Search
Bookapotamus (289 KP) rated No Less Days in Books
May 29, 2018
I won a copy of this book and I didn't know it was Christian Fiction. Definitely not something I would grab for myself to read. I was not turned off by the religious aspects of it though, as most are subtle and not in your face. I tended to glaze over them, which makes me believe this book would have been just as good without them. I won't say they didn't add anything as that's not my place to judge, but I won't judge the book either on parts that I wasn't particularly interested in. I wouldn't judge a mystery on it being mysterious, or a romance for being romantic. So now that we're past that...
The premise of this story is really cool. I admit, it reminded me of that Blake Lively move, Age of Adeline, but WAY better. There was thought here, and it drew me in the second I started reading.
The main focus of the story is that David Galloway cannot die. It should have happened, many times. But nope. Still here... 100 some odd years later and still looking every bit a healthy 35 year old man. We learn a lot of David's history, as well as his present situation, and we wonder: How did he become this way? Are there others like him? Will he ever die? How does he live live without ever aging?
I read this book really fast as I honestly wanted to find out what would happen. Page after page, it kept me riveted. I would give it 5 Stars, but I had some issues with parts of the story. Particularly all the themes going on - some felt really unnecessary. There was a lot of mystery, racial stuff, domestic abuse, love stories, historical references, religion, murders, celebrity, books.... I'm probably missing more. I felt like too much was happening and a lot could be toned down or eliminated. And it's very obviously set up for a sequel, but the way this "strange character" just showed up and then left... felt really disjointed and out of place.
I'm also not a big Speculative Fiction reader as well as the Christian Fiction genre. I would have never bought this book and read it on my own. But that is how you lose certain generalizations about things, and find some of the best stories. I took a chance, and I won :)
I'm happy to have read this book. And I'm pretty sure this is a sequel in the works, and I'll most likely seek that one out to read!
The premise of this story is really cool. I admit, it reminded me of that Blake Lively move, Age of Adeline, but WAY better. There was thought here, and it drew me in the second I started reading.
The main focus of the story is that David Galloway cannot die. It should have happened, many times. But nope. Still here... 100 some odd years later and still looking every bit a healthy 35 year old man. We learn a lot of David's history, as well as his present situation, and we wonder: How did he become this way? Are there others like him? Will he ever die? How does he live live without ever aging?
I read this book really fast as I honestly wanted to find out what would happen. Page after page, it kept me riveted. I would give it 5 Stars, but I had some issues with parts of the story. Particularly all the themes going on - some felt really unnecessary. There was a lot of mystery, racial stuff, domestic abuse, love stories, historical references, religion, murders, celebrity, books.... I'm probably missing more. I felt like too much was happening and a lot could be toned down or eliminated. And it's very obviously set up for a sequel, but the way this "strange character" just showed up and then left... felt really disjointed and out of place.
I'm also not a big Speculative Fiction reader as well as the Christian Fiction genre. I would have never bought this book and read it on my own. But that is how you lose certain generalizations about things, and find some of the best stories. I took a chance, and I won :)
I'm happy to have read this book. And I'm pretty sure this is a sequel in the works, and I'll most likely seek that one out to read!
Caffeinated Fae (464 KP) rated Get a Life, Chloe Brown (The Brown Sisters #1) in Books
Feb 24, 2020
Enemies to Lovers (4 more)
Sunshine Character with a Grumpy Character
Invisible Illness Representation
Amazing Characters
Great Banter
Best Romance of 2019
I read this book a few months ago, thanks to Libro.fm's influencer program. I saw quite a few of my favorite blogs reviewing/talking about this book, so I knew I had to read it. I've waited a while to write this book review simply because I loved it so much. Get A Life, Chloe Brown is one of those books that will stay with you for a while after. I struggled to write this book review because nothing will do justice to how much I loved this book. I seriously want to shove it into everyone's hands and tell them to read it.
The narration for this book was outstanding. Adjoa Andoh narrated this book to perfection. Her voices, her attitude, everything was executed incredibly well. I always knew who was talking and never once questioned her narration. She brought this story to life & I loved every second of it.
What I loved the most about this book was the banter. Seriously, Talia Hibbert should get an award for verbal sparring. As you all know by now, banter is my catnip & I couldn't help but squee at the interactions between Red & Chloe. The author genuinely made me love each character more than I thought possible. Both Characters were realistic and had their faults. I loved seeing them work through their issues and grow.
I also loved that this book included so many of my favorite tropes. Enemies to lovers is hands down one of my favorite tropes, so when paired with a sunshine character with a grumpy character, I was in heaven. Talia Hibbert also executed the enemies to lover trope incredibly well. This trope is hit, or miss and so many things can go wrong. The fact that this was done to perfection still has me wowed.
I wouldn't do this book justice if I didn't mention that Talia Hibbert also handled invisible illnesses, domestic abuse, and some hard-hitting issues with compassion and accuracy. I loved that Chloe has fibromyalgia, and I genuinely appreciated how accurate it was. I also was thankful that this illness was present but didn't define Chloe. Chloe was three dimensional, and fibromyalgia didn't make up the core basis for who she was. It was beautiful to see Chloe as the main character, and I appreciated how well this story came together.
