Search
Search results
Janeeny (200 KP) rated The Pisces in Books
May 9, 2019 (Updated Jun 10, 2019)
Lucy is a student who doesn’t really know what she wants in life, and after an acrimonious break up from her boyfriend. Her sister throws her a lifeline, giving Lucy a break from her desert life in Phoenix, her sister asks Lucy to housesit for her whilst also attending a local therapy group. So Lucy heads to Los Angeles and it’s here that she has an awakening and a lurid affair with a merman.
I read this as this months book club book. The lady that suggested it did mention that there are a fair amount of sex scenes and sexual references so I was prepared. However I must say that, for me, none of the sex scenes were gratuitous, they formed part of the story. If you took out the sex scenes the book really wouldn’t make a lot of sense or would at least be a bit weaker for it. The language she uses isn’t cliche or cringey either (there’s no heaving breasts or throbbing body parts) it’s very ‘real’.
This book is a bit like the ones you’re given to read in English literature classes in school, that are rife with meaning and symbolism that you have no idea about until your teacher points it out. I feel there is a strong feminist message in there somewhere, as most of the women in the book are trying to fight a sexual reliance on men. It’s also heavily underlined by the fact that literally all the male characters are weak in one way or another.
To that point I really did not like Theo, the main love interest. He seemed a bit too weak, not as a character but as a person. This is a book with a strong feminist message, so it wouldn’t do to have your heroine overshadowed by a man so that is understandable. (A little side note, a member of my book group bought up the interesting idea that the ‘weakness’ is just an act and he’s psychologically preying on Lucy’s vulnerability)
There are a lot of references to Sappho, which again I feel hints at a feminist message. I’m sorry to say that even though I am aware of Sappho I have barely any knowledge about her. I have now acquired a couple of books from the library to remedy this.
There were some quite strong opinions on this in book group. Whilst I liked the book for it’s style of writing, one of the other ladies liked it for its controversy, but most of the group really didn’t like it at all. The strong feeling against it came, mostly, from the explicit language that was used, whilst one member was so bewildered by the events within the book she was convinced the main character was just on a big drug trip and hallucinating the whole thing.
A couple of us did take something away from the book, I took away a strong interest in the works of Sappho, and one of the other members took away a deeper understanding of a past friend whose behaviour she recognised in some of the characters in the book.
I think we’re going for something a little less controversial next month
I read this as this months book club book. The lady that suggested it did mention that there are a fair amount of sex scenes and sexual references so I was prepared. However I must say that, for me, none of the sex scenes were gratuitous, they formed part of the story. If you took out the sex scenes the book really wouldn’t make a lot of sense or would at least be a bit weaker for it. The language she uses isn’t cliche or cringey either (there’s no heaving breasts or throbbing body parts) it’s very ‘real’.
This book is a bit like the ones you’re given to read in English literature classes in school, that are rife with meaning and symbolism that you have no idea about until your teacher points it out. I feel there is a strong feminist message in there somewhere, as most of the women in the book are trying to fight a sexual reliance on men. It’s also heavily underlined by the fact that literally all the male characters are weak in one way or another.
To that point I really did not like Theo, the main love interest. He seemed a bit too weak, not as a character but as a person. This is a book with a strong feminist message, so it wouldn’t do to have your heroine overshadowed by a man so that is understandable. (A little side note, a member of my book group bought up the interesting idea that the ‘weakness’ is just an act and he’s psychologically preying on Lucy’s vulnerability)
There are a lot of references to Sappho, which again I feel hints at a feminist message. I’m sorry to say that even though I am aware of Sappho I have barely any knowledge about her. I have now acquired a couple of books from the library to remedy this.
There were some quite strong opinions on this in book group. Whilst I liked the book for it’s style of writing, one of the other ladies liked it for its controversy, but most of the group really didn’t like it at all. The strong feeling against it came, mostly, from the explicit language that was used, whilst one member was so bewildered by the events within the book she was convinced the main character was just on a big drug trip and hallucinating the whole thing.
A couple of us did take something away from the book, I took away a strong interest in the works of Sappho, and one of the other members took away a deeper understanding of a past friend whose behaviour she recognised in some of the characters in the book.
I think we’re going for something a little less controversial next month
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Predator (2018) in Movies
Sep 26, 2018
Waste of idea, talent and my time
If I was to show future generations a prototypical 1980's "Machismo, Blood and Guts Action Flick", I would pull the original 1987 PREDATOR (starring good ol' Arnold Schwarzenegger) off my dusty shelves and show this to them. It is a film so "of it's time".
In subsequent years, there have been more films that attempted to use the Predator character - PREDATOR 2 (1990), AVP: ALIENS VS. PREDATOR (2004), ALIENS VS. PREDATOR: REQUIEM (2007) and PREDATORS (2010) - all disappointing. All failing to equal the balance of machismo, action and humor that is needed.
So...it was with great anticipation that I looked forward to THE PREDATOR, a new film written and directed by Shane Black (KISS KISS BANG BANG, IRON MAN 3, THE NICE GUYS) - one of the actors in the 1987 flick!
And...I was disappointed again.
