Search
Search results
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Light of My Life (2019) in Movies
Jan 22, 2021
It is difficult to talk about Casey Affleck in a positive light as a movie-maker without mentioning the heightened media storm that surrounded him in 2017, at the time of #metoo and his own moment of personal glory in winning the Best Actor Oscar for his excellent performance in Manchester By the Sea. The Oscar was deserved, as was the criticism. The latter affecting the sweetness of the former entirely, and perhaps explaining why a recent Academy Award winner would be so quiet for the next 3 years.
The facts are that he settled out of court for two sexual harassment claims, that in interviews later he would admit some guilt and shame towards. He never tried to hide it and seemed genuinely regretful of his part in whatever crimes took place. He never tried to deny it or belittle it or excuse it as something small and insignificant, he owned up and hung his head.
For which I’d be tempted to say, yes, he behaved like an asshole and abused his position, but is worthy of forgiveness, on probation that he learned from the mistake and never remotely did anything like it again. However, the media doesn’t forget, and in a personal and professional way he has been persona non grata ever since.
Like many others in the spotlight before him for nefarious reasons, I believe emphatically in saying it is possible to separate a person from their work. If someone has done something where they need to be in jail, then let the system take care of it, otherwise let them get on with life and continue to work. Affleck is such a talented actor that it is his performances that spring to mind above anything else by far, and that probably won’t change. I’d absolutely hate to think his negative reputation prevented him from doing the best work of his life.
One way to ensure some relative solitude and privacy whilst remaining at work, then, is to write, produce, direct and star in a small personal film about a father and daughter, alone for 90% of the movie, in a post apocalyptic wilderness. Affleck is the nameless “dad” to the pre-teen daughter he dotes on and will do anything to protect, named “Rag”, for reasons that are explained beautifully in the narrative.
Played by promising newcomer Anna Pniowsky, it is a testament to Affleck’s skill and sensitivity as actor and director that Rag always feels as important and centre stage as the “star” of the show. The film begins very unusually with a 7 minute static dialogue between the two, which demonstrates the relationship and energy of the film perfectly, and in such an interesting way. Pniowsky gives as good as she gets in terms of detailed characterisation, and the dynamic between the two is an absolute delight.
Inevitably, this film is always going to be seen as a poor cousin to The Road, starring Viggo Mortensen, from 2009. It is very similar, it can’t be denied. Even the idea of the parent ensuring “the light / fire” is kept alive within the child, considering that the survival of humanity in all senses is paramount, and supercedes the notion of survival at any cost. Dignity, kindness and non-violence must be maintained, or they will be lost. It is a message worth passing on – enough to make Affleck want to fly so close to the themes and tone of a bigger, well liked film. He must certainly have been aware of how similar they are.
It doesn’t always work, and I did find myself wishing for more action, or at least incident, rather than all the static talking scenes. Although they were often beautifully done, there were just one too many of them to keep the film fully engaging. The use of flashback, where we see the past they came from and the absent mother (presumed long dead) played by Elizabeth Moss, who does not get enough screen time to leave a mark, also doesn’t fully ring true.
Where it does work is in the simple beauty of the relationship between father and daughter. Her innocence and growing curiosity about the tainted world she is inheriting, and his single minded insistence on teaching her things his way and keeping her oblivious to the harshness of life for as long as possible. We begin to suspect his methods are not always the best, and that inevitably the time is coming where for good or bad she will have to find her own path without him.
Which leads to a very touching last 20 minutes I can’t possibly explain without leaving spoilers. If it wasn’t two hours but 90 minutes I believe the idea would have had more impact and not outstay its welcome. As it is, it is just a little flabby in the edit to be described as “great”, and might be otherwise described as slightly indulgent and naive, directorially. It is a tough one to pin down, because whilst I don’t think there is much wrong with it, I also don’t think there is enough right to fully recommend it to a wide audience.
I’m putting this one in the box marked “little seen gems”, intersecting with the one marked “near miss with potential”. When in a patient mood, this could be a film you relate to and enjoy. Just don’t go in expecting too much to happen and concentrate on what it means to be a parent in a cruel world. In that sense it has a lot to say and is well worth your time.
The facts are that he settled out of court for two sexual harassment claims, that in interviews later he would admit some guilt and shame towards. He never tried to hide it and seemed genuinely regretful of his part in whatever crimes took place. He never tried to deny it or belittle it or excuse it as something small and insignificant, he owned up and hung his head.
For which I’d be tempted to say, yes, he behaved like an asshole and abused his position, but is worthy of forgiveness, on probation that he learned from the mistake and never remotely did anything like it again. However, the media doesn’t forget, and in a personal and professional way he has been persona non grata ever since.
Like many others in the spotlight before him for nefarious reasons, I believe emphatically in saying it is possible to separate a person from their work. If someone has done something where they need to be in jail, then let the system take care of it, otherwise let them get on with life and continue to work. Affleck is such a talented actor that it is his performances that spring to mind above anything else by far, and that probably won’t change. I’d absolutely hate to think his negative reputation prevented him from doing the best work of his life.
One way to ensure some relative solitude and privacy whilst remaining at work, then, is to write, produce, direct and star in a small personal film about a father and daughter, alone for 90% of the movie, in a post apocalyptic wilderness. Affleck is the nameless “dad” to the pre-teen daughter he dotes on and will do anything to protect, named “Rag”, for reasons that are explained beautifully in the narrative.
Played by promising newcomer Anna Pniowsky, it is a testament to Affleck’s skill and sensitivity as actor and director that Rag always feels as important and centre stage as the “star” of the show. The film begins very unusually with a 7 minute static dialogue between the two, which demonstrates the relationship and energy of the film perfectly, and in such an interesting way. Pniowsky gives as good as she gets in terms of detailed characterisation, and the dynamic between the two is an absolute delight.
