Search
Search results
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Seinfeld - Season 1 in TV
Jan 22, 2021
I always assumed I wouldn’t like Seinfeld in the 90s. In fact I was opposed to the very idea of it on principle. And that principle was: I’ve never heard of this guy as a comedian, and American stand-up usually isn’t funny. I never saw a single episode until six months ago – in my head it was some dumb, canned laughter show with very forced scripts and little charm. I just didn’t get why it was always quoted amongst the best sitcoms of all time, and I wasn’t willing to find out. This is called “being ignorant”. Guilty.
One random day with nothing else inspiring me I finally took the plunge and put an episode on. Guess what happened? I laughed, I found it completely charming and witty and easy to watch, with some great lines and likeable characters. 3 hours later I had done 6 episodes and was as hooked as anyone can be with anything. It was just so nostalgically and completely 90s! And I loved that!
A show doesn’t run for 9 years and over 170 episodes without being some kind of special, especially taking into account the depreciation due to being dated, as all sitcoms eventually are, and it really is quite remarkable – deserving of a place in the conversation of the greatest ever American half hour shows. Sure, there is an element early on in the preoccupation with everyone’s sex life and dating habits that is a little creepy in 2020, but I am totally willing to forgive it.
Shows that are hyper aware of themselves and the audience are odd creatures the minute they take themselves too seriously, and Seinfeld never does that. It knows it is trivial, essentially about nothing and going nowhere, and style-wise it is always winking at us for being in on the joke and a part of it, even to the point of applauding new characters on their entrance, which is a uniquely American thing to do.
The secret of the show is undoubtedly the chemistry of the four leads, so mismatched that it someone works a spell and creates magic, much in the same way Friends managed to do, times six. Jerry Seinfeld himself is a very likeable everyman, and the schtick of each show beginning and ending with 30 seconds of stand up is a gimmick that grows on you, as does everything about it: the more you watch, the more you love it for what it is.
Jason Alexander as the balding, quirky, self-conscious, opinionated best friend is perhaps my least favourite of the regular quartet, but he has some amazing moments over the course of things, and plays great dead-pan. But the other two are on a plane of equal genius. The verbal timing of the super cute, super smart Julia Louis-Dreyfus as Elaine (who I have fallen in love with a little bit in 1993) and the physical slapstick timing of Michael Richards as Cosmo Kramer (surely one of the most memorable characters in sitcom history) have both left me aching with laughter time after time after time. Just a glance or an expression is often enough.
And the great thing is, it never seems to get old. They are always finding new ways and new situations that keep it fresh. Some trick! Even in the final season of the 9, when there is a small melancholia creeping in because they all know it is coming to an end, it still manages to create moments that aren’t just repeats of previous gags. Which means, as future background watching it is 100% perfect. Leave it on whilst doing something else, look up once in a while, and like the best of all long running US comedy shows each episode is indistinguishable from any other in the best way – it is like having a friend in the room.
I can’t imagine ever saying it is amongst my very favourites, maybe because I missed out on it first time around – which I put down to an inherent middle aged appeal, rather than a youth appeal – but I wouldn’t also ever argue with anyone that did say that it was one of their favourites. Because I get it now. And I’m so glad I got to do it, no matter how late to the party!
One random day with nothing else inspiring me I finally took the plunge and put an episode on. Guess what happened? I laughed, I found it completely charming and witty and easy to watch, with some great lines and likeable characters. 3 hours later I had done 6 episodes and was as hooked as anyone can be with anything. It was just so nostalgically and completely 90s! And I loved that!
A show doesn’t run for 9 years and over 170 episodes without being some kind of special, especially taking into account the depreciation due to being dated, as all sitcoms eventually are, and it really is quite remarkable – deserving of a place in the conversation of the greatest ever American half hour shows. Sure, there is an element early on in the preoccupation with everyone’s sex life and dating habits that is a little creepy in 2020, but I am totally willing to forgive it.
Shows that are hyper aware of themselves and the audience are odd creatures the minute they take themselves too seriously, and Seinfeld never does that. It knows it is trivial, essentially about nothing and going nowhere, and style-wise it is always winking at us for being in on the joke and a part of it, even to the point of applauding new characters on their entrance, which is a uniquely American thing to do.
The secret of the show is undoubtedly the chemistry of the four leads, so mismatched that it someone works a spell and creates magic, much in the same way Friends managed to do, times six. Jerry Seinfeld himself is a very likeable everyman, and the schtick of each show beginning and ending with 30 seconds of stand up is a gimmick that grows on you, as does everything about it: the more you watch, the more you love it for what it is.
Jason Alexander as the balding, quirky, self-conscious, opinionated best friend is perhaps my least favourite of the regular quartet, but he has some amazing moments over the course of things, and plays great dead-pan. But the other two are on a plane of equal genius. The verbal timing of the super cute, super smart Julia Louis-Dreyfus as Elaine (who I have fallen in love with a little bit in 1993) and the physical slapstick timing of Michael Richards as Cosmo Kramer (surely one of the most memorable characters in sitcom history) have both left me aching with laughter time after time after time. Just a glance or an expression is often enough.
And the great thing is, it never seems to get old. They are always finding new ways and new situations that keep it fresh. Some trick! Even in the final season of the 9, when there is a small melancholia creeping in because they all know it is coming to an end, it still manages to create moments that aren’t just repeats of previous gags. Which means, as future background watching it is 100% perfect. Leave it on whilst doing something else, look up once in a while, and like the best of all long running US comedy shows each episode is indistinguishable from any other in the best way – it is like having a friend in the room.
I can’t imagine ever saying it is amongst my very favourites, maybe because I missed out on it first time around – which I put down to an inherent middle aged appeal, rather than a youth appeal – but I wouldn’t also ever argue with anyone that did say that it was one of their favourites. Because I get it now. And I’m so glad I got to do it, no matter how late to the party!
