Search
Search results
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Christopher Robin (2018) in Movies
Apr 1, 2019
Endearing and Pleasant
Never was a big “Winnie the Pooh” guy growing up, but I was always familiar with the characters. Christopher Robin made me fall in love with these characters all the same. Now an adult, Christopher returns to the Hundred Acre Woods to reunite with old friends he left behind.
Acting: 10
Jim Cummings is stellar as both Pooh and Tigger. Although I don’t have a huge point of reference, I can say that it felt like he poured his heart into these characters, making them extremely lovable. His tone and inflection just have a way of making me smile. I also loved Brad Garrett voicing Eeyore. That choice is almost a given as his voice is perfect, but I loved how he took the role and made it his own. Amazing job by the cast all around.
Beginning: 9
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Reminiscent of what they did with the Snuggle bear, the characters are not quite animated, but an odd form of CGI. They don’t feel like fake creatures, rather they are a uniquely pleasant creation. Seeing them interact with Christopher Robin and the settings around them was a treat. I loved the way the Hundred Acre Woods are captured and the well-crafted closeups of the characters that evoke emotion. Especially powerful was the montage of Christopher Robin growing into a man at the beginning of the movie. It shows you just how far removed he is from his childhood.
Conflict: 7
Genre: 9
I appreciate it when a kids film can take their material and use it to appeal to adults. Christopher Robin straddles the line between adults and children extremely well and makes it an enjoyable experience for all. I smiled. I laughed. And maybe, just maybe, I got a little teary.
Memorability: 9
The movie hits you with a strong message about the necessity of growing up and the importance of holding on to yourself as you age. Watching it inspired me to remember how it felt to be fancy free without a care in the world and how good that felt. The movie does a great job of sprinkling the message in with the fun of the story.
One of my favorite scenes in the movie is when Pooh and Christopher reunite for the first time. They are sitting on park benches facing away from each other. It’s an endearing moment that helps to get the adventure rolling.
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
If this ending doesn’t move you, you are not human. Kidding, but it’s the perfect sappy ending for a sappy movie. The kind of ending that makes you want to start the movie over from the beginning and watch it all over again.
Overall: 94
First Po, then Paddington, now Pooh. I don’t know what it is about these bears that put a smile on my face, but whatever it is, it works! Christopher Robin was definitely one of my favorite movies of 2018.
Acting: 10
Jim Cummings is stellar as both Pooh and Tigger. Although I don’t have a huge point of reference, I can say that it felt like he poured his heart into these characters, making them extremely lovable. His tone and inflection just have a way of making me smile. I also loved Brad Garrett voicing Eeyore. That choice is almost a given as his voice is perfect, but I loved how he took the role and made it his own. Amazing job by the cast all around.
Beginning: 9
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Reminiscent of what they did with the Snuggle bear, the characters are not quite animated, but an odd form of CGI. They don’t feel like fake creatures, rather they are a uniquely pleasant creation. Seeing them interact with Christopher Robin and the settings around them was a treat. I loved the way the Hundred Acre Woods are captured and the well-crafted closeups of the characters that evoke emotion. Especially powerful was the montage of Christopher Robin growing into a man at the beginning of the movie. It shows you just how far removed he is from his childhood.
Conflict: 7
Genre: 9
I appreciate it when a kids film can take their material and use it to appeal to adults. Christopher Robin straddles the line between adults and children extremely well and makes it an enjoyable experience for all. I smiled. I laughed. And maybe, just maybe, I got a little teary.
Memorability: 9
The movie hits you with a strong message about the necessity of growing up and the importance of holding on to yourself as you age. Watching it inspired me to remember how it felt to be fancy free without a care in the world and how good that felt. The movie does a great job of sprinkling the message in with the fun of the story.
One of my favorite scenes in the movie is when Pooh and Christopher reunite for the first time. They are sitting on park benches facing away from each other. It’s an endearing moment that helps to get the adventure rolling.
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
If this ending doesn’t move you, you are not human. Kidding, but it’s the perfect sappy ending for a sappy movie. The kind of ending that makes you want to start the movie over from the beginning and watch it all over again.
Overall: 94
First Po, then Paddington, now Pooh. I don’t know what it is about these bears that put a smile on my face, but whatever it is, it works! Christopher Robin was definitely one of my favorite movies of 2018.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated What You Want To See (Roxane Weary #2) in Books
May 10, 2018
The Roxane Weary mystery series is straight-up great!
Roxane Weary is hired by Arthur Ungless, owner of a print shop, to track his fiance, Marin, whom he believes is cheating on him. But her case devolves quickly, between a bounced check and Tom (Roxane's dad's former partner) and a rude cop named Sanko showing up on Roxane's doorstep with the news that Marin is dead. Not only that, they make it pretty clear that they want Roxane to stay out of it. But this is "pathologically nosy" Roxane we are talking about. Stay out of it she cannot. So Roxane continues to work Arthur's case--as the husband, he's the main suspect after all. Roxane is determined he's innocent: a perspective not shared by Tom and Sanko. As she digs deeper into Marin's life, she discovers that she led quite the double life, and Roxane finds herself lost in a world of antiques dealing, wealthy families, and a lot of danger.