Inevitably, this film is always going to be seen as a poor cousin to The Road, starring Viggo Mortensen, from 2009. It is very similar, it can’t be denied. Even the idea of the parent ensuring “the light / fire” is kept alive within the child, considering that the survival of humanity in all senses is paramount, and supercedes the notion of survival at any cost. Dignity, kindness and non-violence must be maintained, or they will be lost. It is a message worth passing on – enough to make Affleck want to fly so close to the themes and tone of a bigger, well liked film. He must certainly have been aware of how similar they are.
It doesn’t always work, and I did find myself wishing for more action, or at least incident, rather than all the static talking scenes. Although they were often beautifully done, there were just one too many of them to keep the film fully engaging. The use of flashback, where we see the past they came from and the absent mother (presumed long dead) played by Elizabeth Moss, who does not get enough screen time to leave a mark, also doesn’t fully ring true.
Where it does work is in the simple beauty of the relationship between father and daughter. Her innocence and growing curiosity about the tainted world she is inheriting, and his single minded insistence on teaching her things his way and keeping her oblivious to the harshness of life for as long as possible. We begin to suspect his methods are not always the best, and that inevitably the time is coming where for good or bad she will have to find her own path without him.
Which leads to a very touching last 20 minutes I can’t possibly explain without leaving spoilers. If it wasn’t two hours but 90 minutes I believe the idea would have had more impact and not outstay its welcome. As it is, it is just a little flabby in the edit to be described as “great”, and might be otherwise described as slightly indulgent and naive, directorially. It is a tough one to pin down, because whilst I don’t think there is much wrong with it, I also don’t think there is enough right to fully recommend it to a wide audience.
I’m putting this one in the box marked “little seen gems”, intersecting with the one marked “near miss with potential”. When in a patient mood, this could be a film you relate to and enjoy. Just don’t go in expecting too much to happen and concentrate on what it means to be a parent in a cruel world. In that sense it has a lot to say and is well worth your time.
Cyn Armistead (14 KP) rated American Gods in Books
Mar 1, 2018
I'm trying to remember whether or not I've read any of Gaiman's other novels before, and I'm fairly certain that I haven't. I read [b:Good Omens|12067|Good Omens|Terry Pratchett|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1266659394s/12067.jpg|4110990], but that was co-written with [a:Terry Pratchett|1654|Terry Pratchett|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1235562205p2/1654.jpg], and the collaboration was genius. I know that the entire world seems to love Sandman, of course, but I'm just not a fan of graphic novels. In fact, it took me a while to realize that the Good Omens co-author and the Sandman author were one and the same.
I've certainly read some short stories, too. The most memorable, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow,_Glass,_Apples">"Snow, Glass, Apples"</a> was reprinted in an anthology I read recently. I find it disturbing, so I won't re-read it. Well-written, of course—it wouldn't be so very memorably distressing if it weren't so masterfully done! (I found the <a href="http://www.holycow.com/dreaming/stories/snow-glass-apples">text online</a> if you care to read it, but please understand that the story deals with pedophilia, necrophilia, and incest here. It is the polar opposite of all things Disney.) Snow White was never one of of my favorite fairy tales, and Gaiman definitely pushed it much farther down the list.
In any case, I don't know what I was expecting from Gaiman, but <i>American Gods</i> wasn't it. I like stories with happy endings, and within the first few chapters I was fairly sure that there wouldn't be one. Is Gaiman fundamentally opposed to joy, or is it just happiness that he doesn't allow?
The novel is epic. It is masterful. All that stuff from the big critics is dead on. The book could be used as the backbone of a mythological scavenger hunt if a teacher were willing to run a very unstructured but engaging course that way. I certainly enjoyed that aspect of it, and it made me glad that I was reading it on my iTouch so that I could look up anything I liked online at any time, no matter where I happened to be (which was almost always at home or somewhere else that had wifi access, happily).
I seldom want to see illustrations in any book, but yes, I think I would like to see good pictures of some of the characters Gaiman described in this one. On the other hand, without artwork I spent time imagining what the characters looked like based on the descriptions. I don't normally stop to do that, as such matters as seldom relevant to a plot, but these beings caught my fancy. Not enough that I would sit through an entire graphic novel, I'm afraid, but if I saw one now I might flip through it to see how the artist's renderings compare with my versions.
I'm seldom able to identify an overall Theme to the books I read. Most of them, honestly, are fluff. I'm fine with that. I read them because they entertain me. <i>American Gods</i> is different. It is entertaining, but it isn't light or fluffy in the least. It definitely has an easily identifiably Theme and Tropes and all those elements that I recall from long-ago classes, the sorts of things that put me off from my original English major because I hated tearing other author's works apart instead of writing anything original. (Now, I begin to understand that we were being taught to recognize what makes for good writing so we might have some hope of possibly creating some of it one day.)
I somewhat timidly conclude that <i>American Gods</i> is the first piece of Literature I've read in a very long time, and well worth the time spent reading it. (I find it rather amusing that it would be British Literature, despite its title, due to the author's nationality.) I'm not going to state the theme, because that would be a spoiler, and I hate putting those in reviews—but it's something that I see as a Truth, and one that needs to be stated far more often, especiallly today. It's even more interesting that it took a Brit to say it.
The book is dark, although it does have some very bright spots in it. I will acknowledge that I was going through a particularly bad time with regards to my health when I was reading it, but I still think it might be best for some people to read this one when in a fairly positive state of mind.
