Search
Search results
ArecRain (8 KP) rated Charming Olivia (Geary Brothers, #1) in Books
Jan 18, 2018
I requested this from NetGalleys erotica section, and boy is it erotica. So much so that it overshadows much of the plot that I almost missed it. While there is a plot, it wasnt one I was interested in. I am tired of the women with tragic pasts that have been hurt in some way.
What I appreciated about this novel is that it shows that people are able to separate love and sex. I think our society is so caught up in the idea that only people who are in love should have sex and if there isnt love involved, then there is something wrong with those people taking part (i.e. sluts, perverts, etc.) Thats not the case at all. Adults should be allowed to explore their sexuality without judgement and be able to enjoy themselves. That is what this novel is about: two people (one more so than the other) discovering their sexuality.
It was an idea I could definitely get behind and that is why I enjoyed this novel so much. While I am a highly monogamous person in my own relationship, I fully support those who arent. I am not saying I condone cheating; that is a completely different ballpark. I just understand that monogamy isnt the only way and people should be able to have a happy healthy sex life without being by judge.
To get back to the story. Harper is a talented writer who knows how to write steamy scenes and a plotline present enough to keep the story moving. Her characters werent my favorite but they were realistic enough with their own flaws and quirks. The best part was the variety and open-mindedness of the erotic.
What I appreciated about this novel is that it shows that people are able to separate love and sex. I think our society is so caught up in the idea that only people who are in love should have sex and if there isnt love involved, then there is something wrong with those people taking part (i.e. sluts, perverts, etc.) Thats not the case at all. Adults should be allowed to explore their sexuality without judgement and be able to enjoy themselves. That is what this novel is about: two people (one more so than the other) discovering their sexuality.
It was an idea I could definitely get behind and that is why I enjoyed this novel so much. While I am a highly monogamous person in my own relationship, I fully support those who arent. I am not saying I condone cheating; that is a completely different ballpark. I just understand that monogamy isnt the only way and people should be able to have a happy healthy sex life without being by judge.
To get back to the story. Harper is a talented writer who knows how to write steamy scenes and a plotline present enough to keep the story moving. Her characters werent my favorite but they were realistic enough with their own flaws and quirks. The best part was the variety and open-mindedness of the erotic.
Adventures in Starry Kitchen: 88 Asian-Inspired Recipes from America's Most Famous Underground Restaurant
Book
The behind-the-scenes story of America's most famous underground restaurant, featuring more than...
And on That Bombshell: Inside the Madness and Genius of Top Gear
Book
I was Top Gear's script editor for 13 years and all 22 series. I basically used to check spelling...
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated Angel Has Fallen (2019) in Movies
Aug 21, 2019
My attention span has fallen
Angel Has Fallen is a dumb, exhausting, joyless & over long experience that proves old isn't always bold. When this first started I won't lie I felt engaged, it felt like the team behind this series had finally matured/evolved past the blatant racism, painful dialog, woeful storytelling & overall silliness of the last movies. Essssh was I wrong. First thing on this downward spiral was Gerard Buttler not only is his accent always halfway between Scottish & American but theres something distracting about his face & how he constantly seems like he's chewing on something he's not enjoying most of the film (maybe the apauling script). Second they seemed to blow all the budget on these big slow motion action scenes at the start as my god do the production values take a complete nose dive half way in. Green screen & cgi go from quite cool/believable to worse than sharknado quality, its ghastly, distracting & im shocked this film got a cinema release looking how it does. I get the film is going for 90s nostalgia but honestly it fails on almost every level ending on such a cliched boss fight that is so unexciting & half arsed its plain embarrassing (I mean who wants to watch two old men fumble around on a boring roof looking more like they are about kiss than stab each other to death). One big brain dead mess & its stupidity/constant Trump praising became tiresome very quickly. Not even so good its bad its just plain lazy film making at its best & it only caters to people that need their movie plots spelt out in spaghetti shapes for them. Pure childish crap that rips parts from all the great action movies of the 90s & destroys your good memories of them. Avoid at all costs.
