Search
Search results
Awix (3310 KP) rated Agent of Chaos in Books
Apr 1, 2019 (Updated Apr 2, 2019)
Weirdly prescient pulp sci-fi novel. 'The great tyrant ruled with solar system with absolute terror. Only one man dared to fight back!' The man in question being one Boris Johnson, who (laser gun in hand) heroically sets out to bring down the government and plunge the world into complete anarchy (this really is the plot, and yes, the book was written in 1967).
Obviously the book is unintended comedy gold for UK readers nowadays, but as something you might actually want to read for pleasure, or for any other reason, it is quite hard work: the plot is hackneyed, the characterisation thin, and much of the book is taken up with lengthy discussions of chaos and order and anarchy and so on. This has given the book a cult following, although I think it depends on how old you are when you first read it. If you're not into radical philosophy and not amused by the doings of Boris Johnson, there's not much else here to enjoy.
Obviously the book is unintended comedy gold for UK readers nowadays, but as something you might actually want to read for pleasure, or for any other reason, it is quite hard work: the plot is hackneyed, the characterisation thin, and much of the book is taken up with lengthy discussions of chaos and order and anarchy and so on. This has given the book a cult following, although I think it depends on how old you are when you first read it. If you're not into radical philosophy and not amused by the doings of Boris Johnson, there's not much else here to enjoy.
I think I'm becoming quite the Ali Smith fan
I absolutely loved this book. I'm becoming quite a fan, and I think I need to read more of Ali Smith's back catalogue. This novel is witty, current, heartfelt with a full-on family! Ali Smith has a lot of political dross and general misery in the news lately to find material from (unfortunately!), but she does so much good WITH it. In the blurb it says about this book that it's "The season that teaches us survival", and the characters in this certainly do just that.
There is a lot of jumping around in time: things that happened in the past that have a bearing on the presents of the characters, and the occasional toe-dip into their futures too. A lot can happen in the few days over Christmas. We're never quite sure if the mother in this is losing her mind or not (it would be a safe bet to say "yes", but then her son isn't particularly stable during the time period that the book is set in either).
I love the wittiness of Smith's writing. For the Brits reading this, you'll probably get this one straight away, but for everyone else, she's referring to Boris Johnson our current (2018) Foreign Secretary (although I think this would probably apply to any politician, regardless of political party or country! Call me a cynic!): "The man who wrote the dictionary. Johnson. Not Boris. The opposite of Boris. A man interested in the meanings of words, not one whose interests leave words meaningless."
And just a quote to finish with. One that represents both the season that the book is set in, and also one of the main story arcs:
"Cymbeline, he says. The one about poison, mess, bitterness, then the balance coming back. The lies revealed. The losses compensated".
Ali Smiths style can take a bit of getting used to (you'll probably have noticed the lack of speech marks - that's not a mistake on my part, by the way), but her books are so worth the effort.
There is a lot of jumping around in time: things that happened in the past that have a bearing on the presents of the characters, and the occasional toe-dip into their futures too. A lot can happen in the few days over Christmas. We're never quite sure if the mother in this is losing her mind or not (it would be a safe bet to say "yes", but then her son isn't particularly stable during the time period that the book is set in either).
I love the wittiness of Smith's writing. For the Brits reading this, you'll probably get this one straight away, but for everyone else, she's referring to Boris Johnson our current (2018) Foreign Secretary (although I think this would probably apply to any politician, regardless of political party or country! Call me a cynic!): "The man who wrote the dictionary. Johnson. Not Boris. The opposite of Boris. A man interested in the meanings of words, not one whose interests leave words meaningless."
And just a quote to finish with. One that represents both the season that the book is set in, and also one of the main story arcs:
"Cymbeline, he says. The one about poison, mess, bitterness, then the balance coming back. The lies revealed. The losses compensated".
Ali Smiths style can take a bit of getting used to (you'll probably have noticed the lack of speech marks - that's not a mistake on my part, by the way), but her books are so worth the effort.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Brexit: The Uncivil War (2019) in Movies
Jan 11, 2019
A painful watch
I have to admit, I’m a little undecided about this. On one hand I found it informative and amusing, but on the other I found it such a difficult and painful thing to watch.
