Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Mank (2020) in Movies
Dec 10, 2020
Cinematography - glorious to look at (1 more)
A fabulous ensemble cast, with Oldham, Seyfried, Arliss and Dance excelling
"Mank" is a biopic slice of the career of Herman Jacob Mankiewicz (Gary Oldman), the Hollywood screenwriter who was the pen behind what is regularly voted by critics as being the greatest movie of all time - "Citizen Kane". "Citizen Kane" was written in 1940 (and released the following year) and much of the action in "Mank" takes place in a retreat in the Mojave desert when Mank, crippled by a full-cast on the leg, has been 'sent' by Orson Welles (Tom Burke) to complete the screenplay without alcohol and other worldly distractions. Helping administer to his writing and care needs are English typist Rita Alexander (Lily Collins) and carer Fraulein Freda (Monika Gossmann). However, although Mank produces brilliant stuff, his speed of progress exasperates his 'minder' and editor John Houseman (Sam Troughton). (Yes, THAT John Houseman, the actor.)
In developing the story, we continuously flash-back six years - - nicely indicated by typed 'script notes' - - to 1934 where Mank is working at MGM studios for Louis B. Mayer (Arliss Howard) and mixing in the circles of millionaire publisher William Randolph Hearst (Charles Dance) and his glamorous young wife, actress Marion Davies (Amanda Seyfried). Allegedly, the "Citizen Kane" script was based on Hearst. But what souring of the relationship could have led to such a stinging betrayal during those six years?
Mank has an embarrassment of acting riches. Mankiewicz is a fascinating character: charismatic, reckless, passionate and the definition of a loose cannon. Basically, a dream for a great actor to portray. And Gary Oldham IS a great actor. After doing Churchill in "Darkest Hour", he here turns in a magnificent performance as the alcoholic writer. Never more so than in a furious tirade at a dinner table late in the film, which will likely be the equivalent to the Churchill "tiger" speech come Oscar time. Surely, there's a Best Actor nomination there?
Equally impressive though are some of the supporting cast.
- Tom Burke - so good as TV's "Strike" - gives a fine impersonation of the great Orson Welles: full of confidence and swagger. It's only a cameo role, but he genuinely 'feels' like the young Welles.
- Amanda Seyfried: It took me almost half of the film to recognize her as Marion Davies, and her performance is pitch perfect - the best of her career in my view, and again Oscar-worthy.
- Arliss Howard for me almost steals the show as the megalomaniac Mayer: his introduction to Mank's brother Joe (Tom Pelphrey) has a memorable "walk with me" walkthrough of the studio with Mayer preaching on the real meaning of MGM and the movies in general. Breathtakingly good.
- But - I said "nearly steals the show".... the guy who made off with it in a swag-bag for me was our own Charles Dance as Hearst. Quietly impressive throughout, he just completely nails it with his "organ-grinder's monkey" speech towards the end of the movie. Probably my favourite monologue of 2020. Chilling. I'd really like to see Dance get a Supporting Actor nomination for this.
The screenplay was originally written by director David Fincher's late father Jack. Jack Fincher died in 2002, and this project has literally been decades in the planning. Mankiewicz has a caustic turn of phrase, and there are laugh-out lines of dialogue scattered throughout the script. "Write hard, aim low" implores Houseman at one point. And my personal favourite: Mank's puncturing of the irony that the Screen Writers Guild has been formed without an apostrophe! A huge LOL!
Aside from the witty dialogue, the script has a nuance to the storytelling that continually surprises. A revelation from Freda about Mank's philanthropic tendencies brings you up short in your face-value impression of his character. And the drivers that engineer the rift between Mankiewicz and Hearst - based around the story of the (fictional) director Shelly Metcalf (Jamie McShane) - are not slapped in your face, but elegantly slipped into your subconscious.
In addition, certain aspects are frustratingly withheld from you. Mank's long-suffering wife (a definition of the phrase) Sara (Tuppence Middleton) only occasionally comes into focus. The only reference to his kids are a crash in the background as they "remodel" the family home. Is the charismatic Mank a faithful husband or a philanderer? Is the relationship with Rita Alexander just professional and platonic (you assume so), or is there more going on? There's a tension there in the storytelling that never quite gets resolved: and that's a good thing.
Mank also has an embarrassment of technical riches. Even from the opening titles, you get the impression that this is a work of genius. All in black and white, and with the appearance of 40's titling, they scroll majestically in the sky and then - after "Charles Dance" - effortlessly scroll down to the desert highway. It's evidence of an attention to detail perhaps forced by lockdown. ("MUM - I'm bored". "Go up to your room and do some more work on that movie then".)
