Search
Search results
Lottie disney bookworm (1056 KP) rated What Once Was Mine in Books
Oct 25, 2021
๐พ๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐น๐๐๐๐๐๐๐โ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐
๐๐๐๐ ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐?
As you will all know by now, I am in love with the Twisted Tales series and have to read each installment as they are released. What Once was Mine is the 12th Twisted Tale book and the 7th written by Liz Braswell so to say I was excited would be an understatement.
As always, TT books come with a tag line to lure you in and this one is โWhat if Rapunzelโs mother drank a potion from the wrong flower?โ Yes, instead of the golden Sundrop flower, the ailing pregnant queen is mistakenly given a potion using the Moondrop flower, resulting in a silver-haired princess whose power kills rather than heals!
Of course, that casts the whole locking the princess in a tower concept into an entirely new light! However, many of the other elements remain the same as Disneyโs โTangledโ movie: Gothel is Rapunzelโs captor and โmotherโ, Flynn steals a crown and is on the run from the Stabbington brothers and Rapunzel is desperate to see the floating lights.
What Liz Braswell manages to do (very well, in my opinion) is to maintain all these similarities, keeping her readers rooted to the original story but also to bend the original fairytale into something a bit more mature, a bit darker and, in some cases, a bit more real.
โ๐๐๐ ๐ฉ๐ง๐ช๐ฉ๐ ๐๐๐ค๐ช๐ฉ ๐ฎ๐ค๐ช ๐๐จ ๐๐ก๐ก ๐ฉ๐๐ฃ๐๐ก๐๐, ๐ก๐๐ ๐ ๐ฎ๐ค๐ช๐ง ๐๐ง๐๐๐๐จ, ๐๐๐ฅ๐ช๐ฃ๐ฏ๐๐กโ
What Once was Mine is written from Rapunzelโs perspective. Now, this may be an obvious choice, but it also gives Braswell the opportunity to show her protagonist in a slightly more mature light than we are used to. Yes, Rapunzel is scatty, enthusiastic and teeth-grittingly cheerful about everything but she also believes she is dangerous and that she belongs in the tower for the safety of others.
Rapunzel has always been told that her hair killed her parents and that Gothel has been charged with her care and protection. However, what I really enjoyed about Braswellโs Rapunzel is that, although she begins with the same blind faith in Gothel as she has in the movie, she soon develops an inner turmoil of emotions with regards to her captor, questioning where she spends her days and recognising the little digs often made at the daughterโs expense.
As her journey continues, Rapunzel observes other mother-daughter relationships and her doubt and distrust of Gothel begins to build as a result. Lords, ladies and bandits alike are hunting for Rapunzel in order to claim her as their prize but this couldnโt be orchestrated by her mother, the only family she has ever known, could it?
โ๐ฝ๐๐๐๐ฃ ๐ฎ๐ค๐ช๐ง ๐ฃ๐๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐ ๐ฎ๐๐๐ง ๐๐ฎ ๐๐ค๐ง๐๐๐ซ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ฎ๐ค๐ช๐ง๐จ๐๐ก๐, ๐๐๐ฅ๐ช๐ฃ๐ฏ๐๐ก. ๐๐๐๐ฉโ๐จ ๐ ๐๐๐ง ๐๐๐ฉ๐ฉ๐๐ง ๐๐๐๐ฉ ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฃ ๐๐ก๐ค๐๐ฉ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ก๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐๐ง๐ฃ๐จ.โ
I have conflicting feelings when it comes to the darker elements of What Once Was Mine. The inclusion of the very real Countess Bathory took me by surprise and was quite gruesome in places: not a problem for a grown-up Disney nerd but Iโm not sure whether I will be passing this one along to the Mini Bookworm any time soon.
There is also the narrator of the story: a brother making up an alternative Rapunzel story for his sister while she is undergoing chemo. I understand this is an emotive topic for the author and I almost got it as a tool for the story-telling, enabling the use of quite modern, colloquial terms such as โmurderhairโ and enabling the creative inclusion of characters such as Maximus.
I really wanted this technique to be profound and make the story mean more, such as fairytales having an important place in the modern world for example. Unfortunately, it fell a little flat for me: it was an interesting tweak but it didnโt make me feel as much as I wanted it to.
It is not all doom and gloom though, Rapunzelโs perspective of the world provides comic moments: her (limited) knowledge of the world comes from the 37 books that she owns, leading to a moose that is definitely a squirrel and a cat which acts suspiciously like a fox. We are also not deprived of the regulars of The Snuggly Duckling, indeed all of your favourites from the film turn up for this novel.
Braswellโs characterisation when it came to Flynn was spot on in my opinion. The observation by Rapunzel that there is the โrealโ Flynn and then there is the charming, roguish mask he uses was perfect! Gina was also a great addition, desperately trying to be an adventurer/criminal and not being taken seriously just because she is a girl. The relationship between her and Flynn was adorable and, of course, Ginaโs mother is just legendary.
โ๐๐๐ ๐ฌ๐๐จ๐ฃโ๐ฉ ๐๐๐๐จ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ฃ๐ฉ ๐ก๐๐๐๐ฉ๐จ; ๐จ๐๐ ๐ฌ๐๐จ ๐ฅ๐ช๐ง๐จ๐ช๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐ฃ ๐ช๐ฃ๐ง๐๐๐ก๐๐ฏ๐๐ ๐๐ง๐๐๐ข ๐ค๐ ๐ฃ๐ค๐ง๐ข๐๐ก๐๐ฎโ
The writing style isnโt for everyone and, I must admit, this is the twisted tale which I have probably put down and walked away from the most. However, if you can stick it through the slow sections the story is really worth it and provides a much-admired evolution of the Disney Princess.
Donโt get me wrong - in the animated movie Rapunzel is great and all but by the end she is a princess with a haircut and a smouldering husband. Braswellโs Rapunzel has magic that she needs to study, understand and control, she is a future Queen in the making and simply has more of a purpose than her animated counterpart.
โ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ฅ๐ค๐ฌ๐๐ง ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ฌ๐๐ก๐ก ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ ๐จ๐ฉ๐ช๐๐๐ค๐ง๐ฃ ๐๐๐จ๐ฅ๐ค๐จ๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃโ
What Once Was Mine brings a whole new depth to the characters of Disneyโs Tangled. It gives us a new (frankly, disgusting) villain alongside all our favourite characters and definitely presents a creative twist on the traditional story. Donโt worry, Rapunzel still gets her Happily Ever After, but she fought a little harder for it this time around!
As you will all know by now, I am in love with the Twisted Tales series and have to read each installment as they are released. What Once was Mine is the 12th Twisted Tale book and the 7th written by Liz Braswell so to say I was excited would be an understatement.
As always, TT books come with a tag line to lure you in and this one is โWhat if Rapunzelโs mother drank a potion from the wrong flower?โ Yes, instead of the golden Sundrop flower, the ailing pregnant queen is mistakenly given a potion using the Moondrop flower, resulting in a silver-haired princess whose power kills rather than heals!
