Search
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Collateral Beauty (2016) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
Loss is something that all of us must face at one time or another. It affects each person differently. While some seem unfazed, others cannot adjust to life after the death of a loved one.
In Collateral Beauty, Will Smith portrays Howard Arnett, a father and advertising executive who has shut off the world after the loss of his daughter to cancer.
He disconnects from work, friends, and family. He is a shell of himself, not knowing how to find his place in the world now that a major piece of him is missing.
In an attempt to bring normalcy back to his life and save their company, his friends and colleagues band together to devise a plan to hire actors to play the roles of abstract beings that Howard contacts in his distress, hoping that it forces him to confront his feelings about his loss.
Collateral Beauty is more than just your run of the mill Holiday films. The movie is touching, heart-wrenching, and layered. The film is not limited to the growth of Howard.
We witness how each of his friends has a challenge that they must face that they have been putting off, just as their friend has for the past two years. An ensemble cast of Dame Hellen Mirren, Edward Norton, Kate Winslet, Michael Pena, Kiera Knigthley, and Naomie Harris would normally have audiences or critics worried that the film itself may be light on content, plot, or depth. This is not the case.
The film’s cast is outshined by the story that develops as audiences watch and wait for Howard to become unbroken. The film does not overshoot with respect to their expectations or even offer up conflated ideas and developments. Collateral Beauty gives audiences a chance to watch a man deal with loss and reflect on how we all deal with loss in our own ways.
The film is tough to watch in some moments due to its approach to love and death in not simplifying the significance of one’s life. It demonstrates that each person matters and their lives have a lasting impact. Collateral Beauty will leave audiences reflecting on their own circumstances and those of people they know.
At times, the feelings are too real and a deep connection is made between the characters and the audience that will leave many wishing that they had brought boxes of tissue with them as they will find themselves being touched and heavily impacted.
In Collateral Beauty, Will Smith portrays Howard Arnett, a father and advertising executive who has shut off the world after the loss of his daughter to cancer.
He disconnects from work, friends, and family. He is a shell of himself, not knowing how to find his place in the world now that a major piece of him is missing.
In an attempt to bring normalcy back to his life and save their company, his friends and colleagues band together to devise a plan to hire actors to play the roles of abstract beings that Howard contacts in his distress, hoping that it forces him to confront his feelings about his loss.
Collateral Beauty is more than just your run of the mill Holiday films. The movie is touching, heart-wrenching, and layered. The film is not limited to the growth of Howard.
We witness how each of his friends has a challenge that they must face that they have been putting off, just as their friend has for the past two years. An ensemble cast of Dame Hellen Mirren, Edward Norton, Kate Winslet, Michael Pena, Kiera Knigthley, and Naomie Harris would normally have audiences or critics worried that the film itself may be light on content, plot, or depth. This is not the case.
The film’s cast is outshined by the story that develops as audiences watch and wait for Howard to become unbroken. The film does not overshoot with respect to their expectations or even offer up conflated ideas and developments. Collateral Beauty gives audiences a chance to watch a man deal with loss and reflect on how we all deal with loss in our own ways.
The film is tough to watch in some moments due to its approach to love and death in not simplifying the significance of one’s life. It demonstrates that each person matters and their lives have a lasting impact. Collateral Beauty will leave audiences reflecting on their own circumstances and those of people they know.
At times, the feelings are too real and a deep connection is made between the characters and the audience that will leave many wishing that they had brought boxes of tissue with them as they will find themselves being touched and heavily impacted.
The Facet LIS Textbook Collection
David Bawden, Alison Jane Pickard, Lyn Robinson and Karen Calhoun
Book
The Facet LIS Textbook Collection contains ten core textbooks for students studying library and...
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated The Wicker Man (1973) in Movies
Feb 18, 2019
Come. It is time to keep your appointment with the Wicker Man.
Though we never even lay eyes on it until the final few moments of the film, the Wicker Man, both as pagan image and classic horror flick, has become an icon of the genre.
But if you are expecting some dimly lit, slow burn slasher movie, then you will be sorely disappointed. The Wicker Man spends most of its runtime, which varies from its various versions, Theatrical, Director’s and Final Cuts, providing us with a pretty decent, if not disturbing insight into paganism.
Or more over, Paganism verses Christianity. Both spiritual, both magical, yet one is fun and the other is boring. The virgin sacrifice by the sexually liberated heathens is played out brilliantly.
The beauty here is that the final twist is so well conceived and executed throughout the entire film that even though most of us know the ending whether we have seen the film or not, it is not spoiled by that foreknowledge.
It is a kin to the previously released Planet Of The Apes (1968) or the much later Sixth Sense (1999). Both spin out complex genre tales which culminate in “that ending”. But in this case, Edward Woodward delivers a chilling performance in the finale, as he is taken to his death, locked inside the burning Wicker Man to be sacrificed in order to restore the poor harvest of the previous year.
“Don’t you see that killing me is not going to bring back your apples?”
