Search
Search results
Rachel King (13 KP) rated The Lost Angel in Books
Feb 11, 2019
This book had almost too much going on, with an extensive glossary in the beginning pages - complete with color photos - that I needed to read beforehand to keep up with the plot. Javier Sierra made a point of mixing fact with fiction in this novel, and the book reads like an extensive 'conspiracy theory.' My husband is much more familiar with many aspects of the plot, and I often asked him if what I was reading about was really true or not. The book opens with a quotation of Genesis 6: 2-3, which states "...the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose. And the Lord said, 'My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.'" This is followed by a quote from John Dee, who figures prominently in the plot, though I did not find the quote to be especially inspiring.
The main focus of the book is about a group of people who consider themselves descendants of those angels that joined with "the daughters of man," and want to find a way to get back into heaven. They will use any means necessary to accomplish this -- murder, deceit, even putting the whole planet in jeopardy.
The main character, Julia Alvarez, is a psychic who is completely duped by their antics. I understand that the author means for the reader to feel sympathy for the angelic descendants through Julia's narration, but the way that Julia allows herself to be used and deceived by even her own husband disgusts me. She believes whatever they tell her and does not question anything. In fact, anyone that does question this main family is characterized as foolish and forgettable, such as Ellen Watson and Inspector Figueiras.
There was one main problem I had with the plot, which is that in the Bible, the angels that mate with human women are 'fallen' because they disobeyed God, which is never addressed. What is also never addressed is any scriptural substantiation for what they believed about Noah and the ark. They believed they could force God to take them back into heaven with their thrown-together mish-mash of technology. How is that believable? God kicked the angels out - they certainly can't force their way back in! Not to mention, this family does not back up their belief that they are descendants of angels with actual scientific proof, such as DNA tests, even though they all claim to be men (and woman) of science.
Overall, the book twists a blasphemous tale of Biblical scripture, using factual information to support a fictitious plot. It has suspense, intrigue, and even a bit of romance, but the end is neither believable nor enjoyable. While books of this nature became popular thanks to the works of Dan Brown, (yes, I've read his stuff, too), I found this book to be merely an okay read.
The main focus of the book is about a group of people who consider themselves descendants of those angels that joined with "the daughters of man," and want to find a way to get back into heaven. They will use any means necessary to accomplish this -- murder, deceit, even putting the whole planet in jeopardy.
The main character, Julia Alvarez, is a psychic who is completely duped by their antics. I understand that the author means for the reader to feel sympathy for the angelic descendants through Julia's narration, but the way that Julia allows herself to be used and deceived by even her own husband disgusts me. She believes whatever they tell her and does not question anything. In fact, anyone that does question this main family is characterized as foolish and forgettable, such as Ellen Watson and Inspector Figueiras.
There was one main problem I had with the plot, which is that in the Bible, the angels that mate with human women are 'fallen' because they disobeyed God, which is never addressed. What is also never addressed is any scriptural substantiation for what they believed about Noah and the ark. They believed they could force God to take them back into heaven with their thrown-together mish-mash of technology. How is that believable? God kicked the angels out - they certainly can't force their way back in! Not to mention, this family does not back up their belief that they are descendants of angels with actual scientific proof, such as DNA tests, even though they all claim to be men (and woman) of science.
Overall, the book twists a blasphemous tale of Biblical scripture, using factual information to support a fictitious plot. It has suspense, intrigue, and even a bit of romance, but the end is neither believable nor enjoyable. While books of this nature became popular thanks to the works of Dan Brown, (yes, I've read his stuff, too), I found this book to be merely an okay read.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Star Wars: Episode IX - The Rise of Skywalker (2019) in Movies
Dec 24, 2019
"Satisfying Enough" Conclusion
I am a fan of the STAR WARS films. Ever since I first went to a place A LONG TIME AGO IN A GALAXY FAR, FAR AWAY I have enjoyed the adventures of the ragtag group of rebels taking on the evil Galactic Empire. Like most folks, I was blown away by the first STAR WARS film, LOVED the sequel, THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, thought the concluding film in the original trilogy, RETURN OF THE JEDI was "good enough", hated the prequels and have been cautiously optimistic when both THE FORCE AWAKENS and ROGUE ONE were good films. Finally, of course, I was disappointed (like everyone else) with THE LAST JEDI and SOLO. So...I was going to go to THE RISE OF SKYWALKER no matter what anyone else says.