The performances in this were great, especially Benedict Cumberbatch and Rory Kinnear. There were some hilarious takes on some of the politicians, it didn’t shy away from allowing them to come across as conceited a-holes, and the impression of Boris Johnson wasmost notable. Yes it was probably verging on parody, but it brought some much needed humour to the film. It’s well shot and scripted, and it is undoubtedly very smart and has obviously picked up a few pointers from the likes of House of Cards. It was interesting to see the story of someone I’ve never even heard of (politics isn’t my strong point I’ll admit) and to see what happened in the background of Brexit - or at least this film’s version of events... I am concerned that this has tried to summarise Brexit in the space over 2 hours and doesn’t seem to include as much detail as it should.
My main issue with this though is that as a Remainer, this is a painful thing to watch. Considering Brexit is still very much ongoing and fresh for anyone in the UK, it raises the question of whether we really needed to see this film right now. It’s not exactly putting our minds at ease, and instead seems to be raising more questions and causing more ructions. But then conversely, I can see the reasons why it would be the perfect time to release this, because we haven’t even left yet. It’s very divisive, and I honestly can’t quite decide exactly how I feel about this. It’s definitely informative and well made, just very difficult to swallow.
The performances in this were great, especially Benedict Cumberbatch and Rory Kinnear. There were some hilarious takes on some of the politicians, it didn’t shy away from allowing them to come across as conceited a-holes, and the impression of Boris Johnson wasmost notable. Yes it was probably verging on parody, but it brought some much needed humour to the film. It’s well shot and scripted, and it is undoubtedly very smart and has obviously picked up a few pointers from the likes of House of Cards. It was interesting to see the story of someone I’ve never even heard of (politics isn’t my strong point I’ll admit) and to see what happened in the background of Brexit - or at least this film’s version of events... I am concerned that this has tried to summarise Brexit in the space over 2 hours and doesn’t seem to include as much detail as it should.
My main issue with this though is that as a Remainer, this is a painful thing to watch. Considering Brexit is still very much ongoing and fresh for anyone in the UK, it raises the question of whether we really needed to see this film right now. It’s not exactly putting our minds at ease, and instead seems to be raising more questions and causing more ructions. But then conversely, I can see the reasons why it would be the perfect time to release this, because we haven’t even left yet. It’s very divisive, and I honestly can’t quite decide exactly how I feel about this. It’s definitely informative and well made, just very difficult to swallow.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Thor: Love and Thunder (2022) in Movies
Aug 8, 2022
Phase four of the MCU has been interesting so far to say the least. Some projects have been great, some have been a little uninspired, but in its attempts to set up multiple overarching story threads, it feels a little wayward, especially in comparison to the recently concluded Infinity Saga. Thor: Love & Thunder has unfortunately arrived right in the middle of this new era of uncertainty, and is a film that ultimately feels a little directionless itself. It adapts a hugely beloved comic arc, an arc that could have potentially used two movies to flesh everything out properly. In this arc, Gorr the God Butcher is a big deal, he feels threatening, menacing, dangerous. In the film, Christian Bale is giving it his all, and there are moments when Gorr is genuinely creepy as hell, but the stakes never feel particularly high, resulting in a villain that feels like a shadow of his comic counterpart. Chris Hemsworth has proven by now that he is a perfect fit for Thor himself, but by this fourth entry, it genuinely feels that he is a straight up dumbass, and is miles away from his character growth in the first Thor. Herein lies the main issue I had with Love & Thunder. Ragnarok was a well balanced MCU film in terms of tone. It provided a much needed shakeup after the disappointment of The Dark World, and Taika Waititi was an inspired choice to bring the quirk. The comedy is tight, lands more often than not, whilst boasting some memorable set pieces. L&T takes the comedy aspect, and doubles down hard. It's joke after joke, to a point where a lot of it falls flat. It reminded me of Guardians of the Galaxy 2 in that respect. It's not terrible by any means, but it's balance feels completely off. There are some great set pieces to be fair. An early scene that involves an attack on New Asgard is a highlight, and almost feels like a horror film at times. It's also where we meet Jane Fosters Thor, who looks comic accurate, and is a genuinely great addition to the movie overall. There's another scene later on that takes place in the shadow realm that provides another highlight. It's mostly in black and white, and it feels unique to the MCU. It's one of a few inspired moments that prevent L&T from becoming a complete misfire.
