Search
Search results
Peekaboo Barn
Education and Games
App
Open up the world-famous Peekaboo Barn, perfect for toddlers. Inside the little bouncing barn,...
Preschool! & Toddler kids learning Abby Games free
Education and Games
App
***** Parents‘ Choice Awards’ winner ***** Developed by an award-winning education studios,...
Red Bull TV
Sports and Entertainment
App
Welcome to the world of Red Bull TV, giving you front row access to live events, the very best in...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Elvis (2022) in Movies
Jun 28, 2022
Butler Shines
Director Baz Luhrmann is one of those artists that I always keep an eye out for. His artistic vision is unique and while the films he directs don’t always work - MOULIN ROUGE is on of my all-time favorites, AUSTRALIA is a mess and his take on the GREAT GATSBY works…mostly - but the one thing that can be said about him is that his projects are always interesting (especially visually). So when he decided to create a bio-pic of “The King”, Elvis Presley, I was intrigued.
And…the resulting film - appropriately called ELVIS - works very well, but not because of Luhrmann’s Direction/Style but more because of the TERRIFIC performance at the center of this picture - and, no, I’m not talking about Tom Hanks as Col. Parker.
ELVIS follows - with the usual Luhrmann quick/cut, flashy style - the rise, fall, rise and (ultimately) death of Elvis Presley. Starting with his boyhood in Tupelo, Mississippi - where he found his rhythm in the roots of African-American Gospel/Spirituals - to his ascension to superstar, this films tries to tell it all, mostly through the shadowy viewpoint of Elvis’ Manager, Col. Tom Parker (a heavily made-up Tom Hanks).
And that is part of the problem with this film - it tries to tell TOO big a story, so while some items are covered in slow, glowing detail (like Elvis’ discovery of the music that will be his trademark), while other items (his movie career) are glossed over quickly in a montage. This is out of necessity, for this film is already 2 hours and 40 minutes long, but it does make this film feel somewhat disjointed - especially when you add Luhrmann’s trademark disorienting quick/cut, stylistic directing style. At times I just wanted to yell at Lurhman to lock his camera down in one position so my eyes (and brain) can settle down and watch what’s going on.
The other issue is the viewpoint of this film - it isn’t consistent. Is this a movie about Elvis? Is this a movie about a conman manipulating Elvis? It starts out following Col. Parker as he discovers Elvis and manipulates him to be his exclusive act, but then we leave Col. Tom and follow Elvis for long periods of time before being drawn back into Col’s Parker’s web, so there is confusion as to who’s story we are telling. In the end we tell both, and each one suffers a little bit because of this.
HOWEVER - and this is an important point - these issues are pushed to the back as minor flaws as the central performance of Austin Butler (Wil Ohmsford in the terrible adaption of THE SHANNARA CHRONICLES on TV) as Elvis is AMAZING. It is a captivating, multi-layered performance both on-stage and off. He has created a character that you are drawn to watch and the off-stage Elvis sets the stage for the charismatic, on-stage Elvis that we all know. Butler did his own singing/performing in this film and it is much, much more that “just” an Elvis impersonation. He personifies “The King” and Butler’s name better be called at Awards time. It is that good of a performance, one that should catapult this young man to stardom.
Fairing less well is Tom Hanks as Col. Parker. While he is game under all that make-up, the character is just not written with any nuance and comes off as a one-dimensional villain, constantly lurking in the background. This character just wasn’t interesting enough to hold the screen - especially against Butler.
But see this film to rekindle the spirit of Elvis through the interpretation of Butler, you’ll be glad you did.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And…the resulting film - appropriately called ELVIS - works very well, but not because of Luhrmann’s Direction/Style but more because of the TERRIFIC performance at the center of this picture - and, no, I’m not talking about Tom Hanks as Col. Parker.
ELVIS follows - with the usual Luhrmann quick/cut, flashy style - the rise, fall, rise and (ultimately) death of Elvis Presley. Starting with his boyhood in Tupelo, Mississippi - where he found his rhythm in the roots of African-American Gospel/Spirituals - to his ascension to superstar, this films tries to tell it all, mostly through the shadowy viewpoint of Elvis’ Manager, Col. Tom Parker (a heavily made-up Tom Hanks).
And that is part of the problem with this film - it tries to tell TOO big a story, so while some items are covered in slow, glowing detail (like Elvis’ discovery of the music that will be his trademark), while other items (his movie career) are glossed over quickly in a montage. This is out of necessity, for this film is already 2 hours and 40 minutes long, but it does make this film feel somewhat disjointed - especially when you add Luhrmann’s trademark disorienting quick/cut, stylistic directing style. At times I just wanted to yell at Lurhman to lock his camera down in one position so my eyes (and brain) can settle down and watch what’s going on.