But Woodward’s character is a devout Christian and he has only his faith and a dogged view of the world to aide him. Unable to accept the seemingly free spirited community in which his finds himself, one where sex is commonplace as he himself is still a virgin.
On the other hand there is Lord Summerisle, Christopher Lee, who steals the show as per usual as the charismatic leader of the this pagan community and the descendant of a lord who routed Christianity from the Highland Island a century before.
But whilst on the surface it may seem like a rather academic subject, the film is a trippy 1970’s sexploitation movie in many ways. Some of the sex and violence fits in well with plot but other moments, such as the nude dance by Britt Ekland, though actually doubled by Lorraine Peters is a prime example of a needless, if not memorable sequence.
Overall, The Wicker Man is low budget British movie of the 1970’s and one which has endured to earn it’s classic status, by meeting the main criteria of being smart, engaging and visually compelling, along with several standout performances throughout.
But if you are expecting some dimly lit, slow burn slasher movie, then you will be sorely disappointed. The Wicker Man spends most of its runtime, which varies from its various versions, Theatrical, Director’s and Final Cuts, providing us with a pretty decent, if not disturbing insight into paganism.
Or more over, Paganism verses Christianity. Both spiritual, both magical, yet one is fun and the other is boring. The virgin sacrifice by the sexually liberated heathens is played out brilliantly.
The beauty here is that the final twist is so well conceived and executed throughout the entire film that even though most of us know the ending whether we have seen the film or not, it is not spoiled by that foreknowledge.
It is a kin to the previously released Planet Of The Apes (1968) or the much later Sixth Sense (1999). Both spin out complex genre tales which culminate in “that ending”. But in this case, Edward Woodward delivers a chilling performance in the finale, as he is taken to his death, locked inside the burning Wicker Man to be sacrificed in order to restore the poor harvest of the previous year.
“Don’t you see that killing me is not going to bring back your apples?”
But Woodward’s character is a devout Christian and he has only his faith and a dogged view of the world to aide him. Unable to accept the seemingly free spirited community in which his finds himself, one where sex is commonplace as he himself is still a virgin.
On the other hand there is Lord Summerisle, Christopher Lee, who steals the show as per usual as the charismatic leader of the this pagan community and the descendant of a lord who routed Christianity from the Highland Island a century before.
But whilst on the surface it may seem like a rather academic subject, the film is a trippy 1970’s sexploitation movie in many ways. Some of the sex and violence fits in well with plot but other moments, such as the nude dance by Britt Ekland, though actually doubled by Lorraine Peters is a prime example of a needless, if not memorable sequence.
Overall, The Wicker Man is low budget British movie of the 1970’s and one which has endured to earn it’s classic status, by meeting the main criteria of being smart, engaging and visually compelling, along with several standout performances throughout.
The Vintage Tea Room Collection
9.0
Rate It
Book
A collection of all three books in the Vintage Tea Room series. Ellie and her twin daughters, Marie...
Cyn Armistead (14 KP) rated More Holmes for the Holidays in Books
Mar 1, 2018
[a:Martin H. Greenberg|6436872|Martin H. Greenberg|http://www.goodreads.com/assets/nophoto/nophoto-M-50x66.jpg] and company have provided a fine collection of Sherlockian holiday stories that fit in quite well with the traditional set.
"The Christmas Gift" by Anne Perry is a nice little piece about a stolen Stradivarius and a couple who want to marry against the wishes of the young lady's father. There is an excellent red herring, one of the few in this anthology.
In "The Four Wise Men" by Peter Lovesey, Watson must answer a call to duty from his former commanding officer in the Army, in order to help guard a medieval treasure in a Christmas pageant. The game is soon afoot, and Sherlock's powers of observation are as keen as ever.
Barbara Paul's "Eleemosynary, My Dear Watson" gives Holmes a jewel theft and a kidnapping to solve, which he does in his inimitable way. One clue seemed slightly too obvious to me, but it may not to other readers.
In "The Adventure of the Greatest Gift" by Loren D. Estleman, Holmes receives a wax cylinder containing a recording of a song popular in America. He takes it as a warning of a crime which could lead to war between Britain and France, and of course he leaps into action. This is Mycroft Holmes' only appearance in the volume.
There's plenty of misdirection in "The Case of the Rajah's Emerald" by Carolyn Wheat. Somehow, though, I suspected one of the great revelations in this one from the beginning, but I couldn't tell you exactly why. It didn't ruin the story for me, and there was still a surprise at the end.
On the other hand, Edward D. Hoch's "The Christmas Conspiracy" managed to take me completely unawares. I couldn't fathom why the crime would be committed or by whom, despite having a major clue dropped by one character. Very well done!
"The Music of Christmas" by L.B. Greenwood telegraphed the identity of the criminal from the start, but was well worth reading. One of the characters also tugged at the heartstrings.
Bill Crider's "The Adventure of the Christmas Bear" is largely memorable because of the appearance of Oscar Wilde as a character.