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated Chat Love in Books
Oct 2, 2020
I wanted to read this book immediately after reading the synopsis, and I was honoured when the author, Justine Faeth, approached me and sent me an ebook copy in exchange for an honest review.
The book synopsis is a very promising one. Lucia is having trouble finding a man. After a few disastrous dates, she chooses to follow her friend’s advice and tries Chat Love, an online dating service.
As promising as the synopsis sounds, this book didn’t quite deliver. With Chat Love, I found the whole setting of the book unrealistic. There is a nice background story and a great idea, but it hasn’t been properly executed.
Lucia is an Italian lady. She is a city girl and a business woman. She is searching for love. See, Lucia is under pressure by her Italian family to get married. And I can completely understand that pressure, being born in a country where I have met people with similar beliefs. Lucia’s family thinks that a woman is made to be a mother, and not have a career. They think that if you are thirty and you haven’t got a boyfriend yet, you are useless and unworthy.
And I completely agree with Lucia when she tries to stand up to them and tell them how it’s important for her to find a man she will really love, not just marry in order to please her family. In some scenes though, it appears as if she hates her family, and has very bad attitude towards them. I understand completely where her frustration comes from.
But then, on the other hand, we have a Lucia that is being a hypocrite.
And while this whole book seems like she is searching for her true love, when someone appears and cares about her, she is acting as if she’s not interested. Woman, WHAT DO YOU WANT? She wants true love, and she doesn’t want to be used as a one-night stand, which is completely acceptable. But going on a date with a man for the first time, and telling him you want to get serious is creepy. Even if that is your long-term goal, you DO NOT say it on the first date. It scares people away. It makes people think you are a creep.
Also, given the fact that the synopsis promises an online app, this left me disappointed. During this book, we don’t get to really see a single chat happen through this app. Apart from a few letters from Jake. Honestly, I expected a back and forth conversations with men before a date happens. In the book, we get to see Lucia dating a lot of men. I didn’t stop to count them, but there must’ve been around twenty dates. And all these men had something wrong with them. But she never screwed up.
I will be honest with you now, and you people need to be honest with yourselves. In your life, you will meet people, and some people will make you giggle. Others might make you gag. But sometimes, the reason for a bad date is you. I am only trying to be honest here. I have screwed up a few dates myself, and you must have done the same thing too. That’s life though. We have to move on and try not to blame others for our mistakes. I wish this been represented in this book.
I really wish I loved this book.
I have mixed feelings, because despite all, this book did make me think and bring up discussions with people around the various topics, from family beliefs, to being creepy on first dates, to finding out what you really like. In a summary, as much as I didn’t enjoy it, I also am grateful for this book, for bringing out a lot of things to think about.
If you love chick-lit and short romance funny novels, you might enjoy it. If you think any of this discussion points is intriguing, you might enjoy it. I would love to have a chat and see what you think of this book.
The book synopsis is a very promising one. Lucia is having trouble finding a man. After a few disastrous dates, she chooses to follow her friend’s advice and tries Chat Love, an online dating service.
As promising as the synopsis sounds, this book didn’t quite deliver. With Chat Love, I found the whole setting of the book unrealistic. There is a nice background story and a great idea, but it hasn’t been properly executed.
Lucia is an Italian lady. She is a city girl and a business woman. She is searching for love. See, Lucia is under pressure by her Italian family to get married. And I can completely understand that pressure, being born in a country where I have met people with similar beliefs. Lucia’s family thinks that a woman is made to be a mother, and not have a career. They think that if you are thirty and you haven’t got a boyfriend yet, you are useless and unworthy.
And I completely agree with Lucia when she tries to stand up to them and tell them how it’s important for her to find a man she will really love, not just marry in order to please her family. In some scenes though, it appears as if she hates her family, and has very bad attitude towards them. I understand completely where her frustration comes from.
But then, on the other hand, we have a Lucia that is being a hypocrite.
And while this whole book seems like she is searching for her true love, when someone appears and cares about her, she is acting as if she’s not interested. Woman, WHAT DO YOU WANT? She wants true love, and she doesn’t want to be used as a one-night stand, which is completely acceptable. But going on a date with a man for the first time, and telling him you want to get serious is creepy. Even if that is your long-term goal, you DO NOT say it on the first date. It scares people away. It makes people think you are a creep.
Also, given the fact that the synopsis promises an online app, this left me disappointed. During this book, we don’t get to really see a single chat happen through this app. Apart from a few letters from Jake. Honestly, I expected a back and forth conversations with men before a date happens. In the book, we get to see Lucia dating a lot of men. I didn’t stop to count them, but there must’ve been around twenty dates. And all these men had something wrong with them. But she never screwed up.
I will be honest with you now, and you people need to be honest with yourselves. In your life, you will meet people, and some people will make you giggle. Others might make you gag. But sometimes, the reason for a bad date is you. I am only trying to be honest here. I have screwed up a few dates myself, and you must have done the same thing too. That’s life though. We have to move on and try not to blame others for our mistakes. I wish this been represented in this book.
I really wish I loved this book.
I have mixed feelings, because despite all, this book did make me think and bring up discussions with people around the various topics, from family beliefs, to being creepy on first dates, to finding out what you really like. In a summary, as much as I didn’t enjoy it, I also am grateful for this book, for bringing out a lot of things to think about.
If you love chick-lit and short romance funny novels, you might enjoy it. If you think any of this discussion points is intriguing, you might enjoy it. I would love to have a chat and see what you think of this book.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Barnyard Roundup in Tabletop Games
Apr 12, 2021
I live in Illinois. I can see cornfields from my house. I do not live on a farm, but have visited farms in the past. There is more to Illinois than Chicago and corn. That all said, farming games tickle me so much and I just enjoy playing them. So imagine my interest level when you combine a publisher known for excellent productions, the designer from said publisher, a member of an art studio in my top three favorite board game artists (Kwanchai and The Mico for the others), and a theme that I already enjoy. This is going to be great! Right?
