Search
Portrait of an Icon
Book
Written by Daniel Storey, Portrait of an Icon features 58 of the greatest names from football's...
sports photography
There's Something About Mary (1998)
7.3
Rate It
Movie Watch
Ted (Ben Stiller) is still in love with his high school prom date, Mary (Cameron Diaz), even though...
Cori June (3033 KP) rated Sleeping Late on Judgement Day (Bobby Dollar #3) in Books
Apr 29, 2021
Contains spoilers, click to show
I think Tad Williams did a disservice to the characters by making this into a trilogy and not a longer series. He leaves a few loose threads that could be made into another book or two. While the ending is good it is a little too open ended to be great. I have too many questions that have no answers. and while they could be answered in short stories, Bobby (in my opinion) deserves more. Still worth the read.
Having to pick himself up in the aftermath of what happened after his trip to Hell. Bobby finds that his allies and even acquaintances are leaving him high and dry. Even his Somewhat Best Friend Sam is ghosting him.
Bobby has to navigate his suspicion of superiors in Heaven, Neo-Nazis, and Nightmare Children, or he may lose more than his halo.
Having to pick himself up in the aftermath of what happened after his trip to Hell. Bobby finds that his allies and even acquaintances are leaving him high and dry. Even his Somewhat Best Friend Sam is ghosting him.
Bobby has to navigate his suspicion of superiors in Heaven, Neo-Nazis, and Nightmare Children, or he may lose more than his halo.
Lindsay (1706 KP) rated If He Had Not Come in Books
Feb 15, 2018 (Updated Apr 9, 2019)
If He had not come is the really good short story. It has a really meaning for Christmas. What would our world be like “If He Had Not Come”? This show you though a boy named Bobby as he experienced this.
What if Jesus was not born? Would we have the world we have now? We can draw anything from the words “If I hadn't come”. Would we still be celebrating Christmas or the birth of Jesus?
This book is good for children and their parents. It good for bedtime. I would even say it even good for the holiday season and around Jesus birth. If you like a good mean full book this one is good for that.
What if Jesus was not born? Would we have the world we have now? We can draw anything from the words “If I hadn't come”. Would we still be celebrating Christmas or the birth of Jesus?
This book is good for children and their parents. It good for bedtime. I would even say it even good for the holiday season and around Jesus birth. If you like a good mean full book this one is good for that.
A Short History of Ireland's Rebels
Book
The stirring story of eighteen of Ireland's greatest rebels, from the sixteenth century to today....
United!: The Comic Strip History
Book
From the formation of the club as Newton Heath LYR through to the Championship in 2012/13 the...
JT (287 KP) rated Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019) in Movies
Mar 5, 2020 (Updated Mar 10, 2020)
Godzilla rises from the deep once again, this time to stand side by side with part of the human race to fend off monsters summoned by the crypto-zoological agency Monarch. Monarch has been able to devise a way to control the giant creatures using a sonar device called the Orca, in the hope that they will be able to live together in perfect harmony.
“Sometimes… the only way to heal our wounds is to make peace with the demons who created them,” says Ken Watanabe‘s Dr Ishiro Serizawa. That theory is short-lived when eco-terrorist Alan Jonah (Charles Dance) threatens to unleash hell, all for the greater good.
It’s one big mess. I don’t know how else to describe it other than that. I lost interest halfway through and only raised an eyebrow when Godzilla arrived on-screen to pummel the shit out of the three-headed Ghidorah and Rodan. In 2014 Godzilla was rarely seen, albeit for the odd glimpse of a whipping tail. Here that is rectified and he’s placed front and centre as he smashes everything to smithereens.
The human element is just as bad. With a cast that boasted the likes of Vera Farmiga, Kyle Chandler, Charles Dance and Strangers Things starlet Millie Bobby Brown I would have expected more from the experienced group. I blame the script which falls by the wayside. Loud, thundering action set pieces do offer a little bit of satisfaction but it’s not enough to carry the film home. Plenty of scenes could have been cut which might have made it bearable.
There are suggestions that we could be getting a Kong Vs Godzilla film at some point which would loosely tie into a Kaiju styled universe but after this load of tripe, they will have their work cut out.
