Search
Search results
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated On the Steel Breeze in Books
Nov 21, 2019
On The Steel Breeze is the second in Reynold's Poseidon's Children trilogy and deals with the relationship between humans and artificial intelligence.
Taking up the story several years after Blue Remembered Earth the main (human) protagonist is Chiku Akinya, daughter of Sunday Akinya from the first book. She has cloned herself and the three Chikus pursue different fates but their stories inevitably interact with each other.even across light years of space.
One is lost in space, presumed dead. Another is on a colony ship heading to a planet that images have shown has a clearly alien structure on the surface. The third remains on Earth, presumably in safety.
As the colony ships near the destination planet they are riven by internal strife and politics just as Chiku finds that things are not as they seem. There are secrets both within the colony ship and with the planet itself, secrets that are bound to cause conflict when they are brought to light. On earth it is clear that some important information has been hidden and Chiku must risk her safe existence to uncover the truth, but at a high cost.
The book starts slowly, maybe a little too keen to establish who Chiku is and reinforce how the world she inhabits is different from ours. However once the story moves to the colony ships it moves along at a good pace with enough twists and surprises to keep the reader's interest. There is plenty of intrigue and it really is hard to tell where the story is going next.
We have the usual 'hard physics' at work as should be expected in a Reynolds book. Except for the hand wavium 'Chibesa physics' that powers the ships, the laws of physics are rigidly adhered to. Again we see how a battle across millions of miles of space could be achieved.
I found the ending to be satisfying (I have read reviews criticising it). It ties up the story of the earth based Chiku. The story for the colonists is clearly only beginning and the third book in the series is set up neatly in the epilogue, while at the same time providing closure on the fate of the colonists.
My only real criticism of the book (and it in no way detracted from it) was the cloning-and-memory-merging gimmick used for the Chiku clones. Although this neatly allowed the story to move between the colony ships and the solar system, I felt that this had been explored better (and with more justification) in Reynold's novel House Of Suns. Here it just seems to be a 'sci-fieqsue' way of allowing the main protagonists to communicate and empathise across the vast tracts of space and otherwise seemed superfluous given the complex set up.
Overall another excellent book from Reynolds, definitely up there with the best 'space opera' novels. I am looking forward to the third book immensely.
Taking up the story several years after Blue Remembered Earth the main (human) protagonist is Chiku Akinya, daughter of Sunday Akinya from the first book. She has cloned herself and the three Chikus pursue different fates but their stories inevitably interact with each other.even across light years of space.
One is lost in space, presumed dead. Another is on a colony ship heading to a planet that images have shown has a clearly alien structure on the surface. The third remains on Earth, presumably in safety.
As the colony ships near the destination planet they are riven by internal strife and politics just as Chiku finds that things are not as they seem. There are secrets both within the colony ship and with the planet itself, secrets that are bound to cause conflict when they are brought to light. On earth it is clear that some important information has been hidden and Chiku must risk her safe existence to uncover the truth, but at a high cost.
The book starts slowly, maybe a little too keen to establish who Chiku is and reinforce how the world she inhabits is different from ours. However once the story moves to the colony ships it moves along at a good pace with enough twists and surprises to keep the reader's interest. There is plenty of intrigue and it really is hard to tell where the story is going next.
We have the usual 'hard physics' at work as should be expected in a Reynolds book. Except for the hand wavium 'Chibesa physics' that powers the ships, the laws of physics are rigidly adhered to. Again we see how a battle across millions of miles of space could be achieved.
I found the ending to be satisfying (I have read reviews criticising it). It ties up the story of the earth based Chiku. The story for the colonists is clearly only beginning and the third book in the series is set up neatly in the epilogue, while at the same time providing closure on the fate of the colonists.
My only real criticism of the book (and it in no way detracted from it) was the cloning-and-memory-merging gimmick used for the Chiku clones. Although this neatly allowed the story to move between the colony ships and the solar system, I felt that this had been explored better (and with more justification) in Reynold's novel House Of Suns. Here it just seems to be a 'sci-fieqsue' way of allowing the main protagonists to communicate and empathise across the vast tracts of space and otherwise seemed superfluous given the complex set up.
Overall another excellent book from Reynolds, definitely up there with the best 'space opera' novels. I am looking forward to the third book immensely.
Lottie disney bookworm (1056 KP) rated The Kingdom in Books
Sep 20, 2020
“Where Happily Ever After is not just a promise, but a rule”
I mean with a tag line like that you can’t not be drawn in by this book! If that doesn’t grab you then the gorgeous cover art will.
Once you get past the wonderful aesthetics; the ‘Disney x Westworld x Big Little Lies’ reality that Jess Rothenberg conjures is sure to captivate you. Rothenberg manages to describe her Kingdom in such minute detail without it seeming contrite: the brazen references to meet and greets, monorails and “the park” are like catnip to a Disney geek like myself; whilst the proclamation from the outset that a crime has occurred appeals to the (slightly) more mature side of this 32 year old bookworm.
The Kingdom is a magical place where dreams come true: or is it? The star attractions: the princesses; are beautiful, perfect, always say the right thing and…are Artificial Intelligence. Their sophisticated technology, wireless signals and encyclopaedic knowledge ensure the princesses are as perfect as possible but it quickly becomes apparent that the princesses are, in fact, prisoners: constantly under surveillance, tracked by GPS implants in their wrists and strapped to their beds at “downtime”.
Ana is our princess and storyteller, opening her world to the reader and introducing us to her “sisters”, “mother” and “father” as well as those who have slightly less favourable views towards the AI, or Fantasists as they are known. There is no doubt that Ana is advanced in comparison to other Fantasists that we meet: she is aware of the park’s wireless blind spots and admits she becomes weary of some songs, unruly children and fathers with wandering eyes. Ironically, Ana is a profoundly human character with whom the reader immediately allies themselves with. Despite clearly being a suspect in the ongoing murder trial, I can’t see any reader convicting Ana. On the contrary, it is a real testament to Jess Rothenberg’s writing that the reader identifies with the Fantasists over and above every human character in her novel. Even Owen, the main human character, is never entirely trustworthy and does not reveal his intentions readily.
The format of The Kingdom is unlike anything else out there at the moment, in my opinion. The mix of prose, advertisements, interviews, trial transcripts and even apps allow our Fantasist to tell her story but also allows the reader to meet personnel and witness events that Ana would never see. This aspect is crucial to the murder mystery vibe of The Kingdom and Rothenberg leaves the reader guessing right to the very end and begging for a sequel.
Rothenberg’s kingdom is quick to show its murkier, thornier side. Those who question their surroundings are made an example of; nature is manipulated for entertainment and nothing is what it seems. If you haven’t guessed by now, I absolutely adored this book. It had me gripped from beginning to end. If you read one Disney book this year- read this one!
I mean with a tag line like that you can’t not be drawn in by this book! If that doesn’t grab you then the gorgeous cover art will.