Barnyard Roundup is a silly game of bluffing and hand management set on a farm. In it players are farmhands trying to help Farmer Brown sell the most animals at market. They do this by bluffing their hands in trade deals with other farmhands, thus making no friends in the process. The player with the most points at the end of the game, when all cards from the draw deck have been drawn, will be the winner!
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup place the five Animal Bonus cards in a line with the Set Bonus cards nearby. Shuffle the large deck of animal cards and deal out cards according to the rulebook per the number of players in the game. The Burglar and Excuse Me tokens are sorted and dealt out with the remainders face-down near the other cards. Remove eight cards from the draw deck and decide who will be the start player. The game may now begin!
Barnyard Roundup turns are quite simple: take two or three actions and end the turn. The first action is mandatory and it is Passing Cards to another player. Choose anywhere from one to six cards, place them face-down on the table in front of the player with whom to be traded, and announce the number and type of cards to be traded. For example, a player may say, “This is four chickens.” The targeted player now must decide whether that group actually IS a group of four chickens or if they believe the trader (not traitor) is bluffing. If so the targeted player may say, “That is NOT four chickens.” Once the agree/disagree statement has been made the cards are flipped over to see which player will be adding the cards to their pens. If the targeted player guessed correctly then they will received all the animal cards that were passed to them. That is, unless the cards were actually CROWS. Crows are worth -5 VP at the end of the game (see the photo below) and will be taken into the pen of the defeated player in the trade. In addition to crows (bad) the game includes Copy Cats (good) which can be wild cards to be placed with other animals and they copy the animal in their group. When the trade is resolved the active player may choose to perform the next step, but it is not mandatory.
Players must note that any time a player gains crows that would extend their collection of crows to any multiple of 3 that player must then draw another Action Token (Burglar, Excuse Me, Scarecrow) from the supply. If a Scarecrow is drawn it is immediately revealed and three crows are discarded from that player’s collection. The Excuse Me token may be used during a trade, but before cards are revealed, by a player not involved in the trade. When they announce, “Excuse Me,” they immediately take the place of the targeted player and will decide whether the trade is correct as announced or is a bluff.
Should they wish, the active player may now Play a Burglar Token from their collection in order to target another player and ask for all of their animals of a specific type – “I wish to procure all of your cows” That player must then immediately hand over all their cows, or else may tell the active player to Go Fish. Okay, that last part isn’t in the rules, but I started doing it and it stuck for me.
The third and final step of a turn is simply to Draw Cards and End Your Turn. Draw cards back up to the hand limit of 5 or 6 and end the turn. Play then passes to the next player.
Play continues in this fashion until the last card has been drawn. The game ends immediately and players tally their points per the rulebook to arrive at an ultimate winner!
Components. This game is a bunch of cards and some tokens in a double-wide+ tuckbox. I love the art, and that makes sense as it is illustrated by Lina Cossette, half of Mr. Cuddington. If you don’t know about Mr. Cuddington, please check out their website. The cards are good quality, as are the tokens. But that box. Now, it LOOKS great, and is a fine size. But a tuckbox? I would have preferred a lidded box, or even one of those with the magnetic fold-out lids. But it’s a tuckbox and the opening flap dented upon its first opening. Oy. I could give a chef’s kiss to everything else though.
Now, there’s a reason why I rated this game a 4 and my wife a 6: she beats me every single time we play and I just cannot find the strategy to take her down. Am I just horrible at bluffing games? Does she just dominate me at ALL games? I’m not sure, but this one certainly highlights the fact that she’s just better than me. I can still hear her haunting and taunting me with, “OH MY GOSH I LOVE THIS GAME! I’M SOOOOO GOOD AT IT!” Meanwhile I am sitting pretty with a whole flock of crows laughing at me like I am the Scarecrow from Wizard of Oz. Perhaps I am truly brainless as well.
That said, the game is enjoyable. I do like to play bluffing games, but I’m the poor soul who would rather play straight than do ANY sort of bluffing at all. Except when I have lulled my prey into trusting my every declaration. Then pull out the big guns and laugh my way to the bank. Well, I tried that several times and no dice. But I do enjoy playing, and I do keep coming back for more torture. And if that isn’t a sign of a good game, then what is?
All in all the game is quick, light on rules, and features wonderful art style. This is the game I will probably use to introduce my children (or new gamers) to bluffing games as the theme is easily digestible and when you get stuck with the negative points you don’t feel super bad about it. It is easy to pronounce that Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a squawkin’-good 10 / 12. If you are looking for a light introductory game to teach bluffing or to hit that sweet-spot, then I recommend you check out Barnyard Roundup from Druid City Games. I ain’t a-bluffin’ ya.
Barnyard Roundup is a silly game of bluffing and hand management set on a farm. In it players are farmhands trying to help Farmer Brown sell the most animals at market. They do this by bluffing their hands in trade deals with other farmhands, thus making no friends in the process. The player with the most points at the end of the game, when all cards from the draw deck have been drawn, will be the winner!
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup place the five Animal Bonus cards in a line with the Set Bonus cards nearby. Shuffle the large deck of animal cards and deal out cards according to the rulebook per the number of players in the game. The Burglar and Excuse Me tokens are sorted and dealt out with the remainders face-down near the other cards. Remove eight cards from the draw deck and decide who will be the start player. The game may now begin!
