Search
Search results
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets (2017) in Movies
Jan 22, 2021
Where to begin with Luc Besson? The masterpiece of Leon aside, he is notorious for creating beautifully bonkers visual treats that twist and turn like a monkey on cocaine, making as much sense. This comic book adaptation starts well, with some jaw dropping CG design and a decent concept – it truly is a dreamscape of glorious colour and imagination rarely matched… but so is Tim Burton’s Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, and we all know how awful that is.
He just doesn’t have the knack with story and character in the same way as he does with the visuals, often leaving you with the impression that even the actors are confused by what is going on, and why, and what the hell is coming out of their mouths as an excuse for dialogue.
I like Dane De Haan, he has shown a lot of promise in some valiant near misses, such as Chronicle, The Place Beyond the Pines and The Cure For Wellness – three films I enjoyed, with reservations, that were better for him being in them – but he has not quite made it to the A-list as yet. Here, opposite the gorgeously cute but somehow hollow presence Cara Delevingne, he is burdened by a love story with no chemistry and some cringe-worthy banter. As the film ultimately focuses and depends on the likability of this relationship it inevitably fails; melting into comic book kookiness that loses a lot in translation.
I almost found myself hating them and wishing they would die painfully so the film could end, but not quite as much as I hated how fundamentally terrible Clive Owen was as the villain – I mean, so awkward and awful it made how uncomfortable Harrison Ford seemed in Ender’s Game look like an Oscar worthy performance. Risible. Inexcusable. Inexplicable. But that’s Besson where let loose into the realm of full sci-fi.
One corner of joy was Rihanna as the shape-shifting Bubble, who showed a charm and talent for film acting I hadn’t quite expected, and how much fun Ethan Hawke had dressing up and hamming it up as Jolly, her pimp. But essentially, you’d be better off turning the sound off completely and just drinking in the spectrum of imaginative design on display. A film that may hold some cult status into the future, and one small children may get oddly addicted to, but as a functioning and satisfying cinematic story… just, no.
He just doesn’t have the knack with story and character in the same way as he does with the visuals, often leaving you with the impression that even the actors are confused by what is going on, and why, and what the hell is coming out of their mouths as an excuse for dialogue.
I like Dane De Haan, he has shown a lot of promise in some valiant near misses, such as Chronicle, The Place Beyond the Pines and The Cure For Wellness – three films I enjoyed, with reservations, that were better for him being in them – but he has not quite made it to the A-list as yet. Here, opposite the gorgeously cute but somehow hollow presence Cara Delevingne, he is burdened by a love story with no chemistry and some cringe-worthy banter. As the film ultimately focuses and depends on the likability of this relationship it inevitably fails; melting into comic book kookiness that loses a lot in translation.
I almost found myself hating them and wishing they would die painfully so the film could end, but not quite as much as I hated how fundamentally terrible Clive Owen was as the villain – I mean, so awkward and awful it made how uncomfortable Harrison Ford seemed in Ender’s Game look like an Oscar worthy performance. Risible. Inexcusable. Inexplicable. But that’s Besson where let loose into the realm of full sci-fi.
One corner of joy was Rihanna as the shape-shifting Bubble, who showed a charm and talent for film acting I hadn’t quite expected, and how much fun Ethan Hawke had dressing up and hamming it up as Jolly, her pimp. But essentially, you’d be better off turning the sound off completely and just drinking in the spectrum of imaginative design on display. A film that may hold some cult status into the future, and one small children may get oddly addicted to, but as a functioning and satisfying cinematic story… just, no.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Churchill (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“We will bore them on the beaches”.
“Churchill” tells the story of the great leader’s extreme opposition to “Operation Overlord”, the Eisenhower-led invasion of Normandy in 1944 that ultimately led – more by luck that judgement perhaps – to the fall of the Third Reich in the following year.
I’m not a historian but am married to one, so know the importance of “sources” in the pursuit of “truth”: one man’s terrorist is after all another man’s freedom fighter from a different perspective. Some sources on the internet (here for example) certainly suggest the The British (led by Churchill as Prime Minister) might have sensibly promoted the acceleration of the Italian campaign to reach Berlin rather than the far riskier Channel crossing.
This film however paints Churchill as a man demonised by his decision to send young men to their deaths in the fateful Gallipoli beach landings of World War One, with this – rather than a sensible strategic one – being the primary reason for opposing the Normandy landings. To further paint him as a bumbling old fool that is “worked around” by his peers strikes you as borderline libellous.
So the film’s script, by novice Alex von Tunzelmann, immediately set the wrong tone with me, and the undeniably strong performances of Brian Cox (“The Bourne Identity”) as Churchill and the wonderful Miranda Richardson (“Harry Potter” and the soon to be released “Stronger”) as Clemmie can’t fill the gap.
Besides anything else, diretor Jonathan Teplitzky (“The Railway Man”) delivers a piece so dull and lifeless, and with so much brooding, that its not remotely enjoyable. You think the introduction of a bullied secretary – Ms Garrett (Ella Purnell) – with a strong personal connection to ‘Overlord’ will add dramatic colour? But this angle too seems to go nowhere in particular.
There are many tales of the Normandy landings that are fascinating, over and above the dramatic sweep of “The Longest Day” (which is surely well overdue for a remake?) and Spielberg’s fictionalisation of the Niland brothers in “Saving Private Ryan”. How about the 2 out of 29 American amphibious tanks that reached Omaha beach after ignoring British advice to not launch so far from shore in rough seas?