Once you get past the wonderful aesthetics; the ‘Disney x Westworld x Big Little Lies’ reality that Jess Rothenberg conjures is sure to captivate you. Rothenberg manages to describe her Kingdom in such minute detail without it seeming contrite: the brazen references to meet and greets, monorails and “the park” are like catnip to a Disney geek like myself; whilst the proclamation from the outset that a crime has occurred appeals to the (slightly) more mature side of this 32 year old bookworm.
The Kingdom is a magical place where dreams come true: or is it? The star attractions: the princesses; are beautiful, perfect, always say the right thing and…are Artificial Intelligence. Their sophisticated technology, wireless signals and encyclopaedic knowledge ensure the princesses are as perfect as possible but it quickly becomes apparent that the princesses are, in fact, prisoners: constantly under surveillance, tracked by GPS implants in their wrists and strapped to their beds at “downtime”.
Ana is our princess and storyteller, opening her world to the reader and introducing us to her “sisters”, “mother” and “father” as well as those who have slightly less favourable views towards the AI, or Fantasists as they are known. There is no doubt that Ana is advanced in comparison to other Fantasists that we meet: she is aware of the park’s wireless blind spots and admits she becomes weary of some songs, unruly children and fathers with wandering eyes. Ironically, Ana is a profoundly human character with whom the reader immediately allies themselves with. Despite clearly being a suspect in the ongoing murder trial, I can’t see any reader convicting Ana. On the contrary, it is a real testament to Jess Rothenberg’s writing that the reader identifies with the Fantasists over and above every human character in her novel. Even Owen, the main human character, is never entirely trustworthy and does not reveal his intentions readily.
The format of The Kingdom is unlike anything else out there at the moment, in my opinion. The mix of prose, advertisements, interviews, trial transcripts and even apps allow our Fantasist to tell her story but also allows the reader to meet personnel and witness events that Ana would never see. This aspect is crucial to the murder mystery vibe of The Kingdom and Rothenberg leaves the reader guessing right to the very end and begging for a sequel.
Rothenberg’s kingdom is quick to show its murkier, thornier side. Those who question their surroundings are made an example of; nature is manipulated for entertainment and nothing is what it seems. If you haven’t guessed by now, I absolutely adored this book. It had me gripped from beginning to end. If you read one Disney book this year- read this one!
Darren (1599 KP) rated A.M.I. (2019) in Movies
Oct 14, 2019
Characters – Cassie is a high school student that has been through a traumatic experience, being involved in a car crash that killed her mother, while others in her life have moved on, she still suffers daily, her boyfriend doesn’t give her time and always makes excuses, while her closest friends are more interested in her lifestyle and boyfriend than her. Cassie turns to an AI system on her phone, that starts guiding her on a killing spree against everyone that has done her wrong. Greg is Cassie’s father that has neglected her after her mother’s death drinking and trying to seduce younger women including one of Cassie’s friends. Liam is the asshole boyfriend that is more interested in a career in American football and sleeping around over being caring towards his own girlfriend, he is one of the most unsupportive people you will ever see in a film. Ruby and Sarah are the best friends that are not supportive in any way more interested in her boyfriend than her friendship.
Performances – Debs Howard in the leading role is very interesting to watch, she has the image of a popular student, only holds the psychotic side back. Sam Robert Muik does give us one of the most unlikable characters of the year. Nobody else really gets any screen time to do much.
Story – The story here follows a teenager girl that is struggling with her mother’s death only to turn to her phone artificial intelligence for a friend, which only turns her into a psychotic killer, taking out revenge on the people that are wronging her in life. This story could easily be one that could have addressed the real life problems Cassie would be experiencing with loss, but instead it just decides to show us that she has no friends or family that want to help her in anyway, despite the fact they should be stood next to her helping her. The speed of which she turns to the phone for friendship is worrying quick and how quickly she starts to kill, though it does have a glancing reference to her head injury, which could have been made more of a point about.
Horror – The horror side of the film does follow Cassie on her slasher style killing spree, it isn’t scary and the kills happen way to quickly to have any tension.
Settings – The film does use the everyday settings which shows how somebody could go lose it and go on a spree.
Special Effects – The effects are used to show injuries, while mostly are off camera too, they don’t need to show us anything if we are honesty.
Scene of the Movie – The slip and slide.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – In one scene Sarah is asked if she wants to call her mother, less than 10 minutes later, she talks about living alone in an apartment.
Final Thoughts – This is an odd little slasher that does everything to make you support the killer over anybody in their life and does almost hit comical with the kills.
Overall: Fun little slasher.
Performances – Debs Howard in the leading role is very interesting to watch, she has the image of a popular student, only holds the psychotic side back. Sam Robert Muik does give us one of the most unlikable characters of the year. Nobody else really gets any screen time to do much.
Story – The story here follows a teenager girl that is struggling with her mother’s death only to turn to her phone artificial intelligence for a friend, which only turns her into a psychotic killer, taking out revenge on the people that are wronging her in life. This story could easily be one that could have addressed the real life problems Cassie would be experiencing with loss, but instead it just decides to show us that she has no friends or family that want to help her in anyway, despite the fact they should be stood next to her helping her. The speed of which she turns to the phone for friendship is worrying quick and how quickly she starts to kill, though it does have a glancing reference to her head injury, which could have been made more of a point about.
Horror – The horror side of the film does follow Cassie on her slasher style killing spree, it isn’t scary and the kills happen way to quickly to have any tension.
Settings – The film does use the everyday settings which shows how somebody could go lose it and go on a spree.
Special Effects – The effects are used to show injuries, while mostly are off camera too, they don’t need to show us anything if we are honesty.
Scene of the Movie – The slip and slide.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – In one scene Sarah is asked if she wants to call her mother, less than 10 minutes later, she talks about living alone in an apartment.
Final Thoughts – This is an odd little slasher that does everything to make you support the killer over anybody in their life and does almost hit comical with the kills.
Overall: Fun little slasher.
BackToTheMovies (56 KP) rated Child's Play (2019) in Movies
Jun 21, 2019
After moving to a new city, young Andy Barclay receives a special present from his mother. A seemingly innocent Buddi doll that becomes his best friend. When the doll suddenly takes on a life of its own, Andy unites with other neighborhood children to stop the sinister toy from wreaking bloody havoc.
For months I’ve been hating on this reboot. Whilst I still don’t necessarily agree with the politics of how this film came to be. I left the theatre quite surprised at how much I enjoyed this movie. Child’s Play is reimagined for a modern generation. Whilst this film is an alternate timeline twist to the original it still manages to throw in that classic Chucky humor we all know and love. Here’s my Child’s Play 2019 review.