“Sometimes… the only way to heal our wounds is to make peace with the demons who created them,” says Ken Watanabe‘s Dr Ishiro Serizawa. That theory is short-lived when eco-terrorist Alan Jonah (Charles Dance) threatens to unleash hell, all for the greater good.
It’s one big mess. I don’t know how else to describe it other than that. I lost interest halfway through and only raised an eyebrow when Godzilla arrived on-screen to pummel the shit out of the three-headed Ghidorah and Rodan. In 2014 Godzilla was rarely seen, albeit for the odd glimpse of a whipping tail. Here that is rectified and he’s placed front and centre as he smashes everything to smithereens.
The human element is just as bad. With a cast that boasted the likes of Vera Farmiga, Kyle Chandler, Charles Dance and Strangers Things starlet Millie Bobby Brown I would have expected more from the experienced group. I blame the script which falls by the wayside. Loud, thundering action set pieces do offer a little bit of satisfaction but it’s not enough to carry the film home. Plenty of scenes could have been cut which might have made it bearable.
There are suggestions that we could be getting a Kong Vs Godzilla film at some point which would loosely tie into a Kaiju styled universe but after this load of tripe, they will have their work cut out.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Jackie (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Spoiler! Her husband gets shot.
“Jackie” tells the story of the spiralling grief, loss and anger of Jackie Kennedy driven by the assassination of JFK in Dallas in November 1963. Hopping backwards and forwards in flashback, the film centres on the first interview given by Jackie (Natalie Portman, “Black Swan”) to a ‘Time’ journalist (Billy Crudup, “Watchmen”, “Spotlight”).
Through this interview we flashback to see Jackie as the young First Lady engaged in recording a TV special for a tour of the White House: nervous, unsure of herself and with a ‘baby girl’ voice. This contrasts with her demeanour in the interview which – although subject to emotional outburst and grief – is assured, confident and above all extremely assertive. We live the film through Jackie’s eyes as she experiences the arrival in Dallas, the traumatic events of November 22nd in Dealey Plaza, the return home to Washington and the complicated arrangement of the President’s funeral.
This is an acting tour de force for Natalie Portman, who is astonishingly emotional as the grief-stricken ex-first lady. She nails this role utterly and completely. Having already won the Golden Globe for an actress in a dramatic role, you would be a foolish man to bet against her not taking the Oscar. (I know I said just the other week that I though Emma Stone should get it for “La La Land” – as another Golden Globe winner, for the Comedy/Musical category – and a large part of my heart would still really like to see Stone win it…. But excellent as that performance was, this is a far more challenging role.)
In a key supporting role is Peter Sarsgaard (“The Magnificent Seven”) as Bobby Kennedy (although his lookalike is not one of the best: that accolade I would give to Gaspard Koenig, in an un-speaking role, as the young Ted Kennedy).
Also providing interesting support as Jackie’s priest is John Hurt (“Alien”, “Dr Who”) and, as Jackie’s close friend, the artist Bill Walton, is Richard E Grant (“Withnail and I”, who as he grows older is looking more and more like Geoffrey Rush – I was sure it was him!).
Director Pablo Larraín (whose previous work I am not familiar with) automatically assumes that EVERYONE has the background history to understand the narrative without further explanation: perhaps as this happened 54 years ago, this is a bit of a presumption for younger viewers? Naturally for people of my advanced years, these events are as burned into our collective psyches as the images in the Zapruder film.
While the film focuses predominantly, and brilliantly, on Jackie’s mental state, the film does gently question (via an outburst from Bobby) as to what JFK actually achieved in his all too short presidency – ‘Will he be remembered for resolving the Cuban missile crisis: something he originally created?’ rants Bobby. In reality, JFK is remembered in history for this assassination and the lost potential for what he might have done. I would have liked the script to have delved a little bit further into that collective soul-searching.
This is a very sombre movie in tone, from the bleak opening, with a soundtrack of sonorous strings, to the bleak weather-swept scenes at Arlington cemetery. The cinematography (by Stéphane Fontaine, “Rust and Bone”) cleverly contrasts between the vibrant hues of Jackie’s “Camelot” to the washed-out blueish tones of the post-assassination events. If you don’t feel depressed going into this film, you probably will be coming out! But the journey is a satisfying one nonetheless, and the script by Noah Oppenheim – in a SIGNIFICANT departure from his previous teen-flick screenplays for “Allegiant” and “The Maze Runner” – is both tight and thought-provoking.