So, as a film, it might be “worthy”. But I didn’t remotely believe the depiction of Churchill and it astonished me that such a rivetingly exciting period of British history could deliver a film that bored me. So, sorry, can’t recommend this one. Perhaps Joe Wright will have a better go with Gary Oldman as Churchill in “Darkest Hour”…
I’m not a historian but am married to one, so know the importance of “sources” in the pursuit of “truth”: one man’s terrorist is after all another man’s freedom fighter from a different perspective. Some sources on the internet (here for example) certainly suggest the The British (led by Churchill as Prime Minister) might have sensibly promoted the acceleration of the Italian campaign to reach Berlin rather than the far riskier Channel crossing.
This film however paints Churchill as a man demonised by his decision to send young men to their deaths in the fateful Gallipoli beach landings of World War One, with this – rather than a sensible strategic one – being the primary reason for opposing the Normandy landings. To further paint him as a bumbling old fool that is “worked around” by his peers strikes you as borderline libellous.
So the film’s script, by novice Alex von Tunzelmann, immediately set the wrong tone with me, and the undeniably strong performances of Brian Cox (“The Bourne Identity”) as Churchill and the wonderful Miranda Richardson (“Harry Potter” and the soon to be released “Stronger”) as Clemmie can’t fill the gap.
Besides anything else, diretor Jonathan Teplitzky (“The Railway Man”) delivers a piece so dull and lifeless, and with so much brooding, that its not remotely enjoyable. You think the introduction of a bullied secretary – Ms Garrett (Ella Purnell) – with a strong personal connection to ‘Overlord’ will add dramatic colour? But this angle too seems to go nowhere in particular.
There are many tales of the Normandy landings that are fascinating, over and above the dramatic sweep of “The Longest Day” (which is surely well overdue for a remake?) and Spielberg’s fictionalisation of the Niland brothers in “Saving Private Ryan”. How about the 2 out of 29 American amphibious tanks that reached Omaha beach after ignoring British advice to not launch so far from shore in rough seas?
So, as a film, it might be “worthy”. But I didn’t remotely believe the depiction of Churchill and it astonished me that such a rivetingly exciting period of British history could deliver a film that bored me. So, sorry, can’t recommend this one. Perhaps Joe Wright will have a better go with Gary Oldman as Churchill in “Darkest Hour”…
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Get Out (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“It really doesn’t matter if you’re ‘Black or White”.
Due to a mixture of holiday, work commitments and sickness (I would not wish to inflict my bronchial cough on ANY cinema audience for a while) I haven’t been to the cinema in over a month… shocking. But it has given me a chance to catch up on some of the films in 2017 (and a few from last year) that I hadn’t got to see. So this will be the first of a series of such “DVD” reviews.
“Get Out” was written and directed by Jordan Peele and was his directorial debut. And a hot item on his resume it is too.
Daniel Kaluuya (“Sicario”) plays African-American Chris Washington who, nervously, takes a trip ‘upstate’ to meet the parents of his cute white girlfriend Rose (Allison Williams). The parents, Dean (Bradley Whitford, best known as Josh Lyman from “The West Wing”) and Missy (Catherine Keener, “ Captain Phillips”), are extremely welcoming.
But the weekend coincides with an “annual gathering” of family and friends, and events quickly take a left turn into “The Twilight Zone”, with anti-smoking hypnosis and a bizarre game of Bingo where the win is so substantial that playing becomes a ‘no brainer’. Can Chris ‘Get Out’, with his mind still intact, before it’s too late?
This is a really clever script by Peele. The film baits you into thinking this is some redneck-inter-racial-revenge flick, but actually the colour of the skin is almost irrelevant. (Or is it? This angle is left deliciously vague). Some of the filming is spectacularly creepy, with the hypnosis scene being reminiscent to me of the excellent “Under The Skin”. And never has a teaspoon in a cup of tea been a more devastating weapon.
I seemed to have talked at length this year in this blog on the subject of the “physics of horror”: the story elements hanging together in a satisfying – albeit sometimes in an unbelievable – way. “Get Out” delivers this to perfection, keeping its powder dry until the closing moments of the film before delivering a series of satisfying “Ah!” relevatory moments.
While the ‘physics’ of the film is good the ‘biology’ is bonkers, featuring a plot point from the terrible first episode of the 3rd season of the original “Star Trek” (if you can be bothered to look that up!). But I’ll forgive this, parking my incredulity, to salute what I think is one of the year’s most novel and impressive low-budget indie horror films.
“Get Out” was written and directed by Jordan Peele and was his directorial debut. And a hot item on his resume it is too.
Daniel Kaluuya (“Sicario”) plays African-American Chris Washington who, nervously, takes a trip ‘upstate’ to meet the parents of his cute white girlfriend Rose (Allison Williams). The parents, Dean (Bradley Whitford, best known as Josh Lyman from “The West Wing”) and Missy (Catherine Keener, “ Captain Phillips”), are extremely welcoming.
But the weekend coincides with an “annual gathering” of family and friends, and events quickly take a left turn into “The Twilight Zone”, with anti-smoking hypnosis and a bizarre game of Bingo where the win is so substantial that playing becomes a ‘no brainer’. Can Chris ‘Get Out’, with his mind still intact, before it’s too late?
This is a really clever script by Peele. The film baits you into thinking this is some redneck-inter-racial-revenge flick, but actually the colour of the skin is almost irrelevant. (Or is it? This angle is left deliciously vague). Some of the filming is spectacularly creepy, with the hypnosis scene being reminiscent to me of the excellent “Under The Skin”. And never has a teaspoon in a cup of tea been a more devastating weapon.
I seemed to have talked at length this year in this blog on the subject of the “physics of horror”: the story elements hanging together in a satisfying – albeit sometimes in an unbelievable – way. “Get Out” delivers this to perfection, keeping its powder dry until the closing moments of the film before delivering a series of satisfying “Ah!” relevatory moments.