It's deliciously modern, yet retro. I love the fact that the cross-reel "circle" cue-marks appear so prominently... the indicators that the projectionist needs to spin up the next reel. I think they are still used in most modern films, but not as noticeably as in the old films... and this one!
A key contributor to the movie is cinematographer Erik Messerschmidt. Everything looks just BEAUTIFUL, and it is now a big regret that I didn't go to watch this on the big screen after all. Surely there will be a cinematography Oscar nomination for this one. Unbelievably, this is Messerschmidt's debut feature as director of cinematography!
Elsewhere, you can imagine multiple other technical Oscar noms. The tight and effective editing is by Kirk Baxter. And the combination of the glorious production design (Donald Graham Burt) and the costume design (Trish Summerville) make the movie emanate the same nostalgia for Hollywood as did last year's "Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood".... albeit set forty years earlier. Even the music (by the regular team of Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross) might get nominated, since I had to go back and check that it actually HAD music at all: it's subtly unobtrusive and effective.
The only area I had any issue with here was the sound mixing, since I had trouble picking up some of the dialogue.
Although I can gush about this movie as a technical work of art, I'm going to hold off a 10* review on this one. For one reason only. I just didn't feel 100% engaged with the story (at least with a first watch). The illustrious Mrs Movie Man summed it up with the phrase "I just didn't care enough what happened to any of the characters". I think though that this one is sufficiently subtle and cerebral that it deserves another watch.
Will it win Oscars. Yes, for sure. Hell, I would like to put a bet on that "Mank" will top the list of the "most nominations" when they are announced. (Hollywood likes nothing more than a navel-gazing look at its history of course). And an obvious nomination here will be David Fincher for Best Director. But, for me, this falls into a similar bucket as that other black and white multi-Oscar winner of two year's ago "Roma". It's glorious to look at; brilliantly directed; but not a movie I would choose to readily reach for to repeatedly watch again.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/12/10/mank-divines-for-oscar-gold-in-a-sea-of-pyrites/. Thanks.)
In developing the story, we continuously flash-back six years - - nicely indicated by typed 'script notes' - - to 1934 where Mank is working at MGM studios for Louis B. Mayer (Arliss Howard) and mixing in the circles of millionaire publisher William Randolph Hearst (Charles Dance) and his glamorous young wife, actress Marion Davies (Amanda Seyfried). Allegedly, the "Citizen Kane" script was based on Hearst. But what souring of the relationship could have led to such a stinging betrayal during those six years?
Mank has an embarrassment of acting riches. Mankiewicz is a fascinating character: charismatic, reckless, passionate and the definition of a loose cannon. Basically, a dream for a great actor to portray. And Gary Oldham IS a great actor. After doing Churchill in "Darkest Hour", he here turns in a magnificent performance as the alcoholic writer. Never more so than in a furious tirade at a dinner table late in the film, which will likely be the equivalent to the Churchill "tiger" speech come Oscar time. Surely, there's a Best Actor nomination there?
Equally impressive though are some of the supporting cast.
- Tom Burke - so good as TV's "Strike" - gives a fine impersonation of the great Orson Welles: full of confidence and swagger. It's only a cameo role, but he genuinely 'feels' like the young Welles.
- Amanda Seyfried: It took me almost half of the film to recognize her as Marion Davies, and her performance is pitch perfect - the best of her career in my view, and again Oscar-worthy.
- Arliss Howard for me almost steals the show as the megalomaniac Mayer: his introduction to Mank's brother Joe (Tom Pelphrey) has a memorable "walk with me" walkthrough of the studio with Mayer preaching on the real meaning of MGM and the movies in general. Breathtakingly good.
- But - I said "nearly steals the show".... the guy who made off with it in a swag-bag for me was our own Charles Dance as Hearst. Quietly impressive throughout, he just completely nails it with his "organ-grinder's monkey" speech towards the end of the movie. Probably my favourite monologue of 2020. Chilling. I'd really like to see Dance get a Supporting Actor nomination for this.
The screenplay was originally written by director David Fincher's late father Jack. Jack Fincher died in 2002, and this project has literally been decades in the planning. Mankiewicz has a caustic turn of phrase, and there are laugh-out lines of dialogue scattered throughout the script. "Write hard, aim low" implores Houseman at one point. And my personal favourite: Mank's puncturing of the irony that the Screen Writers Guild has been formed without an apostrophe! A huge LOL!