And...I was satisfied.
STAR WARS: THE RISE OF SKYWALKER is an above average, "good enough" conclusion to the Skywalker saga of Star Wars, bringing enough action, energy, adventure and character moments - and character cameos - to satisfy my appetite for all things Star Wars.
Directed by returning Director J.J. Abrams, ROS picks up events after the events of THE LAST JEDI. Rey is training to be a Jedi and Poe, Finn, Leia and Chewie are fighting Kylo Ren and the First Order. The film starts out rapidly - perhaps too rapidly - as multiple events take place with action pieces and fast pacing that does leave you slightly breathless - it also feels just a bit rushed, as if J.J. is trying to pack 10 lbs. of movie into a 5 lb bag. By gosh, he was not going to accused of delivering a film that was not "fast-paced".
The performances of the leads are strong - Daisy Ridley (Rey), Adam Driver (Kylo), John Boyega (Finn) and Oscar Isaac (Poe) all know their characters by now and they are able to play in them well. Joined by the expected CGI and costumed droids and aliens (C3PO, R2D2, BB8 and good ol' Chewie), I was happily entertained to see them all together on screen - along with "veterans" like Lando (Billy Dee Williams) and General (not Princess) Leia (the late Carrie Fisher). The filmmakers put a loving tribute to her in this film that is effective (though I could see where they had to use a body double in places), but it is still well done. And, of course, there are plenty of callbacks and cameos to make any StarWars afficianado happy.
Ultimately, the emotional stakes of the denouement fell a bit short for me (as the "big bad" in this didn't have the emotional heft of Darth Vader), but it was a "good enough" emotional ending buried in an above average "final space battle" to have me leave the film satisfied.
And...that's all you can ask for from the 9th film of a series...enough to keep you "satisfied".
Letter Grade: B+
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
And...I was satisfied.
STAR WARS: THE RISE OF SKYWALKER is an above average, "good enough" conclusion to the Skywalker saga of Star Wars, bringing enough action, energy, adventure and character moments - and character cameos - to satisfy my appetite for all things Star Wars.
Directed by returning Director J.J. Abrams, ROS picks up events after the events of THE LAST JEDI. Rey is training to be a Jedi and Poe, Finn, Leia and Chewie are fighting Kylo Ren and the First Order. The film starts out rapidly - perhaps too rapidly - as multiple events take place with action pieces and fast pacing that does leave you slightly breathless - it also feels just a bit rushed, as if J.J. is trying to pack 10 lbs. of movie into a 5 lb bag. By gosh, he was not going to accused of delivering a film that was not "fast-paced".
The performances of the leads are strong - Daisy Ridley (Rey), Adam Driver (Kylo), John Boyega (Finn) and Oscar Isaac (Poe) all know their characters by now and they are able to play in them well. Joined by the expected CGI and costumed droids and aliens (C3PO, R2D2, BB8 and good ol' Chewie), I was happily entertained to see them all together on screen - along with "veterans" like Lando (Billy Dee Williams) and General (not Princess) Leia (the late Carrie Fisher). The filmmakers put a loving tribute to her in this film that is effective (though I could see where they had to use a body double in places), but it is still well done. And, of course, there are plenty of callbacks and cameos to make any StarWars afficianado happy.
Ultimately, the emotional stakes of the denouement fell a bit short for me (as the "big bad" in this didn't have the emotional heft of Darth Vader), but it was a "good enough" emotional ending buried in an above average "final space battle" to have me leave the film satisfied.
And...that's all you can ask for from the 9th film of a series...enough to keep you "satisfied".
Letter Grade: B+
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
The Mammoth Book of Great British Humour
Book
A doorstopper of a collection of the very best of both contemporary and classic British wit and...
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated Love, Heather in Books
Oct 2, 2020
Love, Heather is one of the most disturbing YA novels related to bullying I have read!
Please be aware that this book has bullying and assault triggers.
Stevie and Lottie have been friends since they've known about each other. And when Lottie starts to hang out with the popular kids, Stevie wants to fit in too. One thing leads to another, and Stevie gets bullied by them, which quickly leads to the whole school avoiding her.
Then Stevie becomes friends with Dee, and they start plotting a revenge on the popular kids, which very quickly gets out of hand. The " Love, Heather " pranks are now spreading without anyone being able to stop them.