The other issue is the viewpoint of this film - it isn’t consistent. Is this a movie about Elvis? Is this a movie about a conman manipulating Elvis? It starts out following Col. Parker as he discovers Elvis and manipulates him to be his exclusive act, but then we leave Col. Tom and follow Elvis for long periods of time before being drawn back into Col’s Parker’s web, so there is confusion as to who’s story we are telling. In the end we tell both, and each one suffers a little bit because of this.
HOWEVER - and this is an important point - these issues are pushed to the back as minor flaws as the central performance of Austin Butler (Wil Ohmsford in the terrible adaption of THE SHANNARA CHRONICLES on TV) as Elvis is AMAZING. It is a captivating, multi-layered performance both on-stage and off. He has created a character that you are drawn to watch and the off-stage Elvis sets the stage for the charismatic, on-stage Elvis that we all know. Butler did his own singing/performing in this film and it is much, much more that “just” an Elvis impersonation. He personifies “The King” and Butler’s name better be called at Awards time. It is that good of a performance, one that should catapult this young man to stardom.
Fairing less well is Tom Hanks as Col. Parker. While he is game under all that make-up, the character is just not written with any nuance and comes off as a one-dimensional villain, constantly lurking in the background. This character just wasn’t interesting enough to hold the screen - especially against Butler.
But see this film to rekindle the spirit of Elvis through the interpretation of Butler, you’ll be glad you did.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated How Wendy Redbird Dancing Survived the Dark Ages of Nought in Books
Jun 7, 2018
(This review can be found on my blog <a href="http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.com/">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a>).
When I came across this book on Goodreads, there was something about the blurb that made me want to read it, so when I got asked if I'd like to review it, I said yes instantly. While the first half of the book was a bit hit and miss, the second half really became interesting!
The title is a bit of a mouthful although interesting. I had a hard time remembering what the book was called due to the long name. Eventually, I memorized it, but I would still double check just to make sure I was right.
The cover might be a bit plain, but I think it suits this book perfectly! After the terrible incident that happens to Wendy, she kind of goes inside herself. I think this cover definitely captures that.
What bothered me a bit with the world building was I just felt like the school Wendy attended was racism central. I know that racism is a huge problem is some places, but it just felt a bit over the top in the beginning of the book. Luckily, about a third of the book in, the over the top racism thing stops, and the world building becomes more believable.
The pacing is fairly slow to begin with. However, about a little before halfway in, the pacing speeds up, and it quickly held my attention for the rest of the book. In fact, I couldn't put the book done after that! So if you start off a bit bored with the book, please do continue reading or you'll out miss out on a really good story.
The plot is interesting enough. It deals with racism, being an outcast, sexual abuse, and an emotionally distant mother as well as some other issues. I thought it was an original idea to use Michael Jackson as a teen girl's saint. I love the references to some artists of old.
The characters were written really well. Wendy, aside from her obsession with the king of pop, is just your average teenage girl. Her goal is to see Michael Jackson in concert in London. Wendy is definitely easy to relate to. Shaye comes across as being very cool and charismatic. He's instantly likable. I felt bad that I had ever liked him though after what he did to Wendy. My favorite character was Tanay though. I loved her attitude as well as her sass. She's super funny, yet she's a friend who's got your back. I think teenage girls will have an easy time relating to Wendy and/or Tanay.
The dialogue, for the most part, runs smoothly. However, at the beginning of the book, it does feel a little bit forced especially when it focuses on racism a little too heavily, at least I thought so. Some may get offended with the racism being used, but I didn't feel like the book itself was racist. I just felt that there was too much focus on how segregated Wendy's school is and how much racism (against all colors) there is in that school. Other than that, everything is smooth sailing. The character interactions feel normal, and the dialogue goes well with what a teen book should read like. There is some cussing in this book as well as some sexual situations, so I wouldn't recommend this book to younger teens.
Overall, How Wendy Redbird Dancing Survived the Dark Ages of Nought is a very intriguing book. The issues it deals with are issues that have plagued teens as well as adults for awhile. Hawks does a fantastic job of writing about this issues.
I'd recommend this book to those aged 16+ who want to read something a little more realistic than normal fiction with characters of whom are easy to relate to.
I'd give How Wendy Redbird Dancing Survived the Dark Ages of Nought by Lyn Fairchild Hawks a 3.75 out of 5.
(I received a free paperback of this book from the author in exchange for a fair and honest review).
When I came across this book on Goodreads, there was something about the blurb that made me want to read it, so when I got asked if I'd like to review it, I said yes instantly. While the first half of the book was a bit hit and miss, the second half really became interesting!
