Search
Search results
The Chocolate Lady (94 KP) rated The Other Windsor Girl: A Novel of Princess Margaret, Royal Rebel in Books
Oct 5, 2020
If you call me an Anglophile, I'll say "guilty as charged"! So if you're like me, you might be interested in this recently released novel about Princess Margaret, the troubled younger sister of Queen Elizabeth II. You can read my full book review here. http://tcl-bookreviews.com/2019/11/08/some-royalty-blues/
Lottie disney bookworm (1056 KP) rated Before the Crown in Books
Jun 14, 2020
Thank you to Netgalley and Flora Harding for giving me the opportunity to read an advanced copy of this novel in exchange for an honest review.
Before the Crown is a beautiful historical novel which delves deep into the romance between Princess Elizabeth and Prince Philip of Greece, perhaps better known as Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh.
However, this is not a traditional romance and Harding does not hold back in laying out all the struggles Elizabeth and Philip faced. From the King and Queen's disapproval of the match for their daughter to the effects of public opinion on the relationship, Flora Harding covers it all.
Nor does this novel present the engagement as all hearts and flowers. Despite Elizabeth being attracted to Philip from a young age, this is initially a one-sided crush and a political arrangement for the couple. However, due to Flora Harding presenting her novel from the perspective of both Elizabeth and Philip, the reader is able to experience first hand the doubts, worries, longing and evolution of this infamous relationship.
I will be honest it is hard not to envision the Netflix series when you read this novel but it is by no means a copy cat situation. Harding provides such interesting insights into Philip's lifestyle and his family that it is hard not to pity the sacrifices that he makes in order to be with Elizabeth.
In 'The Crown' young Philip was a bit of a dirt bag and, although Harding's Prince is no angel, he is clearly fighting an uphill battle against the aristocracy's view of him. It is difficult not to sympathise.
I would have liked an author's note to know how much of the story is fact and how much is fiction or speculation. However, given the privacy of the Royal Family I imagine any factual insights are rare.
In summary, 'Before the Crown' is a captivating read, exploring the sacrifices and struggles where we often blindly see prejudice, all against the backdrop of WWII Europe.
Before the Crown is a beautiful historical novel which delves deep into the romance between Princess Elizabeth and Prince Philip of Greece, perhaps better known as Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh.
However, this is not a traditional romance and Harding does not hold back in laying out all the struggles Elizabeth and Philip faced. From the King and Queen's disapproval of the match for their daughter to the effects of public opinion on the relationship, Flora Harding covers it all.
Nor does this novel present the engagement as all hearts and flowers. Despite Elizabeth being attracted to Philip from a young age, this is initially a one-sided crush and a political arrangement for the couple. However, due to Flora Harding presenting her novel from the perspective of both Elizabeth and Philip, the reader is able to experience first hand the doubts, worries, longing and evolution of this infamous relationship.
I will be honest it is hard not to envision the Netflix series when you read this novel but it is by no means a copy cat situation. Harding provides such interesting insights into Philip's lifestyle and his family that it is hard not to pity the sacrifices that he makes in order to be with Elizabeth.
In 'The Crown' young Philip was a bit of a dirt bag and, although Harding's Prince is no angel, he is clearly fighting an uphill battle against the aristocracy's view of him. It is difficult not to sympathise.
I would have liked an author's note to know how much of the story is fact and how much is fiction or speculation. However, given the privacy of the Royal Family I imagine any factual insights are rare.
In summary, 'Before the Crown' is a captivating read, exploring the sacrifices and struggles where we often blindly see prejudice, all against the backdrop of WWII Europe.
This is only a fairly short book with a limited focus, but nevertheless I found it very interesting. It's odd really, because opinion on the subject tends to be so polarised that it's easy to lose sight of a few simple facts and some of what Ashdown-Hill presents here should really be so obvious! For starters, for all the association of Bosworth with Richard III he didn't know it was going to happen and obviously didn't go in 'knowing' that he was going to be defeated - hindsight may be a great thing, but not if you want to look at historical events in context!