While the ‘physics’ of the film is good the ‘biology’ is bonkers, featuring a plot point from the terrible first episode of the 3rd season of the original “Star Trek” (if you can be bothered to look that up!). But I’ll forgive this, parking my incredulity, to salute what I think is one of the year’s most novel and impressive low-budget indie horror films.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Small Great Things in Books
May 24, 2017
Small is an Understatement
Jodi Picoult has been my favourite author since I first came across her novels in 2008. With twenty-three novels under her belt, she continues to delight readers with her page-turning stories. Most of Picoult’s books contain a moral issue, often, but not always, in the form of medical ethics, as well as a hefty court case. Although following along similar lines, Small Great Things is a radical, revolutionary book, which, with great courage, Picoult has written with the intent to expose the reader to truths that most of us, as a society, are intentionally oblivious to.
The gist of the storyline is that a baby dies whilst under the care of a nurse, prompting the grieving parents to take her to court with the accusation of murder. Although that sounds like an interesting story, it barely begins to describe what the book is about. The character on trial, Ruth, is an African American labour and delivery nurse – something that in this day and age need not by an issue. On the other hand, the parents of the baby are White Supremacists: seriously racist with the belief that white people are the master race. The father, Turk, refuses to let his wife and child be treated by Ruth, however circumstances result in her being the only nurse available to watch Davis, when, unfortunately, he so happens to go into cardiac arrest. Although the reader knows that Ruth is not at fault, Turk insists she murdered his child – but is he accusing her of medical negligence, or punishing her for being black?
Three characters, all with different views and experience when it comes to racism, alternately narrate Small Great Things. Ruth and Turk represent the extremes at either side of the scale. Ruth experiences first hand the negative impact of prejudice in the American system and society, not only through this court case, but in everyday life as well. She also reveals the difficulties growing up in a predominately white environment, never feeling like she fitted in with her peers. Alternatively, Turk spent his teenage years attending KKK rallies, participating in a white power movement, and beating up anyone who was different: black, foreign, gay, Jewish and so forth.
The third character represents the majority of white people living in America. Kennedy is a public defender and the lawyer assigned to Ruth’s case. Like most of the population, she believes that she is not racist, and persuades Ruth to leave the colour of her skin out of the argument. However, as she gets to know her client, she begins to realize that it is nigh on impossible to ignore racial prejudice.
Picoult shocks the reader on two accounts: one, the way that people of colour have been, and still are, treated; and two, the revelation that an invisible empire of White Supremacists are living amongst us. Yet there is a third way in which Picoult provokes outrage – she indirectly accuses the reader of being racist, too.
There is always something to learn in a Jodi Picoult novel, for instance medical terminology, or the way in which a court trial is conducted. Small Great Things provides a lot more eye opening information than any of her previous books, unveiling facts about such a controversial subject.
Through Kennedy, the reader’s eyes are opened to the racial discrimination that we all turn a blind eye to. Ignored are the difficulties African Americans suffer when going shopping, applying for jobs, attending school, walking down the street, sitting on a bus, and so forth. Picoult asks me as a reader to think about how my life has been affected by racial discrimination: being served politely in shops because I am white, not having my ethnicity questioned when applying for college etc. Living in Britain I have not experienced openly hateful comments or behaviours towards people with a different skin tone – I used to believe this was primarily an American problem. Yet, Small Great Things has really made me think about the hierarchy of power within society, particularly in regards to the ethnicity of those at the top, compared with those at the bottom.
Jodi Picoult sat on the idea of writing a book about racism for well over a decade, yet it is particularly apt that it is published now, with the current predicaments America is facing. Although we have come a long way in attempts to achieve equality for all – compare the trial in To Kill A Mockingbird to Picoult’s version – recent events have revealed that we are no where near.
Small Great Things will shock everyone who reads it regardless of their ethnicity and so forth. Many may find it uncomfortable to read, become upset or outraged, and even feel like they are being directly targeted. If this is the case, then good – it should do that. Everyone needs to read this book. On the one hand it is a brilliant, well told story with a beautiful, almost poetic narrative, and on the other, it causes us to face up to the issues we are forever making light of or overlooking entirely. We have grown up believing that racism is a form of hatred when, actually, it is about power. However Small Great Things makes you feel, it is definitely worth reading, especially for the satisfying ending – one that you do not see coming.
The gist of the storyline is that a baby dies whilst under the care of a nurse, prompting the grieving parents to take her to court with the accusation of murder. Although that sounds like an interesting story, it barely begins to describe what the book is about. The character on trial, Ruth, is an African American labour and delivery nurse – something that in this day and age need not by an issue. On the other hand, the parents of the baby are White Supremacists: seriously racist with the belief that white people are the master race. The father, Turk, refuses to let his wife and child be treated by Ruth, however circumstances result in her being the only nurse available to watch Davis, when, unfortunately, he so happens to go into cardiac arrest. Although the reader knows that Ruth is not at fault, Turk insists she murdered his child – but is he accusing her of medical negligence, or punishing her for being black?
Three characters, all with different views and experience when it comes to racism, alternately narrate Small Great Things. Ruth and Turk represent the extremes at either side of the scale. Ruth experiences first hand the negative impact of prejudice in the American system and society, not only through this court case, but in everyday life as well. She also reveals the difficulties growing up in a predominately white environment, never feeling like she fitted in with her peers. Alternatively, Turk spent his teenage years attending KKK rallies, participating in a white power movement, and beating up anyone who was different: black, foreign, gay, Jewish and so forth.