Lars Klevberg tells the story of Buddi, an artificial intelligence robot that can control your home appliances and become your best friend. He will play with you, interact with you like a real human being and you can do activities together. After a man is fired at the Buddi factory he reprograms one of the dolls to disobey its commands and the reign of Chucky begins when it falls into the hands of young Andy (Gabriel Bateman) given to him as a present by his mum Karen (Aubrey Plaza). What follows is a thoroughly enjoyable feature that flies by. Chucky’s murderous rage ramps up to artificial intelligence warfare with epic results.
Disregarding the original storyline of a serial killer whose soul inhabits a Good Guys doll the new Child’s Play tells a more chilling tale. The movie runs a very close to home social commentary about our reliance on technology and the implications that could follow. Buddi is your walking, talking Amazon Echo. Every home device is controlled at his fingertips from TV’s to telephones and even as far as automated cars. You can only imagine the terror that unfolds as Chucky learns to utilize his technological surroundings for evil.
Chucky starts off innocent enough. He’s programmed to be Andy’s best friend but what starts out as a unique interaction between boy and robot instantly changes when Chucky becomes sentient. Influenced by those around him and watching horror movies with Andy suddenly Buddi becomes more sinister in nature. Instead of a treasured companion, Chucky becomes possessive and will protect Andy by any means necessary. Quite the different approach from that of previous installments. Even when Chucky begins his reign of terror Andy is still loyal to him to some degree. Whilst he cannot understand why Chucky is doing the things he does there’s a loneliness about Andy’s character that almost seems to justify Chucky’s behavior. He doesn’t agree with it but at the same time, he has a friend, albeit a murderous little rampaging doll.
Child’s Play has some incredible humour mixed in throughout which allows the film to flow freely. Whilst Seed of Chucky and Bride of Chucky had free-speaking souls it’s harder to convey this type of humour within a robotic doll. Instead, the doll spills one-liners and is influenced by those around him leading to some comical results. Chucky’s infamous one-liners come to the fold and various facial expressions on the doll are hysterical.
The vocal work and comedic delivery from Mark Hamil is nothing short of wonderful. There is nothing this man cannot do. The force is strong with him even in a Chucky movie. Whilst more robotic in nature the way the lines are delivered with such dry-pan straight-faced edge is just brilliant. But once again we cannot compare this new Chucky to the sublime work of Brad Dourif. Brad is delivering dialogue as a human being whereas Mark is delivering lines as a robotic entity. They just cannot be compared and it would be a stupid comparison to make. All in all the voice work is great It’s just a shame I can’t take this ugly doll seriously for one second!
Whoever designed the Buddi doll in pre-production needs a serious talking to! I’m not quite sure what look they were going for with this but it certainly isn’t a good one. The film becomes even more of a comedy the more you look at it. The old dolls had that look of innocence in the originals, this one is just so damn weird. I can’t picture a production meeting where everyone in the room agreed that this is the final look of the doll without intense laughing involved. It’s like the production team are openly fucking with us. No one on this planet can take this doll seriously and for me, Child’s Play is way more of a comedy than it will ever be a horror movie.
For the most part, casting within Child’s Play is very strong. Gabriel Bateman (Andy) puts in a strong performance single-handedly carrying the film. Brian Tyree Henry (Mike) who plays a neighbor/detective is also a nice comedic relief within the feature. Ty Consiglio, Beatrice Kitsos and Carlease Burke also play strong supporting roles. Where casting failed for me however was Aubrey Plaza. I’ve seen Aubrey in comedies where her humor never really hits home in any roles she’s in.
Arrogant and annoying in many roles this cookie cutter casting has her playing the same role in every film she’s in. Playing Andy’s mum in this film doesn’t work for me whatsoever. There’s no conviction, no depth, no family dynamic feel of any sort. She almost plays an annoying older sister rather than a mother. Thankfully, she doesn’t play a key role as such to Andy’s arc and thus I can overlook her involvement as such. I think Aubrey should have played a sister role or similar, it would have played to her on-screen strengths.
When Chucky starts killing is when this movie comes into its own. It has nothing to compare it to previous Chucky films. Our new technologically manipulative little doll runs havoc on the millennial generation of mobile phone and gadget addicted humans. The death scenes are gory and for the most part, all have comedy elements to them. Whilst the kills are unimaginative it’s how Chucky delivers those kills that really add that star gore power to proceedings.
Endearing, gory and mostly hilarious. The contrast of tone in Child’s Play may even persuade the die-hard fans to enjoy this one. It shouldn’t really be compared to the originals in any way shape or form although it does have an 80’s flair to it. Child’s Play has taken a new direction but has stayed relevant to modern times and whilst it’s taking a different path than the upcoming TV series, it’s safe to say Chucky really is back!
Thanks for checking out my Child’s Play 2019 review. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did!
https://backtothemovies.com/childs-play-2019-review/
For months I’ve been hating on this reboot. Whilst I still don’t necessarily agree with the politics of how this film came to be. I left the theatre quite surprised at how much I enjoyed this movie. Child’s Play is reimagined for a modern generation. Whilst this film is an alternate timeline twist to the original it still manages to throw in that classic Chucky humor we all know and love. Here’s my Child’s Play 2019 review.
Lars Klevberg tells the story of Buddi, an artificial intelligence robot that can control your home appliances and become your best friend. He will play with you, interact with you like a real human being and you can do activities together. After a man is fired at the Buddi factory he reprograms one of the dolls to disobey its commands and the reign of Chucky begins when it falls into the hands of young Andy (Gabriel Bateman) given to him as a present by his mum Karen (Aubrey Plaza). What follows is a thoroughly enjoyable feature that flies by. Chucky’s murderous rage ramps up to artificial intelligence warfare with epic results.
Disregarding the original storyline of a serial killer whose soul inhabits a Good Guys doll the new Child’s Play tells a more chilling tale. The movie runs a very close to home social commentary about our reliance on technology and the implications that could follow. Buddi is your walking, talking Amazon Echo. Every home device is controlled at his fingertips from TV’s to telephones and even as far as automated cars. You can only imagine the terror that unfolds as Chucky learns to utilize his technological surroundings for evil.
Chucky starts off innocent enough. He’s programmed to be Andy’s best friend but what starts out as a unique interaction between boy and robot instantly changes when Chucky becomes sentient. Influenced by those around him and watching horror movies with Andy suddenly Buddi becomes more sinister in nature. Instead of a treasured companion, Chucky becomes possessive and will protect Andy by any means necessary. Quite the different approach from that of previous installments. Even when Chucky begins his reign of terror Andy is still loyal to him to some degree. Whilst he cannot understand why Chucky is doing the things he does there’s a loneliness about Andy’s character that almost seems to justify Chucky’s behavior. He doesn’t agree with it but at the same time, he has a friend, albeit a murderous little rampaging doll.
Child’s Play has some incredible humour mixed in throughout which allows the film to flow freely. Whilst Seed of Chucky and Bride of Chucky had free-speaking souls it’s harder to convey this type of humour within a robotic doll. Instead, the doll spills one-liners and is influenced by those around him leading to some comical results. Chucky’s infamous one-liners come to the fold and various facial expressions on the doll are hysterical.