I loved this book. I love the first person aspect. The Roxane Weary series is straight-up great mystery writing. No unreliable narrator, no chapters that alternate POV or time periods, no gimmicks--just an excellent protagonist and a strong plot. It makes you long for mysteries of old (think Kinsey Millhone). The ways I love Roxane cannot truly be enumerated--she's a female lead in a mystery series, for one. She's smart, witty, and sarcastic. She's bisexual, but this characteristic is just who she is, not her main defining element or the entire defining point of the novel. As a bisexual female, I cannot stress how amazing this is in literature. To have bisexual representation (and have that representation be intelligent, funny, and not portrayed as evil and deviant), well, it's wonderful. She has relationships of all kinds and works on figuring out herself, just like any other person. Gasp! Imagine that. I couldn't love Roxane more (or Kristen Lepionka for creating this character). Also, Roxane calls waffles "golden beauty" and well, what more do you need in your PI? She's the Leslie Knope of private investigators.
I was worried that the second Roxane Weary novel wouldn't stand up to the first, but I was anxious for no reason. The second book is just as wonderful and intricately crafted as the first, and we get to see Roxane both struggling and growing professionally and personally. The case is a great one--it had me frantically reading and totally shocked me at the end, which I love. So rarely can a detective novel keep me guessing to the anymore. Marin Strasser is quite the character, and her web of lies pulls in a whole host of supporting characters.
We also see Roxane navigating new territory with Tom, her former lover (and, as mentioned, her dad's ex-partner), and get appearances again from the appealing Weary brothers and Roxane's mom. Roxane is still working on her relationships--not just romantic ones, but life ones, and you'll be touched as she figures out trying to be a "surrogate aunt" to Shelby, who appeared in book one. Watching her let her guard down at times is enjoyable.
The case is still mainly the star, though, and it won't disappoint. It's complicated and intriguing and everything comes together in ways that will make you gasp and keep you riveted. I was definitely shocked several times while reading. Not to mention I love it when an author can write a character that I truly hate--you know they've done a good job when you can feel that anger viscerally through the pages!
Overall, I have nothing bad to say about this book. Maybe that it's over, and I have to wait now for a (hopeful!!) book three? I love Roxane. I feel kinship toward her for sure, this sarcastic, bisexual PI whose still navigating the world around her. The mystery in this book won't disappoint, nor will the characters. If you haven't read the first Roxane Weary novel, I do recommend reading it first (mostly because it's also so good), but this will stand on its own. Highly recommend!!
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review. More at http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/.
I loved this book. I love the first person aspect. The Roxane Weary series is straight-up great mystery writing. No unreliable narrator, no chapters that alternate POV or time periods, no gimmicks--just an excellent protagonist and a strong plot. It makes you long for mysteries of old (think Kinsey Millhone). The ways I love Roxane cannot truly be enumerated--she's a female lead in a mystery series, for one. She's smart, witty, and sarcastic. She's bisexual, but this characteristic is just who she is, not her main defining element or the entire defining point of the novel. As a bisexual female, I cannot stress how amazing this is in literature. To have bisexual representation (and have that representation be intelligent, funny, and not portrayed as evil and deviant), well, it's wonderful. She has relationships of all kinds and works on figuring out herself, just like any other person. Gasp! Imagine that. I couldn't love Roxane more (or Kristen Lepionka for creating this character). Also, Roxane calls waffles "golden beauty" and well, what more do you need in your PI? She's the Leslie Knope of private investigators.
I was worried that the second Roxane Weary novel wouldn't stand up to the first, but I was anxious for no reason. The second book is just as wonderful and intricately crafted as the first, and we get to see Roxane both struggling and growing professionally and personally. The case is a great one--it had me frantically reading and totally shocked me at the end, which I love. So rarely can a detective novel keep me guessing to the anymore. Marin Strasser is quite the character, and her web of lies pulls in a whole host of supporting characters.
We also see Roxane navigating new territory with Tom, her former lover (and, as mentioned, her dad's ex-partner), and get appearances again from the appealing Weary brothers and Roxane's mom. Roxane is still working on her relationships--not just romantic ones, but life ones, and you'll be touched as she figures out trying to be a "surrogate aunt" to Shelby, who appeared in book one. Watching her let her guard down at times is enjoyable.
The case is still mainly the star, though, and it won't disappoint. It's complicated and intriguing and everything comes together in ways that will make you gasp and keep you riveted. I was definitely shocked several times while reading. Not to mention I love it when an author can write a character that I truly hate--you know they've done a good job when you can feel that anger viscerally through the pages!
