Search
Search results
Merissa (11721 KP) rated Covered (Gold Hockey Season 2, #7) in Books
Oct 31, 2022
Best one so far...
COVERED is the seventh book in the Gold Hockey Season Two series but you can read it as a standalone. Jess and Josh from book six do feature here as supporting characters, but you don't need to have read their story.
Jordyn's world exploded when she caught her husband and best friend together. She packed up her sons and their lives and moved to be near her brother. Ben can see she is hurting, but also sees the strength inside, the strength she doesn't feel. With his confidence in her, Jordyn is able to find her feet. The connection works both ways, and she is able to help him when his family issues get too big for him to contain.
This was a brilliant read! Ben and Jordyn know what they want and go for it. No messing around, no unnecessary angst, just feelings and the ability to show them in small ways. That's what got me about this book. There are no big flashy 'look at how good I am' moments. Just kind, caring, simple, and oh-so-effective times that burrow under your skin and make you yearn!
I read this book in one sitting as I simply couldn't put it down. I loved Ben and Jordyn's story, not forgetting Sammy and Marcus. The pacing is perfect, the story flowing without any hitches or jerks. Well, maybe Daniel is a jerk, but he's supposed to be!
This was a great addition to the series, the best one so far in my opinion. Now, I just need to wait for Will and Lily. Absolutely recommended by me.
** same worded review will appear elsewhere **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Jordyn's world exploded when she caught her husband and best friend together. She packed up her sons and their lives and moved to be near her brother. Ben can see she is hurting, but also sees the strength inside, the strength she doesn't feel. With his confidence in her, Jordyn is able to find her feet. The connection works both ways, and she is able to help him when his family issues get too big for him to contain.
This was a brilliant read! Ben and Jordyn know what they want and go for it. No messing around, no unnecessary angst, just feelings and the ability to show them in small ways. That's what got me about this book. There are no big flashy 'look at how good I am' moments. Just kind, caring, simple, and oh-so-effective times that burrow under your skin and make you yearn!
I read this book in one sitting as I simply couldn't put it down. I loved Ben and Jordyn's story, not forgetting Sammy and Marcus. The pacing is perfect, the story flowing without any hitches or jerks. Well, maybe Daniel is a jerk, but he's supposed to be!
This was a great addition to the series, the best one so far in my opinion. Now, I just need to wait for Will and Lily. Absolutely recommended by me.
** same worded review will appear elsewhere **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Reggie Watts recommended Dazed and Confused (1993) in Movies (curated)
Erika (17788 KP) rated Kindred (2020) in Movies
Jul 10, 2021
Kindred is a psychological thriller/horror about the reluctantly pregnant Charlotte (Tamara Lawrance) after her boyfriend, Ben (Edward Holcroft), dies in a workplace accident. After this accident, Charlotte is taken in by Ben’s mother (Fiona Shaw), and creepy stepbrother, Thomas (Jack Lowden). They proceed to basically torture her and question her sanity.
Prior to the accident, Charlotte and Ben visit the decrepit family home to announce they’re moving to Australia for a new start. It obviously did not go over well. After this visit, Charlotte finds out she’s pregnant, and that news gets passed around the small town, and that's how Ben finds out. Charlotte expresses that she doesn’t necessarily want the baby, but it was pretty much brushed aside – red flag, RUN GIRL!
This is when the main portion of the film begins, and they take her in under the guise of taking care of her and the baby. It was pretty obvious the only reason they took care of her, because she was the incubator for the grandchild.
This was basically a 21st Century version of Gaslight (1940/1944). The film wasn’t necessarily unique, and the ending was as expected. As always with films now, it’s about the journey, since you already know the end. There was very heavy-handed symbolism with the crow, which for me, began to get a little tedious, but I understood why it was there.
Full disclosure, I only watched the film because Jack Lowden was in it. I figured, if it’s not good, at least there was someone pretty to look at. As I watched this, I asked myself, is Thomas just a really beautiful dummy who constantly announces he’s making lunch? Hmm.
Tamara Lawrance was great in the film, she was compelling, and you did hope that she would be successful in escaping from the creepy family, and wallpaper-peeling house. Also, I liked that she correctly portrayed the serious frustration of expressing concern to doctors and other medical personnel, and not being taken seriously because the issues are related to female reproductive organs.
My curiosity was what made me keep watching, but I wasn’t necessarily completely engaged the entire time. The tension didn’t really stay the entire time. Although I did have the issues with the predictability, I did still surprising like the film. I’m glad I didn’t let it Rest in Peace in my Hulu watchlist graveyard.
Prior to the accident, Charlotte and Ben visit the decrepit family home to announce they’re moving to Australia for a new start. It obviously did not go over well. After this visit, Charlotte finds out she’s pregnant, and that news gets passed around the small town, and that's how Ben finds out. Charlotte expresses that she doesn’t necessarily want the baby, but it was pretty much brushed aside – red flag, RUN GIRL!
This is when the main portion of the film begins, and they take her in under the guise of taking care of her and the baby. It was pretty obvious the only reason they took care of her, because she was the incubator for the grandchild.
This was basically a 21st Century version of Gaslight (1940/1944). The film wasn’t necessarily unique, and the ending was as expected. As always with films now, it’s about the journey, since you already know the end. There was very heavy-handed symbolism with the crow, which for me, began to get a little tedious, but I understood why it was there.
