Search
Search results
Maddi Zoe (6 KP) rated Wonder (2017) in Movies
Feb 8, 2018
acting (2 more)
storyline
underlying message
Cute messages tugging at your heart strings
Based on the best-selling novel of the same name, Wonder, directed by Stephen Chbosky, is a wonderfully endearing and uplifting story about a boy, Auggie Pullman (Jacob Tremblay), who was born with Treacher Collins syndrome and has had several surgeries leaving him with facial deformities.
The movie starts as he is entering into fifth-grade, and actually going to school for the first time as he has previously been home schooled by his mother (Julia Roberts). He is understandably scared about not making friends, or being ridiculed by his classmates, but with the help of his Mum and Dad (Owen Wilson) he braves going to school and meets new people.
There are many moments of sadness, as you would expect, but there are also moments of great joy. I found myself crying from start to finish, riding on a rollercoaster of emotions.
There are a few mini storylines about other characters that get given the spotlight at different times as well, which is a nice change to when some films focus on just the one person, because we get to see other characters backgrounds, and why they act how they do.
The casting is brilliant, Tremblay plays Auggie excellently, bringing both emotion and sass to the character. He has been in a fair few things before, such as Before I Wake, but this role will definitely boost him into the spotlight.
Roberts and Wilson as the parents is also an excellent choice, Roberts gives an emotive performance, and it’s great to see Wilson in a serious role, whilst still bringing some light comic relief.
The cast has a lot of young actors, but there isn’t one that stands out as being stiff or unnatural, they are all brilliant and help to bring the feel of the movie together. The relationships between all the characters is brought to life really well by the actors.
The writing is brilliant, although it is based on a book so the story is there already, but the screenwriters, Chbosky, Steve Conrad and Jack Thorne, put it together for the screen really well.
There are some stand out quotes, that also come from the book, that make you stop and think, and the teacher, Mr Browne (Daveed Diggs), teaches the class about precepts such as ‘When given the choice between being right or being kind, choose kind’.
Overall, it’s a well-rounded family movie, that may change your outlook on some things in life. With such great casting, writing and direction, I’d be very surprised if it didn’t do well during awards season.
The movie starts as he is entering into fifth-grade, and actually going to school for the first time as he has previously been home schooled by his mother (Julia Roberts). He is understandably scared about not making friends, or being ridiculed by his classmates, but with the help of his Mum and Dad (Owen Wilson) he braves going to school and meets new people.
There are many moments of sadness, as you would expect, but there are also moments of great joy. I found myself crying from start to finish, riding on a rollercoaster of emotions.
There are a few mini storylines about other characters that get given the spotlight at different times as well, which is a nice change to when some films focus on just the one person, because we get to see other characters backgrounds, and why they act how they do.
The casting is brilliant, Tremblay plays Auggie excellently, bringing both emotion and sass to the character. He has been in a fair few things before, such as Before I Wake, but this role will definitely boost him into the spotlight.
Roberts and Wilson as the parents is also an excellent choice, Roberts gives an emotive performance, and it’s great to see Wilson in a serious role, whilst still bringing some light comic relief.
The cast has a lot of young actors, but there isn’t one that stands out as being stiff or unnatural, they are all brilliant and help to bring the feel of the movie together. The relationships between all the characters is brought to life really well by the actors.
The writing is brilliant, although it is based on a book so the story is there already, but the screenwriters, Chbosky, Steve Conrad and Jack Thorne, put it together for the screen really well.
There are some stand out quotes, that also come from the book, that make you stop and think, and the teacher, Mr Browne (Daveed Diggs), teaches the class about precepts such as ‘When given the choice between being right or being kind, choose kind’.
Overall, it’s a well-rounded family movie, that may change your outlook on some things in life. With such great casting, writing and direction, I’d be very surprised if it didn’t do well during awards season.
Joe Julians (221 KP) rated The Disaster Artist (2017) in Movies
Jan 30, 2018
James Franco (1 more)
The tone
Far from a disaster
If you haven't seen The Room, then I urge you to do so at once. It's a bemusing, confusing, unintentionally hilarious 90 odd minutes that fully deserves all the cult screenings and bewildered wonder that it has garnered over the years. It's without question a perfect awful movie. And here with The Disaster Artist, based on the book of the same name, we get to see the story of just went on to get this film made.
