Search
TA
The Art of Fiction
Book
James Salter's exalted place in American letters is based largely on the intense admiration of other...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Snowpiercer (2013) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Korean director Joon-ho Bong takes us on a Science fiction ride with Snowpiercer. Based on the graphic novel Le Transperceneige, Snowpiercer is a story set on a train which acts as a human Noah’s Ark as it is the only place to survive after an attempt to stop global warming caused the planet to over freeze and become inhabitable. Not only is the train humanity’s last salvation, but it also mirrors human society as each portion of the train represents a different class structure. The poor and underprivileged are kept imprisoned in the back of the train, while the first class passengers are living in privilege in the front of the train. When the back of the train has finally had enough, they revolt and attempt to take control of the train and improve their place.
This is the film that Chris Evans chose to do in-between filming The Avengers and Captain America: Winter Soldier. In my opinion, he made a great choice. To me, Evans has always been just blah and one-dimensional. While he does not stray too far from how we have seen him act in the past, this film gives him a chance to show some depth and grit of character that we have not truly seen from him. Everyone looks at him as being the leader and you can see why. He embodies that character. I was impressed by his performance.
Along with Evans, Tilda Swinton helps carry this film from basic Sci-Fi ride to better than average film. She is fantastic in this film. She plays Mason, the governance of the train that helps keep things in order. She is the one that comes down from the front of the train and explains how and why the people in the back should keep their place. She steals the show with her presence every time she is on screen and gives a fantastic performance that causes us to both spite her, but also understand she is doing what is best for the train.
Without revealing too much about the story, the pacing of the film is great. It is not in a rush to get you from point A to point B, but rather takes the time to intertwine character development into story. The first half of the film is the revolt film where we see the dregs of life and the fight for freedom. The second half of the film is the reveal of wonderment where we see how the other side lives. In true Sci-Fi fashion, the story is a social commentary on our current place in society with regards to the richest 1% in the world. The revolt changes to a question of control which in turn changes to a question of true freedom, but at what cost?
I would recommend this film to any Sci-Fi fans or anyone looking for a thoughtful film and change of pace from the big summer blockbuster.
For a more in-depth discussion about the film, be sure to check out our podcast review.
This is the film that Chris Evans chose to do in-between filming The Avengers and Captain America: Winter Soldier. In my opinion, he made a great choice. To me, Evans has always been just blah and one-dimensional. While he does not stray too far from how we have seen him act in the past, this film gives him a chance to show some depth and grit of character that we have not truly seen from him. Everyone looks at him as being the leader and you can see why. He embodies that character. I was impressed by his performance.
Along with Evans, Tilda Swinton helps carry this film from basic Sci-Fi ride to better than average film. She is fantastic in this film. She plays Mason, the governance of the train that helps keep things in order. She is the one that comes down from the front of the train and explains how and why the people in the back should keep their place. She steals the show with her presence every time she is on screen and gives a fantastic performance that causes us to both spite her, but also understand she is doing what is best for the train.
Without revealing too much about the story, the pacing of the film is great. It is not in a rush to get you from point A to point B, but rather takes the time to intertwine character development into story. The first half of the film is the revolt film where we see the dregs of life and the fight for freedom. The second half of the film is the reveal of wonderment where we see how the other side lives. In true Sci-Fi fashion, the story is a social commentary on our current place in society with regards to the richest 1% in the world. The revolt changes to a question of control which in turn changes to a question of true freedom, but at what cost?
I would recommend this film to any Sci-Fi fans or anyone looking for a thoughtful film and change of pace from the big summer blockbuster.
For a more in-depth discussion about the film, be sure to check out our podcast review.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Shadow Cabinet (Shades of London, #3) in Books
Feb 13, 2018
I read nearly 3/4 of this book curled up in my easy chair while the kids napped, snow falling softly outside. It is rare that I get that much peace and quiet anymore, so I roared through the book, wanting to finish it before the twins awoke and shattered the peace.