This film fails because it never really got a grip on just what type of film it wanted to be - is it a Sci-Fi film? Is it an Action film? A buddy flick? A gore fest? A look at Autism? Black's script and direction spreads all these items out on the picnic blanket that is this film and then intermittently picks each one of these up to show us - sometimes a couple of them - like a kid trying to decide whether he wants the chips or the hot dogs or the Oreo cookies and just shoves them all in his mouth together.
And that's too bad, for Black has an interesting premise - rival Predators battling on Earth - with a ragtag group of Earthlings thrown in the middle - and what a "ragtag" group they are! Trevante Rhodes (MOONLIGHTING), Thomas Jane (THE MIST), Keegan-Michael Key (KEY & PEELE), Alfie Allen (GAME OF THRONES) and Augusto Aguilera (CHASING LIFE) make an intriguing band of misfit soldiers that easily could have been an equal to Arnold's ragtag group of soldiers from the 1987 original.
Unfortunately, they are the "back-up band" to the boring Boyd Holbrook (NARCOS) and Olivia Munn (X-MEN: APOCALYPSE) as a couple thrown together to defend Holbrook's Autistic son (Jacob Tremblay - so good in ROOM and wasted here) in a by-the-book "they hate each other when they first meet, so - naturally - they'll fall in love by the end" plot contrivance that doesn't work at all.
Add on top of that Sterling K. Brown (THIS IS US) as a "mysterious" Gov't Agent who is so much of a bad guy, all he was missing was a mustache twirl and the missed opportunities of actors such as Yvonne Stahovski (THE HANDMAID'S TALE) and NIall Matter (EUREKA) who both just stand around and do nothing. They even cast Jake Busey (Gary's kid) - who would be the perfect "over-the-top" bad guy for this sort of film, but...he is just misdirection and wasted as well.
What a wasted effort, a wasted opportunity and a waste of my time.
Letter Grade C_+: The ragtag group of soldiers were at least fun to watch (give Thomas Jane and Keegan-Michael Key their own "buddy" picture)!
5 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the BankofMarquis
In subsequent years, there have been more films that attempted to use the Predator character - PREDATOR 2 (1990), AVP: ALIENS VS. PREDATOR (2004), ALIENS VS. PREDATOR: REQUIEM (2007) and PREDATORS (2010) - all disappointing. All failing to equal the balance of machismo, action and humor that is needed.
So...it was with great anticipation that I looked forward to THE PREDATOR, a new film written and directed by Shane Black (KISS KISS BANG BANG, IRON MAN 3, THE NICE GUYS) - one of the actors in the 1987 flick!
And...I was disappointed again.
This film fails because it never really got a grip on just what type of film it wanted to be - is it a Sci-Fi film? Is it an Action film? A buddy flick? A gore fest? A look at Autism? Black's script and direction spreads all these items out on the picnic blanket that is this film and then intermittently picks each one of these up to show us - sometimes a couple of them - like a kid trying to decide whether he wants the chips or the hot dogs or the Oreo cookies and just shoves them all in his mouth together.
And that's too bad, for Black has an interesting premise - rival Predators battling on Earth - with a ragtag group of Earthlings thrown in the middle - and what a "ragtag" group they are! Trevante Rhodes (MOONLIGHTING), Thomas Jane (THE MIST), Keegan-Michael Key (KEY & PEELE), Alfie Allen (GAME OF THRONES) and Augusto Aguilera (CHASING LIFE) make an intriguing band of misfit soldiers that easily could have been an equal to Arnold's ragtag group of soldiers from the 1987 original.
Unfortunately, they are the "back-up band" to the boring Boyd Holbrook (NARCOS) and Olivia Munn (X-MEN: APOCALYPSE) as a couple thrown together to defend Holbrook's Autistic son (Jacob Tremblay - so good in ROOM and wasted here) in a by-the-book "they hate each other when they first meet, so - naturally - they'll fall in love by the end" plot contrivance that doesn't work at all.
Add on top of that Sterling K. Brown (THIS IS US) as a "mysterious" Gov't Agent who is so much of a bad guy, all he was missing was a mustache twirl and the missed opportunities of actors such as Yvonne Stahovski (THE HANDMAID'S TALE) and NIall Matter (EUREKA) who both just stand around and do nothing. They even cast Jake Busey (Gary's kid) - who would be the perfect "over-the-top" bad guy for this sort of film, but...he is just misdirection and wasted as well.
What a wasted effort, a wasted opportunity and a waste of my time.
Letter Grade C_+: The ragtag group of soldiers were at least fun to watch (give Thomas Jane and Keegan-Michael Key their own "buddy" picture)!
5 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the BankofMarquis
Darren (1599 KP) rated A Ghost Story (2017) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: A Ghost Story starts as we follow couple C (Affleck) and M (Mara), they live a happy life in their home even though they are planning to move, but when C dies the perfect world becomes shattered. M dealing with the loss of her husband but C not going into the light and returning home to watch over his wife with a bed sheet covering him.
When M leaves the home, C is seemingly stuck bound to the house for all time as he goes through different households and his only communication comes from a fellow ghost trapped in the neighbouring house, but C is determined to stay for the one he loves even through all the changes the environment around him goes through.