I've certainly read some short stories, too. The most memorable, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow,_Glass,_Apples">"Snow, Glass, Apples"</a> was reprinted in an anthology I read recently. I find it disturbing, so I won't re-read it. Well-written, of course—it wouldn't be so very memorably distressing if it weren't so masterfully done! (I found the <a href="http://www.holycow.com/dreaming/stories/snow-glass-apples">text online</a> if you care to read it, but please understand that the story deals with pedophilia, necrophilia, and incest here. It is the polar opposite of all things Disney.) Snow White was never one of of my favorite fairy tales, and Gaiman definitely pushed it much farther down the list.
In any case, I don't know what I was expecting from Gaiman, but <i>American Gods</i> wasn't it. I like stories with happy endings, and within the first few chapters I was fairly sure that there wouldn't be one. Is Gaiman fundamentally opposed to joy, or is it just happiness that he doesn't allow?
The novel is epic. It is masterful. All that stuff from the big critics is dead on. The book could be used as the backbone of a mythological scavenger hunt if a teacher were willing to run a very unstructured but engaging course that way. I certainly enjoyed that aspect of it, and it made me glad that I was reading it on my iTouch so that I could look up anything I liked online at any time, no matter where I happened to be (which was almost always at home or somewhere else that had wifi access, happily).
I seldom want to see illustrations in any book, but yes, I think I would like to see good pictures of some of the characters Gaiman described in this one. On the other hand, without artwork I spent time imagining what the characters looked like based on the descriptions. I don't normally stop to do that, as such matters as seldom relevant to a plot, but these beings caught my fancy. Not enough that I would sit through an entire graphic novel, I'm afraid, but if I saw one now I might flip through it to see how the artist's renderings compare with my versions.
I'm seldom able to identify an overall Theme to the books I read. Most of them, honestly, are fluff. I'm fine with that. I read them because they entertain me. <i>American Gods</i> is different. It is entertaining, but it isn't light or fluffy in the least. It definitely has an easily identifiably Theme and Tropes and all those elements that I recall from long-ago classes, the sorts of things that put me off from my original English major because I hated tearing other author's works apart instead of writing anything original. (Now, I begin to understand that we were being taught to recognize what makes for good writing so we might have some hope of possibly creating some of it one day.)
I somewhat timidly conclude that <i>American Gods</i> is the first piece of Literature I've read in a very long time, and well worth the time spent reading it. (I find it rather amusing that it would be British Literature, despite its title, due to the author's nationality.) I'm not going to state the theme, because that would be a spoiler, and I hate putting those in reviews—but it's something that I see as a Truth, and one that needs to be stated far more often, especiallly today. It's even more interesting that it took a Brit to say it.
The book is dark, although it does have some very bright spots in it. I will acknowledge that I was going through a particularly bad time with regards to my health when I was reading it, but I still think it might be best for some people to read this one when in a fairly positive state of mind.
Technobabylon
Games
App
City of Newton, 2087. Genetic engineering is the norm, the addictive Trance has replaced almost any...
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Dead and the Dark in Books
Aug 19, 2021
Captivating look at the supernatural and the pull of family
In Snakebite, Oregon, teenagers keep disappearing or turning up dead. Things just seem off. The locals blame Brandon and Alejo Ortiz-Woodley, two former Snakebite residents who are back in town. They now host a popular ghost hunting show and travel the country with their daughter Logan. Wanting to clear the family name, Logan winds up joining forces with Ashley Barton, whose boyfriend was the first to go missing. Ashley is sure she can feel his presence guiding her around Snakebite. But as the two team up, they discover some pretty terrifying and dangerous things about Snakebite.
I loved this book so much. Sometimes it feels like I read similar books over and over. Not this time. Gould’s book is original and spellbinding. This is such a dark and ominous read. Gould truly brings you into Snakebite, the supernatural, creepy, and quite unwelcoming small town. It’s atmospheric and spooky. I could not put this book down!
DARK is filled with LGBTQIA representation, between Logan’s dads, the fact that she’s an out lesbian, and her own burgeoning friendship (and more) with Ashley. I loved everything about all of it.
This book is part horror story, part exploration of the meaning and depths of darkness, and part look at family dynamics. It’s an extremely well written ghost story with a sapphic love interest. It really doesn’t get much better than that! (It’s so good, read it—and it’s a debut!)
I received a copy of this book from St. Martin's Press / Wednesday Books and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review.
I loved this book so much. Sometimes it feels like I read similar books over and over. Not this time. Gould’s book is original and spellbinding. This is such a dark and ominous read. Gould truly brings you into Snakebite, the supernatural, creepy, and quite unwelcoming small town. It’s atmospheric and spooky. I could not put this book down!
DARK is filled with LGBTQIA representation, between Logan’s dads, the fact that she’s an out lesbian, and her own burgeoning friendship (and more) with Ashley. I loved everything about all of it.
This book is part horror story, part exploration of the meaning and depths of darkness, and part look at family dynamics. It’s an extremely well written ghost story with a sapphic love interest. It really doesn’t get much better than that! (It’s so good, read it—and it’s a debut!)
I received a copy of this book from St. Martin's Press / Wednesday Books and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review.
David McK (3425 KP) rated Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022) in Movies
May 15, 2022
Marvel's first horror (themed) movie?
So, Benedict Cumberbatch's Doctor Strange?
He's now appeared in six MCU movies, including this one (which is only his second solo outing). In order, they are:
Doctor Strange (2016)
Thor: Ragnorak (2017)
Avengers: Infinity War (2018)
Avengers: Endgame (2019)
Spider-Man: No Way Home (2021)
Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022)
As well as that, he's also appeared in perhaps the best episode of Marvels animated 'What If ...' series, titled 'What if ... Doctor Strange lost his heart instead of his hands?@
The reason I mention the latter?
