Search
Search results
Debbiereadsbook (1454 KP) rated Thicker Than Water (Redwater Demons #1) in Books
Jul 27, 2024
freaking loved this book!
Independent reviewer for GRR, I was gifted my copy of this book.
This book, right here, is what I love MOST about reviewing. I come across a blurb that I love the sound of, by an author that is new to me, and the book blows me away! I freaking LOVED this book!
Julian is a demon hunter. His latest job finds himself adopted by the demon he was sent to kill. But she's just a little girl, and he cannot. He then finds said toddler kidnapped from him, and a demon contacts him, to share custody! (I'm sorry, but that really did make me chuckle!) But as Cassius and JJ bond over Desi, pieces are being moved on the cheesboard, and it's not very clear who will come out on top.
Like I said, freaking loved this book!
I loved the jump straight in for JJ and Desi. I loved the gentle way we are told about this world and the people and demons in it. The world building is excellent, and I could keep up and follow what was being thrown at me at all times. Cass and JJ have redefined the SLOW BUILD! I love the gradual way the attraction builds between these two. It's slow and subtle, and one of them thinks/says something and its "say what now??" SOme funny moments, too.
It's violent in places. JJ bears the brunt of that but not all is on page. MUCH is implied. I liked that we don't get it all, but we get some clues as to how bad it really was.
While JJ and Cass have a slow build, when we get to the main event?? Totally fade to grey and I freaking LOVED THAT TOO!! I'm big enough to admit, I like my books on the steamy side, and I'm also big enough to admit that not all books nned to be explicit. I loved that this one was not.
Betrayal of the highest order is painful for JJ, but Cass comes to the rescue, in his true form. And I loved that there was no indication that demons in this world had another form! There is some indication who might be next, at the end of this one with a bit of the next book. Actually, it gives you the next TWO books, I hope!
This is a new to me author, at the start of a new series. Two questions I ask myself when I read new authors and starts of series: will I read more by this author?? And will I continue the series. My answers to both questions is a HELL FREAKING YES!!
I can't fault this, I really cannot.
5 full and oh-so shiny stars!
*same worded review will appear elsewhere
This book, right here, is what I love MOST about reviewing. I come across a blurb that I love the sound of, by an author that is new to me, and the book blows me away! I freaking LOVED this book!
Julian is a demon hunter. His latest job finds himself adopted by the demon he was sent to kill. But she's just a little girl, and he cannot. He then finds said toddler kidnapped from him, and a demon contacts him, to share custody! (I'm sorry, but that really did make me chuckle!) But as Cassius and JJ bond over Desi, pieces are being moved on the cheesboard, and it's not very clear who will come out on top.
Like I said, freaking loved this book!
I loved the jump straight in for JJ and Desi. I loved the gentle way we are told about this world and the people and demons in it. The world building is excellent, and I could keep up and follow what was being thrown at me at all times. Cass and JJ have redefined the SLOW BUILD! I love the gradual way the attraction builds between these two. It's slow and subtle, and one of them thinks/says something and its "say what now??" SOme funny moments, too.
It's violent in places. JJ bears the brunt of that but not all is on page. MUCH is implied. I liked that we don't get it all, but we get some clues as to how bad it really was.
While JJ and Cass have a slow build, when we get to the main event?? Totally fade to grey and I freaking LOVED THAT TOO!! I'm big enough to admit, I like my books on the steamy side, and I'm also big enough to admit that not all books nned to be explicit. I loved that this one was not.
Betrayal of the highest order is painful for JJ, but Cass comes to the rescue, in his true form. And I loved that there was no indication that demons in this world had another form! There is some indication who might be next, at the end of this one with a bit of the next book. Actually, it gives you the next TWO books, I hope!
This is a new to me author, at the start of a new series. Two questions I ask myself when I read new authors and starts of series: will I read more by this author?? And will I continue the series. My answers to both questions is a HELL FREAKING YES!!
I can't fault this, I really cannot.
5 full and oh-so shiny stars!
*same worded review will appear elsewhere
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated Fade to Black (Rojan Dizon, #1) in Books
Apr 27, 2018
Imagine a combination of 1984, The Hunger Games, and a James Patterson mystery novel. That is the best way I can sum up Fade to Black. A world so intriguing, mysterious, and exciting that you want to live in it, and yet then again, maybe you don’t. A plot that never stops moving and throwing stuff at you, and with every page you become more and more wrapped up in it. Characters that you want to be, or be friends with, or take a good swing at. I am so excited about this novel, guys. I can’t recommend it enough.
First, the characters/narrator. I love Jake. I love Pacha. I love Rojan. I love them all. I love the way they talk to each other (or don’t talk to each other) and argue with each other. And the narrator, Rojan, is awesome. There are three things that makes Rojan a fantastic character, and a new favorite of mine.
First, he’s different. He’s not the “guy who wants to be a hero,” or the “I want to prove myself” or “I’m looking for my one-true-love” kind of guy. No, Rojan just wants to finish his damn job and get on with his damn life. He doesn’t want to be a hero or a villain: he just wants to get paid, go home, and find a new girl to chase. He’s the reluctant hero.
Second, the word “loyal” is not in Rojan’s repertoire. He specifically admits to enjoying the chase more than the catch, and for some reason, that’s really attractive! And of course, the girl he falls for is so perfect for him that it’s not even funny… in fact, if she’d come to terms with the idea, he might actually manage not to cheat on her. At the very end after he’s managed to kill the bad guys, save the planet, and rescue the girl, the only thing he was focused on was getting into the nurses pants.