To start with, James Franco is perfect as the mysterious and downright bonkers Tommy Wiseau. His voice, his mannerisms, his almost childlike tantrum throwing approach to life, he manages to make an almost unbelievable man fully believable. He's backed up by a cast that commit to the roles, but other than Dave Franco, don't get a huge amount of time in the spotlight. That's not a criticism as such, by design the two central figures in this are Tommy and Greg Sistero- his friend and fellow budding actor.
I suspect if you are a "fan" of The Room, you'll likely get a lot more out of this than if you had little to know knowledge of the film it depicts the making of. It's a blast getting to see certain iconic scenes recreated for this and to hear the origin stories behind key lines- "you're tearing me apart, Lisa" being one such moment that took me by surprise. The original film is a messy nonsensical experience and it's fun to see that almost everyone working on it viewed it as such even when it was being made. Everyone except Tommy that is.
Where things get a little murky for me is with how you are supposed to feel by the time the brilliant end credits roll (there's exact recreations of certain moments played side by side that are great fun.) It seems as though we are meant to be inspired by Tommy and what he has achieved, like in the end this is supposed to be a feel-good movie about never giving up on your dreams. That's all well and good, but Tommy Wiseau doesn't come across particularly well in this. He's a temper tantrum throwing and at times scary man to be around. One scene in particular during the shooting of the 'belly button sex scene' portrays him as a pretty horrible man, one that gets his way by being somewhat of a bully. This isn't addressed again fully and it's hard to feel like cheering him on by the time the big premiere screening rolls round. There's also his about face when it comes to claiming the movie was meant to be a comedy- something nobody believes. On the one hand, it's a smart move to take what he has and run with it, but there's also something sad about him not having something he cared so passionately about be received in the way it was intended. This is something else that is glossed over, but then Wiseau would never speak so candidly to give the writers anything to work with.
Overall this is a great movie and a fascinating watch. Would highly recommend.
To start with, James Franco is perfect as the mysterious and downright bonkers Tommy Wiseau. His voice, his mannerisms, his almost childlike tantrum throwing approach to life, he manages to make an almost unbelievable man fully believable. He's backed up by a cast that commit to the roles, but other than Dave Franco, don't get a huge amount of time in the spotlight. That's not a criticism as such, by design the two central figures in this are Tommy and Greg Sistero- his friend and fellow budding actor.
I suspect if you are a "fan" of The Room, you'll likely get a lot more out of this than if you had little to know knowledge of the film it depicts the making of. It's a blast getting to see certain iconic scenes recreated for this and to hear the origin stories behind key lines- "you're tearing me apart, Lisa" being one such moment that took me by surprise. The original film is a messy nonsensical experience and it's fun to see that almost everyone working on it viewed it as such even when it was being made. Everyone except Tommy that is.
Where things get a little murky for me is with how you are supposed to feel by the time the brilliant end credits roll (there's exact recreations of certain moments played side by side that are great fun.) It seems as though we are meant to be inspired by Tommy and what he has achieved, like in the end this is supposed to be a feel-good movie about never giving up on your dreams. That's all well and good, but Tommy Wiseau doesn't come across particularly well in this. He's a temper tantrum throwing and at times scary man to be around. One scene in particular during the shooting of the 'belly button sex scene' portrays him as a pretty horrible man, one that gets his way by being somewhat of a bully. This isn't addressed again fully and it's hard to feel like cheering him on by the time the big premiere screening rolls round. There's also his about face when it comes to claiming the movie was meant to be a comedy- something nobody believes. On the one hand, it's a smart move to take what he has and run with it, but there's also something sad about him not having something he cared so passionately about be received in the way it was intended. This is something else that is glossed over, but then Wiseau would never speak so candidly to give the writers anything to work with.
Overall this is a great movie and a fascinating watch. Would highly recommend.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Bloodshot (2020) in Movies
May 8, 2020
"Funner" than I expected
BLOODSHOT was one of those movies that I was going to "get around to see, sometime" before it left the movie theaters, little did I know that I would leave the movie theaters before Bloodshot did. So, when I ran across it On-Demand at home, I figured I would check it out - probably to let it run in the background as I multi-tasked.
Well...a funny thing happened while multi-tasking while watching this film. I found myself NOT multi-tasking, but rather, I stopped to focus on the film, for I was being entertained by the events unfolding before me on my screen.
Based on the Valiant comic of the same name, BLOODSHOT tells the tale of Ray Garrison a slain soldier who is brought back to life with nano-technology - technology that allows him to be used as a tool by Dr. Emil Harting.
