Search
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)
Debbiereadsbook (1475 KP) rated Crushed Ice (Hockey Ever After #4) in Books
Feb 6, 2024
Russ fell for Liam, but hadn't been able to put a name to the feelings.
Independent reviewer for Archaeolibrarian, I was gifted my copy of this book.
This is book 4 in the Hockey Ever After series. I have only read book 1 and 2, and missed book 3. It's not necessary to read those books before this one. Dante and Gabe play a part here (from book 1) but neither Ryan and Nico (book 2) or Max and Grady (book 3) play a part except there is a wedding.
I really liked book 1 and I loved book 2. I can't say I loved this one, but I did, for the most part, enjoy this. It was great to catch up with Gabe and Dante!
Russ is already playing for the Caimans when Liam joins them. There is attraction, right from the start, but Russ is not fully out and Liam is his rookie. I loved how Liam set Russ off kilter. The one-liners from Baller made me chuckle. It gets the point across, that Russ fell for Liam but hadn't been able to put a name to the feelings.
It's on the sweeter side, and fairly low angst. There is an age gap, but not a massive one. It's emotional, though, in places, but I didn't get that sucker punch I got from book 2, Scoring Position. Steamy and smexy in palces, but fade to black in others and I did like that.
So, what didn't I like? There are detailed hockey match descriptions. I know, I KNOW this is a hockey romance, but books 1 and 2 didn't have the long descriptions of the matches like there are here. Or I don't think they did. I said in my review for book one, that I liked that book because there were not huge long descriptions of hockey matches. So, for ME, and I stress the ME, those matches that are here were too much for me. I'm a UK native, and ice hockey is not the massive sport it is on the North American continent.
Still, an enjoyable read, that was on a par with book one, but not book 2, which I gave the full 5 stars.
So, 4 very good stars
*same worded review will appear elsewhere
This is book 4 in the Hockey Ever After series. I have only read book 1 and 2, and missed book 3. It's not necessary to read those books before this one. Dante and Gabe play a part here (from book 1) but neither Ryan and Nico (book 2) or Max and Grady (book 3) play a part except there is a wedding.
I really liked book 1 and I loved book 2. I can't say I loved this one, but I did, for the most part, enjoy this. It was great to catch up with Gabe and Dante!
Russ is already playing for the Caimans when Liam joins them. There is attraction, right from the start, but Russ is not fully out and Liam is his rookie. I loved how Liam set Russ off kilter. The one-liners from Baller made me chuckle. It gets the point across, that Russ fell for Liam but hadn't been able to put a name to the feelings.
It's on the sweeter side, and fairly low angst. There is an age gap, but not a massive one. It's emotional, though, in places, but I didn't get that sucker punch I got from book 2, Scoring Position. Steamy and smexy in palces, but fade to black in others and I did like that.
So, what didn't I like? There are detailed hockey match descriptions. I know, I KNOW this is a hockey romance, but books 1 and 2 didn't have the long descriptions of the matches like there are here. Or I don't think they did. I said in my review for book one, that I liked that book because there were not huge long descriptions of hockey matches. So, for ME, and I stress the ME, those matches that are here were too much for me. I'm a UK native, and ice hockey is not the massive sport it is on the North American continent.
Still, an enjoyable read, that was on a par with book one, but not book 2, which I gave the full 5 stars.
So, 4 very good stars
*same worded review will appear elsewhere
Bubble level and Clinometer
Utilities and Productivity
App
In this the limited but therefore free version of Clinometer. It as all features but can not be...
Shift - Create Custom Filters with Textures, Gradients, and Blends
Photo & Video and Entertainment
App
Shift 2.0 allows you to create thousands of custom photo filters by combining textures, color...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Pixie (2020) in Movies
Nov 2, 2020
Olivia Cooke - utterly enchanting (1 more)
Just the right balance of black humour and Tarantino-esque violence
Once upon a Time in the West... of Ireland
You know sometimes when you see a trailer you think "oh yeah - this is a must see"! The trailer for "Pixie" (see below) was one such moment for me. A spaghetti western set in Sligo? With Alec Baldwin as a "deadly gangster priest"? Yes, yes, yes!
