Search

Search only in certain items:

Think Yourself Lucky
Think Yourself Lucky
4
4.0 (1 Ratings)
Book Rating
Thanks to Flame Tree Press and NetGalley for an advance copy in exchange for an honest review.

Co-workers, Emily, Helen, Bill, Andrea and David work in a travel agency. David is a grouch who complains about everything—his job, his girlfriend and his life. Meanwhile, an unnamed narrator is committing horrendous murders. When David discovers a blog using his fantasy blog name talking about the murders, he is concerned. The victims are people at which he was recently angry. Is someone stalking him or is he committing the murders in some sort of fugue state?
I have been reading Ramsey Campbell novels since the early 80’s but had never read this till now. While I enjoyed the novel I definitely don’t consider this one in the category of his best works.
This is definitely a doppelganger type horror but it just didn’t have the hard hitting horror I was expecting. This was just a lot of inane babble but unfortunately reflects the meanness of the human spirit that is so evident today.
  
40x40

Merissa (11758 KP) rated Little Tree in Books

Dec 8, 2018  
Little Tree
Little Tree
Rafe Jadison | 2018 | Contemporary, LGBTQ+, Romance
8
8.0 (1 Ratings)
Book Rating
Little Tree by Rafe Jadison
Little Tree is a beauty of a book. Seasonal in that it takes place just before Christmas, this book is primarily a second-chance romance. Jared was a fool, and has paid the price. David was hurt, but carried on with his life. These two have baggage to contend with, and Jared can only hope that a past hurt won't take over the promise of a future.

I found this book to be 'sweeter' than the others by this author I have read. It was less eroticism, and more sensual. It was a delight to read, with no editing or grammatical errors that disrupted my reading. I loved both main characters, although I did want to whomp Jared around the head when we found out about his past! You could see it as lost opportunities, but I prefer to think the experiences will just have made these two fit together even better.

The characters are well-defined, and the situation the same. There are no doubts about this book, apart from whether they will end up together again or not. I'll leave that to you to find out! All I can say, is this is a great addition to Rafe Jadison's repertoire, and I thoroughly enjoyed every word. Absolutely recommended by me.

* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *

Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
  
40x40

Cee-Lo Green recommended Raw Power by The Stooges in Music (curated)

 
Raw Power by The Stooges
Raw Power by The Stooges
1973 | Punk, Rock
8.4 (9 Ratings)
Album Favorite

"Iggy reminds me a lot of me. And it's all in that name; it's all in the title of that album. It’s raw power, you know? I like the funk that David Bowie was able to get behind Iggy. Believe it or not, I first saw an image of Iggy Pop at church, and they were talking about secret messages and backward masking - and they had [a picture of] Iggy Pop looking crazy. I didn't get into it until later, but I think how I was introduced to it was 'I Wanna Be Your Dog'. And what I like about Iggy is it's just genuine raunch. And the album seems like it’s all done in one take. 'Let's do that one, leave it, just try something else'. With his energy on stage, it seems as if the studio was just destroyed after that album - or at least you'd like to believe that. I just read an interview with him in which he said he wrote a lot of it in Hyde Park sitting under a tree wearing pyjama's too, which gave it a cool twist as well. I just love 'Search And Destroy' and 'I Need Somebody' as well."

Source
  
Next by The Sensational Alex Harvey Band Rock
Next by The Sensational Alex Harvey Band Rock
1973 | Metal, Pop, Rock
(0 Ratings)
Album Favorite

"They were very theatrical. Alex Harvey was 40 something, he was an old guy. And - at the time - that was ancient for rock n roll. He won the Scottish Tommy Steele competition in 1957. The prize? Meeting Tommy Steele! What a bizarre business. That was two years before I was born and he must have been in his late teens/early 20s by then. To be in your early 40s and starting out was unheard of. David Bowie and Alex Harvey knew each other, actually: they bonded over a shared love of Jacques Brel. 'Faith Healer' is one of the best things that ever came out of the 70s. And the end triplet of 'Last Of The Teenage Idols' – which is about the competition that he won. That was amazing. I loved his voice: he screamed his way through life. His version of 'Crazy Horses' is hilarious. He did a song called 'There's No Lights on the Xmas Tree Mother… They're Burning Big Louis Tonight'. It was about a guy in the electric chair who takes all the power off the grid on the night of his death. Nobody in this little town in America gets the Xmas lights. What a brilliant idea for a song. It was theatrics and bravado. Alex Harvey was off kilter - it wasn't like The Sweet or Mud, he was musically brilliant."

