his head instead of that of a civilized man. Larry Talbot never asked for the Wolf Man's curse, which he encountered whilst trying to save the life of a young female friend of his love interest.
With a great story and, at the time, revolutionary stop motion effects for the wolf man transformation, but of course the most important aspect, the beautifully crafted practical effects, the makeup that brings the creature to life, is incredible. My favourite of the classic Universal Monster Movies and one of my favourite movies of all time.
Heard that before in other werewolf movies, well this was it's origin. Created purely for the film, this poem even had some people believing it was an original folklore saying. If you have watched a handful of werewolf movies, then you will have noticed a lot of similarities;
- Silver bullets
- Wolfsbane
- Full Moon
- Not being able to retreat their acts from their loved ones
- Pentagrams
- Gypsies
- Gypsy Curses
- A Bite or scratch from the werewolf turns you
Some of these were originally created by the writers working on this film, and have become stereotypes that inspire many other werewolf films, TV Shows, Books, and Games etc.
The portrayal of Lawrence Talbot, by Lon Chaney Jr. is one that makes the classic Universal Monsters so special. Just like Frankenstein's Monster, the audiences of the 40's would have been frightened and horrified by these creatures, enough so that they wouldn't realise that they are in actual fact, suppose to sympathize with them, because when you watch the creatures being chased and hunted,the angry mobs fail to understand that these creatures never wanted this. Frankenstein's Monster never asked to be created, or to have the brain of a criminal mistakenly placed into his head instead of that of a civilized man. Larry Talbot never asked for the Wolf Man's curse, which he encountered whilst trying to save the life of a young female friend of his love interest.
With a great story and, at the time, revolutionary stop motion effects for the wolf man transformation, but of course the most important aspect, the beautifully crafted practical effects, the makeup that brings the creature to life, is incredible. My favourite of the classic Universal Monster Movies and one of my favourite movies of all time.
LucyB (47 KP) rated Red Sister in Books
Jul 23, 2017
Novel idea, plus a fabulous main character
Killer nuns, hidden powers and secrets aplenty - a fascinating read.
If ever there was a book which I'm not quite sure what to make of, it's this one. I saw all the rave reviews on Goodreads for it, and whilst I think they are well-deserved (the guy can write!), I'm not sure I actually loved this book as much as everyone else. Enjoyed? Yes. Respected? Hugely. But something didn't quite resonate with me on a personal level.
However, as far as storylines go, this book's got it going on. Nona, a tiny, angry-looking girl, finds herself rescued from a hanging and taken to a nunnery, where she learns the fine arts of how to be a bad-ass. So far, so perfect. Indeed, Nona is very much the strength of this story. Fierce, reserved, downright ruthless at times - she's a compelling protagonist, and one you cannot help wanting to know more about. The supporting cast are likewise strong - the untrustworthy Clera, the faithful Hessa, rich-girl Ara - they were all beautifully realised.
There were moments in the book were I was hooked. I needed to know what was going to happen (love that feeling!) and raced through the pages, hungry to find out more. But then, there were sections where I felt my interest wane, though wasn't quite sure why. It ebbed and flowed for me, and that was why I personally found it a little difficult to totally commit to. It's also why it took me a little longer to read.
But, make no mistake - I'm glad I persevered. I like the prevalence of strong female characters (hurrah - note to other authors - more of this, please!), and the world-building was superb. I'll be looking forward to the next one.
If ever there was a book which I'm not quite sure what to make of, it's this one. I saw all the rave reviews on Goodreads for it, and whilst I think they are well-deserved (the guy can write!), I'm not sure I actually loved this book as much as everyone else. Enjoyed? Yes. Respected? Hugely. But something didn't quite resonate with me on a personal level.
However, as far as storylines go, this book's got it going on. Nona, a tiny, angry-looking girl, finds herself rescued from a hanging and taken to a nunnery, where she learns the fine arts of how to be a bad-ass. So far, so perfect. Indeed, Nona is very much the strength of this story. Fierce, reserved, downright ruthless at times - she's a compelling protagonist, and one you cannot help wanting to know more about. The supporting cast are likewise strong - the untrustworthy Clera, the faithful Hessa, rich-girl Ara - they were all beautifully realised.