The Portuguese marriage proposals was something that I did know about, but here it's presented so logically it makes absolute sense. The chosen bride was a princes of Portugal, with a Spanish Infanta also in the playing as a reserve option. Both of these princesses were descended from the legitimate and senior branch of the House of Lancaster! Furthermore, it seems that a Portuguese marriage was also in the offing for Elizabeth of York. That being so, the letter supposedly written by her (reported by Buck, but now seemingly lost) makes more sense as does the confusion over Richard II wanting to marry Elizabeth, his niece, which never made any real sort of sense as, if we accept the truth of the Eleanor Butler pre-contract, then the children of Edward IV by Elizabeth Woodville were undoubtedly illegitimate, so there would be absolutely no point in Richard marrying her. On the other hand, Elizabeth and her sisters were the closest things available to Royal Princesses to be traded on the dynastic marriage market.
The Portuguese marriage proposals was something that I did know about, but here it's presented so logically it makes absolute sense. The chosen bride was a princes of Portugal, with a Spanish Infanta also in the playing as a reserve option. Both of these princesses were descended from the legitimate and senior branch of the House of Lancaster! Furthermore, it seems that a Portuguese marriage was also in the offing for Elizabeth of York. That being so, the letter supposedly written by her (reported by Buck, but now seemingly lost) makes more sense as does the confusion over Richard II wanting to marry Elizabeth, his niece, which never made any real sort of sense as, if we accept the truth of the Eleanor Butler pre-contract, then the children of Edward IV by Elizabeth Woodville were undoubtedly illegitimate, so there would be absolutely no point in Richard marrying her. On the other hand, Elizabeth and her sisters were the closest things available to Royal Princesses to be traded on the dynastic marriage market.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Bad Teacher (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Recently jilted by the sugar daddy of her dreams apathetic schoolteacher Elizabeth Halsey (Cameron Diaz) must return to her day job. Just as Elizabeth has settled in to her listless career reality, a single and wealthy substitute teacher (Scott Delacorte played by Justin Timberlake) appears. Elizabeth must now prove that she is the best teacher in the school to win Delecorte’s attention and wallet. However her nemesis the overachieving and oddly bubbly educator, Amy Squirrel (Lucy Punch) also has eyes for the new faculty member.
Rounding out the eccentric cast of characters is the shy teacher Lynn Davies (Phyllis Smith), the lazy yet funny gym teacher Russell Gettis (Jason Segel), and the dolphin obsessed principal Wally Snur (John Michael Higgins). Further supporting the leads are a number of up and coming child-actors such as Kaitlyn Dever who plays know-it-all student Shasha Abernathy to crush obsessed sad sack Garrett Tiara (Matthew J. Evans).
Despite the strong cast, “Bad Teacher” will likely become associated with Cameron Diaz who uses her intense and direct comedic strength to shine in the nefarious role. Portrayed by Diaz, the character of Elizabeth comes across as wickedly manipulative yet manages to remain likeable.
But, “Bad Teacher” will not have you gasping for air between fits of laughter. The film has slow moments and a number of letdowns. Among the worst is the lackluster comical styling of Justin Timberlake as Scott Delacorte. While the role is critical to the film’s plot, the character is underdeveloped. Moreover Justin Timberlake does nothing for the part which is an unwelcome shock to audiences who associate his name with some of the funniest moments in recent “Saturday Night Live” history as well as his impressive performance in “The Social Network”.
Brimming with vulgar language and shockingly bold comedic scene choices “Bad Teacher” will surely offend bashful audiences. Still, the film is funnier than “There’s Something About Mary” and the recently disappointing “The Hangover: Part II”.
It is not a slam-dunk but “Bad Teacher” will give audiences some unexpected summer laughs, if they are prepared for the onslaught of vulgarity that this film hinges upon.
