Search
Search results
Jaipur
Games
8.7
Rate It
App
A Spiel des Jahres Recommended game, Jaipur is one of the most most well-loved 2-player tabletop...
Boardgames BoardgameApps Greatgames 2playerGames
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Give Me Your Hand in Books
Mar 10, 2019
Dark, intense, and compelling psychological thriller
Kit Owens is surviving high school but not living up to her true potential when Diane Fleming arrives at her school. Diane awakens a fire in Kit and the two form an unlikely friendship that propels Kit to academic success in her senior year. She and Diane study together and push each other to reach to be the best. Kit can't help but feel bad for her friend, who lives with her grandfather after the death of her dad. But all that changes when Diane shares an explosive secret with Kit, one that changes the way she views Diane and basically ends their friendship. Ten years later, Kit has tried to put Diane (and her secret) behind her. She's working in the lab of a female scientist, Dr. Severin, whom she's idolized for years--a woman Diane first helped introduce her to. But when Dr. Severin earns a prestigious grant and Kit learns that Diane is suddenly in the running for one of the coveted spots to work with the Doctor on the research, the past comes rushing back. Soon Diane and Kit find themselves over their head, with secrets and horror lurking around every corner.
So, I wasn't sure I was going to enjoy this one as I started it, but it grew on me. It's not really a pleasant read, at all, and none of the characters are ones you'll really love, but it's very compelling and there's a slow, foreboding creepiness that keeps you reading. I read this one quickly, as it's dark, twisty, and intense and very easy-to-read (as in, a page-turner, not the subject matter).
"My mom always say, you don't have a self until you have a secret." ~Diane
The novel flips between the "then" and "now" format, with Kit narrating to us. It's a female-centered book, and it easily depicts women's uphill battle in the workplace. It also shows the complicated feelings of our female characters: Kit has a lot of thoughts. Her struggle from a poor high school student to doctor is a fascinating one, even if I found her hard to empathize with. You won't necessarily agree with a lot of these characters' (sometimes outlandish) choices, but you'll find them oddly fascinating. I enjoyed how the novel delved into the darkness of friendship--and some of the competition that can come with it. Diane and Kit's relationship is dark and intense, as is the entire novel, really. The secrets that layer this book unravel slowly and eerily, and it really does keep you reading.
I especially thought this one was redeemed or bolstered by its ending; often a thriller is so good and then deflates at the end, but I actually thought this one got a little better at the end. The ending is really well-done, and I didn't feel let down whatsoever.
Overall, this is a dark, intense, and compelling psychological thriller. It's not exactly packed with loveable characters, but they are flawed, interesting, and--at times--quite creepy. You'll be drawn in by its twisty plot and complicated portrayal of friendship and secrets.
So, I wasn't sure I was going to enjoy this one as I started it, but it grew on me. It's not really a pleasant read, at all, and none of the characters are ones you'll really love, but it's very compelling and there's a slow, foreboding creepiness that keeps you reading. I read this one quickly, as it's dark, twisty, and intense and very easy-to-read (as in, a page-turner, not the subject matter).
"My mom always say, you don't have a self until you have a secret." ~Diane
The novel flips between the "then" and "now" format, with Kit narrating to us. It's a female-centered book, and it easily depicts women's uphill battle in the workplace. It also shows the complicated feelings of our female characters: Kit has a lot of thoughts. Her struggle from a poor high school student to doctor is a fascinating one, even if I found her hard to empathize with. You won't necessarily agree with a lot of these characters' (sometimes outlandish) choices, but you'll find them oddly fascinating. I enjoyed how the novel delved into the darkness of friendship--and some of the competition that can come with it. Diane and Kit's relationship is dark and intense, as is the entire novel, really. The secrets that layer this book unravel slowly and eerily, and it really does keep you reading.
I especially thought this one was redeemed or bolstered by its ending; often a thriller is so good and then deflates at the end, but I actually thought this one got a little better at the end. The ending is really well-done, and I didn't feel let down whatsoever.