BookInspector (124 KP) rated Madam Tulip and the Bones of Chance (Madam Tulip #3) in Books
Sep 24, 2020
This novel is the third book in Madam Tulip Mystery series, and overall, it left me longing for the mystery and Madam Tulip herself. In this novel, Derry and Bruce have to travel to Scotland to shoot a movie, where they meet and befriend some rich people. The shooting doesn’t go as well as planned, and like always, Derry is left empty-handed and involved in some serious criminal activities.
Through the pages of this novel, we not only, once again meet Derry’s closest friends and her eccentric parents, but also some new, quite strong characters. From a wide variety to choose, in this book, my favourite was personal assistant Jessica. Ambitious, career-oriented and overall strong character. That is what I liked about this novel, that author portrayed females as independent and powerful creations, who are not afraid to fight for what they want. #GirlPower
I don’t know, was it the Scottish moors or the stone castles that left me quite gloomy with the plot of this book. Like in previous books, the narrative is told from a single perspective, sharing only Derry’s point of view. There were some action and interesting nuances, but I missed Madam Tulip’s mystery and persona in this novel.(She showed up only once) For me, half of the book really dragged, and another half, was more interesting, but it felt very rushed. There are some of the things mentioned from the previous book so, I would recommend reading other parts before digging into this one.
The writing style was pleasant to read, and the language used was easily understandable. The chapters of this book were a decent length and didn’t bore me. The ending felt pleasant, and for me, concluded the story nicely. So, to conclude, even though I missed more mystery and more spice, it was an interesting experience, where I had a great insight into behind the scenes of film shooting and sets, so if you into this kind of thing, give this book a try, and hopefully, you will enjoy it
Through the pages of this novel, we not only, once again meet Derry’s closest friends and her eccentric parents, but also some new, quite strong characters. From a wide variety to choose, in this book, my favourite was personal assistant Jessica. Ambitious, career-oriented and overall strong character. That is what I liked about this novel, that author portrayed females as independent and powerful creations, who are not afraid to fight for what they want. #GirlPower
I don’t know, was it the Scottish moors or the stone castles that left me quite gloomy with the plot of this book. Like in previous books, the narrative is told from a single perspective, sharing only Derry’s point of view. There were some action and interesting nuances, but I missed Madam Tulip’s mystery and persona in this novel.(She showed up only once) For me, half of the book really dragged, and another half, was more interesting, but it felt very rushed. There are some of the things mentioned from the previous book so, I would recommend reading other parts before digging into this one.
The writing style was pleasant to read, and the language used was easily understandable. The chapters of this book were a decent length and didn’t bore me. The ending felt pleasant, and for me, concluded the story nicely. So, to conclude, even though I missed more mystery and more spice, it was an interesting experience, where I had a great insight into behind the scenes of film shooting and sets, so if you into this kind of thing, give this book a try, and hopefully, you will enjoy it
Father Figures (2018)
6.9
Rate It
Movie Watch
Owen Wilson (“The Grand Budapest Hotel,” “Zoolander 2”) and Ed Helms (“The Hangover”...
comedy
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Paddington 2 (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Bear faced brilliance.
I never went to see “Paddington 2” at the cinema when it came out. Well, it’s a kids film isn’t it? And my grandkids I thought… well, their probably a bit too young for the long haul on this one. But – after catching up with it recently on a transatlantic flight – I’m sorry I missed it. For it is brilliant in its own way.
Having not seen the first “Paddington”, also directed by Paul King, there is a useful little flashback to the Peruvian origins of the little chap before we pitch into the plot proper. Paddington (voiced by Ben Wishaw, “Spectre“) has nicely settled down to life with The Brown’s in their London home and is a well-loved member of the community (well, well loved that is by everyone except the cranky Mr Curry (Peter Capaldi, “Dr Who“, “World War Z“). But he longs to buy his Aunt Lucy (Imelda Staunton, “Finding Your Feet“) a special birthday present – a pop-up book of London scenes that he’s seen in a local antique shop. But for that he needs a lot of cash, and so proceeds to earn it through a variety of different jobs.
However, fading actor Phoenix Buchanan (Hugh Grant, “Florence Foster Jenkins“, “The Man From U.N.C.L.E.“) also shows an unhealty interest in the book and, after it disappears from the shop with Paddington’s paw prints all over the scene, the poor bear finds himself on the wrong side of the law.