Stevie's family is a bit of a troubled one. Her mum and dad are divorced, and her dad doesn't have the interest to see her often, being busy with his new missus. Her mum is starting to date other men too, often not spending time with Stevie. Lacking her family love, Stevie sees Lottie's family as hers. Very understandably, given the fact she has spent countless days and nights there. Lottie's family is not perfect either though. They have their own problems, and the most recent one is Lottie's mum transitioning into a man.
Stevie as a character
Stevie is a person that makes you want to feel for you, but you can't. She is supposed to be sympathetic and she is supposed to be a victim. However, most of the time I found her quite annoying and attention seeking. It is also important to mention that she is not alone and could reach for help, but she didn't, despite people often asking her whether she is feeling okay and if there is anything they can do to help.
The world was always revolving about Stevie, and she couldn't understand how other may feel as well. A scene where she tells Lottie how to accept her mum's transition comes to mind. We all know that Stevie cares about Lottie and her mum, but Lottie is way closer and more affected in this situation. There are times where it's not our place to say things, and leave people to cope in their own way, and Stevie was not able to achieve this state of mind.
Powerful!
While I couldn't connect to Stevie on many levels, I absolutely cherish this book because it brings up bullying in a very powerful way. It is very emotional and very intense, every bit of reality hits hard and makes me angry for all the children out there that are getting bullied every day. I was once that kid. I was a Stevie too! And it sucks to see it happen again and again, and realise how cruel life and people can be sometimes, when no one gets punished for what they have done.
I loved how this book showed how small things done in consecutive way can have enormous effect to a person, or a group. How the small things we say today can hurt us badly. And I hope people will read this book with the hope of spreading the knowledge and standing up to bullies, before things go out of hand.
Please be aware that this book has bullying and assault triggers.
Stevie and Lottie have been friends since they've known about each other. And when Lottie starts to hang out with the popular kids, Stevie wants to fit in too. One thing leads to another, and Stevie gets bullied by them, which quickly leads to the whole school avoiding her.
Then Stevie becomes friends with Dee, and they start plotting a revenge on the popular kids, which very quickly gets out of hand. The " Love, Heather " pranks are now spreading without anyone being able to stop them.
Stevie's family is a bit of a troubled one. Her mum and dad are divorced, and her dad doesn't have the interest to see her often, being busy with his new missus. Her mum is starting to date other men too, often not spending time with Stevie. Lacking her family love, Stevie sees Lottie's family as hers. Very understandably, given the fact she has spent countless days and nights there. Lottie's family is not perfect either though. They have their own problems, and the most recent one is Lottie's mum transitioning into a man.
Stevie as a character
Stevie is a person that makes you want to feel for you, but you can't. She is supposed to be sympathetic and she is supposed to be a victim. However, most of the time I found her quite annoying and attention seeking. It is also important to mention that she is not alone and could reach for help, but she didn't, despite people often asking her whether she is feeling okay and if there is anything they can do to help.
The world was always revolving about Stevie, and she couldn't understand how other may feel as well. A scene where she tells Lottie how to accept her mum's transition comes to mind. We all know that Stevie cares about Lottie and her mum, but Lottie is way closer and more affected in this situation. There are times where it's not our place to say things, and leave people to cope in their own way, and Stevie was not able to achieve this state of mind.
Powerful!
While I couldn't connect to Stevie on many levels, I absolutely cherish this book because it brings up bullying in a very powerful way. It is very emotional and very intense, every bit of reality hits hard and makes me angry for all the children out there that are getting bullied every day. I was once that kid. I was a Stevie too! And it sucks to see it happen again and again, and realise how cruel life and people can be sometimes, when no one gets punished for what they have done.
I loved how this book showed how small things done in consecutive way can have enormous effect to a person, or a group. How the small things we say today can hurt us badly. And I hope people will read this book with the hope of spreading the knowledge and standing up to bullies, before things go out of hand.
SCOOP - Magz, Book, Newspaper
Magazines & Newspapers and Book
App
SCOOP delivers over 100,000 editions of magazine, book and newspaper in emagazine, ebook, and epaper...
Laura Doe (1350 KP) rated Inside the Mind of Jeffrey Dahmer: The Cannibal Killer in Books
Mar 12, 2022
Jeffrey Dahmer is one of the serial killers that I didn’t know too much about and this book was definitely a revelation. It takes you through from Dahmer being born right up to his death and a lot of the in between.