Overall, a recommended watch which comes with a prediction: “And the Oscar goes to… Natalie Portman”.
Finally, note that for those of a squeamish disposition, there is a very graphic depiction of the assassination from Jackie’s point-of-view…. but this is not until nearly the end of the film, so you are reasonably safe until then!
Also as a final general whinge, could directors PLEASE place an embargo on the logos of more than two production companies coming up at the start of a film? This has about six of them and is farcical, aping the (very amusing) parody in “Family Guy” (as shown here).
Through this interview we flashback to see Jackie as the young First Lady engaged in recording a TV special for a tour of the White House: nervous, unsure of herself and with a ‘baby girl’ voice. This contrasts with her demeanour in the interview which – although subject to emotional outburst and grief – is assured, confident and above all extremely assertive. We live the film through Jackie’s eyes as she experiences the arrival in Dallas, the traumatic events of November 22nd in Dealey Plaza, the return home to Washington and the complicated arrangement of the President’s funeral.
This is an acting tour de force for Natalie Portman, who is astonishingly emotional as the grief-stricken ex-first lady. She nails this role utterly and completely. Having already won the Golden Globe for an actress in a dramatic role, you would be a foolish man to bet against her not taking the Oscar. (I know I said just the other week that I though Emma Stone should get it for “La La Land” – as another Golden Globe winner, for the Comedy/Musical category – and a large part of my heart would still really like to see Stone win it…. But excellent as that performance was, this is a far more challenging role.)
In a key supporting role is Peter Sarsgaard (“The Magnificent Seven”) as Bobby Kennedy (although his lookalike is not one of the best: that accolade I would give to Gaspard Koenig, in an un-speaking role, as the young Ted Kennedy).
Also providing interesting support as Jackie’s priest is John Hurt (“Alien”, “Dr Who”) and, as Jackie’s close friend, the artist Bill Walton, is Richard E Grant (“Withnail and I”, who as he grows older is looking more and more like Geoffrey Rush – I was sure it was him!).
Director Pablo Larraín (whose previous work I am not familiar with) automatically assumes that EVERYONE has the background history to understand the narrative without further explanation: perhaps as this happened 54 years ago, this is a bit of a presumption for younger viewers? Naturally for people of my advanced years, these events are as burned into our collective psyches as the images in the Zapruder film.
While the film focuses predominantly, and brilliantly, on Jackie’s mental state, the film does gently question (via an outburst from Bobby) as to what JFK actually achieved in his all too short presidency – ‘Will he be remembered for resolving the Cuban missile crisis: something he originally created?’ rants Bobby. In reality, JFK is remembered in history for this assassination and the lost potential for what he might have done. I would have liked the script to have delved a little bit further into that collective soul-searching.
This is a very sombre movie in tone, from the bleak opening, with a soundtrack of sonorous strings, to the bleak weather-swept scenes at Arlington cemetery. The cinematography (by Stéphane Fontaine, “Rust and Bone”) cleverly contrasts between the vibrant hues of Jackie’s “Camelot” to the washed-out blueish tones of the post-assassination events. If you don’t feel depressed going into this film, you probably will be coming out! But the journey is a satisfying one nonetheless, and the script by Noah Oppenheim – in a SIGNIFICANT departure from his previous teen-flick screenplays for “Allegiant” and “The Maze Runner” – is both tight and thought-provoking.
Overall, a recommended watch which comes with a prediction: “And the Oscar goes to… Natalie Portman”.
Finally, note that for those of a squeamish disposition, there is a very graphic depiction of the assassination from Jackie’s point-of-view…. but this is not until nearly the end of the film, so you are reasonably safe until then!
Also as a final general whinge, could directors PLEASE place an embargo on the logos of more than two production companies coming up at the start of a film? This has about six of them and is farcical, aping the (very amusing) parody in “Family Guy” (as shown here).
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Thunder Force (2021) in Movies
May 23, 2021
I love Octavia Spencer's versatility, so a superhero type of film was intriguing, and the combination of her and Melissa McCarthy felt right. Then they throw in Bobby Cannavale and Jason Bateman too? There appears to be a lot to love about this film.
Lydia and Emily, once the best of friends, are brought back together by a school reunion. But things take a turn as the serum devised by Emily to help their city ends up accidentally changing their lives in a way they hadn't planned for.