Of course, that casts the whole locking the princess in a tower concept into an entirely new light! However, many of the other elements remain the same as Disneyโs โTangledโ movie: Gothel is Rapunzelโs captor and โmotherโ, Flynn steals a crown and is on the run from the Stabbington brothers and Rapunzel is desperate to see the floating lights.
What Liz Braswell manages to do (very well, in my opinion) is to maintain all these similarities, keeping her readers rooted to the original story but also to bend the original fairytale into something a bit more mature, a bit darker and, in some cases, a bit more real.
โ๐๐๐ ๐ฉ๐ง๐ช๐ฉ๐ ๐๐๐ค๐ช๐ฉ ๐ฎ๐ค๐ช ๐๐จ ๐๐ก๐ก ๐ฉ๐๐ฃ๐๐ก๐๐, ๐ก๐๐ ๐ ๐ฎ๐ค๐ช๐ง ๐๐ง๐๐๐๐จ, ๐๐๐ฅ๐ช๐ฃ๐ฏ๐๐กโ
What Once was Mine is written from Rapunzelโs perspective. Now, this may be an obvious choice, but it also gives Braswell the opportunity to show her protagonist in a slightly more mature light than we are used to. Yes, Rapunzel is scatty, enthusiastic and teeth-grittingly cheerful about everything but she also believes she is dangerous and that she belongs in the tower for the safety of others.
Rapunzel has always been told that her hair killed her parents and that Gothel has been charged with her care and protection. However, what I really enjoyed about Braswellโs Rapunzel is that, although she begins with the same blind faith in Gothel as she has in the movie, she soon develops an inner turmoil of emotions with regards to her captor, questioning where she spends her days and recognising the little digs often made at the daughterโs expense.
As her journey continues, Rapunzel observes other mother-daughter relationships and her doubt and distrust of Gothel begins to build as a result. Lords, ladies and bandits alike are hunting for Rapunzel in order to claim her as their prize but this couldnโt be orchestrated by her mother, the only family she has ever known, could it?
โ๐ฝ๐๐๐๐ฃ ๐ฎ๐ค๐ช๐ง ๐ฃ๐๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐ ๐ฎ๐๐๐ง ๐๐ฎ ๐๐ค๐ง๐๐๐ซ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ฎ๐ค๐ช๐ง๐จ๐๐ก๐, ๐๐๐ฅ๐ช๐ฃ๐ฏ๐๐ก. ๐๐๐๐ฉโ๐จ ๐ ๐๐๐ง ๐๐๐ฉ๐ฉ๐๐ง ๐๐๐๐ฉ ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฃ ๐๐ก๐ค๐๐ฉ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ก๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐๐ง๐ฃ๐จ.โ
I have conflicting feelings when it comes to the darker elements of What Once Was Mine. The inclusion of the very real Countess Bathory took me by surprise and was quite gruesome in places: not a problem for a grown-up Disney nerd but Iโm not sure whether I will be passing this one along to the Mini Bookworm any time soon.
There is also the narrator of the story: a brother making up an alternative Rapunzel story for his sister while she is undergoing chemo. I understand this is an emotive topic for the author and I almost got it as a tool for the story-telling, enabling the use of quite modern, colloquial terms such as โmurderhairโ and enabling the creative inclusion of characters such as Maximus.
I really wanted this technique to be profound and make the story mean more, such as fairytales having an important place in the modern world for example. Unfortunately, it fell a little flat for me: it was an interesting tweak but it didnโt make me feel as much as I wanted it to.
It is not all doom and gloom though, Rapunzelโs perspective of the world provides comic moments: her (limited) knowledge of the world comes from the 37 books that she owns, leading to a moose that is definitely a squirrel and a cat which acts suspiciously like a fox. We are also not deprived of the regulars of The Snuggly Duckling, indeed all of your favourites from the film turn up for this novel.
Braswellโs characterisation when it came to Flynn was spot on in my opinion. The observation by Rapunzel that there is the โrealโ Flynn and then there is the charming, roguish mask he uses was perfect! Gina was also a great addition, desperately trying to be an adventurer/criminal and not being taken seriously just because she is a girl. The relationship between her and Flynn was adorable and, of course, Ginaโs mother is just legendary.
โ๐๐๐ ๐ฌ๐๐จ๐ฃโ๐ฉ ๐๐๐๐จ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ฃ๐ฉ ๐ก๐๐๐๐ฉ๐จ; ๐จ๐๐ ๐ฌ๐๐จ ๐ฅ๐ช๐ง๐จ๐ช๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐ฃ ๐ช๐ฃ๐ง๐๐๐ก๐๐ฏ๐๐ ๐๐ง๐๐๐ข ๐ค๐ ๐ฃ๐ค๐ง๐ข๐๐ก๐๐ฎโ
The writing style isnโt for everyone and, I must admit, this is the twisted tale which I have probably put down and walked away from the most. However, if you can stick it through the slow sections the story is really worth it and provides a much-admired evolution of the Disney Princess.
Donโt get me wrong - in the animated movie Rapunzel is great and all but by the end she is a princess with a haircut and a smouldering husband. Braswellโs Rapunzel has magic that she needs to study, understand and control, she is a future Queen in the making and simply has more of a purpose than her animated counterpart.
โ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ฅ๐ค๐ฌ๐๐ง ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ฌ๐๐ก๐ก ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ ๐จ๐ฉ๐ช๐๐๐ค๐ง๐ฃ ๐๐๐จ๐ฅ๐ค๐จ๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃโ
What Once Was Mine brings a whole new depth to the characters of Disneyโs Tangled. It gives us a new (frankly, disgusting) villain alongside all our favourite characters and definitely presents a creative twist on the traditional story. Donโt worry, Rapunzel still gets her Happily Ever After, but she fought a little harder for it this time around!
*** I received a free advance copy of this book from NetGalley in exchange for an honest review ***
I have read Adrian Tchakovsky's Shadows of the Apt series and loved it.
I recently read his Dogs of War and enjoyed it. However I think this has somewhat tainted Ironclads for me.
Ireonclads sees us again in the near-future where the UK (read as England which annoyed me, being Scottish) has gained independence from Europe and subsequently gone bust and been bought over by the USA. The USA is likewise invading or at war with much of the rest of the world. These wars are now fought mainly in corporate interest (but then what's new *cough gulf war cough*) with armies of poorly equipped government soldiers being dent in to conflict occasionally supported by corporate playboys (generally the heir to the corporate fortunes) in their massive armoured scion suits (hence iron-clad) where they are fully protected from pretty much everything. These playboys tend to be captured by each other and ransomed back to their families, guffawing at their japes all the way.
The story sees one small group of US soldiers sent in to deepest darkest Sweden to rescue one such playboy who got himself too far ahead of the army and appears to have gone missing but without ransom (without his scion suit).