Thoughts on A Ghost Story
Characters – C is the husband of M that dies, he finds himself coming back as a ghost to watch over his wife but soon finds himself alone once she leaves their home, he sees different lives enter his as he waits for her to return. M is the wife that can’t cope with her husband’s death, she tries to move on but without any hope, so to get away completely she leaves the home. The two do make for a good screen couple.
Performances – Rooney Mara is good in her role even if she is only in part of the film, it is Casey Affleck who must wear a sheet for the most part of this movie that doesn’t say anything but lives a lonely life watching other lives.
Story – The story here is difficult to describe as for the most part we just follow C the ghost with the bed sheet over his head watching every moment of this one location, wait for a chance to be with his love again. This isn’t a horror though it plays into deeper meanings that when you watch the full film you will get rewarded by, but it can be slow getting there. This is a story that will make you think about life and death which is one you need to watch to enjoy.
Fantasy/Romance – The fantasy elements of this film come on strong for the second half as we see the journey the sheeted C goes on, the romance side of the film looks at the idea of eternal love that people could have.
Settings – The whole film is set in once location, the background may well change but our character can’t leave the area he finds himself bound too.
Special Effects – Not many effects are used but the ones that are do help the films journey.
Scene of the Movie – The Beginning?
That Moment That Annoyed Me – There is a really long scene of Rooney Mara eating, I think it could have been near 10 minutes long.
Budget: $100,000
Final Thoughts – This is a very different movie, it shows the idea of eternal love from the side of a deceased character. It will make you think and by the end you will feel like you experienced something different.
Overall: Interesting movie that makes you think.
https://moviesreview101.com/2017/09/24/a-ghost-story-2017/
When M leaves the home, C is seemingly stuck bound to the house for all time as he goes through different households and his only communication comes from a fellow ghost trapped in the neighbouring house, but C is determined to stay for the one he loves even through all the changes the environment around him goes through.
Thoughts on A Ghost Story
Characters – C is the husband of M that dies, he finds himself coming back as a ghost to watch over his wife but soon finds himself alone once she leaves their home, he sees different lives enter his as he waits for her to return. M is the wife that can’t cope with her husband’s death, she tries to move on but without any hope, so to get away completely she leaves the home. The two do make for a good screen couple.
Performances – Rooney Mara is good in her role even if she is only in part of the film, it is Casey Affleck who must wear a sheet for the most part of this movie that doesn’t say anything but lives a lonely life watching other lives.
Story – The story here is difficult to describe as for the most part we just follow C the ghost with the bed sheet over his head watching every moment of this one location, wait for a chance to be with his love again. This isn’t a horror though it plays into deeper meanings that when you watch the full film you will get rewarded by, but it can be slow getting there. This is a story that will make you think about life and death which is one you need to watch to enjoy.
Fantasy/Romance – The fantasy elements of this film come on strong for the second half as we see the journey the sheeted C goes on, the romance side of the film looks at the idea of eternal love that people could have.
Settings – The whole film is set in once location, the background may well change but our character can’t leave the area he finds himself bound too.
Special Effects – Not many effects are used but the ones that are do help the films journey.
Scene of the Movie – The Beginning?
That Moment That Annoyed Me – There is a really long scene of Rooney Mara eating, I think it could have been near 10 minutes long.
Budget: $100,000
Final Thoughts – This is a very different movie, it shows the idea of eternal love from the side of a deceased character. It will make you think and by the end you will feel like you experienced something different.
Overall: Interesting movie that makes you think.
https://moviesreview101.com/2017/09/24/a-ghost-story-2017/
<i>This eBook was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review
Before she was the Queen of Hearts she was just a girl who wanted to fall in love. </i>When Marissa Meyer finished writing <i>The Lunar Chronicles</i>, a series of books loosely based on fairytales, everyone wondered what she would do next. Continuing along the lines of using famous stories, Meyer has devoted an entire novel to Lewis Carroll’s <i>Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland</i>. With thousands of references to the original tale, and a couple of other works too, Heartless is perfect for fans of Carroll’s salient characters.
Unlike most retellings, Meyer has focused on events prior to Alice’s accidental discovery of Wonderland. The resulting novel is essentially a theory as to how the characters turned out the way they did in the original story published in 1865. Drawing attention to the predestined Queen of Hearts, a young woman named Catherine, readers discover a reason for her development into an infamous villain.
Lady Catherine Pinkerton is completely unlike the character she is fated to be. She is a kind, thoughtful girl whose greatest wish is to open her own bakery. Unfortunately, this dream is just that, a dream. With the asinine King of Hearts resolved to marry her, there is little Cath can do to avoid her royal future. At first it may appear odd that Cath is so against marrying the ruler of Hearts, but she soon makes it clear she would much rather marry for love. So, when the court joker, Jest – a similar character to the legendary Hatter – catches her eye, Catherine becomes determined to control her own future.