Vin Diesel is the perfect blunt instrument to play Bloodshot. He reeks of testosterone and macho-ness but is a winning personality on the screen with enough charm and charisma to draw the audience in. Ably aiding him is Eiza Gonzalez (BABY DRIVER) as KT - another experiment/tool of Dr. Harting's - their relationship is the heart of this movie and it there is "enough" chemistry between the two to make me care about them. The revelation for me in this film is Lamorne Morris (GAME NIGHT) as Wilfred Wigans - a rival hacker who is an enemy (or is he a friend) of Bloodshot. I loved the fun that Wigans brought to the role and the film - he knew what kind of movie he was in and just "ran with it".
Everyone else in this film is pretty "generic" - especially (to my disappointment) Guy Pearce as Dr. Harting. I needed him to be less contained and more broad for this type of comic book film. I read that Michael Sheen was slated to play this role but had to drop out at the last moment due to scheduling conflicts. I would have loved to have seen "wild. out of control Michael Sheen" in this role.
The direction by David Wilson - in his major motion picture debut - is "serviceable", his direction doesn't get in the way. He is a former Visual Effects Supervisor and it shows in this film for it is at it's best when the VFX takes center stage (especially in the fight/action scenes). The key to Bloodshot is that he cannot be killed by conventional means for the nano-bots in his blood stream will reform immediately. So, you get quite a few slow-motion shots of bullets piercing through various parts of Bloodshot's body (with nano-bots flying out) only to have the nano-bots stop their flight away from the body and return to reform the shape of the particular body part (mostly, Bloodshot's head). In lesser hands, this could be an annoying trick, but it worked for me here.
The script and secondary characters and the plot is mostly throwaway in this film - clearly we are here for the fight scenes and the VFX - and if you set your expectations correctly, you will be entertained by this film.
I know I was - to my surprise.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Well...a funny thing happened while multi-tasking while watching this film. I found myself NOT multi-tasking, but rather, I stopped to focus on the film, for I was being entertained by the events unfolding before me on my screen.
Based on the Valiant comic of the same name, BLOODSHOT tells the tale of Ray Garrison a slain soldier who is brought back to life with nano-technology - technology that allows him to be used as a tool by Dr. Emil Harting.
Vin Diesel is the perfect blunt instrument to play Bloodshot. He reeks of testosterone and macho-ness but is a winning personality on the screen with enough charm and charisma to draw the audience in. Ably aiding him is Eiza Gonzalez (BABY DRIVER) as KT - another experiment/tool of Dr. Harting's - their relationship is the heart of this movie and it there is "enough" chemistry between the two to make me care about them. The revelation for me in this film is Lamorne Morris (GAME NIGHT) as Wilfred Wigans - a rival hacker who is an enemy (or is he a friend) of Bloodshot. I loved the fun that Wigans brought to the role and the film - he knew what kind of movie he was in and just "ran with it".
Everyone else in this film is pretty "generic" - especially (to my disappointment) Guy Pearce as Dr. Harting. I needed him to be less contained and more broad for this type of comic book film. I read that Michael Sheen was slated to play this role but had to drop out at the last moment due to scheduling conflicts. I would have loved to have seen "wild. out of control Michael Sheen" in this role.
The direction by David Wilson - in his major motion picture debut - is "serviceable", his direction doesn't get in the way. He is a former Visual Effects Supervisor and it shows in this film for it is at it's best when the VFX takes center stage (especially in the fight/action scenes). The key to Bloodshot is that he cannot be killed by conventional means for the nano-bots in his blood stream will reform immediately. So, you get quite a few slow-motion shots of bullets piercing through various parts of Bloodshot's body (with nano-bots flying out) only to have the nano-bots stop their flight away from the body and return to reform the shape of the particular body part (mostly, Bloodshot's head). In lesser hands, this could be an annoying trick, but it worked for me here.
The script and secondary characters and the plot is mostly throwaway in this film - clearly we are here for the fight scenes and the VFX - and if you set your expectations correctly, you will be entertained by this film.
I know I was - to my surprise.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Miles Ahead (2016) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
If you’ve ever found yourself in a coffee shop, bookstore, or perhaps even a jazz club in the 21st century you can’t NOT have heard either the name ‘Miles Davis’, his music, or perhaps both. If you’ve been living under a rock your whole life and by some miracle you have a smartphone, computer, or a radio find a jazz station and it’s almost a sure thing you’ll here his music within minutes. The man is no myth although the man and his music are so legendary there is almost a mythical presence to him. He is one of the greats. No question. No argument.
