Search
Search results
Grazia UK Magazine
Magazines & Newspapers and Lifestyle
App
Grazia is the award-winning, weekly interactive digital magazine for intelligent women. Whether...
The Launch Pad: Inside Y Combinator, Silicon Valley's Most Exclusive School for Startups
Book
In The Launch Pad, Randall Stross, author of eBoys and Planet Google, takes a behind-the-scenes look...
Letterman: The Last Giant of Late Night
Book
New York Times comedy critic Jason Zinoman delivers the definitive story of the life and artistic...
PT
Piercing the Horizon: The Making of a Twentieth-Century American Space Luminary
Book
We all know the names: Grissom, Armstrong, Cernan-legends of the space age whose names resonate with...
Darren (1599 KP) rated Denial (2016) in Movies
Dec 28, 2019
Verdict: Interesting Courtroom Drama
Story: Denial starts when acclaimed writer and historian Deborah Lipstadt (Weisz) has her latest book about the horrors of the Holocaust being released, only her in her book to slams historian and renowned denier David Irving (Spall). David Irving has built up a reputation for being able to fight his case and decides to sue Deborah for libel.
After the years or preparation Deborah watches how Anthony Julius (Scott) and Richard Rampton (Wilkinson) look to make a trial where Deborah will win, without having to put the holocaust on trial, they want to keep it together for argument, with the case being about proving David’s research, rather than whether the holocaust happened.
Thoughts on Denial
Characters – Deborah Lipstadt is an acclaimed author that has made her career out of writing about the horrors around the holocaust, this has created an enemy in David Irving, that she has always been denying the holocaust happened. She must defend her own accusation against him, putting her trust in a group of lawyers to fight the case, despite the fact she would like to put the spotlight on the events, over the facts being disputed. Richard Rampton is the lawyer that is running the case in the courtroom, he has methods that Deborah doesn’t like, until she sees how he has truly been planning the case. Anthony Julius runs the case behind the scenes, he has a huge reputation with his previous work which made headlines and must be strict towards Deborah over what she wants to happen in the case. David Irving is the famous Holocaust denier, he has made a career out of his theories, which has given him a huge following, he decides to sue Deborah for criticising his beliefs, where he uses his natural charisma to get people behind him, despite his anti-Semitic behaviour being clear to see.
Performances – Rachel Weisz in the leading role is great to see, she shows just how helpless Deborah looks during the case, that puts her own reputation on the line. Timothy Spall steals the show with his depiction of David Irving, showing how he is the more colourful character in the case. Tom Wilkinson shows he will always be able to bring a quiet character to life in the moments he needs to shine, while Andrew Scott proves that his rising star will get involved in the major performances.
Story – The story here follows Deborah Lipstadt who has her own book sued for libel by holocaust denier David Irving, forcing them into a court case, which will be about whether he has been making up the truth for his own benefit or whether she had the right to question his beliefs. The story is an interesting one to follow, seeing an conspiracy theorist being put in a courtroom to prove his fictional story about the truth is fascinating to see, having a court case just about whether something as horrific as the holocaust is bad enough, but seeing how everybody seemed to have a fine balance between who could win, was also interesting. The story does struggling to start with, because of the large number of time jumps, with it starting in 1994, before the case happening in 2000, with small scenes in the build up to the case, through the years, but once we get into the courtroom, we are grasp by the story.
Biopic – The biopic side of the story focuses more on the case, rather than the people involved, which could take away just how much the case did take out of the people involved.
Settings – The film does use the courtroom as the main location for the story to move forward, with most of the external locations being ideas of where the story could end up going, with most being office, apart from the haunting trip to Auschwitz.
Scene of the Movie – The court case.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The early time jumps, we seem to have one scene, then jump two more years down the line.
Final Thoughts – This is an interesting courtroom drama, that shows how the truth managed to get all the way to a courtroom, when it was clear it happened, showing even conspiracy theorist could challenge the truth.
Overall: Interesting, but not Intense drama.