Aside from the witty dialogue, the script has a nuance to the storytelling that continually surprises. A revelation from Freda about Mank's philanthropic tendencies brings you up short in your face-value impression of his character. And the drivers that engineer the rift between Mankiewicz and Hearst - based around the story of the (fictional) director Shelly Metcalf (Jamie McShane) - are not slapped in your face, but elegantly slipped into your subconscious.
In addition, certain aspects are frustratingly withheld from you. Mank's long-suffering wife (a definition of the phrase) Sara (Tuppence Middleton) only occasionally comes into focus. The only reference to his kids are a crash in the background as they "remodel" the family home. Is the charismatic Mank a faithful husband or a philanderer? Is the relationship with Rita Alexander just professional and platonic (you assume so), or is there more going on? There's a tension there in the storytelling that never quite gets resolved: and that's a good thing.
Mank also has an embarrassment of technical riches. Even from the opening titles, you get the impression that this is a work of genius. All in black and white, and with the appearance of 40's titling, they scroll majestically in the sky and then - after "Charles Dance" - effortlessly scroll down to the desert highway. It's evidence of an attention to detail perhaps forced by lockdown. ("MUM - I'm bored". "Go up to your room and do some more work on that movie then".)
It's deliciously modern, yet retro. I love the fact that the cross-reel "circle" cue-marks appear so prominently... the indicators that the projectionist needs to spin up the next reel. I think they are still used in most modern films, but not as noticeably as in the old films... and this one!
A key contributor to the movie is cinematographer Erik Messerschmidt. Everything looks just BEAUTIFUL, and it is now a big regret that I didn't go to watch this on the big screen after all. Surely there will be a cinematography Oscar nomination for this one. Unbelievably, this is Messerschmidt's debut feature as director of cinematography!
Elsewhere, you can imagine multiple other technical Oscar noms. The tight and effective editing is by Kirk Baxter. And the combination of the glorious production design (Donald Graham Burt) and the costume design (Trish Summerville) make the movie emanate the same nostalgia for Hollywood as did last year's "Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood".... albeit set forty years earlier. Even the music (by the regular team of Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross) might get nominated, since I had to go back and check that it actually HAD music at all: it's subtly unobtrusive and effective.
The only area I had any issue with here was the sound mixing, since I had trouble picking up some of the dialogue.
Although I can gush about this movie as a technical work of art, I'm going to hold off a 10* review on this one. For one reason only. I just didn't feel 100% engaged with the story (at least with a first watch). The illustrious Mrs Movie Man summed it up with the phrase "I just didn't care enough what happened to any of the characters". I think though that this one is sufficiently subtle and cerebral that it deserves another watch.
Will it win Oscars. Yes, for sure. Hell, I would like to put a bet on that "Mank" will top the list of the "most nominations" when they are announced. (Hollywood likes nothing more than a navel-gazing look at its history of course). And an obvious nomination here will be David Fincher for Best Director. But, for me, this falls into a similar bucket as that other black and white multi-Oscar winner of two year's ago "Roma". It's glorious to look at; brilliantly directed; but not a movie I would choose to readily reach for to repeatedly watch again.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/12/10/mank-divines-for-oscar-gold-in-a-sea-of-pyrites/. Thanks.)
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Rescuing Robin Hood in Tabletop Games
Nov 10, 2020
I have a secret to tell you all. I love the Robin Hood IP, even though my only real knowledge of it comes from the “Robin Hood: Men in Tights” and “Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves” movies. I have never read the story, nor have I ever watched the Errol Flynn movie. So why do I love Robin Hood so much? I really can’t tell you for sure, it just seems like such a fun theme with lots of characters and an interesting central plot. So how does this quasi-deck-builder fare? Faire? I think fare. Let’s find out.
Rescuing Robin Hood is a cooperative card drafting and deck building game with multiple value usage on each card and, at least in my very first play, the humbling experience of having over 20 guards protecting the Sheriff of Nottingham. Players will win once Robin Hood is rescued, but may achieve an ultimate victory by defeating the Sheriff and his guard detail.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, and I do not know for sure if the final components will be any different from these shown. Also, it is not my intention to detail every rule in the game, as there are just too many. You are invited to download the rulebook, back the game through the Kickstarter campaign launching November 10, 2020, or through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
To setup, follow the setup suggestion in the rulebook. The game should roughly look how it is below in the photo. Roughly. The components include cards for Nottingham Castle, the Sheriff, his guards, Robin Hood, his band of Merry Men, other recruitable villagers, and a Tracker Card. Along with all the cards, inside the box are tracker cubes and ability chips. Once the game is setup, determine the starting player and the game may begin!