Therefore, any nitpicks I have about anything in the book feeling rushed are no doubt of my own doing, as I manically flipped pages, wanting to find out what happened to Rory and the rest of the gang. When the series is over, I look forward to reading all the books again, and savoring them a bit more.
Needless to say, I loved this book. Definitely my favorite novel to date this year. I am sure Johnson's Shade of London series isn't for everyone, but I've fallen for American-based Rory, a transplant in London, who can now see ghosts. It sounds preposterous, but Johnson has made it work- and work well- in all three novels so far. I love Rory, I love her character, and I love the group of people she's come to surround herself in London - far away from the home she knows in New Orleans.
<i>*spoilers if you haven't read the first two books - which you should, immediately!*</i>
In book three, Rory is dealing with the grief of losing Stephen, as the team frantically tries to find his ghost. They are also trying to find her prefect, Charlotte, who was kidnapped by Rory's therapist, Jane. We learn more about Jane and her past involvement in an ancient cult and a likely string of murders. It all involves a much bigger plot involving London's ability to harness its dead, and the existence of a murky, rumored government organization who polices ghosts.
We also meet a new character in this novel, Freddie (a girl), who is quite bright, but of whom I still remain suspicious - silly, perhaps, but it's so hard to trust new people coming into the gang. We see more of Jerome, which is nice, and Boo and Callum, of course. There's actually less focus on actual ghosts than you'd think and more on some big conspiracies, but it all works, really well. The camaraderie of the team, and the way Johnson voices Rory is just lovely, and the book reads so well. Even what should be a crazy plot is made readable and believable through the lens of these developed characters.
As always, I'm left a bit bereft, waiting for the next book. (And, for the record, I finished the last few pages right before the twins woke up. I feel like that's fate, right?)
Therefore, any nitpicks I have about anything in the book feeling rushed are no doubt of my own doing, as I manically flipped pages, wanting to find out what happened to Rory and the rest of the gang. When the series is over, I look forward to reading all the books again, and savoring them a bit more.
Needless to say, I loved this book. Definitely my favorite novel to date this year. I am sure Johnson's Shade of London series isn't for everyone, but I've fallen for American-based Rory, a transplant in London, who can now see ghosts. It sounds preposterous, but Johnson has made it work- and work well- in all three novels so far. I love Rory, I love her character, and I love the group of people she's come to surround herself in London - far away from the home she knows in New Orleans.
<i>*spoilers if you haven't read the first two books - which you should, immediately!*</i>
In book three, Rory is dealing with the grief of losing Stephen, as the team frantically tries to find his ghost. They are also trying to find her prefect, Charlotte, who was kidnapped by Rory's therapist, Jane. We learn more about Jane and her past involvement in an ancient cult and a likely string of murders. It all involves a much bigger plot involving London's ability to harness its dead, and the existence of a murky, rumored government organization who polices ghosts.
We also meet a new character in this novel, Freddie (a girl), who is quite bright, but of whom I still remain suspicious - silly, perhaps, but it's so hard to trust new people coming into the gang. We see more of Jerome, which is nice, and Boo and Callum, of course. There's actually less focus on actual ghosts than you'd think and more on some big conspiracies, but it all works, really well. The camaraderie of the team, and the way Johnson voices Rory is just lovely, and the book reads so well. Even what should be a crazy plot is made readable and believable through the lens of these developed characters.
As always, I'm left a bit bereft, waiting for the next book. (And, for the record, I finished the last few pages right before the twins woke up. I feel like that's fate, right?)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Birds (1963) in Movies
Oct 28, 2020
Strong Suspense by the Master of Suspense
THE BIRDS is often listed amongst the great works of Alfred Hitchcock and I could never really understand the attraction. I thought it was a so-so fright-flick, so when I tripped across it on TV the other day, I started watching it with one eye, figuring I'd flip to something else in a few minutes.
And...then I caught myself getting into it.