"The Adventure of the Naturalist's Stock Pin" by Jon L. Breen gives us Charles Darwin as Holmes' client. The mystery is less Sherlockian than some of the others, but I didn't mind reading it.
Daniel Stashower's "The Adventure of the Second Violet" was an interesting twist on a well-known Christmas story. I cannot say more without spoiling it, but he has a nice touch.
"The Human Mystery" by Tanith Lee is as dark as I expect from her, and was a depressing ending to the collection. It was, however, very well-written.
The anthology left me hungry for more Holmes, and wishing that I weren't between seasons of BBC's Sherlock or that I had another collection of stories on hand. That's the sign of a success, I think.
"The Christmas Gift" by Anne Perry is a nice little piece about a stolen Stradivarius and a couple who want to marry against the wishes of the young lady's father. There is an excellent red herring, one of the few in this anthology.
In "The Four Wise Men" by Peter Lovesey, Watson must answer a call to duty from his former commanding officer in the Army, in order to help guard a medieval treasure in a Christmas pageant. The game is soon afoot, and Sherlock's powers of observation are as keen as ever.
Barbara Paul's "Eleemosynary, My Dear Watson" gives Holmes a jewel theft and a kidnapping to solve, which he does in his inimitable way. One clue seemed slightly too obvious to me, but it may not to other readers.
In "The Adventure of the Greatest Gift" by Loren D. Estleman, Holmes receives a wax cylinder containing a recording of a song popular in America. He takes it as a warning of a crime which could lead to war between Britain and France, and of course he leaps into action. This is Mycroft Holmes' only appearance in the volume.
There's plenty of misdirection in "The Case of the Rajah's Emerald" by Carolyn Wheat. Somehow, though, I suspected one of the great revelations in this one from the beginning, but I couldn't tell you exactly why. It didn't ruin the story for me, and there was still a surprise at the end.
On the other hand, Edward D. Hoch's "The Christmas Conspiracy" managed to take me completely unawares. I couldn't fathom why the crime would be committed or by whom, despite having a major clue dropped by one character. Very well done!
"The Music of Christmas" by L.B. Greenwood telegraphed the identity of the criminal from the start, but was well worth reading. One of the characters also tugged at the heartstrings.
Bill Crider's "The Adventure of the Christmas Bear" is largely memorable because of the appearance of Oscar Wilde as a character.
"The Adventure of the Naturalist's Stock Pin" by Jon L. Breen gives us Charles Darwin as Holmes' client. The mystery is less Sherlockian than some of the others, but I didn't mind reading it.
Daniel Stashower's "The Adventure of the Second Violet" was an interesting twist on a well-known Christmas story. I cannot say more without spoiling it, but he has a nice touch.
"The Human Mystery" by Tanith Lee is as dark as I expect from her, and was a depressing ending to the collection. It was, however, very well-written.
The anthology left me hungry for more Holmes, and wishing that I weren't between seasons of BBC's Sherlock or that I had another collection of stories on hand. That's the sign of a success, I think.
Deborah (162 KP) rated Bosworth Field and the Wars of the Roses in Books
Dec 21, 2018
For starters, the book is entitled Bosworth Field & the Wars of the Roses. Discussion of Bosworth is pretty much restricted to one short chapter and about the first third of the book is taken up with an over-detailed account of the events leading up to the Wars of the Roses; if Rowse is concerned about 'Wars of the Roses' being a misnomer, perhaps he should look to his own title! Yes, the events from the disposition of Richard II in 1399 and the usurpation of his throne by Bolingbroke do have an impact on later events, but a third of the book? Do we really need to know the ins and outs of Sir John Oldcastle's Lollard leanings - I fail to see how this is relevant.
Rowse's chapter on Shakespeare must be at least as long, if not longer, than his chapter on Bosworth. The fact that he obviously sincerely believes that one can gain a credible understanding of history from Shakespeare cycle of plays was almost enough to make me drop the book in astonishment! How can one take him seriously?!
He is also ready to give every credit to the supposed work of More. Even here he falls down by claiming that the bodies of the 'princes in the tower' were discovered in the exact place More said! If you read this work you'll find that the opposite is true - they are in the exact place More said they were NOT! The fact that there isn't a shred of evidence that anyone killed the two princes is evidently a small matter to Rowse. He mentions the great turncoat, Sir William Stanley (at this point step-uncle to Henry Tudor) being executed s a result of the Perkin Warbeck debacle, but fails to mention that Sir William is imputed to have said that if Warbeck really was Richard of York, he would not fight against him. Of course he doesn't mention this - he has to keep reminding us that EVERYONE believed Richard III guilty! Really, a credible historian should not pick and choose their facts - something Alison Weir is also very fond of doing.
Another point is that he is quite happy to accept that Katherine of Valois really did marry Owen Tudor, but cannot countenance the much more credible suggestion that Edward IV was married to Eleanor Butler (nee Talbot), who is not even mentioned. He harps on about the morality and piety of the Lancastrians (despite the Beauforts being conceived in double adultery - further hypocrisy) but when Richard III founds a chantry or offers some concession to a religious house that Rowse concludes it much be down to his uneasy concience.