<i>Heartless</i> is a humorous, yet romantic, young adult novel, full of both well-known and new characters. Set in a world with morals similar to the Victorian era, it works extremely well as a prequel to <i>Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland</i>. Catherine is an admirable, feministic character who readers will struggle to believe will become such a notorious Queen. What could possibly happen to vastly alter her personality? Similarly, what is it that makes the Hatter go mad, and who is Jest? Being a character unique to this novel, there is a foreboding sense that this joker, and his poetry reciting raven – cue Edgar Allan Poe references – suffer a horrible demise.
Unlike Marissa Meyer’s previous books where the fairytales were not so obvious, the storyline in <i>Heartless</i> perfectly joins up with Lewis Carroll’s imagination. With references to mock turtles, the Jabberwock and other minor characters, there is so much to discover in Meyer’s interpretation of Wonderland – it even clears up a couple of scenarios from the original tale that may have bamboozled readers initially.
Admittedly, <i>Heartless</i> takes a little while to get going, but once it has, it is difficult to put down. Fans of Marissa Meyer may be disappointed that she did not stick to her futuristic storytelling, however all Alice enthusiasts will fall in love with this book – and probably with Jest as well. Overall, <i>Heartless</i> is a delightful book that reignites our inner childish imagination.
Before she was the Queen of Hearts she was just a girl who wanted to fall in love. </i>When Marissa Meyer finished writing <i>The Lunar Chronicles</i>, a series of books loosely based on fairytales, everyone wondered what she would do next. Continuing along the lines of using famous stories, Meyer has devoted an entire novel to Lewis Carroll’s <i>Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland</i>. With thousands of references to the original tale, and a couple of other works too, Heartless is perfect for fans of Carroll’s salient characters.
Unlike most retellings, Meyer has focused on events prior to Alice’s accidental discovery of Wonderland. The resulting novel is essentially a theory as to how the characters turned out the way they did in the original story published in 1865. Drawing attention to the predestined Queen of Hearts, a young woman named Catherine, readers discover a reason for her development into an infamous villain.
Lady Catherine Pinkerton is completely unlike the character she is fated to be. She is a kind, thoughtful girl whose greatest wish is to open her own bakery. Unfortunately, this dream is just that, a dream. With the asinine King of Hearts resolved to marry her, there is little Cath can do to avoid her royal future. At first it may appear odd that Cath is so against marrying the ruler of Hearts, but she soon makes it clear she would much rather marry for love. So, when the court joker, Jest – a similar character to the legendary Hatter – catches her eye, Catherine becomes determined to control her own future.
<i>Heartless</i> is a humorous, yet romantic, young adult novel, full of both well-known and new characters. Set in a world with morals similar to the Victorian era, it works extremely well as a prequel to <i>Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland</i>. Catherine is an admirable, feministic character who readers will struggle to believe will become such a notorious Queen. What could possibly happen to vastly alter her personality? Similarly, what is it that makes the Hatter go mad, and who is Jest? Being a character unique to this novel, there is a foreboding sense that this joker, and his poetry reciting raven – cue Edgar Allan Poe references – suffer a horrible demise.
Unlike Marissa Meyer’s previous books where the fairytales were not so obvious, the storyline in <i>Heartless</i> perfectly joins up with Lewis Carroll’s imagination. With references to mock turtles, the Jabberwock and other minor characters, there is so much to discover in Meyer’s interpretation of Wonderland – it even clears up a couple of scenarios from the original tale that may have bamboozled readers initially.
Admittedly, <i>Heartless</i> takes a little while to get going, but once it has, it is difficult to put down. Fans of Marissa Meyer may be disappointed that she did not stick to her futuristic storytelling, however all Alice enthusiasts will fall in love with this book – and probably with Jest as well. Overall, <i>Heartless</i> is a delightful book that reignites our inner childish imagination.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Fun With Dick and Jane (2005) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
Story: Fun with Dick and Jane starts as we meet Dick (Carrey) who is about to get a promotion to vice president of the company he has worked for, for year. The problem comes that this promotion is designed to put the blame on the company’s problems on him instead of the men who really are involved, Jack (Baldwin) and Frank (Jenkins).
Dick loses his job and his wife Jane (Leoni) has quit her job, the two struggle to find new jobs and before long they are facing being evicted, which turns them to a life of crime to save their home.
Thoughts on Fun with Dick and Jane
Characters – Dick has been working for a company for his whole working career, he has been waiting for a chance to get to the next step which he gets only to see himself become the fall guy, making him unemployable in the field. He can’t get a job anywhere and out of pure desperation he turns to a life a crime to support his family. Jane is the wife of Dick who quits her job with his new promotion and can’t get a new job, she believes in Dick and ends up teaming up with Dick to commit crime. Jack and Frank are the CEOs that have taken advantage of Dick to get away clean after their illegal trading.
Performances – Jim Carrey gets to play into the full energy comedy that he is known for here, this isn’t the best he has given, but his fans will enjoy what he does, Tea Leoni does struggle with comedy and it is clear to see because she just doesn’t work with Carrey’s comedy. Alec Baldwin and Richard Jenkins get to enjoy their roles in the film playing into what they could be for these real people.
Story – The story follows a couple that are forced into a life of crime after losing everything when a business they are employed with gets closed down with the CEOs leaving the employees broke. This is a remake which has been bought into the modern era of greedy businessman who have taken advantage of their employees only to be left nothing. The story does seem to be going in fast forward with the crime montage flashing over what is happening. This does have a good outcome for everyone involved, but just doesn’t engage for the audience.