Barnyard Roundup turns are quite simple: take two or three actions and end the turn. The first action is mandatory and it is Passing Cards to another player. Choose anywhere from one to six cards, place them face-down on the table in front of the player with whom to be traded, and announce the number and type of cards to be traded. For example, a player may say, “This is four chickens.” The targeted player now must decide whether that group actually IS a group of four chickens or if they believe the trader (not traitor) is bluffing. If so the targeted player may say, “That is NOT four chickens.” Once the agree/disagree statement has been made the cards are flipped over to see which player will be adding the cards to their pens. If the targeted player guessed correctly then they will received all the animal cards that were passed to them. That is, unless the cards were actually CROWS. Crows are worth -5 VP at the end of the game (see the photo below) and will be taken into the pen of the defeated player in the trade. In addition to crows (bad) the game includes Copy Cats (good) which can be wild cards to be placed with other animals and they copy the animal in their group. When the trade is resolved the active player may choose to perform the next step, but it is not mandatory.
Players must note that any time a player gains crows that would extend their collection of crows to any multiple of 3 that player must then draw another Action Token (Burglar, Excuse Me, Scarecrow) from the supply. If a Scarecrow is drawn it is immediately revealed and three crows are discarded from that player’s collection. The Excuse Me token may be used during a trade, but before cards are revealed, by a player not involved in the trade. When they announce, “Excuse Me,” they immediately take the place of the targeted player and will decide whether the trade is correct as announced or is a bluff.
Should they wish, the active player may now Play a Burglar Token from their collection in order to target another player and ask for all of their animals of a specific type – “I wish to procure all of your cows” That player must then immediately hand over all their cows, or else may tell the active player to Go Fish. Okay, that last part isn’t in the rules, but I started doing it and it stuck for me.
The third and final step of a turn is simply to Draw Cards and End Your Turn. Draw cards back up to the hand limit of 5 or 6 and end the turn. Play then passes to the next player.
Play continues in this fashion until the last card has been drawn. The game ends immediately and players tally their points per the rulebook to arrive at an ultimate winner!
Components. This game is a bunch of cards and some tokens in a double-wide+ tuckbox. I love the art, and that makes sense as it is illustrated by Lina Cossette, half of Mr. Cuddington. If you don’t know about Mr. Cuddington, please check out their website. The cards are good quality, as are the tokens. But that box. Now, it LOOKS great, and is a fine size. But a tuckbox? I would have preferred a lidded box, or even one of those with the magnetic fold-out lids. But it’s a tuckbox and the opening flap dented upon its first opening. Oy. I could give a chef’s kiss to everything else though.
Now, there’s a reason why I rated this game a 4 and my wife a 6: she beats me every single time we play and I just cannot find the strategy to take her down. Am I just horrible at bluffing games? Does she just dominate me at ALL games? I’m not sure, but this one certainly highlights the fact that she’s just better than me. I can still hear her haunting and taunting me with, “OH MY GOSH I LOVE THIS GAME! I’M SOOOOO GOOD AT IT!” Meanwhile I am sitting pretty with a whole flock of crows laughing at me like I am the Scarecrow from Wizard of Oz. Perhaps I am truly brainless as well.
That said, the game is enjoyable. I do like to play bluffing games, but I’m the poor soul who would rather play straight than do ANY sort of bluffing at all. Except when I have lulled my prey into trusting my every declaration. Then pull out the big guns and laugh my way to the bank. Well, I tried that several times and no dice. But I do enjoy playing, and I do keep coming back for more torture. And if that isn’t a sign of a good game, then what is?
All in all the game is quick, light on rules, and features wonderful art style. This is the game I will probably use to introduce my children (or new gamers) to bluffing games as the theme is easily digestible and when you get stuck with the negative points you don’t feel super bad about it. It is easy to pronounce that Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a squawkin’-good 10 / 12. If you are looking for a light introductory game to teach bluffing or to hit that sweet-spot, then I recommend you check out Barnyard Roundup from Druid City Games. I ain’t a-bluffin’ ya.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Long Shot (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
Fred Flarksy is a controversial journalist who likes to uncover the evil and corrupt in the world, when his paper is brought by a company that they themselves have uncovered as the "bad guy" he quits on the spot. Lance, his best friend, knows exactly what he needs to feel better, drink, steak, and a fundraiser with Boyz II Men.
It's fair to say that Fred didn't expect leaving his job to lead him to a chance reunion and such a wild ride.
It's fair to say that I wasn't too sure what this one was going to be like. I've never been a massive fan of Seth Rogen, a lot of his roles seem pointlessly crude. I don't mind that particularly, but too much of it just isn't my cup of tea. The line-up of him and Theron seemed a little mad, and a bit off balance, but the trailers looked like they had something to them so I was willing to have my mind changed... and oh boy did I change my mind.
At this point I've seen the movie twice and it really is great fun, and surprisingly heartwarming.
The odd headlining duo actually work wonderfully together, they bounce off each other so well throughout and that chemistry has shot this up into my favourite rom-coms.
Seth Rogen seems to have a knack for the outraged outbursts in films and we get a few of those at the beginning of the film. We quickly see Fred become a loveable character when he first sees Charlotte across the room at the fundraiser. He's sweet, he's vulnerable and he's funny. That's when you really start rooting for him.
Had you asked me to sum up Charlize Theron's previous acting roles I'd have said they were all of the dramatic and action persuasion, and mostly they are, I'd completely forgotten things like Gringo and A Million Ways To Die In The West. I hope we'll see more of her doing this sort of comedy, she's obviously well suited for it.
It's not just the lead roles though, the support cast are brilliant. June Diane Raphael as Charlotte's right-hand woman was so snippy with Fred to great effect, and O'Shea Jackson Jr. as Lance was the sort of supportive friend we all need. The highlight though was Tristan D. Lalla as secret service Agent M, he takes adorable to a whole new level.