As you can tell, I loved this book. It's probably one of my all-time favorite books I have read. I loved the banter, the tropes, and the execution. Talia Hibbert should write a master class on banter. I honestly can't wait to dive into her backlist and have bought this book the second I could.
The narration for this book was outstanding. Adjoa Andoh narrated this book to perfection. Her voices, her attitude, everything was executed incredibly well. I always knew who was talking and never once questioned her narration. She brought this story to life & I loved every second of it.
What I loved the most about this book was the banter. Seriously, Talia Hibbert should get an award for verbal sparring. As you all know by now, banter is my catnip & I couldn't help but squee at the interactions between Red & Chloe. The author genuinely made me love each character more than I thought possible. Both Characters were realistic and had their faults. I loved seeing them work through their issues and grow.
I also loved that this book included so many of my favorite tropes. Enemies to lovers is hands down one of my favorite tropes, so when paired with a sunshine character with a grumpy character, I was in heaven. Talia Hibbert also executed the enemies to lover trope incredibly well. This trope is hit, or miss and so many things can go wrong. The fact that this was done to perfection still has me wowed.
I wouldn't do this book justice if I didn't mention that Talia Hibbert also handled invisible illnesses, domestic abuse, and some hard-hitting issues with compassion and accuracy. I loved that Chloe has fibromyalgia, and I genuinely appreciated how accurate it was. I also was thankful that this illness was present but didn't define Chloe. Chloe was three dimensional, and fibromyalgia didn't make up the core basis for who she was. It was beautiful to see Chloe as the main character, and I appreciated how well this story came together.
As you can tell, I loved this book. It's probably one of my all-time favorite books I have read. I loved the banter, the tropes, and the execution. Talia Hibbert should write a master class on banter. I honestly can't wait to dive into her backlist and have bought this book the second I could.
SG
Shallow Graves: The Hunt for the New Bedford Highway Serial Killer
Book
Eleven women went missing over the spring and summer of 1988 in New Bedford, Massachusetts, an old...
Night Reader Reviews (683 KP) rated Four Years of Despair in Books
Jan 9, 2020
Honest Review for Free Copy of Book
WARNING: This book focuses on Bipolar Disorder, Depression, Suicide, Death, Domestic Violence, Physical Abuse, and Mental Abuse. Parts of this book are extremely hard to read because of the
content.
Four Years of Despair by Jalesa Morrison was a shocker to say the least. It is hard to find the words to accurately describe this book and do it justice. Normally I would complain about the repetitiveness of a book. In this case the repetition accurately portrays the events in the book. I can easily see this being extended into a larger novel if Jalesa Morrison feels confident enough in her ability to stay accurate and go deeper into each character. Parts of this book did make me cringe multiple times. At first I did not like this book at all but then I figured it out. This book is not meant to be liked. It is meant to infom, to show what sever meutal illuess laaks like behind closed doors. It shows what the individual and family members go through on a daily basis that most people do not see or understand.
Jalesa tells the story of thirteen year old Jaunell Morris, her sis ters Lois and Francis, and their mother Joan. Jaunell was your typical preteen up until around her thirteenth birthday. It was then that
Jaunell was diagnosed with a bipolar disorder that also causes her to become extremely depressed. Joan freqiently struggles to get Jaunell to take a shower or even go to school. This also makes it difficult for Joan to hold a job and she has to ask her own mother (Jamell's grandmother) for financial assistance.
Jaunell lashes out and physically attacks her family members miltiple times.
Between Jaunell's lack of bodily cleanliness and her physical outbursts, Joan's friends turn their back on Joan and many of their family members disown Jaunell. Joan's mother blames Joan for Jaunell's behavior and tells her that she is a bad mother. Jaunell's father leaves Joan because he can not handle Jaunell. Lois and Francis also turn their backs on their sister after being hurt by her multiple times. These are only a few of the relationships that are destroyed because of a lack of understanding. Joan becomes depressed as well and ends up abusing Jaunell because she believes everything to be Jaunell's fault even though she knows in her heart that it is not true. Jaunell spends four years in and out of hospitals countless times before her mother has the financial ability to send Jaunell to a long term care facility. But there is hope...
What I liked best was Jalesa's blunt honesty about what is going on. Jalesa tells the story of Jaunell and her family without the fear of offending anyone. Jaunell's story is one that needed to be told. What I liked least was the lack of depth to the characters. In fact, I found it to be mildly disappointing. Also, there were times where I did not agree with what was happening, but that is nothing against the book. That was my personal rejection of admitting that there are people suffering like this every day.
Target readers for this book were hard to determine because of the nature of the topic. It truly depends on the individual's mindset. I believe high school students and older could handle this book. At the same time, the message would be good for middle school students as well but might be hard for them to read. This book got a sold 3 out of 4 rating from me. The only reason it did not get a perfect rating was that I would like to see more depth.
https://www.facebook.com/nightreaderreviews
content.