The third character represents the majority of white people living in America. Kennedy is a public defender and the lawyer assigned to Ruth’s case. Like most of the population, she believes that she is not racist, and persuades Ruth to leave the colour of her skin out of the argument. However, as she gets to know her client, she begins to realize that it is nigh on impossible to ignore racial prejudice.
Picoult shocks the reader on two accounts: one, the way that people of colour have been, and still are, treated; and two, the revelation that an invisible empire of White Supremacists are living amongst us. Yet there is a third way in which Picoult provokes outrage – she indirectly accuses the reader of being racist, too.
There is always something to learn in a Jodi Picoult novel, for instance medical terminology, or the way in which a court trial is conducted. Small Great Things provides a lot more eye opening information than any of her previous books, unveiling facts about such a controversial subject.
Through Kennedy, the reader’s eyes are opened to the racial discrimination that we all turn a blind eye to. Ignored are the difficulties African Americans suffer when going shopping, applying for jobs, attending school, walking down the street, sitting on a bus, and so forth. Picoult asks me as a reader to think about how my life has been affected by racial discrimination: being served politely in shops because I am white, not having my ethnicity questioned when applying for college etc. Living in Britain I have not experienced openly hateful comments or behaviours towards people with a different skin tone – I used to believe this was primarily an American problem. Yet, Small Great Things has really made me think about the hierarchy of power within society, particularly in regards to the ethnicity of those at the top, compared with those at the bottom.
Jodi Picoult sat on the idea of writing a book about racism for well over a decade, yet it is particularly apt that it is published now, with the current predicaments America is facing. Although we have come a long way in attempts to achieve equality for all – compare the trial in To Kill A Mockingbird to Picoult’s version – recent events have revealed that we are no where near.
Small Great Things will shock everyone who reads it regardless of their ethnicity and so forth. Many may find it uncomfortable to read, become upset or outraged, and even feel like they are being directly targeted. If this is the case, then good – it should do that. Everyone needs to read this book. On the one hand it is a brilliant, well told story with a beautiful, almost poetic narrative, and on the other, it causes us to face up to the issues we are forever making light of or overlooking entirely. We have grown up believing that racism is a form of hatred when, actually, it is about power. However Small Great Things makes you feel, it is definitely worth reading, especially for the satisfying ending – one that you do not see coming.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Small Great Things in Books
Dec 7, 2018
Jodi Picoult has been my favourite author since I first came across her novels in 2008. With twenty-three novels under her belt, she continues to delight readers with her page-turning stories. Most of Picoult’s books contain a moral issue, often, but not always, in the form of medical ethics, as well as a hefty court case. Although following along similar lines, <i>Small Great Thing</i>s is a radical, revolutionary book, which, with great courage, Picoult has written with the intent to expose the reader to truths that most of us, as a society, are <s>intentionally</s> oblivious to.
The gist of the storyline is that a baby dies whilst under the care of a nurse, prompting the grieving parents to take her to court with the accusation of murder. Although that sounds like an interesting story, it barely begins to describe what the book is about. The character on trial, Ruth, is an African American labour and delivery nurse – something that in this day and age need not by an issue. On the other hand, the parents of the baby are White Supremacists: seriously racist with the belief that white people are the master race. The father, Turk, refuses to let his wife and child be treated by Ruth, however circumstances result in her being the only nurse available to watch Davis, when, unfortunately, he so happens to go into cardiac arrest. Although the reader knows that Ruth is not at fault, Turk insists she murdered his child – but is he accusing her of medical negligence, or punishing her for being black?
Three characters, all with different views and experience when it comes to racism, alternately narrate<i> Small Great Things</i>. Ruth and Turk represent the extremes at either side of the scale. Ruth experiences first hand the negative impact of prejudice in the American system and society, not only through this court case, but in everyday life as well. She also reveals the difficulties growing up in a predominately white environment, never feeling like she fitted in with her peers. Alternatively, Turk spent his teenage years attending KKK rallies, participating in a white power movement, and beating up anyone who was different: black, foreign, gay, Jewish and so forth.
The third character represents the majority of white people living in America. Kennedy is a public defender and the lawyer assigned to Ruth’s case. Like most of the population, she believes that she is not racist, and persuades Ruth to leave the colour of her skin out of the argument. However, as she gets to know her client, she begins to realize that it is nigh on impossible to ignore racial prejudice.
Picoult shocks the reader on two accounts: one, the way that people of colour have been, and still are, treated; and two, the revelation that an invisible empire of White Supremacists are living amongst us. Yet there is a third way in which Picoult provokes outrage – she indirectly accuses the reader of being racist, too.
There is always something to learn in a Jodi Picoult novel, for instance medical terminology, or the way in which a court trial is conducted. <i>Small Great Things</i> provides a lot more eye opening information than any of her previous books, unveiling facts about such a controversial subject.
Through Kennedy, the reader’s eyes are opened to the racial discrimination that we all turn a blind eye to. Ignored are the difficulties African Americans suffer when going shopping, applying for jobs, attending school, walking down the street, sitting on a bus, and so forth. Picoult asks me as a reader to think about how my life has been affected by racial discrimination: being served politely in shops because I am white, not having my ethnicity questioned when applying for college etc. Living in Britain I have not experienced openly hateful comments or behaviours towards people with a different skin tone – I used to believe this was primarily an American problem. Yet, <i>Small Great Things</i> has really made me think about the hierarchy of power within society, particularly in regards to the ethnicity of those at the top, compared with those at the bottom.
Jodi Picoult sat on the idea of writing a book about racism for well over a decade, yet it is particularly apt that it is published now, with the current predicaments America is facing. Although we have come a long way in attempts to achieve equality for all – compare the trial in <i>To Kill A Mockingbird</i> to Picoult’s version – recent events have revealed that we are no where near.