Being a short (200 pages) book worked well for me, I felt any more scenes or narrative would have felt like padding and this was its natural length.
However, for me this book felt like the notes or background story to Dogs of War and has suffered from my having read the latter. That book notes that wars used to be fought with machines and robots but moves on to cybernetically enhanced animals. This book felt like a side story or introduction to the Dogs of War world and little more.
Other aspects of the story chimed with that of Dogs of War as well and showed the author to be a little short of ideas - living beings with their brains/bodies cybernetically enhanced, swarms of insects used to disrupt communications, the USA being a little bit invadey and corrupt etc.
While this is not my usual cup of tea, I have enjoyed other sci-fi and felt this was a little slapdash. I didn't like the narrative style, finding the blasรฉ, informal tones of the army sergeant both jarring and poorly executed. And while I don't need to be spoon-fed the plot, I found some elements badly or barely explained (what DID the Finns do?!) and the major plot twist neither surprising nor worth the wait.
Tchaikovsky can describe a battle scene well and you get a feel for the whole battle as well as the key conflicts, so the action itself is fairly gripping at times. However, the finished article left me feeling a bit meh.
All in all I am glad I read this, but had expected better things from his sci-fi given Children of Time won the Arthur C Clarke award.
I have read Adrian Tchakovsky's Shadows of the Apt series and loved it.
I recently read his Dogs of War and enjoyed it. However I think this has somewhat tainted Ironclads for me.
Ireonclads sees us again in the near-future where the UK (read as England which annoyed me, being Scottish) has gained independence from Europe and subsequently gone bust and been bought over by the USA. The USA is likewise invading or at war with much of the rest of the world. These wars are now fought mainly in corporate interest (but then what's new *cough gulf war cough*) with armies of poorly equipped government soldiers being dent in to conflict occasionally supported by corporate playboys (generally the heir to the corporate fortunes) in their massive armoured scion suits (hence iron-clad) where they are fully protected from pretty much everything. These playboys tend to be captured by each other and ransomed back to their families, guffawing at their japes all the way.
The story sees one small group of US soldiers sent in to deepest darkest Sweden to rescue one such playboy who got himself too far ahead of the army and appears to have gone missing but without ransom (without his scion suit).
Being a short (200 pages) book worked well for me, I felt any more scenes or narrative would have felt like padding and this was its natural length.
However, for me this book felt like the notes or background story to Dogs of War and has suffered from my having read the latter. That book notes that wars used to be fought with machines and robots but moves on to cybernetically enhanced animals. This book felt like a side story or introduction to the Dogs of War world and little more.
Other aspects of the story chimed with that of Dogs of War as well and showed the author to be a little short of ideas - living beings with their brains/bodies cybernetically enhanced, swarms of insects used to disrupt communications, the USA being a little bit invadey and corrupt etc.
While this is not my usual cup of tea, I have enjoyed other sci-fi and felt this was a little slapdash. I didn't like the narrative style, finding the blasรฉ, informal tones of the army sergeant both jarring and poorly executed. And while I don't need to be spoon-fed the plot, I found some elements badly or barely explained (what DID the Finns do?!) and the major plot twist neither surprising nor worth the wait.
Tchaikovsky can describe a battle scene well and you get a feel for the whole battle as well as the key conflicts, so the action itself is fairly gripping at times. However, the finished article left me feeling a bit meh.
All in all I am glad I read this, but had expected better things from his sci-fi given Children of Time won the Arthur C Clarke award.
Jamie (131 KP) rated The Edible Woman in Books
May 24, 2017
An honest exploration of the roles of women, marriage, and entering adulthood
Marian is an average college-educated woman who lives with a roommate in a decent apartment, works for a survey company, is moderately good looking, and has a handsome fiancรฉ who is on his way to being a big shot lawyer. It sounds like life altogether is going pretty well for Marian. Yet for some reason she feels empty, why?
The Edible Woman explores the themes of losing a sense of self with maturity. At work she is pushed around, her roommate Ainsley is inconsiderate, the landlady is judgmental, and her boyfriend Peter is self centered and makes snide comments at Marianโs expense, acting like he can barely tolerate her. With each encounter Marian puts aside her pride for the sake of avoiding conflict. Marian expresses her problems through eating, or the lack thereof, hinting at a potential eating disorder. Just as she feels inhibited in life, she suddenly feels inhibited with the kinds of food that she can eat.
As the story continues she begins to dread marriage and question the direction her life is goingโbecoming just as listless as her friend and former classmate Clara, who after marriage and three pregnancies just seems beaten down. Marianโs fiancรฉ Peter is the stereotypical perfect bachelor: a manโs man that looks down on women and views marriage as a ball and chain. Peter pushes Marian around in order to mold her into a subservient woman. There is no longer any room for her thoughts, her feelings, or her desires from under his shadow.
But what about work? What are womenโs roles in society and the work force? Throughout the story there are several women including Marian with college educations, yet none of them really have a stable career. Women are expected to be wives and mothers, thereโs simply no time for an education or a job. In this case, their educations are ultimately viewed as their downfall due to the crushing reality of how little opportunity they would have. This was the very sad truth at the time the book was written and thankfully is not exactly the case now in most parts of the world.
Atwood tackles a large number of social issues throughout the book that I think would be important for any young woman. Adulthood, relationships, marriage, the choice between work and education versus starting a family, and lastly feminismโboth good and bad. (Hint: Ainsely is a perfect example of a bad feminist.)
There are certain elements of the book that are becoming quite dated. Namely the typewriters, the social expectation that all women can be are housewives, and the limited ways that women can dress; These things might make it difficult for young women to look past and relate to the main character. Despite this the book is still incredibly relevant in the message that it brings about maintaining oneโs individuality. I absolutely love this book and found a lot of my former self in itโs pages.
The Edible Woman explores the themes of losing a sense of self with maturity. At work she is pushed around, her roommate Ainsley is inconsiderate, the landlady is judgmental, and her boyfriend Peter is self centered and makes snide comments at Marianโs expense, acting like he can barely tolerate her. With each encounter Marian puts aside her pride for the sake of avoiding conflict. Marian expresses her problems through eating, or the lack thereof, hinting at a potential eating disorder. Just as she feels inhibited in life, she suddenly feels inhibited with the kinds of food that she can eat.
As the story continues she begins to dread marriage and question the direction her life is goingโbecoming just as listless as her friend and former classmate Clara, who after marriage and three pregnancies just seems beaten down. Marianโs fiancรฉ Peter is the stereotypical perfect bachelor: a manโs man that looks down on women and views marriage as a ball and chain. Peter pushes Marian around in order to mold her into a subservient woman. There is no longer any room for her thoughts, her feelings, or her desires from under his shadow.
But what about work? What are womenโs roles in society and the work force? Throughout the story there are several women including Marian with college educations, yet none of them really have a stable career. Women are expected to be wives and mothers, thereโs simply no time for an education or a job. In this case, their educations are ultimately viewed as their downfall due to the crushing reality of how little opportunity they would have. This was the very sad truth at the time the book was written and thankfully is not exactly the case now in most parts of the world.