Four Years of Despair by Jalesa Morrison was a shocker to say the least. It is hard to find the words to accurately describe this book and do it justice. Normally I would complain about the repetitiveness of a book. In this case the repetition accurately portrays the events in the book. I can easily see this being extended into a larger novel if Jalesa Morrison feels confident enough in her ability to stay accurate and go deeper into each character. Parts of this book did make me cringe multiple times. At first I did not like this book at all but then I figured it out. This book is not meant to be liked. It is meant to infom, to show what sever meutal illuess laaks like behind closed doors. It shows what the individual and family members go through on a daily basis that most people do not see or understand.
Jalesa tells the story of thirteen year old Jaunell Morris, her sis ters Lois and Francis, and their mother Joan. Jaunell was your typical preteen up until around her thirteenth birthday. It was then that
Jaunell was diagnosed with a bipolar disorder that also causes her to become extremely depressed. Joan freqiently struggles to get Jaunell to take a shower or even go to school. This also makes it difficult for Joan to hold a job and she has to ask her own mother (Jamell's grandmother) for financial assistance.
Jaunell lashes out and physically attacks her family members miltiple times.
Between Jaunell's lack of bodily cleanliness and her physical outbursts, Joan's friends turn their back on Joan and many of their family members disown Jaunell. Joan's mother blames Joan for Jaunell's behavior and tells her that she is a bad mother. Jaunell's father leaves Joan because he can not handle Jaunell. Lois and Francis also turn their backs on their sister after being hurt by her multiple times. These are only a few of the relationships that are destroyed because of a lack of understanding. Joan becomes depressed as well and ends up abusing Jaunell because she believes everything to be Jaunell's fault even though she knows in her heart that it is not true. Jaunell spends four years in and out of hospitals countless times before her mother has the financial ability to send Jaunell to a long term care facility. But there is hope...
What I liked best was Jalesa's blunt honesty about what is going on. Jalesa tells the story of Jaunell and her family without the fear of offending anyone. Jaunell's story is one that needed to be told. What I liked least was the lack of depth to the characters. In fact, I found it to be mildly disappointing. Also, there were times where I did not agree with what was happening, but that is nothing against the book. That was my personal rejection of admitting that there are people suffering like this every day.
Target readers for this book were hard to determine because of the nature of the topic. It truly depends on the individual's mindset. I believe high school students and older could handle this book. At the same time, the message would be good for middle school students as well but might be hard for them to read. This book got a sold 3 out of 4 rating from me. The only reason it did not get a perfect rating was that I would like to see more depth.
https://www.facebook.com/nightreaderreviews
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated My Sister's Bones in Books
Mar 15, 2018
Also read my review here: http://bookbum.weebly.com/book-reviews/my-sisters-bones-by-nuala-ellwood
NOW AVAILABLE IN THE UK!
<b>Trigger warnings are noted in the first paragraph.</b>
<b><i>Were all of us, every day, just a hairbreadth away from evil. If Ive learnt anything from fifteen years of reporting, its that. But I couldnt expect these people to understand.</b></i>
This is a really heavy read as it deals with some really dark and depressing subjects, <b>such as the war and refugees in Syria, domestic & child abuse, rape, death, mental illness, alcoholism and miscarriages.</b> Dont read this if youre having a low period in your life because this is not going to make you feel any better, throughout its a rather distressing and upsetting story.
Each character in this novel was well developed, no matter how small a part they played in the plot. Ellwood has done a fantastic job with her research into PTSD as Kates fears and anxieties seem so real to the reader. Though Ive never experienced anything even close to PTSD, I can really imagine how terrifying and disturbing it would be, from reading this book. Its definitely the best and most harrowing description of the condition Ive ever read in a fiction novel.
This was a really well presented novel and Im amazed that its a debut! It was excellently written and thought out. My only issue being that sometimes, the timings in this book felt a little off. When Kate and Paul were together, one minute they'd be serving dinner and the next, after a small 5 lined conversation, it would be midnight and time for Paul to leave and Kate to get into bed. It seemed like large chunks of the day would just disappear.
Maybe I shouldnt have read some other peoples reviews on this beforehand, but because I was expecting all these super duper amazing twists, I kind of didnt feel that they were super duper amazing. I also found some of them to be a little far fetched and silly, rather than surprising.
I can definitely see why this has gained so many 5 star ratings, but its all down to personal preference at the end of the day, and this one was just a little too dark for my liking. That's not to say I didn't like this...I enjoyed this a lot, hence the 4 stars. I found myself not wanting to put it down, even when my eyes were telling me it was definitely time for sleep. It was certainly a thrilling and page turning read, but I dont know if I could recommend this to anyone because of all the dark subject matters. It seems like the sort of book some people are going to love for its dark realism and others are going to hate that and find it too distressing to read.
Thanks to Netgalley and Penguin Books UK for giving me the opportunity to read this in exchange for an honest review.
NOW AVAILABLE IN THE UK!