Because, roughly halfway through this, Dr Strange falls through the Multiverse (first shown on the big screen in No Way Home): one of which looks very much like the animation style used in said series.
The films also relies heavily on the aftermath from TVs WandaVision (although a brief reprise of that is given by Wanda herself, with Vision barely getting a mention), in that Wanda is now desperate to find her missing children and has the Darkhold in her possession.
She also goes on to show why she is one of - if not the - most powerful beings in the MCU, which is where a lot of the horror elements in this story come into play. It is a Sam Raimi film, so if you've seen The Evil Dead (or even the original Spider-man trilogy, in particular Spider-Man 2), you know the type of thing: crazy camera angles, unsettling imagery, zombies, the damned ....
Oh, and it also definitely - finally! - opens up the MCU for the inclusion of the X-Men or The Fantastic Four.
He's now appeared in six MCU movies, including this one (which is only his second solo outing). In order, they are:
Doctor Strange (2016)
Thor: Ragnorak (2017)
Avengers: Infinity War (2018)
Avengers: Endgame (2019)
Spider-Man: No Way Home (2021)
Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022)
As well as that, he's also appeared in perhaps the best episode of Marvels animated 'What If ...' series, titled 'What if ... Doctor Strange lost his heart instead of his hands?@
The reason I mention the latter?
Because, roughly halfway through this, Dr Strange falls through the Multiverse (first shown on the big screen in No Way Home): one of which looks very much like the animation style used in said series.
The films also relies heavily on the aftermath from TVs WandaVision (although a brief reprise of that is given by Wanda herself, with Vision barely getting a mention), in that Wanda is now desperate to find her missing children and has the Darkhold in her possession.
She also goes on to show why she is one of - if not the - most powerful beings in the MCU, which is where a lot of the horror elements in this story come into play. It is a Sam Raimi film, so if you've seen The Evil Dead (or even the original Spider-man trilogy, in particular Spider-Man 2), you know the type of thing: crazy camera angles, unsettling imagery, zombies, the damned ....
Oh, and it also definitely - finally! - opens up the MCU for the inclusion of the X-Men or The Fantastic Four.
FearlessLover (27 KP) rated Dunkirk (2017) in Movies
Jul 31, 2017
Stunning cinea
It' s 1940, 400,000 allied troops are cornered and cut off on the beaches of Dunkirk; with the enemy closing in, and no cover or defence, they await annihilation or a miracle. We experience the moment as the characters do, without unnecessary exposition or dialogue! This proves quite the departure for Nolan; there is a lot here that owes more to silent cinema than anything else, but his images often say all that needs to be said.
An opening frame invites us to join a group of soldiers. Next, the loudest onslaught of gunfire kicks the film into another gear. We are given as much pause for thought as the soldiers we follow. We run with Tommy, played here by a Fionn Whitehead, and like him, we are aware of comrades falling dead next to us, but it is all panic and no time; we will lament their loss later. Set to the ticking of a watch, we feel Tommy's heart pounding with ours, and we know the tone for this audacious movie has been set.
We see the event from different perspectives and from within different time frames. Right now, not many directors can build momentum like Nolan. The jumping to and from different characters' point of view, the corkscrewing impression of the editing, events echoed and mirrored by Hans Zimmer's Shepherd's Tones and persistent, all enveloping score, acting at times more like sound design than music; it all results in a constant rise in tension, to the point of almost being exhaustive.
This said, the editing also serves another purpose. The "Miracle of Dunkirk" is a grand story, with every soldier, every pilot, and every civilian having their own point of view. Nolan wants us to build up an overall picture of the event purely through subjective experience, so of course we spend a tiring week with the terrified boys. Of course we spend a desperate day with a fisherman as he and his familial crew sail their way into action. Lastly, given the fuel constraints of the RAF, whose decisions had to be immediate and impulsive, always a choice between defending the beach or getting home, why would we spend any more that an edge-of-your-seat, quickly-cut hour in the cockpit of a Spitfire, as they do their duty and enter into dogfights to keep the German aircraft at bay? Each timeline is contracted or dilated to give everybody equal measure and importance, whilst staying true to and very much in their situation. Yes, this means we're kept on our toes; we have moments of confusion as timelines cross over and we see the same thing happening from another point of view, but as we head into the finale, as well as the aforementioned tension and release (which is just exciting cinema), we also get to see how, despite very different perspectives, everyone was working together, and how sacrifice and struggle for duty were par for the course for all involved, whether other people knew it or not. It is important that we the audience recognise this bigger picture, and as everything clicks together in an emotive final convergence of efforts, we not only see the justification for the techniques adopted, but struggle to imagine the story told another way. That is, at least, without going down a standard route, with objective storytelling employed.
A proper review not being complete without comment on the elephant in the room, it must be said that Harry Styles does not stand out like the proverbial sore thumb at all. Frankly, he carries his scenes with aplomb, and surely, following the Heath Ledger lesson, and now this, it is time we learned that, maybe, Christopher Nolan just knows what he's doing better that we do? As to the other big names, there are moments from that remain with me so long after having seen it: Kenneth Brannagh and Mark Rylance can say so much with so little, their faces and gestures doing the heavy lifting to deliver a lot of the human emotion, and it would appear Tom Hardy has Oscar-worthy eyes! You need see nothing more through the course of his drama to have a complete sense of the type of man his Farrier is. We talk about great acting and achieving realism through imagination, but with the knowledge that Nolan actually took everyone to Dunkirk, sank real ships, sailed real ships, flew real Spitfires overhead, employed real explosions on the beach, and even rejected green screen and CGI in favour of cardboard cut-outs, it seems imagination wasn't too necessary for these already consummate actors.