Third, his personality is just fantastic. He’s such a pessimist, and admits to being a cynic. He makes the most absurdly snarky comments about everything, to the point that even in a tense scene there’s comic relief because he’s such a clever bastard (as a matter of fact, I think he actually calls himself that at least once).
The ending was wonderful, and left me feeling satisfied and complete, even though I can’t wait for the next book: not because it had a cliff-hanger, but because it was just so good!
Only thing I hate: It’s book 1 in a 3-book series, and the other two aren’t published… This happened to me while reading Daughter of Smoke and Bone, and The Better Part of Darkness. Gah! So annoying!
Content/Recommendation: Language and violence and dark humor. Mention of rape and sex. This is an adult book, maybe older teens, ages 18+. It’s totally worth the read. It’s also hilarious.
First, the characters/narrator. I love Jake. I love Pacha. I love Rojan. I love them all. I love the way they talk to each other (or don’t talk to each other) and argue with each other. And the narrator, Rojan, is awesome. There are three things that makes Rojan a fantastic character, and a new favorite of mine.
First, he’s different. He’s not the “guy who wants to be a hero,” or the “I want to prove myself” or “I’m looking for my one-true-love” kind of guy. No, Rojan just wants to finish his damn job and get on with his damn life. He doesn’t want to be a hero or a villain: he just wants to get paid, go home, and find a new girl to chase. He’s the reluctant hero.
Second, the word “loyal” is not in Rojan’s repertoire. He specifically admits to enjoying the chase more than the catch, and for some reason, that’s really attractive! And of course, the girl he falls for is so perfect for him that it’s not even funny… in fact, if she’d come to terms with the idea, he might actually manage not to cheat on her. At the very end after he’s managed to kill the bad guys, save the planet, and rescue the girl, the only thing he was focused on was getting into the nurses pants.
Third, his personality is just fantastic. He’s such a pessimist, and admits to being a cynic. He makes the most absurdly snarky comments about everything, to the point that even in a tense scene there’s comic relief because he’s such a clever bastard (as a matter of fact, I think he actually calls himself that at least once).
The ending was wonderful, and left me feeling satisfied and complete, even though I can’t wait for the next book: not because it had a cliff-hanger, but because it was just so good!
Only thing I hate: It’s book 1 in a 3-book series, and the other two aren’t published… This happened to me while reading Daughter of Smoke and Bone, and The Better Part of Darkness. Gah! So annoying!
Content/Recommendation: Language and violence and dark humor. Mention of rape and sex. This is an adult book, maybe older teens, ages 18+. It’s totally worth the read. It’s also hilarious.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Us (2019) in Movies
Mar 25, 2019
Jordan Peele does it again
2 years ago at this time, the comedian known as Jordan Peele was all the talk as his feature film Directorial debut, GET OUT was scaring mainstream audiences. This was quite the accomplishment for a first time African-American Director with a film that was, predominantly, cast with African American actors.
Director/Writer Peele is at it again with the horror film (predominantly filled with African-American actors )US - and audiences, I'm sure, are going to go back in to the theater hoping that they will get scared again. And they will, but they will also get something else - a truly unique film.
I see a lot of movies, so for me to be (1) scared and (2) completely surprised by what is going on in a film is a rarity, indeed. And Jordan Peele has done both of these things with US - he has scared and surprised me, and I mean this in a a good way.
US stars Lupito Nyong'o as Adelaide Wilson, a young mother who had a traumatic experience at the beach as a child. Now, as 30-ish mother of two who is visiting that same beach with her husband and 2 children, the traumatic experience comes rushing back. To tell anymore of the story would be to spoil it and to spoil this film for anyone would be a shame, for the fun in this film is trying to figure out what will happen next. Even when you think you know what's going to happen, something else happens instead and you are kept guessing throughout the film.
As far as the acting goes, Nyong'o shows that she can carry a film. I was beginning to fear that she would be one of those former Oscar winners (for 12 YEARS A SLAVE) who fade into obscurity, but this film puts her right back - front and center - on the map, a map that she deserves to be on. She carries this film - and she carries it well. Winston Duke (M'Baku in BLACK PANTHER) ably plays her husband, but is reserved (for the most part) as needed comic relief. I am always concerned when a heavy part of a film falls into the hands of unknown child actors, but Evan Alex (as their son) and - especially - Shahadi Wright Joseph (as their daughter) pull off the acting they need to do.
Credit for all this falls on Jordan Peele who's direction and script shows that GET OUT was no fluke. As I said before, this is a truly ORIGINAL film in plot and content and Peele keeps the action moving forward in interesting ways.
This is a film that needs to be seen more than once. I, for one, can't wait to go back into the theater and check out US again.
Letter Grade A- (but it might move to an A after a 2nd viewing)
8 out of 10 stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Director/Writer Peele is at it again with the horror film (predominantly filled with African-American actors )US - and audiences, I'm sure, are going to go back in to the theater hoping that they will get scared again. And they will, but they will also get something else - a truly unique film.
I see a lot of movies, so for me to be (1) scared and (2) completely surprised by what is going on in a film is a rarity, indeed. And Jordan Peele has done both of these things with US - he has scared and surprised me, and I mean this in a a good way.