Full disclosure, I only watched the film because Jack Lowden was in it. I figured, if it’s not good, at least there was someone pretty to look at. As I watched this, I asked myself, is Thomas just a really beautiful dummy who constantly announces he’s making lunch? Hmm.
Tamara Lawrance was great in the film, she was compelling, and you did hope that she would be successful in escaping from the creepy family, and wallpaper-peeling house. Also, I liked that she correctly portrayed the serious frustration of expressing concern to doctors and other medical personnel, and not being taken seriously because the issues are related to female reproductive organs.
My curiosity was what made me keep watching, but I wasn’t necessarily completely engaged the entire time. The tension didn’t really stay the entire time. Although I did have the issues with the predictability, I did still surprising like the film. I’m glad I didn’t let it Rest in Peace in my Hulu watchlist graveyard.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Selfless (2015) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
I’ll keep this short.
What if the extremely brilliant minds, could live another 50 years on this earth after their body is about to expire by transporting their mind into a new, younger body…could those minds continue to create amazing legacy? This is the premise for the film Self/less. Ben Kingsley plays Damian, a wealthy business tycoon type who is dying of cancer decides to “shed” his body for a younger healthy body. That body is played by Ryan Reynolds. But when things do not exactly turn out as they appear to be, Damian has a crisis of conscience and has to decide what is right.
That being said, somewhere in this film there is a good story…they just forgot to show us the right chapters. And thus a movie about identity, doesn’t know what it is. Instead of a great nuanced psychological thriller, we get a ho-hummed derivate small action film that is not something terrible to watch, but not something encouraging you to seek it out. In the end, this is really a redbox movie. And that’s a shame
http://sknr.net/2015/07/10/selfless/
What if the extremely brilliant minds, could live another 50 years on this earth after their body is about to expire by transporting their mind into a new, younger body…could those minds continue to create amazing legacy? This is the premise for the film Self/less. Ben Kingsley plays Damian, a wealthy business tycoon type who is dying of cancer decides to “shed” his body for a younger healthy body. That body is played by Ryan Reynolds. But when things do not exactly turn out as they appear to be, Damian has a crisis of conscience and has to decide what is right.
That being said, somewhere in this film there is a good story…they just forgot to show us the right chapters. And thus a movie about identity, doesn’t know what it is. Instead of a great nuanced psychological thriller, we get a ho-hummed derivate small action film that is not something terrible to watch, but not something encouraging you to seek it out. In the end, this is really a redbox movie. And that’s a shame
http://sknr.net/2015/07/10/selfless/
Bong Mines Entertainment (15 KP) rated Blue on Blue - Single by Just Loud in Music
Jun 17, 2019
Just Loud is a New York-based singer-songwriter from Virginia. Not too long ago, he released a music video for his “Blue on Blue” single.
The Ben Guzman-directed audiovisual is all about getting to know who Just Loud is and his constantly changing character. The music video reflects him as an entertainer, artist, and his real self.
‘Blue on Blue’ tells an interesting tale which echoes the aftermath of a toxic relationship and downward spiral of a young guy who self-medicates.
The likable tune contains a relatable storyline, Prince-style falsetto vocals, and neo-funk instrumentation scented with an alternative-pop fragrance.
Written by Just Loud with Dave Katz “Sluggo” (Neon Trees, Good Charlotte) and Patrick Nissley (Thirty Seconds to Mars, Yungblud.
Just Loud was raised around a small county church, but his rebellious and inquisitive nature saw him cast away at the age of 15. Shortly afterward, he found himself homeless in New York on a pursuit to pursue music.
Not too long ago, he released his debut EP, entitled, “Episode 1”. The pleasant project features the Top 25 US Alternative Radio hit, “Electrified”, which has amassed millions of streams online.
https://www.bongminesentertainment.com/just-loud-blue-on-blue/
The Ben Guzman-directed audiovisual is all about getting to know who Just Loud is and his constantly changing character. The music video reflects him as an entertainer, artist, and his real self.
‘Blue on Blue’ tells an interesting tale which echoes the aftermath of a toxic relationship and downward spiral of a young guy who self-medicates.
The likable tune contains a relatable storyline, Prince-style falsetto vocals, and neo-funk instrumentation scented with an alternative-pop fragrance.
Written by Just Loud with Dave Katz “Sluggo” (Neon Trees, Good Charlotte) and Patrick Nissley (Thirty Seconds to Mars, Yungblud.
Just Loud was raised around a small county church, but his rebellious and inquisitive nature saw him cast away at the age of 15. Shortly afterward, he found himself homeless in New York on a pursuit to pursue music.
Not too long ago, he released his debut EP, entitled, “Episode 1”. The pleasant project features the Top 25 US Alternative Radio hit, “Electrified”, which has amassed millions of streams online.
https://www.bongminesentertainment.com/just-loud-blue-on-blue/
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Extract (2009) in Movies
Aug 9, 2019
While some might argue potty mouth humor is a constant from Mike Judge, the man behind “Office Space” and “King of the Hill”, I always seem to be curious when he takes on a new project. Judge’s latest film “Extract” combines his classic comedy style with a slightly more mature kind of humor.