Nolan's principle fan base will be well prepared for what they get; but with his insistence on holding back from the audience any perspective not afforded his characters, ala 'Memento', some knowledge of the "Miracle Of Dunkirk" might put the more casual viewer in better stead. Regardless of which camp you fall into, or indeed of whether or not the movie does it for you, certain things are for sure: With no melodrama or cheese, and no superfluous fluff or emotional subterfuge, 'Dunkirk' is a purely experiential movie, a technical marvel of a war film unlike any other I can name. It also stands as a beacon in Nolan's career, characterised by his desire to cultivate an audience willing to keep up with him. And perhaps most importantly, this is a key moment in world history that is often overlooked; a disaster averted which, had it not been, would have seen the history books written very differently. That this event has been marshalled by a confident and sincere director, who has surely by now cemented his name alongside those of his own heroes, is reason enough to see 'Dunkirk'.
An opening frame invites us to join a group of soldiers. Next, the loudest onslaught of gunfire kicks the film into another gear. We are given as much pause for thought as the soldiers we follow. We run with Tommy, played here by a Fionn Whitehead, and like him, we are aware of comrades falling dead next to us, but it is all panic and no time; we will lament their loss later. Set to the ticking of a watch, we feel Tommy's heart pounding with ours, and we know the tone for this audacious movie has been set.
We see the event from different perspectives and from within different time frames. Right now, not many directors can build momentum like Nolan. The jumping to and from different characters' point of view, the corkscrewing impression of the editing, events echoed and mirrored by Hans Zimmer's Shepherd's Tones and persistent, all enveloping score, acting at times more like sound design than music; it all results in a constant rise in tension, to the point of almost being exhaustive.
This said, the editing also serves another purpose. The "Miracle of Dunkirk" is a grand story, with every soldier, every pilot, and every civilian having their own point of view. Nolan wants us to build up an overall picture of the event purely through subjective experience, so of course we spend a tiring week with the terrified boys. Of course we spend a desperate day with a fisherman as he and his familial crew sail their way into action. Lastly, given the fuel constraints of the RAF, whose decisions had to be immediate and impulsive, always a choice between defending the beach or getting home, why would we spend any more that an edge-of-your-seat, quickly-cut hour in the cockpit of a Spitfire, as they do their duty and enter into dogfights to keep the German aircraft at bay? Each timeline is contracted or dilated to give everybody equal measure and importance, whilst staying true to and very much in their situation. Yes, this means we're kept on our toes; we have moments of confusion as timelines cross over and we see the same thing happening from another point of view, but as we head into the finale, as well as the aforementioned tension and release (which is just exciting cinema), we also get to see how, despite very different perspectives, everyone was working together, and how sacrifice and struggle for duty were par for the course for all involved, whether other people knew it or not. It is important that we the audience recognise this bigger picture, and as everything clicks together in an emotive final convergence of efforts, we not only see the justification for the techniques adopted, but struggle to imagine the story told another way. That is, at least, without going down a standard route, with objective storytelling employed.
A proper review not being complete without comment on the elephant in the room, it must be said that Harry Styles does not stand out like the proverbial sore thumb at all. Frankly, he carries his scenes with aplomb, and surely, following the Heath Ledger lesson, and now this, it is time we learned that, maybe, Christopher Nolan just knows what he's doing better that we do? As to the other big names, there are moments from that remain with me so long after having seen it: Kenneth Brannagh and Mark Rylance can say so much with so little, their faces and gestures doing the heavy lifting to deliver a lot of the human emotion, and it would appear Tom Hardy has Oscar-worthy eyes! You need see nothing more through the course of his drama to have a complete sense of the type of man his Farrier is. We talk about great acting and achieving realism through imagination, but with the knowledge that Nolan actually took everyone to Dunkirk, sank real ships, sailed real ships, flew real Spitfires overhead, employed real explosions on the beach, and even rejected green screen and CGI in favour of cardboard cut-outs, it seems imagination wasn't too necessary for these already consummate actors.
Nolan's principle fan base will be well prepared for what they get; but with his insistence on holding back from the audience any perspective not afforded his characters, ala 'Memento', some knowledge of the "Miracle Of Dunkirk" might put the more casual viewer in better stead. Regardless of which camp you fall into, or indeed of whether or not the movie does it for you, certain things are for sure: With no melodrama or cheese, and no superfluous fluff or emotional subterfuge, 'Dunkirk' is a purely experiential movie, a technical marvel of a war film unlike any other I can name. It also stands as a beacon in Nolan's career, characterised by his desire to cultivate an audience willing to keep up with him. And perhaps most importantly, this is a key moment in world history that is often overlooked; a disaster averted which, had it not been, would have seen the history books written very differently. That this event has been marshalled by a confident and sincere director, who has surely by now cemented his name alongside those of his own heroes, is reason enough to see 'Dunkirk'.
Howl, Kaddish and Other Poems
8.0
Rate It
Book
Allen Ginsberg was the bard of the beat generation, and Howl, Kaddish and Other Poems is a...
Corey Richard Bennett (10 KP) rated Spider-Man: Far From Home (2019) in Movies
Jul 18, 2019 (Updated Jul 18, 2019)
Great follow-up to Avengers Endgame (2 more)
Extremely relatable teen angst and romance
Accurate potrayal of the Spider Man character
Contains spoilers, click to show
The last film in the 4th phase of Marvel's Cinematic Universe is a fitting bookend for the Universe so far, and where the Cinematic Universe is heading. After losing his mentor, Tony Stark, Spider-Man Peter Parker tries to resume a life of normality. With high hopes of romance with classmate MJ abroad in Europe, Peter is drawn into a ploy that is ultimately being triggered by fake interloper Mysterio AKA Quentin Beck. With use of virtual reality tech, and military grade drones, Beck tricks Nick Fury, and Peter into thinking beings known as Elementals are attacking Earth. Seemingly with all other Avengers busy or not home, Fury calls upon Tony Stark's chosen successor to help Mysterio in slaying the new beasts.