I’ve never read this author before but am aware of some of his other books and I think that this book was a good one to start with. I liked that we delved into Dahmer’s childhood and found some possible triggers from there but also that the author reinforced that not every child that suffers a specific trauma in their childhood becomes a serial killer, as I think it is important that the reader is reminded of this each time.
I also liked how there was a chapter for each of the victims and also in the appendix there were the charges in more detail for each victim too. Far too often when reading or watching documentaries about serial killers their victims are glossed over and forgotten while their killer’s name is remembered.
There were a few things that I disliked about this book, the main one being the whole chapter that seemed to be dedicated to slagging off psychiatrists and psychologists. While psychology is not an exact science and different people in the profession can come to different conclusions, I feel that the author spent too many pages trying to prove his point. I also felt that a lot of contempt for the profession was coming through in the writing, which, as somebody who wants to become a psychologist, is not something that I appreciated. I understand that everyone has their opinion on it, but I felt that far too much time was spent trying to get his point across.
There were also a few mistakes that made it hard to make sense of a few things, I understand that it has only just been published and there will be a few mistakes (there was a repeated word in a sentence that wasn’t needed) but when it is an obvious mistake with a date (in the Anthony Hughes chapter it says that he was last seen on 24th September 1991 and then 2 chapters below it says that his family were notified of his death on 5th July 1991) it makes for very confusing reading.
I also found that a lot of the time Christopher Berry-Dee referred to the book written by Brian Masters, I’m unsure if this was only because he hasn’t spoken to Dahmer in person while Masters did but at times I felt like I should have just picked up his book instead. I also found that sometimes the author seemed to boast about which serial killers he had met in real life when he didn’t need to.
Overall, I liked the humour in the book and found the writing style easy to get on with. It wasn’t a pleasant book (what book about a serial killer is?) but it was well written. I would pick up other books by this author in the future. Thank you to The Motherload book club on Facebook for the opportunity to win this book in a giveaway and the publisher Ad Lib for my copy!
I’ve never read this author before but am aware of some of his other books and I think that this book was a good one to start with. I liked that we delved into Dahmer’s childhood and found some possible triggers from there but also that the author reinforced that not every child that suffers a specific trauma in their childhood becomes a serial killer, as I think it is important that the reader is reminded of this each time.
I also liked how there was a chapter for each of the victims and also in the appendix there were the charges in more detail for each victim too. Far too often when reading or watching documentaries about serial killers their victims are glossed over and forgotten while their killer’s name is remembered.
There were a few things that I disliked about this book, the main one being the whole chapter that seemed to be dedicated to slagging off psychiatrists and psychologists. While psychology is not an exact science and different people in the profession can come to different conclusions, I feel that the author spent too many pages trying to prove his point. I also felt that a lot of contempt for the profession was coming through in the writing, which, as somebody who wants to become a psychologist, is not something that I appreciated. I understand that everyone has their opinion on it, but I felt that far too much time was spent trying to get his point across.
There were also a few mistakes that made it hard to make sense of a few things, I understand that it has only just been published and there will be a few mistakes (there was a repeated word in a sentence that wasn’t needed) but when it is an obvious mistake with a date (in the Anthony Hughes chapter it says that he was last seen on 24th September 1991 and then 2 chapters below it says that his family were notified of his death on 5th July 1991) it makes for very confusing reading.
I also found that a lot of the time Christopher Berry-Dee referred to the book written by Brian Masters, I’m unsure if this was only because he hasn’t spoken to Dahmer in person while Masters did but at times I felt like I should have just picked up his book instead. I also found that sometimes the author seemed to boast about which serial killers he had met in real life when he didn’t need to.
Overall, I liked the humour in the book and found the writing style easy to get on with. It wasn’t a pleasant book (what book about a serial killer is?) but it was well written. I would pick up other books by this author in the future. Thank you to The Motherload book club on Facebook for the opportunity to win this book in a giveaway and the publisher Ad Lib for my copy!