<b>Trigger warnings are noted in the first paragraph.</b>
<b><i>Were all of us, every day, just a hairbreadth away from evil. If Ive learnt anything from fifteen years of reporting, its that. But I couldnt expect these people to understand.</b></i>
This is a really heavy read as it deals with some really dark and depressing subjects, <b>such as the war and refugees in Syria, domestic & child abuse, rape, death, mental illness, alcoholism and miscarriages.</b> Dont read this if youre having a low period in your life because this is not going to make you feel any better, throughout its a rather distressing and upsetting story.
Each character in this novel was well developed, no matter how small a part they played in the plot. Ellwood has done a fantastic job with her research into PTSD as Kates fears and anxieties seem so real to the reader. Though Ive never experienced anything even close to PTSD, I can really imagine how terrifying and disturbing it would be, from reading this book. Its definitely the best and most harrowing description of the condition Ive ever read in a fiction novel.
This was a really well presented novel and Im amazed that its a debut! It was excellently written and thought out. My only issue being that sometimes, the timings in this book felt a little off. When Kate and Paul were together, one minute they'd be serving dinner and the next, after a small 5 lined conversation, it would be midnight and time for Paul to leave and Kate to get into bed. It seemed like large chunks of the day would just disappear.
Maybe I shouldnt have read some other peoples reviews on this beforehand, but because I was expecting all these super duper amazing twists, I kind of didnt feel that they were super duper amazing. I also found some of them to be a little far fetched and silly, rather than surprising.
I can definitely see why this has gained so many 5 star ratings, but its all down to personal preference at the end of the day, and this one was just a little too dark for my liking. That's not to say I didn't like this...I enjoyed this a lot, hence the 4 stars. I found myself not wanting to put it down, even when my eyes were telling me it was definitely time for sleep. It was certainly a thrilling and page turning read, but I dont know if I could recommend this to anyone because of all the dark subject matters. It seems like the sort of book some people are going to love for its dark realism and others are going to hate that and find it too distressing to read.
Thanks to Netgalley and Penguin Books UK for giving me the opportunity to read this in exchange for an honest review.
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Rare Beasts (2019) in Movies
Oct 14, 2019
Directorial debuts are tough, and it gives people a chance to establish their personal style. Sadly for me, Billie Piper’s first film had a style that didn’t sit well with me at all. She was heavily involved in the project; directing, writing and starring in it, but her unique first film is perhaps a bit too quirky.
Rare Beasts follows Mandy, a career-driven single mother (Billie Piper) and her turbulent relationship with Pete (Leo Bill). Possibly the most frustrating thing about this film as it’s unclear why the two of them even ended up together at all.
It’s not uncommon for people to choose poorly when they’re dating, and end up in a relationship that doesn’t work, but Rare Beasts offers no reason for the two to even end up together in the first place. Mandy’s a single mother, she’s wild, she wears bold clothing, and Pete is a traditionalist who is, frankly, a misogynist with anger issues.
Interestingly, the film’s synopsis describes Pete as ‘charming’, and I’m unable to see that quality in him, nor is it ever shown from Mandy’s point of view. She never once looks at Pete lovingly, or seems charmed by him.
The lack of context or any indication as to what drove them to be together is a problem for me. Even if we saw one tiny nice moment between them it would make sense, but throughout the film they’re consistently awful to each other with no redeeming features.
Combined with a narrative that is all over the place and dialogue that feels very unnatural, it comes across as jarring most of the time. I have no issue with unconventional film styles, but I found it very hard to follow what was going on at various points.
It seems Rare Beasts is confused about what tone its actually going for, switching between whimsical musical style scenes (minus the music or singing) and gritty realism in a matter of seconds.
I appreciated the efforts to raise awareness of social issues such as domestic abuse, gender inequalities and the struggles of bringing up a child as a single parent, but these messages are squashed by a visual style that is rather overwhelming.
There is also a sub-plot involving Mandy’s parents (Kerry Fox and David Thewlis), who have separated but appear to have a complicated relationship. This is never fully explained either so it’s hard to connect with them, especially when Mandy’s mother falls ill.
This attempt to tug at our heartstrings falls flat, which is disappointing as it had the potential to bring some real, raw emotion to Rare Beasts. Sadly it’s as disjoined and confusing as Mandy and Pete’s relationship.
It’s clear those involved in the film gave it their all, and I can’t fault the quality of the actors even though some of the lines didn’t work and felt too far removed from natural conversation to be taken seriously. At least they tried.
Billie Piper has talent, there’s no doubt about it, but she hasn’t quite made it work in this very daring debut behind the camera. If Rare Beasts was attempting to be relatable and resonate with audiences, it failed to do that with me.
Rare Beasts follows Mandy, a career-driven single mother (Billie Piper) and her turbulent relationship with Pete (Leo Bill). Possibly the most frustrating thing about this film as it’s unclear why the two of them even ended up together at all.
It’s not uncommon for people to choose poorly when they’re dating, and end up in a relationship that doesn’t work, but Rare Beasts offers no reason for the two to even end up together in the first place. Mandy’s a single mother, she’s wild, she wears bold clothing, and Pete is a traditionalist who is, frankly, a misogynist with anger issues.