Based on the novel by Daphne Du Maurier, THE BIRDS is told in Alfred Hithcock's suspenseful style to elevate a "pulp novel" idea of birds turning on humans to something much more tense than it had any right to be.
Newcomer Tippi Hendren stars as wealthy San Francisco socialite Melanie Daniels who chases suave charismatic lawyer Mitch Brenner (Rod Taylor) north of San Fran to his home of Bodego Bay. Will Melanie be able to win Mitch's heart over the objections of his mother (Jessica Tandy) and ex-girlfriend (Suzanne Pleshette)? We'll never know, for the Birds have their own idea of how this tale will end.
Hitchock, of course, earns his nickname "The Master of Suspense" with this film. He has some long scenes that grow with tension. Whether it's Melanie crossing the Bay in a boat (only to, finally, be attacked by a bird) or Mitch's mother going down a long hallway to find out what happened to a farmer friend of hers to the famous - and famously pulled off - scene of the birds gathering en masse on the jungle gym prior to attacking Melanie and the school children. Hitchcock knows exactly how to raise tension in these scenes and he does so marvelously. Even 56 years later, I found what little hairs I have standing up on the back of my neck and my body bending ever so slightly towards the screen during these scenes.
But...the thing that caught me this time around was the performances of the leads and the way Hitchock lets scenes play out with the actors. I've never been a big Rod Taylor fan, I've always thought he was "fine", but nothing special. He is much more than "fine" in this film. It's probably the best work I've ever seen him do. Jessica Tandy, of course, as the mother is wonderfully cold and distant to begin with and slowly moves to close to madness and then understanding, it is a wonderfully understated performance showcasing a superb theater actress. As is Pleshette's turn as school teacher Annie. Her scenes with Hendren were laced (I'm sure purposely) with an undercurrent of sexual tension between the two female characters.
But...the star of this film is Tippi Hendren, beyond a doubt. Much has been made of the cruelty and misogynistic ways that Hitchock treated and abused Hendren in the making of this film. But her performance shone as the gold-digging, fun loving Melanie who descends into the depths as the film progresses. I've never thought much of her as a performer, but will have to check out other films of hers (most notably, Hitchock's MARNIE).
The special effects - which were cutting edge and earned an Oscar nomination back in the day - are dated, but that adds to the charm of the film (at least for me). I'm sure they "wowed" the audience in 1963, so I'll cut them some slack.
I was pleasantly surprised by the pacing, acting and SUSPENSE of this film. It has held up very well and if you haven't seen THE BIRDS in awhile, I recommend you check it out.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And...then I caught myself getting into it.
Based on the novel by Daphne Du Maurier, THE BIRDS is told in Alfred Hithcock's suspenseful style to elevate a "pulp novel" idea of birds turning on humans to something much more tense than it had any right to be.
Newcomer Tippi Hendren stars as wealthy San Francisco socialite Melanie Daniels who chases suave charismatic lawyer Mitch Brenner (Rod Taylor) north of San Fran to his home of Bodego Bay. Will Melanie be able to win Mitch's heart over the objections of his mother (Jessica Tandy) and ex-girlfriend (Suzanne Pleshette)? We'll never know, for the Birds have their own idea of how this tale will end.
Hitchock, of course, earns his nickname "The Master of Suspense" with this film. He has some long scenes that grow with tension. Whether it's Melanie crossing the Bay in a boat (only to, finally, be attacked by a bird) or Mitch's mother going down a long hallway to find out what happened to a farmer friend of hers to the famous - and famously pulled off - scene of the birds gathering en masse on the jungle gym prior to attacking Melanie and the school children. Hitchcock knows exactly how to raise tension in these scenes and he does so marvelously. Even 56 years later, I found what little hairs I have standing up on the back of my neck and my body bending ever so slightly towards the screen during these scenes.