A small company, Reynold’s Extract, is about to be bought out much to the joy of the depressed and sexually frustrated owner, Joel Reynold (Jason Bateman). Joel, tired of working long days with disgruntled employees, would love nothing more than returning to a simpler life at home with his wife, Suzie (Kristen Wiig). When the factories irresponsible employees accidently injure long time worker, Step, the deal begins to go south.
The sudden appearance of attractive new employee, Cindy (Mila Kunis) who has the eye of both frustrated Joel and recently damaged employee, Step, further complicates the situation. As does Reynold’s best friend, Dean (Ben Affleck), the local bartender filled with creative ideas on “bettering” Joel’s situation.
As the film progressed I keep wondering is the movie really funny or is Jason Bateman just so entertaining that it doesn’t matter. The honest truth is probably a little of both. With that said I did laugh, mostly at the blatant delivery by the aforementioned Bateman and at the scattered comedic moments derived from the unexpected nature of the film, it is not everyday you encounter a movie about an flavor extract company.
The eclectic cast of actors, from various avenues of fame, works seamlessly together. The most unexpected acting choice is Ben Affleck as Dean a role that could have filled by any number of lesser celebrities, possibly Rob Schneider.
Still the plot is unique and the story varies greatly from Judge’s traditional support of the working class. In “Extract” the protagonist is the boss man, not an underpaid employee.
A delightful little flick about working, neighbors, and other relationships, “Extract” is a creative yet diluted tale
A small company, Reynold’s Extract, is about to be bought out much to the joy of the depressed and sexually frustrated owner, Joel Reynold (Jason Bateman). Joel, tired of working long days with disgruntled employees, would love nothing more than returning to a simpler life at home with his wife, Suzie (Kristen Wiig). When the factories irresponsible employees accidently injure long time worker, Step, the deal begins to go south.
The sudden appearance of attractive new employee, Cindy (Mila Kunis) who has the eye of both frustrated Joel and recently damaged employee, Step, further complicates the situation. As does Reynold’s best friend, Dean (Ben Affleck), the local bartender filled with creative ideas on “bettering” Joel’s situation.
As the film progressed I keep wondering is the movie really funny or is Jason Bateman just so entertaining that it doesn’t matter. The honest truth is probably a little of both. With that said I did laugh, mostly at the blatant delivery by the aforementioned Bateman and at the scattered comedic moments derived from the unexpected nature of the film, it is not everyday you encounter a movie about an flavor extract company.
The eclectic cast of actors, from various avenues of fame, works seamlessly together. The most unexpected acting choice is Ben Affleck as Dean a role that could have filled by any number of lesser celebrities, possibly Rob Schneider.
Still the plot is unique and the story varies greatly from Judge’s traditional support of the working class. In “Extract” the protagonist is the boss man, not an underpaid employee.
A delightful little flick about working, neighbors, and other relationships, “Extract” is a creative yet diluted tale
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Ben-Hur (2016) in Movies
Feb 20, 2019
Who thought it was a good idea to remake Ben-Hur? Well, on paper, it would seem to be a possibility. Ben-Hur has been hitting our cinema screens since 1907, with three other theatrical versions before this one; a short silent effort in 1907, the 1925 silent epic and the blockbusting MGM epic from 1959.
But this follows stage plays, TV movies and even animated movies, all based on General Lee Wallace's 1880 novel of the same name. But if a comparison is to be made, let us focus on the 1959 Charlton Heston movie. That, which ran for over three and half hours, takes its time to establish characters and situations, then takes us on a journey across the Roman Empire as we follow the turmoil of Judah Ben-Hur, betrayed by his best friend, a Roman who he considered to be a brother.
This journey takes place and parallels the life and ultimate execution of Jesus Christ and with this parallel, Judah is gradually inspired to temper his vengeance against his friend turned enemy and after the famous chariot race and the hollow victory therein, he will witness the crucifixion and through several machinations, find solace in the fledgling Christian movement.
So, how does this version hold up? To the 1959 version; not very well. This two-hour action movie is centred around the chariot race from start to finish, something which happens in the second act of the 1959 version but this is NOT the conclusion, but a catalyst for the finale.
Here, even though the events play out in a similar fashion, they are rushed and none of the character moments are earned. It is as if the film was pitched soley on the concept of showing an action packed chariot race in the 21st century.
If you want to see a modern interpretation of this race, possibly cinema's greatest such sequence, then look at Star Wars: Episode I's Podrace which captures the spirit perfectly. The positioning of this race and its significance to the plot was the same in the 1925 version as well, yet the fifteen minute 1907 short pretty much cherry picked the same plot elements as this 2016 version, which is quite telling really.
There was little interest in the story, just a cynical desire to bring this iconic movie back to the big screen and milk it as they would any franchise. But Ben-Hur is a poisoned chalice, so iconic that it would have to have offered something new without losing the original feel to succeed, as this classic simply did not warrant a remake.
But if you are going to remake it, give it a mega budget, which they did not, an all star cast, again, not the case and bring on board a top director to lead this project.
Instead we have a cast of relative unknowns, with Morgan Freeman being the most notable cast member, the director of such movies as Wanted (2007) and a small budget of just $100,000,000, when a blockbuster these days is usually pushing $200,000,000.
The main selling point for the previous two Ben-Hurs was the scale. These were epics and pushed the technology, filmmaking styles and never shied away from the strong religious overtones. Here it looks like it is given little more than lip service hoping to pander to the religious right.