This is a continually inventive movie, which rockets along with truly impressive verve and panache from scene to scene. As a particular example of this, an animated walk through the pop-up book is marvellously done: a tribute to the 2D retro nature (even in those days!) of the TV animation of the 70’s that will go over the heads of younger viewers. There are plenty of slapstick scenes – notably of Paddington trying window cleaning, and his job in a barber’s shop – which will not only delight younger children but also made this 57 year old laugh out loud too! The prison sequence also delights, with a laundry blunder by the bear leading into a comical showdown with the prison’s chief poisoner, sorry, head chef played by Brendan Gleeson (“Alone in Berlin“, “Live By Night“).
Vision AND sound! Paddington with incarcerated friends, including Brendan Gleeson (centre).
The cast all seem to revel in their parts, with Hugh Bonneville (“Viceroy’s House“, “The Monuments Men“) energetic as Mr Brown and Oscar runner-up (surely!) Sally Hawkins (“The Shape of Water“) very chirpy as Mrs Brown. All of the residents of Windsor Gardens are a who’s who of UK film and TV, and each cameo has a lovely little tale behind it: Julie Walters (“Brooklyn“) as Mrs Bird, the Brown’s help; Sanjeev Bhaskar as Dr Jafri, forever nearly locking himself out; Miss Kitts (Jessica Hynes) and the crusty Colonel Lancaster (Ben Miller) in a ‘will they/won’t they’ potential romance. Elsewhere, Jim Broadbent (“Bridget Jones Baby“, “Eddie the Eagle“) is great as the antique store owner; Tom Conti adds both gravitas and humour as Judge Biggleswade and Richard Ayoade (“The Double“) is very funny as a forensic expert.
The Brown family: from left; Mr Brown (Hugh Bonneville); Jonathan (Samuel Joslin); Mrs Brown (Sally Hawkins); Mrs Bird (Julie Walters); and Judy Brown (Madeleine Harris).
Head and shoulders above all of them though is Hugh Grant who is just outstandingly good as the puffed-up and self-important ham-actor. His Best Supporting Actor nomination for a BAFTA was surprising, but having seen the film so very much deserved. Hang around in the end credits for his last words of the film which are cornily hilarious! One can only hope that Phoenix Buchanen returns for Paddington 3.
A career best… Hugh Grant as the devilishly slippery Phoenix Buchanan.
I would have thought that some of the scenes towards the end of the film, particularly one where Paddington seems doomed to a watery end, might be a little frightening for younger viewers. Thank heavens Sally Hawkins has gills! 🙂
Overall, this is a movie I would gladly watch again, with or without kids. In a movie landscape that is pretty devoid of good comedy, here is a movie that really did make me laugh out loud.
Having not seen the first “Paddington”, also directed by Paul King, there is a useful little flashback to the Peruvian origins of the little chap before we pitch into the plot proper. Paddington (voiced by Ben Wishaw, “Spectre“) has nicely settled down to life with The Brown’s in their London home and is a well-loved member of the community (well, well loved that is by everyone except the cranky Mr Curry (Peter Capaldi, “Dr Who“, “World War Z“). But he longs to buy his Aunt Lucy (Imelda Staunton, “Finding Your Feet“) a special birthday present – a pop-up book of London scenes that he’s seen in a local antique shop. But for that he needs a lot of cash, and so proceeds to earn it through a variety of different jobs.
However, fading actor Phoenix Buchanan (Hugh Grant, “Florence Foster Jenkins“, “The Man From U.N.C.L.E.“) also shows an unhealty interest in the book and, after it disappears from the shop with Paddington’s paw prints all over the scene, the poor bear finds himself on the wrong side of the law.
This is a continually inventive movie, which rockets along with truly impressive verve and panache from scene to scene. As a particular example of this, an animated walk through the pop-up book is marvellously done: a tribute to the 2D retro nature (even in those days!) of the TV animation of the 70’s that will go over the heads of younger viewers. There are plenty of slapstick scenes – notably of Paddington trying window cleaning, and his job in a barber’s shop – which will not only delight younger children but also made this 57 year old laugh out loud too! The prison sequence also delights, with a laundry blunder by the bear leading into a comical showdown with the prison’s chief poisoner, sorry, head chef played by Brendan Gleeson (“Alone in Berlin“, “Live By Night“).