‘Miles Ahead’ is a biopic about the legendary jazz musician directed by and staring Don Cheadle who also co-wrote the film with Steven Baigelman, Christopher Wilkinson, and Steven J. Rivele.
Emayatzy Corinealdi, Ewan McGregor, Michael Stuhlbarg, and Keith Stanfield. Rather than focus on the entire life of the great jazz musician which could encompass several films and take up an entire archive, the film focuses mainly on a period in Davis’s life where he is living in relative seclusion in his home in New York City after having retreated from the public spotlight five years previously. Miles endeavors to begin recording and playing music once again after combating addictions to alcohol and cocaine which he indulged in to deal with his wife leaving him and the heavy stress brought upon him by a loss of inspiration to compose music. At about this same time ‘Rolling Stone’ reporter Dave Braden (McGregor), a borderline paparazzi of the time but not quite, calls upon Davis begging him to let him write about Davis’s great comeback. After several futile attempts on the part of Braden, Davis reluctantly agrees after Braden introduces him to a new dealer willing to supply him with high-grade cocaine. What follows is something thats almost out of a Hunter S. Thompson book as the two attempt to recover a demo tape of Davis’s most recent recordings from a low level gangster/manager/agent who stole the from Davis’s home. Amongst the drugs and the booze and the gun fights and car chases there are brief flashbacks into Miles’s past where he relives times good and bad with his wife Frances (Corinealdi). How they met, how they lived, and how she inspired some of his greatest works through her graceful dancing and their mutual love for classical music like Eric Satie, Chopin, and Stravinsky and how he eventually lost her due to his addictions and indulgences.
For such a brief glimpse into the life of one of music’s greatest, the movie was quite well done. It was clearly a labor of love for Mr. Cheadle who had his hands in nearly every aspect of the movie and went so far as to learn to play the trumpet so he could actually play the music himself in the movie. The actor, who is amongst the best and most underrated of our time, reportedly spent six years making this film. The background music is mostly comprised of tracks from arguably one of Davis’s best albums ‘Sketches Of Spain’ and selections of his work is played by Cheadle himself. It’s sometimes difficult to tell whether the movie is more about the music or the man himself. Does it honestly matter though? In many ways, they’re one in the same are they not? The movie is rated R for scenes with violence, adult language, and intimate scenes. I’d give it 4 out of 5 stars. The only negative thing I have to say about is that I wish there had been more about the life of the man. His beginnings. Like when he was accepted into the Juilliard School of Music in New York only to drop out. His days spent jamming with Charlie Parker. Again, that would encompass far more time than one would consider ‘feasible’ for a movie.
‘Miles Ahead’ is a biopic about the legendary jazz musician directed by and staring Don Cheadle who also co-wrote the film with Steven Baigelman, Christopher Wilkinson, and Steven J. Rivele.
Emayatzy Corinealdi, Ewan McGregor, Michael Stuhlbarg, and Keith Stanfield. Rather than focus on the entire life of the great jazz musician which could encompass several films and take up an entire archive, the film focuses mainly on a period in Davis’s life where he is living in relative seclusion in his home in New York City after having retreated from the public spotlight five years previously. Miles endeavors to begin recording and playing music once again after combating addictions to alcohol and cocaine which he indulged in to deal with his wife leaving him and the heavy stress brought upon him by a loss of inspiration to compose music. At about this same time ‘Rolling Stone’ reporter Dave Braden (McGregor), a borderline paparazzi of the time but not quite, calls upon Davis begging him to let him write about Davis’s great comeback. After several futile attempts on the part of Braden, Davis reluctantly agrees after Braden introduces him to a new dealer willing to supply him with high-grade cocaine. What follows is something thats almost out of a Hunter S. Thompson book as the two attempt to recover a demo tape of Davis’s most recent recordings from a low level gangster/manager/agent who stole the from Davis’s home. Amongst the drugs and the booze and the gun fights and car chases there are brief flashbacks into Miles’s past where he relives times good and bad with his wife Frances (Corinealdi). How they met, how they lived, and how she inspired some of his greatest works through her graceful dancing and their mutual love for classical music like Eric Satie, Chopin, and Stravinsky and how he eventually lost her due to his addictions and indulgences.