Comedy/Crime – The comedy in the film mostly revolves around Jim Carrey bringing in his routine which is enjoyed by people who are fans of his work, the crime side of the film shows just how CEOs can try and get away with things and how one couple looks to crime to survive.
Settings – The film doesn’t give us any settings which feel overly iconic which the film could have had to make us become more invested in what is happening.
Scene of the Movie – The first robbery.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Crime montage.
Final Thoughts – This is a by the book crime comedy that skips over too much of the interesting material only to leave us feeling like we blinked and missed too much.
Overall: Basic crime comedy.
Dick loses his job and his wife Jane (Leoni) has quit her job, the two struggle to find new jobs and before long they are facing being evicted, which turns them to a life of crime to save their home.
Thoughts on Fun with Dick and Jane
Characters – Dick has been working for a company for his whole working career, he has been waiting for a chance to get to the next step which he gets only to see himself become the fall guy, making him unemployable in the field. He can’t get a job anywhere and out of pure desperation he turns to a life a crime to support his family. Jane is the wife of Dick who quits her job with his new promotion and can’t get a new job, she believes in Dick and ends up teaming up with Dick to commit crime. Jack and Frank are the CEOs that have taken advantage of Dick to get away clean after their illegal trading.
Performances – Jim Carrey gets to play into the full energy comedy that he is known for here, this isn’t the best he has given, but his fans will enjoy what he does, Tea Leoni does struggle with comedy and it is clear to see because she just doesn’t work with Carrey’s comedy. Alec Baldwin and Richard Jenkins get to enjoy their roles in the film playing into what they could be for these real people.
Story – The story follows a couple that are forced into a life of crime after losing everything when a business they are employed with gets closed down with the CEOs leaving the employees broke. This is a remake which has been bought into the modern era of greedy businessman who have taken advantage of their employees only to be left nothing. The story does seem to be going in fast forward with the crime montage flashing over what is happening. This does have a good outcome for everyone involved, but just doesn’t engage for the audience.
Comedy/Crime – The comedy in the film mostly revolves around Jim Carrey bringing in his routine which is enjoyed by people who are fans of his work, the crime side of the film shows just how CEOs can try and get away with things and how one couple looks to crime to survive.
Settings – The film doesn’t give us any settings which feel overly iconic which the film could have had to make us become more invested in what is happening.
Scene of the Movie – The first robbery.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Crime montage.
Final Thoughts – This is a by the book crime comedy that skips over too much of the interesting material only to leave us feeling like we blinked and missed too much.
Overall: Basic crime comedy.
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Marriage Story (2019) in Movies
Nov 7, 2019
Divorce has been depicted many times onscreen, as it’s one of those difficult realities about adult relationships. There’s still a lot of stigma around the breakdown of a marriage, but Marriage Story deals with the topic in a very raw and unique way.
The film follows Nicole (Scarlett Johansson) and Charlie (Adam Driver) as they’re going through the turbulent divorce period. The couple share a young son Henry, who naturally causes complications for the two when it comes to custodial agreements.
Marriage Story opens with two gorgeous monologues about what the two characters love about each other, both of which are enough to make you cry a mere few minutes into the film. This contrasts very well with the present day, where they’re both struggling to make their marriage work.
It would have been very easy for Noah Baumbach to encourage the audience to pick sides, leaving them to subconsciously ‘root’ for either party to do well in the scenario. But remarkably that’s not the case, as it’s a very unbiased film that lays everything out on the table for us to see. Each messy, complicated detail is shown to us, and we end up sympathising with both.
One thing I really enjoyed about Marriage Story is the way Baumbach criticises some of the ridiculousness associated with divorce, especially when it comes to legal battles. Nicole reluctantly turns to ruthless lawyer Nora Fanshaw (Laura Dern), who is honest about the lies that have to be told in order to get through this.
Dern’s performance is hilarious but also highlights some of the inequalities and utterly baffling scenarios that happen when picking up a legal case. I wasn’t aware of any of them so it was quite a shock.
Watching the film is excruciating in places, but that’s a compliment on how raw and honest it is. It seems wrong for Charlie and Nicole to have to say and do certain things, all dictated by their respective lawyers. A clean break just isn’t possible when a child is involved.
It becomes even more complicated for the couple when Nicole decides to move back to Los Angeles, 2,789 miles away from New York City where she and Charlie used to reside. This creates a very literal distance between them, and causes problems with the battle for custody and Henry’s wellbeing.
Whilst there are many scenes which will reduce you to tears, Marriage Story has some comedic elements to lighten the mood, especially when it comes to Nicole’s family and how they react to the news of the divorce.
The two central performances in Marriage Story really are exceptional, and you become invested in the lives of people you don’t even know. One dramatic scene between Charlie and Nicole in particular had me openly sobbing, as it was full of contempt instead of love. Many of us can react to that exchange in a failing relationship, and it hurts.
If you want a very honest look at what it’s like to go through a divorce, then Marriage Story is just that. This isn’t the kind of film that sugarcoats anything and instead takes its audience on an emotional rollercoaster from start to finish.