Overall, this is a dark, intense, and compelling psychological thriller. It's not exactly packed with loveable characters, but they are flawed, interesting, and--at times--quite creepy. You'll be drawn in by its twisty plot and complicated portrayal of friendship and secrets.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Tear Me Apart in Books
Mar 11, 2019
Quick, engaging read
Mindy Wright--an up and coming competitive teenage skier-- breaks her leg in competition. During surgery, doctors discover that Mindy is sick: she has an aggressive form of leukemia and needs a stem cell transplant. But when her family is tested, it is discovered that Mindy's parents are not her biological parents. What does this mean? Was she switched at birth, or did something more dark and dramatic happen? At the core, Mindy needs to live. But beyond that, what are the ramifications for the Wright family? What secrets will be revealed and uncovered while trying to save their precious daughter?
This was a dramatic and interesting story that grabbed me from the beginning. The first portion is told from the perspective of three women: Mindy, age 17; her mother, Lauren; and Lauren's sister, Juliet, who actually works as a scientist in a DNA crime lab. This gives Juliet early and easy access to DNA samples relating to Mindy and the "case" as it progresses on. We also get excerpts of letters that appear to be from or relating to a psychiatric hospital in the early 1990s. All of this makes for an interesting and compelling format to our story, with a slow and steady reveal of strange information that you know does not add up: a twisted web of secrets and lies. We are immediately left wondering what happened with Mindy--how is she not Lauren's daughter? What is going on?
I do not want to go into too much detail and ruin much of the plot, but I found this one very intriguing, as I was wondering where the story would go. I might have been a little slow on the uptake as to who was Mindy's real mother, but I did find it exciting to put all the pieces together. I really liked the characters of Mindy and Juliet and a few others who were introduced later on (the story is told in various parts, so you get some different narrators, too).
In true Ellison fashion, there's some great drama and a few good "whoa" moments, as well. When I first started the book, I hadn't refreshed myself on the description, and I was a little worried that this would be more of a family drama than a mystery, but have no fear--while this family has more than their share of drama, there's a great mystery/thriller aspect as well. In fact, the novel can get downright creepy at times, with a villain who can give you the chills.
Overall, I thought this was another winner from Ms. Ellison. It's a quick, engaging read with interesting characters and a plot that encourages you to put the pieces together. She's quickly becoming a go-to author of mine. I'm actually chasing down her Taylor Jackson series on Paperbackswap, because I want to read more of her books! If you enjoy a dramatic, quick-moving thriller, I highly recommend this one!
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review (thank you!).
This was a dramatic and interesting story that grabbed me from the beginning. The first portion is told from the perspective of three women: Mindy, age 17; her mother, Lauren; and Lauren's sister, Juliet, who actually works as a scientist in a DNA crime lab. This gives Juliet early and easy access to DNA samples relating to Mindy and the "case" as it progresses on. We also get excerpts of letters that appear to be from or relating to a psychiatric hospital in the early 1990s. All of this makes for an interesting and compelling format to our story, with a slow and steady reveal of strange information that you know does not add up: a twisted web of secrets and lies. We are immediately left wondering what happened with Mindy--how is she not Lauren's daughter? What is going on?
I do not want to go into too much detail and ruin much of the plot, but I found this one very intriguing, as I was wondering where the story would go. I might have been a little slow on the uptake as to who was Mindy's real mother, but I did find it exciting to put all the pieces together. I really liked the characters of Mindy and Juliet and a few others who were introduced later on (the story is told in various parts, so you get some different narrators, too).
In true Ellison fashion, there's some great drama and a few good "whoa" moments, as well. When I first started the book, I hadn't refreshed myself on the description, and I was a little worried that this would be more of a family drama than a mystery, but have no fear--while this family has more than their share of drama, there's a great mystery/thriller aspect as well. In fact, the novel can get downright creepy at times, with a villain who can give you the chills.
Overall, I thought this was another winner from Ms. Ellison. It's a quick, engaging read with interesting characters and a plot that encourages you to put the pieces together. She's quickly becoming a go-to author of mine. I'm actually chasing down her Taylor Jackson series on Paperbackswap, because I want to read more of her books! If you enjoy a dramatic, quick-moving thriller, I highly recommend this one!