<i>Small Great Things</i> will shock everyone who reads it regardless of their ethnicity and so forth. Many may find it uncomfortable to read, become upset or outraged, and even feel like they are being directly targeted. If this is the case, then good – it should do that. Everyone needs to read this book. On the one hand it is a brilliant, well told story with a beautiful, almost poetic narrative, and on the other, it causes us to face up to the issues we are forever making light of or overlooking entirely. We have grown up believing that racism is a form of hatred when, actually, it is about power. However <i>Small Great Things </i>makes you feel, it is definitely worth reading, especially for the satisfying ending – one that you do not see coming.
The gist of the storyline is that a baby dies whilst under the care of a nurse, prompting the grieving parents to take her to court with the accusation of murder. Although that sounds like an interesting story, it barely begins to describe what the book is about. The character on trial, Ruth, is an African American labour and delivery nurse – something that in this day and age need not by an issue. On the other hand, the parents of the baby are White Supremacists: seriously racist with the belief that white people are the master race. The father, Turk, refuses to let his wife and child be treated by Ruth, however circumstances result in her being the only nurse available to watch Davis, when, unfortunately, he so happens to go into cardiac arrest. Although the reader knows that Ruth is not at fault, Turk insists she murdered his child – but is he accusing her of medical negligence, or punishing her for being black?
Three characters, all with different views and experience when it comes to racism, alternately narrate<i> Small Great Things</i>. Ruth and Turk represent the extremes at either side of the scale. Ruth experiences first hand the negative impact of prejudice in the American system and society, not only through this court case, but in everyday life as well. She also reveals the difficulties growing up in a predominately white environment, never feeling like she fitted in with her peers. Alternatively, Turk spent his teenage years attending KKK rallies, participating in a white power movement, and beating up anyone who was different: black, foreign, gay, Jewish and so forth.
The third character represents the majority of white people living in America. Kennedy is a public defender and the lawyer assigned to Ruth’s case. Like most of the population, she believes that she is not racist, and persuades Ruth to leave the colour of her skin out of the argument. However, as she gets to know her client, she begins to realize that it is nigh on impossible to ignore racial prejudice.
Picoult shocks the reader on two accounts: one, the way that people of colour have been, and still are, treated; and two, the revelation that an invisible empire of White Supremacists are living amongst us. Yet there is a third way in which Picoult provokes outrage – she indirectly accuses the reader of being racist, too.
There is always something to learn in a Jodi Picoult novel, for instance medical terminology, or the way in which a court trial is conducted. <i>Small Great Things</i> provides a lot more eye opening information than any of her previous books, unveiling facts about such a controversial subject.
Through Kennedy, the reader’s eyes are opened to the racial discrimination that we all turn a blind eye to. Ignored are the difficulties African Americans suffer when going shopping, applying for jobs, attending school, walking down the street, sitting on a bus, and so forth. Picoult asks me as a reader to think about how my life has been affected by racial discrimination: being served politely in shops because I am white, not having my ethnicity questioned when applying for college etc. Living in Britain I have not experienced openly hateful comments or behaviours towards people with a different skin tone – I used to believe this was primarily an American problem. Yet, <i>Small Great Things</i> has really made me think about the hierarchy of power within society, particularly in regards to the ethnicity of those at the top, compared with those at the bottom.
Jodi Picoult sat on the idea of writing a book about racism for well over a decade, yet it is particularly apt that it is published now, with the current predicaments America is facing. Although we have come a long way in attempts to achieve equality for all – compare the trial in <i>To Kill A Mockingbird</i> to Picoult’s version – recent events have revealed that we are no where near.
<i>Small Great Things</i> will shock everyone who reads it regardless of their ethnicity and so forth. Many may find it uncomfortable to read, become upset or outraged, and even feel like they are being directly targeted. If this is the case, then good – it should do that. Everyone needs to read this book. On the one hand it is a brilliant, well told story with a beautiful, almost poetic narrative, and on the other, it causes us to face up to the issues we are forever making light of or overlooking entirely. We have grown up believing that racism is a form of hatred when, actually, it is about power. However <i>Small Great Things </i>makes you feel, it is definitely worth reading, especially for the satisfying ending – one that you do not see coming.
Connor Sheffield (293 KP) rated Yoshi's Crafted World in Video Games
Apr 17, 2019
Simple mechanics (3 more)
Beautiful Art style
Yoshi (all of them)
Some level of difficulty in some areas
Tons of adorable fun for all ages!
So Yoshi's crafted world was one of the two games I recieved as part of a bundle deal when I bought my Nintendo Switch Console. I was looking forward to playing the game as I hadn't played a Yoshi based game for some time and Yoshi is one of my all time fave characters. I didn't get chance to play wooly world as I haven't owned a new Nintendo console since DS Lite and the Wii. (I know it sucks, I just never had the money for them and by the time I did the next gen console was out and I was torn)
Anyways, as I began playing Yoshi's Crafted world and working my through the many incredibly awesome looking levels which not only have collectibles but has a flip side to each level in which you go through the level from the back which adds to the awesome game design as a whole, I realised that whilst it all looked new and had a new interesting yet simple plot to play through, the gameplay was the same mechanics that we've been playing for years in almost all the Mario Themed 2D platformers/side scrollers. You run across, bounce on enemies heads, throw eggs to smash things, collect coins and move on to the next level, then repeat. It works as a mechanic but at the same time I felt like there wasn't much of a change. However, they did add some more directions to this game, as you no longer just side scroll (although that is the majority of the game) but on the levels there will be certain areas where you can turn and head either towards the screen or away from it, in order to reach secrets or to simply continue through the level. So they mixed it up a little bit, but not much in my opinion.