The film follows Nicole (Scarlett Johansson) and Charlie (Adam Driver) as they’re going through the turbulent divorce period. The couple share a young son Henry, who naturally causes complications for the two when it comes to custodial agreements.
Marriage Story opens with two gorgeous monologues about what the two characters love about each other, both of which are enough to make you cry a mere few minutes into the film. This contrasts very well with the present day, where they’re both struggling to make their marriage work.
It would have been very easy for Noah Baumbach to encourage the audience to pick sides, leaving them to subconsciously ‘root’ for either party to do well in the scenario. But remarkably that’s not the case, as it’s a very unbiased film that lays everything out on the table for us to see. Each messy, complicated detail is shown to us, and we end up sympathising with both.
One thing I really enjoyed about Marriage Story is the way Baumbach criticises some of the ridiculousness associated with divorce, especially when it comes to legal battles. Nicole reluctantly turns to ruthless lawyer Nora Fanshaw (Laura Dern), who is honest about the lies that have to be told in order to get through this.
Dern’s performance is hilarious but also highlights some of the inequalities and utterly baffling scenarios that happen when picking up a legal case. I wasn’t aware of any of them so it was quite a shock.
Watching the film is excruciating in places, but that’s a compliment on how raw and honest it is. It seems wrong for Charlie and Nicole to have to say and do certain things, all dictated by their respective lawyers. A clean break just isn’t possible when a child is involved.
It becomes even more complicated for the couple when Nicole decides to move back to Los Angeles, 2,789 miles away from New York City where she and Charlie used to reside. This creates a very literal distance between them, and causes problems with the battle for custody and Henry’s wellbeing.
Whilst there are many scenes which will reduce you to tears, Marriage Story has some comedic elements to lighten the mood, especially when it comes to Nicole’s family and how they react to the news of the divorce.
The two central performances in Marriage Story really are exceptional, and you become invested in the lives of people you don’t even know. One dramatic scene between Charlie and Nicole in particular had me openly sobbing, as it was full of contempt instead of love. Many of us can react to that exchange in a failing relationship, and it hurts.
If you want a very honest look at what it’s like to go through a divorce, then Marriage Story is just that. This isn’t the kind of film that sugarcoats anything and instead takes its audience on an emotional rollercoaster from start to finish.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Tempting Death in Books
Jan 23, 2020
I fully admit I signed up for the blog tour because of the way the synopsis is written it speaks to me! Of course I'm excited! Except there's a big problem: what if I don't like it? What if I hate it, or, or, want to throw it out the window because it was just that terrible?
Hint: I didn't throw it out the window. Holloway's debut novel is one you don't want to bypass simply. A girl nearly gets killed, gets saved and offered a job yet has 48 hours to choose. Add the fact a best friend is marked for murder and time is tick tocking (certainly not slowly) what more could you ask for? The idea oozes awesomeness all around.
BUT... there's just a few things. I feel that Holloway focused more on the plot and the action rather than the character building. I completely get that the fast pace might be an emphasis for how fast time is running out for Libbi. And as much as I just love Libbi Piper as a character and her personality, I don't feel as though I know her. Libbi and I are still strangers there's hardly anything about her past aside from a life of taking care of her brother when her mom is working in a hospital. Her dad just upped and left once upon a time. Well, at least until she was supposedly killed. But I'm quite sure Libbi has a much more interesting life than always taking care of her little brother even I have one (and my life is quite similar to Libbi's. Just lots of family drama.)!
Aside from all of that, there's barely anything else about Libbi, and she's the main character. You would expect more than a life of taking care of her brother and having a couple of besties since childhood I feel like I know Grimmy Aaron more now. I'm quite disappointed.
Second, the love triangle. It was extremely obvious the romance isn't going to go well (please, don't tell me the best friend never wins. I know that. That's beside the point.). If there's one thing that's obvious from day one, it's the fact Libbi is going to be no doubt jumping between two corners of the triangle so said corners wouldn't murder each other. LITERALLY.
(I personally predict that will be the near future of the Lux series.)
Despite the couple of problems, I loved Call Me Grim the building of the Grim Reaper world, Libbi's humor and making light of the entire situation even though it was likely she wouldn't get out of the situation "alive". Elizabeth Holloway is an author you'll want to watch out for in this particular genre.
-------------------
Advanced copy provided by Month9Books for the blog tour
Original Review posted at <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2014/09/blog-tour-call-me-grim-by-elizabeth-holloway-arc-review-and-giveaway.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cG5gfBqJVzk/VA5BIojjZ9I/AAAAAAAAD1g/7srLUfpAGEU/s1600/banner.png"; /></a>
Hint: I didn't throw it out the window. Holloway's debut novel is one you don't want to bypass simply. A girl nearly gets killed, gets saved and offered a job yet has 48 hours to choose. Add the fact a best friend is marked for murder and time is tick tocking (certainly not slowly) what more could you ask for? The idea oozes awesomeness all around.