There were moments in the book were I was hooked. I needed to know what was going to happen (love that feeling!) and raced through the pages, hungry to find out more. But then, there were sections where I felt my interest wane, though wasn't quite sure why. It ebbed and flowed for me, and that was why I personally found it a little difficult to totally commit to. It's also why it took me a little longer to read.
But, make no mistake - I'm glad I persevered. I like the prevalence of strong female characters (hurrah - note to other authors - more of this, please!), and the world-building was superb. I'll be looking forward to the next one.
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated King's Cage in Books
May 16, 2018
The third installment in Victoria Aveyard’s Red Queen series, King’s Cage, is probably my favorite so far. Once again, Aveyard proves she is more focused on telling a story than describing a romance – something my readers know I really like. Especially when it comes to young adult fantasy. In fact, I feel labeling this series as “romance” is a stretch – especially given how little Aveyard focuses on actual material meant to draw in readers of that genre.
King’s Cage begins where Glass Sword left off: Mare’s deal with Maven. While she spends her time in prison, we finally get to learn more about other characters in the story – namely Cameron and (later) Evangeline. Though the latter takes place more toward when the action begins to kick up. Naturally, the story is more focused on Mare even from these perspectives, but it provides a refreshing look at the rebellion.
Surprisingly, there are several turns in King’s Cage that caught me entirely off guard. This is a good thing: I hate when books and stories become predictable. I won’t divulge more than that, for fear of spoilers, but I will say this: so far, this book is my favorite in the series and though I am so angry at the ending I could burn it, part of me wants to open it back up to page one and start again. I don’t imagine the library will like it much if I burn their book.
Until the fourth book hits shelves, I guess I’ll have to satisfy my hunger for more by reading the two novellas that Aveyard wrote for her post-apocalypse universe. Oh, and as a side note? This is the first one I read physically so I finally got to see a map of the lands. As I suspected, it takes place in the ruins of what was once the United States.
King’s Cage begins where Glass Sword left off: Mare’s deal with Maven. While she spends her time in prison, we finally get to learn more about other characters in the story – namely Cameron and (later) Evangeline. Though the latter takes place more toward when the action begins to kick up. Naturally, the story is more focused on Mare even from these perspectives, but it provides a refreshing look at the rebellion.
Surprisingly, there are several turns in King’s Cage that caught me entirely off guard. This is a good thing: I hate when books and stories become predictable. I won’t divulge more than that, for fear of spoilers, but I will say this: so far, this book is my favorite in the series and though I am so angry at the ending I could burn it, part of me wants to open it back up to page one and start again. I don’t imagine the library will like it much if I burn their book.
Until the fourth book hits shelves, I guess I’ll have to satisfy my hunger for more by reading the two novellas that Aveyard wrote for her post-apocalypse universe. Oh, and as a side note? This is the first one I read physically so I finally got to see a map of the lands. As I suspected, it takes place in the ruins of what was once the United States.
Merissa (12069 KP) rated The Vessel (Semiramis #3) in Books
Feb 14, 2019
The Vessel (Semiramis, #3) by Maya Daniels
The Vessel is the third book in the Semiramis series, and once again, we continue where we left off. Alexia and her sisters (plus others) are reunited; they still have the tablets to find; and now Alexia is dealing with Lucifer too.
This series has completely enthralled me. I dropped what I was reading, to read this. Trust me, that NEVER happens. I am a monogamist reader!!! Except... I NEEDED to know what happened. Now, I'm not saying this book was perfect (although it came damn near close). Did I have questions at the end? Yes, I did. Did it matter or impact my enjoyment of this book? Absolutely not.
The wit, banter, and love is full throttle in this book, and one of the bits I loved most was when everyone thought Alexia was angry, and instead she was grief stricken. Her explanation was perfect! There are surprises aplenty in this book, and I will admit to crying throughout what felt like three-quarters of the book!!! The characters have drawn me in over the three books - becoming real in my mind. I laughed with them, and so therefore I cried with them too. ?
Now, this is the last book in this trilogy, but it can't be the end. It simply can't. I refuse to admit it. I NEED more, like at least another three book set! I won't say anymore as I don't want to give out any spoilers, but read it for yourself, and you'll see what I mean.