Source
  
The Fallen Idol (1949)
The Fallen Idol (1949)
1949 | Classics, Drama, Mystery
(0 Ratings)
Movie Favorite

"Carol Reed was a brilliant director and a sweet man, but he was not a one-man band like David Lean; he required a strong, patient producer who loved him, as my Uncle Alex did, and a gifted screenwriter, which Alex found for him in the novelist Graham Greene, as well as an art director of genius—my father. He was at his best surrounded by talented people who loved him, who were virtual family, and that shows in his best films, Odd Man Out, The Fallen Idol, and The Third Man. One unusual aspect of Carol’s gifts was that he was among the rare directors good at working with children—go watch The Third Man and you will be astonished at the brilliant inclusion of the ghastly little boy who accuses Holly Martins of murder. Most of the great directors hate working with animals or children, but Carol—himself the illegitimate son of the great Edwardian actor and theatrical producer Sir Herbert Beerbohm Tree—had a natural sympathy and understanding of children. He was in fact childlike himself—hence his choice, later in life, to make a film of the musical Oliver!—and this shows in his direction of Bobby Henrey in this, another of those English films in which good manners manage to hide passion and even murder, except in the alarmingly clear view of a child. Ralph Richardson, dear Ralph, is at his best in the role of the butler."

Source
  
Joe (2014)
Joe (2014)
2014 | Drama
8
8.0 (1 Ratings)
Movie Rating
So, officially … spring is here although it still feels like winter to your friendly
neighborhood freelance photographer but according to the calendar it’s spring.

Another indicator that it might be spring? Nicolas Cage has a new film out.
Seriously, he does .. and it’s actually a dark, heavy-duty drama.

‘Joe’ is based on the 1991 novel of the same name written by author Larry Brown.
Directed by David Gordon Green who’se credits include comedies like 2008’s
‘Pineapple Express’ and the HBO t.v. series ‘Eastbound & Down’ … ‘Joe’is certainly
no comedy.

Starring Nicolas Cage, Tye Sheridan, and Ronnie Gene Belvins ‘Joe’ is a dark, gritty
film that tells the story of Joe Ransom. An angry ex-con who befriends Gary, a teenager
from an abusive, broken home who approaches Joe looking for work with his ‘tree poinsoning’
crew. Impressed by Gary’s stubborness and determination Joe gives him a job (and later
his truck) and attempts to set Gary on ‘the right path’ and becomes an unlikely rolemodel
for him. At home though, Gary’s family life is slowly spiraling at of control due to
his alcholic father and the situation points to a dark, violent confrontation.

I can honestly say that this is one of Nic Cage’s best and ‘sincere’ performances in a
while and due to the darkness of the film, it will most likely go unrecognized. The film
doesn’t hold back. It’s in-your-face, gritty, and violent. The minute you don’t think it
can get more disturbing, it does just that. As the viewer, the experience was like an
old-fashioned pinball machine only you, the viewer, ARE the pinball.

I don’t recommend this as a ‘date movie’ but if you like Nicolas Cage’s work and you’re
looking for a good drama, this is defintely one to see. If this movie is any indication,
I imagine it won’t be too long before Nic Cage has another great performance under his belt
so keep an eye out. ‘Joe’ is rated ‘R’ and you can catch it in theaters on April 11th.
I give the film 4 out of 5 stars.
  
Pete's Dragon (2016)
Pete's Dragon (2016)
2016 | Family
8
7.8 (10 Ratings)
Movie Rating
Lovely in every sense of the word
2016 really does belong to Disney. The House of Mouse has been churning out some incredible films this year with the live-action remake of The Jungle Book proving sceptical audiences (and critics) completely wrong.