It failed. Darren Aronofsky's Noah (2013) made more of an impact and it divided audiences, but at least it was faithful to itself, pushed boundaries and left its mark on cinema.
But by the end, my jaw was literally on the floor as the maimed Massalia reconciled with Judah and the pair ride off into the sunset together, all forgiven....
WHAT!!!
And more importantly, what was the point? Jesus sacrified himself, (in the story) so that people like Judah would put down their swords and learn to forgive, yet in the end, Judah and Massalia sacrifice nothing as they both regain their friendship and live happily ever after. In the previous versions, Ben-Hur beat Massalia but he has the last laugh as his mother and sister have been left with leprosy, that is until Jesus' death sparks a miracle which cures them. This was his reward for seeing the error of his ways, not getting his family and his friend back.
In the end, this is not a bad action romp, very watchable and is an entertaining spectacle but ultimately forgettable. It will entertain for two hours but leaves you with nothing to think about, unlike the books, plays and films which have preceded this.
A real shame...
But this follows stage plays, TV movies and even animated movies, all based on General Lee Wallace's 1880 novel of the same name. But if a comparison is to be made, let us focus on the 1959 Charlton Heston movie. That, which ran for over three and half hours, takes its time to establish characters and situations, then takes us on a journey across the Roman Empire as we follow the turmoil of Judah Ben-Hur, betrayed by his best friend, a Roman who he considered to be a brother.
This journey takes place and parallels the life and ultimate execution of Jesus Christ and with this parallel, Judah is gradually inspired to temper his vengeance against his friend turned enemy and after the famous chariot race and the hollow victory therein, he will witness the crucifixion and through several machinations, find solace in the fledgling Christian movement.
So, how does this version hold up? To the 1959 version; not very well. This two-hour action movie is centred around the chariot race from start to finish, something which happens in the second act of the 1959 version but this is NOT the conclusion, but a catalyst for the finale.
Here, even though the events play out in a similar fashion, they are rushed and none of the character moments are earned. It is as if the film was pitched soley on the concept of showing an action packed chariot race in the 21st century.
If you want to see a modern interpretation of this race, possibly cinema's greatest such sequence, then look at Star Wars: Episode I's Podrace which captures the spirit perfectly. The positioning of this race and its significance to the plot was the same in the 1925 version as well, yet the fifteen minute 1907 short pretty much cherry picked the same plot elements as this 2016 version, which is quite telling really.
There was little interest in the story, just a cynical desire to bring this iconic movie back to the big screen and milk it as they would any franchise. But Ben-Hur is a poisoned chalice, so iconic that it would have to have offered something new without losing the original feel to succeed, as this classic simply did not warrant a remake.
But if you are going to remake it, give it a mega budget, which they did not, an all star cast, again, not the case and bring on board a top director to lead this project.
Instead we have a cast of relative unknowns, with Morgan Freeman being the most notable cast member, the director of such movies as Wanted (2007) and a small budget of just $100,000,000, when a blockbuster these days is usually pushing $200,000,000.
The main selling point for the previous two Ben-Hurs was the scale. These were epics and pushed the technology, filmmaking styles and never shied away from the strong religious overtones. Here it looks like it is given little more than lip service hoping to pander to the religious right.
It failed. Darren Aronofsky's Noah (2013) made more of an impact and it divided audiences, but at least it was faithful to itself, pushed boundaries and left its mark on cinema.
But by the end, my jaw was literally on the floor as the maimed Massalia reconciled with Judah and the pair ride off into the sunset together, all forgiven....
WHAT!!!
And more importantly, what was the point? Jesus sacrified himself, (in the story) so that people like Judah would put down their swords and learn to forgive, yet in the end, Judah and Massalia sacrifice nothing as they both regain their friendship and live happily ever after. In the previous versions, Ben-Hur beat Massalia but he has the last laugh as his mother and sister have been left with leprosy, that is until Jesus' death sparks a miracle which cures them. This was his reward for seeing the error of his ways, not getting his family and his friend back.
In the end, this is not a bad action romp, very watchable and is an entertaining spectacle but ultimately forgettable. It will entertain for two hours but leaves you with nothing to think about, unlike the books, plays and films which have preceded this.
A real shame...
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Savages (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Over the past 15 years, Oliver Stone’s films have been kind of hit or miss to me. It’s as if Stone is still trying to make the same controversial films he became popular for in the 80’s and early 90’s. Only, as an audience, we have become keen to his filmmaking style and therefore his more recent work suffers from the apathy of a “show me something new” culture. Still, despite his failures, Stone does not makes apologies for his work while he continues in his quest to make films about controversial subjects. This time around Stone strives to take us into the violent world of the Mexican drug cartels though a film adaptation of the novel Savages by Don Winslow.
As the film opens we are introduced to “O” (Blake Lively) who, as our narrator, acquaints us with the open yet loving relationship she shares with our two protagonists, Chon and Ben. Chon (Taylor Kitsch), an ex-Navy SEAL, is unquestionably the muscle of the trio’s operation. Chon was the original financier for his high school friend Ben, (Aaron Johnson) the peaceful, charitable, botany genius who has created the most potent marijuana in the world. Together these two embody the perfect man for O, while the three of them enjoy the spoils of the small marijuana empire they created in southern California.