So, overall, not a book I can recommend in the least. He may try to convince us that his unbending traditionalist view is 'sensible' and 'common sense' but anyone with a little knowledge of the subject will see it as laughably absurd and highly prejudiced.
Rowse's chapter on Shakespeare must be at least as long, if not longer, than his chapter on Bosworth. The fact that he obviously sincerely believes that one can gain a credible understanding of history from Shakespeare cycle of plays was almost enough to make me drop the book in astonishment! How can one take him seriously?!
He is also ready to give every credit to the supposed work of More. Even here he falls down by claiming that the bodies of the 'princes in the tower' were discovered in the exact place More said! If you read this work you'll find that the opposite is true - they are in the exact place More said they were NOT! The fact that there isn't a shred of evidence that anyone killed the two princes is evidently a small matter to Rowse. He mentions the great turncoat, Sir William Stanley (at this point step-uncle to Henry Tudor) being executed s a result of the Perkin Warbeck debacle, but fails to mention that Sir William is imputed to have said that if Warbeck really was Richard of York, he would not fight against him. Of course he doesn't mention this - he has to keep reminding us that EVERYONE believed Richard III guilty! Really, a credible historian should not pick and choose their facts - something Alison Weir is also very fond of doing.
Another point is that he is quite happy to accept that Katherine of Valois really did marry Owen Tudor, but cannot countenance the much more credible suggestion that Edward IV was married to Eleanor Butler (nee Talbot), who is not even mentioned. He harps on about the morality and piety of the Lancastrians (despite the Beauforts being conceived in double adultery - further hypocrisy) but when Richard III founds a chantry or offers some concession to a religious house that Rowse concludes it much be down to his uneasy concience.
So, overall, not a book I can recommend in the least. He may try to convince us that his unbending traditionalist view is 'sensible' and 'common sense' but anyone with a little knowledge of the subject will see it as laughably absurd and highly prejudiced.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Batman (2022) in Movies
Feb 28, 2022
In 1989 Michael Keaton was seen as a very controversial choice to wear the Cowl of Batman but soon proved his doubters wrong by turning “Batman” and its subsequent sequel “Batman Returns” into massive Box Office success before leaving the cape behind.
While four other actors have taken up the cinematic version of the character in the subsequent years, Keaton has remained for many the Gold Standard with Christian Bale likely being his biggest rival.
When Robert Pattinson was named as the new Batman, there was interest but concern as an actor who is largely known for playing Edward in the “Twilight” films seemed to be an odd choice. However, I would say that anyone who has seen some of his recent work including his performance in “The Lighthouse” would be playing him a disservice by saying he was not up to the part.
In “The Batman”, audiences are given a darker and more broken Bruce Wayne, an Emo recluse who is far from the Socialite he has been portrayed as for decades and a very sullen and withdrawn individual who does not exude charm or grace and even shows issues making eye-contact.
When the Mayor of Gotham is killed shortly before the election by a mysterious individual known as “The Riddler” (Paul Dano), the vigilante known as “The Batman” is called in to help the police by Lt. James Gordon (Jeffrey Wright). Gordon has been working with Batman for some time but it is clear that his association with him has not won him any favors with his fellow officers, many of which openly question his use and involvement in the crime scenes.
Further complicating matters are clues left at the various crime locales that are addressed to The Batman and cause many to believe that he may be working with the very killer they are attempting to stop.
As the investigation unfolds, the seedy side of Gotham City comes to light in the form of a missing girl who was photographed with the married Mayor and may well be the key to the investigation. Her disappearance leads her friend Selina Kyle (Zoe Kravitz), to take on her Catwoman persona and delve deep into an underworld that features deadly individuals ranging from Carmine Falcone (John Turturro), and The Penguin (Colin Farrell), amongst others as she and the Batman conduct their own investigations that at times overlap and further complicate matters.
As the body count rises and Batman races to find the true method behind the madness of The Riddler, the tone becomes darker and more sinister in a deadly race against time.
The film eschews the usual abundance of action sequences and glossy special effects which are common for Comic Book related films and instead gives audiences a slow-burning murder mystery that holds your attention from start to finish over its three-hour run time.
The dark and foreboding tone of the film is brought home by the haunting and sharp piano keys of the film’s theme that permeates the film and punches home that this is a film clearly aimed at a more adult audience.
Pattinson does a great job showing the deeply broken individual that is behind the mask and that Batman is the only form of escape or therapy that Bruce Wayne has due to his insistence on saving a city that many argue cannot be saved. He has strained his relationship at times with Alfred (Andy Serkis), caused damage to the financial stability and reputation of the family company in his quest for vengeance and justice, and has become a bitter and broken recluse in doing so. In many ways, it could be argued that his only socialization with others is as The Batman and his single-minded obsession is chilling to watch.
Pattinson also handles the action sequences well as the film spaces them out to put the emphasis more on the man than the gadgets as they are kept to a minimum even during a thrilling chase with the new version of The Batmobile.