Overall, I have nothing bad to say about this book. Maybe that it's over, and I have to wait now for a (hopeful!!) book three? I love Roxane. I feel kinship toward her for sure, this sarcastic, bisexual PI whose still navigating the world around her. The mystery in this book won't disappoint, nor will the characters. If you haven't read the first Roxane Weary novel, I do recommend reading it first (mostly because it's also so good), but this will stand on its own. Highly recommend!!
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review. More at http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/.
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Vice (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
A patronising mess of a film
If you want to learn how to completely and utterly fail at satire, look no further than Adam McKay’s Vice. It honestly does pain me to say this was one of the worst experiences I’ve ever had in the cinema. As a matter of fact, I was seconds away from walking out at one point. But, like any good critic, I stayed in my seat. I hoped and prayed it would get better… but it didn’t. If anything, it snowballed.
Vice is a ‘comedy’ (I’ve put this in quotation marks because there’s nothing funny about it) biopic about former American Vice President, Dick Cheney. The film attempts to give us further insight into his life, and how he got away with all the horrible things he did whilst in office. On paper, it actually sounds pretty appealing, especially for someone like me who knows very little about the man. On screen, it is an entirely different experience. 24 hours later, I’m still shocked by how appalling it was.
So, what has Vice done to receive such a scathing review from me? First and foremost, the dialogue is horrendously condescending and talks to the audience like they’re complete idiots. I have never seen such a patronising and immature biopic in my entire life. I’m not sure what’s more obnoxious: Cheney himself or the tone of the film. Maybe they’re on par with each other. I was barely half an hour into this when I was already starting to feel angry about the way they addressed things. You can give your audience context without talking down to them. The film did everything it could to seem edgy and like it was giving the audience the finger, but I just sat there cringing the whole time. It failed.
Secondly, the narrative is all over the place. I’m perfectly fine with non-linear stories, provided they actually make sense. Vice doesn’t know whether it’s coming or going, and changes between the past and future constantly. The pacing is an absolute shambles and makes the film feel longer than it actually is. It runs at just over 2 hours, but feels so much longer than that. I have never wanted a film to end so badly. In fact, I was ready to get up and leave when they decided to throw in a fake ending in an attempt to be funny. Yes, that actually happens. No, I didn’t laugh.
Don’t even get me started on the way it sloppily splices random pictures and video clips throughout the film, making me wonder who on earth nominated this for Best Editing. Are they okay? Without spoiling this too much, Vice’s editing is incredibly jarring and decides to patronise the audience even further by giving visual aids to the idioms that are described by the narrator. At one point it even tries to condescendingly explain Guantanamo Bay, which just caused me to facepalm. What were you thinking guys?
Having said all of this, does the film have some redeeming features? Sure. The quality of the acting is good, I enjoyed Christian Bale as Cheney and Amy Adams as his equally awful wife, Lynne. I also enjoyed Steve Carell as Donald Rumsfeld and Sam Rockwell as George W Bush. It is a shame to waste such great talent on a script as weak as this one. If someone had written this better, maybe I would’ve enjoyed it a lot more. Sadly, I’m stuck with this one. I’m baffled by how anyone can consider this to be a well written script. If anyone wants to enlighten me, by all means, try.
If I never have to watch Vice again, I’ll be fine with that. I feel completely let down by McKay, and this hurts more considering I like some of his other films such as Anchorman and Step Brothers. He’s better than this, and I hope he can redeem himself with whatever he creates next.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2019/02/03/a-patronising-mess-of-a-film-my-review-of-vice/
Vice is a ‘comedy’ (I’ve put this in quotation marks because there’s nothing funny about it) biopic about former American Vice President, Dick Cheney. The film attempts to give us further insight into his life, and how he got away with all the horrible things he did whilst in office. On paper, it actually sounds pretty appealing, especially for someone like me who knows very little about the man. On screen, it is an entirely different experience. 24 hours later, I’m still shocked by how appalling it was.
So, what has Vice done to receive such a scathing review from me? First and foremost, the dialogue is horrendously condescending and talks to the audience like they’re complete idiots. I have never seen such a patronising and immature biopic in my entire life. I’m not sure what’s more obnoxious: Cheney himself or the tone of the film. Maybe they’re on par with each other. I was barely half an hour into this when I was already starting to feel angry about the way they addressed things. You can give your audience context without talking down to them. The film did everything it could to seem edgy and like it was giving the audience the finger, but I just sat there cringing the whole time. It failed.
Secondly, the narrative is all over the place. I’m perfectly fine with non-linear stories, provided they actually make sense. Vice doesn’t know whether it’s coming or going, and changes between the past and future constantly. The pacing is an absolute shambles and makes the film feel longer than it actually is. It runs at just over 2 hours, but feels so much longer than that. I have never wanted a film to end so badly. In fact, I was ready to get up and leave when they decided to throw in a fake ending in an attempt to be funny. Yes, that actually happens. No, I didn’t laugh.
Don’t even get me started on the way it sloppily splices random pictures and video clips throughout the film, making me wonder who on earth nominated this for Best Editing. Are they okay? Without spoiling this too much, Vice’s editing is incredibly jarring and decides to patronise the audience even further by giving visual aids to the idioms that are described by the narrator. At one point it even tries to condescendingly explain Guantanamo Bay, which just caused me to facepalm. What were you thinking guys?