Interestingly, the film’s synopsis describes Pete as ‘charming’, and I’m unable to see that quality in him, nor is it ever shown from Mandy’s point of view. She never once looks at Pete lovingly, or seems charmed by him.
The lack of context or any indication as to what drove them to be together is a problem for me. Even if we saw one tiny nice moment between them it would make sense, but throughout the film they’re consistently awful to each other with no redeeming features.
Combined with a narrative that is all over the place and dialogue that feels very unnatural, it comes across as jarring most of the time. I have no issue with unconventional film styles, but I found it very hard to follow what was going on at various points.
It seems Rare Beasts is confused about what tone its actually going for, switching between whimsical musical style scenes (minus the music or singing) and gritty realism in a matter of seconds.
I appreciated the efforts to raise awareness of social issues such as domestic abuse, gender inequalities and the struggles of bringing up a child as a single parent, but these messages are squashed by a visual style that is rather overwhelming.
There is also a sub-plot involving Mandy’s parents (Kerry Fox and David Thewlis), who have separated but appear to have a complicated relationship. This is never fully explained either so it’s hard to connect with them, especially when Mandy’s mother falls ill.
This attempt to tug at our heartstrings falls flat, which is disappointing as it had the potential to bring some real, raw emotion to Rare Beasts. Sadly it’s as disjoined and confusing as Mandy and Pete’s relationship.
It’s clear those involved in the film gave it their all, and I can’t fault the quality of the actors even though some of the lines didn’t work and felt too far removed from natural conversation to be taken seriously. At least they tried.
Billie Piper has talent, there’s no doubt about it, but she hasn’t quite made it work in this very daring debut behind the camera. If Rare Beasts was attempting to be relatable and resonate with audiences, it failed to do that with me.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated I, Tonya (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Some Darwin award winners.
Man, I personally found this one to be an exceedingly uncomfortable watch.
“I, Tonya” is cleverly filmed as a pseudo-documentary, featuring re-enactments of the real-life interviews of most of the participants in this true-life drama. I recently bitterly criticised some film critics for spoiling the story of Donald Crowhurst, the subject of the recent “The Mercy”. But I was about to do exactly the same here, *assuming* that you all know the lurid tale of the rivalry between Tonya Harding and Nancy Kerrigan that led up to an ‘event’ in 1994 that shocked the world. And of course, many of you younger folk don’t know: case in point my 26 year old son who I went to see this with, and who went into the story blissfully blind of the drama about to unfold. So I will try to keep this review spoiler-free.
Playing Tonya from a (not very credible!) 15 years old to her mid-20’s is Margot Robbie (“The Wolf of Wall Street”, “Suicide Squad”) in what is a BAFTA and Oscar nominated performance. And for good reason: the performance is raw, visceral and disturbing in reflecting a victim who still thinks everything at heart is her own fault.
Also BAFTA and Oscar nominated is Allison Janney (“The Girl on the Train”) as Tonya’s obnoxious chain-smoking mother LaVona. Janney is truly terrifying as the mother who abuses her daughter both physically and mentally in a driven attempt to make her the best ice-skater in the world.
Victims seem to attract abusers, and Tonya is surrounded by people who are just plain bad for her: notably her husband Jeff (Sebastian Stan, “The Martian”, “Captain America: Winter Soldier”) and his slimy and pitifully self-deluded friend Shawn (Paul Walter Hauser). The end credits video footage of the real-life players show just how well these parts were cast.
Why so uncomfortable to watch? There is a significant degree of domestic abuse featured in the film, both in terms of LaVona on her child and Jeff on his wife. This is something I abhor in general, having been brought up to believe it is never EVER acceptable to lay a hand on a woman. To have these cowardly individuals sensationalised in the movie I found to be really upsetting. I strongly feel, for this reason alone, that the film should have had an 18 certificate. Violence in film should be related to the context as well as the severity. (Note that this is in stark contrast to my comments of recent BBFC decisions to make “Phantom Thread” and “Lady Bird” 15-certificates when I believe they should have been 12A).
The film is executed extremely well, with 4:3 framing for the staged interviews, and ice skating scenes that seamlessly cut between the professional clearly doing the stunts and Robbie (who must also be a half decent skater too). The soundtrack is nicely littered – “Guardians of the Galaxy” style – with classic hits of the early 90’s.
To think that this story actually unfolded in this way is nothing short of astounding… but it did! There is an astonishing video clip here (#spoilers) of the run up to, and the immediate aftermath of, the Kerrigan incident. I came out of the film with a deep feeling of sadness for Harding (at least, as portrayed) and utter disgust that the villains of this piece could be a) so cruel and out of control and b) so utterly stupid. These are individuals who really should have been sterilised to stop them polluting the gene pool any further.
Written by Steven Rogers (“Stepmom”) and directed by Australian Craig Gillespie, there is no doubting that this is a powerful film: played to an absolutely silent and gripped Saturday night cinema audience. And it has truly dynamite performances from Allison Janney and Margot Robbie. But be warned that you’ll need a strong stomach to go and see it without being affected by it afterwards. It’s a mental keeper.
