Search
Search results
Buoy Finder NOAA
Weather and Travel
App
Get near real-time data from NOAA/NDBC buoy stations, global sea surface temperatures and weather...
Caribbeanjobs.com Job Search
Business and Utilities
App
Find your dream job in the Caribbean. With the CaribbeanJobs.com job search app you can find and...
EHS Audit - Inspect better
Business and Productivity
App
Inspect your operations for compliance to safety, quality and environmental standards and...
Design Dimensions
Reference and Utilities
App
An extensive visual database of commonly referenced items and their corresponding dimensions. With...
StairCalc - Stair Framing & Formwork Calculator For Carpenters
Business and Utilities
App
STAIRS FRAMING & FORMWORK CALCULATOR - Stair calc is designed for carpenters, contractors and...
The Robot Factory by Tinybop
Education and Games
App
Create robots. Test robots. Collect robots. Build with exoskeletons, zephyr mechanisms, hydrostatic...
LEGO® Juniors
Games and Entertainment
App
CREATIVE PROBLEM-SOLVING WITH COOL CREATIONS The LEGO® Juniors app is an engaging, creative...
The Disappointing Mr. Whicher...or is it the Wandering Ms. Summerscale? No, I've got it! The Bloated Book of Everything Victorian!
I was looking forward to reading, what I thought was, a true crime book with a bit of a look into Mr. Whicher's professional life too. What I got instead was four, possibly more, books in a 304 page book. These four parts consist of the murder of Saville Kent, Mr. Jonathan Whicher himself, an analysis of detective fiction (especially Poe, Dickens, and Collins), the origin of words and phrases in the detection field, many murder/crime stories of the day, other oddly inserted facts and history, etc., etc.
Now, Ms. Summerscale is a fine writer (and researcher for that matter), but it seems as if she wrote for herself instead of us, the readers. While her odd bits and pieces of history are interesting (usually), they are not essential to the plot (or what I thought was the main story), and I found myself glazing quite a bit. Whenever she rhapsodized poetic about Poe, Dickens or any of the other writers of the early detection mystery, it had the overall feel of a research paper and usually didn't have much to do with the murder in the least. The author wandered off way too many times to her own fancy and whenever she went back to the supposed case, it felt as if she had forgotten that she was supposed to be writing about the murder. This left the plotting of the book oddly pieced together and me discombobulated. Where was the editor? Out to lunch? Or did the author disregard what the editor(s) advised her to do? Who knows, but all this extraneous information was just filler and added nothing to the book. I cannot believe this actually won anything. Another quibble was that she also had a bit of a problem with her 'sensationalistic' chapter endings; they just didn't go (or flow) with the whole book.
My biggest problem with the whole book is there isn't much on the murder, which you would think there would be by the cover, synopsis, praise, and marketing. Only a little speculation is spared on a few other suspects; no why might they have done it, how the family may have felt - I wish there had been more focused on the murder and less on everything else. That's why I picked up the book, I wanted to know about the crime and consequences, not on the way of Victorian life or how it influenced writers, there are other books for that (which are listed in the notes and select bibliography in the back I might add). Now, don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the subject content, but the overall construction of the book with all the un-necessary passages left me dissatisfied and grumpy.
I was looking forward to reading, what I thought was, a true crime book with a bit of a look into Mr. Whicher's professional life too. What I got instead was four, possibly more, books in a 304 page book. These four parts consist of the murder of Saville Kent, Mr. Jonathan Whicher himself, an analysis of detective fiction (especially Poe, Dickens, and Collins), the origin of words and phrases in the detection field, many murder/crime stories of the day, other oddly inserted facts and history, etc., etc.
Now, Ms. Summerscale is a fine writer (and researcher for that matter), but it seems as if she wrote for herself instead of us, the readers. While her odd bits and pieces of history are interesting (usually), they are not essential to the plot (or what I thought was the main story), and I found myself glazing quite a bit. Whenever she rhapsodized poetic about Poe, Dickens or any of the other writers of the early detection mystery, it had the overall feel of a research paper and usually didn't have much to do with the murder in the least. The author wandered off way too many times to her own fancy and whenever she went back to the supposed case, it felt as if she had forgotten that she was supposed to be writing about the murder. This left the plotting of the book oddly pieced together and me discombobulated. Where was the editor? Out to lunch? Or did the author disregard what the editor(s) advised her to do? Who knows, but all this extraneous information was just filler and added nothing to the book. I cannot believe this actually won anything. Another quibble was that she also had a bit of a problem with her 'sensationalistic' chapter endings; they just didn't go (or flow) with the whole book.