The strong supporting cast works well with the film and Paul Dano gives a very compelling and disturbing version of his character which makes the film even darker and more engrossing.
Director Matt Reeves has crafted a dark and foreboding tone and visual style as a good portion of the film takes place in the darkness and his screenplay is not afraid to take chances by putting the emphasis on the characters and their flaws versus an abundance of action and effects.
I found this version of the character and interpretation more engrossing than prior versions of the film as the bold move to do a slow-burning and dark murder mystery versus an effect-laden action film reminded me of some of the better Batman stories such as Batman: The Killing Joke or Batman: The Long Halloween.
The film is not going to be for everyone, especially younger viewers and some may take issue with the casting choices, but their performances shine and as such, “The Batman” was a very engaging and unforgettable tale that for me serves as one of the best adaptations of the character ever.
4 stars out of 5
While four other actors have taken up the cinematic version of the character in the subsequent years, Keaton has remained for many the Gold Standard with Christian Bale likely being his biggest rival.
When Robert Pattinson was named as the new Batman, there was interest but concern as an actor who is largely known for playing Edward in the “Twilight” films seemed to be an odd choice. However, I would say that anyone who has seen some of his recent work including his performance in “The Lighthouse” would be playing him a disservice by saying he was not up to the part.
In “The Batman”, audiences are given a darker and more broken Bruce Wayne, an Emo recluse who is far from the Socialite he has been portrayed as for decades and a very sullen and withdrawn individual who does not exude charm or grace and even shows issues making eye-contact.
When the Mayor of Gotham is killed shortly before the election by a mysterious individual known as “The Riddler” (Paul Dano), the vigilante known as “The Batman” is called in to help the police by Lt. James Gordon (Jeffrey Wright). Gordon has been working with Batman for some time but it is clear that his association with him has not won him any favors with his fellow officers, many of which openly question his use and involvement in the crime scenes.
Further complicating matters are clues left at the various crime locales that are addressed to The Batman and cause many to believe that he may be working with the very killer they are attempting to stop.
As the investigation unfolds, the seedy side of Gotham City comes to light in the form of a missing girl who was photographed with the married Mayor and may well be the key to the investigation. Her disappearance leads her friend Selina Kyle (Zoe Kravitz), to take on her Catwoman persona and delve deep into an underworld that features deadly individuals ranging from Carmine Falcone (John Turturro), and The Penguin (Colin Farrell), amongst others as she and the Batman conduct their own investigations that at times overlap and further complicate matters.
As the body count rises and Batman races to find the true method behind the madness of The Riddler, the tone becomes darker and more sinister in a deadly race against time.
The film eschews the usual abundance of action sequences and glossy special effects which are common for Comic Book related films and instead gives audiences a slow-burning murder mystery that holds your attention from start to finish over its three-hour run time.
The dark and foreboding tone of the film is brought home by the haunting and sharp piano keys of the film’s theme that permeates the film and punches home that this is a film clearly aimed at a more adult audience.
Pattinson does a great job showing the deeply broken individual that is behind the mask and that Batman is the only form of escape or therapy that Bruce Wayne has due to his insistence on saving a city that many argue cannot be saved. He has strained his relationship at times with Alfred (Andy Serkis), caused damage to the financial stability and reputation of the family company in his quest for vengeance and justice, and has become a bitter and broken recluse in doing so. In many ways, it could be argued that his only socialization with others is as The Batman and his single-minded obsession is chilling to watch.
Pattinson also handles the action sequences well as the film spaces them out to put the emphasis more on the man than the gadgets as they are kept to a minimum even during a thrilling chase with the new version of The Batmobile.
The strong supporting cast works well with the film and Paul Dano gives a very compelling and disturbing version of his character which makes the film even darker and more engrossing.
Director Matt Reeves has crafted a dark and foreboding tone and visual style as a good portion of the film takes place in the darkness and his screenplay is not afraid to take chances by putting the emphasis on the characters and their flaws versus an abundance of action and effects.
I found this version of the character and interpretation more engrossing than prior versions of the film as the bold move to do a slow-burning and dark murder mystery versus an effect-laden action film reminded me of some of the better Batman stories such as Batman: The Killing Joke or Batman: The Long Halloween.
The film is not going to be for everyone, especially younger viewers and some may take issue with the casting choices, but their performances shine and as such, “The Batman” was a very engaging and unforgettable tale that for me serves as one of the best adaptations of the character ever.
4 stars out of 5
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Isle of Dogs (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
When an outbreak of “dog-flu” and other dog diseases ravish Japan. Mayor Kobayashi (Kunichi Nomura voice) signs an order to banish all dogs to Trash Island, aka the Isle of Dogs. The island is now home to thousands of dogs who are all scavenging for food. Groups of dogs’ band together to fight for scraps of trash and survive. Then all one day a plane crashes on the island. A boy, Atari (Koyu Rankin voice), has come to the island to find his dog best friend Spots (Liev Schreiber voice). Five dogs find Atari injured buy the crash. The lone stray in the group, Chief (Bryan Cranston voice), has no use for masters and wants to leave the boy. But the rest of the group, Rex (Edward Norton voice), King (Bob Balaban voice), Duke (Jeff Goldblum voice) and Boss (Bill Murray voice) all want help the boy find his best friend. Out voted by the domesticated dogs in the group Chief agrees and they set out on a journey to find Atari’s lost dog on an island full of dogs.