Vision AND sound! Paddington with incarcerated friends, including Brendan Gleeson (centre).
The cast all seem to revel in their parts, with Hugh Bonneville (“Viceroy’s House“, “The Monuments Men“) energetic as Mr Brown and Oscar runner-up (surely!) Sally Hawkins (“The Shape of Water“) very chirpy as Mrs Brown. All of the residents of Windsor Gardens are a who’s who of UK film and TV, and each cameo has a lovely little tale behind it: Julie Walters (“Brooklyn“) as Mrs Bird, the Brown’s help; Sanjeev Bhaskar as Dr Jafri, forever nearly locking himself out; Miss Kitts (Jessica Hynes) and the crusty Colonel Lancaster (Ben Miller) in a ‘will they/won’t they’ potential romance. Elsewhere, Jim Broadbent (“Bridget Jones Baby“, “Eddie the Eagle“) is great as the antique store owner; Tom Conti adds both gravitas and humour as Judge Biggleswade and Richard Ayoade (“The Double“) is very funny as a forensic expert.
The Brown family: from left; Mr Brown (Hugh Bonneville); Jonathan (Samuel Joslin); Mrs Brown (Sally Hawkins); Mrs Bird (Julie Walters); and Judy Brown (Madeleine Harris).
Head and shoulders above all of them though is Hugh Grant who is just outstandingly good as the puffed-up and self-important ham-actor. His Best Supporting Actor nomination for a BAFTA was surprising, but having seen the film so very much deserved. Hang around in the end credits for his last words of the film which are cornily hilarious! One can only hope that Phoenix Buchanen returns for Paddington 3.
A career best… Hugh Grant as the devilishly slippery Phoenix Buchanan.
I would have thought that some of the scenes towards the end of the film, particularly one where Paddington seems doomed to a watery end, might be a little frightening for younger viewers. Thank heavens Sally Hawkins has gills! 🙂
Overall, this is a movie I would gladly watch again, with or without kids. In a movie landscape that is pretty devoid of good comedy, here is a movie that really did make me laugh out loud.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem (AVP 2) (2007) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem starts by picking up where the last film ended with the alien causing havoc on the predator ship, forcing it into crashing into small town America. With the alien causing havoc killing everybody or anything that gets in its way, we get to meet the town’s people who we must care about, bad boy just returned to town Dallas (Pasquale), returning solider Kelly (Aylesworth), her family Tim (Trammell) daughter Molly (Gade) sheriff Morales (Ortiz), troubled teenager Ricky (Lewis) and his crush Jesse (Hager).
As the people of the town go about their daily lives, the predators are preparing to clean up the mess left in this small town but will they make it before the aliens cause too much damage or can they face a new threat in a predator-alien hybrid.
Thoughts on Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem
Characters/Performance – Dallas is the bad boy rebel who just happens to return to town the same day the crash happens. Kelly is the returning solider who is dealing with the idea that her young daughter has lost her connection with her while she was away but now must use her skills to save her daughter. Morales is the sheriff and old running buddy of Dallas who has put his bad boy ways behind him. Ricky gives us the high school dynamics with his crush on the beautiful Jesse who has an arsehole boyfriend.
Performance wise, well this is one of the negatives, Pasquale does struggle in the leading role, while it is partly down to writing and performance because Reiko doesn’t reach the levels of an alien trend setting strong leading ladies. The rest of the performances are largely forgettable with Hager clearly hired for her look.
Story – The pure story is in parts very interesting, we know how deadly the aliens are and after last time we know the predators place in the battle. We know aliens will kill anybody which this film isn’t afraid to play on and we also see the swarm mentality which is caused with the aliens spreading. With these parts all in place this film does still end up coming off messy in places though because the humans are written so badly with the final pay off feeling flat.