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review (thank you!).
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Sing (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Fun for all the family
Talking animated animals are big business over in Hollywood. After all, Disney’s Zootopia was one of only a handful of films to gross over $1billion last year. Its competitor, The Secret Life of Pets performed well but wasn’t critically successful.
Here, the company behind that second film, Illumination Entertainment, try to get the genre right with Sing. But are we looking at the next superstar of the animated genre?
Koala Buster Moon (Matthew McConaughey) presides over a once-grand theatre that has recently fallen on hard times. An eternal optimist, he loves his work enormously and will do anything to preserve it. Facing the crumbling of his life’s ambition, he takes one final chance to restore his fading jewel to its former glory by producing a singing competition, with eternal glory facing the winner.
There’s an impressive roster of talent on offer in Sing, something that parents will no doubt enjoy slightly more than the offspring they no doubt have to bring with them. With Matthew McConaughey taking the lead role, Taron Egerton, Reese Witherspoon, Scarlett Johansson and Seth McFarlane to name a few all lend their voices. There’s even a role for Brit-favourite Jennifer Saunders as a grumpy old sheep, it’s not ground-breaking, but it’s immensely likeable stuff.
Illumination Entertainment has brought us the brilliant Despicable Me franchise as well as its ridiculously successful spin-off Minions, but they’ve been criticised heavily for relying too much on the funny yellow critters to cash their paycheques. Thankfully, bar the now infamous company logo, the tic-tac shaped creatures are nowhere to be found and Sing is a vastly entertaining movie, in spite of their absence.
Whilst it’s true that the animation lacks the depth or fluidity of offerings from Pixar, Disney, and Dreamworks, there is a certain charm to its simplistic colour palate that children will find endearing. The plot is woefully unoriginal but director Garth Jennings, in his first animated feature, utilises that well, cleverly referencing the many talent shows that feature on our television screens – including those we are sick of.
There are some moral lessons in here too. Tori Kelly’s stage-shy elephant Meena has a great story arc that sees her face her fears and embrace her talents, whilst Taron Egerton’s gorilla Johnny stands up to his criminal father and learns that a life of crime doesn’t always pay.
In fact, only Seth MacFarlane’s obnoxious mouse Mike fails to make an impact on the plot, with his berating of an asthmatic sheep in the cleverly produced opening sequence coming across a little crude in comparison to the rest of the script.
Overall, Sing is a great film to hold the kid’s attention as we approach the half-term holidays. It would be easy to criticise it for lacking an original story, but there’s more to offer here than a half-baked plot. It’s beautifully voiced and reasonably well animated. Illumination Entertainment may not have topped Zootopia, but this is their best offering outside of Despicable Me by a country mile.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/01/28/fun-for-all-the-family-sing-review/
Here, the company behind that second film, Illumination Entertainment, try to get the genre right with Sing. But are we looking at the next superstar of the animated genre?
Koala Buster Moon (Matthew McConaughey) presides over a once-grand theatre that has recently fallen on hard times. An eternal optimist, he loves his work enormously and will do anything to preserve it. Facing the crumbling of his life’s ambition, he takes one final chance to restore his fading jewel to its former glory by producing a singing competition, with eternal glory facing the winner.
There’s an impressive roster of talent on offer in Sing, something that parents will no doubt enjoy slightly more than the offspring they no doubt have to bring with them. With Matthew McConaughey taking the lead role, Taron Egerton, Reese Witherspoon, Scarlett Johansson and Seth McFarlane to name a few all lend their voices. There’s even a role for Brit-favourite Jennifer Saunders as a grumpy old sheep, it’s not ground-breaking, but it’s immensely likeable stuff.
Illumination Entertainment has brought us the brilliant Despicable Me franchise as well as its ridiculously successful spin-off Minions, but they’ve been criticised heavily for relying too much on the funny yellow critters to cash their paycheques. Thankfully, bar the now infamous company logo, the tic-tac shaped creatures are nowhere to be found and Sing is a vastly entertaining movie, in spite of their absence.