But...the thing that caught me this time around was the performances of the leads and the way Hitchock lets scenes play out with the actors. I've never been a big Rod Taylor fan, I've always thought he was "fine", but nothing special. He is much more than "fine" in this film. It's probably the best work I've ever seen him do. Jessica Tandy, of course, as the mother is wonderfully cold and distant to begin with and slowly moves to close to madness and then understanding, it is a wonderfully understated performance showcasing a superb theater actress. As is Pleshette's turn as school teacher Annie. Her scenes with Hendren were laced (I'm sure purposely) with an undercurrent of sexual tension between the two female characters.
But...the star of this film is Tippi Hendren, beyond a doubt. Much has been made of the cruelty and misogynistic ways that Hitchock treated and abused Hendren in the making of this film. But her performance shone as the gold-digging, fun loving Melanie who descends into the depths as the film progresses. I've never thought much of her as a performer, but will have to check out other films of hers (most notably, Hitchock's MARNIE).
The special effects - which were cutting edge and earned an Oscar nomination back in the day - are dated, but that adds to the charm of the film (at least for me). I'm sure they "wowed" the audience in 1963, so I'll cut them some slack.
I was pleasantly surprised by the pacing, acting and SUSPENSE of this film. It has held up very well and if you haven't seen THE BIRDS in awhile, I recommend you check it out.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Becs (244 KP) rated Shadow and Bone (The Grisha #1) in Books
Aug 23, 2019
Captivating story that leaves you enthralled
You can also find this review along with others on my blog: bookingwayreads.wordpress.com
TRIGGER WARNINGS: violence, manipulation, death, blood, absent of parent(s), emotional abuse, anger issues, anxiety – panic attacks, talk of hallucinations
Review:
Firstly, I did not realize that Shadow and Bone was set in Russia or should I say – based on Russia and spun into a fantasy filled folklore novel. It starts off strong in the prologue and holds that captivating appeal throughout. I was enthralled with the whole basis of the story.
The one thing that knocked half of a star off of this review is the extremely overused trope of “the main character is ordinary and then finds out that they are extraordinary.” In Leigh Bardugo’s doing, this trope works perfectly well with the plot line of this story. But it made me really dislike the main character, Alina, quite a lot. Behind that awful trope, lies a girl who is not only strong, but shows intelligence and loyalty. Alina was also extremely relatable through her sarcastic perceptiveness but there was something else about her that I couldn’t put my finger on and found rather annoying.
The Darkling on the other hand was this morally gray character that fascinated me. For example: how he is willing to be ruthless just to pursue his goal of freeing Ravka from the Shadow Fold. His sarcasm that outwits Alina’s. His good looks and charms. I love to hate him! Plus that one scene had me heated from head to toe. If only The Darkling were real…
Overall, all of the characters were multidimensional and extremely interesting! The pacing of Shadow and Bone was done excruciating well and I was absorbed in this fantastical world of magic and war, love and mystery. Finding out more of who the Grisha truly were, kept me turning page after page. The chemistry between characters was even amazing! There was a bit of a love triangle style of trope, yet it wasn’t quite that exactly. All in all, Leigh did an excellent job with giving Alina more than one love interest but showing how vastly different feelings she feels for each.
The plot was extremely engaging and continued on, even after the climax. It enthralled the reader, calling them with a whisper that is interwoven with a dark energy, seeking to break your heart. I did not notice any spelling and/ or grammatical errors that took away from the story. I do however want to know more of not only Alina’s and Ravkas fate, but The Darklings as well.
Leigh Bardugo, why do you do cruel things to me…
“What is infinite? The universe and the greed of men.”
TRIGGER WARNINGS: violence, manipulation, death, blood, absent of parent(s), emotional abuse, anger issues, anxiety – panic attacks, talk of hallucinations
Review:
Firstly, I did not realize that Shadow and Bone was set in Russia or should I say – based on Russia and spun into a fantasy filled folklore novel. It starts off strong in the prologue and holds that captivating appeal throughout. I was enthralled with the whole basis of the story.