That is until they gain the attention from a Mexican cartel intent on creating a stronger foothold in the southern California area. The cartel offers them a partnership and explains that by teaming up their business will triple in three years. But when the trio refuse the offer, the ruthless head of the cartel, Elena (Selma Hayek), instructs her enforcer, Lado (Benicio Del Toro), to kidnap O and hold her hostage so the boys will cooperate. Soon our heroes use their network of connections, like crooked DEA agent Dennis (John Travolta) and financial broker Spin (Emile Hirsch), to battle the cartel in a series of savage maneuvers to get back their one “shared” love.
Stone has been known to inspire his actors to give Oscar worthy performances. Sadly, you will not find any such performances here. That is not to say that the acting was terrible. It just seemed that the characters themselves are uninspired which is a shame because I would have liked to have seen some growth in this young cast, especially from Taylor Kitsch.
I feel that many critics will be hard on Taylor Kitsch because of his previous epic fails of 2012 (John Carter and Battleship) however I am surprised to admit that, for this movie at least, he gets a pass in my book. Not because he delivers a fantastic performance that makes me believe he’s truly an up and coming talent, but rather because he is convincing in his portrayal of Chon. When O describes our protagonists as each being one half of the perfect man, she refers to Chon as “Hard Steel,” which is exactly what Kitsch plays him as, a one-dimensional, emotionally devoid character with no growth or any real redeeming qualities other than the ability to go to war. Regardless of whether or not Kitsch has any additional acting range not showcased in this film, I cannot penalize him for his performance in this movie. He fit the part that he was cast in fine.
Blake Lively (Gossip Girl, Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants) plays O, short for Ophelia. And yes she channels the mad, love-struck, melancholic character from Hamlet after whom she is named. And while it is easy to make those comparisons to the character of this film, they only appear to be on the surface, if anything. And herein lies the problem. Regardless of how you feel about her open relationship with Ben and Chon, the more I learned about her, the less I cared. Like Kitsch’s character, O is boring and one dimensional. She is the product of being a pretty little rich girl whose mother is off somewhere with husband number twelve. She has been getting stoned every day since she was young and the only place she finds herself loved is in with the company of Chon and Ben. Tragic, I know. While watching the film I honestly thought to myself, if I was Ben or Chon, I would say, “Fuck it. Cut her loose and let’s go to Asia.” She has no redeeming qualities other than being good looking and a good lay. So why would they go through so much trouble for her? The trio’s relationship is weakly tied together by her telling us through narration but never really materializes on screen. At times you get some of a feeling that Ben actually loves her but that love is never really reciprocated from O. It is safe to say that that I did not derive any loving connection from Lively’s performance, though her deliver as a narrator was tolerable.
Aaron Johnson (Kick-Ass) is the one redeeming performance from this young cast. In contrast to Chon, O describes Ben as “Soft Wood” which makes him the better half. Ben is the one character who actually goes through some kind of character arc and growth. Using the wood analogy, we watch him bend from the peaceful Buddhist businessman to the man who will sacrifice everything, to get back this woman he loves. Nowhere is this better embodied than when Ben is faced with the tough choice of sticking to his peaceful beliefs or incinerating a man in cold blood during one of their moves against the cartel. I found myself actually curious about what Ben would do next. Unlike Chon and O, Ben has some depth and struggles with his personal beliefs, his love for O and what needs to be done. Needless to say, Johnson delivers a believable performance that actually helps move along the action and was the only protagonist that kept me interested in their battle.
In addition to Johnson, the film is littered with several strong supporting cast members who all deliver solid performances. Selma Hayek is strong as Elena, the leader of the cartel that challenges Ben and Chon. She is a ruthless and shrewd businesswoman and yet has a better “sense of morality” as she explains during her interactions with O and her own daughter. Her enforcer Lado is played by Benicio Del Toro who, with the help of an uncomfortable rapist mustache, comes off as an extremely menacing character. Del Toro solidifies himself on screen by being down right creepy and yet intelligent in his own savage way. During every moment of screen time you expect him to kill someone just because it is good for business.
A needed bit of change of pace is provided by an unexpected performance by Emile Hirsch (Into the Wild) as Ben and Chon’s witty financial broker, Spin. As well as by John Travolta who plays Dennis, the dirty DEA agent who’s in Ben and Chon’s pocket. In fact, even though Travolta’s screen time is maybe a total of 12 minutes, his performance steals the show with his sole bit of comic relief, for lack of a better explanation. Perhaps the strongest acted moment of this film is during a standoff scene between Del Toro and Travolta that in many ways makes me want to know more about those characters. And what that movie would be about.
In typical Stone fashion the movie is shot in a variety of film angles and stylistic devices used to foreshadow and at times create a foreboding presence. Visually the movie provides a strong and believable feeling for the world these characters live in and the way that they operate their business. In addition, narration is used at points to move along the action and provide the audience with insight that otherwise would not have been possible on performances alone. I personally have no problem with narration as long as it is set up from the beginning and used to advance the story, which it is. However in the final act, the movie introduces a film device from left field that completely kills the already weak pacing of the movie. I cannot get into it without giving away the story, but I can see how this device could completely ruin the movie for those patrons who are already disinterested by the time the final act rolls around. Especially for those who do not find any connection to any of the characters. In which case, the pacing of this film will seem slow and drawn out.