My only negative on the casting was Alexander Skarsgård, but that's not because of his acting, it's because of what they did to him... that slurping, that laugh... why would you do that?! Why!!? After the wonder of him in The Aftermath this has ruined the image of him for me.
Long Shot's plot is entirely predictable. Two people are reunited after years, they catch feelings, something gets in the way, they split up, then they get back together. The fact you know where it's leading just means that you can sit back and enjoy it more. I was expecting the funny, but I really wasn't expecting to cry... yes, I know I'm a wreck. There are some surprisingly touching moments involved and the way they brought the film together at the end was perfect.
This probably deserves 5 stars, and I would give it that extra half star in a heartbeat if it wasn't for the Skarsgård thing and the fact that there's no way I could watch this with my parents even though I know dad would find it hilarious.
What you should do
It's definitely one to see, it doesn't need the big screen but you certainly won't be wasting your money if you went and saw it at the cinema.
It's fair to say that Fred didn't expect leaving his job to lead him to a chance reunion and such a wild ride.
It's fair to say that I wasn't too sure what this one was going to be like. I've never been a massive fan of Seth Rogen, a lot of his roles seem pointlessly crude. I don't mind that particularly, but too much of it just isn't my cup of tea. The line-up of him and Theron seemed a little mad, and a bit off balance, but the trailers looked like they had something to them so I was willing to have my mind changed... and oh boy did I change my mind.
At this point I've seen the movie twice and it really is great fun, and surprisingly heartwarming.
The odd headlining duo actually work wonderfully together, they bounce off each other so well throughout and that chemistry has shot this up into my favourite rom-coms.
Seth Rogen seems to have a knack for the outraged outbursts in films and we get a few of those at the beginning of the film. We quickly see Fred become a loveable character when he first sees Charlotte across the room at the fundraiser. He's sweet, he's vulnerable and he's funny. That's when you really start rooting for him.
Had you asked me to sum up Charlize Theron's previous acting roles I'd have said they were all of the dramatic and action persuasion, and mostly they are, I'd completely forgotten things like Gringo and A Million Ways To Die In The West. I hope we'll see more of her doing this sort of comedy, she's obviously well suited for it.
It's not just the lead roles though, the support cast are brilliant. June Diane Raphael as Charlotte's right-hand woman was so snippy with Fred to great effect, and O'Shea Jackson Jr. as Lance was the sort of supportive friend we all need. The highlight though was Tristan D. Lalla as secret service Agent M, he takes adorable to a whole new level.
My only negative on the casting was Alexander Skarsgård, but that's not because of his acting, it's because of what they did to him... that slurping, that laugh... why would you do that?! Why!!? After the wonder of him in The Aftermath this has ruined the image of him for me.
Long Shot's plot is entirely predictable. Two people are reunited after years, they catch feelings, something gets in the way, they split up, then they get back together. The fact you know where it's leading just means that you can sit back and enjoy it more. I was expecting the funny, but I really wasn't expecting to cry... yes, I know I'm a wreck. There are some surprisingly touching moments involved and the way they brought the film together at the end was perfect.
This probably deserves 5 stars, and I would give it that extra half star in a heartbeat if it wasn't for the Skarsgård thing and the fact that there's no way I could watch this with my parents even though I know dad would find it hilarious.
What you should do
It's definitely one to see, it doesn't need the big screen but you certainly won't be wasting your money if you went and saw it at the cinema.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Like A Boss (2020) in Movies
Jan 22, 2020
Before going in I knew this was either going to be fantastic or a total disaster, it wasn't likely to fall in the middle of the scale. For the most part that was an accurate assumption.
Mia and Mel are lifelong friends and both share a passion for make-up and a more positive way of living. Their business, while a source of joy for them, is close to an end. But when Claire Luna appears on the scene Mel thinks it could be the answer to their financial worries, Mia is a little more sceptical. It appears that Claire is up to something but can they get to the bottom of everything before they lose their business, and each other?
Let us first give a round of applause to the uncredited actors in this film... Salma Hayek's breasts. They did sterling work, everyone else rather paled in comparison.
Now on to the serious things.
Let me be upfront about this... I will never want to watch this film again, if I happened across it being shown I would probably sit in silence for 83 minutes instead.
I love so many of the actors in this and yet I couldn't even rely on them to help this along. It's a fun premise and it had a cast that could definitely have made this great and yet somehow it's really quite poorly executed. Jokes didn't hit home and while I did chuckle a couple of times towards the end the beginning was not strong enough to be drama and not amusing enough to be comedy.
Billy Porter and Karan Soni probably come out the best from the whole ensemble. Porter has a very dramatic humour throughout and his delivery really helped. Soni's bitchy assistant wasn't overly complicated and had a fairly simple storyline to follow which allowed him to be more memorable.
I was rather disappointed with the hand that Jennifer Coolidge got dealt, she is amazingly funny and the humour in Like A Boss needed to give her something better to work with. Tiffany Haddish's return to over the top comedy also left me sad, having seen her in The Kitchen and being so impressed with her dramatic role I was really hoping she would try more of the same. While Mia is perfectly matched to her comedy stylings the script was severely lacking.
Everything about this seemed dated and it's very much a 90's feeling scenario. It felt like they were going for a bit of slapstick but left out the actual slapstick element. The confusion/disappointment did not stop there, the end of the film became evident quite early on and then it was just a case of waiting for it to happen without any anticipation.
The curious thing to me is the film's rating. There is absolutely no reason for this to be rated 15... that's to say that it didn't need any of the bits that would have caused it to be a 15, it easily could have been 12 and still had the same or hopefully a better impact.