The one thing that knocked half of a star off of this review is the extremely overused trope of “the main character is ordinary and then finds out that they are extraordinary.” In Leigh Bardugo’s doing, this trope works perfectly well with the plot line of this story. But it made me really dislike the main character, Alina, quite a lot. Behind that awful trope, lies a girl who is not only strong, but shows intelligence and loyalty. Alina was also extremely relatable through her sarcastic perceptiveness but there was something else about her that I couldn’t put my finger on and found rather annoying.
The Darkling on the other hand was this morally gray character that fascinated me. For example: how he is willing to be ruthless just to pursue his goal of freeing Ravka from the Shadow Fold. His sarcasm that outwits Alina’s. His good looks and charms. I love to hate him! Plus that one scene had me heated from head to toe. If only The Darkling were real…
Overall, all of the characters were multidimensional and extremely interesting! The pacing of Shadow and Bone was done excruciating well and I was absorbed in this fantastical world of magic and war, love and mystery. Finding out more of who the Grisha truly were, kept me turning page after page. The chemistry between characters was even amazing! There was a bit of a love triangle style of trope, yet it wasn’t quite that exactly. All in all, Leigh did an excellent job with giving Alina more than one love interest but showing how vastly different feelings she feels for each.
The plot was extremely engaging and continued on, even after the climax. It enthralled the reader, calling them with a whisper that is interwoven with a dark energy, seeking to break your heart. I did not notice any spelling and/ or grammatical errors that took away from the story. I do however want to know more of not only Alina’s and Ravkas fate, but The Darklings as well.
Leigh Bardugo, why do you do cruel things to me…
“What is infinite? The universe and the greed of men.”
Stumbling Stones
Book
"Alice knew that Selma sometimes felt judged by their mother and didn't always like it when Alice...
Historical Fiction Jewish History Family History WWII
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Kitchen (2019) in Movies
May 17, 2020
Thinly written and directed
A rainy weekend is the perfect time to catch up with films that I meant to see in the Cineplex, but just didn't get around to it. So it was with some excitement that I flipped on the "Women Run The Mafia" movie THE KITCHEN from 2019.
I should have watched 21 BRIDGES.
Based on the DC/VERTIGO graphic novel, THE KITCHEN is set in the late 1970's in NYC and offers up the "what if" scenario of 3 women that take over the Mafia. A pretty interesting premise that could have been the GODFATHER or GOODFELLA's of the day (or...at least...another WIDOWS from 2018), but instead THE KITCHEN falls flat like the all female GHOSTBUSTERS from a few year's ago.
A star of that Ghostbuster's film, Melissa McCarthy leads the cast as Kathy Brennan, the wife of a mobster who was sent to jail and becomes the leader of the group. McCarthy has shown that she has the "chops" as an actress to tackle this role, but she never really gets there. There is no real depth or emotional stakes to her character throughout the course of the film. The screenplay (and McCarthy's performance) does pick up at the end, but by then, it is too little, too late. Also not fairing well is comedienne Tiffany Hadish as Ruby O'Carroll - an African-American female trying to dominate in a predominately white male world. Again...this character had potential, but the writing and, quite frankly, Hadish's performance just didn't quite succeed.
What did succeed is the always excellent Elisabeth Moss as the 3rd part of this triumvirate. Her "mousy, abused housewife turned stone cold killer" was interesting to watch - especially when paired with Domhnall Gleeson's assassin about 1/2 way through the movie. I wanted to watch a movie with these 2 criminals on the run.
I've mentioned the weak writing as part the issue here, so I'll have to mention first time Veteran Writer and first-time Director Andrea Berloff as the main culprit here. She wrote STRAIGHT OUTTA COMPTON so she has it in her, but here, the screenplay and characterizations are "thin". Perhaps, a good Director could have made something out of this, but she also made her Directing debut with this film, so it just didn't work well enough.
This isn't a bad film, it just isn't a very good - or very interesting - one.
Letter Grade B- (for the Moss/Gleeson portion of this film)
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
I should have watched 21 BRIDGES.
