Search
Search results
Joe Goodhart (27 KP) rated DC Universe: Rebirth #1 in Books
Nov 30, 2020
When I still had my physical comic colletion, this had been one of the last ones purchased before making the change over to digital only, selling off the physical copies. That was then, this is now. Long story short, this review is based off of a re-read as part of my "Marvel's Making Some Dumb AF Decisions of Late, Let's Go With DC Instead" Tour!
Let me just say I remember much of it, but it still hit me hard at the end of it! Just lots and lots of SUPER-feels (is that even a word/thing? Oh well, if not, it is now! lol)! Having the story told from Wally West's POV really helped to drive the overall feeling home.
Unfortunately (and this did not necessarily wreck my enjoyment), this re-reading helped to fuel my desire for DOOMSDAY CLOCK to just finish up already! Still not sure on how you can solicit something without it even being close to completely finished! Or better still how Windows 10 can be ready for release, yet every other week there's a new patch or update for it! :S
There was a lot of set-up for what was to come in the DCU, as well as some nods to things past (including WATCHMAN and CRISIS ON INFINITE EARTHS) and the New 52 (which, for the longest time, I hated with a passion)! You don't have to be a pro at "Where's Waldo?" or even Sherlock Holmes, you just need to be alert and taking in everything with a careful eye.
Speaking of attention to detail... Let me give a shout to all the artists involved in this undertaking: Gary Frank (I love the man's art, but his slowness as far as DOOMSDAY CLOCK is frustrating. Clearly, as this book indicates, he is better at illustrating shorter vignettes, rather than epic 12-issue maxi-series!), Ethan Van Sciver (love or hate, you gotta appreciate his art! Bee-yoo-ti-ful!), Phil Jimenez (always love me some Jimenez pencilling!), and Ivan Reis (never a disappointment). And as important as the artists were, it would be unfair of me not to also acknowledge the inkers and colorists on this: Brad Anderson, Jason Wright, and Joe Prado. So, a big ol' panda-rific round of applause and adulation for the art teams for all their hard work! You guys are all aces!
Over the years, DC has published a more than fair amount of solid events and single issues. Is this the best book they've ever published? I wouldn't go that far, but it a damned good one! And at the end of the day, that's what it really comes down to: whether it's a good or a bad one, hence the name of this pretty cool less-FB-ish social media site! :)
Let me just say I remember much of it, but it still hit me hard at the end of it! Just lots and lots of SUPER-feels (is that even a word/thing? Oh well, if not, it is now! lol)! Having the story told from Wally West's POV really helped to drive the overall feeling home.
Unfortunately (and this did not necessarily wreck my enjoyment), this re-reading helped to fuel my desire for DOOMSDAY CLOCK to just finish up already! Still not sure on how you can solicit something without it even being close to completely finished! Or better still how Windows 10 can be ready for release, yet every other week there's a new patch or update for it! :S
There was a lot of set-up for what was to come in the DCU, as well as some nods to things past (including WATCHMAN and CRISIS ON INFINITE EARTHS) and the New 52 (which, for the longest time, I hated with a passion)! You don't have to be a pro at "Where's Waldo?" or even Sherlock Holmes, you just need to be alert and taking in everything with a careful eye.
Speaking of attention to detail... Let me give a shout to all the artists involved in this undertaking: Gary Frank (I love the man's art, but his slowness as far as DOOMSDAY CLOCK is frustrating. Clearly, as this book indicates, he is better at illustrating shorter vignettes, rather than epic 12-issue maxi-series!), Ethan Van Sciver (love or hate, you gotta appreciate his art! Bee-yoo-ti-ful!), Phil Jimenez (always love me some Jimenez pencilling!), and Ivan Reis (never a disappointment). And as important as the artists were, it would be unfair of me not to also acknowledge the inkers and colorists on this: Brad Anderson, Jason Wright, and Joe Prado. So, a big ol' panda-rific round of applause and adulation for the art teams for all their hard work! You guys are all aces!
Over the years, DC has published a more than fair amount of solid events and single issues. Is this the best book they've ever published? I wouldn't go that far, but it a damned good one! And at the end of the day, that's what it really comes down to: whether it's a good or a bad one, hence the name of this pretty cool less-FB-ish social media site! :)
FA
Fractional and Multivariable Calculus: Model Building and Optimization Problems
Book
This textbook presents a rigorous approach to multivariable calculus in the context of model...