One aspect I enjoyed was the outfits you could buy which worked as armour in a way. The designs are all made to look as though they are crafted out of cardboard boxes and other household items (hence the name 'crafted world') and this gives the game and adorable and very clever asthetic.
However if you're a fan of sidescrollers, the Mario world or just Yoshi in general then I would recommend giving it a go because it is fun, especially if you get a friend to join you and you can choose which outfits you want to wear and more importantly which colour Yoshi you want to be.
Anyways, as I began playing Yoshi's Crafted world and working my through the many incredibly awesome looking levels which not only have collectibles but has a flip side to each level in which you go through the level from the back which adds to the awesome game design as a whole, I realised that whilst it all looked new and had a new interesting yet simple plot to play through, the gameplay was the same mechanics that we've been playing for years in almost all the Mario Themed 2D platformers/side scrollers. You run across, bounce on enemies heads, throw eggs to smash things, collect coins and move on to the next level, then repeat. It works as a mechanic but at the same time I felt like there wasn't much of a change. However, they did add some more directions to this game, as you no longer just side scroll (although that is the majority of the game) but on the levels there will be certain areas where you can turn and head either towards the screen or away from it, in order to reach secrets or to simply continue through the level. So they mixed it up a little bit, but not much in my opinion.
One aspect I enjoyed was the outfits you could buy which worked as armour in a way. The designs are all made to look as though they are crafted out of cardboard boxes and other household items (hence the name 'crafted world') and this gives the game and adorable and very clever asthetic.
However if you're a fan of sidescrollers, the Mario world or just Yoshi in general then I would recommend giving it a go because it is fun, especially if you get a friend to join you and you can choose which outfits you want to wear and more importantly which colour Yoshi you want to be.
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Ant-Man and the Wasp (2018) in Movies
May 11, 2019
'Hold on, you gave her wings?!'
A much welcome breather after the heavyweight that was Avengers: Infinity War, the 20th instalment in the Marvel Cinematic Universe is another lighthearted ride unfolding on the same minuscule scale as Ant-Man, and though not as impressive as Marvel's best works, it still delivers a fine dose of fun, amusing & action-packed entertainment.
Set in the aftermath of Captain America: Civil War, the story of Ant-Man and the Wasp finds Scott Lang under house arrest and Dr. Hank Pym & Hope van Dyne in hiding until an urgent mission brings them together once again as the trio attempt to unlock the secrets of quantum realm before it's too late, while being pursued by both cops & new enemies.
Directed by Peyton Reed, the sequel offers him more freedom & bigger canvas to showcase his vision & creativity yet he fails to makes the most of the opportunity and delivers a story that's pretty much on same level as its predecessor. Its action scenes do get an upgrade but the plot is quite simple and is missing the character complexity that drives most sequels.
On the plus side, the film retains the humour of the original while the continuous banter & brisk pacing make sure that its 118 mins runtime never becomes a chore. The swift, kinetic operation of camera infuses an energy to its moments of action on both macro & micro levels while the bright colour tones add a rich texture that makes the images pop out. And Christophe Beck's splendid score adds energy of its own into the mix.
Coming to the performances, Ant-Man and the Wasp benefits from Paul Rudd's natural charisma but it's Evangeline Lilly who steals the show this time in the role of Hope/Wasp. The chemistry between the two still carries a spark but purely on individual inputs, Lilly outshines Rudd by a significant margin. Both Michael Peña & Michael Douglas are more fun in their respective roles this time around but the new characters are no good.
On an overall scale, Ant-Man and the Wasp makes for a sufficiently entertaining action-adventure and is at its best when it isn't trying too hard. A standalone entry for the most part that eventually connects with the heavy conclusion of Infinity War in a shocking mid-credits sequence, Ant-Man and the Wasp does enough to allow the viewers to settle down before things got hot & heavy once again in Avengers Endgame
Set in the aftermath of Captain America: Civil War, the story of Ant-Man and the Wasp finds Scott Lang under house arrest and Dr. Hank Pym & Hope van Dyne in hiding until an urgent mission brings them together once again as the trio attempt to unlock the secrets of quantum realm before it's too late, while being pursued by both cops & new enemies.
Directed by Peyton Reed, the sequel offers him more freedom & bigger canvas to showcase his vision & creativity yet he fails to makes the most of the opportunity and delivers a story that's pretty much on same level as its predecessor. Its action scenes do get an upgrade but the plot is quite simple and is missing the character complexity that drives most sequels.
On the plus side, the film retains the humour of the original while the continuous banter & brisk pacing make sure that its 118 mins runtime never becomes a chore. The swift, kinetic operation of camera infuses an energy to its moments of action on both macro & micro levels while the bright colour tones add a rich texture that makes the images pop out. And Christophe Beck's splendid score adds energy of its own into the mix.
Coming to the performances, Ant-Man and the Wasp benefits from Paul Rudd's natural charisma but it's Evangeline Lilly who steals the show this time in the role of Hope/Wasp. The chemistry between the two still carries a spark but purely on individual inputs, Lilly outshines Rudd by a significant margin. Both Michael Peña & Michael Douglas are more fun in their respective roles this time around but the new characters are no good.
On an overall scale, Ant-Man and the Wasp makes for a sufficiently entertaining action-adventure and is at its best when it isn't trying too hard. A standalone entry for the most part that eventually connects with the heavy conclusion of Infinity War in a shocking mid-credits sequence, Ant-Man and the Wasp does enough to allow the viewers to settle down before things got hot & heavy once again in Avengers Endgame
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Gods Of Egypt (2016) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
God Awful
Those of you who keep up to date with the goings on in the film world may be thinking Gods of Egypt was released way back in February; and you’d be right for thinking that.