This stop-motion animated film is the latest written and directed film by Wes Anderson (Fantastic Mr. Fox, Moonrise Kingdom, and The Royal Tenenbaums). Anderson’s unique film style and dialog are very present in this Japanese based tale. The stop motion animation is very well done and highlighted throughout the film. From the dogs’ hair moving with the animals to flower petals floating through the air the small details are not missed and expertly done. The dialog was also very much staying with Andersons unique style. It is fast paced and full of subtle comedy. The story is original and fun but also full of meaning and heart. The star studded cast does well in providing their voices to the animated film. The sound track really fits the film well.
The film was not without its struggles. At the beginning of the film it was pointed out that the humans would speak their native language, in most cases Japanese, and the dogs barks had been translated to English. This provides some fun moments throughout the film as there are translators to press conferences and the dog interpreting what the humans say to other dogs. But at times it seemed to me that the humans could understand what the dogs were saying, barking. So it was a little inconsistent. Also one character put into the movie presumably to aid in translation in the film as an American exchange student, Tracy Walker (Greta Gerwig voice). Other than translating parts of the film I don’t know why this character had to be American and could not have been Japanese. It definitely helped the overall theme of the movie to have her there to describe what was happening, given the fact there were no subtitles, but did seem a little forced.
I am definitely a fan of Wes Anderson’s film making and one of a kind style. That comes with certain expectations, which in this case were met. But I also understand that as someone reviewing the film it may make me a little bias. As noted above there a few minor issues I had with the film in general but overall I enjoyed the film and thing fans of Anderson will not be disappointed and neither will those who are just looking for a fun movie. I think overall this is a beautifully made and fun film.
This stop-motion animated film is the latest written and directed film by Wes Anderson (Fantastic Mr. Fox, Moonrise Kingdom, and The Royal Tenenbaums). Anderson’s unique film style and dialog are very present in this Japanese based tale. The stop motion animation is very well done and highlighted throughout the film. From the dogs’ hair moving with the animals to flower petals floating through the air the small details are not missed and expertly done. The dialog was also very much staying with Andersons unique style. It is fast paced and full of subtle comedy. The story is original and fun but also full of meaning and heart. The star studded cast does well in providing their voices to the animated film. The sound track really fits the film well.
The film was not without its struggles. At the beginning of the film it was pointed out that the humans would speak their native language, in most cases Japanese, and the dogs barks had been translated to English. This provides some fun moments throughout the film as there are translators to press conferences and the dog interpreting what the humans say to other dogs. But at times it seemed to me that the humans could understand what the dogs were saying, barking. So it was a little inconsistent. Also one character put into the movie presumably to aid in translation in the film as an American exchange student, Tracy Walker (Greta Gerwig voice). Other than translating parts of the film I don’t know why this character had to be American and could not have been Japanese. It definitely helped the overall theme of the movie to have her there to describe what was happening, given the fact there were no subtitles, but did seem a little forced.
I am definitely a fan of Wes Anderson’s film making and one of a kind style. That comes with certain expectations, which in this case were met. But I also understand that as someone reviewing the film it may make me a little bias. As noted above there a few minor issues I had with the film in general but overall I enjoyed the film and thing fans of Anderson will not be disappointed and neither will those who are just looking for a fun movie. I think overall this is a beautifully made and fun film.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Twelfth Grade Kills (The Chronicles of Vladimir Tod, #5) in Books
Jan 23, 2020
Original Review posted on <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2013/01/review-twelfth-grade-kills-by-heather-brewer.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Original Rating: 4.5
It's been awhile since I last read the series (read: last year) so I'm pretty vague on details (I know. It's sad that my memory details are so vague. On an awesomous vampire series. But I know enough where I can at least know almost all of what's going on the last one :)) on the finale. And now that I've read the series, I think I see why my friend actually gushes over the series (imagine my poor ears after hearing it in Book Battle 24/7 last year - well, not exactly 24/7).
I suggest you know what you're doing if you're reading Twelfth Grade Kills because you definitely don't want to end up in the sorry hole with this kid (read: me. Not that I skip books. I honestly don't. Because if I do, it's my mom's random library book choices fault). The book simply has too much going on that if you're reading from the series backwards, I'm suggesting you go back and read from Eighth Grade Bites and onward (not that anyone would read backwards in a series). Or if you're not paying attention to what you're reading, you'll be missing out on a LOT so do yourself a favor and pay attention. ^_^
After reading Eleventh Grade Burns over the summer, I just HAD to read the last book due to it's killing cliff-hanger. But the thing is, I got thrown off at the end. I'm still going "Say What?" and pondering over what happened as I'm typing this. I mean, you don't usually see a cliff-hanger on the finale of books... do you? Chances of it happening are rare, lol (at least in my knowledge of reading. Even those with spin-offs don't seem to have it... do they?). There's always a happily ever after and so on. In this case though, there may be a happy ending, but be prepared to be thrown off.