BUT... there's just a few things. I feel that Holloway focused more on the plot and the action rather than the character building. I completely get that the fast pace might be an emphasis for how fast time is running out for Libbi. And as much as I just love Libbi Piper as a character and her personality, I don't feel as though I know her. Libbi and I are still strangers there's hardly anything about her past aside from a life of taking care of her brother when her mom is working in a hospital. Her dad just upped and left once upon a time. Well, at least until she was supposedly killed. But I'm quite sure Libbi has a much more interesting life than always taking care of her little brother even I have one (and my life is quite similar to Libbi's. Just lots of family drama.)!
Aside from all of that, there's barely anything else about Libbi, and she's the main character. You would expect more than a life of taking care of her brother and having a couple of besties since childhood I feel like I know Grimmy Aaron more now. I'm quite disappointed.
Second, the love triangle. It was extremely obvious the romance isn't going to go well (please, don't tell me the best friend never wins. I know that. That's beside the point.). If there's one thing that's obvious from day one, it's the fact Libbi is going to be no doubt jumping between two corners of the triangle so said corners wouldn't murder each other. LITERALLY.
(I personally predict that will be the near future of the Lux series.)
Despite the couple of problems, I loved Call Me Grim the building of the Grim Reaper world, Libbi's humor and making light of the entire situation even though it was likely she wouldn't get out of the situation "alive". Elizabeth Holloway is an author you'll want to watch out for in this particular genre.
-------------------
Advanced copy provided by Month9Books for the blog tour
Original Review posted at <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2014/09/blog-tour-call-me-grim-by-elizabeth-holloway-arc-review-and-giveaway.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cG5gfBqJVzk/VA5BIojjZ9I/AAAAAAAAD1g/7srLUfpAGEU/s1600/banner.png"; /></a>
Night Reader Reviews (683 KP) rated Go Back for Love in Books
Mar 18, 2020
Honest Review for Free Copy of Book
Go Back for Love by Anne-Marie Sassoli is an extremely brief romance. This book can easily be read in a day, in not just a couple of hours. It also relies heavily on time travel in very short bursts.
Laura is a bit of a nobody and always has been, at least in her own opinion. Then one seemingly random day she gets a letter from a solicitor. This letter sets her off on a whole new life as it is her inheritance from an aunt she barely knew. Along with a large sum of money Laura is given a mysterious coin collection that is connected to her aunt in a most unusual way. Through these coins, Laura learns about her aunt's past. She is introduced to her aunt’s fall from riches to being a servant. Her aunt’s journey doesn't end there but in an unexpected interaction with a man who sees her potential as a person despite the differences in their social classes.
During Laura’s discovery of her aunt's past, she also starts forming a cautious relationship with her neighbor, Blaire, who also happens to own the building she lives in. What is most startling is how Blaire is already interwoven into Laura’s life by a surprising connection to her Aunt. Was their meeting predetermined by fate (or the Aunt) or is it just something that happened by chance?
Like many of the books that I do not care for, I do like the concept, it just wasn’t presented very well. So much could be done with how the Aunt's coins allowed Laura to travel back in time. What Laura saw when she traveled was also interesting but lacked relevance, it contained no lesson and did nothing to directly encourage Blaire and Laura to get together. The book is extremely vague. It is almost as if it is an unfinished draft of what could be a much larger story. Unfortunately, everything felt glossed over, like the author had a good idea but didn’t want to take the time to write a larger novel.
If I were to recommend this book to anyone it would be adults who like romance (there is one semi-vivid sex scene). It is good for those that want a basic and quick read, but those wanting something with more depth will be disappointed. I rate this book 1 out of 4. I was rather disappointed in it. While so short stories have the amazing ability to quickly draw readers in, provoke emotion, or make them think, this one missed the mark. In fact upon thinking about the story, time travel wasn’t even needed as the money that Laura also got put the couple in contact and not the coins.
https://www.facebook.com/nightreaderreviews/
https://smashbomb.com/nightreader
https://nightreaderreviews.blogspot.com/
Laura is a bit of a nobody and always has been, at least in her own opinion. Then one seemingly random day she gets a letter from a solicitor. This letter sets her off on a whole new life as it is her inheritance from an aunt she barely knew. Along with a large sum of money Laura is given a mysterious coin collection that is connected to her aunt in a most unusual way. Through these coins, Laura learns about her aunt's past. She is introduced to her aunt’s fall from riches to being a servant. Her aunt’s journey doesn't end there but in an unexpected interaction with a man who sees her potential as a person despite the differences in their social classes.
During Laura’s discovery of her aunt's past, she also starts forming a cautious relationship with her neighbor, Blaire, who also happens to own the building she lives in. What is most startling is how Blaire is already interwoven into Laura’s life by a surprising connection to her Aunt. Was their meeting predetermined by fate (or the Aunt) or is it just something that happened by chance?
Like many of the books that I do not care for, I do like the concept, it just wasn’t presented very well. So much could be done with how the Aunt's coins allowed Laura to travel back in time. What Laura saw when she traveled was also interesting but lacked relevance, it contained no lesson and did nothing to directly encourage Blaire and Laura to get together. The book is extremely vague. It is almost as if it is an unfinished draft of what could be a much larger story. Unfortunately, everything felt glossed over, like the author had a good idea but didn’t want to take the time to write a larger novel.