Atwood tackles a large number of social issues throughout the book that I think would be important for any young woman. Adulthood, relationships, marriage, the choice between work and education versus starting a family, and lastly feminismโboth good and bad. (Hint: Ainsely is a perfect example of a bad feminist.)
There are certain elements of the book that are becoming quite dated. Namely the typewriters, the social expectation that all women can be are housewives, and the limited ways that women can dress; These things might make it difficult for young women to look past and relate to the main character. Despite this the book is still incredibly relevant in the message that it brings about maintaining oneโs individuality. I absolutely love this book and found a lot of my former self in itโs pages.
Rachel King (13 KP) rated JESUS, Career Counselor: How to Find (and Keep) Your Perfect Work in Books
Feb 11, 2019
This book sat on my desk for the longest time, half-read. I am a SAHM, stay-at-home mom, and I found this book had very little to do with my "career." Jones did eventually address this in the book, but only briefly, and it makes me wonder what the author's personal views are on women who choose my career. A perfect example of this is that at the end of every element section, she lists careers she considers appropriate for those that match that element, and none of the four lists mention a SAHM. Even when she discusses those who have been forced to leave their job or choose to leave their job, she views being stuck at home as a temporary place and describes how to move out of it, never considering that maybe Jesus wants it to be permanent.
Delving into the opening of the book, it is quickly apparent that the author assumes that the reader has read the author's previous books and will use these other books to produce a mission statement, personality profile, "four greatest talents", and a vision statement. As I have not read her previous works, and don't intend to, I felt I was at a further disadvantage from benefiting from reading this book.
Another mark against the book is that Jones does not stick with only one version of the Bible to quote from, and the only time she actually states which version she is quoting from is when she quotes the KJV - every other time is a mystery.
There are many positive points to the book, such as the organization. Each of the four elements are covered in-depth, with each of the four sections containing three chapters that each focus on a single word that fits that element, all beginning with the prefix "re-". Each of these words come with a detailed definition, and each chapter provides places for the reader to take notes and answer the author's questions, such as the "Make It Yours" sections and the "Career Exercises", with each chapter ending with a prayer. The "Bonus Features" at the end of each of the four sections list additional prayers, the aforementioned list of recommended occupations, and "Summary Points" of the three words defined in each section. The last section of the book has additional "Bonus Features," which is the authors' Book Picks, a list of Internet resources, a section on resumes, and a section titled "How to Deal with Sudden Job Loss / Reversal of Fortune." I do enjoy a well-organized book.
The anecdotes were entertaining and the advice seemed good and useful to those in the job market. I did appreciate Jones' goal of making Jesus central to a person's career, even if the methods by which she approaches this seemed more New Age than Biblical, despite the scripture quotes. Her writing was also very sensitive to the reader who has lost a job or is unhappy in his or her current job, which would be an appropriate way to address the reader in the current economy.
Delving into the opening of the book, it is quickly apparent that the author assumes that the reader has read the author's previous books and will use these other books to produce a mission statement, personality profile, "four greatest talents", and a vision statement. As I have not read her previous works, and don't intend to, I felt I was at a further disadvantage from benefiting from reading this book.
Another mark against the book is that Jones does not stick with only one version of the Bible to quote from, and the only time she actually states which version she is quoting from is when she quotes the KJV - every other time is a mystery.
There are many positive points to the book, such as the organization. Each of the four elements are covered in-depth, with each of the four sections containing three chapters that each focus on a single word that fits that element, all beginning with the prefix "re-". Each of these words come with a detailed definition, and each chapter provides places for the reader to take notes and answer the author's questions, such as the "Make It Yours" sections and the "Career Exercises", with each chapter ending with a prayer. The "Bonus Features" at the end of each of the four sections list additional prayers, the aforementioned list of recommended occupations, and "Summary Points" of the three words defined in each section. The last section of the book has additional "Bonus Features," which is the authors' Book Picks, a list of Internet resources, a section on resumes, and a section titled "How to Deal with Sudden Job Loss / Reversal of Fortune." I do enjoy a well-organized book.
The anecdotes were entertaining and the advice seemed good and useful to those in the job market. I did appreciate Jones' goal of making Jesus central to a person's career, even if the methods by which she approaches this seemed more New Age than Biblical, despite the scripture quotes. Her writing was also very sensitive to the reader who has lost a job or is unhappy in his or her current job, which would be an appropriate way to address the reader in the current economy.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Deepwater Horizon (2016) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 10, 2019)
Disaster with feeling
โBased on true eventsโ. I canโt think of anything more disconcerting when I sit down to watch a film. When it comes to blockbusters inspired by real-life situations, the outcome can be a poignant movie that captures the heart and emotion of the episode โ a la American Sniper.
Unfortunately, films in this genre can also be a disaster from start to finish with a story barely related to its real-life counterpart. You can forgive me then for going into Deepwater Horizon with an air of scepticism, but was it justified?
Thankfully, director Peter Berg (Hancock, Battleship) strikes the right balance between pleasing the movie-going masses and respecting the events that took the lives of eleven people aboard the Deepwater Horizon oil rig.
Based on the events that occurred in the Gulf of Mexico on April 20, 2010, the story chronicles the courage of those who worked on the Deepwater Horizon and the extreme moments of bravery and survival in the face of what would become one of the biggest man-made disasters in world history.
Mark Wahlberg takes the helm of this intriguing action thriller as Mike Williams, an electrician working on the rig during the explosion. A supporting cast that includes Kurt Russell, Gina Rodriguez, John Malkovich and The Maze Runnerโs Dylan OโBrien bolster Wahlbergโs natural charisma and each of the aforementioned actors give first-rate performances.
The acting from all sides is superb. Mark Wahlberg in particular excels, being one of his best roles to date. His work has been decidedly dodgy over the last few years but his performance here shows just how good he is with the right material.
Nevertheless, at its core, Deepwater Horizon is a simple disaster movie, and carries the genreโs traits to a tee; thereโs the obligatory hero (Mark Wahlberg), the boss/politician who doesnโt believe anything is wrong (John Malkovich), the bombastic score (courtesy of Steve Jablonsky) and the damsel in distress (Gina Rodriguez). What it does differently however is focus more on the human elements of the plot โ something helped by the fact the scriptwriters had factual events to pick from.
The special effects are astounding, aided greatly by Peter Bergโs often hectic camerawork. Thereโs very little shaky-cam but the claustrophobic nature of the rig itself is beautifully utilised in low angled shots and sweeping exterior sequences. The scenes showing the rig on fire are so intense you can virtually feel the heat radiating from them.
It almost feels like a documentary, and a very good one at that. The audience is given references throughout the film of Deepwater Horizonโs many functions and the scale of the behemoth is apparent throughout.