The vocal work and comedic delivery from Mark Hamil is nothing short of wonderful. There is nothing this man cannot do. The force is strong with him even in a Chucky movie. Whilst more robotic in nature the way the lines are delivered with such dry-pan straight-faced edge is just brilliant. But once again we cannot compare this new Chucky to the sublime work of Brad Dourif. Brad is delivering dialogue as a human being whereas Mark is delivering lines as a robotic entity. They just cannot be compared and it would be a stupid comparison to make. All in all the voice work is great It’s just a shame I can’t take this ugly doll seriously for one second!
Whoever designed the Buddi doll in pre-production needs a serious talking to! I’m not quite sure what look they were going for with this but it certainly isn’t a good one. The film becomes even more of a comedy the more you look at it. The old dolls had that look of innocence in the originals, this one is just so damn weird. I can’t picture a production meeting where everyone in the room agreed that this is the final look of the doll without intense laughing involved. It’s like the production team are openly fucking with us. No one on this planet can take this doll seriously and for me, Child’s Play is way more of a comedy than it will ever be a horror movie.
For the most part, casting within Child’s Play is very strong. Gabriel Bateman (Andy) puts in a strong performance single-handedly carrying the film. Brian Tyree Henry (Mike) who plays a neighbor/detective is also a nice comedic relief within the feature. Ty Consiglio, Beatrice Kitsos and Carlease Burke also play strong supporting roles. Where casting failed for me however was Aubrey Plaza. I’ve seen Aubrey in comedies where her humor never really hits home in any roles she’s in.
Arrogant and annoying in many roles this cookie cutter casting has her playing the same role in every film she’s in. Playing Andy’s mum in this film doesn’t work for me whatsoever. There’s no conviction, no depth, no family dynamic feel of any sort. She almost plays an annoying older sister rather than a mother. Thankfully, she doesn’t play a key role as such to Andy’s arc and thus I can overlook her involvement as such. I think Aubrey should have played a sister role or similar, it would have played to her on-screen strengths.
When Chucky starts killing is when this movie comes into its own. It has nothing to compare it to previous Chucky films. Our new technologically manipulative little doll runs havoc on the millennial generation of mobile phone and gadget addicted humans. The death scenes are gory and for the most part, all have comedy elements to them. Whilst the kills are unimaginative it’s how Chucky delivers those kills that really add that star gore power to proceedings.
Endearing, gory and mostly hilarious. The contrast of tone in Child’s Play may even persuade the die-hard fans to enjoy this one. It shouldn’t really be compared to the originals in any way shape or form although it does have an 80’s flair to it. Child’s Play has taken a new direction but has stayed relevant to modern times and whilst it’s taking a different path than the upcoming TV series, it’s safe to say Chucky really is back!
Thanks for checking out my Child’s Play 2019 review. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did!
https://backtothemovies.com/childs-play-2019-review/
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) in Movies
May 12, 2018
Awesome
When an artificial intelligence outthinks its creator and forms itself into dozens of destructive robots, Earth's mightiest heroes come together once again to put a stop to the threat.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
As most MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe) films tend to do, Avengers: Age of Ultron gets off to a really quick start wasting no time with action. Everyone gets a piece in the first ten minutes and they're working even better together than they did in the first film. While Hulk (Mark Ruffalo) and Thor (Chris Hemsworth) flex their muscle and rip tanks in half, Hawkeye Jeremy Renner) pierces through dudes like the modern-day Legolas.
Characters: 10
A part of what works so well for these characters is how grossly different their backstories and personalities are. Hawkeye is a family man that uses humor to mask his annoyance in certain situations. Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is constantly pushing the boundary envelope and acts superior to the ideas and thoughts of the rest of the group. Normally you hate a guy like this but he wears the hat so well. Throw in Vision, a benevolent AI with a sense of purpose, and the rest of the crew and you have a pretty solid character-base.
AI of the hour Ultron (James Spader) is a villain with a surprising amount of depth. He fights for his own cause which, in his mind, is the only necessary option for balance and preservation. His smooth, even-keeled voice can be chilling at times making for some pretty solid scenes.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
There is enough action in the film for two films. The plot steamrolls into new scenes of combat, one after the next. Dull moments are nonexistent. There is something about having all of these characters on the screen at the same time that keeps the film exciting and fresh. Teamups are especially cool, watching pairs like Captain America (Chris Evans) and Thor perform unique combo moves. You want eye candy? The film delivers.
Genre: 8
Not the best superhero film I've seen, although I believe that says more about the emergence of the genre than the film itself. This century has ushered in some phenomenal superhero movies that do the genre proud, including ones that set themselves apart by having enriched characters and deeper meaning. Age of Ultron is solid, but falls just slightly out of the Cream of the Crop territory.
Memorability: 9
The action sequences alone played throughout my mind well after having watched the film. Among other things, Age of Ultron gives you a falling city along with a classic matchup between Hulk and Stark in the Hulkbuster suit. Perhaps the most memorable part came at the very end when Ultron and Vision are having a conversation about the fate of humanity. Part foreshadowing, part introspection, it was a very fitting way to bring the curtain down on the action.
Pace: 10
Plot: 9
Resolution: 8
Overall: 94
No, it's not the best MCU film made to date, but it's still a high-quality film with a solid story and memorable sequences that keep you glued to your seat. Thankful for the rewatch as I enjoyed it even more the second time around.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
As most MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe) films tend to do, Avengers: Age of Ultron gets off to a really quick start wasting no time with action. Everyone gets a piece in the first ten minutes and they're working even better together than they did in the first film. While Hulk (Mark Ruffalo) and Thor (Chris Hemsworth) flex their muscle and rip tanks in half, Hawkeye Jeremy Renner) pierces through dudes like the modern-day Legolas.
Characters: 10
A part of what works so well for these characters is how grossly different their backstories and personalities are. Hawkeye is a family man that uses humor to mask his annoyance in certain situations. Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is constantly pushing the boundary envelope and acts superior to the ideas and thoughts of the rest of the group. Normally you hate a guy like this but he wears the hat so well. Throw in Vision, a benevolent AI with a sense of purpose, and the rest of the crew and you have a pretty solid character-base.
AI of the hour Ultron (James Spader) is a villain with a surprising amount of depth. He fights for his own cause which, in his mind, is the only necessary option for balance and preservation. His smooth, even-keeled voice can be chilling at times making for some pretty solid scenes.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
There is enough action in the film for two films. The plot steamrolls into new scenes of combat, one after the next. Dull moments are nonexistent. There is something about having all of these characters on the screen at the same time that keeps the film exciting and fresh. Teamups are especially cool, watching pairs like Captain America (Chris Evans) and Thor perform unique combo moves. You want eye candy? The film delivers.