Yes, there were some minor plus points but Like A Boss was overwhelmingly poor. I say that but it obviously has an audience out there because a lot of the people in our screening were laughing. Perhaps it would have helped me if so many key laughter points weren't shown in the trailer... but I think that's a little optimistic. On the plus side it did give me a chance to have a catch up with my friend around the dire movie.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/01/like-boss-movie-review.html
Mia and Mel are lifelong friends and both share a passion for make-up and a more positive way of living. Their business, while a source of joy for them, is close to an end. But when Claire Luna appears on the scene Mel thinks it could be the answer to their financial worries, Mia is a little more sceptical. It appears that Claire is up to something but can they get to the bottom of everything before they lose their business, and each other?
Let us first give a round of applause to the uncredited actors in this film... Salma Hayek's breasts. They did sterling work, everyone else rather paled in comparison.
Now on to the serious things.
Let me be upfront about this... I will never want to watch this film again, if I happened across it being shown I would probably sit in silence for 83 minutes instead.
I love so many of the actors in this and yet I couldn't even rely on them to help this along. It's a fun premise and it had a cast that could definitely have made this great and yet somehow it's really quite poorly executed. Jokes didn't hit home and while I did chuckle a couple of times towards the end the beginning was not strong enough to be drama and not amusing enough to be comedy.
Billy Porter and Karan Soni probably come out the best from the whole ensemble. Porter has a very dramatic humour throughout and his delivery really helped. Soni's bitchy assistant wasn't overly complicated and had a fairly simple storyline to follow which allowed him to be more memorable.
I was rather disappointed with the hand that Jennifer Coolidge got dealt, she is amazingly funny and the humour in Like A Boss needed to give her something better to work with. Tiffany Haddish's return to over the top comedy also left me sad, having seen her in The Kitchen and being so impressed with her dramatic role I was really hoping she would try more of the same. While Mia is perfectly matched to her comedy stylings the script was severely lacking.
Everything about this seemed dated and it's very much a 90's feeling scenario. It felt like they were going for a bit of slapstick but left out the actual slapstick element. The confusion/disappointment did not stop there, the end of the film became evident quite early on and then it was just a case of waiting for it to happen without any anticipation.
The curious thing to me is the film's rating. There is absolutely no reason for this to be rated 15... that's to say that it didn't need any of the bits that would have caused it to be a 15, it easily could have been 12 and still had the same or hopefully a better impact.
Yes, there were some minor plus points but Like A Boss was overwhelmingly poor. I say that but it obviously has an audience out there because a lot of the people in our screening were laughing. Perhaps it would have helped me if so many key laughter points weren't shown in the trailer... but I think that's a little optimistic. On the plus side it did give me a chance to have a catch up with my friend around the dire movie.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/01/like-boss-movie-review.html
Home yoga practice
Health & Fitness and Lifestyle
App
What is preventing you from living your life to the fullest TODAY? Body aches? Stress? Your mood? ...
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated The Outsider (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
The concept of ‘The Outsider’ is a very interesting one, and partially why I was so drawn to the film in the first place. The film follows a former American GI by the name of Nick Lowell who joins the Yakuza, and that synopsis alone was enough to grab my attention. The second reason was the fact it starred Jared Leto, as I believe he’s a very good actor based on his performances in ‘Requiem for a Dream’, ‘Dallas Buyers Club’ and ‘American Psycho’.
Coming into this film, I had incredibly high hopes and was expecting an afternoon of thrilling scenes and engaging characters. As it was so easily accessible on Netflix, I also had no excuse to pass up the opportunity to get it watched. Unfortunately for me, I was left mostly disappointed by what ‘The Outsider’ delivered.
Running at 2 hours, it seems to drag on for much longer than that because the pacing of the film is poor. To be clear, I have no issue with films that have long runtimes provided they can make it work (‘The Wolf of Wall Street’, for example, runs at 3 hours yet seems to fly by), but this film has tedious scenes that simply didn’t do enough to hold my interest. They could’ve easily cut out half an hour’s worth of footage and still made the film work, in my opinion. It seems strange that a film about the Yakuza could be so boring, but sadly it was.
Jared Leto’s character, Nick, doesn’t have a clear backstory and because of this he’s a very uninteresting character. When we’re first introduced to him, I liked the fact he was such an enigma and assumed we’d learn more about him, but we never really do save for a few chunks of information scattered randomly throughout the narrative. As a Leto fan, I was disappointed that he didn’t really bring anything special to the role and literally any other actor could’ve taken his place and still delivered the same story.
The characters that Nick encounters throughout the film aren’t particularly noteworthy either, as they seem to exist to just berate Nick and frown at him, and not much happens beyond that. It seems very lazy that a film like ‘The Outsider’ has so many characters that are sloppily written, with no backstories to keep the audience interested.
‘The Outsider’ did have some redeeming features, though not enough for me to say I particularly enjoyed watching the film. There are a few gory, intense moments that hold your attention and make you squirm, but much less than I expected from a supposed crime film, especially one that focuses on such a notorious criminal organisation. Cinematically, it’s a decent film to look at based on the camerawork and colour grading throughout, but the absence of any decent story makes it fall flat.
Martin Zandvliet’s cinematic portrayal of the Japanese Yakuza is mediocre at best, and not what I expected based on the marketing I’d seen prior to watching the film. I wanted a violent, sexy, engaging crime film and got absolutely none of that.
https://jumpcutonline.co.uk/the-outsider/
Coming into this film, I had incredibly high hopes and was expecting an afternoon of thrilling scenes and engaging characters. As it was so easily accessible on Netflix, I also had no excuse to pass up the opportunity to get it watched. Unfortunately for me, I was left mostly disappointed by what ‘The Outsider’ delivered.