I am torn about my review of this film. Savages is something that I wanted to like more than I did. Two of the three protagonists are one dimensional and if it was not for Johnson and the strong supporting cast I might have found the movie boring. It was also completely different from the expectations set by the commercials. Those looking for an action movie will feel misled and will more than likely be disappointed with the film. Not that there is not any action, only it comes between very long periods of dialogue and slow pacing. By the end of the movie, you are either invested in these characters or just waiting for the lights to come up in the theater. And in typical Oliver Stone fashion the movie tries to make us question our own perception of just what it means to be a savage.
As the film opens we are introduced to “O” (Blake Lively) who, as our narrator, acquaints us with the open yet loving relationship she shares with our two protagonists, Chon and Ben. Chon (Taylor Kitsch), an ex-Navy SEAL, is unquestionably the muscle of the trio’s operation. Chon was the original financier for his high school friend Ben, (Aaron Johnson) the peaceful, charitable, botany genius who has created the most potent marijuana in the world. Together these two embody the perfect man for O, while the three of them enjoy the spoils of the small marijuana empire they created in southern California.
That is until they gain the attention from a Mexican cartel intent on creating a stronger foothold in the southern California area. The cartel offers them a partnership and explains that by teaming up their business will triple in three years. But when the trio refuse the offer, the ruthless head of the cartel, Elena (Selma Hayek), instructs her enforcer, Lado (Benicio Del Toro), to kidnap O and hold her hostage so the boys will cooperate. Soon our heroes use their network of connections, like crooked DEA agent Dennis (John Travolta) and financial broker Spin (Emile Hirsch), to battle the cartel in a series of savage maneuvers to get back their one “shared” love.
Stone has been known to inspire his actors to give Oscar worthy performances. Sadly, you will not find any such performances here. That is not to say that the acting was terrible. It just seemed that the characters themselves are uninspired which is a shame because I would have liked to have seen some growth in this young cast, especially from Taylor Kitsch.
I feel that many critics will be hard on Taylor Kitsch because of his previous epic fails of 2012 (John Carter and Battleship) however I am surprised to admit that, for this movie at least, he gets a pass in my book. Not because he delivers a fantastic performance that makes me believe he’s truly an up and coming talent, but rather because he is convincing in his portrayal of Chon. When O describes our protagonists as each being one half of the perfect man, she refers to Chon as “Hard Steel,” which is exactly what Kitsch plays him as, a one-dimensional, emotionally devoid character with no growth or any real redeeming qualities other than the ability to go to war. Regardless of whether or not Kitsch has any additional acting range not showcased in this film, I cannot penalize him for his performance in this movie. He fit the part that he was cast in fine.
Blake Lively (Gossip Girl, Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants) plays O, short for Ophelia. And yes she channels the mad, love-struck, melancholic character from Hamlet after whom she is named. And while it is easy to make those comparisons to the character of this film, they only appear to be on the surface, if anything. And herein lies the problem. Regardless of how you feel about her open relationship with Ben and Chon, the more I learned about her, the less I cared. Like Kitsch’s character, O is boring and one dimensional. She is the product of being a pretty little rich girl whose mother is off somewhere with husband number twelve. She has been getting stoned every day since she was young and the only place she finds herself loved is in with the company of Chon and Ben. Tragic, I know. While watching the film I honestly thought to myself, if I was Ben or Chon, I would say, “Fuck it. Cut her loose and let’s go to Asia.” She has no redeeming qualities other than being good looking and a good lay. So why would they go through so much trouble for her? The trio’s relationship is weakly tied together by her telling us through narration but never really materializes on screen. At times you get some of a feeling that Ben actually loves her but that love is never really reciprocated from O. It is safe to say that that I did not derive any loving connection from Lively’s performance, though her deliver as a narrator was tolerable.
Aaron Johnson (Kick-Ass) is the one redeeming performance from this young cast. In contrast to Chon, O describes Ben as “Soft Wood” which makes him the better half. Ben is the one character who actually goes through some kind of character arc and growth. Using the wood analogy, we watch him bend from the peaceful Buddhist businessman to the man who will sacrifice everything, to get back this woman he loves. Nowhere is this better embodied than when Ben is faced with the tough choice of sticking to his peaceful beliefs or incinerating a man in cold blood during one of their moves against the cartel. I found myself actually curious about what Ben would do next. Unlike Chon and O, Ben has some depth and struggles with his personal beliefs, his love for O and what needs to be done. Needless to say, Johnson delivers a believable performance that actually helps move along the action and was the only protagonist that kept me interested in their battle.
In addition to Johnson, the film is littered with several strong supporting cast members who all deliver solid performances. Selma Hayek is strong as Elena, the leader of the cartel that challenges Ben and Chon. She is a ruthless and shrewd businesswoman and yet has a better “sense of morality” as she explains during her interactions with O and her own daughter. Her enforcer Lado is played by Benicio Del Toro who, with the help of an uncomfortable rapist mustache, comes off as an extremely menacing character. Del Toro solidifies himself on screen by being down right creepy and yet intelligent in his own savage way. During every moment of screen time you expect him to kill someone just because it is good for business.
