Search
Search results
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Killers of the Flower Moon: The Osage Murder and the Birth of the FBI in Books
Dec 7, 2018
<I>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</I>
It is well known that throughout history, facts have been omitted from history books. Written accounts of events ostensibly make important figures and countries appear to be in the right, whereas reality reveals otherwise. One such exclusion is the fate of the Native Americans inhabiting the southern states at the beginning of the 1900s. Children are brought up to believe the stories that “Red Indians” are bad and the cowboys are good, but this was unlikely the case. David Grann has researched into a particular period of Native American history that most people may never have heard of.<I> Killers of the Flower Moon</I> reveals the horrors innocent people faced at the hands of perfidious criminals.
The majority of the book is written as a third person narrative, recounting the lives of some of the members of the Osage Indian Nation in Oklahoma. White people, believing themselves to be superior, had forced the natives off their homelands and onto rocky, unwanted ground. What they did not anticipate, however, was the abundance of oil residing beneath the surface. The Osage went from being oppressed to being the wealthiest people in the state. Full of avarice, the whites were not going to let them get away with this fortune for long.
David Grann takes a particular interest in Mollie Burkhart, an Osage member with a white husband. Mollie had three sisters, but within a few short years they were all dead, and so was her mother. Believing they had been murdered, Mollie fears for her life. Other Osage members were also being killed, as well as those who tried to investigate the spreading slaughter. However, the case remained stubbornly unsolved.
Nevertheless, there was still hope for Mollie after the arrival of Tom White, an agent of the soon to be known as Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Determined to get to the bottom of the so-called Reign of Terror, Tom and his team carefully analyse the behaviours and motives of the disingenuous citizens, narrowing down the suspects until eventually finding their duplicitous killer.
Learning about this unknown period of history is eye opening and offers a completely new view on the relations between whites and Native Americans. It was a time of prejudice and racism, not unlike the attitude towards black people emphasised with the civil rights movement in the mid-1900s. Greed was a significant motivator, particularly where making money was involved. But, David Grann does not stop here.
The final section of <i>Killers of the Flower Moon</i> is written from the author’s perspective. As a staff writer at <i>The New Yorker</i>, the evidence of the Osage murders case intrigued David Grann, but he was concerned about some unresolved holes in the story. Determined to uncover the truth, Grann conducted his own research to discover the culprits behind the undocumented murders unrelated to Mollie Burkhart’s family. What he stumbles on highlights the severity of the dark fate the Osage Indians were threatened with.
Despite being written as a narrative, it is obvious that <i>Killers of the Flower Moon</i> is a work of non-fiction. It lacks emotion and character insight, however, since it is not meant to be a fabricated story, these elements are not required. Instead, it shocks and disturbs the reader with its unbelievable truths.
An extensive biography proves the authenticity of David Grann’s revelation. With the reinforcement of FBI files, jury testimonials, statements, court transcripts, letters, telegrams, diaries and confessions, Grann produces a strong historical record of events that should not be glossed over. Without authors and books such as <i>Killers of the Flower Moon</i>, people will blindly go around believing falsehoods. The truth needs to be discovered, and readers can start by reading this book.
It is well known that throughout history, facts have been omitted from history books. Written accounts of events ostensibly make important figures and countries appear to be in the right, whereas reality reveals otherwise. One such exclusion is the fate of the Native Americans inhabiting the southern states at the beginning of the 1900s. Children are brought up to believe the stories that “Red Indians” are bad and the cowboys are good, but this was unlikely the case. David Grann has researched into a particular period of Native American history that most people may never have heard of.<I> Killers of the Flower Moon</I> reveals the horrors innocent people faced at the hands of perfidious criminals.
The majority of the book is written as a third person narrative, recounting the lives of some of the members of the Osage Indian Nation in Oklahoma. White people, believing themselves to be superior, had forced the natives off their homelands and onto rocky, unwanted ground. What they did not anticipate, however, was the abundance of oil residing beneath the surface. The Osage went from being oppressed to being the wealthiest people in the state. Full of avarice, the whites were not going to let them get away with this fortune for long.
David Grann takes a particular interest in Mollie Burkhart, an Osage member with a white husband. Mollie had three sisters, but within a few short years they were all dead, and so was her mother. Believing they had been murdered, Mollie fears for her life. Other Osage members were also being killed, as well as those who tried to investigate the spreading slaughter. However, the case remained stubbornly unsolved.