Running at 2 hours, it seems to drag on for much longer than that because the pacing of the film is poor. To be clear, I have no issue with films that have long runtimes provided they can make it work (‘The Wolf of Wall Street’, for example, runs at 3 hours yet seems to fly by), but this film has tedious scenes that simply didn’t do enough to hold my interest. They could’ve easily cut out half an hour’s worth of footage and still made the film work, in my opinion. It seems strange that a film about the Yakuza could be so boring, but sadly it was.
Jared Leto’s character, Nick, doesn’t have a clear backstory and because of this he’s a very uninteresting character. When we’re first introduced to him, I liked the fact he was such an enigma and assumed we’d learn more about him, but we never really do save for a few chunks of information scattered randomly throughout the narrative. As a Leto fan, I was disappointed that he didn’t really bring anything special to the role and literally any other actor could’ve taken his place and still delivered the same story.
The characters that Nick encounters throughout the film aren’t particularly noteworthy either, as they seem to exist to just berate Nick and frown at him, and not much happens beyond that. It seems very lazy that a film like ‘The Outsider’ has so many characters that are sloppily written, with no backstories to keep the audience interested.
‘The Outsider’ did have some redeeming features, though not enough for me to say I particularly enjoyed watching the film. There are a few gory, intense moments that hold your attention and make you squirm, but much less than I expected from a supposed crime film, especially one that focuses on such a notorious criminal organisation. Cinematically, it’s a decent film to look at based on the camerawork and colour grading throughout, but the absence of any decent story makes it fall flat.
Martin Zandvliet’s cinematic portrayal of the Japanese Yakuza is mediocre at best, and not what I expected based on the marketing I’d seen prior to watching the film. I wanted a violent, sexy, engaging crime film and got absolutely none of that.
https://jumpcutonline.co.uk/the-outsider/
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated The Murder of King Tut in Books
Apr 27, 2018
THE MURDER OF KING TUT—THE PLOT TO KILL THE CHILD KING (Audio Book) by James Patterson and Martin Dugard, read by Joe Barrett
Genre: non-fiction thriller
Rating: 4.5/5
Summary: James Patterson tells a story in three parts—one part, the mysterious death of King Tut, the second part the discovery of his tomb by Carter, and the third part his writing, own exploration, research, and discovery of the elusive history of the boy king.
Thoughts: This is one of the best James Patterson books I’ve ever read (listened too). JP has taken an age old mystery and solved it. Yes, it appears as though the mystery of Tut is mystery no more. This book is very alive, even though the plot revolves around a murder. I felt like I was standing right there, watching it all take place. At times, I felt like the characters themselves. This was an amazing escape from reality.
Characters (5/5): Characters should be relatable for a book to be enjoyable, and the characters in Tut’s world were wonderful. They were highly developed right away, and were the kind that either you routed for or hated with a passion.
Writing (4/5/5): James is an awesome writer. I always love reading his work because it’s so lyric. His words flow smoothly and he doesn’t overuse too many phrases (though several “waves” of various things did “wash over” many people).
Content (4/5): There was barely any language in this book, which was a nice change of JP’s work. It wasn’t necessary, either. It just goes to show that the point can be made—and made well—without filthy language. There was a little bit of sex but it wasn’t too graphic, nor was it frequent.
Reader (4/5): I really liked the voice of the reader for this book. I’ve heard some pretty awful ones before, I’ll say that much right now! But Joe’s voice was perfect for this book. The only thing I didn’t like were the voices he put with the characters—the accents were pretty lousy, and when he put on a “fake” voice for the child characters, it just sounded a little silly. I was glad when Tut got old enough that he didn’t have to do that anymore!
Recommendation: Ages 16+ to lovers of fiction, history, nonfiction, thrillers, mystery, or to any James-Patterson-addict.
Genre: non-fiction thriller
Rating: 4.5/5
Summary: James Patterson tells a story in three parts—one part, the mysterious death of King Tut, the second part the discovery of his tomb by Carter, and the third part his writing, own exploration, research, and discovery of the elusive history of the boy king.
Thoughts: This is one of the best James Patterson books I’ve ever read (listened too). JP has taken an age old mystery and solved it. Yes, it appears as though the mystery of Tut is mystery no more. This book is very alive, even though the plot revolves around a murder. I felt like I was standing right there, watching it all take place. At times, I felt like the characters themselves. This was an amazing escape from reality.
Characters (5/5): Characters should be relatable for a book to be enjoyable, and the characters in Tut’s world were wonderful. They were highly developed right away, and were the kind that either you routed for or hated with a passion.
Writing (4/5/5): James is an awesome writer. I always love reading his work because it’s so lyric. His words flow smoothly and he doesn’t overuse too many phrases (though several “waves” of various things did “wash over” many people).
Content (4/5): There was barely any language in this book, which was a nice change of JP’s work. It wasn’t necessary, either. It just goes to show that the point can be made—and made well—without filthy language. There was a little bit of sex but it wasn’t too graphic, nor was it frequent.
Reader (4/5): I really liked the voice of the reader for this book. I’ve heard some pretty awful ones before, I’ll say that much right now! But Joe’s voice was perfect for this book. The only thing I didn’t like were the voices he put with the characters—the accents were pretty lousy, and when he put on a “fake” voice for the child characters, it just sounded a little silly. I was glad when Tut got old enough that he didn’t have to do that anymore!
Recommendation: Ages 16+ to lovers of fiction, history, nonfiction, thrillers, mystery, or to any James-Patterson-addict.
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated The Cutaway in Books
May 16, 2018
I seem to be of a minority when it comes to those that have read Christina Kovac's debut novel The Cutaway. Tagged as a mystery, suspense, and thriller novel, it really doesn't feel like one to me. While there are elements of a typical thriller, the crime at hand and the persons of interest take a back seat to the main character's love life for nearly three-fourths of the novel. In fact, the missing woman is practically non-existent for much of the story. To me, that's a pretty big turn off. I nearly dropped it, actually.