Biofilms in Plant and Soil Health
Book
Biofilms are predominant mode of life for microbes under natural conditions. The three-dimensional...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Widows (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
Before I'd even seen anything beyond the plot and a poster I was confused. It really just felt like the poster was designed to catch people. "Look, we've got these big names! Come and watch it!" I know that's what posters are meant to do, but considering the movie is about these women taking up the reins of their dearly departed I'd have had more respect for a poster that focused on them.
Widows has every chance to be great. Based on Lynda La Plante's Widows, with the screenplay written by Gillian Flynn and Steve McQueen, as well as being directed by the latter. Those three names should guarantee a success, and while it seems to be very popular among viewers it has left me some what cold.
The idea is a solid one that you would expect from La Plante's repertoire, and it's worked before. Unfortunately that could not bring it back from the brink for me.
I can't think of another film that has given me such an instant feeling of dislike. The opening scene made me cringe, and having it quickly change pace into a violently loud action scene and back again was jarring to watch.
The first inkling that something is awry comes fairly early on and even without much more you can see where the plot is going. I'm impressed that the trailers managed to stay away from anything obvious.
We have an interesting assortment of baddies and there are two perfectly contrasting ones in Jamal (Brian Tyree Henry) and Jatemme (Daniel Kaluuya) Manning. The former is charismatic and subtly scary, whereas the latter has no likable qualities (apart from a clear love of reading) and is extremely vicious. The other difference is that Jamal in enjoyable to watch and Jatemme isn't. Usually even the most loathed of villains is good to watch on screen, not in this case. Jamal comes out on top in the villain stakes even with the dog incident.
Normally I wouldn't think much beyond what you're presented with in each scene of the movie, but I quickly found myself wondering about a lot of things. Linda's interaction with Delia's husband was strange and one of many things that felt unnecessary. And while I'll happily believe that women could successfully execute a heist, I'm not really sure I can believe that THESE women could do it, I don't care how well documented his notebook was.
Something that seems to a popular device in this is "the flashback". At the beginning it lays up the backstory of the two crews quickly and gives you a good sense of the people, even though I feel the way it was executed on screen wasn't so hot. When the film starts to round up and these scenes give you the missing story at just the right point. The one's I didn't like were between Veronica and Harry. Not all of them were flashbacks, some were Veronica dealing with Harry's death. They seemed more on the dramatic side and didn't feel in-keeping with the rest of the film. (I will say that this film is listed on IMDb as "crime, drama, romance"... Romance seems like a bit of a stretch, and crime and drama as two separate things are very different to a "crime drama". I'll admit that it's a very slight difference, but I think it's still there.)
I'm not sure how the characters worked in the book, but I would assume that some liberties had to be taken to change the setting, and obviously when you're turning a book into a film then you're going to have to tie up some loopholes with jiggery-pokery. What was left were some characters with potential that never seemed to be filled and others that were so throwaway I had already forgotten about them when I read through the cast list after I'd seen it.
What you should do
I'd wait until this one is streaming. It doesn't require a big screen and I always think films like this are better if you can talk to the screen while you're watching them. "Why are you doing that?!" "Yeah, let's see how far that gets you!" and the like. It's got enough reasonable moments to watch it at least once.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Obviously the giant piles of money are always appealing, but I'm very tempted to go for Linda's store. I'd love to work all day in a shop selling fantastical dresses and tiaras watching people's faces light up when they found the right one. It's like the Disney Princess dream come to life!
Widows has every chance to be great. Based on Lynda La Plante's Widows, with the screenplay written by Gillian Flynn and Steve McQueen, as well as being directed by the latter. Those three names should guarantee a success, and while it seems to be very popular among viewers it has left me some what cold.
The idea is a solid one that you would expect from La Plante's repertoire, and it's worked before. Unfortunately that could not bring it back from the brink for me.
I can't think of another film that has given me such an instant feeling of dislike. The opening scene made me cringe, and having it quickly change pace into a violently loud action scene and back again was jarring to watch.
The first inkling that something is awry comes fairly early on and even without much more you can see where the plot is going. I'm impressed that the trailers managed to stay away from anything obvious.
We have an interesting assortment of baddies and there are two perfectly contrasting ones in Jamal (Brian Tyree Henry) and Jatemme (Daniel Kaluuya) Manning. The former is charismatic and subtly scary, whereas the latter has no likable qualities (apart from a clear love of reading) and is extremely vicious. The other difference is that Jamal in enjoyable to watch and Jatemme isn't. Usually even the most loathed of villains is good to watch on screen, not in this case. Jamal comes out on top in the villain stakes even with the dog incident.