The title is a bit of a mouthful although interesting. I had a hard time remembering what the book was called due to the long name. Eventually, I memorized it, but I would still double check just to make sure I was right.
The cover might be a bit plain, but I think it suits this book perfectly! After the terrible incident that happens to Wendy, she kind of goes inside herself. I think this cover definitely captures that.
What bothered me a bit with the world building was I just felt like the school Wendy attended was racism central. I know that racism is a huge problem is some places, but it just felt a bit over the top in the beginning of the book. Luckily, about a third of the book in, the over the top racism thing stops, and the world building becomes more believable.
The pacing is fairly slow to begin with. However, about a little before halfway in, the pacing speeds up, and it quickly held my attention for the rest of the book. In fact, I couldn't put the book done after that! So if you start off a bit bored with the book, please do continue reading or you'll out miss out on a really good story.
The plot is interesting enough. It deals with racism, being an outcast, sexual abuse, and an emotionally distant mother as well as some other issues. I thought it was an original idea to use Michael Jackson as a teen girl's saint. I love the references to some artists of old.
The characters were written really well. Wendy, aside from her obsession with the king of pop, is just your average teenage girl. Her goal is to see Michael Jackson in concert in London. Wendy is definitely easy to relate to. Shaye comes across as being very cool and charismatic. He's instantly likable. I felt bad that I had ever liked him though after what he did to Wendy. My favorite character was Tanay though. I loved her attitude as well as her sass. She's super funny, yet she's a friend who's got your back. I think teenage girls will have an easy time relating to Wendy and/or Tanay.
The dialogue, for the most part, runs smoothly. However, at the beginning of the book, it does feel a little bit forced especially when it focuses on racism a little too heavily, at least I thought so. Some may get offended with the racism being used, but I didn't feel like the book itself was racist. I just felt that there was too much focus on how segregated Wendy's school is and how much racism (against all colors) there is in that school. Other than that, everything is smooth sailing. The character interactions feel normal, and the dialogue goes well with what a teen book should read like. There is some cussing in this book as well as some sexual situations, so I wouldn't recommend this book to younger teens.
Overall, How Wendy Redbird Dancing Survived the Dark Ages of Nought is a very intriguing book. The issues it deals with are issues that have plagued teens as well as adults for awhile. Hawks does a fantastic job of writing about this issues.
I'd recommend this book to those aged 16+ who want to read something a little more realistic than normal fiction with characters of whom are easy to relate to.
I'd give How Wendy Redbird Dancing Survived the Dark Ages of Nought by Lyn Fairchild Hawks a 3.75 out of 5.
(I received a free paperback of this book from the author in exchange for a fair and honest review).
Gossip Life - The Interactive Episode Story Game
Games and Entertainment
App
NEW GOSSIP LIFE – MORE THAN JUST A STORY GAME! IMMERSE yourself in our interactive stories...
PI.EXCHANGE
Lifestyle
App
WHY WE MAKE THIS APP PI.EXCHANGE strives to change the way the personal data ecosystem operates. We...
Puzzle Game for Kids! Create&Play! FREE
Games and Education
App
Assemble these cute forest animals out of colorful parts and watch them come to life right under...
Twilight Struggle
7.7
Rate It
Tabletop Game
"Now the trumpet summons us again, not as a call to bear arms, though arms we need; not as a call to...
Boardgames 2playergames PoliticalGames HistoricalGames
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Drive My Car (2021) in Movies
Mar 19, 2022
Raw, Pure and Honest
If I’m being honest, I purposely pushed my Oscar “homework assignment” of viewing DRIVE MY CAR to the end of the list for I saw that it was a 3 Hour Japanese Film that is a meditation on loss, grief, anger and regret set against the backdrop of a production of Chekov’s Uncle Vanya. I was ready to buckle-in for an arty “Art House” film that is not as good as the “artists” recommending it would have you believe.
And I would be wrong with that assumption as DRIVE MY CAR is the BEST FILM of 2021 with raw, pure and honest performances that draws you in and touches your heart.
Directed by Ryusuke Hamaguchi (who was Oscar Nominated for his work), DRIVE MY CAR follows a renowned Actor/Director who heads to Hiroshima to Direct a production of Uncle Vanya while grappling with the consequences of the unexpected death of his wife - and the unresolved issues of their marriage. While in Hiroshima, he is forced to accept a chauffeur for his duration there and the relationship between the two begins to unlock long dormant emotions.
Sounds like it could end up being a modern version of DRIVING MISS DAISY, right? Wrong. In the hands of Hamaguchi, from an Oscar Nominated screenplay that Hamaguchi wrote with Takamasa Oe (based on the short story by Haruki Murakami), Drive My Car becomes a character-driven drama that peels the layers of the onion back at a deliberate pace (in this case, that’s a compliment) to reveal what is at the core of the main characters.