The Cutaway is supposed to focus on Virginia Knightly's efforts of getting the scoop on a missing person. En route to tracking down the perpetrator, readers encounter the typical sort of motives: affairs, money, political intrigue. It's a pretty standard plot when it comes to suspense novels. The twists are predictable and the story remains dreadfully slow until the final twenty to thirty percent.
For the most part, the characters of The Cutaway are painfully flat. Most of the male characters, with the exception of the News Director, are handsome with exceptionally whiny personalities. The News Director, Mellay, is a stereotypical angry boss sort who only cares about his own pockets. Even worse, the female characters are all Mary Sues. Sure, they have their own troubling pasts, but for as much suffering as they went through in their childhoods, the effect it has had on their adulthood is fairly minor. All of the women are drop dead gorgeous, not counting one of the witnesses. Ugh - that's all I can really say about that.
It's also clear from reading the novel that Kovac's most familiar with the reporting side of an investigation, which is to be expected from someone who has spent much of their time in the same career as the main character. Unfortunately, it also lends a bit of blandness to the story telling.
Overall, The Cutaway was an extremely painful read. Many times I considered dropping it: I could not get into the characters and I feel that the novel is more suited to the romance genre. There are several questions left unanswered and parts of it feel either rushed or as if Kovac is simply grasping at straws.
I would like to thank Atria Publishing, the author, and NetGalley for providing me with a copy for review.
The Cutaway is supposed to focus on Virginia Knightly's efforts of getting the scoop on a missing person. En route to tracking down the perpetrator, readers encounter the typical sort of motives: affairs, money, political intrigue. It's a pretty standard plot when it comes to suspense novels. The twists are predictable and the story remains dreadfully slow until the final twenty to thirty percent.
For the most part, the characters of The Cutaway are painfully flat. Most of the male characters, with the exception of the News Director, are handsome with exceptionally whiny personalities. The News Director, Mellay, is a stereotypical angry boss sort who only cares about his own pockets. Even worse, the female characters are all Mary Sues. Sure, they have their own troubling pasts, but for as much suffering as they went through in their childhoods, the effect it has had on their adulthood is fairly minor. All of the women are drop dead gorgeous, not counting one of the witnesses. Ugh - that's all I can really say about that.
It's also clear from reading the novel that Kovac's most familiar with the reporting side of an investigation, which is to be expected from someone who has spent much of their time in the same career as the main character. Unfortunately, it also lends a bit of blandness to the story telling.
Overall, The Cutaway was an extremely painful read. Many times I considered dropping it: I could not get into the characters and I feel that the novel is more suited to the romance genre. There are several questions left unanswered and parts of it feel either rushed or as if Kovac is simply grasping at straws.
I would like to thank Atria Publishing, the author, and NetGalley for providing me with a copy for review.
Kyera (8 KP) rated The Dream Thieves (The Raven Cycle, #2) in Books
Jan 31, 2018
The Dream Thieves was definitely a more engaging novel than the first book in the series. It was a combination of a more interesting plot, the magic system being developed more and having spent time with these characters that we finally have formed a connection to them. As this is the second book in the series, there may be minor spoilers for events or aspects of the first book in this review but not for the second book.
The main characters were developed a little bit more in this book than they had been in the previous. You start to understand their motivations and dreams, which was really nice because I felt a disconnect from them in the first book. I liked seeing events that happened in the past that made them who they are today or the way actions they took in the first book are now affecting them.
Having become familiar with the author's writing style, I understood more that she wasn't just including characters or storylines just to take up a few more pages but because for whatever reason they were a very important aspect of the story. In the first book, the character we kept jumping back to had an impact on the story but not until the very end. His scenes just dragged the book and made it significantly less enjoyable. The character we jump to in the second book has a more interesting plot (and less of a propensity to incessantly whine about his life) and more immediately becomes interwoven with our characters.
The magic system in relation to the Welsh King/Cabeswater still didn't feel entirely real to me. It felt like more of a nebulous idea than a physical one because it wasn't explained very much. The aspect of it that was explained more fully was the dream abilities. There isn't much I can say without spoiling things in the second book, but that development made the book infinitely more interesting and entertaining. I was fascinated to learn, slowly, how it worked and the limits.
There may have been scenes that dragged, but overall I found the plot of the Dream Thieves to be most fast-paced with intriguing reveals that helps to draw the reader in and keep them enamored. I hope that the series continues on this upward path of improvement because it has become a much more enjoyable read.
The main characters were developed a little bit more in this book than they had been in the previous. You start to understand their motivations and dreams, which was really nice because I felt a disconnect from them in the first book. I liked seeing events that happened in the past that made them who they are today or the way actions they took in the first book are now affecting them.
Having become familiar with the author's writing style, I understood more that she wasn't just including characters or storylines just to take up a few more pages but because for whatever reason they were a very important aspect of the story. In the first book, the character we kept jumping back to had an impact on the story but not until the very end. His scenes just dragged the book and made it significantly less enjoyable. The character we jump to in the second book has a more interesting plot (and less of a propensity to incessantly whine about his life) and more immediately becomes interwoven with our characters.
The magic system in relation to the Welsh King/Cabeswater still didn't feel entirely real to me. It felt like more of a nebulous idea than a physical one because it wasn't explained very much. The aspect of it that was explained more fully was the dream abilities. There isn't much I can say without spoiling things in the second book, but that development made the book infinitely more interesting and entertaining. I was fascinated to learn, slowly, how it worked and the limits.
There may have been scenes that dragged, but overall I found the plot of the Dream Thieves to be most fast-paced with intriguing reveals that helps to draw the reader in and keep them enamored. I hope that the series continues on this upward path of improvement because it has become a much more enjoyable read.