For such a brief glimpse into the life of one of music’s greatest, the movie was quite well done. It was clearly a labor of love for Mr. Cheadle who had his hands in nearly every aspect of the movie and went so far as to learn to play the trumpet so he could actually play the music himself in the movie. The actor, who is amongst the best and most underrated of our time, reportedly spent six years making this film. The background music is mostly comprised of tracks from arguably one of Davis’s best albums ‘Sketches Of Spain’ and selections of his work is played by Cheadle himself. It’s sometimes difficult to tell whether the movie is more about the music or the man himself. Does it honestly matter though? In many ways, they’re one in the same are they not? The movie is rated R for scenes with violence, adult language, and intimate scenes. I’d give it 4 out of 5 stars. The only negative thing I have to say about is that I wish there had been more about the life of the man. His beginnings. Like when he was accepted into the Juilliard School of Music in New York only to drop out. His days spent jamming with Charlie Parker. Again, that would encompass far more time than one would consider ‘feasible’ for a movie.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Paddington 2 (2017) in Movies
Nov 26, 2019
Verdict: Charming and Entertaining
Story: Paddington 2 starts as Paddington is a welcome member of the Brown family, the neighbours are always willing to accept his help and now Paddington sees a gift for his Aunt Lucy in Mr Gruber (Broadbent) antique shop and decides to get a job to pay for it.
Just about to buy the present, Paddington catches a thief breaking into the store and goes in chase, only to find himself captured and thrown in prison. Paddington soon makes friends with the prisoners including the feared Knuckles (Gleeson), while the Brown family Henry (Bonneville) and Mary (Hawkins) try to free Paddington, learning that the once famous actor Phoenix Buchanan (Grant) is behind the crime.
Thoughts on Paddington 2
Characters – Paddington is the kind-hearted marmalade loving bear living in London, he has made countless friends both human and animal, he wants to get a present for his Aunt which sees him trying to get a job. He does try to do the right thing by helping with a robbery only to be found guilty. Paddington always the people bear makes friends, while believing that everybody has good about them. Henry, Mary Brown and Mrs Bird treat Paddington like their third child and will do everything to help get him out of prison. Phoenix Buchanan is the once famous actor that has moved in next door to the Browns, he is very eccentric and trying to rebuild his fortune which sees him stealing the book and learning about the clues in the book, always trying to stay ahead of the people trying to capture him, using his different costumes from his career. Knuckles McGinty is the prison chef, he is feared by the other inmates, but Paddington breaks down those barriers showing him to be a good man inside, one that could bring the prisoners together.
Performances – When we go into the performances, the original cast are all wonderfully, but it is the addition members of the cast that truly shine, Hugh Grant practically steals every scene, while Brendan Gleeson proves that he can be the funniest man on camera, these two are outstanding in every single scene they are in.
Story – The story here follows Paddington’s next adventure as he tries to give his Aunt a present of seeing London only for him to get framed and thrown in prison, while the Brown family try to figure out who really committed the crime. This is a coming together story, it shows how somebody’s good nature can change everything in life and without them around you will notice the change in life. The idea that Paddington is facing off against an evil washed up actor is entertaining too, though it would have been nice to see more of the treasure hunt side of the story. While most of the story is largely predictable it does have a huge heart behind it and shows that good people will rub off on others to show kindness can be a change to life for the better.
Adventure/Comedy – The adventure side of the film seems to be focused more on the villains adventure, more than seeing what Paddington must get up to, the comedy comes from seeing just what Paddington gets himself into and the trouble he causes with his innocent nature.
Settings – We keep London as the main backdrop for the film, while we do have Paddington in a prison and the major landmarks being used as clues to a treasure, most places are locations we are expecting to see in any London based movie.
Special Effects – The effects are brilliant putting Paddington in every scene like he is really there, it never looks out of place which shows just how far this technology has come.
Scene of the Movie – Lets make marmalade.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Surely, Mr Gruber would be the one who decides whether to press charges against Paddington?
Final Thoughts – This is a entertaining, big hearted movie that could be enjoyed by the whole family and would leave a smile on everybody’s face.
Overall: Big Heart Movie.
Story: Paddington 2 starts as Paddington is a welcome member of the Brown family, the neighbours are always willing to accept his help and now Paddington sees a gift for his Aunt Lucy in Mr Gruber (Broadbent) antique shop and decides to get a job to pay for it.
Just about to buy the present, Paddington catches a thief breaking into the store and goes in chase, only to find himself captured and thrown in prison. Paddington soon makes friends with the prisoners including the feared Knuckles (Gleeson), while the Brown family Henry (Bonneville) and Mary (Hawkins) try to free Paddington, learning that the once famous actor Phoenix Buchanan (Grant) is behind the crime.