We start with a wonderful comic book opening that give a very succinct review of how the whole has shaped the tale we're about to hear. That then drops us into Lydia and Emily's friendship. I really did enjoy this part, and the young Lydia's were particularly good. It gave a solid start to the film and I was feeling optimistic about what was to come after having enjoyed the trailer.
But at this point it starts to show a few issues.
Grown-up Emily (Spencer) feels a little inconsistent. She's reserved initially but it fluctuates a lot throughout, which doesn't feel right for a woman in her position.
Lydia seemed to be much more believable, and the outlandish behaviour was quite amusing while still cementing the caring person that she is, and what we can expect from her going forward.
Spencer and McCarthy do work well together, and the back and forth when it's there is really good, but Emily is never as strong in scenes that they share.
Bobby Cannavale as The King makes an excellent baddie, and Pom Klementieff as a henchwoman is too. They're backed by some wonderfully comedic "muscle", and as a team they work well together. But... while every character is a little quirky, The Crab is where my problems begin. Jason Bateman acts well during the "serious" scenes, but the humour that is attached to his character just didn't land. I was pleased they added in crab-like characteristics, but its amusement was short-lived.
The main problem with the humour in Thunder Force is something I see in other Melissa McCarthy films. It rushes up to the line of going too far, stops briefly, and the crab scuttles straight across it and far off into the distance. Why make one joke when you can make five in a row? This is particularly evident in Lydia and The Crab's interactions, and its repetition became a little tiresome.
The script didn't just mess with these characters, it also ruined a perfectly good (though mildly inexplicable) scene where The King and Laser come face to face with Lydia and Emily. It was going so well and then it jumped over that line. It does do some good things though. There's an ongoing joke with Lydia and her training that did land well every time, and it had some lovely moments of bonding with Tracy and Lydia. How all these things made it into the same film I don't know.
My time watching this didn't feel wasted, but I don't think I'd need to watch it again anytime soon. And that's a shame, because there's a really good film hiding in Thunder Force.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/05/thunder-force-movie-review.html
Lydia and Emily, once the best of friends, are brought back together by a school reunion. But things take a turn as the serum devised by Emily to help their city ends up accidentally changing their lives in a way they hadn't planned for.
We start with a wonderful comic book opening that give a very succinct review of how the whole has shaped the tale we're about to hear. That then drops us into Lydia and Emily's friendship. I really did enjoy this part, and the young Lydia's were particularly good. It gave a solid start to the film and I was feeling optimistic about what was to come after having enjoyed the trailer.
But at this point it starts to show a few issues.
Grown-up Emily (Spencer) feels a little inconsistent. She's reserved initially but it fluctuates a lot throughout, which doesn't feel right for a woman in her position.
Lydia seemed to be much more believable, and the outlandish behaviour was quite amusing while still cementing the caring person that she is, and what we can expect from her going forward.
Spencer and McCarthy do work well together, and the back and forth when it's there is really good, but Emily is never as strong in scenes that they share.
Bobby Cannavale as The King makes an excellent baddie, and Pom Klementieff as a henchwoman is too. They're backed by some wonderfully comedic "muscle", and as a team they work well together. But... while every character is a little quirky, The Crab is where my problems begin. Jason Bateman acts well during the "serious" scenes, but the humour that is attached to his character just didn't land. I was pleased they added in crab-like characteristics, but its amusement was short-lived.
The main problem with the humour in Thunder Force is something I see in other Melissa McCarthy films. It rushes up to the line of going too far, stops briefly, and the crab scuttles straight across it and far off into the distance. Why make one joke when you can make five in a row? This is particularly evident in Lydia and The Crab's interactions, and its repetition became a little tiresome.
The script didn't just mess with these characters, it also ruined a perfectly good (though mildly inexplicable) scene where The King and Laser come face to face with Lydia and Emily. It was going so well and then it jumped over that line. It does do some good things though. There's an ongoing joke with Lydia and her training that did land well every time, and it had some lovely moments of bonding with Tracy and Lydia. How all these things made it into the same film I don't know.
My time watching this didn't feel wasted, but I don't think I'd need to watch it again anytime soon. And that's a shame, because there's a really good film hiding in Thunder Force.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/05/thunder-force-movie-review.html