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Pootie Tang (2001) in Movies
May 3, 2018
Dare You Not to Like it
Platinum recording artist Pootie Tang (Lance Crouther) has to figure out how to get his mojo back after the scandalous Ireenie (Jennifer Coolidge) steals his magical belt that is the source of both his power and swag. Sound dumb? Well, it is. But it's damn funny and I challenge anyone not to laugh without cracking up at the absurdity of it all.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Pootie provides the most hilarious moments in the film. As it opens, Pootie is having an interview with Bob Costas and you quickly learn that Pootie speaks his own language literally. For the sake of this review, let's call it Pootie Slang. The audience doesn't understand Pootie Slang, but the world he lives in can somehow make out every word he's saying. Best example I can think of: Groot speech. The words he says are enough to make you laugh, but it's the confidence in which the lines are delivered that take it to a whole new level. Pootie's got swag. For whatever reason, the ladies love him and everyone respects him, including the "Tippy ties" (those are children, by the way). It's one of those films you have to see to understand.
If Pootie isn't enough, there's an array of characters that keep the film entertaining. There's Biggy Shorty (Wanda Sykes), Pootie's love interest who has an eccentric style of dress and will slap the taste out of the mouth of anyone that disrespects Pooty. Then you have Trucky, Pootie's loudmouth friend that basically lives off of Pootie's success. Dirty Dee (Reg E. Cathey), the dirty scoundrel who walks around constantly covered in muck. My personal favorite: Lacey (Mario Joyner) who has a special knack for repeating everything a person said as if it were his idea. I could go on...
Cinematography/Visuals: 7
You haven't laughed until you have seen eight-year-old Pootie walking down a street while a woman three times his age throws his big wheel out the window because she's mad at him. You haven't laughed until you see Pootie's father get attacked at his job by a "gorilla" which is really someone in a gorilla costume. You really haven't laughed until you've seen Pootie record a song with absolutely no sound as he silently screams into the mic. And you really haven't laughed...well, you get my point.
Conflict: 10
Genre: 8
Memorability: 7
Pace: 7
Pacing was a bit spotty at times. When it's rolling, it's really rolling. However, there were a handful of dry spots where the film didn't seem like it knew where it was headed.
Plot: 6
The plot is all over the place at times, like watching a grenade explode. It has a direct line of sight, sure. There is a clear beginning, middle, and end. It's all the filler between these three things where the film goes south. There is a bit of forgiveness here as Pootie Tang manages to stay humorous even when it's confusing. Sometimes the confusion is what makes things funny. The writing definitely could have been stronger in certain points.
Resolution: 9
Overall: 84
Will Pootie Tang ever win an award for underrated comedy? No. Is it a pretty darn good time that makes you laugh consistently? Absolutely. It's dumb, but that's what makes it endearing. Honestly, I don't think it's any less dumb than a Bill and Ted film or *insert Pauly Shore film here* and those are regarded as cult classics. Just saying...Give it a chance. Maybe you hate it, but it's going to leave you laughing a few times and that's all that matters.
P.S.--Did I really just mention Groot and Pootie Tang in the same review? Wow...
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Pootie provides the most hilarious moments in the film. As it opens, Pootie is having an interview with Bob Costas and you quickly learn that Pootie speaks his own language literally. For the sake of this review, let's call it Pootie Slang. The audience doesn't understand Pootie Slang, but the world he lives in can somehow make out every word he's saying. Best example I can think of: Groot speech. The words he says are enough to make you laugh, but it's the confidence in which the lines are delivered that take it to a whole new level. Pootie's got swag. For whatever reason, the ladies love him and everyone respects him, including the "Tippy ties" (those are children, by the way). It's one of those films you have to see to understand.
If Pootie isn't enough, there's an array of characters that keep the film entertaining. There's Biggy Shorty (Wanda Sykes), Pootie's love interest who has an eccentric style of dress and will slap the taste out of the mouth of anyone that disrespects Pooty. Then you have Trucky, Pootie's loudmouth friend that basically lives off of Pootie's success. Dirty Dee (Reg E. Cathey), the dirty scoundrel who walks around constantly covered in muck. My personal favorite: Lacey (Mario Joyner) who has a special knack for repeating everything a person said as if it were his idea. I could go on...
Cinematography/Visuals: 7
You haven't laughed until you have seen eight-year-old Pootie walking down a street while a woman three times his age throws his big wheel out the window because she's mad at him. You haven't laughed until you see Pootie's father get attacked at his job by a "gorilla" which is really someone in a gorilla costume. You really haven't laughed until you've seen Pootie record a song with absolutely no sound as he silently screams into the mic. And you really haven't laughed...well, you get my point.
Conflict: 10
Genre: 8
Memorability: 7
Pace: 7
Pacing was a bit spotty at times. When it's rolling, it's really rolling. However, there were a handful of dry spots where the film didn't seem like it knew where it was headed.