A game of Rescuing Robin Hood lasts five rounds (or “days” to rescue the hero from being executed). Each round has players dealing four cards from their draw decks and using these four villagers in conjunction with their chosen Merry Men character card to create values on the Tracker Card for Wit, Stealth, Brawn, and Jolliness. Some villagers or characters will also provide the player with ability chips to be used during the turn. These include Prayer (which can move guards from one group to another, or eliminate a guard entirely – the power of prayer is REAL), Cookery (which can be used to increase the values of Wit, Stealth, or Brawn by +2 for each chip), and Scouting (which allows a player to reveal a face-down guard card in any group).
Once the active player has adjusted all their values they wish, they may now begin attacking guards. Per the setup card for each round a group of guards are holding villagers captive and they must be defeated in order to free the villagers to be recruited to players’ decks. In order to defeat a guard or entire groups of guards, players will be attacking twice using their Wit, Stealth, and/or Brawn values.
To attack with Wit, the active player will determine which group of guards they will attack and target the face-up guard at the end of the group. If defeated, the player will reduce their total Wit by the value of Wit they expended to defeat the first guard. Should they wish to continue attacking guards with Wit, they must state this before flipping the next guard face-up. This adds the push-your-luck element to the game. Should the player wish to stop, the guards are defeated. Should the player bust, the entire collection of guards previously outwitted are added back to the group face-up to be defeated by another player or by the same player using a different attack method.
If the active player wishes to use Stealth to attack guards, they must choose a group of guards and pick them off one by one. Using their total Stealth value and decreasing it with each successful attack, the player will choose one or more (face-up or face-down) guards to attack. Again, should they succeed the guards will be defeated and removed from play. Should the player bust by attempting to pick off too many guards, then all guards are added back to the group face-up.
Using Brawn to attack guards requires the active player to choose a group of guards and attack the ENTIRE group using their Brawn value. Should the player succeed in defeating all guards in the group (no matter the size of the group) then all guards are removed from play. If the player fails, as always, the guards are returned to the group to taunt the next player.
Active players will be able to attack guards twice on a turn but must use two different attack methods. Should the player end their turn with remaining Brawn or Jolliness values, those values will be passed along to the next player in turn order to be used. Additionally, should the next player end their turn with Brawn or Jolliness, they will be passed to the next player and so on.
At the end of each round villagers that were freed of guards during the round will be drafted to players’ decks. At the end of round 2 and 4 players’ decks will be thinned by choosing which villagers stay and which will aid the players in the final round. The final round of Rescuing Robin Hood pits the players against the walls of Nottingham Castle, a Courtyard full of guards, and even Sheriff Nottingham and his personal guards. Again, should the players defeat the Castle walls and Courtyard, they free Robin Hood and win the game. If the players are feeling particularly confident they may also challenge the Sheriff for ultimate victory.
Components. Again, this is a prototype copy of the game using prototype components. That said, the components we received are truly excellent. Firstly, the art style throughout the game is crisp and colorful and a lot of fun. Some of the names of the villagers are downright silly and punny and I absolutely love that. The cards are all wonderful, and the cubes are normal game cubes (not Nintendo-related), and hopefully they will be upgraded via a successful Kickstarter campaign. All in all the components are great and the art is quite enjoyable.
So do I like Rescuing Robin Hood? Oh yes, quite a bit! This game exercises my brain so much without having to labor for minutes on end creating strategies and alternate strategies. I enjoy being able to just barrel into a group of guards and take out the entire swath of them using my extreme Brawniness. Need to pump up before a fight? Well obviously I’ll use up my Jolliness to boost my confidence or narrow my concentration. I purposely omitted several rules so as not to bog down my review any further, but there are so many interesting little flecks of mechanics working together to create a cohesive gaming experience and it is simply delicious.
While Rescuing Robin Hood is not incredibly heavy, there are tons of choices to be made and risks to be taken to achieve ultimate victory. I enjoy being able to tailor my deck with powerful villagers, or specialize in two attack values to unload on guards. Having players that use interesting mixes of Merry Men characters also increases the enjoyment as this game is absolutely cooperative and players may assist each other in many ways. Need some extra Wit for your turn coming up? Here, let me pass along my extra Jolliness to you to use. Want some Cookery too? Go ahead, I’ve got plenty to share. Oh, such great feelings at the table being able to share resources like this.
So I urge you, dear reader, to check out the Kickstarter campaign for Rescuing Robin Hood. If you enjoy lighter (but not tooooo light) cooperative, card drafting, deck building games with a great theme, you need to pick up a copy of Rescuing Robin Hood. I didn’t see Blinkin or Ahchoo in the game, but that’s not to say Castillo Games doesn’t have these hiding in stretch goals (I really don’t know if they are in the plans, but they SHOULD be).