US stars Lupito Nyong'o as Adelaide Wilson, a young mother who had a traumatic experience at the beach as a child. Now, as 30-ish mother of two who is visiting that same beach with her husband and 2 children, the traumatic experience comes rushing back. To tell anymore of the story would be to spoil it and to spoil this film for anyone would be a shame, for the fun in this film is trying to figure out what will happen next. Even when you think you know what's going to happen, something else happens instead and you are kept guessing throughout the film.
As far as the acting goes, Nyong'o shows that she can carry a film. I was beginning to fear that she would be one of those former Oscar winners (for 12 YEARS A SLAVE) who fade into obscurity, but this film puts her right back - front and center - on the map, a map that she deserves to be on. She carries this film - and she carries it well. Winston Duke (M'Baku in BLACK PANTHER) ably plays her husband, but is reserved (for the most part) as needed comic relief. I am always concerned when a heavy part of a film falls into the hands of unknown child actors, but Evan Alex (as their son) and - especially - Shahadi Wright Joseph (as their daughter) pull off the acting they need to do.
Credit for all this falls on Jordan Peele who's direction and script shows that GET OUT was no fluke. As I said before, this is a truly ORIGINAL film in plot and content and Peele keeps the action moving forward in interesting ways.
This is a film that needs to be seen more than once. I, for one, can't wait to go back into the theater and check out US again.
Letter Grade A- (but it might move to an A after a 2nd viewing)
8 out of 10 stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated The Wrong Stars in Books
Aug 26, 2018 (Updated Aug 26, 2018)
Diversity (2 more)
World-building
Amazing alien species
I've watched my fair share of Space Opera (Firefly, Dark Matter, Farscape, Star Trek, Star Wars - don't try to tell me those last two aren't Space Opera, THEY TOTALLY ARE) - but I haven't read much of it. I picked up The Wrong Stars mostly because reviews said it had a demisexual main character, rather than because it's a Space Opera. Regardless, I am SO GLAD I DID. The book is excellent.
First off, the diversity! Over the course of the story, we meet people who are, in no particular order, gay, bisexual, demisexual, asexual, transgender, and non-binary. The story is set 500 years after Earth sends out its first colony ships, and in that time, culture has evolved. Marriage is not common, but contractually-bound relationships exist. Promiscuity and non-monogamy aren't viewed any different than monogamy, and in the same way, the distinctions between gay, straight, and bi don't carry any negative connotations. It's not a complete utopia - it's still a capitalist society, and there is still scarcity - but socially, at least, it has definitely evolved a lot from the present!
Elena, one of our main characters, was a biologist sent out on one of the first colony ships. Stocked with seeds, crude replicators, and cryo-sleep pods, a small crew was sent out, in stasis, on a five-hundred year journey to a system with probable life-supporting planets. They were called Goldilocks ships, in the hope they'd find a planet that was "just right." What humanity didn't expect was that in the intervening five hundred years, they would make contact with an alien species and be given the means for true space travel via wormholes. Some of the ships arrived at their destinations to find human colonies already thriving on their target planets! Elena, however, found something quite different, and it's a very disconcerting difference. She is rescued by the motley crew of the White Raven, and they quickly get drawn into the mystery.
I really enjoyed the world-building and characterization in The Wrong Stars. The science of it made sense to me, but I'm not very versed in science, so I can't really say how realistic it is. It was at least pretty internally consistent. I'd like to learn more about how the AIs are created, though. Luckily, there is a sequel coming! The Dreaming Stars should be coming out this September, and I'm DEFINITELY going to read it.
If you like Dark Matter, Firefly, or Farscape, you should definitely read The Wrong Stars. There's a little bit of light romance threaded into the larger plot, and one fade-to-black sex scene. It's definitely not the focus of the book. There is some violence, but nothing incredibly graphic. I would put it at about the same maturity level as Star Trek.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.com
First off, the diversity! Over the course of the story, we meet people who are, in no particular order, gay, bisexual, demisexual, asexual, transgender, and non-binary. The story is set 500 years after Earth sends out its first colony ships, and in that time, culture has evolved. Marriage is not common, but contractually-bound relationships exist. Promiscuity and non-monogamy aren't viewed any different than monogamy, and in the same way, the distinctions between gay, straight, and bi don't carry any negative connotations. It's not a complete utopia - it's still a capitalist society, and there is still scarcity - but socially, at least, it has definitely evolved a lot from the present!
Elena, one of our main characters, was a biologist sent out on one of the first colony ships. Stocked with seeds, crude replicators, and cryo-sleep pods, a small crew was sent out, in stasis, on a five-hundred year journey to a system with probable life-supporting planets. They were called Goldilocks ships, in the hope they'd find a planet that was "just right." What humanity didn't expect was that in the intervening five hundred years, they would make contact with an alien species and be given the means for true space travel via wormholes. Some of the ships arrived at their destinations to find human colonies already thriving on their target planets! Elena, however, found something quite different, and it's a very disconcerting difference. She is rescued by the motley crew of the White Raven, and they quickly get drawn into the mystery.
I really enjoyed the world-building and characterization in The Wrong Stars. The science of it made sense to me, but I'm not very versed in science, so I can't really say how realistic it is. It was at least pretty internally consistent. I'd like to learn more about how the AIs are created, though. Luckily, there is a sequel coming! The Dreaming Stars should be coming out this September, and I'm DEFINITELY going to read it.