Plot: 6
The plot is all over the place at times, like watching a grenade explode. It has a direct line of sight, sure. There is a clear beginning, middle, and end. It's all the filler between these three things where the film goes south. There is a bit of forgiveness here as Pootie Tang manages to stay humorous even when it's confusing. Sometimes the confusion is what makes things funny. The writing definitely could have been stronger in certain points.
Resolution: 9
Overall: 84
Will Pootie Tang ever win an award for underrated comedy? No. Is it a pretty darn good time that makes you laugh consistently? Absolutely. It's dumb, but that's what makes it endearing. Honestly, I don't think it's any less dumb than a Bill and Ted film or *insert Pauly Shore film here* and those are regarded as cult classics. Just saying...Give it a chance. Maybe you hate it, but it's going to leave you laughing a few times and that's all that matters.
P.S.--Did I really just mention Groot and Pootie Tang in the same review? Wow...
Darren (1599 KP) rated Dolls (2019) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
Story: Dolls starts when alcoholic children’s book author Robert Holbrook (Downey) moves into his recently deceased mother’s home to start work on his latest work, when he is joined by his teenage daughter Sammey (Simpson) who wants to get away from her mother.
When Robert and Sammey discover three creepy dolls in the attic, Robert decides that he wants to use these characters to create his latest story, known as the Attic Dolls. When a sister of a former patient Margaret (Wallace) appears, she warns Sammey about the evil inside the dolls that come out to play when you look away.
Thoughts on Dolls
Characters – Robert is an alcoholic children’s author, he has made mistakes in his life which has left his family facing financial ruin, his daughter struggle to be able to face a college future, he has moved out to focus on his new book, which will see him being joined by his daughter. The latest book idea uses the creepy dolls found in the attic of his mother’s home, which will see him suffer nightmares as he looks to withdraw from his drinking problems. Sammey is his 17-year-old daughter who wants to live with him over her mother, she has been on certain medications, though it is unclear what is wrong with her to need them. She first gets scared by the dolls believing the story she hears about them, while trying to remain rebellious about her future. Margaret was the sister of one of the patient’s of Robert’s mother, she warns the family about the evil from the dolls which might be connected to the deaths.
Performances – Thomas Downey is strong through the film, we believe that he is going through troubles. Trinity Simpson is entertaining in her role, she brings the fear of what is going on to make us believe everything happening. Dee Wallace is the biggest name in the film, she is in a supporting role, which lets her bring the experience to the film.
Story – The story here follows a family that move into a house of a deceased relative only to discover three creepy dolls in the attic, soon strange things start happening around the house as it appears the dolls come to life when people aren’t looking. This story does play into the creepy dolls genre of horror which does to use mental health and addiction to try and reflect the situation going on through the events of the film. It does start by going in one direction, but it does feel like it is going to target on a rampage, then throws another twist to them in and it does seem to rush a lot of the story going on through the film. it does end in a very confusing manor which could make most of the film feel almost redundant.
Horror – The horror in this comes from the dolls which do feel creepy and make us feel uneasy wondering what they will be doing next.
Settings – The film is set in the one location which is the house, it is filled with locations where the dolls could sneak around without being seen, only heard, which does play into the rules created.
Special Effects – The effects in the film are only used when they are needed, they are simply with certain small movements which does help the film unfold.
Scene of the Movie – The dolls appearance.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The ending.
Final Thoughts – This is a new creepy doll movie, which has been the it feature at the moment, with Child’s Play and Annabelle in the cinema, this one does have a creepy feel to it even if the story does seem to be rushed.
Overall: Creepy Fun horror.
When Robert and Sammey discover three creepy dolls in the attic, Robert decides that he wants to use these characters to create his latest story, known as the Attic Dolls. When a sister of a former patient Margaret (Wallace) appears, she warns Sammey about the evil inside the dolls that come out to play when you look away.
Thoughts on Dolls
Characters – Robert is an alcoholic children’s author, he has made mistakes in his life which has left his family facing financial ruin, his daughter struggle to be able to face a college future, he has moved out to focus on his new book, which will see him being joined by his daughter. The latest book idea uses the creepy dolls found in the attic of his mother’s home, which will see him suffer nightmares as he looks to withdraw from his drinking problems. Sammey is his 17-year-old daughter who wants to live with him over her mother, she has been on certain medications, though it is unclear what is wrong with her to need them. She first gets scared by the dolls believing the story she hears about them, while trying to remain rebellious about her future. Margaret was the sister of one of the patient’s of Robert’s mother, she warns the family about the evil from the dolls which might be connected to the deaths.