What drew me into this film (a movie who’s 3 hour run-time seemed short to me), was the performances that Hamaguchi was able to draw out of his talented cast, they are - top to bottom - raw, honest and real. Starting with Hidetoshi Nishijima as Actor/Director Yusuke Kafuku. He plays this character with a stoic pragmatism, but it is played in such a way that you understand that there are emotions broiling underneath this façade and they, eventually, will need to find their way out. But the brilliance of this film is that when this character finally opens up, it is not a showy, “yelly” performance, it is subtle, small - and effective.
Matching Nishijima’s stoicism (at least early on) is Toko Miura as the chauffer. She is enigmatic in the early goings of the film, listening much more than talking but as Kafuku opens up, she does as well, and it is this part of the film that really drew me in.
Also, surprisingly to me, was the rehearsal/performance scenes of Uncle Vanya that are sprinkled throughout this film. I am NOT a scholar (or fan) of Chekov’s works (I find them to be too introspective) but the scenes that are shown are a mirror to what is happening to these characters outside of the theater and were affecting (particularly a scene that the company does in the park between two female characters). I’m sure a Chekov scholar could comment on the parallel themes at work here - but I am not that scholar and that did not diminish my love of this film. It does do one surprising thing - it makes me (almost) want to see a full production of Vanya…almost.
And therein lies another layer to this film - the eclectic group of performers that populate the company of actors that perform Vanya - they perform in Japanese, Mandarin, English and (in one case) sign language. I was reading the subtitles anyway (yes, please view this film in it’s original language with subtitles - you’ll feel the emotions of the actors’ performances) and this disparity between the performers enhanced what was already an intriguing film.
Not for everyone, the pace and themes of this film will turn many off early on, but if you click into the feel of this film, you will be rewarded with a very rich experience.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And I would be wrong with that assumption as DRIVE MY CAR is the BEST FILM of 2021 with raw, pure and honest performances that draws you in and touches your heart.
Directed by Ryusuke Hamaguchi (who was Oscar Nominated for his work), DRIVE MY CAR follows a renowned Actor/Director who heads to Hiroshima to Direct a production of Uncle Vanya while grappling with the consequences of the unexpected death of his wife - and the unresolved issues of their marriage. While in Hiroshima, he is forced to accept a chauffeur for his duration there and the relationship between the two begins to unlock long dormant emotions.
Sounds like it could end up being a modern version of DRIVING MISS DAISY, right? Wrong. In the hands of Hamaguchi, from an Oscar Nominated screenplay that Hamaguchi wrote with Takamasa Oe (based on the short story by Haruki Murakami), Drive My Car becomes a character-driven drama that peels the layers of the onion back at a deliberate pace (in this case, that’s a compliment) to reveal what is at the core of the main characters.
What drew me into this film (a movie who’s 3 hour run-time seemed short to me), was the performances that Hamaguchi was able to draw out of his talented cast, they are - top to bottom - raw, honest and real. Starting with Hidetoshi Nishijima as Actor/Director Yusuke Kafuku. He plays this character with a stoic pragmatism, but it is played in such a way that you understand that there are emotions broiling underneath this façade and they, eventually, will need to find their way out. But the brilliance of this film is that when this character finally opens up, it is not a showy, “yelly” performance, it is subtle, small - and effective.
Matching Nishijima’s stoicism (at least early on) is Toko Miura as the chauffer. She is enigmatic in the early goings of the film, listening much more than talking but as Kafuku opens up, she does as well, and it is this part of the film that really drew me in.
Also, surprisingly to me, was the rehearsal/performance scenes of Uncle Vanya that are sprinkled throughout this film. I am NOT a scholar (or fan) of Chekov’s works (I find them to be too introspective) but the scenes that are shown are a mirror to what is happening to these characters outside of the theater and were affecting (particularly a scene that the company does in the park between two female characters). I’m sure a Chekov scholar could comment on the parallel themes at work here - but I am not that scholar and that did not diminish my love of this film. It does do one surprising thing - it makes me (almost) want to see a full production of Vanya…almost.
And therein lies another layer to this film - the eclectic group of performers that populate the company of actors that perform Vanya - they perform in Japanese, Mandarin, English and (in one case) sign language. I was reading the subtitles anyway (yes, please view this film in it’s original language with subtitles - you’ll feel the emotions of the actors’ performances) and this disparity between the performers enhanced what was already an intriguing film.
Not for everyone, the pace and themes of this film will turn many off early on, but if you click into the feel of this film, you will be rewarded with a very rich experience.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)