Rescuing Robin Hood is a cooperative card drafting and deck building game with multiple value usage on each card and, at least in my very first play, the humbling experience of having over 20 guards protecting the Sheriff of Nottingham. Players will win once Robin Hood is rescued, but may achieve an ultimate victory by defeating the Sheriff and his guard detail.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, and I do not know for sure if the final components will be any different from these shown. Also, it is not my intention to detail every rule in the game, as there are just too many. You are invited to download the rulebook, back the game through the Kickstarter campaign launching November 10, 2020, or through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
To setup, follow the setup suggestion in the rulebook. The game should roughly look how it is below in the photo. Roughly. The components include cards for Nottingham Castle, the Sheriff, his guards, Robin Hood, his band of Merry Men, other recruitable villagers, and a Tracker Card. Along with all the cards, inside the box are tracker cubes and ability chips. Once the game is setup, determine the starting player and the game may begin!
A game of Rescuing Robin Hood lasts five rounds (or “days” to rescue the hero from being executed). Each round has players dealing four cards from their draw decks and using these four villagers in conjunction with their chosen Merry Men character card to create values on the Tracker Card for Wit, Stealth, Brawn, and Jolliness. Some villagers or characters will also provide the player with ability chips to be used during the turn. These include Prayer (which can move guards from one group to another, or eliminate a guard entirely – the power of prayer is REAL), Cookery (which can be used to increase the values of Wit, Stealth, or Brawn by +2 for each chip), and Scouting (which allows a player to reveal a face-down guard card in any group).
Once the active player has adjusted all their values they wish, they may now begin attacking guards. Per the setup card for each round a group of guards are holding villagers captive and they must be defeated in order to free the villagers to be recruited to players’ decks. In order to defeat a guard or entire groups of guards, players will be attacking twice using their Wit, Stealth, and/or Brawn values.
To attack with Wit, the active player will determine which group of guards they will attack and target the face-up guard at the end of the group. If defeated, the player will reduce their total Wit by the value of Wit they expended to defeat the first guard. Should they wish to continue attacking guards with Wit, they must state this before flipping the next guard face-up. This adds the push-your-luck element to the game. Should the player wish to stop, the guards are defeated. Should the player bust, the entire collection of guards previously outwitted are added back to the group face-up to be defeated by another player or by the same player using a different attack method.
If the active player wishes to use Stealth to attack guards, they must choose a group of guards and pick them off one by one. Using their total Stealth value and decreasing it with each successful attack, the player will choose one or more (face-up or face-down) guards to attack. Again, should they succeed the guards will be defeated and removed from play. Should the player bust by attempting to pick off too many guards, then all guards are added back to the group face-up.
Using Brawn to attack guards requires the active player to choose a group of guards and attack the ENTIRE group using their Brawn value. Should the player succeed in defeating all guards in the group (no matter the size of the group) then all guards are removed from play. If the player fails, as always, the guards are returned to the group to taunt the next player.
Active players will be able to attack guards twice on a turn but must use two different attack methods. Should the player end their turn with remaining Brawn or Jolliness values, those values will be passed along to the next player in turn order to be used. Additionally, should the next player end their turn with Brawn or Jolliness, they will be passed to the next player and so on.
At the end of each round villagers that were freed of guards during the round will be drafted to players’ decks. At the end of round 2 and 4 players’ decks will be thinned by choosing which villagers stay and which will aid the players in the final round. The final round of Rescuing Robin Hood pits the players against the walls of Nottingham Castle, a Courtyard full of guards, and even Sheriff Nottingham and his personal guards. Again, should the players defeat the Castle walls and Courtyard, they free Robin Hood and win the game. If the players are feeling particularly confident they may also challenge the Sheriff for ultimate victory.
Components. Again, this is a prototype copy of the game using prototype components. That said, the components we received are truly excellent. Firstly, the art style throughout the game is crisp and colorful and a lot of fun. Some of the names of the villagers are downright silly and punny and I absolutely love that. The cards are all wonderful, and the cubes are normal game cubes (not Nintendo-related), and hopefully they will be upgraded via a successful Kickstarter campaign. All in all the components are great and the art is quite enjoyable.
So do I like Rescuing Robin Hood? Oh yes, quite a bit! This game exercises my brain so much without having to labor for minutes on end creating strategies and alternate strategies. I enjoy being able to just barrel into a group of guards and take out the entire swath of them using my extreme Brawniness. Need to pump up before a fight? Well obviously I’ll use up my Jolliness to boost my confidence or narrow my concentration. I purposely omitted several rules so as not to bog down my review any further, but there are so many interesting little flecks of mechanics working together to create a cohesive gaming experience and it is simply delicious.