A needed bit of change of pace is provided by an unexpected performance by Emile Hirsch (Into the Wild) as Ben and Chon’s witty financial broker, Spin. As well as by John Travolta who plays Dennis, the dirty DEA agent who’s in Ben and Chon’s pocket. In fact, even though Travolta’s screen time is maybe a total of 12 minutes, his performance steals the show with his sole bit of comic relief, for lack of a better explanation. Perhaps the strongest acted moment of this film is during a standoff scene between Del Toro and Travolta that in many ways makes me want to know more about those characters. And what that movie would be about.
In typical Stone fashion the movie is shot in a variety of film angles and stylistic devices used to foreshadow and at times create a foreboding presence. Visually the movie provides a strong and believable feeling for the world these characters live in and the way that they operate their business. In addition, narration is used at points to move along the action and provide the audience with insight that otherwise would not have been possible on performances alone. I personally have no problem with narration as long as it is set up from the beginning and used to advance the story, which it is. However in the final act, the movie introduces a film device from left field that completely kills the already weak pacing of the movie. I cannot get into it without giving away the story, but I can see how this device could completely ruin the movie for those patrons who are already disinterested by the time the final act rolls around. Especially for those who do not find any connection to any of the characters. In which case, the pacing of this film will seem slow and drawn out.
I am torn about my review of this film. Savages is something that I wanted to like more than I did. Two of the three protagonists are one dimensional and if it was not for Johnson and the strong supporting cast I might have found the movie boring. It was also completely different from the expectations set by the commercials. Those looking for an action movie will feel misled and will more than likely be disappointed with the film. Not that there is not any action, only it comes between very long periods of dialogue and slow pacing. By the end of the movie, you are either invested in these characters or just waiting for the lights to come up in the theater. And in typical Oliver Stone fashion the movie tries to make us question our own perception of just what it means to be a savage.
Hadley (567 KP) rated The Lost Causes of Bleak Creek in Books
Jan 21, 2020
Likable characters (1 more)
Great storyline
If your best friend was sent away to a reform school, what would you do? You'd either let them do their 'time,' or you would come up with a plan to help them escape, and with a pinch of the supernatural, this is what 'The Lost Causes of Bleak Creek' is all about.
When you read this novel by two of the most well-known YouTube personalities (Rhett and Link of Good Mythical Morning), be sure you have plenty of time to spare because this is a book you won't want to put down. The novel follows three best friends of a small town in North Carolina in the early 1990's, when one of them gets sent to a infamous reform school for an accident, they start to uncover mysterious deaths that have taken place there, and begin to fear that their friend is going to be a victim of one.
In 'The Lost Causes of Bleak Creek,' the main characters, Rex, Leif and Alicia, make their debut at a pig roasting to raise funds for a church, whose copper organ pipes had been stolen days before. It's here we learn that the three are making a film called PolterDog, which leads to Alicia getting sent away after a near-deadly accident with the owner and headmaster of the local Whitewood Reform School.
Soon after, Rex and Leif run into an escapee from the school (Ben), who tells them that their friend's life is in danger while she's at Whitewood. While the three come up with a plan to rescue Alicia, a woman who's visiting the town of Bleak Creek, who is trying to film a documentary about kidney stones, becomes a valuable part of their rescue mission.
Not only do we get to see from Rex and Leif's point of view, but we also get to see from inside the Whitewood Reform School from Alicia's view. This view point is much needed to help readers experience the abuse that goes on inside the school (and to realize that Ben was telling the truth) and also to help readers root for the main characters' success in their rescue mission. Even though the majority of the story is the main characters getting everything together for this mission, the writing was done so well that all of it makes sense leading up to the end.
To not give too much away about this book, I have to cut my review short of it. The writing is really good, with the pace continuously keeping the reader going and wanting more.This story also encompasses everything that makes a great novel: best friends trying to save another, small town mysteries, well-placed humor and murder. I found all of the characters likable, and the situations they found themselves in made complete sense in the story. This will be one that readers can pick up more than once and enjoy it each time they read it. As a horror book, this story is high on my scale with scenarios happening that I couldn't see coming.
When you read this novel by two of the most well-known YouTube personalities (Rhett and Link of Good Mythical Morning), be sure you have plenty of time to spare because this is a book you won't want to put down. The novel follows three best friends of a small town in North Carolina in the early 1990's, when one of them gets sent to a infamous reform school for an accident, they start to uncover mysterious deaths that have taken place there, and begin to fear that their friend is going to be a victim of one.
In 'The Lost Causes of Bleak Creek,' the main characters, Rex, Leif and Alicia, make their debut at a pig roasting to raise funds for a church, whose copper organ pipes had been stolen days before. It's here we learn that the three are making a film called PolterDog, which leads to Alicia getting sent away after a near-deadly accident with the owner and headmaster of the local Whitewood Reform School.
Soon after, Rex and Leif run into an escapee from the school (Ben), who tells them that their friend's life is in danger while she's at Whitewood. While the three come up with a plan to rescue Alicia, a woman who's visiting the town of Bleak Creek, who is trying to film a documentary about kidney stones, becomes a valuable part of their rescue mission.
Not only do we get to see from Rex and Leif's point of view, but we also get to see from inside the Whitewood Reform School from Alicia's view. This view point is much needed to help readers experience the abuse that goes on inside the school (and to realize that Ben was telling the truth) and also to help readers root for the main characters' success in their rescue mission. Even though the majority of the story is the main characters getting everything together for this mission, the writing was done so well that all of it makes sense leading up to the end.