The BFG was a pleasant and inoffensive adaptation of Roald Dahl’s wonderful novel and Finding Dory got Pixar back on the right track, and let’s not forget Captain America: Civil War, by far the best superhero film of the year.

Here, Disney continues its trend with recreating its classic cartoons in live-action; resurrecting Pete’s Dragon. But is this remake of the 1977 film of the same name as good as The Jungle Book?

Mr. Meacham (Robert Redford), a woodcarver, delights local children with stories of a mysterious dragon that lives deep in the woods of the Pacific Northwest. His daughter Grace (Bryce Dallas Howard) believes these are just tall tales, until she meets Pete (Oakes Fegley), a 10-year-old orphan who says he lives in the woods with a giant, friendly dragon called Elliot. With help from a young girl named Natalie (Oona Laurence), Grace sets out to investigate if this fantastic claim can be true.

Director David Lowery helms the film with a quiet subtlety that automatically makes Pete’s Dragon a very different adaptation to Jon Favreau’s stomping Jungle Book. Here, the joy is in the storytelling rather than popping on a set of nostalgia glasses and settling in for the journey.

Acting wise, it’s a pretty formulaic affair. Bryce Dallas Howard, in her first major role since last year’s smash hit Jurassic World, is as likeable as ever and like the film itself, commands the screen with an understated presence. Elsewhere, Oakes Fegley gives a cracking portrayal of Pete.

Naturally, the main character throughout is Elliot, the big friendly dragon. This bright green behemoth is rendered in wonderful CGI, with each gust of wind lifting his fur beautifully. Considering the film’s modest $65million budget, Elliot is utterly believable in each and every scene.

The lush forest landscape provides a mesmerising backdrop on which to construct a film and David Lowery takes the audience on sweeping journeys across the tree-tops, brilliantly juxtaposed with confined caves and the woodland floor.

Unfortunately, the deforestation side plot is never truly explored with Karl Urban’s underdeveloped “villain” proving to be a slight undoing in this near perfect remake.

Thankfully though, the themes of family, friendship and never giving up despite the odds are explored to their fullest – these are themes that Disney knows how to do better than any other studio and the emotional heart that brings to Pete’s Dragon ensures teary eyes are inevitable.

Overall, Disney has done it again. Just five months after the phenomenal Jungle Book remake, the studio has got it spot on with Pete’s Dragon. The two films couldn’t be further apart, with this one succeeding in its quiet dignity. It is in every sense of the word – lovely.

https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/08/16/lovely-in-every-sense-of-the-word-petes-dragon-review/
  
Mary Poppins Returns (2018)
Mary Poppins Returns (2018)
2018 | Family
A valiant attempt to recreate a masterpiece.
How do you repaint a masterpiece: the Mona Lisa of children’s fantasy cinema? Some would say “You shouldn’t try”.

As I’ve said before, Mary Poppins was the first film I saw when it came out (or soon afterwards) at a very impressionable age…. I was said to have bawled my eyes out with “THE MAGIC NANNY IS GOING AWAY!!” as Julie Andrews floated off! So as my last cinema trip of 2018 I went to see this sequel, 54 years after the original, with a sense of dread. I’m relieved to say that although the film has its flaws it’s by no means the disaster I envisaged.

The plot
It’s a fairly lightweight story. Now all grown up, young Michael from the original film (Ben Whishaw) has his own family. His troubles though come not singly but in battalions since not only is he grieving a recent loss but he is also about to be evicted from 17 Cherry Tree Lane. Help is at hand in that his father, George Banks, had shares with the Fidelity Fiduciary Bank. But despite their best efforts neither he, his sister Jane (Emily Mortimer) nor their chirpy “strike a light” lamplighter friend Jack (Lin-Manuel Miranda) can find the all-important share certificates. With the deadline from bank manager Wilkins (Colin Firth) approaching, it’s fortuitous that Mary Poppins (Emily Blunt) drops in to look after the Banks children – John (Nathanael Saleh), Anabel (Pixie Davies) and Georgie (Joel Dawson) – in her own inimitable fashion.