If you like Dark Matter, Firefly, or Farscape, you should definitely read The Wrong Stars. There's a little bit of light romance threaded into the larger plot, and one fade-to-black sex scene. It's definitely not the focus of the book. There is some violence, but nothing incredibly graphic. I would put it at about the same maturity level as Star Trek.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.com
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Transformers: The Last Knight (2017) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Director Michael Bay is back with “Transformers” The Last Knight”, and even before the Paramount logo could fade; Bay’s trademark fire and explosions light up the screen. This is a big indication of what is to come as from the start we are bombarded with fire, explosions, and lots of slow motion shots of people being thrown about.
The film stars Mark Wahlberg as Cade Yeager who continues to try to help the Autobots despite being declared illegal for their destructive war with the Decepticons which has left a path of human death and destruction in its wake.
While Cade runs afoul of the government, he reluctantly helps those in need including a young girl named Izabella (Isabela Moner), who also has a soft spot for the kind Autobots.
The two warring factions are in a race to find a mythical object that they believe will restore they damaged home world but of course, will lay waste to the Earth in the process. One would say ok with this storyline we have enough to work with. Unfortunately the film keeps cramming in plot points and subplots that do not really go anywhere. We are introduced to characters that appear important and then vanish for most of the film without contributing much of any significance. The audience is also bombarded with a barrage of chases, action sequences and of course; fiery explosions after another but without anything in the form of suspense or excitement.
Sir Anthony Hopkins appears and for a few moments I had hopes that the film would start to be more coherent and gain some focus, but thanks to his erratic and annoying character and even more annoying robotic butler, the film almost becomes unwatchable. It was like watching a two-plus hour FX reel for people with short attention spans. The dialogue is groan inducing even for an action film and it seems as if every character can only say Sh*t when they are frustrated or stressed.
I do not expect a great plot, acting, or writing for a film based on a popular toy series but we have seen much better examples in the prior films.
It seems that Bay is so content to simply let the very impressive visuals of the film carry the day and things such as a plot, character development, and a brisker run time simply got in the way of his desire to blow more things up and fill each shot with as many FX sequences as possible regardless of how annoying they were and if they were needed at all.
I am not a Michael Bay basher as has a solid track record of success and you know what you are getting with him. But if the franchise is to move forward, it will need an infusion of fresh ideas and creativity as this was borderline unwatchable at points. The fans and the franchise deserve much better than this effort.
http://sknr.net/2017/06/20/transformers-last-knight/
The film stars Mark Wahlberg as Cade Yeager who continues to try to help the Autobots despite being declared illegal for their destructive war with the Decepticons which has left a path of human death and destruction in its wake.
While Cade runs afoul of the government, he reluctantly helps those in need including a young girl named Izabella (Isabela Moner), who also has a soft spot for the kind Autobots.
The two warring factions are in a race to find a mythical object that they believe will restore they damaged home world but of course, will lay waste to the Earth in the process. One would say ok with this storyline we have enough to work with. Unfortunately the film keeps cramming in plot points and subplots that do not really go anywhere. We are introduced to characters that appear important and then vanish for most of the film without contributing much of any significance. The audience is also bombarded with a barrage of chases, action sequences and of course; fiery explosions after another but without anything in the form of suspense or excitement.
Sir Anthony Hopkins appears and for a few moments I had hopes that the film would start to be more coherent and gain some focus, but thanks to his erratic and annoying character and even more annoying robotic butler, the film almost becomes unwatchable. It was like watching a two-plus hour FX reel for people with short attention spans. The dialogue is groan inducing even for an action film and it seems as if every character can only say Sh*t when they are frustrated or stressed.
I do not expect a great plot, acting, or writing for a film based on a popular toy series but we have seen much better examples in the prior films.
It seems that Bay is so content to simply let the very impressive visuals of the film carry the day and things such as a plot, character development, and a brisker run time simply got in the way of his desire to blow more things up and fill each shot with as many FX sequences as possible regardless of how annoying they were and if they were needed at all.
I am not a Michael Bay basher as has a solid track record of success and you know what you are getting with him. But if the franchise is to move forward, it will need an infusion of fresh ideas and creativity as this was borderline unwatchable at points. The fans and the franchise deserve much better than this effort.
http://sknr.net/2017/06/20/transformers-last-knight/
Debbiereadsbook (1454 KP) rated The Deception (The Secret Tales #2) in Books
Jun 26, 2024
Patrick and Charlotte are perfect for each other!
Independent reviewer for Archaeolibrarian, I was gifted my copy of this book.
This is book 2 in The Secret Tales series, but can totally be read as a stand alone. I would say, as a personal point, that you will get a better understanding of the ladies of this time, and what they have to do to stay safe. It's also a stunning 5 star read, so you know, get to it!
I loved The Bond, and I loved this one too, for very different reasons!
The Bond is a slow burn, low steam book. Very much a fade to black book. And this one? Not so much! It's a tad steamier, but not explicit, at all. Patrick and Charlotte are perfect for each other, even if they were never meant to be. And I loved that difference about the two books, I really did.
I loved how Patrick deals with his injury: by not letting it get the better of him. Being confined to a wheelchair after a life at sea would be hard for anyone to deal with, but Patrick and his family set out to make his life easier, but not limiting. I gather from reading this, that injuries of this sort at that time were far more devastating than they are in this time. But once Patrick got his head round what HE needed, he got to it, and devised his new wheelchair, adapted his house to accomodate his chair. I love that his sister devised a new saddle for him to continue to ride his horse.
Lottie's forging her father's work is their only real stumbling block, but once Patrick knows WHY she does it, he understands, but makes sure Lottie knows it cannot continue once they are married. But that takes a nasty turn, and I really did not see that coming at me!