While Rescuing Robin Hood is not incredibly heavy, there are tons of choices to be made and risks to be taken to achieve ultimate victory. I enjoy being able to tailor my deck with powerful villagers, or specialize in two attack values to unload on guards. Having players that use interesting mixes of Merry Men characters also increases the enjoyment as this game is absolutely cooperative and players may assist each other in many ways. Need some extra Wit for your turn coming up? Here, let me pass along my extra Jolliness to you to use. Want some Cookery too? Go ahead, I’ve got plenty to share. Oh, such great feelings at the table being able to share resources like this.
So I urge you, dear reader, to check out the Kickstarter campaign for Rescuing Robin Hood. If you enjoy lighter (but not tooooo light) cooperative, card drafting, deck building games with a great theme, you need to pick up a copy of Rescuing Robin Hood. I didn’t see Blinkin or Ahchoo in the game, but that’s not to say Castillo Games doesn’t have these hiding in stretch goals (I really don’t know if they are in the plans, but they SHOULD be).
Hadley (567 KP) rated The Devil in the White City: Murder, Magic, and Madness in Books
Jan 18, 2021
History (1 more)
Well-written
H.H. Holmes had many aliases and lives.
He's been a doctor and a licensed pharmacist, who then conned an old couple into selling their drug store to him where he preyed on young girls and ignorant customers that would buy whatever Holmes would tell them to buy, whether it were real or fake tonics.
He was a building owner who had a murder hotel secretly built with " a wooden chute that would descend from a secret location on the second floor all the way to the basement... ", "a room next to his office fitted with a large walk-in vault, with airtight seams and asbestos-coated iron walls. A gas jet embedded in one wall would be controlled from his closet...", "a large basement with hidden chambers and a sub-basement for the permanent storage of sensitive material. "
He owned and ran an alcohol-treatment company known as the Silver Ash Institute that claimed to have the cure for alcoholism.
He was a traveling business man, who had two wives and two children. He established the Campbell-Yates Manufacturing Company, which made nothing and sold nothing.
He was also labeled as America's first serial killer. His body count is unknown even today; his victims were frequently young women, which included stenographers and house wives. He was best known for convincing people who trusted him to sign him as the beneficiary of their life insurance policies, only to kill them and make it seem an accident so he could collect the money.
Holmes grew up in a small farming village in New Hampshire, where he briefly spoke about an early fear of a human skeleton that hung in a doctor's office: " 'I had daily to pass the office of one village doctor, the door of which was seldom if ever barred,' he wrote in a later memoir. 'Partly from its being associated in my mind as the source of all the nauseous mixtures that had been my childish terror (for this was before the day of children's medicines), and partly because of vague rumors I had heard regarding its contents, this place was one of peculiar abhorrence to me.' "... "Two children discovered Mudgett's [Holmes' real last name] fear and one day captured him and dragged him 'struggling and shrieking' into the doctor's office. 'Nor did they desist,' Mudgett wrote, 'until I had been brought face to face with one of its grinning skeletons, which, with arms outstretched, seemed ready in its turn to seize me. It was a wicked and dangerous thing to do to a child of tender years and health,' he wrote, ' but it proved an heroic method of treatment, destined ultimately to cure me of my fears, and to inculcate in me, first, a strong feeling of curiosity, and, later, a desire to learn, which resulted years afterwards in my adopting medicine as a profession.' "
Erik Larson's fourth book, the Devil in the White City, is only partly about Holmes and his dark trail of murder and lies. The story told is mostly centered around the planning and building of the 1893 World's Fair. The prologue opens with one of the architects aboard a ship long after the fair has ended - - - 1912 to be exact- - - where he begins to write of the fair in his diary. The next chapter continues on with Chicago competing against other major cities to win the rights to host the World's Fair. Chicago was not the ideal place for the fair because it was known for it's crime and slaughter houses - - - this was exactly why the politicians wanted it so badly there, so it would help to lighten the image of Chicago for the rest of the world. Even the local Whitechapel Club that had sprouted up after the infamous murders by Jack the Ripper, were excited to win the rights to host the fair in their city, and celebrated in a macabre way:
"Upon learning that Chicago had won the fair, the men of the Whitechapel Club composed a telegram to Chauncey Depew, who more than any other man symbolized New York and its campaign to win the fair. Previously Depew had promised the members of the Whitechapel Club that if Chicago prevailed he would present himself at the club's next meeting, to be hacked apart by the Ripper himself - - - metaphorically, he presumed, although at the Whitechapel Club could one ever be certain? The club's coffin, for example, had once been used to transport the body of a member who had committed suicide. After claiming his body, the club hauled it to the Indiana Dunes on Lake Michigan, where members erected an immense pyre. They placed the body on top, then set it alight. Carrying torches and wearing black hooded robes, they circled the fire singing hymns to the dead between sips of whiskey. The club also had a custom of sending robed members to kidnap visiting celebrities and steal them away in a black coach with covered windows, all without saying a word.