Action/Horror/Sci-Fi – The action is mindless and a lot is in too darker location so you can’t see what is happening with the horror side working in places but not in all scenes it needs to, with the sci-fi elements coming from building for the next part of the franchise which never happened.
Settings – Moving the action to a small town ups the stakes in the film, which also gives us a chance to see how deadly the aliens can be spreading through a population. This gives us a chance to get a large body count but also characters we don’t know anything about.
Special Effects – Most of the effects are good it is the lighting which hinders this film in places.
Final Thoughts – This is a great idea for a sequel but it has problems all over it, mostly coming from badly executed action sequences that have large jump cuts, no lighting for those scenes and horribly written human character.
https://moviesreview101.com/2017/11/19/aliens-vs-predator-requiem-2007/
As the people of the town go about their daily lives, the predators are preparing to clean up the mess left in this small town but will they make it before the aliens cause too much damage or can they face a new threat in a predator-alien hybrid.
Thoughts on Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem
Characters/Performance – Dallas is the bad boy rebel who just happens to return to town the same day the crash happens. Kelly is the returning solider who is dealing with the idea that her young daughter has lost her connection with her while she was away but now must use her skills to save her daughter. Morales is the sheriff and old running buddy of Dallas who has put his bad boy ways behind him. Ricky gives us the high school dynamics with his crush on the beautiful Jesse who has an arsehole boyfriend.
Performance wise, well this is one of the negatives, Pasquale does struggle in the leading role, while it is partly down to writing and performance because Reiko doesn’t reach the levels of an alien trend setting strong leading ladies. The rest of the performances are largely forgettable with Hager clearly hired for her look.
Story – The pure story is in parts very interesting, we know how deadly the aliens are and after last time we know the predators place in the battle. We know aliens will kill anybody which this film isn’t afraid to play on and we also see the swarm mentality which is caused with the aliens spreading. With these parts all in place this film does still end up coming off messy in places though because the humans are written so badly with the final pay off feeling flat.
Action/Horror/Sci-Fi – The action is mindless and a lot is in too darker location so you can’t see what is happening with the horror side working in places but not in all scenes it needs to, with the sci-fi elements coming from building for the next part of the franchise which never happened.
Settings – Moving the action to a small town ups the stakes in the film, which also gives us a chance to see how deadly the aliens can be spreading through a population. This gives us a chance to get a large body count but also characters we don’t know anything about.
Special Effects – Most of the effects are good it is the lighting which hinders this film in places.
Final Thoughts – This is a great idea for a sequel but it has problems all over it, mostly coming from badly executed action sequences that have large jump cuts, no lighting for those scenes and horribly written human character.
https://moviesreview101.com/2017/11/19/aliens-vs-predator-requiem-2007/
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Deepwater Horizon (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“Full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing” could be a summary of this modern-age disaster movie. In 2010 the “Deepwater Horizon” drilling rig off the coast of Louisiana failed in spectacular fashion, bursting into flames and spewing millions of barrels of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico in what was the worst oil-spill in American history. Mark Wahlberg plays the well-respected electrical ‘Mr fixit’ Mike Williams on the rig, reporting to the Operations Manager Jimmy Harrell (Kurt Russell).
The exploratory project is way-behind and BP are not happy. Big-wigs from the company add support to Donald Vidrine, the BP site leader, in applying mounting pressure on Harrell to press on regardless without all the necessary and time-consuming tests by Schlumberger being completed. Rogue numbers in further tests are waved away as ‘glitches’. A familiar story of corporate greed and pressure overriding the expert’s better judgment.
When disaster strikes it strikes quickly, with some spectacular and exciting special effects that leave the audience especially hot under the collar. Female support is provided by the comely Andrea Fleytas (Gina Rodriguez), given the almost impossible job of keeping the floating bomb on station as chaos reigns about her. As an audience we are back on familiar ground here from classic Irwin Allen disaster movies such as “The Towering Inferno” and “The Poseidon Adventure”. Who will make it, and who won’t?
A more telling question here is “Do we care?” and unfortunately for the film, the answer is “Not really”. This feels a callous thing to say when this was a real and recent event and eleven people and – as touchingly illustrated at the end of the film in tribute – many of them family men with young kids, never went home again. But film-wise, we only really get bought into the fate of Williams, whose back-story, with cute wife (Kate Hudson) and cute daughter (Stella Allen) we get to meet and sympathize with.