Thoughts on Paddington 2
Characters – Paddington is the kind-hearted marmalade loving bear living in London, he has made countless friends both human and animal, he wants to get a present for his Aunt which sees him trying to get a job. He does try to do the right thing by helping with a robbery only to be found guilty. Paddington always the people bear makes friends, while believing that everybody has good about them. Henry, Mary Brown and Mrs Bird treat Paddington like their third child and will do everything to help get him out of prison. Phoenix Buchanan is the once famous actor that has moved in next door to the Browns, he is very eccentric and trying to rebuild his fortune which sees him stealing the book and learning about the clues in the book, always trying to stay ahead of the people trying to capture him, using his different costumes from his career. Knuckles McGinty is the prison chef, he is feared by the other inmates, but Paddington breaks down those barriers showing him to be a good man inside, one that could bring the prisoners together.
Performances – When we go into the performances, the original cast are all wonderfully, but it is the addition members of the cast that truly shine, Hugh Grant practically steals every scene, while Brendan Gleeson proves that he can be the funniest man on camera, these two are outstanding in every single scene they are in.
Story – The story here follows Paddington’s next adventure as he tries to give his Aunt a present of seeing London only for him to get framed and thrown in prison, while the Brown family try to figure out who really committed the crime. This is a coming together story, it shows how somebody’s good nature can change everything in life and without them around you will notice the change in life. The idea that Paddington is facing off against an evil washed up actor is entertaining too, though it would have been nice to see more of the treasure hunt side of the story. While most of the story is largely predictable it does have a huge heart behind it and shows that good people will rub off on others to show kindness can be a change to life for the better.
Adventure/Comedy – The adventure side of the film seems to be focused more on the villains adventure, more than seeing what Paddington must get up to, the comedy comes from seeing just what Paddington gets himself into and the trouble he causes with his innocent nature.
Settings – We keep London as the main backdrop for the film, while we do have Paddington in a prison and the major landmarks being used as clues to a treasure, most places are locations we are expecting to see in any London based movie.
Special Effects – The effects are brilliant putting Paddington in every scene like he is really there, it never looks out of place which shows just how far this technology has come.
Scene of the Movie – Lets make marmalade.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Surely, Mr Gruber would be the one who decides whether to press charges against Paddington?
Final Thoughts – This is a entertaining, big hearted movie that could be enjoyed by the whole family and would leave a smile on everybody’s face.
Overall: Big Heart Movie.
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated If I Stay (If I Stay, #1) in Books
May 10, 2018
Mia is a typical 17 year old girl. She has a great family, plays the cello, has good friends and an incredible boyfriend. On a very non-typical day in her home of Oregon, a dusting of snow keeps the whole family home from work and school. Her family decides to take a drive and visit some family and friends. Unfortunately, on this journey, tragedy strikes. Mia's family is involved in a car accident. As Mia's life hangs in the balance, she reflects on all that has happened in her short time on earth and what would or could happen if she decided to stay.
I thought this was going to be a tear-jerker, but it wasn't so much. The events that took place are sad for sure, but I didn't find myself crying like I thought I would. Imagine if everyone in your immediate family is killed in a car accident and you are the only survivor. What do you do? You watch your whole family laying in pools of blood and then you watch yourself being operated on and see the looks in the eyes of your friends and family as they try to make sense of it all as well. In the book, the movie Ghost is referenced, and this book does remind me a bit of that movie. Patrick Swayze is dead though, and Mia is just trying to figure out if she should stay with the living, or go and be with her parents and her brother. It's a hard decision to make and I'm not sure if it is one that I could make. For me or for any other member of my family. How can you make the decision to let someone live or die? How do you make that decision yourself? Are we really able to make that decision?
My favorite part of this book, is looking back into Mia's life. Getting an understanding of who she is and who her family was. I love the fact that her family was so close and most of her life treated her like a little adult instead of a child. They were encouraging and always there for her. Her boyfriend and her best friend were the same way. They may not have always agreed on everything, but they were always understanding and willing to give a listening ear. I'm not sure if the series follows Mia along the rest of her journey, but I would like to know what her decision was.