“I, Tonya” is cleverly filmed as a pseudo-documentary, featuring re-enactments of the real-life interviews of most of the participants in this true-life drama. I recently bitterly criticised some film critics for spoiling the story of Donald Crowhurst, the subject of the recent “The Mercy”. But I was about to do exactly the same here, *assuming* that you all know the lurid tale of the rivalry between Tonya Harding and Nancy Kerrigan that led up to an ‘event’ in 1994 that shocked the world. And of course, many of you younger folk don’t know: case in point my 26 year old son who I went to see this with, and who went into the story blissfully blind of the drama about to unfold. So I will try to keep this review spoiler-free.
Playing Tonya from a (not very credible!) 15 years old to her mid-20’s is Margot Robbie (“The Wolf of Wall Street”, “Suicide Squad”) in what is a BAFTA and Oscar nominated performance. And for good reason: the performance is raw, visceral and disturbing in reflecting a victim who still thinks everything at heart is her own fault.
Also BAFTA and Oscar nominated is Allison Janney (“The Girl on the Train”) as Tonya’s obnoxious chain-smoking mother LaVona. Janney is truly terrifying as the mother who abuses her daughter both physically and mentally in a driven attempt to make her the best ice-skater in the world.
Victims seem to attract abusers, and Tonya is surrounded by people who are just plain bad for her: notably her husband Jeff (Sebastian Stan, “The Martian”, “Captain America: Winter Soldier”) and his slimy and pitifully self-deluded friend Shawn (Paul Walter Hauser). The end credits video footage of the real-life players show just how well these parts were cast.
Why so uncomfortable to watch? There is a significant degree of domestic abuse featured in the film, both in terms of LaVona on her child and Jeff on his wife. This is something I abhor in general, having been brought up to believe it is never EVER acceptable to lay a hand on a woman. To have these cowardly individuals sensationalised in the movie I found to be really upsetting. I strongly feel, for this reason alone, that the film should have had an 18 certificate. Violence in film should be related to the context as well as the severity. (Note that this is in stark contrast to my comments of recent BBFC decisions to make “Phantom Thread” and “Lady Bird” 15-certificates when I believe they should have been 12A).
The film is executed extremely well, with 4:3 framing for the staged interviews, and ice skating scenes that seamlessly cut between the professional clearly doing the stunts and Robbie (who must also be a half decent skater too). The soundtrack is nicely littered – “Guardians of the Galaxy” style – with classic hits of the early 90’s.
To think that this story actually unfolded in this way is nothing short of astounding… but it did! There is an astonishing video clip here (#spoilers) of the run up to, and the immediate aftermath of, the Kerrigan incident. I came out of the film with a deep feeling of sadness for Harding (at least, as portrayed) and utter disgust that the villains of this piece could be a) so cruel and out of control and b) so utterly stupid. These are individuals who really should have been sterilised to stop them polluting the gene pool any further.
Written by Steven Rogers (“Stepmom”) and directed by Australian Craig Gillespie, there is no doubting that this is a powerful film: played to an absolutely silent and gripped Saturday night cinema audience. And it has truly dynamite performances from Allison Janney and Margot Robbie. But be warned that you’ll need a strong stomach to go and see it without being affected by it afterwards. It’s a mental keeper.
Alien Slave Masters: Part One
5.7
Rate It
Book
The Captain's Pet When a distant planet’s ownership is in dispute, conquering aliens turn...
Science Fiction Erotica MM Dark
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Tenet (2020) in Movies
Aug 28, 2020
Spectacular action set pieces done "in camera" (1 more)
Branagh and Debecki, both superb
Sound mix makes dialogue unintelligible (1 more)
In the words of Huey Lewis, "You're too darn loud"
Only Nolan and Schrödinger’s cat knows what’s going on.
Tenet is the long awaited new movie from Christopher Nolan. The movie that's set to reboot the multiplexes post-Covid. It's a manic, extremely loud, extremely baffling sci-fi cum spy rollercoaster that will please a lot of Nolan fan-boys but which left me with very mixed views.
How to write a spoiler-free plot summary? John David Washington (Denzel's lad) plays "The Protagonist" - a crack-CIA field operative who is an unstoppable one-man army in the style of Hobbs or Shaw. Recruited into an even more shadowy organisation, he's on the trail of an international arms dealer, Andrei Sator (Kenneth Branagh in full villain mode). Sator is bullying his estranged wife Kat (Elizabeth Debicki) over custody of their son (and the film unusually has a BBFC warning about "Domestic Abuse"). Our hero jets the world to try to prevent a very particular kind of Armageddon while also keeping the vulnerable and attractive Kat alive.
This is cinema at its biggest and boldest. Nolan has taken a cinema 'splurge' gun, filled it with money, set it on rapid fire, removed the safety and let rip at the screen. Given that Nolan is famous for doing all of his 'effects' for real and 'in camera', some of what you see performed is almost unbelievable. You thought crashing a train through rush-hour traffic in "Inception" was crazy? You ain't seen nothing yet with the airport scene! And for lovers of Chinooks (I must admit I am one and rush out of the house to see one if I hear it coming!) there is positively Chinook-p*rn on offer in the film's ridiculously huge finale.