This is peak portrayal of the web-slinger as Tom Holland makes you really feel for his teenage character who is balancing a life of normality and a life with huge responsibility. Peter constantly thinks of his friends well-being and hiding his secret identity throughout Europe. Then there is the aspect of Peter's budding romance for MJ, played beautifully by Zendaya. This incarnation of MJ is quirky and awkward, which is not like any other portrayals I have seen before, but it matches with Holland's Parker, as he too is awkward as most teenagers trying to find themselves in life.
Now the bad guy. Mysterio is a long well known enemy in the Spider-Man lore, so the twist that he is Master of Illusion should not be a shock, but the trailers did a good job painting the possibility that we were seeing a new incarnation of the dome-headed man of mystery. The trailers also got fans excited, with the possibility of a multiverse being created by the snap of Thanos, now referred to as the Blip by the people of Earth. The multiverse could have been the way to shoe-horn the X-Men into the MCU, but alas it was all a ploy to get the ever powerful Stark Tech glasses (known as EDITH Even Dead I'm The Hero) away from Peter, as Tony had left them to him in his will. Tricking everyone including usually tactful Nick Fury, Mysterio gains Peter's trust, and then his glasses, as Peter thinks Beck is a more fitting replacement to Iron-Man than Peter himself, who wants to live a normal life for the time being. Mysterio almost gets away with his plan, but with one simple slip-up Peter realizes his gaff and pursues Beck to Berlin, which brings me to the best scene (In my humble Opinion).
Knowing Peter is on his way, Beck springs his own web of illusions around Peter which tricks Peter immensely, and dazzles the fan. Tricking Peter to the point that he learns who knows of his plan, dispatches Peter via a train, which Peter barely survives. Beck moves his plans to London where he tries to enact his greatest illusion but a rejuvenated Peter (with help from Happy Hogan) thwarts Beck's plan which ultimately leads to Beck's untimely demise. But with his plan burning around him, he uses his last minutes to frame Peter in his death, and reveal his identity to the world.
In the course of the movie, Peter and MJ finally reveal their feelings for one another, and become a couple before landing back in the USA, but with Peter's secret to the world (which MJ had figured out a while back) their relationship and Peter's safety hangs in the balance. Now the only question alot of people like myself are left wondering, what's next? What's next for the MCU? and Whats next for Spider-Man? Well for the MCU, Black-Widow's solo movie seems to be next in line with Guardians 3 in the Horizon. As for Spider-Man, Marvel and Sony's deal has one more movie left, so hopefully they make a longer agreement, as Tom Holland should being playing this role for a long time. The next film should be a fantastic spot to bring in Kraven the Hunter into the MCU, as Peter Parker is now enemy number 1 in New York and Kraven would be the best villian to set loose to hunt for Peter. Using MJ as bait or even Ned, the story rights itself, even possibly using the comic book story which Kraven buries Spider-Man. But I guess we need a few more years to find out what will happen to Peter, but this film is a great one in a line of great MCU entries.
P.S. Yeah that end-credit scene. Yup, we are getting Secret Wars storyline as the next big Avengers event.
This is peak portrayal of the web-slinger as Tom Holland makes you really feel for his teenage character who is balancing a life of normality and a life with huge responsibility. Peter constantly thinks of his friends well-being and hiding his secret identity throughout Europe. Then there is the aspect of Peter's budding romance for MJ, played beautifully by Zendaya. This incarnation of MJ is quirky and awkward, which is not like any other portrayals I have seen before, but it matches with Holland's Parker, as he too is awkward as most teenagers trying to find themselves in life.
Now the bad guy. Mysterio is a long well known enemy in the Spider-Man lore, so the twist that he is Master of Illusion should not be a shock, but the trailers did a good job painting the possibility that we were seeing a new incarnation of the dome-headed man of mystery. The trailers also got fans excited, with the possibility of a multiverse being created by the snap of Thanos, now referred to as the Blip by the people of Earth. The multiverse could have been the way to shoe-horn the X-Men into the MCU, but alas it was all a ploy to get the ever powerful Stark Tech glasses (known as EDITH Even Dead I'm The Hero) away from Peter, as Tony had left them to him in his will. Tricking everyone including usually tactful Nick Fury, Mysterio gains Peter's trust, and then his glasses, as Peter thinks Beck is a more fitting replacement to Iron-Man than Peter himself, who wants to live a normal life for the time being. Mysterio almost gets away with his plan, but with one simple slip-up Peter realizes his gaff and pursues Beck to Berlin, which brings me to the best scene (In my humble Opinion).
Knowing Peter is on his way, Beck springs his own web of illusions around Peter which tricks Peter immensely, and dazzles the fan. Tricking Peter to the point that he learns who knows of his plan, dispatches Peter via a train, which Peter barely survives. Beck moves his plans to London where he tries to enact his greatest illusion but a rejuvenated Peter (with help from Happy Hogan) thwarts Beck's plan which ultimately leads to Beck's untimely demise. But with his plan burning around him, he uses his last minutes to frame Peter in his death, and reveal his identity to the world.