The club's telegram reached Depew in Washington twenty minutes after the final ballot, just as Chicago's congressional delegation began celebrating at the Willard Hotel near the White House. The telegram asked, 'When may we see you at our dissecting table?' "
There are chapters in-between, technically reading like a side story, that tell us about Holmes and his misdeeds in Chicago, but there just wasn't enough about Holmes that I could consider this a True Crime book, nor an informative book about Holmes. Unfortunately, when the reader begins to really dwell into the story of Holmes, it's quickly ended by having two or more chapters about the building of the World's Fair. One interesting point about the story is that the reader does get to see how many inventions were brought to light because of the Fair, such as the invention of the Ferris Wheel. Larson's writing is very coherent and the descriptions are so well done that the reader is practically transported back to the late 1800s, yet, before I finished the book, I felt misled by the title... then coming across everything that happened to not only the Fair, but the people who were involved with it, it's hard not to wonder if the whole thing was cursed, thus the Devil being in the White City.
One of the side stories I did really enjoy was the slow unfolding of a man named Prendergast. A delusional young man who ran one of the groups of paperboys in Chicago, who was also obsessed with politics, became a determined supporter of Mayor Harrison; after Harrison was voted into office again, Prendergast believed it was because of him and the letters he sent out to numerous politicians and potential voters. Prendergast also believed he deserved a chair on the council for Harrison's re-election, for which he even showed up at City Hall to take over. This incident was the straw that broke the camel's back for Prendergast - - - he was humiliated when the people there laughed in his face. Prendergast then decided to take matters into his own hands, and bought a revolver. The day before the Fair would end, Prendergast showed up at Harrison's home and shot him. Harrison died minutes later. Prendergast turned himself in for the murder as soon as he left Harrison's residence. When asked why he had done it, Prendergast responded: " ' Because he betrayed my confidence. I supported him through his campaign and he promised to appoint me corporation counsel. He didn't live up to his word.' "
This book has been voted as a top True Crime must-read novel. I don't agree with this. As I said before: Holmes' chapters are few; eighty percent of this book is about the building of the World's Fair. As a True Crime junkie, I didn't enjoy this one, but also as a history junkie, I enjoyed learning about the Fair and everything that happened. I can't recommend this book to TC fans or horror fans. It's mostly history and architecture.
He's been a doctor and a licensed pharmacist, who then conned an old couple into selling their drug store to him where he preyed on young girls and ignorant customers that would buy whatever Holmes would tell them to buy, whether it were real or fake tonics.
He was a building owner who had a murder hotel secretly built with " a wooden chute that would descend from a secret location on the second floor all the way to the basement... ", "a room next to his office fitted with a large walk-in vault, with airtight seams and asbestos-coated iron walls. A gas jet embedded in one wall would be controlled from his closet...", "a large basement with hidden chambers and a sub-basement for the permanent storage of sensitive material. "
He owned and ran an alcohol-treatment company known as the Silver Ash Institute that claimed to have the cure for alcoholism.
He was a traveling business man, who had two wives and two children. He established the Campbell-Yates Manufacturing Company, which made nothing and sold nothing.
He was also labeled as America's first serial killer. His body count is unknown even today; his victims were frequently young women, which included stenographers and house wives. He was best known for convincing people who trusted him to sign him as the beneficiary of their life insurance policies, only to kill them and make it seem an accident so he could collect the money.