Genre: 8
Not the best superhero film I've seen, although I believe that says more about the emergence of the genre than the film itself. This century has ushered in some phenomenal superhero movies that do the genre proud, including ones that set themselves apart by having enriched characters and deeper meaning. Age of Ultron is solid, but falls just slightly out of the Cream of the Crop territory.
Memorability: 9
The action sequences alone played throughout my mind well after having watched the film. Among other things, Age of Ultron gives you a falling city along with a classic matchup between Hulk and Stark in the Hulkbuster suit. Perhaps the most memorable part came at the very end when Ultron and Vision are having a conversation about the fate of humanity. Part foreshadowing, part introspection, it was a very fitting way to bring the curtain down on the action.
Pace: 10
Plot: 9
Resolution: 8
Overall: 94
No, it's not the best MCU film made to date, but it's still a high-quality film with a solid story and memorable sequences that keep you glued to your seat. Thankful for the rewatch as I enjoyed it even more the second time around.
BookblogbyCari (345 KP) rated Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind in Books
Aug 5, 2018
This book was chosen to be the first book read and discussed in an online non-fiction book club I recently joined – and I’m glad we did choose this one!
The book is an overview of homo-sapiens as a species, and how we have changed over the ages, and what we have done, before finally touching on where we are going. As such the book is a cross-pollination of history, sociology, and economics.
As you may expect from a book with such a broad scope, there are some sweeping statements, and rather than being a neutral dispassionate account, Harari makes his opinions very evident. However rather than being irritating, I feel this makes for a more entertaining read.
The book begins by introducing the theme of homo-sapiens in the context of the presence of the other human species that used to exist. He then goes on to describe the cognitive and agricultural revolutions. Then it’s the establishment of patriarchal social hierarchies across the world, largely based on historical conventions. Next Harari states that the purpose of religion is to unify fragile societies with superhuman legitimacy.
Harari then moves on to the scientific revolution, describing how an admission of ignorance by Europeans, along with a desire to discover and conquer new lands was key to the movement.
The conversation moves swiftly then to economics, using the fact that a bank can loan £10 for every £1 it has, to argue that our economics is based on trust in the future. Harari states that a country’s credit rating is more important than its actual resources. Harari describes capitalism and consumerism as being 2 sides of the same coin with two commandments: rich must invest, rest of us must buy. Consumerism, he says, aims to convince people that indulgence is good and frugality is self-oppression.
Harari also argues that, now, instead of relying on local communities the individual relies on the market or the state. Parental authority no longer sacred, he says, and state intervenes. And so when Harari asks if we are any happier now than when we were hunter-gatherers, he argues that our rise of wealth is offset by the disintegration of community life.
Harari also speaks of ecological degradation and our tendency to treat other species as a means to an end, for example, the farming of cow's and chickens has cut years off the lives of both, since they are killed as soon as they reach their maximum weight.
In the final chapter, Harari speculates on the future of mankind. With improvements in medical knowledge comes new ethical conundrums, he says. How will we handle the options of genetic engineering? What will the advent of artificial intelligence mean for humanity?
In my book club, we found that the book generated a lot of talking points. What would the world be like now, had the other species of humans survived? Why have so many cultures across history and the world had patriarchal hierarchies? Can societies improve over time, or is one style better than another? Can communism be considered a religion? Are human rights really just a figment of our collective imagination?
Whilst not everyone in my book club enjoyed the book equally, I would say that it’s as enlightening as it is thought provoking. By the end, it was hard to argue with the author's conclusion that homo-sapiens are like dissatisfied and irresponsible gods.
The book is an overview of homo-sapiens as a species, and how we have changed over the ages, and what we have done, before finally touching on where we are going. As such the book is a cross-pollination of history, sociology, and economics.
As you may expect from a book with such a broad scope, there are some sweeping statements, and rather than being a neutral dispassionate account, Harari makes his opinions very evident. However rather than being irritating, I feel this makes for a more entertaining read.
The book begins by introducing the theme of homo-sapiens in the context of the presence of the other human species that used to exist. He then goes on to describe the cognitive and agricultural revolutions. Then it’s the establishment of patriarchal social hierarchies across the world, largely based on historical conventions. Next Harari states that the purpose of religion is to unify fragile societies with superhuman legitimacy.
Harari then moves on to the scientific revolution, describing how an admission of ignorance by Europeans, along with a desire to discover and conquer new lands was key to the movement.
The conversation moves swiftly then to economics, using the fact that a bank can loan £10 for every £1 it has, to argue that our economics is based on trust in the future. Harari states that a country’s credit rating is more important than its actual resources. Harari describes capitalism and consumerism as being 2 sides of the same coin with two commandments: rich must invest, rest of us must buy. Consumerism, he says, aims to convince people that indulgence is good and frugality is self-oppression.
Harari also argues that, now, instead of relying on local communities the individual relies on the market or the state. Parental authority no longer sacred, he says, and state intervenes. And so when Harari asks if we are any happier now than when we were hunter-gatherers, he argues that our rise of wealth is offset by the disintegration of community life.
Harari also speaks of ecological degradation and our tendency to treat other species as a means to an end, for example, the farming of cow's and chickens has cut years off the lives of both, since they are killed as soon as they reach their maximum weight.
In the final chapter, Harari speculates on the future of mankind. With improvements in medical knowledge comes new ethical conundrums, he says. How will we handle the options of genetic engineering? What will the advent of artificial intelligence mean for humanity?
In my book club, we found that the book generated a lot of talking points. What would the world be like now, had the other species of humans survived? Why have so many cultures across history and the world had patriarchal hierarchies? Can societies improve over time, or is one style better than another? Can communism be considered a religion? Are human rights really just a figment of our collective imagination?
Whilst not everyone in my book club enjoyed the book equally, I would say that it’s as enlightening as it is thought provoking. By the end, it was hard to argue with the author's conclusion that homo-sapiens are like dissatisfied and irresponsible gods.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) in Movies
Jun 26, 2019
Hulk Continues to Smash...and I'm Here For All of it
When an artificial intelligence outthinks its creator and forms itself into dozens of destructive robots, Earth's mightiest heroes come together once again to put a stop to the threat.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
As most MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe) films tend to do, Avengers: Age of Ultron gets off to a really quick start wasting no time with action. Everyone gets a piece in the first ten minutes and they're working even better together than they did in the first film. While Hulk (Mark Ruffalo) and Thor (Chris Hemsworth) flex their muscle and rip tanks in half, Hawkeye Jeremy Renner) pierces through dudes like the modern-day Legolas.
Characters: 10
A part of what works so well for these characters is how grossly different their backstories and personalities are. Hawkeye is a family man that uses humor to mask his annoyance in certain situations. Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is constantly pushing the boundary envelope and acts superior to the ideas and thoughts of the rest of the group. Normally you hate a guy like this but he wears the hat so well. Throw in Vision, a benevolent AI with a sense of purpose, and the rest of the crew and you have a pretty solid character-base.