In the course of the movie, Peter and MJ finally reveal their feelings for one another, and become a couple before landing back in the USA, but with Peter's secret to the world (which MJ had figured out a while back) their relationship and Peter's safety hangs in the balance. Now the only question alot of people like myself are left wondering, what's next? What's next for the MCU? and Whats next for Spider-Man? Well for the MCU, Black-Widow's solo movie seems to be next in line with Guardians 3 in the Horizon. As for Spider-Man, Marvel and Sony's deal has one more movie left, so hopefully they make a longer agreement, as Tom Holland should being playing this role for a long time. The next film should be a fantastic spot to bring in Kraven the Hunter into the MCU, as Peter Parker is now enemy number 1 in New York and Kraven would be the best villian to set loose to hunt for Peter. Using MJ as bait or even Ned, the story rights itself, even possibly using the comic book story which Kraven buries Spider-Man. But I guess we need a few more years to find out what will happen to Peter, but this film is a great one in a line of great MCU entries.
P.S. Yeah that end-credit scene. Yup, we are getting Secret Wars storyline as the next big Avengers event.
Annie Chanse (15 KP) rated Deadly Curiosities in Books
Dec 19, 2017
I received an ARC copy of this book in exchange for my open and honest opinion. This in no way has influenced my opinion of the book.
***may contain spoilers***
This book by Martin is the first in a new series that centers around Cassidy, the owner of an antique shop called Trifles and Folly. At least, that is what she does on the surface. Her true purpose is much less mundane. She, along with her "silent partner" Sorren -- an ancient vampire -- and her employee and friend Teag, work for a group called the Alliance.
The Alliance has been around for centuries, and they do many things. However, one of the most important things they do is to rid the world of powerful and dangerous paranormal artifacts. Cassidy, a powerful psychometric -- someone who "reads" an item's energy and history -- uses her antique shop to help the Alliance with their endeavor. When people bring items into her shop, she holds them and sees the history that happened around those objects. If something in the object's history gives off warning signals that Cassidy thinks might make the item dangerous and/or susceptible to hauntings, possessions, etc., she buys the item and presents it to Sorren to take to the Alliance, where they dispose of it safely. (At least that is what they are SUPPOSEDLY DOING... since this is the beginning of a series, I'm wondering if eventually Cassidy will find out that the Alliance's motives aren't as pure as they claim them to be... but that is simply my speculation and neither here nor there concerning this book. :-p)
The fun in THIS book really begins when a lady brings in a pair of antique opera glasses to sell to Cassidy. Shortly after, Cassidy receives a phone call from a buyer saying that items she purchased from Cassidy's shop are causing a lot of ghostly-type problems. Cassidy and Teag realize that several items which should not have been causing negative effects are, in fact, creating all kinds of havoc. They decide to investigate the phenomena, and this investigation leads to all kinds of craziness, including voudon practitioners, dark sorcerers who should have been dead centuries before, a nasty demon, and a man who surrounds himself with hundreds of clocks everywhere he goes... And this is just a taste of what a reader finds in the pages of Martin's new book.
The storyline is interesting and unique. The characters are very likeable. The setting is lovely and perfect. The writing style is solid. And the action is well-paced, after the first thirty or so pages, which are a bit slow.
The only complaint I have with this novel is that at times it is a bit repetitive. For instance, one line might mention something about the blood-caked clothes she's wearing, and the next line will say the same thing, only with differently arranged words.
I wish I had marked an actual specific example of what I was talking about, but I didn't, so I can't provide an example, but I will give my own made up example to illustrate my point.
*Note: This is NOT a line from the actual book. Just something I made up to, again, illustrate the point.*
"She stepped into the room and shivered as the feeling of something watching her from the darkness crept over her. It seemed as though there was something she couldn't see in the darkness, but it could see her, and it was watching her. The thought made her shiver as it crept down her spine."
This didn't happen VERY often in the book, but it did happen enough times that I mentally made a note of it, and it irritated me. I'm a smart girl. You only have to tell me once, and I usually get the picture. Ha.
But overall, I really did enjoy the book, and I look forward to reading the next one when it comes out.
***may contain spoilers***
This book by Martin is the first in a new series that centers around Cassidy, the owner of an antique shop called Trifles and Folly. At least, that is what she does on the surface. Her true purpose is much less mundane. She, along with her "silent partner" Sorren -- an ancient vampire -- and her employee and friend Teag, work for a group called the Alliance.
The Alliance has been around for centuries, and they do many things. However, one of the most important things they do is to rid the world of powerful and dangerous paranormal artifacts. Cassidy, a powerful psychometric -- someone who "reads" an item's energy and history -- uses her antique shop to help the Alliance with their endeavor. When people bring items into her shop, she holds them and sees the history that happened around those objects. If something in the object's history gives off warning signals that Cassidy thinks might make the item dangerous and/or susceptible to hauntings, possessions, etc., she buys the item and presents it to Sorren to take to the Alliance, where they dispose of it safely. (At least that is what they are SUPPOSEDLY DOING... since this is the beginning of a series, I'm wondering if eventually Cassidy will find out that the Alliance's motives aren't as pure as they claim them to be... but that is simply my speculation and neither here nor there concerning this book. :-p)
The fun in THIS book really begins when a lady brings in a pair of antique opera glasses to sell to Cassidy. Shortly after, Cassidy receives a phone call from a buyer saying that items she purchased from Cassidy's shop are causing a lot of ghostly-type problems. Cassidy and Teag realize that several items which should not have been causing negative effects are, in fact, creating all kinds of havoc. They decide to investigate the phenomena, and this investigation leads to all kinds of craziness, including voudon practitioners, dark sorcerers who should have been dead centuries before, a nasty demon, and a man who surrounds himself with hundreds of clocks everywhere he goes... And this is just a taste of what a reader finds in the pages of Martin's new book.
The storyline is interesting and unique. The characters are very likeable. The setting is lovely and perfect. The writing style is solid. And the action is well-paced, after the first thirty or so pages, which are a bit slow.