Having said all of this, does the film have some redeeming features? Sure. The quality of the acting is good, I enjoyed Christian Bale as Cheney and Amy Adams as his equally awful wife, Lynne. I also enjoyed Steve Carell as Donald Rumsfeld and Sam Rockwell as George W Bush. It is a shame to waste such great talent on a script as weak as this one. If someone had written this better, maybe I would’ve enjoyed it a lot more. Sadly, I’m stuck with this one. I’m baffled by how anyone can consider this to be a well written script. If anyone wants to enlighten me, by all means, try.
If I never have to watch Vice again, I’ll be fine with that. I feel completely let down by McKay, and this hurts more considering I like some of his other films such as Anchorman and Step Brothers. He’s better than this, and I hope he can redeem himself with whatever he creates next.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2019/02/03/a-patronising-mess-of-a-film-my-review-of-vice/
Waking, Dreaming, Being: Self and Consciousness in Neuroscience, Meditation, and Philosophy
Stephen Batchelor and Evan Thompson
Book
A renowned philosopher of the mind, also known for his groundbreaking work on Buddhism and cognitive...
Amanda (96 KP) rated The Diary: Book One of Cursed in Books
Mar 25, 2019
So this is a first in an upcoming series. Reading it kind of gave me a Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets vibe - that's my favorite book in the series by the way. Anyway, two girls named Ana and Sophie come across a new shop that has opened. It sells crystals, some dresses, and spell books. Ana comes across this blank book, a diary, and decides to purchase it and record everything going on in her life - like most teenage girls want to do. I certainly did, and I still do to an extent.
It seems like everything Ana writes in this diary seems to come true - for instance, wanting her friend to finally stop whining about a boy she likes and asks him out. It's pointed out quite a few times how 'out of character' it was for Sophie to ask a boy out. She describes it as an out of body experience where she was watching herself just simply go up to the the boy and ask him on a date.
In a sense of 'be careful what you wish for' in this case it's, 'be careful what you write.' The diary, however, has a mind of its own and it slowly starts to take over Ana.
Does anybody else hear Smeegal's voice and wishing that Ana would once say, 'My Precious!'? No? Okay, I'm really that nerdy, but I don't care. I wear it like a badge of honor.
I won't lie it say it wasn't a tad but cheesy. Almost like watching some parts of it as a Disney show, at least the ones that include someone falling from a Ferris wheel or getting an allergic reaction. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, because it's not overpowering like the new Disney shows these days are, gag me.
The writing style was simplistic and it's one that I liked. It wasn't told from Ana's point of view, which is surprising because most of the YA novels I've read are told from the main character's point of view. It's not a terrible thing, but it's not always the best. In this book, you get more than just Ana's views which is important to a story like this.
The ending did, of course, leave a cliffhanger and a small excerpt for the next book in the series.
All in all, the book was a quick read for the most part. I like the three main characters of the story and I enjoyed how it was written. Can you imagine finding a diary and it making things you write in it come true? The good will come with bad.
It seems like everything Ana writes in this diary seems to come true - for instance, wanting her friend to finally stop whining about a boy she likes and asks him out. It's pointed out quite a few times how 'out of character' it was for Sophie to ask a boy out. She describes it as an out of body experience where she was watching herself just simply go up to the the boy and ask him on a date.
In a sense of 'be careful what you wish for' in this case it's, 'be careful what you write.' The diary, however, has a mind of its own and it slowly starts to take over Ana.
Does anybody else hear Smeegal's voice and wishing that Ana would once say, 'My Precious!'? No? Okay, I'm really that nerdy, but I don't care. I wear it like a badge of honor.
I won't lie it say it wasn't a tad but cheesy. Almost like watching some parts of it as a Disney show, at least the ones that include someone falling from a Ferris wheel or getting an allergic reaction. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, because it's not overpowering like the new Disney shows these days are, gag me.
The writing style was simplistic and it's one that I liked. It wasn't told from Ana's point of view, which is surprising because most of the YA novels I've read are told from the main character's point of view. It's not a terrible thing, but it's not always the best. In this book, you get more than just Ana's views which is important to a story like this.
The ending did, of course, leave a cliffhanger and a small excerpt for the next book in the series.
All in all, the book was a quick read for the most part. I like the three main characters of the story and I enjoyed how it was written. Can you imagine finding a diary and it making things you write in it come true? The good will come with bad.
Lyndsey Gollogly (2893 KP) rated Killing for Company: Case of Dennis Nilsen in Books
May 19, 2021
64 of 250
Book
Killing for Company: The Case of Dennis Nilsen
By Brian Masters
Once read a review will be written via Smashbomb and link posted in comments
__________________
Dennis Nilsen, who died in May 2018, admitted to killing at least 15 people before his arrest in 1983. This ground-breaking criminal study of his killings was written with Nilsen's full cooperation, resulting in a fascinating - and horrifying - portrait of the man who worshipped death.