Rounding out the eccentric cast of characters is the shy teacher Lynn Davies (Phyllis Smith), the lazy yet funny gym teacher Russell Gettis (Jason Segel), and the dolphin obsessed principal Wally Snur (John Michael Higgins). Further supporting the leads are a number of up and coming child-actors such as Kaitlyn Dever who plays know-it-all student Shasha Abernathy to crush obsessed sad sack Garrett Tiara (Matthew J. Evans).
Despite the strong cast, “Bad Teacher” will likely become associated with Cameron Diaz who uses her intense and direct comedic strength to shine in the nefarious role. Portrayed by Diaz, the character of Elizabeth comes across as wickedly manipulative yet manages to remain likeable.
But, “Bad Teacher” will not have you gasping for air between fits of laughter. The film has slow moments and a number of letdowns. Among the worst is the lackluster comical styling of Justin Timberlake as Scott Delacorte. While the role is critical to the film’s plot, the character is underdeveloped. Moreover Justin Timberlake does nothing for the part which is an unwelcome shock to audiences who associate his name with some of the funniest moments in recent “Saturday Night Live” history as well as his impressive performance in “The Social Network”.
Brimming with vulgar language and shockingly bold comedic scene choices “Bad Teacher” will surely offend bashful audiences. Still, the film is funnier than “There’s Something About Mary” and the recently disappointing “The Hangover: Part II”.
It is not a slam-dunk but “Bad Teacher” will give audiences some unexpected summer laughs, if they are prepared for the onslaught of vulgarity that this film hinges upon.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Intruder (1989) in Movies
Feb 19, 2021
If you were to look up the definition of "underrated horror gem" then Intruder would be staring you in the face.
Brought to life by several members of the team behind Evil Dead II, it's no surprise that this movie is equally as fun as it is gory. It's cast of likable characters drive the film for the mostly bloodless first half, with final girl Elizabeth Cox being a stand out.
When things do get gory, Intruder doesn't fuck about. The kills inflicted upon the main cast are pretty damn creative, and incredibly realised by fantastic practical effects courtesy of Robert Kurtzman and Greg Nicotero. The scenes not set in the main supermarket hall have a low budget and dimly lit Evil Dead feel to them, and results in a genuinely nasty atmosphere when coupled with the more violent moments.
It's a shame that Intruder isn't as widely hailed as some of its better known slasher contemporaries, for all of the above reasons.
Brought to life by several members of the team behind Evil Dead II, it's no surprise that this movie is equally as fun as it is gory. It's cast of likable characters drive the film for the mostly bloodless first half, with final girl Elizabeth Cox being a stand out.
When things do get gory, Intruder doesn't fuck about. The kills inflicted upon the main cast are pretty damn creative, and incredibly realised by fantastic practical effects courtesy of Robert Kurtzman and Greg Nicotero. The scenes not set in the main supermarket hall have a low budget and dimly lit Evil Dead feel to them, and results in a genuinely nasty atmosphere when coupled with the more violent moments.
It's a shame that Intruder isn't as widely hailed as some of its better known slasher contemporaries, for all of the above reasons.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Darkest Hour (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
As the Nazi’s sweep through Europe at the beginning of World War II the British face the difficult issue of replacing their Prime Minister. The people and members of Parliament have become disenchanted with Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain (Ronald Pickup). They feel his lack of action lead to the rise of Hitler and the Nazis. He agrees to step down and has to name a replacement. While he would prefer to have his protégé, Foreign Secretary Viscount Halifax (Stephen Dillane), there is only one member of his party that all of Parliament will accept, Winston Churchill (Gary Oldman). King George VI (Ben Mendelsohn) is also opposed to the brash and opinionated Churchill. Bowing to the will of the opposition Churchill the King agrees to appoint him the next Prime Minister. Although he is thrilled at finally achieving his lifelong dream he has no delusions that he is facing extremely difficult times ahead. The Nazis are tearing through Europe. They have already taken Belgium and Holland they now are invading France. The Nazis have also managed to surround nearly the entire British ground force on the French beaches with no way home. Not only does he have to worry about foreign foes but also his numerous political enemies in his own party. Many oppose his brash and unpredictable nature, while others think of him as heavy drinker that is no more than an exceptional orator with little capacity to make hard decisions. He must overcome all of this to protect the English people and prepare them for the tough days ahead.