Normally I wouldn't think much beyond what you're presented with in each scene of the movie, but I quickly found myself wondering about a lot of things. Linda's interaction with Delia's husband was strange and one of many things that felt unnecessary. And while I'll happily believe that women could successfully execute a heist, I'm not really sure I can believe that THESE women could do it, I don't care how well documented his notebook was.
Something that seems to a popular device in this is "the flashback". At the beginning it lays up the backstory of the two crews quickly and gives you a good sense of the people, even though I feel the way it was executed on screen wasn't so hot. When the film starts to round up and these scenes give you the missing story at just the right point. The one's I didn't like were between Veronica and Harry. Not all of them were flashbacks, some were Veronica dealing with Harry's death. They seemed more on the dramatic side and didn't feel in-keeping with the rest of the film. (I will say that this film is listed on IMDb as "crime, drama, romance"... Romance seems like a bit of a stretch, and crime and drama as two separate things are very different to a "crime drama". I'll admit that it's a very slight difference, but I think it's still there.)
I'm not sure how the characters worked in the book, but I would assume that some liberties had to be taken to change the setting, and obviously when you're turning a book into a film then you're going to have to tie up some loopholes with jiggery-pokery. What was left were some characters with potential that never seemed to be filled and others that were so throwaway I had already forgotten about them when I read through the cast list after I'd seen it.
What you should do
I'd wait until this one is streaming. It doesn't require a big screen and I always think films like this are better if you can talk to the screen while you're watching them. "Why are you doing that?!" "Yeah, let's see how far that gets you!" and the like. It's got enough reasonable moments to watch it at least once.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Obviously the giant piles of money are always appealing, but I'm very tempted to go for Linda's store. I'd love to work all day in a shop selling fantastical dresses and tiaras watching people's faces light up when they found the right one. It's like the Disney Princess dream come to life!
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Green Book (2018) in Movies
Dec 14, 2018
One of the best of 2018
When the dust is settled on 2018, you can be rest assured that GREEN BOOK will be listed as one of my top films of the year.
Yes, it's that good.
"Based on a true story", GREEN BOOK stars Viggo Mortenson (Aragon in the LOTR films) as "Tony Lip" a bouncer at the Copacabana in the early 1960's who is tapped by African American concert pianist Dr. Don Shirley (Academy Award winner Mahershala Ali) to be his driver/escort/security on a tour of a very prejudicial Southern part of the United States in the early 1960's. Both Tony and Dr. Don look down their noses at the other one, but during the course of this film, the two develop mutual respect and a friendship that lasted until the both passed away in 2013.
That is, in essence, the entire plot of this film. But it is not the destination, but rather, the journey that is the core of this film - and what a journey it is.
We, the audience, probably spend 70% of the film in a car with the 2 stars of this film, so they better be interesting to look at and listen to (for nothing much else happens) and both characters - and both actors- are up to the task.
Ali won a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his brief turn in Barry Jenkins MOONLIGHT - and he is even better here as Dr. Don Shirley, an elitist virtuoso piano player, with strong pride and hidden secrets of his own. Ali brings a humanity and vulnerability to this character that acts as a softening of the hard shell of this character that allows us, the audience, a glimpse into this character's heart. This person could easily have been a one-note caricature, but in Ali's hands, it is much, much more.
The biggest surprise to me is two-time Oscar Nominee Mortenson as "Tony Lip". While the character starts as a typical early 1960's Italian-mob type, Mortenson brings humor, humanity and (yes) heart to a matter-of-fact character and continues to evolve the rough edges of Tony as Tony, himself, develops throughout the course of the film. I have always "liked but not loved" Mortenson, but, I LOVE HIM in this film and will be rooting for him come Oscars time.
The other big surprise of this film is the strong, subtle and human way that Director Peter Farrelly brings events to the screen. Prior to this, Farrelly (along with his brother Bobby) Directed such over-the-top comedies as THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT MARY and KINGPIN, so I was a bit concerned that the Direction would be over-the-top. But...it wasn't...and I wouldn't be surprised if Farelly's name is called when Oscar nominations are announced.
I was charmed and moved by these characters - and this story - and was glad to spend 2 hours with them.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Yes, it's that good.