Overall, to say Deepwater Horizon is a cracking disaster film feels like a slight disservice to the eleven people who died aboard it in 2010. Having Peter Berg direct was a risky move when looking at his back-catalogue but after a viewing, itโs hard to think of anyone else better suited.
This is a disaster movie with feeling and itโs one of the best films of the year.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/09/30/disaster-with-feeling-deepwater-horizon-review/
Unfortunately, films in this genre can also be a disaster from start to finish with a story barely related to its real-life counterpart. You can forgive me then for going into Deepwater Horizon with an air of scepticism, but was it justified?
Thankfully, director Peter Berg (Hancock, Battleship) strikes the right balance between pleasing the movie-going masses and respecting the events that took the lives of eleven people aboard the Deepwater Horizon oil rig.
Based on the events that occurred in the Gulf of Mexico on April 20, 2010, the story chronicles the courage of those who worked on the Deepwater Horizon and the extreme moments of bravery and survival in the face of what would become one of the biggest man-made disasters in world history.
Mark Wahlberg takes the helm of this intriguing action thriller as Mike Williams, an electrician working on the rig during the explosion. A supporting cast that includes Kurt Russell, Gina Rodriguez, John Malkovich and The Maze Runnerโs Dylan OโBrien bolster Wahlbergโs natural charisma and each of the aforementioned actors give first-rate performances.
The acting from all sides is superb. Mark Wahlberg in particular excels, being one of his best roles to date. His work has been decidedly dodgy over the last few years but his performance here shows just how good he is with the right material.
Nevertheless, at its core, Deepwater Horizon is a simple disaster movie, and carries the genreโs traits to a tee; thereโs the obligatory hero (Mark Wahlberg), the boss/politician who doesnโt believe anything is wrong (John Malkovich), the bombastic score (courtesy of Steve Jablonsky) and the damsel in distress (Gina Rodriguez). What it does differently however is focus more on the human elements of the plot โ something helped by the fact the scriptwriters had factual events to pick from.
The special effects are astounding, aided greatly by Peter Bergโs often hectic camerawork. Thereโs very little shaky-cam but the claustrophobic nature of the rig itself is beautifully utilised in low angled shots and sweeping exterior sequences. The scenes showing the rig on fire are so intense you can virtually feel the heat radiating from them.
It almost feels like a documentary, and a very good one at that. The audience is given references throughout the film of Deepwater Horizonโs many functions and the scale of the behemoth is apparent throughout.
Overall, to say Deepwater Horizon is a cracking disaster film feels like a slight disservice to the eleven people who died aboard it in 2010. Having Peter Berg direct was a risky move when looking at his back-catalogue but after a viewing, itโs hard to think of anyone else better suited.
This is a disaster movie with feeling and itโs one of the best films of the year.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/09/30/disaster-with-feeling-deepwater-horizon-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Inside Out (2015) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
A delightful treat
If thereโs one thing Pixar knows how to do, itโs create memorable films. Long after youโve walked out the cinema, the likes of Wall.E and Finding Nemo stay with you.
2015 marks the first time the studio will release two films in the same year, with The Good Dinosaur coming to cinemas in December and the subject of this review, Inside Out, in this yearโs busy summer season.
But has this increased workload for Pixarโs animators resulted in a poorer quality movie?
Inside Out follows the story of young Riley, an eleven-year-old girl coming to terms with growing up in a new home away from her friends and the neighbourhood she knows and loves.
Deep inside her head, however, we find a whole host of colourful characters controlling Rileyโs emotions. Joy, Sadness, Fear, Anger and Disgust all play a part in keeping her level-headed. Unfortunately, after a near disaster it falls on upbeat Joy and ever-blue Sadness to bring Riley back to who she once was.
Inside Out continues Pixarโs trend of creating beautifully animated films that really strike a chord with audiences. The sheer amount of colour is absolutely breath-taking and children will find much to enjoy in both the central characters and the numerous environments inside Rileyโs head, while adults will love the stunning recreation of San Francisco in all its bustling glory.
The cast, which includes voice work by Bill Hader (Monsters University), Kyle MacLachlan (Desperate Housewives) and Diane Lane (Man of Steel) all do sterling jobs in bringing their characters to life but it is in Phyllis Smith, who plays Sadness, that we find the best portrayal.
A relatively unknown actress with few film credits to her name, Smith is truly wonderful as the little blue lady who keeps a check on the more upsetting moments in Rileyโs life.
Elsewhere, Pixar has once again created a story that really focuses on the themes of growth, family bonding and what it means to grow up in todayโs society with numerous cultural references that children and adults alike will enjoy.
However, itโs important to note that Inside Out is one of the more emotional films Pixar has created. At numerous points throughout the movie there were a couple of children in the cinema wiping away the tears โ though this shows how heavily invested in the characters they became.
Unfortunately, despite being 94 minutes in length, Inside Out does feel a little drawn out in places and lacks the deeper storytelling elements that has made some of the studios other films so charming. This isnโt to say it lacks charm, but itโs in slightly shorter supply here.
Overall, Pixar has added another cracking film to its ever-increasing roster. Whilst not hitting the heights of Wall.E or Toy Story, it makes for a memorable and sensible film for the whole family to enjoy.
Itโs the perfect start to the summer holidays. Roll on The Good Dinosaur.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/07/26/a-delightful-treat-inside-out-review/
2015 marks the first time the studio will release two films in the same year, with The Good Dinosaur coming to cinemas in December and the subject of this review, Inside Out, in this yearโs busy summer season.
But has this increased workload for Pixarโs animators resulted in a poorer quality movie?
Inside Out follows the story of young Riley, an eleven-year-old girl coming to terms with growing up in a new home away from her friends and the neighbourhood she knows and loves.
Deep inside her head, however, we find a whole host of colourful characters controlling Rileyโs emotions. Joy, Sadness, Fear, Anger and Disgust all play a part in keeping her level-headed. Unfortunately, after a near disaster it falls on upbeat Joy and ever-blue Sadness to bring Riley back to who she once was.
Inside Out continues Pixarโs trend of creating beautifully animated films that really strike a chord with audiences. The sheer amount of colour is absolutely breath-taking and children will find much to enjoy in both the central characters and the numerous environments inside Rileyโs head, while adults will love the stunning recreation of San Francisco in all its bustling glory.
The cast, which includes voice work by Bill Hader (Monsters University), Kyle MacLachlan (Desperate Housewives) and Diane Lane (Man of Steel) all do sterling jobs in bringing their characters to life but it is in Phyllis Smith, who plays Sadness, that we find the best portrayal.
A relatively unknown actress with few film credits to her name, Smith is truly wonderful as the little blue lady who keeps a check on the more upsetting moments in Rileyโs life.
Elsewhere, Pixar has once again created a story that really focuses on the themes of growth, family bonding and what it means to grow up in todayโs society with numerous cultural references that children and adults alike will enjoy.