Songs that are more Meh-ry Poppins
I know musical taste is very personal. My biggest problem with the film though was that the songs by Marc Shaiman were, to me, on the lacklustre side. Only one jumped out and struck me: the jaunty vaudeville number “A Cover is not the Book”. Elsewhere they were – to me – unmemorable and nowhere near as catchy as those of “The Greatest Showman“. (What amplified this for me was having some of the classic Sherman-brothers themes woven into the soundtrack that just made me realise what I was missing!) Richard M Sherman – now 90 – was credited with “Music Consultant” but I wonder how much input he actually had?

The other flaws
Another issue I had with the film was that it just tried WAAYYY too hard to tick off the key attributes of the original:

‘Mary in the mirror’ – check
‘Bottomless carpet bag’ – check
‘Initial fun in the nursery’ – check
‘Quirky trip to a cartoon land’ – check
‘Dance on the ceiling with a quirky relative’ – check
‘Chirpy chimney sweeps’ – check (“Er… Mr Marshall… we couldn’t get chimney sweeps… will lamplighters do?” “Yeah, good enough”)
Another thing that struck me about the film – particularly as a film aimed at kids – is just how long it is. At 2 hours and 10 minutes it’s a bladder-testing experience for adults let alone younger children. (It’s worth noting that this is still 9 minutes shorter than the original, but back in the 60’s we had FAR fewer options to be stimulated by entertainment and our attention spans were – I think – much longer as a result!)

What it does get right
But with this whinging aside, the film does get a number of things spit-spot on.

Emily Blunt is near perfection as Poppins. (In the interests of balance my wife found her bizarrely clipped accent very grating, but I suspect P.L. Travers would have approved!). Broadway star Lin-Manuel Miranda also does a good job as Jack, although you wonder whether the ‘society of cockney actors’ must again be in a big grump about the casting! I found Emily Mortimer just delightful as the grown-up Jane, although Ben Whishaw‘s Michael didn’t particularly connect with me.

Almost unrecognisable was David Warner as the now wheelchair-bound Admiral Boom. His first mate is none other than Jim Norton of “Father Ted” Bishop Brennan fame (thanks to my daughter Jenn for pointing that one out)!

Also watch out (I’d largely missed it before I realised!) for a nice pavement cameo by Karen Dotrice, the original Jane, asking directions to number 19 Cherry Tree Lane.

What the film also gets right is to implement the old-school animation of the “Jolly Holidays” segment of the original. That’s a really smart move. Filmed at Shepperton Studios in London, this is once again a great advert for Britain’s film technicians. The London sets and the costumes (by the great Sandy Powell) are just superb.

Some cameo cherries on the cake
Finally, the aces in the hole are the two cameos near the end of the film. And they would have been lovely surprises as well since neither name appears in the opening credits. It’s therefore a CRYING SHAME that they chose to let the cat out of the bag in the trailer (BLOODY MARKETING EXECS!). In case you haven’t seen the trailer, I won’t spoil it for you here. But as a magical movie experience the first of those cameos moved me close to tears. He also delivers a hum-dinger of a plot twist that is a genuinely welcome crossover from the first film.

Final Thoughts
Rob Marshall directs, and with a pretty impossible task he delivers an end-product that, while it didn’t completely thrill me, did well not to trash my delicate hopes and dreams either. Having just listened to Kermode and Mayo’s review (and it seems that Mark Kermode places Poppins on a similar pedestal to me) the songs (and therefore the “Place Where Lost Things Go” song) just didn’t resonate with me in the same way, and so, unlike Kermode, I mentally never bridged the gap to safely enjoying it.

But what we all think is secondary. Because if some three or four year old out there gets a similarly lifelong love of the cinema by watching this, then that’s all that matters.
  
Twin Peaks  - Season 3
Twin Peaks - Season 3
2017 | Drama
The Cast (1 more)
The new mysterys
Lack of the familar Twin Peaks stuff (2 more)
The way the story unfolds
Very Slow
The first four episodes
Twin Peaks: The Return

*** Ive tried to write this as spoiler free as i can, you may find some in here but nothing that i think would ruin watching the show for you ***

I don’t think it will come to anyones surprise to say that the first four episodes of Twin Peaks return are strange. But maybe not in the way that we know and love.