The 'inversion' aspects of the story also lends itself to some fight scenes - one in particular in an airport 'freeport' - which are both bizarre to watch and, I imagine, technically extremely challenging to pull off. In this regard John David Washington is an acrobatic and talented stunt performer in his own right, and must have trained for months for this role.
Nolan's crew also certainly racked up their air miles pre-lockdown, since the locations range far and wide across the world. The locations encompassed Denmark, Estonia, India, Italy, Norway, the United Kingdom, and United States. Hoyte Van Hoytema's cinematography is lush in introducing these, especially the beautiful Italian coast scenes. Although I did miss the David Arnold strings that would typically introduce these in a Bond movie: it felt like that was missing.
The 'timey-wimey' aspects of the plot are also intriguing and very cleverly done. There are numerous points at which you think "Oh, that's a sloppy continuity error" or "Shame the production design team missed that cracked wing mirror". Then later in the movie, you get at least a dozen "Aha!" moments. Some of them (no spoilers) are jaw-droppingly spectacular.
Perhaps the best twist is hidden in the final line of the movie. I only processed it on the way home.
And so to the first of my significant gripes with Tenet. The sound mix in the movie is all over the place. I'd go stronger than that... it's truly awful (expletive deleted)! Nolan often implements Shakespeare's trick of having characters in the play provide exposition of the plot to aid comprehension. But unfortunately, all of this exposition dialogue was largely incomprehensible. This was due to:
- the ear-splitting volume of the sound: 2020 movie audiences are going to be suffering from 'Tenetis'! (that joke © David Moody, 2020);
- the dialogue is poorly mixed with the thumping music by Ludwig Göransson (Wot? No Hans Zimmer?);
- a large proportion of the dialogue was through masks of varying description (#covid-appropriate). Aaron Taylor-Johnson was particularly unintelligible to my ears.
Overall, watching this with subtitles at a special showing might be advisable!
OK, so I only have a PhD in Physics... but at times I was completely lost as to the intricacies of the plot. It made "Inception" look like "The Tiger Who Came to Tea". There was an obvious 'McGuffin' in "Inception" - - ("These 'dream levels'... how exactly are they architected??".... "Don't worry... they'll never notice". And we didn't!) In "Tenet" there are McGuffins nested in McGuffins. So much of this is casually waved away as "future stuff... you're not qualified" that it feels vaguely condescending to the audience. At one point Kat says "I don't understand what's going on" - darn right luv.
There are also gaps in the storyline that jar. The word "Tenet"? What does it mean. Is it just a password? I'm none the wiser.
The manic pace of Tenet and the constant din means that the movie gallops along like a series of disconnected (albeit brilliant) action set pieces. For me, it has none of the emotional heart of the Cobb's marriage problems from "Inception" or the father/daughter separation of "Interstellar". In fact, you barely care for anyone in the movie, perhaps with the exception of Kat.
It's a talented cast. As mentioned above, John David Washington is muscular and athletic in the role. It's a big load for the actor to carry in such a tent-pole movie, given his only significant starring role before was in the excellent BlacKkKlansman. But he carries it off well. A worthy successor to Gerard Butler and Jason Statham for action roles in the next 10 years.
This is also a great performance by Robert Pattinson, in his most high-profile film in a long time, playing the vaguely alcoholic and Carré-esque support guy. Pattinson's Potter co-star Clemence Poésy also pops up - rather more un-glam that usual - as the scientist plot-expositor early in the movie.
Nolan's regular Michael Caine also pops up. although the 87-year old legend is starting to show his age: His speech was obviously affected at the time of filming (though nice try Mr Nolan in trying to disguise that with a mouth full of food!). But in my book, any amount of Caine in a movie is a plus. He also gets to deliver the best killer line in the film about snobbery!
However, it's Kenneth Branagh and Elizabeth Debicki that really stand out. They were both fabulous, especially when they were bouncing off each other in their marital battle royale.
So, given this was my most anticipated movie of the year, it's a bit of a curate's egg for me. A mixture of being awe-struck at times and slightly disappointed at others. It's a movie which needs a second watch, so I'm heading back today to give my ear drums another bashing! And this is one where I reserve the right to revisit my rating after that second watch... it's not likely to go down... but it might go up.
(For the full graphical review, check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/08/28/tenet-only-nolan-and-schrodingers-cat-knows-whats-going-on/ .)
How to write a spoiler-free plot summary? John David Washington (Denzel's lad) plays "The Protagonist" - a crack-CIA field operative who is an unstoppable one-man army in the style of Hobbs or Shaw. Recruited into an even more shadowy organisation, he's on the trail of an international arms dealer, Andrei Sator (Kenneth Branagh in full villain mode). Sator is bullying his estranged wife Kat (Elizabeth Debicki) over custody of their son (and the film unusually has a BBFC warning about "Domestic Abuse"). Our hero jets the world to try to prevent a very particular kind of Armageddon while also keeping the vulnerable and attractive Kat alive.