Winston Churchill is a very well know historically figure. He was known for his powerful speeches and bigger than life personality. This film takes a look at the early days of him being Prime Minister, during some of the most volatile days in the history of Europe. Not only does the story delve into the politics and struggles of Churchill to put forth his agenda in a hostile climate but also shows him at his most vulnerable. One example is after delivering his first radio address to the nation he walks home alone and to talk with and be reassured by his wife, Clementine Churchill (Kristin Scott Thomas), that his speech was good and people could hear him.
Gary Oldman is spectacular in his role as Chruchill. From the iconic speeches to the light moments with his family and personal secretary, Elizabeth Layton (Lily James), he puts forth a great performance. The supporting cast is great as well, highlighted by Mendelsohn, Scott Thomas and James. The flow of the film really worked, under direction of Joe Wright (Atonement, The Soloist, and Pan). The two hour and five minute run time felt shorter and the movie really moved along. There were some points that they showed some battle scenes, after all it is a World War II era film, which did feel like afterthoughts and didn’t really add anything to the movie. The tension of the moment was well done even without these scenes. Besides those scenes the movie was shot well and added to the overall feel of the movie.
This film will appeal to those who are fans of history, the World War II era specifically, and historical figures. It also is powerful and heartfelt. Really the performances of the cast are what really stuck with me and will be the reason that I watch it again.
Winston Churchill is a very well know historically figure. He was known for his powerful speeches and bigger than life personality. This film takes a look at the early days of him being Prime Minister, during some of the most volatile days in the history of Europe. Not only does the story delve into the politics and struggles of Churchill to put forth his agenda in a hostile climate but also shows him at his most vulnerable. One example is after delivering his first radio address to the nation he walks home alone and to talk with and be reassured by his wife, Clementine Churchill (Kristin Scott Thomas), that his speech was good and people could hear him.
Gary Oldman is spectacular in his role as Chruchill. From the iconic speeches to the light moments with his family and personal secretary, Elizabeth Layton (Lily James), he puts forth a great performance. The supporting cast is great as well, highlighted by Mendelsohn, Scott Thomas and James. The flow of the film really worked, under direction of Joe Wright (Atonement, The Soloist, and Pan). The two hour and five minute run time felt shorter and the movie really moved along. There were some points that they showed some battle scenes, after all it is a World War II era film, which did feel like afterthoughts and didn’t really add anything to the movie. The tension of the moment was well done even without these scenes. Besides those scenes the movie was shot well and added to the overall feel of the movie.
This film will appeal to those who are fans of history, the World War II era specifically, and historical figures. It also is powerful and heartfelt. Really the performances of the cast are what really stuck with me and will be the reason that I watch it again.
JT (287 KP) rated The Girl in the Spider's Web (2018) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
It would be a major change for any actress. But for Claire Foy, to go from the beauty and elegance of Elizabeth II in The Crown, to punked out gothic hacker in The Girl in the Spider’s Web takes some doing – and she adapts to it extremely well.
The film is based on the novel written by David Lagercrantz after original writer Stig Larsson’s death. It attempted to restart the series which had become very popular, especially with the original films starring Noomi Rapace. These were held in high regard and the decision to remake The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo was met with cautious scepticism.
But where David Fincher’s remake was dark and unnerving Fede Alvarez‘s Spider’s Web is stylish and explosive. Filled with gadgets and a variety of hacking abilities that wouldn’t look out of place within the world of James Bond or Mission Impossible, the film doesn’t provide enough sinister thrills. Instead, it pumps out several action set pieces, that while thoroughly entertaining, leave behind the trauma and shock value of Dragon Tattoo and subsequent originals.