The film, directed by Alex Proyas (I, Robot, Knowing) performed so poorly in America at the start of the year that its UK release was scrapped, until now. But is the resulting film as bad as its figures would suggest? Or are we looking at a future cult classic?
Good god no. From shocking dialogue to laughable special effects; Gods of Egypt is a dreadful dirge of a movie with practically no saving graces. It’s just that bad.
The survival of mankind hangs in the balance when Set (Gerard Butler), the merciless god of darkness, usurps Egypt’s throne and plunges the empire into chaos. Hoping to save the world and rescue his true love, a defiant mortal named Bek (Brenton Thwaites) forms an alliance with the powerful god Horus (Nikolaj Coster-Waldau) to stop Set before he destroys everything.
Thankfully, the plot itself isn’t too bad and has a vaguely interesting premise. The problem is how it is executed. Alex Proyas takes our protagonists on a rollercoaster ride of bland set pieces, populated by cardboard enemies and special effects that manage to look expensive and awful at the same time.
Gold, blood red, sparkling granite and deep, rich blacks all combine for a nauseating colour palate, only worsened by the cinematography. No shot is lingered on for any great amount of time – it’s like Alex Proyas was too terrified of allowing his audience to see the mess up close, shifting from frame to frame every few seconds.
Elsewhere, the acting is fairly inconsistent. Gerard Butler yet again channels his character from 300, while newcomer Brenton Thwaites looks po-faced as he spouts complete and utter drivel, a departure from his promising turn in 2013’s The Giver. The painful attempts at comedy fall flat on every single occasion and ensure no cast member leaves with their dignity intact.
2016 has thrown up some pretty bad films. London Has Fallen, Through the Looking Glass and Zoolander 2 spring immediately to mind, but this manages to outdo them by a country mile.
Overall, Gods of Egypt leaves you with more questions than it answers. Why is the Egyptian god of darkness Scottish? Why is it over two hours long? What on earth was Summit Entertainment thinking pouring $140million into this thing?
There is some good news at the end of this rather murky rainbow however. Your question as to whether you should go and see it may well be the only question that can be answered.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/06/18/god-awful-gods-of-egypt-review/
The film, directed by Alex Proyas (I, Robot, Knowing) performed so poorly in America at the start of the year that its UK release was scrapped, until now. But is the resulting film as bad as its figures would suggest? Or are we looking at a future cult classic?
Good god no. From shocking dialogue to laughable special effects; Gods of Egypt is a dreadful dirge of a movie with practically no saving graces. It’s just that bad.
The survival of mankind hangs in the balance when Set (Gerard Butler), the merciless god of darkness, usurps Egypt’s throne and plunges the empire into chaos. Hoping to save the world and rescue his true love, a defiant mortal named Bek (Brenton Thwaites) forms an alliance with the powerful god Horus (Nikolaj Coster-Waldau) to stop Set before he destroys everything.
Thankfully, the plot itself isn’t too bad and has a vaguely interesting premise. The problem is how it is executed. Alex Proyas takes our protagonists on a rollercoaster ride of bland set pieces, populated by cardboard enemies and special effects that manage to look expensive and awful at the same time.
Gold, blood red, sparkling granite and deep, rich blacks all combine for a nauseating colour palate, only worsened by the cinematography. No shot is lingered on for any great amount of time – it’s like Alex Proyas was too terrified of allowing his audience to see the mess up close, shifting from frame to frame every few seconds.
Elsewhere, the acting is fairly inconsistent. Gerard Butler yet again channels his character from 300, while newcomer Brenton Thwaites looks po-faced as he spouts complete and utter drivel, a departure from his promising turn in 2013’s The Giver. The painful attempts at comedy fall flat on every single occasion and ensure no cast member leaves with their dignity intact.
2016 has thrown up some pretty bad films. London Has Fallen, Through the Looking Glass and Zoolander 2 spring immediately to mind, but this manages to outdo them by a country mile.
Overall, Gods of Egypt leaves you with more questions than it answers. Why is the Egyptian god of darkness Scottish? Why is it over two hours long? What on earth was Summit Entertainment thinking pouring $140million into this thing?
There is some good news at the end of this rather murky rainbow however. Your question as to whether you should go and see it may well be the only question that can be answered.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/06/18/god-awful-gods-of-egypt-review/
theVman (16 KP) rated Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018) in Movies
Jun 1, 2018 (Updated Jun 1, 2018)
Supporting Actors (1 more)
Director manged to pull together a watchable film
The two leads actors (1 more)
Clunky Script
A Good Lead Casting is Far Far Away
Its not The Last Jedi bad, but it nowhere close to being The Force Awakens good. Its main problem being that its leading actors struggle to bring a shred of charisma to the screen. Luckily the supporting cast did their job brilliantly and its the support that the film so desperately needed. Much like Rouge One did, Solo director Ron Howard delivers a very different looking Star Wars story and that is made very clear from the first shot. Visually, Solo invokes it inner Ridley Scott, and uses a very mixed bag in the use of it colour and lighting palettes that in any other movie might feel as if its been jigsawed together by three different directors. Somehow Solo has made this work to its advantage and by offering us answers to the key questions we might have about Hans Solo past “How did he meet Chewy?” and “How did he get the Millennium Falcon?” we can get through a very clunky and disjointed script with the end result being something watchable – just.
I cant shake the fact that i thought Alden Ehrenreich, facially, looks alot more like a young Jack Back than Harrison Ford. In fairness every now and again Alden captures a small something that made Star Wars fans fall in love with Hans Solo in the first place, but he mainly offers an uneven performance that made me forget that i was supposed to be watching a younger version of the charming rouge. Emilia Clarkes portrayal as the love interest, was as emotional barren as the plot offered through out the entire first act of the film, and combined, almost destroys the audiences ability to invest in the rest of the film at all.