However, itโs important to note that Inside Out is one of the more emotional films Pixar has created. At numerous points throughout the movie there were a couple of children in the cinema wiping away the tears โ though this shows how heavily invested in the characters they became.
Unfortunately, despite being 94 minutes in length, Inside Out does feel a little drawn out in places and lacks the deeper storytelling elements that has made some of the studios other films so charming. This isnโt to say it lacks charm, but itโs in slightly shorter supply here.
Overall, Pixar has added another cracking film to its ever-increasing roster. Whilst not hitting the heights of Wall.E or Toy Story, it makes for a memorable and sensible film for the whole family to enjoy.
Itโs the perfect start to the summer holidays. Roll on The Good Dinosaur.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/07/26/a-delightful-treat-inside-out-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Zoolander 2 (2016) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
A Fashion Faux pas
It pains me to say it, but Ben Stiller hasnโt really been relevant for quite some time. His last film, the final movie in the Night at the Museum franchise struggled with critics and audiences alike.
Once dubbed part of the so-called โFratpackโ, alongside Will Ferrell, Owen Wilson and Vince Vaughn to name a few, their success has fallen by the wayside since introducing rising stars like Melissa McCarthy and Chris Pratt to the comedy genre.
Here, Stiller gives one of his most memorable characters, Derek Zoolander, a sequel that no-one was really asking for. But is it worthy of your time?
In Zoolander 2, titular male model Derek Zoolander has fallen out of favour with the public and has retreated into hiding away from the prying eyes of the media to focus on getting his life back together. By a stroke of luck, a chance encounter with old friend Hansel (Owen Wilson) sets them on a path to help stop high-profile celebrity deaths, finding out who is behind them in the process.
The story is a little nondescript with the intentions of both the โheroesโ and โvillainsโ not quite clear. There are elements of the first live-action Scooby Doo film in its design โ and thatโs not a good thing.
An all-star cast that includes the exceptionally beautiful Penelope Cruz, Will Ferrell and Kristen Wiig is bolstered by more celebrity cameos than you can shake a stick at. Justin Bieber, Anna Wintour, Sting, Ariana Grande, MC Hammer and Kiefer Sutherland are just a few on a list that is nearly endless.
Unfortunately, these cameos are the highlights in a film full of recycled gags and very poor camerawork. As we follow our two leads on their journey across a dreary looking Rome, Zoolander 2 drags with only a couple of laughs in the first hour โ something the first one managed to avoid.
In fact, things are so bad, they only pick up in the final 30 minutes when Will Ferrellโs villain Mugatu makes a much-needed appearance, steering this near-trainwreck of a comedy into fairly decent territory. Ferrelโs comic timing is as usual, on point, but itโs unfortunate he puts Stiller and Wilson to shame.
Penelope Cruz is her ever-watchable self but piles on the shtick to such an extent that it takes away from her character, making her almost cartoonish in personality and actions.
Elsewhere, the clever parodies relating to the fashion industry are taken away; instead Zoolander 2 is lumped with cheap laughs that constantly try too hard to raise even the smallest smirk from its audience.
Overall, Zoolander 2 is not a patch on its predecessor with Will Ferrell providing the film with its only genuine moments of hilarity and this comes within the final 30 minutes of a 102 minute feature. Stiller may have tried to resurrect one of his finest characters, but in doing so, has tarnished that reputation.
Much like its lead star, Zoolander 2 tries desperately to stay relevant, and unfortunately this type of comedy just doesnโt cut the mustard anymore.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/02/21/a-fashion-faux-pas-zoolander-2-review/
Once dubbed part of the so-called โFratpackโ, alongside Will Ferrell, Owen Wilson and Vince Vaughn to name a few, their success has fallen by the wayside since introducing rising stars like Melissa McCarthy and Chris Pratt to the comedy genre.
Here, Stiller gives one of his most memorable characters, Derek Zoolander, a sequel that no-one was really asking for. But is it worthy of your time?
In Zoolander 2, titular male model Derek Zoolander has fallen out of favour with the public and has retreated into hiding away from the prying eyes of the media to focus on getting his life back together. By a stroke of luck, a chance encounter with old friend Hansel (Owen Wilson) sets them on a path to help stop high-profile celebrity deaths, finding out who is behind them in the process.
The story is a little nondescript with the intentions of both the โheroesโ and โvillainsโ not quite clear. There are elements of the first live-action Scooby Doo film in its design โ and thatโs not a good thing.
An all-star cast that includes the exceptionally beautiful Penelope Cruz, Will Ferrell and Kristen Wiig is bolstered by more celebrity cameos than you can shake a stick at. Justin Bieber, Anna Wintour, Sting, Ariana Grande, MC Hammer and Kiefer Sutherland are just a few on a list that is nearly endless.
Unfortunately, these cameos are the highlights in a film full of recycled gags and very poor camerawork. As we follow our two leads on their journey across a dreary looking Rome, Zoolander 2 drags with only a couple of laughs in the first hour โ something the first one managed to avoid.
In fact, things are so bad, they only pick up in the final 30 minutes when Will Ferrellโs villain Mugatu makes a much-needed appearance, steering this near-trainwreck of a comedy into fairly decent territory. Ferrelโs comic timing is as usual, on point, but itโs unfortunate he puts Stiller and Wilson to shame.
Penelope Cruz is her ever-watchable self but piles on the shtick to such an extent that it takes away from her character, making her almost cartoonish in personality and actions.
Elsewhere, the clever parodies relating to the fashion industry are taken away; instead Zoolander 2 is lumped with cheap laughs that constantly try too hard to raise even the smallest smirk from its audience.
Overall, Zoolander 2 is not a patch on its predecessor with Will Ferrell providing the film with its only genuine moments of hilarity and this comes within the final 30 minutes of a 102 minute feature. Stiller may have tried to resurrect one of his finest characters, but in doing so, has tarnished that reputation.
Much like its lead star, Zoolander 2 tries desperately to stay relevant, and unfortunately this type of comedy just doesnโt cut the mustard anymore.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/02/21/a-fashion-faux-pas-zoolander-2-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Brothers Grimsby (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
It's grim in England (apparently)
Itโs probably accurate to say that Sacha Baron Cohenโs sense of humour is a little like marmite, itโs a love or hate kind of affair. Offering up characters like Borat and Bruno to the unsuspecting public has proved beneficial to him over the years; with the outlandish antics of those personalities drawing in massive audiences.
His latest offering, English football hooligan Nobby Butcher, promises to be one of his most controversial roles to date, but does the corresponding film, simply titled Grimsby, push the boundaries a little too far?
Cohenโs beer-drinking, benefit-swindling character stars alongside his long-lost brother Sebastian, played by an incredibly wasted Mark Strong. It just so happens that Seb is a secret agent, on the run after an incident at a global health event. What ensues is a formulaic Cohen comedy that utilises every orifice known to the human body โ this is definitely low-brow humour.