Nevertheless, there was still hope for Mollie after the arrival of Tom White, an agent of the soon to be known as Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Determined to get to the bottom of the so-called Reign of Terror, Tom and his team carefully analyse the behaviours and motives of the disingenuous citizens, narrowing down the suspects until eventually finding their duplicitous killer.
Learning about this unknown period of history is eye opening and offers a completely new view on the relations between whites and Native Americans. It was a time of prejudice and racism, not unlike the attitude towards black people emphasised with the civil rights movement in the mid-1900s. Greed was a significant motivator, particularly where making money was involved. But, David Grann does not stop here.
The final section of <i>Killers of the Flower Moon</i> is written from the author’s perspective. As a staff writer at <i>The New Yorker</i>, the evidence of the Osage murders case intrigued David Grann, but he was concerned about some unresolved holes in the story. Determined to uncover the truth, Grann conducted his own research to discover the culprits behind the undocumented murders unrelated to Mollie Burkhart’s family. What he stumbles on highlights the severity of the dark fate the Osage Indians were threatened with.
Despite being written as a narrative, it is obvious that <i>Killers of the Flower Moon</i> is a work of non-fiction. It lacks emotion and character insight, however, since it is not meant to be a fabricated story, these elements are not required. Instead, it shocks and disturbs the reader with its unbelievable truths.
An extensive biography proves the authenticity of David Grann’s revelation. With the reinforcement of FBI files, jury testimonials, statements, court transcripts, letters, telegrams, diaries and confessions, Grann produces a strong historical record of events that should not be glossed over. Without authors and books such as <i>Killers of the Flower Moon</i>, people will blindly go around believing falsehoods. The truth needs to be discovered, and readers can start by reading this book.
BackToTheMovies (56 KP) rated The Haunting of Sharon Tate (2019) in Movies
Jun 21, 2019
With it being 50 years since the tragic Manson murders in California we have a year of Manson movies. We have the independent film Charlie Says which explores Manson and his cult in sensitive detail before the tragic night. We have Tarantino’s Once Up A Time In Hollywood which has been given the go-ahead from Sharon Tate’s sister to be made. Then we have this. The Haunting of Sharon Tate. An overly exploitative piece that twists truths to create a narrative and completely trashes the legacy of the late actress.
August 8, 1969, the night that Sharon Tate, Jay Sebring, Wojciech Frykowski, Abigail Folger and Steven Parent were brutally murdered. The film focuses on the days before the tragic event. The movie dramatizes the slayings and plays on the notion that Sharon Tate predicted her own death in the days leading up to the slaughter.
Surrounded by bad acting and awful scripting it was a very poor choice to make this film in the first place. Writer-director Daniel Farrands has created an offensive and frankly insulting ‘thriller’. Hilary Duff stars as Sharon Tate and whilst she somewhat looks the part, she doesn’t have that raw magic and flair that Sharon had. This tragic event has been turned into some stock-horror slash um up movie with a psychic paranormal twist.
At one point Manson’s song ‘Cease to Exist’ plays to Sharon over a tape player and the Manson Family stalks Tate and her friends around her home. It really is that bad. The introduction of the movie shows real-life footage as a black and white Hilary Duff talks about her own death. The opening scene of the movie is enough to want me to turn off the film instantly.
The Haunting of Sharon Tate still
With no care or respect being paid to the real-life counterparts, the movie has very little to say other than ‘you’re going to die soon’. There’s no feeling of empathy. The Haunting of Sharon Tate is just a 90-minute exploitation of a horrific night in Hollywood’s history.
https://backtothemovies.com/exploitative-trash-the-haunting-of-sharon-tate-review/
August 8, 1969, the night that Sharon Tate, Jay Sebring, Wojciech Frykowski, Abigail Folger and Steven Parent were brutally murdered. The film focuses on the days before the tragic event. The movie dramatizes the slayings and plays on the notion that Sharon Tate predicted her own death in the days leading up to the slaughter.
Surrounded by bad acting and awful scripting it was a very poor choice to make this film in the first place. Writer-director Daniel Farrands has created an offensive and frankly insulting ‘thriller’. Hilary Duff stars as Sharon Tate and whilst she somewhat looks the part, she doesn’t have that raw magic and flair that Sharon had. This tragic event has been turned into some stock-horror slash um up movie with a psychic paranormal twist.
At one point Manson’s song ‘Cease to Exist’ plays to Sharon over a tape player and the Manson Family stalks Tate and her friends around her home. It really is that bad. The introduction of the movie shows real-life footage as a black and white Hilary Duff talks about her own death. The opening scene of the movie is enough to want me to turn off the film instantly.