Any other gripes from me would require stepping into spoiler territory so I'll leave it there. Love & Thunder is frequently dumb, but equally fun, colourful and loud, despite being a bit of a mess. The more Marvel Studios venture into Phase Four, the more sporadic and shaky it feels. I have no doubt that everything will plateau into a solid narrative again, I just hope that moment comes sooner, rather than later.
On a final note, the person I watched this with leaned over to me around the halfway point, and said that Thor just sounds like Boris Johnson when he talks, and now I can't unhear it. If I have to suffer, then you do to.
Any other gripes from me would require stepping into spoiler territory so I'll leave it there. Love & Thunder is frequently dumb, but equally fun, colourful and loud, despite being a bit of a mess. The more Marvel Studios venture into Phase Four, the more sporadic and shaky it feels. I have no doubt that everything will plateau into a solid narrative again, I just hope that moment comes sooner, rather than later.
On a final note, the person I watched this with leaned over to me around the halfway point, and said that Thor just sounds like Boris Johnson when he talks, and now I can't unhear it. If I have to suffer, then you do to.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies
Nov 10, 2019
Joachim Phoenix - Oscar winning performance? (1 more)
Look and feel of the film - technically brilliant
A loser's tale.
“Joker” has managed to stir up a whirlwind of controversy, centring partly around the level of violence included but also on the use of “that song” on the soundtrack. But putting aside that flurry of commentary, what of the film itself?
Man, this is a dark film! It’s as much of an anti-superhero film as this year’s “Brightburn“. The Batman legacy has addressed the mental state of the protagonists before (both that of the hero and the villains). Here we have a real study of how a mentally unstable no-hoper can be pushed over the edge by bigotry, carelessness and government cut-backs.
Indeed, there is something alarmingly prescient about the movie’s plot line, watching this as we (in the UK) are in the month of possible (or as Boris Johnson would say, definite) Brexit madness! “Is it me, or is it getting crazier out there?” Arthur Fleck muses to his social worker (Sharon Washington). And a rant by Arthur late on goes “Everybody just yells and screams at each other. Nobody’s civil anymore. Nobody thinks what it’s like to be the other guy. You think men like Thomas Wayne ever think what it’s like to be someone like me? To be somebody but themselves? They don’t. They think that we’ll just sit there and take it, like good little boys! That we won’t werewolf and go wild!” Chilling words as we possibly face a very bumpy October and November in the UK.
After reviewing “Judy” I wouldn’t be the least surprised if I’d just seen the Best Actress award bagged (by Renée Zellweger). Now, with “Joker”, surely Joachim Phoenix might bag his first (and well overdue in my book) Oscar. Although nominated before (for “Gladiator”, “Walk the Line” and “The Master”) he’s never won. Here Phoenix’s physical transformation into Arthur Fleck is SIMPLY EXTRAORDINARY. And the way he captures the (medically) induced fits of helpless laughter, ending in a sort of choking fit, is brilliant and replicated to a ‘T’ on multiple occasions.
I loved “You Were Never Really Here“, primarily due to Phoenix’s pitch-perfect performance. And “Joker” reminded me very much of Lynne Ramsey‘s film: a disturbed loner, looking after his elderly mother; with violence meted out to wrong-doers. Joe is almost the yin to Arthur Fleck’s yang: Joe is an invisible man who is very much present; Arthur is a very visible man who thinks he is invisible. There’s even comment by Fleck towards the end of the film that sometimes he thinks he’s ‘not really there at all’! (A deliberate ‘in’ joke in reference to that film?)
After some pretty piss-poor “pension grabs” in recent years, culminating in the appalling career- nadir of “Dirty Grandpa” in 2016, Robert De Niro comes good with a fine performance as the idolised but thoughtless and cruel talk-show host Murray Franklin. It’s very much a supporting role, but delivered with great aplomb.
Also great again is “Deadpool 2“‘s Zazie Beetz (a great trivia answer for an actor with three ‘z’s’ in the name). This angle of the story is deviously clever, and Zazie handles the various twists and turns brilliantly.