After getting over the truly horrific portrayal of life up north, and the appalling representation of a town that is no-where near as bad as is reflected, Grimsby is actually a reasonably funny spy caper โ not in the league of last yearโs Spy โ but certainly better than say Johnny English: Reborn or to some extent, Get Smart.
A talented cast bolsters Cohen and Strong with Nobbyโs girlfriend Dawn, played by Rebel Wilson, providing some of the filmโs funniest moments, despite her lack of screen time.
Elsewhere, Penelope Cruzโs role is a wasted opportunity and she suffers the same fate here as she did in Zoolander 2. Isla Fisher, Ricky Tomlinson and Johnny Vegas are unfortunately all underused as Clash of the Titans director Louis Leterrier focuses on the main pair.
Leterrierโs work on big blockbusters also helps move Grimsby through its ridiculously swift run time. At less than 90 minutes, the story is stretched to the brink, though there are some clever scenes, including a brilliantly choreographed chase through tight urban streets at the beginning.
Unfortunately, the gags miss their targets more than they hit. Your individual views on toilet humour will ultimately decide whether or not Grimsby is funny and some of the comedic elements intermittently cross the line, an ill-timed HIV joke being one of them.
Itโs fair to say youโll be cringing one minute, and roaring with embarrassed laughter the next.
Nevertheless, Cohen has promised time and time again that he has no time for personal opinions on his films and with each new character; he continues to deliver on that promise. Whether or not his target audience is getting tired is another story completely.
Overall, Grimsby is a movie that is unapologetic with what it is trying to achieve. From homophobic comments, casual racism and a grim depiction of life in Northern England, itโs everything we should despise in modern film-making. However, thereโs just something about Cohenโs brazen attitude that keeps us coming back for more.
If youโre reading this Sacha, donโt visit Grimsby for a while, thereโs a bounty on your head.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/02/27/its-grim-in-england-apparently-grimsby-review/
His latest offering, English football hooligan Nobby Butcher, promises to be one of his most controversial roles to date, but does the corresponding film, simply titled Grimsby, push the boundaries a little too far?
Cohenโs beer-drinking, benefit-swindling character stars alongside his long-lost brother Sebastian, played by an incredibly wasted Mark Strong. It just so happens that Seb is a secret agent, on the run after an incident at a global health event. What ensues is a formulaic Cohen comedy that utilises every orifice known to the human body โ this is definitely low-brow humour.
After getting over the truly horrific portrayal of life up north, and the appalling representation of a town that is no-where near as bad as is reflected, Grimsby is actually a reasonably funny spy caper โ not in the league of last yearโs Spy โ but certainly better than say Johnny English: Reborn or to some extent, Get Smart.
A talented cast bolsters Cohen and Strong with Nobbyโs girlfriend Dawn, played by Rebel Wilson, providing some of the filmโs funniest moments, despite her lack of screen time.
Elsewhere, Penelope Cruzโs role is a wasted opportunity and she suffers the same fate here as she did in Zoolander 2. Isla Fisher, Ricky Tomlinson and Johnny Vegas are unfortunately all underused as Clash of the Titans director Louis Leterrier focuses on the main pair.
Leterrierโs work on big blockbusters also helps move Grimsby through its ridiculously swift run time. At less than 90 minutes, the story is stretched to the brink, though there are some clever scenes, including a brilliantly choreographed chase through tight urban streets at the beginning.
Unfortunately, the gags miss their targets more than they hit. Your individual views on toilet humour will ultimately decide whether or not Grimsby is funny and some of the comedic elements intermittently cross the line, an ill-timed HIV joke being one of them.
Itโs fair to say youโll be cringing one minute, and roaring with embarrassed laughter the next.
Nevertheless, Cohen has promised time and time again that he has no time for personal opinions on his films and with each new character; he continues to deliver on that promise. Whether or not his target audience is getting tired is another story completely.
Overall, Grimsby is a movie that is unapologetic with what it is trying to achieve. From homophobic comments, casual racism and a grim depiction of life in Northern England, itโs everything we should despise in modern film-making. However, thereโs just something about Cohenโs brazen attitude that keeps us coming back for more.
If youโre reading this Sacha, donโt visit Grimsby for a while, thereโs a bounty on your head.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/02/27/its-grim-in-england-apparently-grimsby-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Dad's Army (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Full of wasted British talent
I may be fairly young in years, but I grew up around comedies like Only Fools & Horses, One Foot in the Grave and of course Dadโs Army. I remember many evenings sitting at home with my dad as he cried with laughter at all three, though it was the latterโs influence that stuck with me the most.
Now, Dadโs Army like so many classic TV shows is getting the silver screen treatment, but does this modern-day reimagining, with an all-star British cast live up to the series that delighted so many for so long?
The movie adaptation of Dadโs Army follows on from the TV series, taking place just before the Second World War comes to an end. In Walmington-On-Sea, the Home Guard, led by Captain Mainwaring must track down a German spy, who is intent on swaying the war in their favour.
A whole host of British talent, young and old, star and each and every one of them slots perfectly into the well-worn shoes of classic characters. From Michael Gambonโs effervescent performance as Godfrey and Toby Jonesโ faithful portrayal of Mainwaring to Inbetweeners star Blake Harrison taking on the role of Pike, it feels as though the casting team really put a lot of thought into getting the characteristics right.
It doesnโt stop there, Welsh beauty Catherine Zeta Jones, TV favourite Sarah Lancashire and Victor Meldrewโs long-suffering wife Margaret (Annette Crosbie) all make appearances for the fairer sex, with each bringing something to the table.
The scenery is beautiful, filmed just a couple of hours up the road in Bridlington, East Yorkshire, the normally vibrant seaside town is transformed into 1940s Walmington with an enviable amount of detail. Elsewhere, the White Cliffs of Dover are replicated exceptionally at Flamborough on the east coast.
Unfortunately, the story is a little on the light side, barely managing to stretch to the filmโs slightly overlong running time. This is an issue that blights many TV to film projects and it feels like this unbelievably talented cast is somewhat wasted with a fairly run-of-the-mill plot.
It also feels like the comedy is on rations. Yes, itโs nostalgic with constant references to its small-screen counterpart, but it comes across like the producers were too busy trying to shoehorn as many elements of the TV series into the film, without concentrating on what Dadโs Army was all about โ laughs.
Nevertheless, there is plenty to enjoy despite a lack of giggles. The acting is, as said previously, remarkable with fans of the series and newcomers alike being able to enjoy the warm, typically British feeling these thespians bring to the film.
Overall, Dadโs Army is a decent, albeit slightly underwhelming, effort in bringing one of the most popular TV shows of all time to the big screen. Its talent and casting are undeniable and the filming style is very impressive, but a lack of attention to the plot and a comedy drought stop it short of achieving what it clearly set out to do.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/02/07/full-of-wasted-british-talent-dads-army-review/
Now, Dadโs Army like so many classic TV shows is getting the silver screen treatment, but does this modern-day reimagining, with an all-star British cast live up to the series that delighted so many for so long?