To not give too much away about this book, I have to cut my review short of it. The writing is really good, with the pace continuously keeping the reader going and wanting more.This story also encompasses everything that makes a great novel: best friends trying to save another, small town mysteries, well-placed humor and murder. I found all of the characters likable, and the situations they found themselves in made complete sense in the story. This will be one that readers can pick up more than once and enjoy it each time they read it. As a horror book, this story is high on my scale with scenarios happening that I couldn't see coming.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Mountain Between Us (2017) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
A film not quite sure what it’s trying to be.
Idris Elba after scoring a mammoth hit with UK TV’s “Luther” has really struggled to make a breakthrough as a leading man into A-grade movies. Although he’s had some strong supporting roles (“Molly’s Game” and “Star Trek Beyond” for example) and small bit parts in the Marvel universe, when he has landed a lead role they are in films best forgotton (e.g. “Bastille Day”; “The Dark Tower”). This is seldom down to his performance. Here he is given more of a chance to shine, in what is almost a two-hander with Kate Winslet for most of the film. And he is the best thing in the film: lots of the brooding look that he is so famous for.
Elba plays Ben Bass, a neuro-surgeon stranded at Boise airport who has to get back to Baltimore for an important operation. Winslett playing Alex Martin, a famous photo-journalist, is stranded with him and equally desperate to travel as she is due to get married in New York the following day. The two club together to hire a plane from charter pilot Walter (Beau Bridges, “Homeland”, “The Descendents”). But in terrible conditions, and with a medical emergency, the plane crash lands in the snow of the Rockies, and Ben and Alex (together with Walter’s Labrador) need to struggle to survive in the wilderness. The problem is that they are an odd couple, and constantly wind each other up the wrong way.
It’s a well-worn tale that has been portrayed many times before in films like “Alive” and “The Grey”, so what makes the film live or die is the quality of the screenplay and the chemistry between the characters. Unfortunately the former by Chris Weitz (co-writer on “Rogue One“) is rather clunky, and in the latter case I just didn’t feel it. Winslett’s character is just so goddamn whiney and annoying that the thought of Ben doing anything with her other than hitting her with the shovel and feeding her to the dog seems unlikely! Winslett seems to sense that too, since I never felt she was completely invested in her character. Aside from one (impressive) monologue, I found it to be a so-so performance from her.
Aside from Elba the other star of the show is the landscape of the High Uintascape in North East Utah of the which is beautifully filmed, on location by Mandy Walker (“Hidden Figures“).
The story leaps from improbability to improbability and raises more questions than it answers: in a survival situation should you walk or stay put? If you have a dog, should you eat it* and what condiments are appropriate? Does an iced-over river have any current flowing under the ice? If they both died, would the audience care?
No spoilers with answers to any of these (*apart from the dog… just joking, they don’t!) , but the ending is as corny as you can get… but it still gave me a lump in my throat. #suckered!
Directed by Hany Abu-Assad, overall if you have a rainy afternoon you need to fill then this a perfectly pleasant movie to veg in front of, but it neither completely satisfies as a romance nor as an adventure flick but falls rather uncomfortably between the two stools.
Elba plays Ben Bass, a neuro-surgeon stranded at Boise airport who has to get back to Baltimore for an important operation. Winslett playing Alex Martin, a famous photo-journalist, is stranded with him and equally desperate to travel as she is due to get married in New York the following day. The two club together to hire a plane from charter pilot Walter (Beau Bridges, “Homeland”, “The Descendents”). But in terrible conditions, and with a medical emergency, the plane crash lands in the snow of the Rockies, and Ben and Alex (together with Walter’s Labrador) need to struggle to survive in the wilderness. The problem is that they are an odd couple, and constantly wind each other up the wrong way.
It’s a well-worn tale that has been portrayed many times before in films like “Alive” and “The Grey”, so what makes the film live or die is the quality of the screenplay and the chemistry between the characters. Unfortunately the former by Chris Weitz (co-writer on “Rogue One“) is rather clunky, and in the latter case I just didn’t feel it. Winslett’s character is just so goddamn whiney and annoying that the thought of Ben doing anything with her other than hitting her with the shovel and feeding her to the dog seems unlikely! Winslett seems to sense that too, since I never felt she was completely invested in her character. Aside from one (impressive) monologue, I found it to be a so-so performance from her.
Aside from Elba the other star of the show is the landscape of the High Uintascape in North East Utah of the which is beautifully filmed, on location by Mandy Walker (“Hidden Figures“).
The story leaps from improbability to improbability and raises more questions than it answers: in a survival situation should you walk or stay put? If you have a dog, should you eat it* and what condiments are appropriate? Does an iced-over river have any current flowing under the ice? If they both died, would the audience care?
No spoilers with answers to any of these (*apart from the dog… just joking, they don’t!) , but the ending is as corny as you can get… but it still gave me a lump in my throat. #suckered!
Directed by Hany Abu-Assad, overall if you have a rainy afternoon you need to fill then this a perfectly pleasant movie to veg in front of, but it neither completely satisfies as a romance nor as an adventure flick but falls rather uncomfortably between the two stools.