Whilst it’s true that the animation lacks the depth or fluidity of offerings from Pixar, Disney, and Dreamworks, there is a certain charm to its simplistic colour palate that children will find endearing. The plot is woefully unoriginal but director Garth Jennings, in his first animated feature, utilises that well, cleverly referencing the many talent shows that feature on our television screens – including those we are sick of.
There are some moral lessons in here too. Tori Kelly’s stage-shy elephant Meena has a great story arc that sees her face her fears and embrace her talents, whilst Taron Egerton’s gorilla Johnny stands up to his criminal father and learns that a life of crime doesn’t always pay.
In fact, only Seth MacFarlane’s obnoxious mouse Mike fails to make an impact on the plot, with his berating of an asthmatic sheep in the cleverly produced opening sequence coming across a little crude in comparison to the rest of the script.
Overall, Sing is a great film to hold the kid’s attention as we approach the half-term holidays. It would be easy to criticise it for lacking an original story, but there’s more to offer here than a half-baked plot. It’s beautifully voiced and reasonably well animated. Illumination Entertainment may not have topped Zootopia, but this is their best offering outside of Despicable Me by a country mile.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/01/28/fun-for-all-the-family-sing-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Legend of Tarzan (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
CPR Needed
As tends to be the case with Hollywood, studios pay very close attention to their rivals release schedules, eyeing up potential competition to pit their films against, maxing box-office returns in the process.
And when Disney announced they were rebooting The Jungle Book in March this year, Warner Bros quickly responded with another jungle-themed film; The Legend of Tarzan. But does this interpretation on the classic character swing or fall?
It’s been nearly a decade since Tarzan (Alexander Skarsgård), aka John Clayton III, left Africa to live in Victorian England with his wife Jane (Margot Robbie). Danger lurks on the horizon as Leon Rom (Christoph Waltz), a treacherous envoy for King Leopold, devises a scheme that lures the couple and friend George Williams (Samuel L Jackson) to the Congo. Rom plans to capture Tarzan and deliver him to an old enemy in exchange for diamonds. When Jane becomes a pawn in his devious plot, Tarzan must return to the jungle to save the woman he loves.
Directed by David Yates (Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows), Legend of Tarzan features committed performances from its lead cast, immersive scenery and impressive special effects, but all of the glitz can’t save a film that plods along at a dreadful pace. Not since Peter Jackson’s King Kong has there been a movie that wastes so much of its opening act.
Alexander Skarsgård is likeable and commanding as the titular character, but lacks enough acting prowess to tackle the deeper, more emotional side that writers Adam Cozad and Craig Brewer have brought to the table here. Therefore, the scenes featuring a solo Tarzan suffer somewhat and Samuel L Jackson feels wasted in a poorly written and half-hearted role.
It is in Margot Robbie and Christoph Waltz that we find the film’s saving graces. Their characters leap off the screen with Waltz in particular being a highlight throughout. It’s unfortunate that one of our greatest living actors is lambasted with poor dialogue however, though the script just about keeps him afloat.
David Yates brings a similar filming style here to that of his foray into Harry Potter. The action is confidently filmed, but he avoids the use of shaky-cam that many directors seem to find appealing nowadays. The CGI is on the whole very good, especially in the finale which is breath-taking to watch.
It’s just a shame the rest of the film is such a drag. The first hour is incredibly poorly paced with very brief, albeit well-filmed, action sequences not doing enough to brighten Legend of Tarzan up. Elsewhere, the use of flashbacks is at first a decent way of giving the audience some exposition, but after the tenth one, they’re a nuisance.
Overall, The Legend of Tarzan does a lot more with its iconic character than other films have done, but that doesn’t excuse its poor pacing. Thankfully, the exciting finale lifts the final act above the standard of the first hour, and commanding performances from all the cast sustain interest just about enough to see it through to the end.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/07/07/cpr-needed-the-legend-of-tarzan-review/
And when Disney announced they were rebooting The Jungle Book in March this year, Warner Bros quickly responded with another jungle-themed film; The Legend of Tarzan. But does this interpretation on the classic character swing or fall?