What I really hate though? Practically everyone dies. Which I find disappointing. Dx (No more awesome cookies and frosting fights??? ;( )
The one thing I find epically funny is the fact vampires don't sparkle (read: be prepared for some meme(s)). Edward Cullen would disagree. On the good side though? Professor Snape agrees. So, in no offense to Twilight peeps (oh hey. Just because I'm not a fan of Twilight doesn't mean I bash it. I just found the quote funny and it well... reminded me of Twlight. Yes, I'm asking for mercy of the tomato throwing).
<img src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-uTrufQilgqQ/UQHUwxlSdpI/AAAAAAAAA60/T0RB6OMYRqY/s200/Snape+Vampire+Funny.jpg"; width="290" height="180"/>
Caption: They're fairiesss O_O
It might be a risk to my health, but I kinda agree (yes, a risk to my health... but I might be exaggerating a bit over there). So if you're looking for a series in which no one is a sparkling fairy vampire, I suggest you should check this series out. Because apparently, I think I need to grab some kleenex before the computer erupts on fire (that would be BAD). And then go gush to my friend mentioned above some day. (By the way, why another awful cliff-hanger? I only have so many hands. But at least I can get The Slayer Chronicles from the school library soon :D.)
Original Rating: 4.5
It's been awhile since I last read the series (read: last year) so I'm pretty vague on details (I know. It's sad that my memory details are so vague. On an awesomous vampire series. But I know enough where I can at least know almost all of what's going on the last one :)) on the finale. And now that I've read the series, I think I see why my friend actually gushes over the series (imagine my poor ears after hearing it in Book Battle 24/7 last year - well, not exactly 24/7).
I suggest you know what you're doing if you're reading Twelfth Grade Kills because you definitely don't want to end up in the sorry hole with this kid (read: me. Not that I skip books. I honestly don't. Because if I do, it's my mom's random library book choices fault). The book simply has too much going on that if you're reading from the series backwards, I'm suggesting you go back and read from Eighth Grade Bites and onward (not that anyone would read backwards in a series). Or if you're not paying attention to what you're reading, you'll be missing out on a LOT so do yourself a favor and pay attention. ^_^
After reading Eleventh Grade Burns over the summer, I just HAD to read the last book due to it's killing cliff-hanger. But the thing is, I got thrown off at the end. I'm still going "Say What?" and pondering over what happened as I'm typing this. I mean, you don't usually see a cliff-hanger on the finale of books... do you? Chances of it happening are rare, lol (at least in my knowledge of reading. Even those with spin-offs don't seem to have it... do they?). There's always a happily ever after and so on. In this case though, there may be a happy ending, but be prepared to be thrown off.
What I really hate though? Practically everyone dies. Which I find disappointing. Dx (No more awesome cookies and frosting fights??? ;( )
The one thing I find epically funny is the fact vampires don't sparkle (read: be prepared for some meme(s)). Edward Cullen would disagree. On the good side though? Professor Snape agrees. So, in no offense to Twilight peeps (oh hey. Just because I'm not a fan of Twilight doesn't mean I bash it. I just found the quote funny and it well... reminded me of Twlight. Yes, I'm asking for mercy of the tomato throwing).
<img src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-uTrufQilgqQ/UQHUwxlSdpI/AAAAAAAAA60/T0RB6OMYRqY/s200/Snape+Vampire+Funny.jpg"; width="290" height="180"/>
Caption: They're fairiesss O_O
It might be a risk to my health, but I kinda agree (yes, a risk to my health... but I might be exaggerating a bit over there). So if you're looking for a series in which no one is a sparkling fairy vampire, I suggest you should check this series out. Because apparently, I think I need to grab some kleenex before the computer erupts on fire (that would be BAD). And then go gush to my friend mentioned above some day. (By the way, why another awful cliff-hanger? I only have so many hands. But at least I can get The Slayer Chronicles from the school library soon :D.)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Johnny English Strikes Again (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Spy spoof caper that’s only passably amusing.
It’s a HILARIOUS concept. It’s Bond but not as we know it: a suave, sophisticated, well-dressed hero but someone who’s a complete klutz when it comes to the spy business. Rowan Atkinson is perfect in the role: because when he plays his face ”straight” he IS strangely good-looking and certainly pulls off the air of confidence, intelligence and sophistication well.
So it was that 2003’s Johnny English was a refreshing novelty. Roll forwards 15 years (via 2011’s “Johnny English Reborn”) and the concoction needs… you know… actual JOKES.
For “Johnny English Strikes Again” is unfortunately a pretty lame affair.