"Based on a true story", GREEN BOOK stars Viggo Mortenson (Aragon in the LOTR films) as "Tony Lip" a bouncer at the Copacabana in the early 1960's who is tapped by African American concert pianist Dr. Don Shirley (Academy Award winner Mahershala Ali) to be his driver/escort/security on a tour of a very prejudicial Southern part of the United States in the early 1960's. Both Tony and Dr. Don look down their noses at the other one, but during the course of this film, the two develop mutual respect and a friendship that lasted until the both passed away in 2013.
That is, in essence, the entire plot of this film. But it is not the destination, but rather, the journey that is the core of this film - and what a journey it is.
We, the audience, probably spend 70% of the film in a car with the 2 stars of this film, so they better be interesting to look at and listen to (for nothing much else happens) and both characters - and both actors- are up to the task.
Ali won a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his brief turn in Barry Jenkins MOONLIGHT - and he is even better here as Dr. Don Shirley, an elitist virtuoso piano player, with strong pride and hidden secrets of his own. Ali brings a humanity and vulnerability to this character that acts as a softening of the hard shell of this character that allows us, the audience, a glimpse into this character's heart. This person could easily have been a one-note caricature, but in Ali's hands, it is much, much more.
The biggest surprise to me is two-time Oscar Nominee Mortenson as "Tony Lip". While the character starts as a typical early 1960's Italian-mob type, Mortenson brings humor, humanity and (yes) heart to a matter-of-fact character and continues to evolve the rough edges of Tony as Tony, himself, develops throughout the course of the film. I have always "liked but not loved" Mortenson, but, I LOVE HIM in this film and will be rooting for him come Oscars time.
The other big surprise of this film is the strong, subtle and human way that Director Peter Farrelly brings events to the screen. Prior to this, Farrelly (along with his brother Bobby) Directed such over-the-top comedies as THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT MARY and KINGPIN, so I was a bit concerned that the Direction would be over-the-top. But...it wasn't...and I wouldn't be surprised if Farelly's name is called when Oscar nominations are announced.
I was charmed and moved by these characters - and this story - and was glad to spend 2 hours with them.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Dineout: Reserve a Table
Food & Drink and Lifestyle
App
Dineout is a restaurant reservation app that helps you search across various cuisines, deals,...
Solomon Wendt (30 KP) rated Ready Player One (2018) in Movies
May 5, 2019
Nostalgia (1 more)
Video Games
This movie is based off of the book of the same name and matches it for most of the major plot points. In short, the story follows Wade Wilson, an egg hunter (Gunter for short), on the search for a virtual Easter egg that unlock control over the virtual reality known as The Oasis. In a scavenger hunt fashion, there are clues and trials that Wade must figure out and overcome in his attempt at such a coveted prize.
The film follows the major points of the book, but does change the clues and trials so its not the same exact story, which I feel is the purpose of film adaptations. However, as with many sci-fi films, majority of interest here is of the world that is constructed which is quickly glossed over. To be fair, how much more do we really need to than people are addicted to virtual reality and want to have more power in it? But the issue is the sort of background that is left out that can leave the soley film consumers a bit confused or leave more questions. As for the actual content of the film, it is a real nostalgia trip for those who enjoyed 80's pop culture and tries to include more recent fandoms such as Overwatch and Halo. Sadly, the viewer doesn't really take part in the treasure hunt as mystery and adventure films try to do. The clues are obscure and related to the creator of the hunt, so there isn't much guessing at what a clue means until it is flat out explained.
However, with the audience participation aside, it is a good sci-fi adventure that utilizes a good blend of motion capture technology and cgi work. It explore a good variety of worlds, environments, and character models that make this film noteworthy of that aspect of production. It leaves quite the impression and I know I looked up how much virtual reality cost after I was done.
In short, it was a good overall production in terms of tools utilized, but lacked a little bit of story in an attempt to cram a different world and rule set while trying to make a complete adventure and story arc. I recommend viewing it at least once, but doesn't really need to be viewed more than that.
The film follows the major points of the book, but does change the clues and trials so its not the same exact story, which I feel is the purpose of film adaptations. However, as with many sci-fi films, majority of interest here is of the world that is constructed which is quickly glossed over. To be fair, how much more do we really need to than people are addicted to virtual reality and want to have more power in it? But the issue is the sort of background that is left out that can leave the soley film consumers a bit confused or leave more questions. As for the actual content of the film, it is a real nostalgia trip for those who enjoyed 80's pop culture and tries to include more recent fandoms such as Overwatch and Halo. Sadly, the viewer doesn't really take part in the treasure hunt as mystery and adventure films try to do. The clues are obscure and related to the creator of the hunt, so there isn't much guessing at what a clue means until it is flat out explained.