Holmes grew up in a small farming village in New Hampshire, where he briefly spoke about an early fear of a human skeleton that hung in a doctor's office: " 'I had daily to pass the office of one village doctor, the door of which was seldom if ever barred,' he wrote in a later memoir. 'Partly from its being associated in my mind as the source of all the nauseous mixtures that had been my childish terror (for this was before the day of children's medicines), and partly because of vague rumors I had heard regarding its contents, this place was one of peculiar abhorrence to me.' "... "Two children discovered Mudgett's [Holmes' real last name] fear and one day captured him and dragged him 'struggling and shrieking' into the doctor's office. 'Nor did they desist,' Mudgett wrote, 'until I had been brought face to face with one of its grinning skeletons, which, with arms outstretched, seemed ready in its turn to seize me. It was a wicked and dangerous thing to do to a child of tender years and health,' he wrote, ' but it proved an heroic method of treatment, destined ultimately to cure me of my fears, and to inculcate in me, first, a strong feeling of curiosity, and, later, a desire to learn, which resulted years afterwards in my adopting medicine as a profession.' "
Erik Larson's fourth book, the Devil in the White City, is only partly about Holmes and his dark trail of murder and lies. The story told is mostly centered around the planning and building of the 1893 World's Fair. The prologue opens with one of the architects aboard a ship long after the fair has ended - - - 1912 to be exact- - - where he begins to write of the fair in his diary. The next chapter continues on with Chicago competing against other major cities to win the rights to host the World's Fair. Chicago was not the ideal place for the fair because it was known for it's crime and slaughter houses - - - this was exactly why the politicians wanted it so badly there, so it would help to lighten the image of Chicago for the rest of the world. Even the local Whitechapel Club that had sprouted up after the infamous murders by Jack the Ripper, were excited to win the rights to host the fair in their city, and celebrated in a macabre way:
"Upon learning that Chicago had won the fair, the men of the Whitechapel Club composed a telegram to Chauncey Depew, who more than any other man symbolized New York and its campaign to win the fair. Previously Depew had promised the members of the Whitechapel Club that if Chicago prevailed he would present himself at the club's next meeting, to be hacked apart by the Ripper himself - - - metaphorically, he presumed, although at the Whitechapel Club could one ever be certain? The club's coffin, for example, had once been used to transport the body of a member who had committed suicide. After claiming his body, the club hauled it to the Indiana Dunes on Lake Michigan, where members erected an immense pyre. They placed the body on top, then set it alight. Carrying torches and wearing black hooded robes, they circled the fire singing hymns to the dead between sips of whiskey. The club also had a custom of sending robed members to kidnap visiting celebrities and steal them away in a black coach with covered windows, all without saying a word.
The club's telegram reached Depew in Washington twenty minutes after the final ballot, just as Chicago's congressional delegation began celebrating at the Willard Hotel near the White House. The telegram asked, 'When may we see you at our dissecting table?' "
There are chapters in-between, technically reading like a side story, that tell us about Holmes and his misdeeds in Chicago, but there just wasn't enough about Holmes that I could consider this a True Crime book, nor an informative book about Holmes. Unfortunately, when the reader begins to really dwell into the story of Holmes, it's quickly ended by having two or more chapters about the building of the World's Fair. One interesting point about the story is that the reader does get to see how many inventions were brought to light because of the Fair, such as the invention of the Ferris Wheel. Larson's writing is very coherent and the descriptions are so well done that the reader is practically transported back to the late 1800s, yet, before I finished the book, I felt misled by the title... then coming across everything that happened to not only the Fair, but the people who were involved with it, it's hard not to wonder if the whole thing was cursed, thus the Devil being in the White City.
One of the side stories I did really enjoy was the slow unfolding of a man named Prendergast. A delusional young man who ran one of the groups of paperboys in Chicago, who was also obsessed with politics, became a determined supporter of Mayor Harrison; after Harrison was voted into office again, Prendergast believed it was because of him and the letters he sent out to numerous politicians and potential voters. Prendergast also believed he deserved a chair on the council for Harrison's re-election, for which he even showed up at City Hall to take over. This incident was the straw that broke the camel's back for Prendergast - - - he was humiliated when the people there laughed in his face. Prendergast then decided to take matters into his own hands, and bought a revolver. The day before the Fair would end, Prendergast showed up at Harrison's home and shot him. Harrison died minutes later. Prendergast turned himself in for the murder as soon as he left Harrison's residence. When asked why he had done it, Prendergast responded: " ' Because he betrayed my confidence. I supported him through his campaign and he promised to appoint me corporation counsel. He didn't live up to his word.' "
This book has been voted as a top True Crime must-read novel. I don't agree with this. As I said before: Holmes' chapters are few; eighty percent of this book is about the building of the World's Fair. As a True Crime junkie, I didn't enjoy this one, but also as a history junkie, I enjoyed learning about the Fair and everything that happened. I can't recommend this book to TC fans or horror fans. It's mostly history and architecture.
Rest by Charlotte Gainsbourg
7.0
Rate It
Album Watch
Sometimes it takes a personal tragedy to catalyse an artist’s practise, a crack in everything, to...
Pop