In February 1983, residents of Muswell Hill had been plagued by blocked drains. When a plumber was called to investigate, he discovered a large blockage of biological material. To his horror, it appeared to be formed of human flesh and bones.
The next day, local resident Dennis Nilsen was arrested.
'Are we talking about one body or two?' a detective asked. Nilsen replied 'Fifteen or sixteen, since 1978. I'll tell you everything.'
Within days he had confessed to fifteen gruesome murders over a period of four years. His victims, mostly young gay men at a time when society cared little for them, had been overlooked. Killing for Company is a unique study of a murderer's mind, essential reading for true crime aficionados.
__________________
This is a seriously hard book to read and review! I grew up loving true crimes and British serial killers and a bit later American serial killers and although I knew this case as I’d read lots about it growing up I found this book hard going, not because it was poorly written but by the content and knowing Nilsen had a lot to say to Masters. I have read Masters book on Jeffery Dahmer and it was a decent retelling but to me it always seemed so far away! This however was in the UK and only 100+ miles down the motorway, he was in the army the same time as my dad and the fact he on paper seemed so bloody normal! He held a steady job and campaigned via the union for people under discrimination, he loved pets he didn’t have all the common markers as your typical serial killer! It’s only when he was on remand you start seeing how mentally ill he really was! It’s always hard to say you enjoy these types of books I tend to find them fascinating not enjoyable this one really hit home I cried and felt physically sick at several points. I want to know how it can suddenly change from being the person he was before the first murder to that monster ( the only word to describe him). Reading his reactions to how one victims parents would hopefully forgive him is chilling! Also the illustrations at the end of the book are just shocking! Worth a read and I would recommend but this left me asking so many questions!
Book
Killing for Company: The Case of Dennis Nilsen
By Brian Masters
Once read a review will be written via Smashbomb and link posted in comments
__________________
Dennis Nilsen, who died in May 2018, admitted to killing at least 15 people before his arrest in 1983. This ground-breaking criminal study of his killings was written with Nilsen's full cooperation, resulting in a fascinating - and horrifying - portrait of the man who worshipped death.
In February 1983, residents of Muswell Hill had been plagued by blocked drains. When a plumber was called to investigate, he discovered a large blockage of biological material. To his horror, it appeared to be formed of human flesh and bones.
The next day, local resident Dennis Nilsen was arrested.
'Are we talking about one body or two?' a detective asked. Nilsen replied 'Fifteen or sixteen, since 1978. I'll tell you everything.'
Within days he had confessed to fifteen gruesome murders over a period of four years. His victims, mostly young gay men at a time when society cared little for them, had been overlooked. Killing for Company is a unique study of a murderer's mind, essential reading for true crime aficionados.
__________________
This is a seriously hard book to read and review! I grew up loving true crimes and British serial killers and a bit later American serial killers and although I knew this case as I’d read lots about it growing up I found this book hard going, not because it was poorly written but by the content and knowing Nilsen had a lot to say to Masters. I have read Masters book on Jeffery Dahmer and it was a decent retelling but to me it always seemed so far away! This however was in the UK and only 100+ miles down the motorway, he was in the army the same time as my dad and the fact he on paper seemed so bloody normal! He held a steady job and campaigned via the union for people under discrimination, he loved pets he didn’t have all the common markers as your typical serial killer! It’s only when he was on remand you start seeing how mentally ill he really was! It’s always hard to say you enjoy these types of books I tend to find them fascinating not enjoyable this one really hit home I cried and felt physically sick at several points. I want to know how it can suddenly change from being the person he was before the first murder to that monster ( the only word to describe him). Reading his reactions to how one victims parents would hopefully forgive him is chilling! Also the illustrations at the end of the book are just shocking! Worth a read and I would recommend but this left me asking so many questions!
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Sky Sharks (2020) in Movies
Aug 29, 2020
Fright Fest kicked off with a film that I absolutely had to see... Nazi zombies and flying sharks? No brainer.
A team of arctic explorers uncover an old Nazi lab that was developing ways to help them conquer the world. The team unwittingly let loose their two most powerful experiments that unleashes a swarm of flying sharks flown by unstoppable pilots.
Despite this having the word "sharks" in the title (and my love of shark films) I do have to be a buzzkill and say that this is not a shark film. I'd happily categorise it in zombie film territory, but the quality is way too good for this to be classified as a shark film. I don't want to take away from these fantastic flying finned devils though, they're brilliant and super happy looking.
It has the ridiculous ideas that make for an entertaining watch. but I can't help but think that a good budget actually had a negative effect. Once you get to a certain level of production value it goes against the nature of the story and "traditions".
With sky based villains you would obviously get something involving airplanes, but from the early action sequence I got heavy Sharknado 2 vibes. I don't want to ruin this bit for you so I'll just say that it's got the requisite amount of scientific impossibilities and graphic violence.