The Haunting of Sharon Tate still
With no care or respect being paid to the real-life counterparts, the movie has very little to say other than ‘you’re going to die soon’. There’s no feeling of empathy. The Haunting of Sharon Tate is just a 90-minute exploitation of a horrific night in Hollywood’s history.
https://backtothemovies.com/exploitative-trash-the-haunting-of-sharon-tate-review/
The Last House on the Street
8.0
Rate It
Book
A small town divided by prejudice. A secret that won't remain silent... The stunning new novel...
Tom Scanner Pro - PDF document scanner with OCR
Business and Utilities
App
Tom Scanner is the best app for quickly scanning and saving a digital version of a paper document....
Canon PIXMA TS9150
7.0
Rate It
Tech Watch
Canon’s PIXMA TS9150 is a stylish and feature-packed all-in-one inkjet colour printer, offering...
Andy K (10823 KP) rated Bride of Frankenstein (1935) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
She's alive!
I am trying to remember the last film I saw where the title character doesn't appear until the last 10 minutes? I don't think I can. In Superman, you don't see Christopher Reeve for the first hour, in Aliens you don't see any full grown Aliens until an hour in. Can you think of any others?
The 2nd Frankenstein film is certainly a continuation as it starts right when the last film ends. The monster is presumed dead, during the windmill fire. He is eventually found, chained and hauled off to prison. He escapes and then wanders the countryside encountering a friendly bling man. Unknowing the hideous nature of his new friend, he invites the monster in to eat, drink and smoke. The monster begins to actually act civilized for a bit even spurting out his first words and smiling. This is short-lived as he is again located and flees.
Meanwhile, Dr. Frankenstein is still recovering himself when he meets Doctor Pretorius, an even more wacky scientist bent on creating his own abomination. Frankenstein has had a change of mind and heart about his monster and wants it to be destroyed. Pretorius kidnaps Frankenstein's new wife and blackmails him into helping with the new project.
Eventual success brings us the Bride of Frankenstein!
Karloff continues his stellar performance as the monster, this time giving him humanity, humor and benevolence in addition to the usual rage. You see his loneliness and wanting to belong with no one who gazes upon him ever giving him a chance to have a personality.
The look of the film also has a starring role including the vast depth of the Frankenstein home which seems to go on forever and again showcased in glorious black and white. The majesty of the outdoor landscapes are also beautiful and really assist the audience in merging with its storytelling beautifully.
I did find is strange they introduced the bride so late in the film. She doesn't really have much to do other than get introduced to her new groom and make a few grunting noises. I am assuming she will play a bigger role in Son of Frankenstein which is up next!
The 2nd Frankenstein film is certainly a continuation as it starts right when the last film ends. The monster is presumed dead, during the windmill fire. He is eventually found, chained and hauled off to prison. He escapes and then wanders the countryside encountering a friendly bling man. Unknowing the hideous nature of his new friend, he invites the monster in to eat, drink and smoke. The monster begins to actually act civilized for a bit even spurting out his first words and smiling. This is short-lived as he is again located and flees.
Meanwhile, Dr. Frankenstein is still recovering himself when he meets Doctor Pretorius, an even more wacky scientist bent on creating his own abomination. Frankenstein has had a change of mind and heart about his monster and wants it to be destroyed. Pretorius kidnaps Frankenstein's new wife and blackmails him into helping with the new project.
Eventual success brings us the Bride of Frankenstein!
Karloff continues his stellar performance as the monster, this time giving him humanity, humor and benevolence in addition to the usual rage. You see his loneliness and wanting to belong with no one who gazes upon him ever giving him a chance to have a personality.
The look of the film also has a starring role including the vast depth of the Frankenstein home which seems to go on forever and again showcased in glorious black and white. The majesty of the outdoor landscapes are also beautiful and really assist the audience in merging with its storytelling beautifully.
I did find is strange they introduced the bride so late in the film. She doesn't really have much to do other than get introduced to her new groom and make a few grunting noises. I am assuming she will play a bigger role in Son of Frankenstein which is up next!
ChmPlus Pro - CHM Reader
Book and Utilities
App
ChmPlus Reader (CHM+ Reader) is a feature-rich CHM (Microsoft Compiled HTML Help) document / ebook...