Story: Denial starts when acclaimed writer and historian Deborah Lipstadt (Weisz) has her latest book about the horrors of the Holocaust being released, only her in her book to slams historian and renowned denier David Irving (Spall). David Irving has built up a reputation for being able to fight his case and decides to sue Deborah for libel.
After the years or preparation Deborah watches how Anthony Julius (Scott) and Richard Rampton (Wilkinson) look to make a trial where Deborah will win, without having to put the holocaust on trial, they want to keep it together for argument, with the case being about proving David’s research, rather than whether the holocaust happened.
Thoughts on Denial
Characters – Deborah Lipstadt is an acclaimed author that has made her career out of writing about the horrors around the holocaust, this has created an enemy in David Irving, that she has always been denying the holocaust happened. She must defend her own accusation against him, putting her trust in a group of lawyers to fight the case, despite the fact she would like to put the spotlight on the events, over the facts being disputed. Richard Rampton is the lawyer that is running the case in the courtroom, he has methods that Deborah doesn’t like, until she sees how he has truly been planning the case. Anthony Julius runs the case behind the scenes, he has a huge reputation with his previous work which made headlines and must be strict towards Deborah over what she wants to happen in the case. David Irving is the famous Holocaust denier, he has made a career out of his theories, which has given him a huge following, he decides to sue Deborah for criticising his beliefs, where he uses his natural charisma to get people behind him, despite his anti-Semitic behaviour being clear to see.
Performances – Rachel Weisz in the leading role is great to see, she shows just how helpless Deborah looks during the case, that puts her own reputation on the line. Timothy Spall steals the show with his depiction of David Irving, showing how he is the more colourful character in the case. Tom Wilkinson shows he will always be able to bring a quiet character to life in the moments he needs to shine, while Andrew Scott proves that his rising star will get involved in the major performances.
Story – The story here follows Deborah Lipstadt who has her own book sued for libel by holocaust denier David Irving, forcing them into a court case, which will be about whether he has been making up the truth for his own benefit or whether she had the right to question his beliefs. The story is an interesting one to follow, seeing an conspiracy theorist being put in a courtroom to prove his fictional story about the truth is fascinating to see, having a court case just about whether something as horrific as the holocaust is bad enough, but seeing how everybody seemed to have a fine balance between who could win, was also interesting. The story does struggling to start with, because of the large number of time jumps, with it starting in 1994, before the case happening in 2000, with small scenes in the build up to the case, through the years, but once we get into the courtroom, we are grasp by the story.
Biopic – The biopic side of the story focuses more on the case, rather than the people involved, which could take away just how much the case did take out of the people involved.
Settings – The film does use the courtroom as the main location for the story to move forward, with most of the external locations being ideas of where the story could end up going, with most being office, apart from the haunting trip to Auschwitz.
Scene of the Movie – The court case.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The early time jumps, we seem to have one scene, then jump two more years down the line.
Final Thoughts – This is an interesting courtroom drama, that shows how the truth managed to get all the way to a courtroom, when it was clear it happened, showing even conspiracy theorist could challenge the truth.
Overall: Interesting, but not Intense drama.
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
May 27, 2019
"They said the age of heroes would never come again."
As a huge fan of Zack Snyder's first two efforts inside the DCEU and Patty Jenkins wonderful Wonder Woman, my expectations for Justice League were pretty much through the roof. After the mediocre buzz that it got and all the stuff that happened behind the scenes, I was a little skeptical but still very excited, but after getting out of the theater, one word really just describes how I felt; disappointed.
One of the most wonderful things about the huge explosion of comic book movies has brought, to me personally, is being able to see the comics/cartoons that I grew up on, be brought to life on the big screen. The Justice League animated series was my one of my favorite shows as a kid and seeing seeing them come to screen brought joy to my eyes, and was something of a dream come true and that's the one major point I can give to the film as a whole.