However, the second act brings the arrival of Donald Glover pretty much nailing his role as a younger Lando Carlrissian, unfortunately the script makes this Lando feel like a bit of a character of obligation as oppose to a character of substance and necessity. The action scenes pick up, the usual special effects and musical score make things a little more “Star Wars-y” and the film becomes way more enjoyable. Knowing that these are its strengths, the film over indulges in them way to much, leading to lengthy action scenes over staying their welcome and forgetting to develop the subplots.
After an action heavy middle, the script tries do too much in the final act to reclaim its grasp on a story leading to a very laborious and tedious climax.
I cant shake the fact that i thought Alden Ehrenreich, facially, looks alot more like a young Jack Back than Harrison Ford. In fairness every now and again Alden captures a small something that made Star Wars fans fall in love with Hans Solo in the first place, but he mainly offers an uneven performance that made me forget that i was supposed to be watching a younger version of the charming rouge. Emilia Clarkes portrayal as the love interest, was as emotional barren as the plot offered through out the entire first act of the film, and combined, almost destroys the audiences ability to invest in the rest of the film at all.
However, the second act brings the arrival of Donald Glover pretty much nailing his role as a younger Lando Carlrissian, unfortunately the script makes this Lando feel like a bit of a character of obligation as oppose to a character of substance and necessity. The action scenes pick up, the usual special effects and musical score make things a little more “Star Wars-y” and the film becomes way more enjoyable. Knowing that these are its strengths, the film over indulges in them way to much, leading to lengthy action scenes over staying their welcome and forgetting to develop the subplots.
After an action heavy middle, the script tries do too much in the final act to reclaim its grasp on a story leading to a very laborious and tedious climax.
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</i>
“Effortless inspiration for a happier life.” It has been scientifically proven that gratitude can be beneficial to both mental and physical wellbeing. It is also acknowledged that being thankful is difficult for many people due to negative circumstances or pessimistic personalities. <i>Gratitude</i> is a little, hardback book by writer and graphic designer, Dani DiPirro, whose purpose is to encourage the reader to show and feel more gratitude in their lives. In a way, this is a self-help book.
Using quotes, written insights and activity suggestions, DiPirro guides the reader through a number of situations in which one can be grateful. The author’s insights are sensitive but to the point, suggesting that everyone faces these problems, and does not isolate individuals. The quotes help to emphasise the points she makes and the activities are simple and relevant.
The activities themselves are nothing to be afraid of; they are not strenuous or difficult, they merely require you to think or complete a task that does not require you to go out of your way: “ Reflect on the last time you experienced compassion or forgiveness.”
The book itself is simply yet beautifully designed. The red colour theme makes it feel bright and positive; however will be more attractive to women than it would be to men. The print is large, clear and easy to read; suitable for all ages and backgrounds.
Although roughly 130 pages, it only takes ten minutes to read from cover to cover. However, this is not the intention of the author. To get the most out of the book, each section/task should be tackled individually in order to experience the outcome you are hoping for: feeling a sense of gratitude. This is a book that you can return to time and time again, whether you feel motivated or need a little pick me up.
At the back of the book DiPirro has provided lists of top ten ways to be grateful in different environments. These are useful for when you are experiencing problems in the home, or at work, and need help stepping back and seeing the bigger picture.
Overall, <i>Gratitude</i> is a lovely, inexpensive guide to help people gain a more positive outlook on life. There are also other books in this series that focus on different areas of life that people struggle with; e.g. forgiveness and living in the moment. <i>Gratitude</i> is the ideal book to give as a gift to a loved one, or even to keep on your own bookshelf or bedside table, accessible when needed.
“Effortless inspiration for a happier life.” It has been scientifically proven that gratitude can be beneficial to both mental and physical wellbeing. It is also acknowledged that being thankful is difficult for many people due to negative circumstances or pessimistic personalities. <i>Gratitude</i> is a little, hardback book by writer and graphic designer, Dani DiPirro, whose purpose is to encourage the reader to show and feel more gratitude in their lives. In a way, this is a self-help book.
Using quotes, written insights and activity suggestions, DiPirro guides the reader through a number of situations in which one can be grateful. The author’s insights are sensitive but to the point, suggesting that everyone faces these problems, and does not isolate individuals. The quotes help to emphasise the points she makes and the activities are simple and relevant.
The activities themselves are nothing to be afraid of; they are not strenuous or difficult, they merely require you to think or complete a task that does not require you to go out of your way: “ Reflect on the last time you experienced compassion or forgiveness.”
The book itself is simply yet beautifully designed. The red colour theme makes it feel bright and positive; however will be more attractive to women than it would be to men. The print is large, clear and easy to read; suitable for all ages and backgrounds.
Although roughly 130 pages, it only takes ten minutes to read from cover to cover. However, this is not the intention of the author. To get the most out of the book, each section/task should be tackled individually in order to experience the outcome you are hoping for: feeling a sense of gratitude. This is a book that you can return to time and time again, whether you feel motivated or need a little pick me up.
At the back of the book DiPirro has provided lists of top ten ways to be grateful in different environments. These are useful for when you are experiencing problems in the home, or at work, and need help stepping back and seeing the bigger picture.
Overall, <i>Gratitude</i> is a lovely, inexpensive guide to help people gain a more positive outlook on life. There are also other books in this series that focus on different areas of life that people struggle with; e.g. forgiveness and living in the moment. <i>Gratitude</i> is the ideal book to give as a gift to a loved one, or even to keep on your own bookshelf or bedside table, accessible when needed.