It’s been nearly a decade since Tarzan (Alexander Skarsgård), aka John Clayton III, left Africa to live in Victorian England with his wife Jane (Margot Robbie). Danger lurks on the horizon as Leon Rom (Christoph Waltz), a treacherous envoy for King Leopold, devises a scheme that lures the couple and friend George Williams (Samuel L Jackson) to the Congo. Rom plans to capture Tarzan and deliver him to an old enemy in exchange for diamonds. When Jane becomes a pawn in his devious plot, Tarzan must return to the jungle to save the woman he loves.
Directed by David Yates (Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows), Legend of Tarzan features committed performances from its lead cast, immersive scenery and impressive special effects, but all of the glitz can’t save a film that plods along at a dreadful pace. Not since Peter Jackson’s King Kong has there been a movie that wastes so much of its opening act.
Alexander Skarsgård is likeable and commanding as the titular character, but lacks enough acting prowess to tackle the deeper, more emotional side that writers Adam Cozad and Craig Brewer have brought to the table here. Therefore, the scenes featuring a solo Tarzan suffer somewhat and Samuel L Jackson feels wasted in a poorly written and half-hearted role.
It is in Margot Robbie and Christoph Waltz that we find the film’s saving graces. Their characters leap off the screen with Waltz in particular being a highlight throughout. It’s unfortunate that one of our greatest living actors is lambasted with poor dialogue however, though the script just about keeps him afloat.
David Yates brings a similar filming style here to that of his foray into Harry Potter. The action is confidently filmed, but he avoids the use of shaky-cam that many directors seem to find appealing nowadays. The CGI is on the whole very good, especially in the finale which is breath-taking to watch.
It’s just a shame the rest of the film is such a drag. The first hour is incredibly poorly paced with very brief, albeit well-filmed, action sequences not doing enough to brighten Legend of Tarzan up. Elsewhere, the use of flashbacks is at first a decent way of giving the audience some exposition, but after the tenth one, they’re a nuisance.
Overall, The Legend of Tarzan does a lot more with its iconic character than other films have done, but that doesn’t excuse its poor pacing. Thankfully, the exciting finale lifts the final act above the standard of the first hour, and commanding performances from all the cast sustain interest just about enough to see it through to the end.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/07/07/cpr-needed-the-legend-of-tarzan-review/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated the PlayStation 4 version of Atari Flashback Classics Volume 1 in Video Games
Jun 19, 2019
As a child I fondly remember going to Arcades and how exciting it was to see new games arrive. IN the pre-Internet days, you would only learn of new games through word of mouth, a magazine article, or seeing them in an arcade, so naturally gamers would check out a few locales on a regular basis to help ensure that they were up to date with all of the gaming options available to them.
Atari established itself early and often as one of the leading companies for Arcade Games and classics such as Asteroids, Centipede, Missile, Command, Tempest, and countless others always drew eager gamers who would place their quarters down to experience what the company had to offer.
In time Atari released the Atari 2600 system which allowed gamers to play 100s of titles at home even though the graphics and gameplay were far from the standards of the Arcade Games and were comically primitive by today’s gaming standards.
Atari released subsequent systems but never gained the impact on the market that their original system did largely due to increased competition, the decline of the Arcades, and the rise of PC gaming, but many fondly remember that era of gaming well and the classics that installed an early love of gaming in us.
Thankfully a good dose of nostalgia and fun has arrived for the Nintendo Switch in the form of the Atari Flashback Classics Collection. While there have been other collections of classic Atari games before, this collection offers 150 games taken from the best of their Arcade, Atari 2600, and Atari 5200 catalogs. Being able to play Arcade versions of beloved classics like Lunar Lander and the blister inducing Trac-Ball games like Football and Baseball is a nostalgic trip down memory lane.
The games are faithfully captured but do require some patience as in the mobile version; the gaming screen is often only a portion of the screen leaving gaps on either side. Some games as well also must be played vertically which requires some adjustments.
The controls can take some getting used to as some are too responsive which makes controlling the games an exercise in patience and frustration. It does help to change the sensitivity but I can see how some players will not want to do this for each game they encounter issues with.