I found these first four episodes difficult to enjoy not because they were bad, but because it was not what I was expecting at all. I wanted the key things that I love about Twin Peaks to be there, the returning characters, the iconic score by Angleo Badalamenti, the quirky weirdness grounded by soap opera like stories. I wanted the dark seriousness of murder, lust and money, beautifully intertwined with the ridiculousness of silent drape runners, saving the pine weasel and miss twin peaks contests.Unfortunately I found very little of any of what I wanted.

Yes Cooper is back or more accurately Kyle Maclachlan is back but has yet to act or sound anything like Special Agent Dale Cooper at all, the story calling for him to play a very lifeless rendition of his former glory. Other familiar faces have shown up along the way, but not very many and for not very long at all.

What we have is something very Lynchian, long drawn out scenes, especially in The Black Lodge that after extended moments of a droning humming score and lot of not a lot going on in slow motion followed by more not a lot going on but this time with a white horse or a talking lump of flesh on a leafless tree in the picture, it starts to feel like a lot of weird stuff just for sheer sake of being weird.

Fans of the previous seasons of Twin Peaks might be left wondering what is going on with the stories that were left open, is Leo still holding that rope in his mouth, what happened after the explosion in the bank vault, and what the hell has happened to Annie – well you wont find any of these answers here. Instead we are given a whole bunch of new characters, who’s stories we are still trying to figure out and how they are related to the events of Twin Peaks, which is a made into a bigger and more confusing mystery seeing as none of them actually take place in Twin Peaks at all. In fact, the most recognisable place in the first few hours is The Black Lodge, which features extensively in the first two episodes before “Cooper” bizarrely ends up in Las Vegas. Also knocking us out of our comfort zone and driving home the fact that this is not the same kind of Twin Peaks show we are used to, are the occasional F bombs being dropped and the coy sexiness that flowed through the show has been replaced with plain nudity.

We have been given vision that is pure David Lynch. He produces some fantastical imagery and some unnerving editing that is like watching Eraserhead, Lost Highway and Fire Walk With Me all at the same time on the same screen. As a piece of art it has its place amongst Lynch fans, but as a piece of entertainment for prime time television, it missed the mark for me, and as a return to Twin Peaks, it should be ashamed of itself, as apart from 30 seconds or so in episode 4 where here the familiar twangs of the original score, I didn’t feel like there was any return to that great tv show from the early 90s. There is the odd nugget of new that will keep me watching, Naomi Watts and Matthew Lillard have joined the team in what promises to be entertaining roles, there is a glass box that is being kept in some kind of secret bunker under constant video monitoring that seems to have something to do with The Black Lodge, the log lady is getting message from her log again, a body that doesn’t belong to its head and we are still hanging out at the Bang Bang Bar with Bobby, Shelley and James even if it was for far too brief at time.

Overall: It didn’t deliver on its promise, or give me what I wanted, but there is still a lot more episodes to come. I cant think of another show that would get away with such a slow build or lack of deliverance than the new third season of Twin Peaks.
  
Avatar (2009)
Avatar (2009)
2009 | Action, Comedy, Mystery
Jake Sully (Sam Worthington) is your typical jarhead from the military other than the fact that he doesn't have the use of his legs, but him being in a wheelchair doesn't seem to slow him down at all. Jake is the type of soldier to shoot first and ask questions later while his twin brother was more of the scientific type, but Jake's life takes an unexpected turn when his brother is killed. Jake is asked to step into his brother's shoes, so to speak, and take his spot in the Avatar project. The project requires him to travel to Pandora, a planet that takes nearly six years to get to, and to try to learn the ways of the natives there, the Na'vi.