Based on the DC/VERTIGO graphic novel, THE KITCHEN is set in the late 1970's in NYC and offers up the "what if" scenario of 3 women that take over the Mafia. A pretty interesting premise that could have been the GODFATHER or GOODFELLA's of the day (or...at least...another WIDOWS from 2018), but instead THE KITCHEN falls flat like the all female GHOSTBUSTERS from a few year's ago.
A star of that Ghostbuster's film, Melissa McCarthy leads the cast as Kathy Brennan, the wife of a mobster who was sent to jail and becomes the leader of the group. McCarthy has shown that she has the "chops" as an actress to tackle this role, but she never really gets there. There is no real depth or emotional stakes to her character throughout the course of the film. The screenplay (and McCarthy's performance) does pick up at the end, but by then, it is too little, too late. Also not fairing well is comedienne Tiffany Hadish as Ruby O'Carroll - an African-American female trying to dominate in a predominately white male world. Again...this character had potential, but the writing and, quite frankly, Hadish's performance just didn't quite succeed.
What did succeed is the always excellent Elisabeth Moss as the 3rd part of this triumvirate. Her "mousy, abused housewife turned stone cold killer" was interesting to watch - especially when paired with Domhnall Gleeson's assassin about 1/2 way through the movie. I wanted to watch a movie with these 2 criminals on the run.
I've mentioned the weak writing as part the issue here, so I'll have to mention first time Veteran Writer and first-time Director Andrea Berloff as the main culprit here. She wrote STRAIGHT OUTTA COMPTON so she has it in her, but here, the screenplay and characterizations are "thin". Perhaps, a good Director could have made something out of this, but she also made her Directing debut with this film, so it just didn't work well enough.
This isn't a bad film, it just isn't a very good - or very interesting - one.
Letter Grade B- (for the Moss/Gleeson portion of this film)
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Alone in Berlin (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Small Rebellions.
Once again, World War II turns up another true story of quiet valour to turn into a motion picture. At a time when Trump is pontificating about so called “fake news”, here is a timely tale from history which centres on the battle against genuinely fake news: the Nazi propaganda machine.
After losing their only son in the French campaign, Berliners Otto (Brendan Gleeson,”Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire”) and Anna (Emma Thompson, “Saving Mr Banks“) turn against the regime and in repeated acts of rebellion Otto laboriously hand writes subversive postcards to leave in office blocks around Berlin.
Resistance is futile. Otto (Brendan Gleeson) and Anna (Emma Thompson) out on a new mission.
Out to catch him is local police investigator Escherich (Daniel Brühl) but in an age before CCTV that’s no easy task and with increasing SS pressure the stakes for Escherich steadily increase. For Otto and Anna, the stress is there but both are resigned to their fate: with their son stolen from them for an unjust cause they are an island of indifference in an unholy land. Both are ‘alone in Berlin’.
Daniel Brühl as police detective Escherich getting more than he bargained for from the SS.
After 70 years it still chills the blood to see German locations decked out in Nazi regalia, but one of the joys of this film is this rendering of life in wartime Berlin: starting with jubilation at German progress prior to D-Day and turning to despair and genuine danger as the tide turns towards 1945. In a pretty bleak film there are touches of black comedy now and then: Otto’s carpentry company is being encouraged “by the Fuhrer” to double and triple their output… of coffins.
A (very clean) Berlin, decked out with Nazi regalia.
More joy comes from the star turns of Gleeson and Thompson, both of who deliver on their emotionally challenging roles. Gleeson in particular makes a very believable German with a sour demeanor and a steely determination. But the star acting turn for me goes to the wonderful Daniel Brühl (“Rush“) as the tormented police detective, bullied into an ethical corner by the SS. The finale of the film – whilst not seeming quite believable – makes for a nicely unexpected twist.
The Nazi Womens’ League out on another fund-raising sweep, providing Thompson with one of her best scenes in the film with an Oberführer’s wife.