With a collection this large some titles did not make the cut as I would have loved to have seen Battlezone and Kangaroo be included as I think gamers should truly be able to have every Atari Arcade game in one collection but of course there are often numerous reasons behind their absence so we can only hope that the collection will prove popular enough to spawn a second collection down the road.
For now the Atari Flashback Collection offers an impressive collection of beloved and obscure Atari games from the days of old which is a must-own for fans of that era and those who love retro gaming.
http://sknr.net/2019/01/05/atari-flashback-classics/
Atari established itself early and often as one of the leading companies for Arcade Games and classics such as Asteroids, Centipede, Missile, Command, Tempest, and countless others always drew eager gamers who would place their quarters down to experience what the company had to offer.
In time Atari released the Atari 2600 system which allowed gamers to play 100s of titles at home even though the graphics and gameplay were far from the standards of the Arcade Games and were comically primitive by today’s gaming standards.
Atari released subsequent systems but never gained the impact on the market that their original system did largely due to increased competition, the decline of the Arcades, and the rise of PC gaming, but many fondly remember that era of gaming well and the classics that installed an early love of gaming in us.
Thankfully a good dose of nostalgia and fun has arrived for the Nintendo Switch in the form of the Atari Flashback Classics Collection. While there have been other collections of classic Atari games before, this collection offers 150 games taken from the best of their Arcade, Atari 2600, and Atari 5200 catalogs. Being able to play Arcade versions of beloved classics like Lunar Lander and the blister inducing Trac-Ball games like Football and Baseball is a nostalgic trip down memory lane.
The games are faithfully captured but do require some patience as in the mobile version; the gaming screen is often only a portion of the screen leaving gaps on either side. Some games as well also must be played vertically which requires some adjustments.
The controls can take some getting used to as some are too responsive which makes controlling the games an exercise in patience and frustration. It does help to change the sensitivity but I can see how some players will not want to do this for each game they encounter issues with.
With a collection this large some titles did not make the cut as I would have loved to have seen Battlezone and Kangaroo be included as I think gamers should truly be able to have every Atari Arcade game in one collection but of course there are often numerous reasons behind their absence so we can only hope that the collection will prove popular enough to spawn a second collection down the road.
For now the Atari Flashback Collection offers an impressive collection of beloved and obscure Atari games from the days of old which is a must-own for fans of that era and those who love retro gaming.
http://sknr.net/2019/01/05/atari-flashback-classics/
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated The Favourite (2018) in Movies
Jan 18, 2019 (Updated Jan 18, 2019)
Fantastic script (3 more)
Brilliant performances
Clever cinematography
Insanely detailed set design
Strange But Brilliant
To be honest, I am not a huge fan of Yorgos Lanthimos' other movies, I also have a hatred for most period pieces. I am however a huge fan of Olivia Colman and it was her that swayed me to go and see this movie and I am very glad that I did.
Colman absolutely nails her role as a grief stricken, overly dramatic, short tempered Queen Anne. Her acting ability is diverse enough that she can take you from a side splitting remark one moment to a genuinely saddening comment the next and do it flawlessly and convincingly. Rachel Weisz is also pretty good here as Queen Anne's original favourite lady, Anne may be the Queen, but it is Lady Marlborough who is really running the show.
The biggest surpise for me was Emma Stone's performance. I don't hate Emma Stone, but I do feel like she plays the same goofy studenty American girl in everything that she is in, but here she is actually acting and her English accent was brilliant throughout the whole movie. It proves how much a good director is able to get out of their actors performance-wise.
The other main star here is the script. It is jam packed with brilliantly crass lines that are fired out so quickly and with such venom from the respective characters that you really feel the words being said. It is one of the best written scripts I have seen in a film in a while.
I'm not normally one to gush about set design, but my God... This movie goes all out with it's backdrops. I know that for the exterior shots, they shot on location at real palaces and castles and used mostly natural lighting at least for the daytime scenes. While these scenes are impressive, it is the interior scenes that are really mesmerising. The level of detail on the background elements in this movie is insane and anywhere that you look onscreen, there is something new and interesting to catch your eye.