AI of the hour Ultron (James Spader) is a villain with a surprising amount of depth. He fights for his own cause which, in his mind, is the only necessary option for balance and preservation. His smooth, even-keeled voice can be chilling at times making for some pretty solid scenes.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
There is enough action in the film for two films. The plot steamrolls into new scenes of combat, one after the next. Dull moments are nonexistent. There is something about having all of these characters on the screen at the same time that keeps the film exciting and fresh. Teamups are especially cool, watching pairs like Captain America (Chris Evans) and Thor perform unique combo moves. You want eye candy? The film delivers.
Genre: 8
Not the best superhero film I've seen, although I believe that says more about the emergence of the genre than the film itself. This century has ushered in some phenomenal superhero movies that do the genre proud, including ones that set themselves apart by having enriched characters and deeper meaning. Age of Ultron is solid, but falls just slightly out of the Cream of the Crop territory.
Memorability: 9
The action sequences alone played throughout my mind well after having watched the film. Among other things, Age of Ultron gives you a falling city along with a classic matchup between Hulk and Stark in the Hulkbuster suit. Perhaps the most memorable part came at the very end when Ultron and Vision are having a conversation about the fate of humanity. Part foreshadowing, part introspection, it was a very fitting way to bring the curtain down on the action.
Pace: 10
Plot: 9
Resolution: 8
Overall: 94
No, it's not the best MCU film made to date, but it's still a high-quality film with a solid story and memorable sequences that keep you glued to your seat. Thankful for the rewatch as I enjoyed it even more the second time around.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
As most MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe) films tend to do, Avengers: Age of Ultron gets off to a really quick start wasting no time with action. Everyone gets a piece in the first ten minutes and they're working even better together than they did in the first film. While Hulk (Mark Ruffalo) and Thor (Chris Hemsworth) flex their muscle and rip tanks in half, Hawkeye Jeremy Renner) pierces through dudes like the modern-day Legolas.
Characters: 10
A part of what works so well for these characters is how grossly different their backstories and personalities are. Hawkeye is a family man that uses humor to mask his annoyance in certain situations. Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is constantly pushing the boundary envelope and acts superior to the ideas and thoughts of the rest of the group. Normally you hate a guy like this but he wears the hat so well. Throw in Vision, a benevolent AI with a sense of purpose, and the rest of the crew and you have a pretty solid character-base.
AI of the hour Ultron (James Spader) is a villain with a surprising amount of depth. He fights for his own cause which, in his mind, is the only necessary option for balance and preservation. His smooth, even-keeled voice can be chilling at times making for some pretty solid scenes.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
There is enough action in the film for two films. The plot steamrolls into new scenes of combat, one after the next. Dull moments are nonexistent. There is something about having all of these characters on the screen at the same time that keeps the film exciting and fresh. Teamups are especially cool, watching pairs like Captain America (Chris Evans) and Thor perform unique combo moves. You want eye candy? The film delivers.
Genre: 8
Not the best superhero film I've seen, although I believe that says more about the emergence of the genre than the film itself. This century has ushered in some phenomenal superhero movies that do the genre proud, including ones that set themselves apart by having enriched characters and deeper meaning. Age of Ultron is solid, but falls just slightly out of the Cream of the Crop territory.
Memorability: 9
The action sequences alone played throughout my mind well after having watched the film. Among other things, Age of Ultron gives you a falling city along with a classic matchup between Hulk and Stark in the Hulkbuster suit. Perhaps the most memorable part came at the very end when Ultron and Vision are having a conversation about the fate of humanity. Part foreshadowing, part introspection, it was a very fitting way to bring the curtain down on the action.
Pace: 10
Plot: 9
Resolution: 8
Overall: 94
No, it's not the best MCU film made to date, but it's still a high-quality film with a solid story and memorable sequences that keep you glued to your seat. Thankful for the rewatch as I enjoyed it even more the second time around.
Kara Skinner (332 KP) rated Of Mice Not Men in Books
Jun 12, 2019
Genre: Science Fiction, Non-Romance
Page Count: 350 pages
Average Goodreads Rating: 4.75 out of 5 stars
My rating: 3 out of 5 stars
After manmade natural disasters wiped out most humans and life around the world, war breaks out among the remaining humans. The faction called the Developers want to take the resources from Earth and leave the dying planet behind to join the stars. The Harmonizers want to stay and restore Earth’s resources. Both factions race to stop the other, using deadly, even sadistic measures. After all, the fate of the planet and the human race lies in the balance.
I had my ups and downs with this book to be sure. Aside from the book badly needing a proofreader, the writing itself is well done, only dipping into preachiness about human’s greed a couple of times. The brain curdling torture scenes were deliciously awful and made me stop reading a couple times to look up pictures of pet pigs until I calmed down enough to continue.
I thought I had a stomach for violence. I read Stephen King books and have watched plenty of horror movies. In middle school I reveled in shocking my classmates with presentations of General Sherman’s March to the Sea and torture practices from the Spanish Inquisition. In high school I was the only one who could watch the video of a shark eating a turtle without looking away ( but I ended up crying about shark fin soup later that year).
The point is, violence in books usually doesn’t bother me. But Canterbury takes it to a whole new level in a few of the torture scenes. It wasn’t just the twisted sadism in the scenes that bothered me, however. It was the fact that both sides are tooth achingly aware of the finite resources left and yet they both spend resources making inefficient weapons. The Developers do it in the name of sadism and the Harmonizers end up with weapons that are less effective than gun powder guns. I guess it shows that humans don’t make sense.
There are a lot of characters in this book, but Jasmine is the main character. I didn’t like her at first. I found her too cold-hearted and hot-headed. Granted, she’s in deeper and darker shit than I’ve ever seen in my lifetime, but despite her parents dying, she isn’t a sympathetic character for most of the book. Her relationship with Thomas feels as forced as a cheap jigsaw puzzle. Mostly she is indifferent to him or pushing him away. For awhile the only reason she was still with him was out of fear of being alone. And then suddenly she loves him? I never really bought it. Cynthia’s relationship with an alien artificial intelligence robot feels more real and she thought she was hallucinating it.
But I ended up really liking Jasmine in the end, and even Thomas. The plot was fascinating, even a couple of parts I was skeptical about at first and this book turned out to be entertaining, even though I guessed two of the biggest plot “twists” (if you can even call them that) as soon as the foreshadowing again. But one plot twist I didn’t see coming at all, which was great.
I do wish the sides were not so black and white. The Developers were clearly evil with practically no human sides in any main characters while the Harmonizers were clearly peaceful with no dark streaks to be found. It ended up making what could have been a great story about needless conflict and saving the world sound a little like anti space exploration propaganda. That being said, it is still entertaining.
While Canterbury’s writing skills are rough, he has the potential to be a great science fiction/horror writer.