Based on a novel by Hans Fallada, the lead writing credits for the piece are shared between Achim von Borries and the director Vincent Perez – in a rare directorial outing for the Swiss actor. The script exudes a melancholic gloom and at times expresses beautifully both the grief and love shared by this older couple. But some of the dialogue needs more work and we don’t see enough of Thompson in the early part of the film where her motivations should be being developed. This rather comes down to a lack of focus by the director. While the primary story of the card distribution is slight, it is compelling and a detour into a sub-story about an old Jewish lodger living upstairs is unnecessary and detracts from the overall story arc. I would have far preferred if the running time had been a tight 90 minutes just focused on Otto’s mission. One final comment on the script: did I mishear that Anna claimed to have a 6 year old child during an air raid scene? I know Emma Thompson looks great for her age, but….
Otto and Elise Hampel – the real life characters on which the film’s Otto and Anna Quangel were based.
I can’t finish this without commending the beautiful piano score of Alexandre Desplat. From the first note I knew it was him – he has such a characteristic style – and his clever use of the score complements the film exquisitely. “Small” films like this tend to rather disappear into the woodwork for Oscar consideration, but here’s a soundtrack that I think should be considered: (but what do I know… when “Nocturnal Animals” wasn’t even nominated in one of the Oscar crimes of the century!).
In summary, I found this a thoughtful and thought-provoking film, that – despite some of the mean reviews I’ve seen – I thought was well crafted and with excellent production design by Jean-Vincent Puzos (“Amour”). It will be particularly appreciated by older audiences looking for an untold story from the war, and by all lovers of fine acting performances by the three leads.
After losing their only son in the French campaign, Berliners Otto (Brendan Gleeson,”Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire”) and Anna (Emma Thompson, “Saving Mr Banks“) turn against the regime and in repeated acts of rebellion Otto laboriously hand writes subversive postcards to leave in office blocks around Berlin.
Resistance is futile. Otto (Brendan Gleeson) and Anna (Emma Thompson) out on a new mission.
Out to catch him is local police investigator Escherich (Daniel Brühl) but in an age before CCTV that’s no easy task and with increasing SS pressure the stakes for Escherich steadily increase. For Otto and Anna, the stress is there but both are resigned to their fate: with their son stolen from them for an unjust cause they are an island of indifference in an unholy land. Both are ‘alone in Berlin’.
Daniel Brühl as police detective Escherich getting more than he bargained for from the SS.
After 70 years it still chills the blood to see German locations decked out in Nazi regalia, but one of the joys of this film is this rendering of life in wartime Berlin: starting with jubilation at German progress prior to D-Day and turning to despair and genuine danger as the tide turns towards 1945. In a pretty bleak film there are touches of black comedy now and then: Otto’s carpentry company is being encouraged “by the Fuhrer” to double and triple their output… of coffins.
A (very clean) Berlin, decked out with Nazi regalia.
More joy comes from the star turns of Gleeson and Thompson, both of who deliver on their emotionally challenging roles. Gleeson in particular makes a very believable German with a sour demeanor and a steely determination. But the star acting turn for me goes to the wonderful Daniel Brühl (“Rush“) as the tormented police detective, bullied into an ethical corner by the SS. The finale of the film – whilst not seeming quite believable – makes for a nicely unexpected twist.
The Nazi Womens’ League out on another fund-raising sweep, providing Thompson with one of her best scenes in the film with an Oberführer’s wife.
Based on a novel by Hans Fallada, the lead writing credits for the piece are shared between Achim von Borries and the director Vincent Perez – in a rare directorial outing for the Swiss actor. The script exudes a melancholic gloom and at times expresses beautifully both the grief and love shared by this older couple. But some of the dialogue needs more work and we don’t see enough of Thompson in the early part of the film where her motivations should be being developed. This rather comes down to a lack of focus by the director. While the primary story of the card distribution is slight, it is compelling and a detour into a sub-story about an old Jewish lodger living upstairs is unnecessary and detracts from the overall story arc. I would have far preferred if the running time had been a tight 90 minutes just focused on Otto’s mission. One final comment on the script: did I mishear that Anna claimed to have a 6 year old child during an air raid scene? I know Emma Thompson looks great for her age, but….