My biggest disappointment in the film is actually Warner Brothers. They are a big bunch of idiots, to be honest. If they would've left Snyder to take his time and actually hired someone who Snyder wanted, the film would've been so much better. It's a sad fact when you can obviously tell which scenes were Snyder's and which were Whedon's. I actually loved every part of the film that you could tell was Zack's; it felt passionate and like it was coming from a fan. Whedon gave shitty one-liners and basically made me feel like I was watching a TV-movie.
A major component to why I actually liked the film was the action. It left me satisfied and I was rooting for them to just kickass and look cool doing it, because when you look at the classic "Justice League" stories, that's basically what it was. But even though the action was pretty stellar; I'm so mad at the fact of Steppenwolf looked so fake and like some of the worst CGI I've ever seen; so it mad the fights a little weak when it looks like the team is fighting a green screen. Also, the last 30-ish minutes kinda saved it for me. It was really "epic" and it felt really pure, I guess is the right word.
The cast. Oh my god the cast was so freaking good. Marvel Studios gets it right a lot of the time, but damn DC you won this one. Ezra Miller & Jason Momoa stood out like a sore thumb at how much better they were. They were so charismatic, yet intense, and altogether just right at place in their characters. Ben Affleck I'm so sorry that Whedon choose to mess you up. Affleck was stellar in BvS yet here, he felt dull and not the Batman I know he could be. Gal Gadot & Ray Fisher were both pretty good, but Gadot felt a little like she was but in the backseat, for sure reason. Henry Cavill though, he was kinda good? I couldn't really tell because half the time he looked like CGI, but I'm sure I'll get over it.
Even though there are some major problems I have with the film; Whedon, crappy CGI, and easily way too short for it too work, Zack Snyder's Justice League still works its way into my enjoyment field and I can see myself watching it further down the line. I definitely hope WB can release a longer, and more put together version, because what we got didn't live up to the hype I had for it.
One of the most wonderful things about the huge explosion of comic book movies has brought, to me personally, is being able to see the comics/cartoons that I grew up on, be brought to life on the big screen. The Justice League animated series was my one of my favorite shows as a kid and seeing seeing them come to screen brought joy to my eyes, and was something of a dream come true and that's the one major point I can give to the film as a whole.
My biggest disappointment in the film is actually Warner Brothers. They are a big bunch of idiots, to be honest. If they would've left Snyder to take his time and actually hired someone who Snyder wanted, the film would've been so much better. It's a sad fact when you can obviously tell which scenes were Snyder's and which were Whedon's. I actually loved every part of the film that you could tell was Zack's; it felt passionate and like it was coming from a fan. Whedon gave shitty one-liners and basically made me feel like I was watching a TV-movie.
A major component to why I actually liked the film was the action. It left me satisfied and I was rooting for them to just kickass and look cool doing it, because when you look at the classic "Justice League" stories, that's basically what it was. But even though the action was pretty stellar; I'm so mad at the fact of Steppenwolf looked so fake and like some of the worst CGI I've ever seen; so it mad the fights a little weak when it looks like the team is fighting a green screen. Also, the last 30-ish minutes kinda saved it for me. It was really "epic" and it felt really pure, I guess is the right word.
The cast. Oh my god the cast was so freaking good. Marvel Studios gets it right a lot of the time, but damn DC you won this one. Ezra Miller & Jason Momoa stood out like a sore thumb at how much better they were. They were so charismatic, yet intense, and altogether just right at place in their characters. Ben Affleck I'm so sorry that Whedon choose to mess you up. Affleck was stellar in BvS yet here, he felt dull and not the Batman I know he could be. Gal Gadot & Ray Fisher were both pretty good, but Gadot felt a little like she was but in the backseat, for sure reason. Henry Cavill though, he was kinda good? I couldn't really tell because half the time he looked like CGI, but I'm sure I'll get over it.
Even though there are some major problems I have with the film; Whedon, crappy CGI, and easily way too short for it too work, Zack Snyder's Justice League still works its way into my enjoyment field and I can see myself watching it further down the line. I definitely hope WB can release a longer, and more put together version, because what we got didn't live up to the hype I had for it.
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.