The other great thing about this movie, is that even if you don't care about the competition for favour that is at the centre of the movie's plot, there is enough going on with the filmmaking itself to keep your attention throughout. The odd looking fish eye lenses that Lanthimos uses and the bizarre shot compositions looking up from waist-height at the actors is as fascinating to look at as it is weird. It gives the movie a unique feel that sets it apart from any other period piece I have seen.
Overall, I got way more out of The Favourite than I expected to going in. The movie is funny, witty and pretty unique. The attention to detail is impressive and the performances are great, with Olivia Colman's alone making the film worth the price of admission. The script is great and the direction is oddly interesting. Do be warned though; this movie is very weird and definitely not your typical period piece movie.
Colman absolutely nails her role as a grief stricken, overly dramatic, short tempered Queen Anne. Her acting ability is diverse enough that she can take you from a side splitting remark one moment to a genuinely saddening comment the next and do it flawlessly and convincingly. Rachel Weisz is also pretty good here as Queen Anne's original favourite lady, Anne may be the Queen, but it is Lady Marlborough who is really running the show.
The biggest surpise for me was Emma Stone's performance. I don't hate Emma Stone, but I do feel like she plays the same goofy studenty American girl in everything that she is in, but here she is actually acting and her English accent was brilliant throughout the whole movie. It proves how much a good director is able to get out of their actors performance-wise.
The other main star here is the script. It is jam packed with brilliantly crass lines that are fired out so quickly and with such venom from the respective characters that you really feel the words being said. It is one of the best written scripts I have seen in a film in a while.
I'm not normally one to gush about set design, but my God... This movie goes all out with it's backdrops. I know that for the exterior shots, they shot on location at real palaces and castles and used mostly natural lighting at least for the daytime scenes. While these scenes are impressive, it is the interior scenes that are really mesmerising. The level of detail on the background elements in this movie is insane and anywhere that you look onscreen, there is something new and interesting to catch your eye.
The other great thing about this movie, is that even if you don't care about the competition for favour that is at the centre of the movie's plot, there is enough going on with the filmmaking itself to keep your attention throughout. The odd looking fish eye lenses that Lanthimos uses and the bizarre shot compositions looking up from waist-height at the actors is as fascinating to look at as it is weird. It gives the movie a unique feel that sets it apart from any other period piece I have seen.
Overall, I got way more out of The Favourite than I expected to going in. The movie is funny, witty and pretty unique. The attention to detail is impressive and the performances are great, with Olivia Colman's alone making the film worth the price of admission. The script is great and the direction is oddly interesting. Do be warned though; this movie is very weird and definitely not your typical period piece movie.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Pixels (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
The new Sony film ‘Pixels’, was written by Tim Herlihy, Adam Sandler and Timothy Dowling. It stars Adam Sandler (Sam Brenner), Peter Dinklage (Eddie ‘The Fire Blaster’), Kevin James (President Will Cooper), Jane Krakowski (the First Lady), and Josh Gad (Ludlow Lamonsoff).
The movie opens with scenes straight out of the 1980’s and shows Sam, Eddie, Will and Ludlow all gathering at the arcade video world championships. The championships are being recorded to send in a time capsule to outer space, hoping to find alien life forms. The competition comes down to Sam and Eddie (who has nick named himself ‘The Fire Blaster’) and Eddie defeats Sam. Sam is crushed.
Fast forward about 30 years and Sam is working as an installation technician, and somehow Will has become the POTUS. Ludlow and Eddie are no where to be seen.
An attack occurs, Ludlow mysteriously appears in Sams van, and Ludlow reveals that the attack was perpetrated not only by aliens, but by 80’s style pixelated arcade aliens, who apparently intercepted our space bound time capsule, interpreted it as a declaration of war (????) and sent back pixelated arcade aliens to destroy us (?!?).
The two childhood friends go to the president with the information, who at first, under the pressure of his advisors, brushes them off.