The CGI is a little hit and miss, the sharks are pretty good and I'm convinced have sneaky smiles on their faces, but the zombie aspects are a little ropey whenever they pop up.
When it comes to acting the cast deliver exactly what you'd expect from this sort of film, over the top when needed, dramatic in both serious and ridiculous ways, and I really hope that some of the female cast were appropriately compensated from some of their truly over the top scenes. You expect nudity because that's what these things do, but my goodness did they go to town with it.
Nazi scientists with extraordinary plans is a great storyline, you can take it in so many directions. I can't help but feel that Sky Sharks suffers from over complications. Discovery, accidental release followed by solution... that simple formula is cluttered with a lot of back story that could easily be cut back and made easier to follow, a fair amount seemed to have no purpose.
Even with all of this it's still something daft to enjoy, probably when drunk. I'm not sure if it's for zombie fans or shark fans, it doesn't quite fit in either classification properly but for those who want to free their brains from thinking then it's probably going to work for that.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/08/sky-sharks-movie-review.html
A team of arctic explorers uncover an old Nazi lab that was developing ways to help them conquer the world. The team unwittingly let loose their two most powerful experiments that unleashes a swarm of flying sharks flown by unstoppable pilots.
Despite this having the word "sharks" in the title (and my love of shark films) I do have to be a buzzkill and say that this is not a shark film. I'd happily categorise it in zombie film territory, but the quality is way too good for this to be classified as a shark film. I don't want to take away from these fantastic flying finned devils though, they're brilliant and super happy looking.
It has the ridiculous ideas that make for an entertaining watch. but I can't help but think that a good budget actually had a negative effect. Once you get to a certain level of production value it goes against the nature of the story and "traditions".
With sky based villains you would obviously get something involving airplanes, but from the early action sequence I got heavy Sharknado 2 vibes. I don't want to ruin this bit for you so I'll just say that it's got the requisite amount of scientific impossibilities and graphic violence.
The CGI is a little hit and miss, the sharks are pretty good and I'm convinced have sneaky smiles on their faces, but the zombie aspects are a little ropey whenever they pop up.
When it comes to acting the cast deliver exactly what you'd expect from this sort of film, over the top when needed, dramatic in both serious and ridiculous ways, and I really hope that some of the female cast were appropriately compensated from some of their truly over the top scenes. You expect nudity because that's what these things do, but my goodness did they go to town with it.
Nazi scientists with extraordinary plans is a great storyline, you can take it in so many directions. I can't help but feel that Sky Sharks suffers from over complications. Discovery, accidental release followed by solution... that simple formula is cluttered with a lot of back story that could easily be cut back and made easier to follow, a fair amount seemed to have no purpose.
Even with all of this it's still something daft to enjoy, probably when drunk. I'm not sure if it's for zombie fans or shark fans, it doesn't quite fit in either classification properly but for those who want to free their brains from thinking then it's probably going to work for that.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/08/sky-sharks-movie-review.html
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Tranquility Base Hotel & Casino by Arctic Monkeys in Music
May 14, 2018 (Updated May 15, 2018)
Eh?
So the new Arctic Monkeys album is finally here, after half a decade of speculation and anticipation and I don't think it's what anybody wanted. Most fans expected another guitar led record to follow up 2013's AM but this instead record sounds a bit like the smiths or pulp, but not as good as either of them and with a significantly less amount of guitar.
Music critics seem afraid to commit one way or the other, with most reviews from popular publications containing a verbal bashing in the body of the review, before summing it up with a positive conclusion and overall score. It's as if they don't like it on the surface, but deep down they don't have the heart to give an Arctics album a bad review.
Personally, I have a love/hate relationship with the Arctic Monkeys' music. I adore their first album so much. For me, that record was a beacon of light in a murky, mediocre musical landscape when it dropped and I genuinely thought these lads were going to be the next Oasis. I was then let down consecutively by every subsequent release as I watched this band squander their potential to become one of the most overrated groups in the industry. I did like Don't Sit Down from Suck It and See and I am a fan of Alex Turner's side project, the Last Shadow Puppets and despite my better nature, every time the Arctics release a new record I vainly get my hopes up only to be inevitably let down upon hearing it.
This album is basically the polar opposite of Whatever People Say I Am, which I fell in love with because it was an album for belting out while banging on the table with a pint in your hand at the pub. This album is for sitting with a glass of wine on your posh veranda of self indulgence.
In terms of his vocal performance, he sounds great on some tracks and elsewhere, the cheap Bowie impression really starts to grate, with 4 Out Of Five being the worst offender.
The worst thing is, it isn't a bad album, it's just painfully mediocre, which isn't really good enough. They kept their fans waiting for 5 years, didn't release any singles before the album and cryptically teased us for ages, to release this? A weak, bland rag of mediocrity?
After a few listens through, I like some elements of it. The mixing is nice and some of the hooks are pretty clever, but overall I can see what they were trying to do here and they just missed the mark. There is a difference between challenging your listeners and being tone deaf to what it is that they want to hear.