Lilyn G - Sci-Fi & Scary (91 KP) rated Winchester: The House That Ghosts Built (2018) in Movies
Feb 2, 2018
It was okay. Nothing more, nothing less.
So, when I saw the trailer for Winchester, I was a little intrigued. Not a lot, but a little. A bit more so when I realized that Helen Mirren was in it. Though I can’t say I could name anything else she’s been in off-hand, I did recognize that she had a bit of weight behind her name. Her presence, combined with Jason Clarke (who I recognize more as a “Hey, it’s that guy” than actually recognize) gave me some hope for the movie. Hence stealing away on a Friday afternoon, paying entirely too much money for a ticket and popcorn to get the big-screen experience.
Winchester could have been good, if it didn’t feel like they were scared to go outside the realm of jump-scares. (Though, I will give the directors credit for surprising me and putting a different spin on the typical mirror scare.) Most of the acting was decent-to-solid, but the actors were sorely limited by a distinctly yawn-worthy script.
In regards to the Winchester cast: Clarke has an undeniable charisma. The way Mirren portrayed Sara Winchester, she had that haughty, truth-speaking old lady thing going on that I appreciated and thought I was in for a treat. I was wrong, unfortunately. I felt very much like Mirren’s heart wasn’t in her role at all, and hiding her behind a veil was sometimes the only way to disguise the blue cardboard of her eyes. Sarah Snook reminded me a bit of Maggie Smith, and she had a way of keeping your attention on her. However, Henry, played by Finn Scicluna-O’Prey was barely worth noticing. Scicluna-O’Prey’s ability to command attention on the screen was pretty much solely limited to the well-light scenes featuring his brilliant red hair. (I feel really mean saying that about a younger actor, but it’s the truth.)
The pacing was middling. I definitely got the fidgets a few times during the movie. The dialogue had it’s moments. (There’s a scene between Mirren and Clarke that’ll have you snickering.) The action, such as it was, was bland and cliched. The ending scene had me rolling my eyes.
Overall, Winchester wasn’t god-awful, but it wasn’t something your average horror-movie watcher hasn’t seen 999 times before. It’s one to rent at your local Redbox, or when it his Amazon, but not worth paying movie theatre prices for right now.
Winchester could have been good, if it didn’t feel like they were scared to go outside the realm of jump-scares. (Though, I will give the directors credit for surprising me and putting a different spin on the typical mirror scare.) Most of the acting was decent-to-solid, but the actors were sorely limited by a distinctly yawn-worthy script.
In regards to the Winchester cast: Clarke has an undeniable charisma. The way Mirren portrayed Sara Winchester, she had that haughty, truth-speaking old lady thing going on that I appreciated and thought I was in for a treat. I was wrong, unfortunately. I felt very much like Mirren’s heart wasn’t in her role at all, and hiding her behind a veil was sometimes the only way to disguise the blue cardboard of her eyes. Sarah Snook reminded me a bit of Maggie Smith, and she had a way of keeping your attention on her. However, Henry, played by Finn Scicluna-O’Prey was barely worth noticing. Scicluna-O’Prey’s ability to command attention on the screen was pretty much solely limited to the well-light scenes featuring his brilliant red hair. (I feel really mean saying that about a younger actor, but it’s the truth.)
The pacing was middling. I definitely got the fidgets a few times during the movie. The dialogue had it’s moments. (There’s a scene between Mirren and Clarke that’ll have you snickering.) The action, such as it was, was bland and cliched. The ending scene had me rolling my eyes.
Overall, Winchester wasn’t god-awful, but it wasn’t something your average horror-movie watcher hasn’t seen 999 times before. It’s one to rent at your local Redbox, or when it his Amazon, but not worth paying movie theatre prices for right now.
Hatching Twitter
8.0
Rate It
Book
New York Times Bestseller Wall Street Journal Business Bestseller Evening Standard pick Favourite...
Near-Earth Objects: Finding Them Before They Find Us
Book
Of all the natural disasters that could befall us, only an Earth impact by a large comet or asteroid...