I had to giggle though, out loud! It was so funny, reading about what Lottie thought was going to happen on her wedding night. She really had no clue and it was Rose who educated her. Proper made me laugh! I loved that Rose and Rhys (since Rhys is Patrick's brother) play a huge part here, it was so lovely to catch up with them.
I wrote at the end of my review for The Bond that I thought one of Rose's sisters was the second book, but I cannot remember which one! However, Lottie is not one of Rose's sisters and one of LOTTIE'S sisters has the next book.
I love this group of ladies, and the men who fall for them and I really look forward to catching up with the supporting cast in future books, cos there are some interesting side characters!
Loved it, so it can only get:
5 full and shiny stars
*same worded review will appear elsewhere
This is book 2 in The Secret Tales series, but can totally be read as a stand alone. I would say, as a personal point, that you will get a better understanding of the ladies of this time, and what they have to do to stay safe. It's also a stunning 5 star read, so you know, get to it!
I loved The Bond, and I loved this one too, for very different reasons!
The Bond is a slow burn, low steam book. Very much a fade to black book. And this one? Not so much! It's a tad steamier, but not explicit, at all. Patrick and Charlotte are perfect for each other, even if they were never meant to be. And I loved that difference about the two books, I really did.
I loved how Patrick deals with his injury: by not letting it get the better of him. Being confined to a wheelchair after a life at sea would be hard for anyone to deal with, but Patrick and his family set out to make his life easier, but not limiting. I gather from reading this, that injuries of this sort at that time were far more devastating than they are in this time. But once Patrick got his head round what HE needed, he got to it, and devised his new wheelchair, adapted his house to accomodate his chair. I love that his sister devised a new saddle for him to continue to ride his horse.
Lottie's forging her father's work is their only real stumbling block, but once Patrick knows WHY she does it, he understands, but makes sure Lottie knows it cannot continue once they are married. But that takes a nasty turn, and I really did not see that coming at me!
I had to giggle though, out loud! It was so funny, reading about what Lottie thought was going to happen on her wedding night. She really had no clue and it was Rose who educated her. Proper made me laugh! I loved that Rose and Rhys (since Rhys is Patrick's brother) play a huge part here, it was so lovely to catch up with them.
I wrote at the end of my review for The Bond that I thought one of Rose's sisters was the second book, but I cannot remember which one! However, Lottie is not one of Rose's sisters and one of LOTTIE'S sisters has the next book.
I love this group of ladies, and the men who fall for them and I really look forward to catching up with the supporting cast in future books, cos there are some interesting side characters!
Loved it, so it can only get:
5 full and shiny stars
*same worded review will appear elsewhere
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Pieces of a Woman (2020) in Movies
Apr 16, 2021
Realistic view of Grieving
Films about grief are a tricky proposition, for while they can be cathartic and life-affirming, they can also be dour, depressing experiences that spiral downward under it’s own weight.
Fortunately, PIECES OF A WOMAN avoids wallowing in it’s own melancholy and gives the audience a thoughtful, heavy, exploration of grief and what grief does to a dysfunctional family.
Written by Kata Weber, who wrote this as a way to deal with her own grief, PIECES OF A WOMAN tells the tale of how a family deals with a tragedy when a home birth goes “horribly wrong” (not spoiling anything here, it’s in the marketing material).
I was fearful going into this film that we would be subjected to an intense, bloody butchery of a home birth, but Director Kornel Mundruczo and actors Vanessa Kirby, Shia LaBeouf and the always good Molly Parker gives us a loving, caring, intense and (ultimately) sad and tragic beginning to the film.
And then comes grief…and anger…and blame…and isolation.
Sitting squarely in the middle of all of this is Vanessa Kirby (Princess Margaret in the first 2 seasons of THE CROWN) in her Oscar Nominated turn as the birth mother in the middle of all of this. We follow her as she drifts in oblivion while those around her try to tell her what to do and how to feel. It is a haunted, holisitic, realistic portrayal of a person who just wants to fade into nothingness rather than feel the tragic loss.
Shia LaBeouf (TRANSFORMERS) proves, once again, that he can act as the husband/father. His character, Sean, is impotent to prevent the tragedy, care for his wife and deal with his own grief. He, too, creates a real character and the interplay between husband and wife are all too realistic.
The great, Oscar-winning Actress Ellen Burstyn (the mother in THE EXORCIST) is on board as the domineering mother of Kirby’s character who demands that someone pays for the death of the child. This is the type of showy-role that an aging, revered actress is normally Oscar nominated for and I am surprised she was not (especially because an added layer was added to her character that makes her, as well, realistic).
Credit for all of these performance has to go to Director Mundruczo for steering this ship away from maudlin and melodrama and squarely into the real world. It’s not a perfect Directing job as the film does tend to dwell on the grief and Kirby’s character does spend a good deal of time looking out the window while a solo piano plays single notes, but those are nits on an otherwise solid effort.
All-in-all I was pleasantly surprised at how moving - and real - this film is. You have to be in the mood for this movie (grief is not a happy subject) but you will be rewarded with a strong look at grief and it’s affects.
Letter Grade: A- (I could have used a few less moments of looking out the window to tinkling of the piano keys)
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
Fortunately, PIECES OF A WOMAN avoids wallowing in it’s own melancholy and gives the audience a thoughtful, heavy, exploration of grief and what grief does to a dysfunctional family.