Music critics seem afraid to commit one way or the other, with most reviews from popular publications containing a verbal bashing in the body of the review, before summing it up with a positive conclusion and overall score. It's as if they don't like it on the surface, but deep down they don't have the heart to give an Arctics album a bad review.
Personally, I have a love/hate relationship with the Arctic Monkeys' music. I adore their first album so much. For me, that record was a beacon of light in a murky, mediocre musical landscape when it dropped and I genuinely thought these lads were going to be the next Oasis. I was then let down consecutively by every subsequent release as I watched this band squander their potential to become one of the most overrated groups in the industry. I did like Don't Sit Down from Suck It and See and I am a fan of Alex Turner's side project, the Last Shadow Puppets and despite my better nature, every time the Arctics release a new record I vainly get my hopes up only to be inevitably let down upon hearing it.
This album is basically the polar opposite of Whatever People Say I Am, which I fell in love with because it was an album for belting out while banging on the table with a pint in your hand at the pub. This album is for sitting with a glass of wine on your posh veranda of self indulgence.
In terms of his vocal performance, he sounds great on some tracks and elsewhere, the cheap Bowie impression really starts to grate, with 4 Out Of Five being the worst offender.
The worst thing is, it isn't a bad album, it's just painfully mediocre, which isn't really good enough. They kept their fans waiting for 5 years, didn't release any singles before the album and cryptically teased us for ages, to release this? A weak, bland rag of mediocrity?
After a few listens through, I like some elements of it. The mixing is nice and some of the hooks are pretty clever, but overall I can see what they were trying to do here and they just missed the mark. There is a difference between challenging your listeners and being tone deaf to what it is that they want to hear.
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Samsung Galaxy Buds in Tech
Apr 13, 2019
Virtually flawless
I need to start off by saying that prior to owning these, I have never used any sort of wireless headphones and neither do I claim to be a headphone connoisseur. I usually just use the free ones you get with phones. All I will say is that I really hope that all other wireless bluetooth headphones are as brilliant as these are.
They look fantastic. From the small pill box shaped container to the headphone, they look sleek and stylish and are fairly small too. They're simple to set up - as soon as I opened them, my phone recognised them and linked them straight away, so quickly done. And the even recognise when you've put them in your ears! The Samsung Wearables app is a great tool to be able to check the battery on the headphones and change the equaliser and what actions the touch controls make. Sound quality is brilliant and they really do block out surrounding sound so well - I wore them at a busy gym (which had loud music on in the background), and couldn't hear anything other than myself. The ambient sound feature is a nice touch too for those occasions when you want to be able to hear things around you.
The fit of the headphones is surprisingly good. They come with 3 different sizes of rubber wings & tips so you can easily find a size to fit you, and I was pleasantly surprised to find that once these are in my ear, I didn't have to keep pushing them in to stop them from falling out. In fact I used these at the gym and whilst out and about, and I never once had them fall out like standard headphones do. And if they do fall out or you lose one, theres a 'find my bud' feature that will help locate them (assuming they havent got too far!).
They aren't perfect though. The touch pad controls are a little temperamental. This could be due to a novice user, or just how it is. Also the positioning of the headphones and touchpads means if you like to lie on your side and listen to music in bed, it could be difficult. And the other slight issue is the battery life. Combined charge between the headphones & pod is around 13 hours, which isn't a lot. Although I'm probably only moaning because it means it's another piece of tech that I have to remember to charge.
These are only very slight niggles though. These are by far the best headphones I've ever owned - great sound quality, intuitive, great size and very functional. I'll never go back to wearing wired headphones again.
They look fantastic. From the small pill box shaped container to the headphone, they look sleek and stylish and are fairly small too. They're simple to set up - as soon as I opened them, my phone recognised them and linked them straight away, so quickly done. And the even recognise when you've put them in your ears! The Samsung Wearables app is a great tool to be able to check the battery on the headphones and change the equaliser and what actions the touch controls make. Sound quality is brilliant and they really do block out surrounding sound so well - I wore them at a busy gym (which had loud music on in the background), and couldn't hear anything other than myself. The ambient sound feature is a nice touch too for those occasions when you want to be able to hear things around you.
The fit of the headphones is surprisingly good. They come with 3 different sizes of rubber wings & tips so you can easily find a size to fit you, and I was pleasantly surprised to find that once these are in my ear, I didn't have to keep pushing them in to stop them from falling out. In fact I used these at the gym and whilst out and about, and I never once had them fall out like standard headphones do. And if they do fall out or you lose one, theres a 'find my bud' feature that will help locate them (assuming they havent got too far!).
They aren't perfect though. The touch pad controls are a little temperamental. This could be due to a novice user, or just how it is. Also the positioning of the headphones and touchpads means if you like to lie on your side and listen to music in bed, it could be difficult. And the other slight issue is the battery life. Combined charge between the headphones & pod is around 13 hours, which isn't a lot. Although I'm probably only moaning because it means it's another piece of tech that I have to remember to charge.