This is cinema at its biggest and boldest. Nolan has taken a cinema 'splurge' gun, filled it with money, set it on rapid fire, removed the safety and let rip at the screen. Given that Nolan is famous for doing all of his 'effects' for real and 'in camera', some of what you see performed is almost unbelievable. You thought crashing a train through rush-hour traffic in "Inception" was crazy? You ain't seen nothing yet with the airport scene! And for lovers of Chinooks (I must admit I am one and rush out of the house to see one if I hear it coming!) there is positively Chinook-p*rn on offer in the film's ridiculously huge finale.
The 'inversion' aspects of the story also lends itself to some fight scenes - one in particular in an airport 'freeport' - which are both bizarre to watch and, I imagine, technically extremely challenging to pull off. In this regard John David Washington is an acrobatic and talented stunt performer in his own right, and must have trained for months for this role.
Nolan's crew also certainly racked up their air miles pre-lockdown, since the locations range far and wide across the world. The locations encompassed Denmark, Estonia, India, Italy, Norway, the United Kingdom, and United States. Hoyte Van Hoytema's cinematography is lush in introducing these, especially the beautiful Italian coast scenes. Although I did miss the David Arnold strings that would typically introduce these in a Bond movie: it felt like that was missing.
The 'timey-wimey' aspects of the plot are also intriguing and very cleverly done. There are numerous points at which you think "Oh, that's a sloppy continuity error" or "Shame the production design team missed that cracked wing mirror". Then later in the movie, you get at least a dozen "Aha!" moments. Some of them (no spoilers) are jaw-droppingly spectacular.
Perhaps the best twist is hidden in the final line of the movie. I only processed it on the way home.
And so to the first of my significant gripes with Tenet. The sound mix in the movie is all over the place. I'd go stronger than that... it's truly awful (expletive deleted)! Nolan often implements Shakespeare's trick of having characters in the play provide exposition of the plot to aid comprehension. But unfortunately, all of this exposition dialogue was largely incomprehensible. This was due to:
- the ear-splitting volume of the sound: 2020 movie audiences are going to be suffering from 'Tenetis'! (that joke © David Moody, 2020);
- the dialogue is poorly mixed with the thumping music by Ludwig Göransson (Wot? No Hans Zimmer?);
- a large proportion of the dialogue was through masks of varying description (#covid-appropriate). Aaron Taylor-Johnson was particularly unintelligible to my ears.
Overall, watching this with subtitles at a special showing might be advisable!
OK, so I only have a PhD in Physics... but at times I was completely lost as to the intricacies of the plot. It made "Inception" look like "The Tiger Who Came to Tea". There was an obvious 'McGuffin' in "Inception" - - ("These 'dream levels'... how exactly are they architected??".... "Don't worry... they'll never notice". And we didn't!) In "Tenet" there are McGuffins nested in McGuffins. So much of this is casually waved away as "future stuff... you're not qualified" that it feels vaguely condescending to the audience. At one point Kat says "I don't understand what's going on" - darn right luv.
There are also gaps in the storyline that jar. The word "Tenet"? What does it mean. Is it just a password? I'm none the wiser.
The manic pace of Tenet and the constant din means that the movie gallops along like a series of disconnected (albeit brilliant) action set pieces. For me, it has none of the emotional heart of the Cobb's marriage problems from "Inception" or the father/daughter separation of "Interstellar". In fact, you barely care for anyone in the movie, perhaps with the exception of Kat.
It's a talented cast. As mentioned above, John David Washington is muscular and athletic in the role. It's a big load for the actor to carry in such a tent-pole movie, given his only significant starring role before was in the excellent BlacKkKlansman. But he carries it off well. A worthy successor to Gerard Butler and Jason Statham for action roles in the next 10 years.
This is also a great performance by Robert Pattinson, in his most high-profile film in a long time, playing the vaguely alcoholic and Carré-esque support guy. Pattinson's Potter co-star Clemence Poésy also pops up - rather more un-glam that usual - as the scientist plot-expositor early in the movie.
Nolan's regular Michael Caine also pops up. although the 87-year old legend is starting to show his age: His speech was obviously affected at the time of filming (though nice try Mr Nolan in trying to disguise that with a mouth full of food!). But in my book, any amount of Caine in a movie is a plus. He also gets to deliver the best killer line in the film about snobbery!
However, it's Kenneth Branagh and Elizabeth Debicki that really stand out. They were both fabulous, especially when they were bouncing off each other in their marital battle royale.
So, given this was my most anticipated movie of the year, it's a bit of a curate's egg for me. A mixture of being awe-struck at times and slightly disappointed at others. It's a movie which needs a second watch, so I'm heading back today to give my ear drums another bashing! And this is one where I reserve the right to revisit my rating after that second watch... it's not likely to go down... but it might go up.
(For the full graphical review, check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/08/28/tenet-only-nolan-and-schrodingers-cat-knows-whats-going-on/ .)