Page Count: 350 pages
Average Goodreads Rating: 4.75 out of 5 stars
My rating: 3 out of 5 stars
After manmade natural disasters wiped out most humans and life around the world, war breaks out among the remaining humans. The faction called the Developers want to take the resources from Earth and leave the dying planet behind to join the stars. The Harmonizers want to stay and restore Earth’s resources. Both factions race to stop the other, using deadly, even sadistic measures. After all, the fate of the planet and the human race lies in the balance.
I had my ups and downs with this book to be sure. Aside from the book badly needing a proofreader, the writing itself is well done, only dipping into preachiness about human’s greed a couple of times. The brain curdling torture scenes were deliciously awful and made me stop reading a couple times to look up pictures of pet pigs until I calmed down enough to continue.
I thought I had a stomach for violence. I read Stephen King books and have watched plenty of horror movies. In middle school I reveled in shocking my classmates with presentations of General Sherman’s March to the Sea and torture practices from the Spanish Inquisition. In high school I was the only one who could watch the video of a shark eating a turtle without looking away ( but I ended up crying about shark fin soup later that year).
The point is, violence in books usually doesn’t bother me. But Canterbury takes it to a whole new level in a few of the torture scenes. It wasn’t just the twisted sadism in the scenes that bothered me, however. It was the fact that both sides are tooth achingly aware of the finite resources left and yet they both spend resources making inefficient weapons. The Developers do it in the name of sadism and the Harmonizers end up with weapons that are less effective than gun powder guns. I guess it shows that humans don’t make sense.
There are a lot of characters in this book, but Jasmine is the main character. I didn’t like her at first. I found her too cold-hearted and hot-headed. Granted, she’s in deeper and darker shit than I’ve ever seen in my lifetime, but despite her parents dying, she isn’t a sympathetic character for most of the book. Her relationship with Thomas feels as forced as a cheap jigsaw puzzle. Mostly she is indifferent to him or pushing him away. For awhile the only reason she was still with him was out of fear of being alone. And then suddenly she loves him? I never really bought it. Cynthia’s relationship with an alien artificial intelligence robot feels more real and she thought she was hallucinating it.
But I ended up really liking Jasmine in the end, and even Thomas. The plot was fascinating, even a couple of parts I was skeptical about at first and this book turned out to be entertaining, even though I guessed two of the biggest plot “twists” (if you can even call them that) as soon as the foreshadowing again. But one plot twist I didn’t see coming at all, which was great.
I do wish the sides were not so black and white. The Developers were clearly evil with practically no human sides in any main characters while the Harmonizers were clearly peaceful with no dark streaks to be found. It ended up making what could have been a great story about needless conflict and saving the world sound a little like anti space exploration propaganda. That being said, it is still entertaining.
While Canterbury’s writing skills are rough, he has the potential to be a great science fiction/horror writer.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Chappie (2015) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
In the world of 2016 South Africa, the police have taken a firm stand against the out of control crime problem facing the community by deploying a new line of robotic police officers. The robots known as “Scouts” are the creation of Deon Wilson (Dev Patel), who works for a defense contractor and dreams of taking artificial intelligence to the next level.
His boss Michelle (Sigourney Weaver), is not interested in anything other than the bottom line and discourages any creation or research that do not have military and financial ramification to them.
Deon must also content with an ex-soldier and rival designer named Vincent (Hugh Jackman), who is jealous of the success of the Scouts and wants to instead see his heavy weapons unit be given the chance to shine.
When he has a breakthrough, Deon opts to defy his boss and installs a new and revolutionary A.I. program into a Scout that was scheduled to be demolished after taking extensive damage in the field.
Things do not go as planned when Deon and his creation are captured by a gang who are desperate to raise money in order to pay back a debt to a rival gangster.
The new unit is like a child and Deon explains that he has to be treated like a child and given the chance to learn. The fact that his damage prevents him from being able to be recharged means the Scout now named “Chappie” only a few days of life adds urgency to the situation.
The gang starts to teach Chappie (Sharito Copley), when he needs to know to help them pull of their crimes but also become attached to him as he innocent ways and outlook start to grow on the gruff criminals.
With the clock ticking, events take a turn when Vincent takes matters into his own hands and before long several parties are pitted against one another with their very survival on the line.
Writer./Director Neil Blomkamp has crafted a “Thinking Man’s” science fiction film that evokes many solid debates about the definition of life, death, a soul, and other less tangible themes. The film has some action at the beginning and end and the CGI effects are very solid.
The biggest issue I had with the film was that the great premise lost momentum in the final act and in many ways takes some huge leaps of faith. We are supposed to believe that this is a top defense company yet people are able to come and go, especially at crunch time during the film. I had no idea you can just drive through a fence into a loading dock without every encountering any security or resistance. The area is like a revolving door as characters come and go without raising an eyebrow.
The cast is solid but some may have an issue with the accents in the film which Blomkamp recognizes by adding in subtitles at various moments in the film.
In the end “Chappie” is a good premise that never fully meets the potential it aspires to but still has enough good moments to underscore that Blomkamp is one of the most gifted talents in Science Fiction as he is able to infuse what would otherwise be a soulless character with enough heart and compassion that the audience will have empathy for him. With that in mind, Blomkamp should do a great job with the upcoming new Alien film as he has crafted a solid and enjoyable film that entertains while making you think about the deeper issues of existence without doing it in a heavy-handed manner.
http://sknr.net/2015/03/06/chappie/
His boss Michelle (Sigourney Weaver), is not interested in anything other than the bottom line and discourages any creation or research that do not have military and financial ramification to them.
Deon must also content with an ex-soldier and rival designer named Vincent (Hugh Jackman), who is jealous of the success of the Scouts and wants to instead see his heavy weapons unit be given the chance to shine.
When he has a breakthrough, Deon opts to defy his boss and installs a new and revolutionary A.I. program into a Scout that was scheduled to be demolished after taking extensive damage in the field.
Things do not go as planned when Deon and his creation are captured by a gang who are desperate to raise money in order to pay back a debt to a rival gangster.
The new unit is like a child and Deon explains that he has to be treated like a child and given the chance to learn. The fact that his damage prevents him from being able to be recharged means the Scout now named “Chappie” only a few days of life adds urgency to the situation.
The gang starts to teach Chappie (Sharito Copley), when he needs to know to help them pull of their crimes but also become attached to him as he innocent ways and outlook start to grow on the gruff criminals.
With the clock ticking, events take a turn when Vincent takes matters into his own hands and before long several parties are pitted against one another with their very survival on the line.
Writer./Director Neil Blomkamp has crafted a “Thinking Man’s” science fiction film that evokes many solid debates about the definition of life, death, a soul, and other less tangible themes. The film has some action at the beginning and end and the CGI effects are very solid.
The biggest issue I had with the film was that the great premise lost momentum in the final act and in many ways takes some huge leaps of faith. We are supposed to believe that this is a top defense company yet people are able to come and go, especially at crunch time during the film. I had no idea you can just drive through a fence into a loading dock without every encountering any security or resistance. The area is like a revolving door as characters come and go without raising an eyebrow.