Performances – Thomas Downey is strong through the film, we believe that he is going through troubles. Trinity Simpson is entertaining in her role, she brings the fear of what is going on to make us believe everything happening. Dee Wallace is the biggest name in the film, she is in a supporting role, which lets her bring the experience to the film.
Story – The story here follows a family that move into a house of a deceased relative only to discover three creepy dolls in the attic, soon strange things start happening around the house as it appears the dolls come to life when people aren’t looking. This story does play into the creepy dolls genre of horror which does to use mental health and addiction to try and reflect the situation going on through the events of the film. It does start by going in one direction, but it does feel like it is going to target on a rampage, then throws another twist to them in and it does seem to rush a lot of the story going on through the film. it does end in a very confusing manor which could make most of the film feel almost redundant.
Horror – The horror in this comes from the dolls which do feel creepy and make us feel uneasy wondering what they will be doing next.
Settings – The film is set in the one location which is the house, it is filled with locations where the dolls could sneak around without being seen, only heard, which does play into the rules created.
Special Effects – The effects in the film are only used when they are needed, they are simply with certain small movements which does help the film unfold.
Scene of the Movie – The dolls appearance.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The ending.
Final Thoughts – This is a new creepy doll movie, which has been the it feature at the moment, with Child’s Play and Annabelle in the cinema, this one does have a creepy feel to it even if the story does seem to be rushed.
Overall: Creepy Fun horror.
Kids Song -Over 160 English Kids Song With Lyrics
Education and Music
6.0
Rate It
App
- Over 160+ English Kids Song. - 11 Disc Catalogue, 16 Songs each Disc. Over 160 Songs. - Random...
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018) in Movies
Feb 18, 2019
The Star Wars Story that nobody asked for, but was is a story worth telling?
In short, NO.
Where to start? Indeed, where to start with a background prequel focusing on one of the most iconic Star Wars characters ever, taking the ageing Harrison Ford’s characters to, well not so far beyond the age that we first met him back in 1977.
Recast with actor who brings very little Ford with him, apart from a few well practice smiles and other expressions here and there, this is a reinterpretation of the character, in this case as a naive and wimpy version, maybe even soft, is not the part for Alden Ehrenreich.
The Character arch of Han Solo in the original trilogy was his redemption from a selfish, self-assured space pirate to a man who could recognise and fight for a cause bigger than himself. But according this haphazard prequel, he was already a big softy before her learns the harsh realities of life, only he doesn’t, not really.
He just learns to be a little more cynical and to smirk his way through every situation with his lucky die and everything turns out okay for him. Ehrenrieich done not bring an ounce of the gravitas or charisma of Harrison Ford, as this film, which had to be almost entirely re-shot with Ron Howard taking the helm after The Lego Movie directing due Chris Miller and Phil Lord where unceremoniously fired after “not getting it”, apparently, shoe horns as much of the token events of Solo’s pre-rebellion life into its two and bit hour run time.
Ron Howard; A few hits and plenty of misses. Willow (1988) springs to mind. Not only was Willow Lucas’ attempt to begin and new fantasy trilogy after the Star Wars Saga was completed, it was micro directed by George Lucas as Ron Howard took the credit. And this has a lot of the hallmarks of Willow.
In short; A poor mans Star Wars. Hammy scripting and at times acting, the story is all over the place, with shallow characterisations, poor exposition, haphazard pacing and the action is actually quite hard to follow. Just please, give us ONE decent shot of the Millennium Falcon that we can keep up with and actually see, especially as it has been altered so much from the icon version that we all love. Maybe we’re getting bored of the same ship after 40 years? Maybe we all need to go out and by a new version?
Toyetic… anyone?
Instead everything of interest is speeding across the screen and the boring stuff is left to linger. And there was a level of boredom here. Incredibly predictable plotting, simply going through the motions of a no stakes story. But it does feel as if they shoehorned a larger narrative in there, with introduction in the final act of the rebellion and an old villain returns with a new legs, but by the time what should have been an earth shattering twist appeared, it wasn’t really interested, especially if you know the The Clone Wars or Rebels.