We get a minimalist view of Fleytas’s backstory, but only enough to provide a recurring “Mustang” reference. And that’s it. All the other characters are just two-dimensional “rig crew”: cannon-fodder for the special effects team. The screenplay by Matthew Sand and Matthew Carnahan really doesn’t deliver enough heft to get us bought in.
While the special effects are good, the sound design isn’t, with much of the dialogue being incomprehensible.
All the acting is fine, with the ever-watchable John Malkovich nicely portraying the corporate head you love to hate. Wahlberg as well delivers enough range to make you forget in this “action mode” that he was also in “Ted”. And Rodriguez as a junior lead holds her own against the big guns in what is a creditable performance in a big film role for her.
While “Lone Survivor”/”Battleship” director Peter Berg neatly provides an insight into life on and around rigs, and (via subtitles) descriptions of the drilling process which I found interesting, this comes down to the sum of a tense build up, an hour of frenetic disaster, and then a whimper of an ending. Where were some of the dramatic scenes of conflict in the congressional hearing that the film’s opening implies might come? Where are the scenes of ecological disaster and local financial ruin to add emotional angles to the story? None of this is really exploited and the whole concoction comes across a bit “meh” as a result. Not a bad film by any means. But not one I will remember in a month or two’s time.
The exploratory project is way-behind and BP are not happy. Big-wigs from the company add support to Donald Vidrine, the BP site leader, in applying mounting pressure on Harrell to press on regardless without all the necessary and time-consuming tests by Schlumberger being completed. Rogue numbers in further tests are waved away as ‘glitches’. A familiar story of corporate greed and pressure overriding the expert’s better judgment.
When disaster strikes it strikes quickly, with some spectacular and exciting special effects that leave the audience especially hot under the collar. Female support is provided by the comely Andrea Fleytas (Gina Rodriguez), given the almost impossible job of keeping the floating bomb on station as chaos reigns about her. As an audience we are back on familiar ground here from classic Irwin Allen disaster movies such as “The Towering Inferno” and “The Poseidon Adventure”. Who will make it, and who won’t?
A more telling question here is “Do we care?” and unfortunately for the film, the answer is “Not really”. This feels a callous thing to say when this was a real and recent event and eleven people and – as touchingly illustrated at the end of the film in tribute – many of them family men with young kids, never went home again. But film-wise, we only really get bought into the fate of Williams, whose back-story, with cute wife (Kate Hudson) and cute daughter (Stella Allen) we get to meet and sympathize with.
We get a minimalist view of Fleytas’s backstory, but only enough to provide a recurring “Mustang” reference. And that’s it. All the other characters are just two-dimensional “rig crew”: cannon-fodder for the special effects team. The screenplay by Matthew Sand and Matthew Carnahan really doesn’t deliver enough heft to get us bought in.
While the special effects are good, the sound design isn’t, with much of the dialogue being incomprehensible.
All the acting is fine, with the ever-watchable John Malkovich nicely portraying the corporate head you love to hate. Wahlberg as well delivers enough range to make you forget in this “action mode” that he was also in “Ted”. And Rodriguez as a junior lead holds her own against the big guns in what is a creditable performance in a big film role for her.
While “Lone Survivor”/”Battleship” director Peter Berg neatly provides an insight into life on and around rigs, and (via subtitles) descriptions of the drilling process which I found interesting, this comes down to the sum of a tense build up, an hour of frenetic disaster, and then a whimper of an ending. Where were some of the dramatic scenes of conflict in the congressional hearing that the film’s opening implies might come? Where are the scenes of ecological disaster and local financial ruin to add emotional angles to the story? None of this is really exploited and the whole concoction comes across a bit “meh” as a result. Not a bad film by any means. But not one I will remember in a month or two’s time.
Blood Brothers: The Fatal Friendship Between Muhammad Ali and Malcolm X
Randy Roberts and Johnny Smith
Book
In 1962, boxing writers and fans considered Cassius Clay an obnoxious self-promoter, and few...