The cast is solid but some may have an issue with the accents in the film which Blomkamp recognizes by adding in subtitles at various moments in the film.
In the end “Chappie” is a good premise that never fully meets the potential it aspires to but still has enough good moments to underscore that Blomkamp is one of the most gifted talents in Science Fiction as he is able to infuse what would otherwise be a soulless character with enough heart and compassion that the audience will have empathy for him. With that in mind, Blomkamp should do a great job with the upcoming new Alien film as he has crafted a solid and enjoyable film that entertains while making you think about the deeper issues of existence without doing it in a heavy-handed manner.
http://sknr.net/2015/03/06/chappie/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) in Movies
Mar 4, 2018
Groundbreaking Special Effects (1 more)
Music
Truly...a masterpiece
Over the years, many, many words have been written and said about the 1968 Stanley Kubrick opus, 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY, but after re-watching it, there is only 1 word I would write about it...
MASTERPIECE
I have a long history with this film. My father took me to it as a 7 year old. I was intrigued by the Sci-Fi special effects, but mostly liked the monkeys at the beginning. I then saw it again as a college student in the early 1980's and was "really into" (for obvious reasons) the psychedelic special effects at the end. Later...in the early 1990's, during my Arthur C. Clark phase, I read the book and then re-watched the film and my understanding of what was happening on the screen gelled and, consequently, my fascination and respect for the themes and scope of 2001 opened up new doors of understanding. I think I have seen it another 4 or 5 times since then and have appreciated it in different ways each time.
For this viewing, I walked away with a sense of awe of the sheer craftsmanship and audacity that Kubrick put up on the screen. The scope of the project in 1968 was (I'm sure) daunting with a subject matter that was just outside of normal vision, so for Kubrick to get a studio to o'k this film is mind-boggling to me.
But...how does it stack up as a film? Very well, indeed.
Told in 4 parts, 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY tells the tale of mankind's evolution from ape-man to space explorers and the mysterious, monolithic aliens who help mankind advance along this line.
In the hands of the great Stanley Kubrick, 2001 dazzles with pure visionary visuals, exploding heretofore unseen images on the screen. Showing us what could be possible in outer space visuals (not just paper plates hung on a wire against a star background). The film is full of Kubrick hallmarks - meticulously staged and choreographed scenes, stark colors - mostly one color with a dab of another color across the screen, and long scenes where not much dialogue takes place, but what is said (or not said) in the pauses speaks volume. Some would call this type of film making boring (and I have accused other filmmakers who have attempted this as boring and pretentious), but in the hands of Kubrick, this film is mesmerizing and continuously fascinating.
The first 20 minutes of the film - the DAWN OF MAN portion - and the last 20 minutes - the JUPITER AND BEYOND THE INFINITE portion - are both dialogue-free. Kubrick let's the action and visuals speak for themselves. In between are THE MOON portion, which really serves as the audience introduction into the style and substance of the film, the wonderfully, Oscar winning special effects set upon a backdrop of classical music (who can hear Also sprach Zarathustra and not think of 2001)?
It is during the 3rd - and most famous - portion of this film that a viewer will either engage or disengage with this film. This is the famous HAL 9000 portion of the film where 2 astronauts end up battling with a increasingly unstable artificial intelligence on a journey to Jupiter. It is here where Kubrick, I feel, is at his best. The long, uncomfortable silences and the glances between the two astronauts (played wonderfully by the oft-praised Keir Dullea and the underrated Gary Lockwood) leads to a sense of dread that is very reminiscent of Alfred Hitchcock at his finest.
I will admit that this film is not for everyone - and more than 1 of you reading this will attempt to watch 2001:A SPACE ODYSSEY and fall asleep during the middle of it - but for those of you that can plug into what Kubrick was achieving here will be rewarded with a very rich, very fascinating and very GOOD film that will garner conversation and criticism for many, many years to come.
Truly...a masterpiece.
Letter Grade: A+
10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
MASTERPIECE
I have a long history with this film. My father took me to it as a 7 year old. I was intrigued by the Sci-Fi special effects, but mostly liked the monkeys at the beginning. I then saw it again as a college student in the early 1980's and was "really into" (for obvious reasons) the psychedelic special effects at the end. Later...in the early 1990's, during my Arthur C. Clark phase, I read the book and then re-watched the film and my understanding of what was happening on the screen gelled and, consequently, my fascination and respect for the themes and scope of 2001 opened up new doors of understanding. I think I have seen it another 4 or 5 times since then and have appreciated it in different ways each time.
For this viewing, I walked away with a sense of awe of the sheer craftsmanship and audacity that Kubrick put up on the screen. The scope of the project in 1968 was (I'm sure) daunting with a subject matter that was just outside of normal vision, so for Kubrick to get a studio to o'k this film is mind-boggling to me.
But...how does it stack up as a film? Very well, indeed.
Told in 4 parts, 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY tells the tale of mankind's evolution from ape-man to space explorers and the mysterious, monolithic aliens who help mankind advance along this line.
In the hands of the great Stanley Kubrick, 2001 dazzles with pure visionary visuals, exploding heretofore unseen images on the screen. Showing us what could be possible in outer space visuals (not just paper plates hung on a wire against a star background). The film is full of Kubrick hallmarks - meticulously staged and choreographed scenes, stark colors - mostly one color with a dab of another color across the screen, and long scenes where not much dialogue takes place, but what is said (or not said) in the pauses speaks volume. Some would call this type of film making boring (and I have accused other filmmakers who have attempted this as boring and pretentious), but in the hands of Kubrick, this film is mesmerizing and continuously fascinating.
The first 20 minutes of the film - the DAWN OF MAN portion - and the last 20 minutes - the JUPITER AND BEYOND THE INFINITE portion - are both dialogue-free. Kubrick let's the action and visuals speak for themselves. In between are THE MOON portion, which really serves as the audience introduction into the style and substance of the film, the wonderfully, Oscar winning special effects set upon a backdrop of classical music (who can hear Also sprach Zarathustra and not think of 2001)?
It is during the 3rd - and most famous - portion of this film that a viewer will either engage or disengage with this film. This is the famous HAL 9000 portion of the film where 2 astronauts end up battling with a increasingly unstable artificial intelligence on a journey to Jupiter. It is here where Kubrick, I feel, is at his best. The long, uncomfortable silences and the glances between the two astronauts (played wonderfully by the oft-praised Keir Dullea and the underrated Gary Lockwood) leads to a sense of dread that is very reminiscent of Alfred Hitchcock at his finest.
I will admit that this film is not for everyone - and more than 1 of you reading this will attempt to watch 2001:A SPACE ODYSSEY and fall asleep during the middle of it - but for those of you that can plug into what Kubrick was achieving here will be rewarded with a very rich, very fascinating and very GOOD film that will garner conversation and criticism for many, many years to come.
Truly...a masterpiece.
Letter Grade: A+
10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