I thought this was going to be a tear-jerker, but it wasn't so much. The events that took place are sad for sure, but I didn't find myself crying like I thought I would. Imagine if everyone in your immediate family is killed in a car accident and you are the only survivor. What do you do? You watch your whole family laying in pools of blood and then you watch yourself being operated on and see the looks in the eyes of your friends and family as they try to make sense of it all as well. In the book, the movie Ghost is referenced, and this book does remind me a bit of that movie. Patrick Swayze is dead though, and Mia is just trying to figure out if she should stay with the living, or go and be with her parents and her brother. It's a hard decision to make and I'm not sure if it is one that I could make. For me or for any other member of my family. How can you make the decision to let someone live or die? How do you make that decision yourself? Are we really able to make that decision?
My favorite part of this book, is looking back into Mia's life. Getting an understanding of who she is and who her family was. I love the fact that her family was so close and most of her life treated her like a little adult instead of a child. They were encouraging and always there for her. Her boyfriend and her best friend were the same way. They may not have always agreed on everything, but they were always understanding and willing to give a listening ear. I'm not sure if the series follows Mia along the rest of her journey, but I would like to know what her decision was.
Alison Pink (7 KP) rated Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close in Books
Jan 15, 2018
I have never been a big fan of history. There have been events in history which have captured my attention...the Holocaust, JFK's assassination, the Civil Rights movement, the Beatles. I think my issue with history is just that, its history. I had no connection to it. All of that changed on September 11, 2001, my generation's version of the day that will live in infamy. Like most everyone who was old enough to remember, I remember that day like it were yesterday...where I was when I heard, what it was like to watch those massive building collapse, the fear, the uncertainty, the need to have those I loved close to me, how I knew it was real but just not being able to comprehend that I was watching the news & not some movie. I didn't have a personal connection with losing someone that day thank God.
Jonathan Safran Foer's book gave me that personal connection. While I know it is fiction, it felt SO incredibly real. His writing was very heartfelt...funny, depressing, hopeful, and heartbreaking all at once. It tells the story of Oskar Schell who lost his father on that horrible day. It tells the tale of the aftermath for those left behind, those who still today stuggle to get a handle on wrapping their minds around their loved one being gone, even though there is nothing to put closure to their loss.
Oskar spends months a searching for an explanation to a key he found at the bottom of a vase in his father's closet after he died. He embarks on the search hoping to feel close to his dad, if only for a little while longer. That search leads him all through New York and into the homes of a very eclectic group of people who are all dealing with some kind of tragedy. In the end, what he finds surprises Oskar, but also manages to pull him back to his mother and deal with his anger at the same time.
I'm not sure what I was expecting, but this book was a pleasant surprise. I laughed & cried, often times all from just one page of text. The story is accompanied by photos that just add to the personal nature of the story. I don't do this often if ever really, but I think this is a book I will read more than once.
Jonathan Safran Foer's book gave me that personal connection. While I know it is fiction, it felt SO incredibly real. His writing was very heartfelt...funny, depressing, hopeful, and heartbreaking all at once. It tells the story of Oskar Schell who lost his father on that horrible day. It tells the tale of the aftermath for those left behind, those who still today stuggle to get a handle on wrapping their minds around their loved one being gone, even though there is nothing to put closure to their loss.
Oskar spends months a searching for an explanation to a key he found at the bottom of a vase in his father's closet after he died. He embarks on the search hoping to feel close to his dad, if only for a little while longer. That search leads him all through New York and into the homes of a very eclectic group of people who are all dealing with some kind of tragedy. In the end, what he finds surprises Oskar, but also manages to pull him back to his mother and deal with his anger at the same time.
I'm not sure what I was expecting, but this book was a pleasant surprise. I laughed & cried, often times all from just one page of text. The story is accompanied by photos that just add to the personal nature of the story. I don't do this often if ever really, but I think this is a book I will read more than once.
nearbuy.com: The Step-Out App
Lifestyle and Food & Drink
App
More than 4 million people across India are using nearbuy.com right now to discover new experiences...
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated It (2017) in Movies
Aug 9, 2019
The best way to describe the most recent adaption of Stephen King's It, is that it feels like a ghost train.
It's one scene after the next of spooky imagery and mild jump scares - it's not overly terrifying, but it's an enjoyable time.
I didn't find It to be particularly scary - there were parts here and there that were uncomfortable (the old woman in the background of the library scene - no focus on her whatsoever, but it gave me chills) and of course, the already infamous scene at the beginning with Georgie is hard to watch considering the age of the child.
But it's lack of all out terror is not a bad thing - the movie can concentrate on a hugely important aspect of the original book - the friendship shared betweens The Losers Club.
The young actors in this are great, all hugely believable, and likable, as they set off on their quest to stop Pennywise and his reign over the town of Derry.