Written by Kata Weber, who wrote this as a way to deal with her own grief, PIECES OF A WOMAN tells the tale of how a family deals with a tragedy when a home birth goes “horribly wrong” (not spoiling anything here, it’s in the marketing material).
I was fearful going into this film that we would be subjected to an intense, bloody butchery of a home birth, but Director Kornel Mundruczo and actors Vanessa Kirby, Shia LaBeouf and the always good Molly Parker gives us a loving, caring, intense and (ultimately) sad and tragic beginning to the film.
And then comes grief…and anger…and blame…and isolation.
Sitting squarely in the middle of all of this is Vanessa Kirby (Princess Margaret in the first 2 seasons of THE CROWN) in her Oscar Nominated turn as the birth mother in the middle of all of this. We follow her as she drifts in oblivion while those around her try to tell her what to do and how to feel. It is a haunted, holisitic, realistic portrayal of a person who just wants to fade into nothingness rather than feel the tragic loss.
Shia LaBeouf (TRANSFORMERS) proves, once again, that he can act as the husband/father. His character, Sean, is impotent to prevent the tragedy, care for his wife and deal with his own grief. He, too, creates a real character and the interplay between husband and wife are all too realistic.
The great, Oscar-winning Actress Ellen Burstyn (the mother in THE EXORCIST) is on board as the domineering mother of Kirby’s character who demands that someone pays for the death of the child. This is the type of showy-role that an aging, revered actress is normally Oscar nominated for and I am surprised she was not (especially because an added layer was added to her character that makes her, as well, realistic).
Credit for all of these performance has to go to Director Mundruczo for steering this ship away from maudlin and melodrama and squarely into the real world. It’s not a perfect Directing job as the film does tend to dwell on the grief and Kirby’s character does spend a good deal of time looking out the window while a solo piano plays single notes, but those are nits on an otherwise solid effort.
All-in-all I was pleasantly surprised at how moving - and real - this film is. You have to be in the mood for this movie (grief is not a happy subject) but you will be rewarded with a strong look at grief and it’s affects.
Letter Grade: A- (I could have used a few less moments of looking out the window to tinkling of the piano keys)
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Greatest Beer Run Ever (2022) in Movies
Oct 10, 2022
Touched Me In The End
The new Apple TV+ original film THE GREATEST BEER RUN EVER is being advertised as kind of a “wacky buddy comedy” with a bunch of New York slackers looking for beer in Viet Nam.
This advertisement is doing this film a great disservice for this movie is much, much more than that and deserves some attention - and eyeballs looking at it.
Starring Zach Efron (who has turned into an actor who is much, much more than Troy Bolton of HIGH SCHOOL MUSICAL fame) and directed by Peter Farrelly (one of the Farrelly brothers that brought you such comedies as THERE’S SOMETHING ABOUT MARY and KINGPIN), THE GREATEST BEER RUN EVER tells the tale of a New Yorker in the late 1960’s who is big on talk and little on action. To shut those around him up, Chickie Donohue (Efron) decides to bring his buddies that are fighting in Viet Nam some beer from home. What starts out as a lark, evolves into something much more serious…and meaningful…for both Chickie and the audience.
Efron is quite good in the central role as Chickie and this film needs his inherent charisma in the center of this film as he is in every scene. Efron exudes goodness and sincerity even though, at times, he his speaking out of the sides of his mouth - or a place much further down his anatomy. And, as his character learns more and more about what is really going on in the war in Vietnam, his bravado and bluster fade and we get a glimpse of the real person underneath who is horrified by what he sees in this war.
Russell Crowe - who is finding a career renaissance in Supporting Roles - is strong (naturally) as a war photographer who befriends Chickie and takes him under his wing while the myriad of young, unknown actors who play Chickie’s friends scattered across various theaters of action in Viet Nam are appropriately played as folks who think what Chickie is doing is hilarious to those who are horrified that Chickie would voluntarily enter this war zone.
The tone of the film shifts from fun and silly to deep and meaningful throughout it’s 2 hour, 6 minute run-time, all under the watchful eye of Farrelly. He really has a handle on the deeper war-torn aspects of this film, while he (purposefully, I would imagine) shies away from his expected comedy and zaniness that could have been the first part of this movie. IMHO, Farrelly could have imparted some more zaniness at the start - to give the film a better kickstart (the beginning is a little slow) while also more starkly contrasting the beginning and end of the film - and the change in Chickie because of this experience.
I was drawn in - and touched - by the latter part of this BEER RUN and would strongly encourage everyone to check out this fine film.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
This advertisement is doing this film a great disservice for this movie is much, much more than that and deserves some attention - and eyeballs looking at it.
Starring Zach Efron (who has turned into an actor who is much, much more than Troy Bolton of HIGH SCHOOL MUSICAL fame) and directed by Peter Farrelly (one of the Farrelly brothers that brought you such comedies as THERE’S SOMETHING ABOUT MARY and KINGPIN), THE GREATEST BEER RUN EVER tells the tale of a New Yorker in the late 1960’s who is big on talk and little on action. To shut those around him up, Chickie Donohue (Efron) decides to bring his buddies that are fighting in Viet Nam some beer from home. What starts out as a lark, evolves into something much more serious…and meaningful…for both Chickie and the audience.
Efron is quite good in the central role as Chickie and this film needs his inherent charisma in the center of this film as he is in every scene. Efron exudes goodness and sincerity even though, at times, he his speaking out of the sides of his mouth - or a place much further down his anatomy. And, as his character learns more and more about what is really going on in the war in Vietnam, his bravado and bluster fade and we get a glimpse of the real person underneath who is horrified by what he sees in this war.