The only complaint I have with this novel is that at times it is a bit repetitive. For instance, one line might mention something about the blood-caked clothes she's wearing, and the next line will say the same thing, only with differently arranged words.
I wish I had marked an actual specific example of what I was talking about, but I didn't, so I can't provide an example, but I will give my own made up example to illustrate my point.
*Note: This is NOT a line from the actual book. Just something I made up to, again, illustrate the point.*
"She stepped into the room and shivered as the feeling of something watching her from the darkness crept over her. It seemed as though there was something she couldn't see in the darkness, but it could see her, and it was watching her. The thought made her shiver as it crept down her spine."
This didn't happen VERY often in the book, but it did happen enough times that I mentally made a note of it, and it irritated me. I'm a smart girl. You only have to tell me once, and I usually get the picture. Ha.
But overall, I really did enjoy the book, and I look forward to reading the next one when it comes out.
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated The First Mistake in Books
Apr 27, 2019
Predictable but Good
I love a good thriller, so I was very excited to read The First Mistake by Sandie Jones. The synopsis just sucked me in. I was so happy that this book didn't disappoint.
The plot sucked me in right away. I found myself immersed in the world that Sandie Jones had created for her characters. Alice is still grieving over her husband Tom who died years ago. However, she's now married to Nathan and has a daughter with him. Alice soon suspects that Nathan is having an affair. When Alice tries to find out if Nathan is cheating, that's when she begins to realize that no one is who they seem. I will say that while I did find the plot interesting enough, I also found it predictable. Early on, I had predicted the plot twists for this book including the major plot twist. That didn't me enjoy it any less. I kept reading to make sure I was correct in my predictions. What really irked me the most was the ending of The First Mistake. It just seemed really rushed. The truth came out, and then it was all over within a page. I don't want to go into too much detail due to spoilers, but I just felt as if the author couldn't be bothered to write anymore, so she took the easy way out. I would have liked to know what happened to everyone in a few months time instead of the book ending so suddenly.
I thought all of the characters were well written in The First Mistake. Alice was a likable character, and I found myself angry when it seemed like Nathan may have been cheating on her. However, I felt like she was cheating on Nathan in a sense as she was still grieving her dead husband almost 10 years later. Beth was an interesting character, and I enjoyed her backstory. However, I felt like she wasn't around enough in the actual present day story. We learn about her past, but we don't see her and Alice interact too much even though they are best friends. Although I had Nathan figured out, I felt he was fleshed out very well, and I loved how convincing and charming he was towards his wife and how great he was at calming her fears about him having an affair even when all the evidence that he was cheating was there. Olivia was my favorite character. She's Nathan's and Alice's daughter. I just thought she was the cutest little girl!
The pacing was done very well, and the only place I felt like it faltered was during Beth's backstory. I just felt there was too much information that was irrelevant when learning about Beth's past. Apart from that, I felt like the pacing stayed consistent throughout.
Trigger warnings for The First Mistake include sexual situations (though not graphic), drinking alcohol, profanity, violence, and death.
All in all, The First Mistake is an interesting read. Although I found it predictable, and I hated the ending, I still enjoyed this book very much. I would recommend The First Mistake by Sandie Jones to everyone aged 17+ who enjoy a good thriller. This one does not disappoint.
--
(A special thank you to the publisher for providing me with an ARC paperback of The First Mistake by Sandie Jones in exchange for an honest and unbiased review.)
The plot sucked me in right away. I found myself immersed in the world that Sandie Jones had created for her characters. Alice is still grieving over her husband Tom who died years ago. However, she's now married to Nathan and has a daughter with him. Alice soon suspects that Nathan is having an affair. When Alice tries to find out if Nathan is cheating, that's when she begins to realize that no one is who they seem. I will say that while I did find the plot interesting enough, I also found it predictable. Early on, I had predicted the plot twists for this book including the major plot twist. That didn't me enjoy it any less. I kept reading to make sure I was correct in my predictions. What really irked me the most was the ending of The First Mistake. It just seemed really rushed. The truth came out, and then it was all over within a page. I don't want to go into too much detail due to spoilers, but I just felt as if the author couldn't be bothered to write anymore, so she took the easy way out. I would have liked to know what happened to everyone in a few months time instead of the book ending so suddenly.
I thought all of the characters were well written in The First Mistake. Alice was a likable character, and I found myself angry when it seemed like Nathan may have been cheating on her. However, I felt like she was cheating on Nathan in a sense as she was still grieving her dead husband almost 10 years later. Beth was an interesting character, and I enjoyed her backstory. However, I felt like she wasn't around enough in the actual present day story. We learn about her past, but we don't see her and Alice interact too much even though they are best friends. Although I had Nathan figured out, I felt he was fleshed out very well, and I loved how convincing and charming he was towards his wife and how great he was at calming her fears about him having an affair even when all the evidence that he was cheating was there. Olivia was my favorite character. She's Nathan's and Alice's daughter. I just thought she was the cutest little girl!
The pacing was done very well, and the only place I felt like it faltered was during Beth's backstory. I just felt there was too much information that was irrelevant when learning about Beth's past. Apart from that, I felt like the pacing stayed consistent throughout.
Trigger warnings for The First Mistake include sexual situations (though not graphic), drinking alcohol, profanity, violence, and death.
All in all, The First Mistake is an interesting read. Although I found it predictable, and I hated the ending, I still enjoyed this book very much. I would recommend The First Mistake by Sandie Jones to everyone aged 17+ who enjoy a good thriller. This one does not disappoint.
--
(A special thank you to the publisher for providing me with an ARC paperback of The First Mistake by Sandie Jones in exchange for an honest and unbiased review.)