In a world transfixed with Stranger Things, the atmosphere of It treads familiar turf, the 80s setting hitting the right nostalgic spots.
Bill Skarsgård makes a great Pennywise. He doesn't try to copy what the great Tim Curry did in the original TV movie, he makes it his own. He's not quite as sinister as Tim Curry, but he's damn entertaining, and his costume and make up make for a creepy enough clown.
I'm really looking forward to the upcoming Chapter 2, to see if Andy Muschietti can pull off the ending as well as he pulled off the beginning.
It's one scene after the next of spooky imagery and mild jump scares - it's not overly terrifying, but it's an enjoyable time.
I didn't find It to be particularly scary - there were parts here and there that were uncomfortable (the old woman in the background of the library scene - no focus on her whatsoever, but it gave me chills) and of course, the already infamous scene at the beginning with Georgie is hard to watch considering the age of the child.
But it's lack of all out terror is not a bad thing - the movie can concentrate on a hugely important aspect of the original book - the friendship shared betweens The Losers Club.
The young actors in this are great, all hugely believable, and likable, as they set off on their quest to stop Pennywise and his reign over the town of Derry.
In a world transfixed with Stranger Things, the atmosphere of It treads familiar turf, the 80s setting hitting the right nostalgic spots.
Bill Skarsgård makes a great Pennywise. He doesn't try to copy what the great Tim Curry did in the original TV movie, he makes it his own. He's not quite as sinister as Tim Curry, but he's damn entertaining, and his costume and make up make for a creepy enough clown.
I'm really looking forward to the upcoming Chapter 2, to see if Andy Muschietti can pull off the ending as well as he pulled off the beginning.
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Daredevil (2003) in Movies
Sep 20, 2020
"𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘬𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘵𝘸𝘰 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘐'𝘷𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘭𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘥, 𝘸𝘩𝘺?"
"𝘉𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴..."
*Director's cut*
Old proverb states: can a movie *truly* be bad with a Colin Farrell performance this fuckin' gonzo? Just as hokey as you remember, that playground fight is one of the worst things to make it through to pass in any superhero movie - and it's hilarious. Really funny when it tries to be, too though - for that matter. Overstuffed and contrived for sure but not too much more or less cartoonish than most of the stuff in the Raimi 𝘚𝘱𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘳-𝘔𝘢𝘯 movies, and this at least endearing market-tested clumsiness is - at the very least - twenty times more palatable than the intolerable formula market-testing in most of the Phase One/Three MCU flicks. This at least tries to have some fun, good humor, comic book replication, varied story beats, and a palpable edge beyond just its superficial emo-ness. I just can't help but smirk at the moon physics fight sequences or corny needledrops ("All this time I can't believe I couldn't see" with a lingering cut to Matt's eyes, come on man lmao). There's also a pretty rock solid backdrop in here about how most of the characters - good or bad - are motivated by greed or self-interest, so ultimately what we have to judge in the end is what's left when that wealth, pride, and/or power is unceremoniously stripped away from them. That final fight/scene with Kingpin is epic. Comes out much more sorta dorkily awkward as opposed to corporately sinister than it did in its day, because of what this has been replaced with and how immeasurably worse it is.
"𝘉𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴..."
*Director's cut*
Old proverb states: can a movie *truly* be bad with a Colin Farrell performance this fuckin' gonzo? Just as hokey as you remember, that playground fight is one of the worst things to make it through to pass in any superhero movie - and it's hilarious. Really funny when it tries to be, too though - for that matter. Overstuffed and contrived for sure but not too much more or less cartoonish than most of the stuff in the Raimi 𝘚𝘱𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘳-𝘔𝘢𝘯 movies, and this at least endearing market-tested clumsiness is - at the very least - twenty times more palatable than the intolerable formula market-testing in most of the Phase One/Three MCU flicks. This at least tries to have some fun, good humor, comic book replication, varied story beats, and a palpable edge beyond just its superficial emo-ness. I just can't help but smirk at the moon physics fight sequences or corny needledrops ("All this time I can't believe I couldn't see" with a lingering cut to Matt's eyes, come on man lmao). There's also a pretty rock solid backdrop in here about how most of the characters - good or bad - are motivated by greed or self-interest, so ultimately what we have to judge in the end is what's left when that wealth, pride, and/or power is unceremoniously stripped away from them. That final fight/scene with Kingpin is epic. Comes out much more sorta dorkily awkward as opposed to corporately sinister than it did in its day, because of what this has been replaced with and how immeasurably worse it is.