Movie violence needs to be taken in context to both the film’s story and to the movie’s certificate. For those expecting a light and fluffy “Avengers” style of movie, they might be shocked by what they see. True that the film definitely pushes the boundaries of what I think is acceptable in a UK15-certificate film. … I suspect there were HEATED discussions at the BBFC after this screening! The violence though seems comparable to some other 15’s I’ve seen: a DIY-store drill scene in “The Equalizer” comes to mind.
A particularly brutal scene is reminiscent of a climactic scene in “Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood“, such that Quentin Tarantino might have just cause to appeal his ‘UK18’ certificate.
You might argue about the level of violence that SHOULD be shown in a 15 certificate film. But I think the violence portrayed – given this is in the known context an origin story for a psychopathic killer – is appropriate. I personally found the Heath Ledger‘s Joker’s “pencil trick” scene in “The Dark Knight” more disturbing, given it was a 12 certificate.
I have less sympathy for the inclusion of “Rock and Roll Part 2” on the soundtrack. The fact that a convicted paedophile (I refuse to say his name) is profiting from the ticket sales is galling. This is almost deliberately courting controversy. There has been some view that this is a “traditional” chant song at US football matches (as “The Hey Song”). But most (all?) teams have now recognized the connection and stopped its use. At least here the director and producers should have more of a ‘world view’ on this.
Where “Hangover” director Todd Phillips does recover some of this respect is in the quality of the script (co-written with Scott Silver) and the direction. It’s misdirection without mis-direction! Some of the twists in the plot (no spoilers here!) I did not see coming, and certain aspects of the story (again no spoilers!) are left brilliantly (and chillingly) vague.
Sure, it borrows heavily in story-line and mood from Martin Scorsese‘s “Taxi Driver”. And I was also reminded of 1993’s Joel Schumacher flick “Falling Down” where Michael Douglas is an ordinary man pushed to the edge and beyond by a series of life’s trials. But if you want to criticise a film for “not being 100% original” then let’s start at the top of the 2019 IMDB listings and keep going! I’ve also seen comment from some that criticises the somewhat clunky overlay of the Batman back-story into the script. I also understand that view but I didn’t personally share it.
Elsewhere I would not be surprised if the movie gets garlanded with technical Oscar nominations aplenty come January. The cinematography, by Phillips-regular Lawrence Sher, is exquisite in setting the grimy 70’s tone. (I loved the retro Warner Brothers logo too). And both video and sound editing is top-notch. Not forgetting a sonorous cello-heavy soundtrack that perfectly suits the mood. Want to put a bet on which film might top the “number of Oscar nominations” list? This might not be a bad choice.
Dark and brooding, with a slow-burn start, this is a proper drama that might make action superhero fans fidgety. But I simply loved it, and would love to carve out the time to give it a re-watch. The Phoenix performance is extraordinary. Will this make my Top 10 of the year? Fingers to head, and pull the trigger…. it’s a no-brainer.
Man, this is a dark film! It’s as much of an anti-superhero film as this year’s “Brightburn“. The Batman legacy has addressed the mental state of the protagonists before (both that of the hero and the villains). Here we have a real study of how a mentally unstable no-hoper can be pushed over the edge by bigotry, carelessness and government cut-backs.
Indeed, there is something alarmingly prescient about the movie’s plot line, watching this as we (in the UK) are in the month of possible (or as Boris Johnson would say, definite) Brexit madness! “Is it me, or is it getting crazier out there?” Arthur Fleck muses to his social worker (Sharon Washington). And a rant by Arthur late on goes “Everybody just yells and screams at each other. Nobody’s civil anymore. Nobody thinks what it’s like to be the other guy. You think men like Thomas Wayne ever think what it’s like to be someone like me? To be somebody but themselves? They don’t. They think that we’ll just sit there and take it, like good little boys! That we won’t werewolf and go wild!” Chilling words as we possibly face a very bumpy October and November in the UK.
After reviewing “Judy” I wouldn’t be the least surprised if I’d just seen the Best Actress award bagged (by Renée Zellweger). Now, with “Joker”, surely Joachim Phoenix might bag his first (and well overdue in my book) Oscar. Although nominated before (for “Gladiator”, “Walk the Line” and “The Master”) he’s never won. Here Phoenix’s physical transformation into Arthur Fleck is SIMPLY EXTRAORDINARY. And the way he captures the (medically) induced fits of helpless laughter, ending in a sort of choking fit, is brilliant and replicated to a ‘T’ on multiple occasions.