However, with the audience participation aside, it is a good sci-fi adventure that utilizes a good blend of motion capture technology and cgi work. It explore a good variety of worlds, environments, and character models that make this film noteworthy of that aspect of production. It leaves quite the impression and I know I looked up how much virtual reality cost after I was done.
In short, it was a good overall production in terms of tools utilized, but lacked a little bit of story in an attempt to cram a different world and rule set while trying to make a complete adventure and story arc. I recommend viewing it at least once, but doesn't really need to be viewed more than that.
Principles of Solar Engineering
Book
An Engineering-Based Survey of Modern Solar Energy Concepts and Practical Applications Reflecting...
Mark Jaye (65 KP) rated Suicide Squad (2016) in Movies
May 14, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
I'll say from the outset, I'm a lifelong comic book fan. During my teenage years back in the 80's I collected John Ostrander's Suicide Squad title and absolutely loved it. It was always a given for me therefore that I would jump at the prospect of a movie based on my favourite title.
You know the synopsis I'm guessing (if you're reading this review) - government official Amanda Waller assembles a group of the baddest incarcerated criminals to go up against the potential of a metahuman crisis should the 'next' Superman not share our values. This is deemed more relevant following the demise of the man of steel himself at the climax of Dawn Of Justice. Amongst those villains are Deadshot (Will Smith), Harley Quinn (Margot Robbie), Captain Boomerang (Jai Courtney), El Diablo (Jay Hernandez), and Enchantress/Dr June Moone (Carla Delevigne). Heading up the group is Colonel Rick Flagg (Joel Kinnaman), albeit reluctantly.
The story essentially revolves around Enchantress going rogue and converting a subway station in Midway City into a warzone as she resurrects her brother Incubus and the two attempt to destroy the world. The only criticism I have with the movie concerns the simplicity within which Enchantress 'turns' on the group shortly after it is her actions that cause the senate committee to approve the founding of Task Force X only a couple of scenes earlier in the movie. It just feels a bit rushed. It's also interesting to note that the events of the movie would never have taken place had Waller not established her little 'pet project' to begin with!
The dialogue is witty and sharp and the characters are highly likeable (despite them being arch-villains and - in some cases, murderers). Will Smith is the core of the group as Deadshot and his cold-bloodedness as an assassin is softened by the connection he has to his daughter (how the audience is expected no doubt to warm to him?). Joel Kinnaman's Rick Flagg is also key to the story's heart with his flawed relationship with Dr June Moone - Enchantress's alter ego. Margot Robbie is superb as Harley Quinn although at times it seems as if her rear's the star of the show.
What do I need to say about Jared Leto that hasn't been said before? You'll either love or hate his portrayal of Mr.J!
You know the synopsis I'm guessing (if you're reading this review) - government official Amanda Waller assembles a group of the baddest incarcerated criminals to go up against the potential of a metahuman crisis should the 'next' Superman not share our values. This is deemed more relevant following the demise of the man of steel himself at the climax of Dawn Of Justice. Amongst those villains are Deadshot (Will Smith), Harley Quinn (Margot Robbie), Captain Boomerang (Jai Courtney), El Diablo (Jay Hernandez), and Enchantress/Dr June Moone (Carla Delevigne). Heading up the group is Colonel Rick Flagg (Joel Kinnaman), albeit reluctantly.
The story essentially revolves around Enchantress going rogue and converting a subway station in Midway City into a warzone as she resurrects her brother Incubus and the two attempt to destroy the world. The only criticism I have with the movie concerns the simplicity within which Enchantress 'turns' on the group shortly after it is her actions that cause the senate committee to approve the founding of Task Force X only a couple of scenes earlier in the movie. It just feels a bit rushed. It's also interesting to note that the events of the movie would never have taken place had Waller not established her little 'pet project' to begin with!
The dialogue is witty and sharp and the characters are highly likeable (despite them being arch-villains and - in some cases, murderers). Will Smith is the core of the group as Deadshot and his cold-bloodedness as an assassin is softened by the connection he has to his daughter (how the audience is expected no doubt to warm to him?). Joel Kinnaman's Rick Flagg is also key to the story's heart with his flawed relationship with Dr June Moone - Enchantress's alter ego. Margot Robbie is superb as Harley Quinn although at times it seems as if her rear's the star of the show.
What do I need to say about Jared Leto that hasn't been said before? You'll either love or hate his portrayal of Mr.J!