I have loved this #Fantasy #Romance series, and I have absolutely no hesitation in recommending either this book, or the series.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
This series has completely enthralled me. I dropped what I was reading, to read this. Trust me, that NEVER happens. I am a monogamist reader!!! Except... I NEEDED to know what happened. Now, I'm not saying this book was perfect (although it came damn near close). Did I have questions at the end? Yes, I did. Did it matter or impact my enjoyment of this book? Absolutely not.
The wit, banter, and love is full throttle in this book, and one of the bits I loved most was when everyone thought Alexia was angry, and instead she was grief stricken. Her explanation was perfect! There are surprises aplenty in this book, and I will admit to crying throughout what felt like three-quarters of the book!!! The characters have drawn me in over the three books - becoming real in my mind. I laughed with them, and so therefore I cried with them too. ?
Now, this is the last book in this trilogy, but it can't be the end. It simply can't. I refuse to admit it. I NEED more, like at least another three book set! I won't say anymore as I don't want to give out any spoilers, but read it for yourself, and you'll see what I mean.
I have loved this #Fantasy #Romance series, and I have absolutely no hesitation in recommending either this book, or the series.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Lost Man in Books
Apr 4, 2019
I love Jane Harper and this book was certainly no exception. This is her first standalone novel (no Aaron Falk this time), and it is another beautifully written, captivating book that leaves you guessing until the very end. The characters are as scant as the landscape: the three brothers; their mother; Cameron's wife, Isle; Nathan's teenage son, Xander; a few workers from Cameron's property; and a couple of townsfolk. Yet somehow Harper weaves an excellent story that casts doubt from the beginning on what happened to Cameron. Did he purposely wander into the outback to his death? Or was something more nefarious going on?
While we're trying to figure out what happened, we're learning that something happened with Nathan in this isolated community, leaving him angry and alone. Bub seems bitter himself. Harper inserts tales of the family's past along with the present, giving us more details about our characters. And, at the same time, we start to see how no one's stories really add up. There's no real detective in this one, per se--at least no Aaron Falk, even if there is someone investigating Cameron's death--so things unravel mainly from Nathan's perspective.
And, of course, the unforgiving outback landscape is its own character: vast, stark, and dividing the brothers in more ways than one. Harper describes it so beautifully, just as she has done in her previous works. She so expertly captures the complicated family drama occurring as well as the small town dynamics happening in this often dangerous, isolated environment. The result, especially with these tense, well-drawn characters is a taunt, dramatic story that kept me reading and wondering until the very end.
I will easily read anything Jane Harper writes; her books simply do not disappoint. This one was different, in many ways, than the first two Aaron Falk novels, yet had many similarities, including her beautiful writing, nuanced plot, and wonderful characters. 4+ stars.
While we're trying to figure out what happened, we're learning that something happened with Nathan in this isolated community, leaving him angry and alone. Bub seems bitter himself. Harper inserts tales of the family's past along with the present, giving us more details about our characters. And, at the same time, we start to see how no one's stories really add up. There's no real detective in this one, per se--at least no Aaron Falk, even if there is someone investigating Cameron's death--so things unravel mainly from Nathan's perspective.
And, of course, the unforgiving outback landscape is its own character: vast, stark, and dividing the brothers in more ways than one. Harper describes it so beautifully, just as she has done in her previous works. She so expertly captures the complicated family drama occurring as well as the small town dynamics happening in this often dangerous, isolated environment. The result, especially with these tense, well-drawn characters is a taunt, dramatic story that kept me reading and wondering until the very end.
I will easily read anything Jane Harper writes; her books simply do not disappoint. This one was different, in many ways, than the first two Aaron Falk novels, yet had many similarities, including her beautiful writing, nuanced plot, and wonderful characters. 4+ stars.
Rikki Hammond (33 KP) rated X-Men: Dark Phoenix (2019) in Movies
Jun 9, 2019
Dull plot (3 more)
Contrived tropes
Extremely poor ending to the franchise
Villains aren't threatening in the slightest
Blame Game: The Movie
Contains spoilers, click to show
I've just come back from watching Dark Phoenix, and boy, was I let down! This certainly wasn't the way X-Men should end!