These are only very slight niggles though. These are by far the best headphones I've ever owned - great sound quality, intuitive, great size and very functional. I'll never go back to wearing wired headphones again.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated A Different Kind in Books
Jan 23, 2020
A Different Kind follows Payton Carlson, a high school who has a perfect life as a cheerleader and on top of the social pyramid at her school, at least until she starts getting strange dreams that are actually her being abducted by aliens.
A Different Kind definitely isn't my favorite book, contrary to the stellar rating. It reminded me a lot about Lux, which I actually have a like/hate relationship:
~ Aliens. Obviously. On the bright side, the name isn't complex, although Lux certainly isn't complex. But Latin is most certainly complex. Here, they're just called Greys. Simple. Easy.
~ DOD, aka Department of Defense, or maybe some sort of government interference. The DOD checks up on fellow Luxens in Lux. It's pretty much a similar case here, although it's simply someone. Chances are it's the DOD. That's up to Lauryn to confirm.
~ Telepathy. Need I say more? O_O I did find "We mean you no harm" funny though... it's probably made me think of the weird voice going "We come in peace."
<img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-C7DVLiXJ_jg/U3FdCxE4PMI/AAAAAAAADQI/JNNizFBzwVw/s1600/we_come_in_peace.jpg"; height="240" width="320">
<b>What Made Me Enjoy A Different Kind?</b>
~ Logan's humble. At least, that's what it seems to me. He certainly doesn't need an ego check AT ALL. I don't think he even has an ego. I'm not saying all book boys with an ego need a check. Some I just don't like. Some I don't like in the first but I like them by the second, and if I don't like said boy by the second book, he's toasty. No pun intended.
~ Telekinesis over metal, which I find majorly cool. Blacksmiths would be uber happy if this were an actual power. Oh, and there would be less hospital bills. ;)
~ Despite the fact I disliked Payton in the first half of the book, I actually liked her by the end. She makes a major character change from being a complete jerk to someone who realized that she didn't want to be popular after all and for her entire life, she's been acting like someone that everyone expected her to be. I did have a problem with her being drunk a lot though. But that was before her change. I suppose that means strong character development. :3
MORAL: Be Yourself
<img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-inMi1-dfOq4/U3FdRYX9AwI/AAAAAAAADQQ/6xhvm2InqUo/s1600/be-yourself-Favim.com-368618.gif"; height="179" width="320">
------------------
Review copy provided by the author
Original Rating: 4.5
This review and more can be found over at <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2014/06/review-a-different-kind-by-lauryn-april.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Gi5Rk5yLloA/UtliaUbdL3I/AAAAAAAACbE/J27z92_qrYU/s1600/Official+Banner.png"; /></a>
A Different Kind definitely isn't my favorite book, contrary to the stellar rating. It reminded me a lot about Lux, which I actually have a like/hate relationship:
~ Aliens. Obviously. On the bright side, the name isn't complex, although Lux certainly isn't complex. But Latin is most certainly complex. Here, they're just called Greys. Simple. Easy.
~ DOD, aka Department of Defense, or maybe some sort of government interference. The DOD checks up on fellow Luxens in Lux. It's pretty much a similar case here, although it's simply someone. Chances are it's the DOD. That's up to Lauryn to confirm.
~ Telepathy. Need I say more? O_O I did find "We mean you no harm" funny though... it's probably made me think of the weird voice going "We come in peace."
<img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-C7DVLiXJ_jg/U3FdCxE4PMI/AAAAAAAADQI/JNNizFBzwVw/s1600/we_come_in_peace.jpg"; height="240" width="320">
<b>What Made Me Enjoy A Different Kind?</b>
~ Logan's humble. At least, that's what it seems to me. He certainly doesn't need an ego check AT ALL. I don't think he even has an ego. I'm not saying all book boys with an ego need a check. Some I just don't like. Some I don't like in the first but I like them by the second, and if I don't like said boy by the second book, he's toasty. No pun intended.
~ Telekinesis over metal, which I find majorly cool. Blacksmiths would be uber happy if this were an actual power. Oh, and there would be less hospital bills. ;)
~ Despite the fact I disliked Payton in the first half of the book, I actually liked her by the end. She makes a major character change from being a complete jerk to someone who realized that she didn't want to be popular after all and for her entire life, she's been acting like someone that everyone expected her to be. I did have a problem with her being drunk a lot though. But that was before her change. I suppose that means strong character development. :3
MORAL: Be Yourself
<img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-inMi1-dfOq4/U3FdRYX9AwI/AAAAAAAADQQ/6xhvm2InqUo/s1600/be-yourself-Favim.com-368618.gif"; height="179" width="320">
------------------
Review copy provided by the author
Original Rating: 4.5
This review and more can be found over at <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2014/06/review-a-different-kind-by-lauryn-april.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Gi5Rk5yLloA/UtliaUbdL3I/AAAAAAAACbE/J27z92_qrYU/s1600/Official+Banner.png"; /></a>