One major plus note though, Donald Glover aced Lando Calrissian, to such an extant that I wish this movie was actually called Lando: A Star War Story rather than Solo, because there’s no doubt that Glover brought so much more Billy Dee Williams and built on it, than Ehrenreich did for Ford’s.
As well as the subtle and well conceived plotting around Lando’s female droid, L3-37 (Phoebe Waller-Bridge) who may well be the ‘Old girl’ referred to by both Han and Lando during in the original trilogy when they speak to the Falcon, whilst shining a light on the deliberately ambiguous nature of droids in the Star Wars universe. In short; are they sentient or not? But this is not Star Trek so we do not really need an answer to that… do we?
Overall, I want to say that this was missed opportunity but in truth, it was not. It was waste of time. A story that did not need to be told with script that did not know what say. Clearly, they were aiming for a Guardians Of The Galaxy (2015), unaware that the secret of that surprise success was that it tapped in to the retro Star Wars vibe by NOT being Star Wars. And with little expectations.
Here they were playing with one of the biggest guns in modern film history and in my opinion, it blew up in there faces.
Where to start? Indeed, where to start with a background prequel focusing on one of the most iconic Star Wars characters ever, taking the ageing Harrison Ford’s characters to, well not so far beyond the age that we first met him back in 1977.
Recast with actor who brings very little Ford with him, apart from a few well practice smiles and other expressions here and there, this is a reinterpretation of the character, in this case as a naive and wimpy version, maybe even soft, is not the part for Alden Ehrenreich.
The Character arch of Han Solo in the original trilogy was his redemption from a selfish, self-assured space pirate to a man who could recognise and fight for a cause bigger than himself. But according this haphazard prequel, he was already a big softy before her learns the harsh realities of life, only he doesn’t, not really.
He just learns to be a little more cynical and to smirk his way through every situation with his lucky die and everything turns out okay for him. Ehrenrieich done not bring an ounce of the gravitas or charisma of Harrison Ford, as this film, which had to be almost entirely re-shot with Ron Howard taking the helm after The Lego Movie directing due Chris Miller and Phil Lord where unceremoniously fired after “not getting it”, apparently, shoe horns as much of the token events of Solo’s pre-rebellion life into its two and bit hour run time.
Ron Howard; A few hits and plenty of misses. Willow (1988) springs to mind. Not only was Willow Lucas’ attempt to begin and new fantasy trilogy after the Star Wars Saga was completed, it was micro directed by George Lucas as Ron Howard took the credit. And this has a lot of the hallmarks of Willow.
In short; A poor mans Star Wars. Hammy scripting and at times acting, the story is all over the place, with shallow characterisations, poor exposition, haphazard pacing and the action is actually quite hard to follow. Just please, give us ONE decent shot of the Millennium Falcon that we can keep up with and actually see, especially as it has been altered so much from the icon version that we all love. Maybe we’re getting bored of the same ship after 40 years? Maybe we all need to go out and by a new version?
Toyetic… anyone?
Instead everything of interest is speeding across the screen and the boring stuff is left to linger. And there was a level of boredom here. Incredibly predictable plotting, simply going through the motions of a no stakes story. But it does feel as if they shoehorned a larger narrative in there, with introduction in the final act of the rebellion and an old villain returns with a new legs, but by the time what should have been an earth shattering twist appeared, it wasn’t really interested, especially if you know the The Clone Wars or Rebels.
One major plus note though, Donald Glover aced Lando Calrissian, to such an extant that I wish this movie was actually called Lando: A Star War Story rather than Solo, because there’s no doubt that Glover brought so much more Billy Dee Williams and built on it, than Ehrenreich did for Ford’s.
As well as the subtle and well conceived plotting around Lando’s female droid, L3-37 (Phoebe Waller-Bridge) who may well be the ‘Old girl’ referred to by both Han and Lando during in the original trilogy when they speak to the Falcon, whilst shining a light on the deliberately ambiguous nature of droids in the Star Wars universe. In short; are they sentient or not? But this is not Star Trek so we do not really need an answer to that… do we?
Overall, I want to say that this was missed opportunity but in truth, it was not. It was waste of time. A story that did not need to be told with script that did not know what say. Clearly, they were aiming for a Guardians Of The Galaxy (2015), unaware that the secret of that surprise success was that it tapped in to the retro Star Wars vibe by NOT being Star Wars. And with little expectations.
Here they were playing with one of the biggest guns in modern film history and in my opinion, it blew up in there faces.