The Plot
Johnny English (Atkinson) is retired from MI7 and living life as a Geography teacher at a public school. Aside from teaching them about sheep farming in Australia and magma, English delights in teaching his young pupils the tricks of the spy trade: “You’re looking particularly beautiful tonight”, with a twinkle and a vodka martini in hand. “You’re looking particularly beautiful tonight” repeats the class.
But the quiet life of English is about to end, since a cyber-attack has exposed all of MI7’s current agents and the Prime Minister (Emma Thompson) needs to re-hire a retired agent who is currently ‘off the grid’. But noone – friend or foe – is safe when the bumbling English and his faithful helper Bough (Ben Miller) go back into the field.
The Turns
As UK comedy professionals, Atkinson and Miller deliver their English/Bough schtick serviceably enough. The brilliant Emma Thompson though is woefully underused as a straight-woman, being asked to do little more than an exasperated Theresa May impersonation.
If you need a sexy and sophisticated femme fatale for a Bond spoof, what better than a real ex-Bond girl? So the extremely sexy and sophisticated Olga Kurylenko (Camille from “Quantum of Solace”) plays Ophelia Bhuletova, which sounds much funnier when pronounced by Atkinson. And a very good job she does too.
The Review
To emphasise the positive for a moment, the film is suitably glossy, which are table stakes for a spy caper like this or Austin Powers.
But the script by William Davies (who did the previous Johnny Englishes, but nothing much since “Reborn”) doesn’t deliver any real laugh-out-loud moments. My hopes were raised when the “pensioner interviews” happened and Charles Dance, Edward Fox and Michael Gambon turned up. Great, I thought… having the old timers play off Atkinson will be fun. But unfortunately they were nothing but cameos and (although one of the film’s comedy highlights) they came and went in the blink of an eye.
Elsewhere the film relied too much on a few running jokes: ostensibly the need for health and safety in MI7, where guns are rather frowned upon, given their potential to caused injury or worse. A ‘virtual reality’ training mission also delivers smiles but outstays its welcome.
The film is a first-time feature for TV-comedy director David Kerr.
Final thoughts
There are films which are wildly offensive. There are films that are just plain bad. This is neither: it is as Douglas Adams might have described it as “Mostly Harmless”. But to get any more than the rating I have given it, a comedy film has to make me laugh and this one failed miserably. It’s a watchable TV film for a rainy afternoon, but not worth heading out to the cinema to watch.
So it was that 2003’s Johnny English was a refreshing novelty. Roll forwards 15 years (via 2011’s “Johnny English Reborn”) and the concoction needs… you know… actual JOKES.
For “Johnny English Strikes Again” is unfortunately a pretty lame affair.
The Plot
Johnny English (Atkinson) is retired from MI7 and living life as a Geography teacher at a public school. Aside from teaching them about sheep farming in Australia and magma, English delights in teaching his young pupils the tricks of the spy trade: “You’re looking particularly beautiful tonight”, with a twinkle and a vodka martini in hand. “You’re looking particularly beautiful tonight” repeats the class.
But the quiet life of English is about to end, since a cyber-attack has exposed all of MI7’s current agents and the Prime Minister (Emma Thompson) needs to re-hire a retired agent who is currently ‘off the grid’. But noone – friend or foe – is safe when the bumbling English and his faithful helper Bough (Ben Miller) go back into the field.
The Turns
As UK comedy professionals, Atkinson and Miller deliver their English/Bough schtick serviceably enough. The brilliant Emma Thompson though is woefully underused as a straight-woman, being asked to do little more than an exasperated Theresa May impersonation.
If you need a sexy and sophisticated femme fatale for a Bond spoof, what better than a real ex-Bond girl? So the extremely sexy and sophisticated Olga Kurylenko (Camille from “Quantum of Solace”) plays Ophelia Bhuletova, which sounds much funnier when pronounced by Atkinson. And a very good job she does too.
The Review
To emphasise the positive for a moment, the film is suitably glossy, which are table stakes for a spy caper like this or Austin Powers.
But the script by William Davies (who did the previous Johnny Englishes, but nothing much since “Reborn”) doesn’t deliver any real laugh-out-loud moments. My hopes were raised when the “pensioner interviews” happened and Charles Dance, Edward Fox and Michael Gambon turned up. Great, I thought… having the old timers play off Atkinson will be fun. But unfortunately they were nothing but cameos and (although one of the film’s comedy highlights) they came and went in the blink of an eye.
Elsewhere the film relied too much on a few running jokes: ostensibly the need for health and safety in MI7, where guns are rather frowned upon, given their potential to caused injury or worse. A ‘virtual reality’ training mission also delivers smiles but outstays its welcome.
The film is a first-time feature for TV-comedy director David Kerr.
Final thoughts
There are films which are wildly offensive. There are films that are just plain bad. This is neither: it is as Douglas Adams might have described it as “Mostly Harmless”. But to get any more than the rating I have given it, a comedy film has to make me laugh and this one failed miserably. It’s a watchable TV film for a rainy afternoon, but not worth heading out to the cinema to watch.