My biggest problem with the whole book is there isn't much on the murder, which you would think there would be by the cover, synopsis, praise, and marketing. Only a little speculation is spared on a few other suspects; no why might they have done it, how the family may have felt - I wish there had been more focused on the murder and less on everything else. That's why I picked up the book, I wanted to know about the crime and consequences, not on the way of Victorian life or how it influenced writers, there are other books for that (which are listed in the notes and select bibliography in the back I might add). Now, don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the subject content, but the overall construction of the book with all the un-necessary passages left me dissatisfied and grumpy.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Great Wall (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Disappointingly Pedestrian
Acclaimed director Zhang Yimou has been at the helm of some of China’s greatest film assets. 1991’s Raise the Red Lantern is widely regarded as one of the defining foreign-language films of its period and 2004’s House of Flying Daggers received huge critical acclamation for its stunning cinematography and exceptional script.
Here, Yimou teams up with one of Hollywood’s greatest assets, Matt Damon in a monster flick to rival all others. But does The Great Wall showcase the very best from its director and leading man?
When a mercenary warrior on the run from a group of bandits (Matt Damon) is imprisoned within China’s magnificent Great Wall, he discovers the mystery behind one of the greatest wonders of the world. As surge after surge of snarling, prowling beasts called Taotie besiege the massive construction, his quest for immeasurable fortune turns into a journey toward heroism. He joins a vast army of elite Chinese soldiers to confront the unimaginable and seemingly unstoppable force.
Unfortunately, The Great Wall squanders the talents of both Damon and Yimou with an unnecessarily dense script overriding any sense of drama. To be honest, it’s all just a bit of a bore.
The cast is fine but so vast that Damon and Jin Tian, who we will see again very soon in Kong: Skull Island, are the only stars to make any sort of impact. Even then, a poor script stops them from being anything but cardboard cut-outs. There is no character development whatsoever. In fact, as I write this paragraph I nearly forgot to mention Willem Dafoe. He makes no impact on the final outcome at all.
Elsewhere, the special effects range from laughably poor to adequate and certainly not befitting of a film costing well over $200million. The wall itself is rendered in decent CGI and the numerous battle scenes have a reasonably immersive feel, but the Taotie lacks realism and as the main antagonists throughout, this is a serious problem.
The cinematography too is not up to the standard of Yimou’s previous works. Relying far too heavily on green screen, it wastes his incredible eye for detail and continuously feels like you’re sat watching a very expensive video game. As with last year’s Gods of Egypt, there’s a certain glossy quality to the picture that dominates and this is what stops it being believable.
Nevertheless, the music is very good indeed. Ramin Djawadi has scored big budget blockbusters like Iron Man and Pacific Rim with The Great Wall taking a few influences from the latter. It’s definitely the saving grace here and alleviates a couple of the shortcomings.
Overall, The Great Wall is a film unworthy of the talent both behind and in front of the lens. It’s crammed full of poor CGI and uninspiring cinematography, though its great score is unquestionably a highlight. With such good subject matter, it feels like a bit of a wasted opportunity.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/02/18/the-great-wall-disappointingly-pedestrian/
Here, Yimou teams up with one of Hollywood’s greatest assets, Matt Damon in a monster flick to rival all others. But does The Great Wall showcase the very best from its director and leading man?
When a mercenary warrior on the run from a group of bandits (Matt Damon) is imprisoned within China’s magnificent Great Wall, he discovers the mystery behind one of the greatest wonders of the world. As surge after surge of snarling, prowling beasts called Taotie besiege the massive construction, his quest for immeasurable fortune turns into a journey toward heroism. He joins a vast army of elite Chinese soldiers to confront the unimaginable and seemingly unstoppable force.
Unfortunately, The Great Wall squanders the talents of both Damon and Yimou with an unnecessarily dense script overriding any sense of drama. To be honest, it’s all just a bit of a bore.
The cast is fine but so vast that Damon and Jin Tian, who we will see again very soon in Kong: Skull Island, are the only stars to make any sort of impact. Even then, a poor script stops them from being anything but cardboard cut-outs. There is no character development whatsoever. In fact, as I write this paragraph I nearly forgot to mention Willem Dafoe. He makes no impact on the final outcome at all.
Elsewhere, the special effects range from laughably poor to adequate and certainly not befitting of a film costing well over $200million. The wall itself is rendered in decent CGI and the numerous battle scenes have a reasonably immersive feel, but the Taotie lacks realism and as the main antagonists throughout, this is a serious problem.
The cinematography too is not up to the standard of Yimou’s previous works. Relying far too heavily on green screen, it wastes his incredible eye for detail and continuously feels like you’re sat watching a very expensive video game. As with last year’s Gods of Egypt, there’s a certain glossy quality to the picture that dominates and this is what stops it being believable.
Nevertheless, the music is very good indeed. Ramin Djawadi has scored big budget blockbusters like Iron Man and Pacific Rim with The Great Wall taking a few influences from the latter. It’s definitely the saving grace here and alleviates a couple of the shortcomings.
Overall, The Great Wall is a film unworthy of the talent both behind and in front of the lens. It’s crammed full of poor CGI and uninspiring cinematography, though its great score is unquestionably a highlight. With such good subject matter, it feels like a bit of a wasted opportunity.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/02/18/the-great-wall-disappointingly-pedestrian/