After the brilliant Days of Future Past and Apocalypse, Dark Phoenix falls very short of the mark in terms of plot, character development, and action.
The plot revolves around the X-Men going to space to rescue some astronauts, and Jean Grey getting caught in what we are led to believe is a solar flare, giving her unimaginable power. What follows is basically a gigantic blame game, where Jean blames Charles Xavier for hiding her past, Beast blaming Charles for Raven's death (due to Jean losing control, accidently killing Raven, who blames herself for it,) Magneto blaming Jean for the same thing, etc etc, all the while, Jean gets angry sometimes and destroys stuff.
Then some random aliens (the D'Bari) show up who want to use Jean for her powers, and these guys are supposed to be the villains of the film, however, they are the least threatening villains to come out in a long time, and there's no big finale to their demise at the end, they are literally disintegrated by Jean/Phoenix.
The biggest problem with Dark Phoenix is that there really isn't much in the way of story here, and it certainly doesn't add to the X-Men universe much at all. Even after Jean 'dies' no one grieves or mourns for her, we simply see Charles and Magneto playing chess, then the film ends.
The only positives I can really give are that the acting was decent enough, especially from James McAvoy, and there were a couple of good action scenes, but overall, this will end up being another highly forgettable film, and a very disappointing end to the X-Men franchise.
After the brilliant Days of Future Past and Apocalypse, Dark Phoenix falls very short of the mark in terms of plot, character development, and action.
The plot revolves around the X-Men going to space to rescue some astronauts, and Jean Grey getting caught in what we are led to believe is a solar flare, giving her unimaginable power. What follows is basically a gigantic blame game, where Jean blames Charles Xavier for hiding her past, Beast blaming Charles for Raven's death (due to Jean losing control, accidently killing Raven, who blames herself for it,) Magneto blaming Jean for the same thing, etc etc, all the while, Jean gets angry sometimes and destroys stuff.
Then some random aliens (the D'Bari) show up who want to use Jean for her powers, and these guys are supposed to be the villains of the film, however, they are the least threatening villains to come out in a long time, and there's no big finale to their demise at the end, they are literally disintegrated by Jean/Phoenix.
The biggest problem with Dark Phoenix is that there really isn't much in the way of story here, and it certainly doesn't add to the X-Men universe much at all. Even after Jean 'dies' no one grieves or mourns for her, we simply see Charles and Magneto playing chess, then the film ends.
The only positives I can really give are that the acting was decent enough, especially from James McAvoy, and there were a couple of good action scenes, but overall, this will end up being another highly forgettable film, and a very disappointing end to the X-Men franchise.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated The Cloverfield Paradox (2018) in Movies
Mar 19, 2018
Whomp Whomp
The Good: It's got the word "Cloverfield" in the title? That's gotta count for something right. First two films? Solid. The Cloverfield Paradox? Please avoid at all costs.
Confusion abounds as the film rushes through itself. Throughout its entirety, I sat there wondering, "Is this how it feels to be born?" I was angry. Confused. Lost. Not a decent combination of feelings when you're trying to have a good time. The most frustrating part was being able to see the holes that could have been plugged to make the film better. This is what happens when potential suffers from a lack of follow-through.
I wanted to like it, but it just wouldn't give me the chance. The sheer lack of explanation throughout is just plain maddening. You think it's coming, then director Julius Onah hits you with a "Are we good here? Yeah, we're good here, let's move on. Next scene!"
Meanwhile, the characters are running around as if the crazy things that are happening are just another walk in the park. I've never seen a calmer reaction in film to a guy suddenly losing his arm. Why aren't your eyes wide with terror? Why aren't you screaming? There are some things that happen on the ship (no more spoilers) that are ridiculously insane, but everyone seems to be as cool as a cucumber for the most part. Sure, there may be an initial shock reaction, but the reaction wears off in no time. A part of instilling panic in the audience is seeing the characters panic. Unsuccessful.
To make matters worse, The Cloverfield Paradox never really feels like a complete tie-in to the other two films. It's about a space crew trying to harness new forms of energy out in space to save a dying Earth. Frustrating at best, it's absolutely a skip for me. I give it a 43.