Russell Crowe - who is finding a career renaissance in Supporting Roles - is strong (naturally) as a war photographer who befriends Chickie and takes him under his wing while the myriad of young, unknown actors who play Chickie’s friends scattered across various theaters of action in Viet Nam are appropriately played as folks who think what Chickie is doing is hilarious to those who are horrified that Chickie would voluntarily enter this war zone.
The tone of the film shifts from fun and silly to deep and meaningful throughout it’s 2 hour, 6 minute run-time, all under the watchful eye of Farrelly. He really has a handle on the deeper war-torn aspects of this film, while he (purposefully, I would imagine) shies away from his expected comedy and zaniness that could have been the first part of this movie. IMHO, Farrelly could have imparted some more zaniness at the start - to give the film a better kickstart (the beginning is a little slow) while also more starkly contrasting the beginning and end of the film - and the change in Chickie because of this experience.
I was drawn in - and touched - by the latter part of this BEER RUN and would strongly encourage everyone to check out this fine film.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Holdovers (2023) in Movies
Dec 31, 2023
Emotional Rich...and Real
The last time Paul Giamatti starred in an Alexander Payne film (2004’s SIDEWAYS), Payne won the Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay.
Reunited for THE HOLDOVERS, it might be time for Giamatti to win the Oscar.
THE HOLDOVERS tells a well-worn story of a cranky older guy, all-Male Prep School teacher Paul Hunham (Giamatti) who is forced to spend the Christmas holidays sometime in the early 1970’s with arrogant, intelligent, student, Angus Tully (Dominic Sessa). Will they learn to tolerate - and then respect - each other by the time school is back in session? Of course they are.
But it is the journey and not the destination that this film is about - and, boy, what a journey.
Director Payne (working off a screenplay by David Hemingson - WHISKEY CAVALIER) infuses his usual human style into the HOLDOVERS focusing on the characters and driving strong, emotional performances. Sometimes this works (SIDEWAYS, NEBRASKA), sometimes it doesn’t (DOWNSIZING) but in a Payne film it all depends on the strength of the script - and performances - in the film.
Payne was wise to turn over the central character of Paul “Walleye” Hunham to Giamatti who rides the line of curmudgeonly without becoming evil. From the start you can see some sort of humanity under the cranky surface of Paul and when the facade starts to fade away you see a real human being under there. It is, perhaps, the finest performance of Giamatti’s career and expect to see Giamatti’s name called come Oscar Nomination time.
Of course, Giamatti’s performance is only as good as the other actors that he is working against and in newcomer Sessa, Payne has given Giamatti a very good counterpoint indeed - especially since this is Sessa’s Major Motion Picture screen debut. He imbues Tulley with the requisite youthful arrogance but you can sense the vulnerability underneath from a young man who just wants to be accepted - and loved - for who he is.
A joyful surprise of this film is the work of Da’Vine Joy Randolph (ONLY MURDERS IN THE BUILDING) as the cafeteria worker (with a secret tragedy of her own) who volunteers to stay behind to cook for these two. She provides a welcome 3rd leg to this stool and counterbalances both Giamatti’s and Sessa’s performance in a strong - and real - way.
All of this, of course, is due to the fine direction of Payne and the smart, funny and emotionally rich script by Hemingson. They wisely set this piece in the early 1970’s - so there are no cell phones or Internet to draw these people away from each other. They are trapped with one another and must deal with each other in an emotionally satisfying manner.
One of the best films of 2023 (expect to see it in my Top 5 of the year), THE HOLDOVERS is the type of film that the Academy loves - so expect more than 1 Oscar nomination and, just maybe, an Oscar win for Giamatti.
All would be well deserved.
Letter Grade: A
9 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Reunited for THE HOLDOVERS, it might be time for Giamatti to win the Oscar.
THE HOLDOVERS tells a well-worn story of a cranky older guy, all-Male Prep School teacher Paul Hunham (Giamatti) who is forced to spend the Christmas holidays sometime in the early 1970’s with arrogant, intelligent, student, Angus Tully (Dominic Sessa). Will they learn to tolerate - and then respect - each other by the time school is back in session? Of course they are.
But it is the journey and not the destination that this film is about - and, boy, what a journey.
Director Payne (working off a screenplay by David Hemingson - WHISKEY CAVALIER) infuses his usual human style into the HOLDOVERS focusing on the characters and driving strong, emotional performances. Sometimes this works (SIDEWAYS, NEBRASKA), sometimes it doesn’t (DOWNSIZING) but in a Payne film it all depends on the strength of the script - and performances - in the film.
Payne was wise to turn over the central character of Paul “Walleye” Hunham to Giamatti who rides the line of curmudgeonly without becoming evil. From the start you can see some sort of humanity under the cranky surface of Paul and when the facade starts to fade away you see a real human being under there. It is, perhaps, the finest performance of Giamatti’s career and expect to see Giamatti’s name called come Oscar Nomination time.
Of course, Giamatti’s performance is only as good as the other actors that he is working against and in newcomer Sessa, Payne has given Giamatti a very good counterpoint indeed - especially since this is Sessa’s Major Motion Picture screen debut. He imbues Tulley with the requisite youthful arrogance but you can sense the vulnerability underneath from a young man who just wants to be accepted - and loved - for who he is.