I loved “You Were Never Really Here“, primarily due to Phoenix’s pitch-perfect performance. And “Joker” reminded me very much of Lynne Ramsey‘s film: a disturbed loner, looking after his elderly mother; with violence meted out to wrong-doers. Joe is almost the yin to Arthur Fleck’s yang: Joe is an invisible man who is very much present; Arthur is a very visible man who thinks he is invisible. There’s even comment by Fleck towards the end of the film that sometimes he thinks he’s ‘not really there at all’! (A deliberate ‘in’ joke in reference to that film?)
After some pretty piss-poor “pension grabs” in recent years, culminating in the appalling career- nadir of “Dirty Grandpa” in 2016, Robert De Niro comes good with a fine performance as the idolised but thoughtless and cruel talk-show host Murray Franklin. It’s very much a supporting role, but delivered with great aplomb.
Also great again is “Deadpool 2“‘s Zazie Beetz (a great trivia answer for an actor with three ‘z’s’ in the name). This angle of the story is deviously clever, and Zazie handles the various twists and turns brilliantly.
Movie violence needs to be taken in context to both the film’s story and to the movie’s certificate. For those expecting a light and fluffy “Avengers” style of movie, they might be shocked by what they see. True that the film definitely pushes the boundaries of what I think is acceptable in a UK15-certificate film. … I suspect there were HEATED discussions at the BBFC after this screening! The violence though seems comparable to some other 15’s I’ve seen: a DIY-store drill scene in “The Equalizer” comes to mind.
A particularly brutal scene is reminiscent of a climactic scene in “Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood“, such that Quentin Tarantino might have just cause to appeal his ‘UK18’ certificate.
You might argue about the level of violence that SHOULD be shown in a 15 certificate film. But I think the violence portrayed – given this is in the known context an origin story for a psychopathic killer – is appropriate. I personally found the Heath Ledger‘s Joker’s “pencil trick” scene in “The Dark Knight” more disturbing, given it was a 12 certificate.
I have less sympathy for the inclusion of “Rock and Roll Part 2” on the soundtrack. The fact that a convicted paedophile (I refuse to say his name) is profiting from the ticket sales is galling. This is almost deliberately courting controversy. There has been some view that this is a “traditional” chant song at US football matches (as “The Hey Song”). But most (all?) teams have now recognized the connection and stopped its use. At least here the director and producers should have more of a ‘world view’ on this.
Where “Hangover” director Todd Phillips does recover some of this respect is in the quality of the script (co-written with Scott Silver) and the direction. It’s misdirection without mis-direction! Some of the twists in the plot (no spoilers here!) I did not see coming, and certain aspects of the story (again no spoilers!) are left brilliantly (and chillingly) vague.
Sure, it borrows heavily in story-line and mood from Martin Scorsese‘s “Taxi Driver”. And I was also reminded of 1993’s Joel Schumacher flick “Falling Down” where Michael Douglas is an ordinary man pushed to the edge and beyond by a series of life’s trials. But if you want to criticise a film for “not being 100% original” then let’s start at the top of the 2019 IMDB listings and keep going! I’ve also seen comment from some that criticises the somewhat clunky overlay of the Batman back-story into the script. I also understand that view but I didn’t personally share it.
Elsewhere I would not be surprised if the movie gets garlanded with technical Oscar nominations aplenty come January. The cinematography, by Phillips-regular Lawrence Sher, is exquisite in setting the grimy 70’s tone. (I loved the retro Warner Brothers logo too). And both video and sound editing is top-notch. Not forgetting a sonorous cello-heavy soundtrack that perfectly suits the mood. Want to put a bet on which film might top the “number of Oscar nominations” list? This might not be a bad choice.
Dark and brooding, with a slow-burn start, this is a proper drama that might make action superhero fans fidgety. But I simply loved it, and would love to carve out the time to give it a re-watch. The Phoenix performance is extraordinary. Will this make my Top 10 of the year? Fingers to head, and pull the trigger…. it’s a no-brainer.