Otto and Elise Hampel – the real life characters on which the film’s Otto and Anna Quangel were based.
I can’t finish this without commending the beautiful piano score of Alexandre Desplat. From the first note I knew it was him – he has such a characteristic style – and his clever use of the score complements the film exquisitely. “Small” films like this tend to rather disappear into the woodwork for Oscar consideration, but here’s a soundtrack that I think should be considered: (but what do I know… when “Nocturnal Animals” wasn’t even nominated in one of the Oscar crimes of the century!).
In summary, I found this a thoughtful and thought-provoking film, that – despite some of the mean reviews I’ve seen – I thought was well crafted and with excellent production design by Jean-Vincent Puzos (“Amour”). It will be particularly appreciated by older audiences looking for an untold story from the war, and by all lovers of fine acting performances by the three leads.
Ross (3284 KP) rated Perfect Remains: A Gripping Thriller That Will Leave You Breathless in Books
Aug 30, 2018 (Updated Aug 30, 2018)
Very good, gripping crime novel based in Edinburgh. Recently arrived French detective Luc Callanach finds himself at the wheel of the force's biggest crime, while still trying to find his feet in his new city.
As the reader is made aware of the "murderer"'s identity from very early on, this feels more like an early Mark Billingham book than an Ian Rankin or Ed James. Not a true whodunit, more of a case of watching the story unfold, which is thrilling and you get to see the criminal and the detective's view of the events, but may put others off.
While the story is very well crafted, the pacing is top notch and the action exciting, a few aspects irritated me at times. Luc Callanach seems to have coped very well with his change in circumstances, and at times it is almost like he (or the author) has forgotten he is French completely! And also the attitude and conclusions of what was supposed to be a very experienced psychological profiler just didn't feel plausible. And finally, as so often happens with "detective x crime series" books - if the main character didn't see it, it didn't happen. This means that Callanach has to abandon his massive case and oddly decide to go off with another detective in order to discuss something, purely as a plot device - i.e. he has to be involved in it for it to be an important part of the story. In places this worked, and got to the point, but at other times his actions just seemed so unusual as to be ludicrous, just to meet a plot point. Why the lesser characters can't have a PoV chapter is beyond me. It works perfectly well in fantasy fiction, why not in crime?!
However these were minor quibbles, an otherwise great book.
As the reader is made aware of the "murderer"'s identity from very early on, this feels more like an early Mark Billingham book than an Ian Rankin or Ed James. Not a true whodunit, more of a case of watching the story unfold, which is thrilling and you get to see the criminal and the detective's view of the events, but may put others off.
While the story is very well crafted, the pacing is top notch and the action exciting, a few aspects irritated me at times. Luc Callanach seems to have coped very well with his change in circumstances, and at times it is almost like he (or the author) has forgotten he is French completely! And also the attitude and conclusions of what was supposed to be a very experienced psychological profiler just didn't feel plausible. And finally, as so often happens with "detective x crime series" books - if the main character didn't see it, it didn't happen. This means that Callanach has to abandon his massive case and oddly decide to go off with another detective in order to discuss something, purely as a plot device - i.e. he has to be involved in it for it to be an important part of the story. In places this worked, and got to the point, but at other times his actions just seemed so unusual as to be ludicrous, just to meet a plot point. Why the lesser characters can't have a PoV chapter is beyond me. It works perfectly well in fantasy fiction, why not in crime?!
However these were minor quibbles, an otherwise great book.
Uncle Tom's Cabin
Harriet Beecher Stowe and Elizabeth Ammons
8.0
Rate It
Book
In the nineteenth century, Uncle Tom's Cabin sold more copies than any book in the world except the...