Filled with gadgets and a variety of hacking abilities that wouldn’t look out of place within the world of James Bond or Mission Impossible
After an opening that provides plenty of back story surrounding Lisbeth’s childhood, we’re fast-forwarded into the high-tech world. Here a computer programme that can access virtually any nuclear codes in the world has been created by a now remorseful tech whiz (Stephen Merchant) who wants to help destroy it. With a number of people interested in the program, Lisbeth must go on the run and at the same time dig up her past in order to save the world.
This incarnation of Lisbeth Salander feels like a softer version compared with the portrayal by Rapace and 2011’s Rooney Mara. Yet the character is played with gusto by Foy who delivers her lines with a determined grittiness. The film’s plot while somewhat far fetched, is still an enjoyable ride.
The film is based on the novel written by David Lagercrantz after original writer Stig Larsson’s death. It attempted to restart the series which had become very popular, especially with the original films starring Noomi Rapace. These were held in high regard and the decision to remake The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo was met with cautious scepticism.
But where David Fincher’s remake was dark and unnerving Fede Alvarez‘s Spider’s Web is stylish and explosive. Filled with gadgets and a variety of hacking abilities that wouldn’t look out of place within the world of James Bond or Mission Impossible, the film doesn’t provide enough sinister thrills. Instead, it pumps out several action set pieces, that while thoroughly entertaining, leave behind the trauma and shock value of Dragon Tattoo and subsequent originals.
Filled with gadgets and a variety of hacking abilities that wouldn’t look out of place within the world of James Bond or Mission Impossible
After an opening that provides plenty of back story surrounding Lisbeth’s childhood, we’re fast-forwarded into the high-tech world. Here a computer programme that can access virtually any nuclear codes in the world has been created by a now remorseful tech whiz (Stephen Merchant) who wants to help destroy it. With a number of people interested in the program, Lisbeth must go on the run and at the same time dig up her past in order to save the world.
This incarnation of Lisbeth Salander feels like a softer version compared with the portrayal by Rapace and 2011’s Rooney Mara. Yet the character is played with gusto by Foy who delivers her lines with a determined grittiness. The film’s plot while somewhat far fetched, is still an enjoyable ride.
Felipe (17 KP) rated Chaplin (1992) in Movies
Dec 7, 2020
A modern tragedy meant to be one of the greats
Contains spoilers, click to show
Richard Attenborough delivers another masterpiece of cinematic biography and is a worthy successor to Ghandi. The structure of the film is told as a flashback while Charlie Chaplin is writing his autobiography with a fictional editor that does not exist. We see for the first time the flaws of who Chaplin is as a person and we see him confront his past in a way that is painful not unlike how it is painful when we relive moments in our lives we would rather choose to forget. However, the success of the film is how it strips the illusion of who Chaplin was and presents to us a person who is tragically flawed but who is unbale to appreciate his own genius. An example is when Chaplin's version of the invention of the Tramp is seen for what he imagined it to be an idealized moment in which the character is calling to him except for what it really was, We see the reality of the movies during this time; a hectic spur of the moment improvised invention drawn from real life. Yet we see Chaplin as the midwife to this new artform the movies and we see him develop it for what it is, the highest expression of art that stirs our imagination and makes us believe anything is possible. We even cry during Chaplin's moments of personal tragedy; the insanity and loss of his mother; repeated failed marriages; the death of his best friend, Douglas Fairbanks and finally his tragic and painful exile from America the only place he knew as home all taking place in the backdrop of the invention and evolution of cinema. However, I feel that in the end Chaplin is the one that comes out triumphant. In the last moments of the movie we see how Chaplin despairs that he feels that he has been forgotten and made irrelevant by the changing times; he feels that the weight of not only his age but the weight of the world on his shoulders and yet we see that everything he believes himself to be is completely wrong when Hollywood bestows on him the greatest honor which is not only the special Oscar but also a standing ovation. His final triumph is to be made a knight by Queen Elizabeth II, we are truly made to see that although flawed he is triumphant in the end.