6513 Soldat (2): The German Soldier on the Eastern Front 1943-1944
Gordon L. Rottman and Stephen Andrew
Book
The years 1943-1945 marked a reversal in the military fortunes of Germany, beginning with the huge...
Mick Hucknall recommended Led Zeppelin 2 by Led Zeppelin in Music (curated)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Many Saints of Newark (2021) in Movies
Oct 5, 2021
Production design (1 more)
Great cast
Sopranos prequel that failed to hit the high note with this Sopranos virgin.
With Bond showing on virtually every screen of my local Cineworld, there were few other choices for movies to go see this week. So even though I've never seen "The Sopranos" TV series, I decided to give this movie prequel a shot.
Positives:
- Like any good mafia story, there's a nicely developed sense of place for the action. The film is set in the late 60's / early 70's, and the score and the production design nicely portray the period. The rise of black factions to challenge the white status quo, even in the crime world, make this a nice companion piece to "Judas and the Black Messiah" .
- Although he's been in films like "American Hustle" and "Selma", I wouldn't have been able to pick Alessandro Nivola out of a line-up. But he did a great job portraying the different sides of Dickie: both caring uncle and psychopathic gangster. And Odom Jnr is again impressive: I've not yet seen him deliver any role that's been sub-par.
- It's also impressive that they had Michael Gandolfini to play the younger self of his late father's role. Although I kept being distracted by how much he looks and acts like a young John Cusack!
Negatives:
- The story is told over many years and the script came across as quite uneven. There are regular cut-aways to Dickie visiting his uncle "Hollywood Dick" (Ray Liotta) in prison, which a lot of the time, to me, felt disconnected from the main plot.
- Whilst most of the ensemble cast do a good job, some of the portrayals felt like forced caricatures of "Goodfellas" characters.
- As a "Sopranos" virgin, I could tell that there were lots of Easter Eggs and in-jokes in the movie (e.g. The baby Christopher crying whenever Anthony talked to him). WIth "Sopranos" regulars Alan Taylor and David Chase in charge, that's not surprising. But I'm afraid all of these went right over my head.
Summary Thoughts on "The Many Saints of Newark": This wasn't a complete bust for me, which it might have been if it had been a sequel rather than a prequel. Indeed there are the occasional flashes of brilliance with certain scenes. But neither did I find it so engrossing that it's going to trouble my top 20 for the year.
I guess is that if you are a "Sopranos" fan, then you would get a lot more out of this than I did. But it's still an interesting way to spend a couple of hours.
(For the full graphical review, please check out #oemannsmovies on the web, Facebook or Tiktok. Thanks.)
Positives:
- Like any good mafia story, there's a nicely developed sense of place for the action. The film is set in the late 60's / early 70's, and the score and the production design nicely portray the period. The rise of black factions to challenge the white status quo, even in the crime world, make this a nice companion piece to "Judas and the Black Messiah" .
- Although he's been in films like "American Hustle" and "Selma", I wouldn't have been able to pick Alessandro Nivola out of a line-up. But he did a great job portraying the different sides of Dickie: both caring uncle and psychopathic gangster. And Odom Jnr is again impressive: I've not yet seen him deliver any role that's been sub-par.
- It's also impressive that they had Michael Gandolfini to play the younger self of his late father's role. Although I kept being distracted by how much he looks and acts like a young John Cusack!
Negatives:
- The story is told over many years and the script came across as quite uneven. There are regular cut-aways to Dickie visiting his uncle "Hollywood Dick" (Ray Liotta) in prison, which a lot of the time, to me, felt disconnected from the main plot.
- Whilst most of the ensemble cast do a good job, some of the portrayals felt like forced caricatures of "Goodfellas" characters.
- As a "Sopranos" virgin, I could tell that there were lots of Easter Eggs and in-jokes in the movie (e.g. The baby Christopher crying whenever Anthony talked to him). WIth "Sopranos" regulars Alan Taylor and David Chase in charge, that's not surprising. But I'm afraid all of these went right over my head.
Summary Thoughts on "The Many Saints of Newark": This wasn't a complete bust for me, which it might have been if it had been a sequel rather than a prequel. Indeed there are the occasional flashes of brilliance with certain scenes. But neither did I find it so engrossing that it's going to trouble my top 20 for the year.
I guess is that if you are a "Sopranos" fan, then you would get a lot more out of this than I did. But it's still an interesting way to spend a couple of hours.
(For the full graphical review, please check out #oemannsmovies on the web, Facebook or Tiktok. Thanks.)