If I were to recommend this book to anyone it would be adults who like romance (there is one semi-vivid sex scene). It is good for those that want a basic and quick read, but those wanting something with more depth will be disappointed. I rate this book 1 out of 4. I was rather disappointed in it. While so short stories have the amazing ability to quickly draw readers in, provoke emotion, or make them think, this one missed the mark. In fact upon thinking about the story, time travel wasn’t even needed as the money that Laura also got put the couple in contact and not the coins.
https://www.facebook.com/nightreaderreviews/
https://smashbomb.com/nightreader
https://nightreaderreviews.blogspot.com/
Surge: Gay Dating App
Dating, Lifestyle and Social Networking
1.0
Rate It
App
Discover hot gay men nearby with the fastest-growing gay dating and social networking app on Apple...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Zoo (2018) in Movies
Feb 27, 2021
I'm not sure how this came into the watching loop, I honestly think it was the fact it was only about an hour and a half long.
John and Karen have fallen out of love with each other, their future might have been very different if it wasn't for the mysterious and dangerous plague going on outside their flat. Can they wait out the danger with the promise of rescue on the horizon?
From the outset the music comes across as quite jarring. I would expect it to be for this sort of topic, however I didn't find it easy to listen to, or that it fit well into the overall film. It's something I noticed several times, and you know me, I only notice music if it's amazing or terrible.
John and Karen, played by Ed Speleers and Zoë Tapper, take most of the screen time in their flat. We see their relationship change over the course of the film, from their rocky beginning they use their time together to become reacquainted with each other. At the beginning I wasn't entirely sure about them as a couple, the chemistry between the two actors seemed a little off, even when taking into account the divide in their character's relationship. Once we're underway though I found the power dynamic became more apparent and that helped move things along.
Despite them being confined, you never get that claustrophobic feeling, and that seemed rather strange. That spacious flat almost felt welcoming with its size, and that's at odds with the point of the film. Their spacious flat almost felt welcoming with its size. Had it "opened up" as we progressed, that would have made some sense, but all the space was used fairly early on even as extra people get added. At no point did their environment inside the flat have any real sense of danger.
The character of Karen is never massively likeable even in vulnerable moments, and her actions often seem to contradict themselves during the proceedings. When the neighbours are added into the mix I genuinely didn't see the reality in their interactions. It became a struggle between two alphas and their clueless partners, but it lacked chemistry and was a low point in the film for me.
At the beginning as the couple montage their way to trying to survive I started to engage more, but the middle chunk didn't really click with me. But somewhere along the way it seemed to get back on track... but again, more of that contradiction came and it became a real miss match.
Because of the way Death Do Us Part decided to handle the catastrophe you actually get a lot less gore than you'd expect. There are still violent moments to be seen, but it does quite a good job of hiding most of it away.
Death Do Us Part was an intriguing take on a zombie movie, with definite highs and lows. And while it was eventually an enjoyable watch, it does leave you with few answers about the story outside their flat, which was both fine and yet frustrating.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/02/death-do-us-part-movie-review.html
John and Karen have fallen out of love with each other, their future might have been very different if it wasn't for the mysterious and dangerous plague going on outside their flat. Can they wait out the danger with the promise of rescue on the horizon?
From the outset the music comes across as quite jarring. I would expect it to be for this sort of topic, however I didn't find it easy to listen to, or that it fit well into the overall film. It's something I noticed several times, and you know me, I only notice music if it's amazing or terrible.
John and Karen, played by Ed Speleers and Zoë Tapper, take most of the screen time in their flat. We see their relationship change over the course of the film, from their rocky beginning they use their time together to become reacquainted with each other. At the beginning I wasn't entirely sure about them as a couple, the chemistry between the two actors seemed a little off, even when taking into account the divide in their character's relationship. Once we're underway though I found the power dynamic became more apparent and that helped move things along.
Despite them being confined, you never get that claustrophobic feeling, and that seemed rather strange. That spacious flat almost felt welcoming with its size, and that's at odds with the point of the film. Their spacious flat almost felt welcoming with its size. Had it "opened up" as we progressed, that would have made some sense, but all the space was used fairly early on even as extra people get added. At no point did their environment inside the flat have any real sense of danger.
The character of Karen is never massively likeable even in vulnerable moments, and her actions often seem to contradict themselves during the proceedings. When the neighbours are added into the mix I genuinely didn't see the reality in their interactions. It became a struggle between two alphas and their clueless partners, but it lacked chemistry and was a low point in the film for me.
At the beginning as the couple montage their way to trying to survive I started to engage more, but the middle chunk didn't really click with me. But somewhere along the way it seemed to get back on track... but again, more of that contradiction came and it became a real miss match.
Because of the way Death Do Us Part decided to handle the catastrophe you actually get a lot less gore than you'd expect. There are still violent moments to be seen, but it does quite a good job of hiding most of it away.
Death Do Us Part was an intriguing take on a zombie movie, with definite highs and lows. And while it was eventually an enjoyable watch, it does leave you with few answers about the story outside their flat, which was both fine and yet frustrating.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/02/death-do-us-part-movie-review.html