After another attack occurs, President Will over rides his advisers and enlists Sam and Ludlows help, and also reaches out to The Fire Blaster (currently in prison, and demanding a list of concessions in exchange for his help and expertise.)
The movie didn’t have any dragging points for me, and I did laugh out loud at some portions. My son who is nearly 7 REALLY enjoyed it, and if it had had slightly less obvious (and what felt like marginally unnecessary) curse words I would have liked it better for his age range. There were children even younger than my son in the theatre though, and I found myself cringing at some of the language, and noticed my son looking at me to see if I noticed him noticing that there were ‘bad words’. Since it IS rated PG-13, there’s not a whole lot to be said about it, but it could have been just as good a movie, and therefore enjoyable by a bigger age range, without the cursing.
When I asked him later whether he liked the movie he said he ‘liked it a lot, but it had some bad words’.
Pixels was pretty action packed, and although I found it to be an odd premise for a movie, I did enjoy it. I don’t feel that they made as good a use of the 3D format as they could have. The soundtrack was good. I liked the characters, even though i couldn’t quite make the jump as to ‘why or how’ Will became president, and I had the hardest time dealing with Eddies accent. It just ‘felt off’, most likely because I’ve been watching him most recently on Game of Thrones.
I think kids will enjoy it for the action and parents will like it well enough for the nostalgia factor.
Overall I would give this movie 2.5 out of 5 stars.
The movie opens with scenes straight out of the 1980’s and shows Sam, Eddie, Will and Ludlow all gathering at the arcade video world championships. The championships are being recorded to send in a time capsule to outer space, hoping to find alien life forms. The competition comes down to Sam and Eddie (who has nick named himself ‘The Fire Blaster’) and Eddie defeats Sam. Sam is crushed.
Fast forward about 30 years and Sam is working as an installation technician, and somehow Will has become the POTUS. Ludlow and Eddie are no where to be seen.
An attack occurs, Ludlow mysteriously appears in Sams van, and Ludlow reveals that the attack was perpetrated not only by aliens, but by 80’s style pixelated arcade aliens, who apparently intercepted our space bound time capsule, interpreted it as a declaration of war (????) and sent back pixelated arcade aliens to destroy us (?!?).
The two childhood friends go to the president with the information, who at first, under the pressure of his advisors, brushes them off.
After another attack occurs, President Will over rides his advisers and enlists Sam and Ludlows help, and also reaches out to The Fire Blaster (currently in prison, and demanding a list of concessions in exchange for his help and expertise.)
The movie didn’t have any dragging points for me, and I did laugh out loud at some portions. My son who is nearly 7 REALLY enjoyed it, and if it had had slightly less obvious (and what felt like marginally unnecessary) curse words I would have liked it better for his age range. There were children even younger than my son in the theatre though, and I found myself cringing at some of the language, and noticed my son looking at me to see if I noticed him noticing that there were ‘bad words’. Since it IS rated PG-13, there’s not a whole lot to be said about it, but it could have been just as good a movie, and therefore enjoyable by a bigger age range, without the cursing.
When I asked him later whether he liked the movie he said he ‘liked it a lot, but it had some bad words’.
Pixels was pretty action packed, and although I found it to be an odd premise for a movie, I did enjoy it. I don’t feel that they made as good a use of the 3D format as they could have. The soundtrack was good. I liked the characters, even though i couldn’t quite make the jump as to ‘why or how’ Will became president, and I had the hardest time dealing with Eddies accent. It just ‘felt off’, most likely because I’ve been watching him most recently on Game of Thrones.
I think kids will enjoy it for the action and parents will like it well enough for the nostalgia factor.
Overall I would give this movie 2.5 out of 5 stars.
Cosmic Cabaret
Rosalie Redd, Jayne Fury, C.J. Cade, Kat Vancil, Blaire Edens, Diana Rivis, Tessa McFionn, Dena Garson, Selene Grace Silver, Cailin Briste, Athena Grayson , Jenna Lincoln and Kerry Adrienne
8.0
Rate It
Book
Where Hearts Collide in the Greatest Show in Space Join us aboard Blue Star Line’s crown jewel,...
Science_Fiction Romance Anthology