The movie adaptation of Dadโs Army follows on from the TV series, taking place just before the Second World War comes to an end. In Walmington-On-Sea, the Home Guard, led by Captain Mainwaring must track down a German spy, who is intent on swaying the war in their favour.
A whole host of British talent, young and old, star and each and every one of them slots perfectly into the well-worn shoes of classic characters. From Michael Gambonโs effervescent performance as Godfrey and Toby Jonesโ faithful portrayal of Mainwaring to Inbetweeners star Blake Harrison taking on the role of Pike, it feels as though the casting team really put a lot of thought into getting the characteristics right.
It doesnโt stop there, Welsh beauty Catherine Zeta Jones, TV favourite Sarah Lancashire and Victor Meldrewโs long-suffering wife Margaret (Annette Crosbie) all make appearances for the fairer sex, with each bringing something to the table.
The scenery is beautiful, filmed just a couple of hours up the road in Bridlington, East Yorkshire, the normally vibrant seaside town is transformed into 1940s Walmington with an enviable amount of detail. Elsewhere, the White Cliffs of Dover are replicated exceptionally at Flamborough on the east coast.
Unfortunately, the story is a little on the light side, barely managing to stretch to the filmโs slightly overlong running time. This is an issue that blights many TV to film projects and it feels like this unbelievably talented cast is somewhat wasted with a fairly run-of-the-mill plot.
It also feels like the comedy is on rations. Yes, itโs nostalgic with constant references to its small-screen counterpart, but it comes across like the producers were too busy trying to shoehorn as many elements of the TV series into the film, without concentrating on what Dadโs Army was all about โ laughs.
Nevertheless, there is plenty to enjoy despite a lack of giggles. The acting is, as said previously, remarkable with fans of the series and newcomers alike being able to enjoy the warm, typically British feeling these thespians bring to the film.
Overall, Dadโs Army is a decent, albeit slightly underwhelming, effort in bringing one of the most popular TV shows of all time to the big screen. Its talent and casting are undeniable and the filming style is very impressive, but a lack of attention to the plot and a comedy drought stop it short of achieving what it clearly set out to do.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/02/07/full-of-wasted-british-talent-dads-army-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Wedding Ringer (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Best reserved for the DVD shelf
The comedy genre is one which goes through many cycles. You can go for years with lacklustre efforts featuring big-name celebrities like Norbit and Johnny English: Reborn, but every so often something special comes along to remind you how funny films can be โ a la Bridesmaids or The Heat.
This yearโs first offering is The Wedding Ringer. Fronted by Kevin Hart and Josh Gad, it follows the story of a loner who is forced to hire a best man to ensure his upcoming wedding goes without a hitch. But will it have you in fits of laughter or running from the altar?
Jeremy Garelick directs a film that despite a few chuckles here and there and the odd laugh-out-loud moment never really manages to settle into a groove and as such it all feels a little, well vanilla.
Dough Harris (Gad) is a man with a secret, one so big he is unable to share it with his obnoxious fiancรฉe Gretchen โ the normally adorable Kaley Cuoco-Sweeting in an against type performance. He simply hasnโt got any friends and is forced to hire Jimmy Callahan (Hart) as his best man to make himself look less of a loser.
Naturally things donโt go quite to plan with a selection of mildly amusing set-pieces involving bachelor parties, dogs and dancing interspersed with genuinely touching scenes which look at self-worth and finding true love and friendship.
Unfortunately this is where things begin to unravel. A mixture of slapstick and more complex comedic elements are put into a film which isnโt quite sure which genre it is trying to be, outright comedy or romantic comedy drama.
Hart plays Jimmy well and Gad is good as the bumbling yet sweet Doug, but the former seems to be on autopilot for the majority of The Wedding Ringerโs 101 minute running time while the latter seems to be just going through the motions, exhibiting no real connection with the script.
Other characters including a selection of hired groomsmen and close family barely register as cardboard cut-outs, never mind major characters in a motion picture.
However, the real fun to be had here is in the more childish sequences with one involving a dog, and another featuring an extended danceringer-dancing sequence having the audience in fits of laughter, though again these moments are few and far between.
Ultimately then, The Wedding Ringer isnโt as disappointing as it could have been but falls short of the comedic standard that audiences now expect when paying the increasingly expensive price of a cinema ticket.
Despite some reasonably charming performances, a couple of stand-out scenes and a cracking soundtrack, The Wedding Ringer fits into a bracket reserved for comedy films which could have delivered so much, but in the end just didnโt go quite far enough and it leaves Bridesmaids at the top of the pile for wedding-themed hilarity.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/02/22/best-reserved-for-the-dvd-shelf-the-wedding-ringer-review/
This yearโs first offering is The Wedding Ringer. Fronted by Kevin Hart and Josh Gad, it follows the story of a loner who is forced to hire a best man to ensure his upcoming wedding goes without a hitch. But will it have you in fits of laughter or running from the altar?
Jeremy Garelick directs a film that despite a few chuckles here and there and the odd laugh-out-loud moment never really manages to settle into a groove and as such it all feels a little, well vanilla.
Dough Harris (Gad) is a man with a secret, one so big he is unable to share it with his obnoxious fiancรฉe Gretchen โ the normally adorable Kaley Cuoco-Sweeting in an against type performance. He simply hasnโt got any friends and is forced to hire Jimmy Callahan (Hart) as his best man to make himself look less of a loser.
Naturally things donโt go quite to plan with a selection of mildly amusing set-pieces involving bachelor parties, dogs and dancing interspersed with genuinely touching scenes which look at self-worth and finding true love and friendship.
Unfortunately this is where things begin to unravel. A mixture of slapstick and more complex comedic elements are put into a film which isnโt quite sure which genre it is trying to be, outright comedy or romantic comedy drama.
Hart plays Jimmy well and Gad is good as the bumbling yet sweet Doug, but the former seems to be on autopilot for the majority of The Wedding Ringerโs 101 minute running time while the latter seems to be just going through the motions, exhibiting no real connection with the script.
Other characters including a selection of hired groomsmen and close family barely register as cardboard cut-outs, never mind major characters in a motion picture.
However, the real fun to be had here is in the more childish sequences with one involving a dog, and another featuring an extended danceringer-dancing sequence having the audience in fits of laughter, though again these moments are few and far between.
Ultimately then, The Wedding Ringer isnโt as disappointing as it could have been but falls short of the comedic standard that audiences now expect when paying the increasingly expensive price of a cinema ticket.
Despite some reasonably charming performances, a couple of stand-out scenes and a cracking soundtrack, The Wedding Ringer fits into a bracket reserved for comedy films which could have delivered so much, but in the end just didnโt go quite far enough and it leaves Bridesmaids at the top of the pile for wedding-themed hilarity.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/02/22/best-reserved-for-the-dvd-shelf-the-wedding-ringer-review/