Incredible technology has been developed that enables users to transfer their human essence into the body of a Na'vi avatar that they've raised from a DNA injected fetus and transfer back again. Parker Selfridge (Giovanni Ribisi) runs the project currently taking place on Pandora, who is after a resource known as unobtanium that could be the answer to the energy crisis back on Earth. A sacred tree that acts as the Na'vi's central base rests on top of the largest unobtanium deposits in Pandora. When Jake begins being trusted by the Na'vi race, a deal is made that he'll get his legs back if he can somehow convince the Na'vi people to leave. However, Jake begins to realize how spectacular their world really is, that the Na'vi people are more than just "blue monkeys," and begins to feel like his time in the avatar body is more genuine than when he wakes up. He begins to wonder if he's fighting for the wrong side.

The first feature film from director James Cameron (director of the first two Terminator films, Aliens, and Titanic) in 12 years that promised some of the most groundbreaking special effects to ever hit the screen is finally here. This film's ad campaign has been insane with clips and behind the scenes featurettes showing up online left and right while TV spots were nearly on every major channel. Is there any way a film could live up this kind of hype? The short answer is yes.

Avatar starts off rather slowly with the main human characters and the world of Pandora being introduced to us. Then there's the technology on the human side that needs its fair amount of screen time. Needless to say, it takes a good while for things to really get rolling. Character development is never a bad thing to accomplish early on. It makes it that much easier to establish an emotional connection when things get rough later on, which is exactly what this film does. Plus, when the war finally does happen, it's well worth the wait. Although, the emotional connection didn't seem as strong as it should have been or as strong as previous Cameron films. Once things took a turn for the worst, the emotions were there but it just seemed like it should have had a stronger connection given the duration of the film along with the time, effort, and money put into making this film as great as it is.

The special effects are pretty mind blowing. James Cameron has practically given life to this extravagant world and the marvelous creatures that inhabit it. The majority of the film looks realistic even though nearly every scene relies heavily on CGI. A feat not many CGI-heavy films have been able to pull off and none to the extent that this film has. There's a scene where Jake is attacked by a group of viperwolves and another scene where Jake learns to ride a direhorse that look incredibly genuine. To make something like people with blue skin or a horse that has an anteater head with six legs look real is an accomplishment worth being proud of. The technology used in the film by the humans is pulled off so flawlessly that it seems like it could come to fruition in the real world tomorrow.

Sam Worthington continues his trend of exceptional performances, as well. While Zoey Saldana, Sigourney Weaver, Giovanni Ribisi, and Joel David Moore all have their shining moments, Worthington steals the spotlight and rightfully so since he's the lead. His dry humor and struggle to do what's right are one of the most enjoyable factors in watching the film (other than the special effects, of course). Worthington was really the only redeeming factor of Terminator: Salvation and looks to put in another strong performance in next year's Clash of the Titans.

While the film has superb action sequences (the thanator chase and leonopteryx chase were amazing in IMAX), nearly flawless CGI, and strong performances from the cast, the film still had its flaws. The story is probably the weakest aspect of the film. It's pretty thin and predictable, but that is probably the last thing on the minds of most of the moviegoing audience. With South Park mocking the film last month by calling the film, "Dances With Smurfs," and the film being called, "Dances With Wolves in space," nearly all across the net, the similarities of those two comparisons are certainly there. While the Smurf one is a bit of a stretch, Dances With Wolves in space seems almost accurate as a nutshell review. The nearly three hour duration may also be a factor for some while 3D and IMAX versions of the film may be a problem for those who had problems with a film like Cloverfield. Seeing the film in IMAX, going back for future viewings of the film in 3D and 2D seems like a good idea just to compare since the IMAX version didn't feel like the definitive version. Would it have the same effect in digital 3D showings? What about regular showings? Shelling out $15 when you could spend half of that is something to take into consideration when seeing a film that was sold out nearly its entire opening weekend.

James Cameron's Avatar was well worth the wait and certainly lives up to the hype. Its special effects are certainly the best to be featured in any film to date as these vibrant creatures nearly jump to life because of the effects alone. The performances are top notch and the action sequences certainly live up to James Cameron's reputation. Despite all this, the emotional connection between the audience and the characters didn't seem quite as strong as some of the other films this year. Up, Where the Wild Things Are, and even Moon were able to establish a stronger connection. So while the film is exceptional, it isn’t the best film of 2009 which is probably a shock to some.