Confusion abounds as the film rushes through itself. Throughout its entirety, I sat there wondering, "Is this how it feels to be born?" I was angry. Confused. Lost. Not a decent combination of feelings when you're trying to have a good time. The most frustrating part was being able to see the holes that could have been plugged to make the film better. This is what happens when potential suffers from a lack of follow-through.
I wanted to like it, but it just wouldn't give me the chance. The sheer lack of explanation throughout is just plain maddening. You think it's coming, then director Julius Onah hits you with a "Are we good here? Yeah, we're good here, let's move on. Next scene!"
Meanwhile, the characters are running around as if the crazy things that are happening are just another walk in the park. I've never seen a calmer reaction in film to a guy suddenly losing his arm. Why aren't your eyes wide with terror? Why aren't you screaming? There are some things that happen on the ship (no more spoilers) that are ridiculously insane, but everyone seems to be as cool as a cucumber for the most part. Sure, there may be an initial shock reaction, but the reaction wears off in no time. A part of instilling panic in the audience is seeing the characters panic. Unsuccessful.
To make matters worse, The Cloverfield Paradox never really feels like a complete tie-in to the other two films. It's about a space crew trying to harness new forms of energy out in space to save a dying Earth. Frustrating at best, it's absolutely a skip for me. I give it a 43.
Cody Cook (8 KP) rated The Satanic Bible in Books
Jun 29, 2018
LaVey echoes a view of man's value and of non-materialist religion which can be easily found in the writings of Friedrich Nietzsche (especially Antichrist) and Ayn Rand. He is incredibly inconsistent on the subject of morality and shows only a cursory understanding of Christian history, doctrines, and the Bible.
LaVey does not view Satan as a person (nor does he view God that way), but as a representation of what man really is in his primal nature-- a violent and lustful nature which LaVey calls good, though he simultaneously argues that certain parts of it (that which would harm children or rape, for instance) are not good-- a dichotomy that he calls hypocritical in righthand path religions such as Christianity. Beyond this tension, he elsewhere seems to argue for moral relativism, creating a vicious circle of nonsense. Because good and evil are falsehoods and God and Satan are non-persons, the spells and rituals he creates are only symbols meant to harness our primal energies, sending them out to accomplish our goals (much like in the Hicks' Law of Attraction books or in The Secret).
A mix of equal parts tongue-in-cheek symbolism and outright charlatanism.
I suspect that this book's teachings would appeal primarily to two types of people: narcissists who want to seem edgy and angry people who have been harmed by institutional religion. In regard to the former, there are more thoughtful ways to be counter-cultural. In regard to the latter, an assessment of the intellectual weaknesses of this philosophy won't remove the hurt or pain they've been through, but hopefully an understanding that the kind of Christianity spoken of by LaVey is not genuine Christianity can remove some of the hatred they feel toward it due to the immoral actions performed by its claimed representatives.
Totally off-topic, but Lavey looks like a bald version of Evil Spock.
LaVey does not view Satan as a person (nor does he view God that way), but as a representation of what man really is in his primal nature-- a violent and lustful nature which LaVey calls good, though he simultaneously argues that certain parts of it (that which would harm children or rape, for instance) are not good-- a dichotomy that he calls hypocritical in righthand path religions such as Christianity. Beyond this tension, he elsewhere seems to argue for moral relativism, creating a vicious circle of nonsense. Because good and evil are falsehoods and God and Satan are non-persons, the spells and rituals he creates are only symbols meant to harness our primal energies, sending them out to accomplish our goals (much like in the Hicks' Law of Attraction books or in The Secret).
A mix of equal parts tongue-in-cheek symbolism and outright charlatanism.
I suspect that this book's teachings would appeal primarily to two types of people: narcissists who want to seem edgy and angry people who have been harmed by institutional religion. In regard to the former, there are more thoughtful ways to be counter-cultural. In regard to the latter, an assessment of the intellectual weaknesses of this philosophy won't remove the hurt or pain they've been through, but hopefully an understanding that the kind of Christianity spoken of by LaVey is not genuine Christianity can remove some of the hatred they feel toward it due to the immoral actions performed by its claimed representatives.
Totally off-topic, but Lavey looks like a bald version of Evil Spock.