A joyful surprise of this film is the work of Da’Vine Joy Randolph (ONLY MURDERS IN THE BUILDING) as the cafeteria worker (with a secret tragedy of her own) who volunteers to stay behind to cook for these two. She provides a welcome 3rd leg to this stool and counterbalances both Giamatti’s and Sessa’s performance in a strong - and real - way.
All of this, of course, is due to the fine direction of Payne and the smart, funny and emotionally rich script by Hemingson. They wisely set this piece in the early 1970’s - so there are no cell phones or Internet to draw these people away from each other. They are trapped with one another and must deal with each other in an emotionally satisfying manner.
One of the best films of 2023 (expect to see it in my Top 5 of the year), THE HOLDOVERS is the type of film that the Academy loves - so expect more than 1 Oscar nomination and, just maybe, an Oscar win for Giamatti.
All would be well deserved.
Letter Grade: A
9 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Dracula (English) (1931) in Movies
Mar 7, 2019
Where it all began...
Contains spoilers, click to show
The year was 1931: Two years after the success of The Jazz Singer and the final introduction of sound movies into the mainstream, sound was still revolutionising the industry. But in 1931, a bit like 3D now, there was still much confusion over to how make films, with directors, producers and actors alike, were still moving over from the suddenly dated silent era, with varying success.
Tod Browning was a man who would unfortunately find little success in the sound era, but not necessarily because he couldn't move with the times, but because his career was derailed a couple of years later by his disturbing horror pic, Freaks.
Dracula was shot THREE times. One, this one, was the conventional sound version that we all know. An other was shot at night and in Spanish for the benefit of that audience, which the studio supposedly preferred. This was quite common at this time, but little known nowadays. And the third was a straight forward silent version for the many theatres still un-equipped to handle sound.
But the styles of the silent era are all over this film. From the long silent reactions shots and the over acting, especially by Bela Lagosi in the titular role. This was also the adaptation of the stage adaptation of Bram Stoker's chiller, and was faithfully adapted from that source, hence the lack of more complex special effects, with bats on strings and fog machines, over more cinematic effects.
The transformation scenes for example, where the Count morphs from a bat to the undead human occur off-screen, rather than some form of cross fade etc. Is this a choice driven by lack of money? Lack of cinematic ambition of a choice to stick to the stage material? To be honest, I have too little knowledge or experience of Tod Browning's work to suggest a reason, but when all's said and done, it did work.
Let's be honest, this is 80 years old and is not the least bit scary and it is hard not to laugh, but in context, I'm sure it worked well at the time and the story is well conveyed. Lagosi's undead performance is hammy by today's standards but he was somewhat likable. He was very deliberate, slow and the silent era has certainly left its scars, as the subtly of sound performing was yet to take hold.
But this is the sort of film were silent melodramatic acting still worked. This is of course a piece Gothic Horror, the home of melodrama if ever there was one. This is surly a product of its time, both as the industry went through one of it's most dramatic changes, which ended so many careers as well a created so many new ones, but it's also, let's not forget, the first direct adaptation of Bram Stoker's book, besides the 1922 German version, Nosferatu, which changes a fair few details to try to get around the copyright, failing to do so mind, resulting in failed bid to have every copy of the film destroyed.
This is the film that ingrained the image of the Dracula that we know today into popular culture. This was were the Universal horror franchise began. For whatever faults it has by today's standards, it did something right.
Tod Browning was a man who would unfortunately find little success in the sound era, but not necessarily because he couldn't move with the times, but because his career was derailed a couple of years later by his disturbing horror pic, Freaks.
Dracula was shot THREE times. One, this one, was the conventional sound version that we all know. An other was shot at night and in Spanish for the benefit of that audience, which the studio supposedly preferred. This was quite common at this time, but little known nowadays. And the third was a straight forward silent version for the many theatres still un-equipped to handle sound.
But the styles of the silent era are all over this film. From the long silent reactions shots and the over acting, especially by Bela Lagosi in the titular role. This was also the adaptation of the stage adaptation of Bram Stoker's chiller, and was faithfully adapted from that source, hence the lack of more complex special effects, with bats on strings and fog machines, over more cinematic effects.
The transformation scenes for example, where the Count morphs from a bat to the undead human occur off-screen, rather than some form of cross fade etc. Is this a choice driven by lack of money? Lack of cinematic ambition of a choice to stick to the stage material? To be honest, I have too little knowledge or experience of Tod Browning's work to suggest a reason, but when all's said and done, it did work.
Let's be honest, this is 80 years old and is not the least bit scary and it is hard not to laugh, but in context, I'm sure it worked well at the time and the story is well conveyed. Lagosi's undead performance is hammy by today's standards but he was somewhat likable. He was very deliberate, slow and the silent era has certainly left its scars, as the subtly of sound performing was yet to take hold.
But this is the sort of film were silent melodramatic acting still worked. This is of course a piece Gothic Horror, the home of melodrama if ever there was one. This is surly a product of its time, both as the industry went through one of it's most dramatic changes, which ended so many careers as well a created so many new ones, but it's also, let's not forget, the first direct adaptation of Bram Stoker's book, besides the 1922 German version, Nosferatu, which changes a fair few details to try to get around the copyright, failing to do so mind, resulting in failed bid to have every copy of the film destroyed.
This is the film that ingrained the image of the Dracula that we know today into popular culture. This was were the Universal horror franchise began. For whatever faults it has by today's standards, it did something right.