In a remote Irish church, two Irish priests and two "visiting Afghan Catholic priests" are gunned down by a couple of losers in animal masks - Fergus (Fra Fee) and Colin (Rory Fleck Byrne) - over a stash of MDMA worth a million Euros. This reignites a simmering gang war between the gangster families of Dermot O'Brien (Colm Meaney) and Father Hector McGrath (Alec Baldwin). Linking everything together is Pixie (Olivia Cooke), O'Brien's daughter, who has a magnetic effect on men. She is somehow subtly the woman controlling everything going on.
Drawn into the mayhem are hapless teens Frank (Ben Hardy) and Harland (Daryl McCormack) - both of who have the hots for Pixie - who embark on a wild and bloody road-trip around southern Ireland.
Key to your belief in the ridiculous story is that the character of Pixie has to have the beauty and charisma to utterly enslave the poor men she crosses paths with: taking a "Kalashnikov to their hearts" as drug dealer Daniel (Chris Walley) puts it. And Olivia Cooke - so good in "Ready Player One" - absolutely and completely nails the role. I'm utterly in love with her after this movie, and she's thirty years too young for me! There's a sparkle and a mischief behind her that reminded me strongly of a young Audrey Hepburn.
Supporting her really well are the "Harry and Ron" to Cooke's Hermione - Ben Hardy (Roger Taylor in "Bohemian Rhapsody") and Daryl McCormack. And the trio make a truly memorable "love triangle". A bedroom scene manages to be both quietly erotic and excruciatingly funny in equal measure.
The direction here is by Barnaby Thompson, who's better known as a producer with the only previous movie directing credits being the St Trinian's reboots in 2007/09. Here he manages to channel some of the quirky camera shots of the likes of Guy Ritchie and Matthew Vaughn and mix them with the black humour and comedic gore of Quentin Tarantino. The taciturn hit-man Seamus (Ned Dennehy) typifies the comedy on offer, using a Land Rover to drag a poor victim round in a figure of eight on a soggy moor to make him talk!
Where I think the movie wimps out a bit is in an ecclesiastical shoot-out finale. Vaughn's "Kingsman: The Secret Service" set the bar here for completely outrageous and out-there church-based violence. Here, the scene is both tame by comparison (not necessarily a bad thing!), but also highly predictable. Given this is supposed to be "a plan", none of it feels to be very well thought-through! As such, belief can only be suspended for so long.
The visuals and music are fab. The cinematography - by veteran John de Borman - makes the west Ireland coast look utterly glorious and the Irish tourist board must have been delighted. There are also some beautifully-framed shots: a boot-eye (US: trunk-eye) perspective is fabulous, and there's a gasp-inducing fade-back to Pixie's face following a flashback. And a shout-out too to the editing by Robbie Morrison, since some of the plot twists are delivered as expert surprises.
The music - by Gerry Diver and David Holmes - is also spectacularly good at propelling the action and maintaining the feel-good theme.
Where I did have issues was with the audio mix. I'm sure there were a bunch of clever one-liners buried in there, but the combination of the accents (and I've worked in Northern Ireland for 20 years and am "tuned in"!) and the sound quality meant I missed a number of them. I will need another watch with subtitles to catch them all.
Thanks to ANOTHER WRETCHED LOCKDOWN in the UK this was my last trip to the cinema for at least a month: I was one of only four viewers in the "Odeon" cinema for this showing. Because it's a great shame that so few people will get to see this (at least for a while), since its the sort of feelgood movie that we all need right now. Slick and utterly entertaining, I'll quietly predict that this one will gain a following as a mini-cult-classic when it gets to streaming services. Recommended.
(For the full graphical review, please check-out the bob the movie man review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/11/02/pixie-once-upon-a-time-in-the-west-of-ireland/. Thanks.)
In a remote Irish church, two Irish priests and two "visiting Afghan Catholic priests" are gunned down by a couple of losers in animal masks - Fergus (Fra Fee) and Colin (Rory Fleck Byrne) - over a stash of MDMA worth a million Euros. This reignites a simmering gang war between the gangster families of Dermot O'Brien (Colm Meaney) and Father Hector McGrath (Alec Baldwin). Linking everything together is Pixie (Olivia Cooke), O'Brien's daughter, who has a magnetic effect on men. She is somehow subtly the woman controlling everything going on.
Drawn into the mayhem are hapless teens Frank (Ben Hardy) and Harland (Daryl McCormack) - both of who have the hots for Pixie - who embark on a wild and bloody road-trip around southern Ireland.
Key to your belief in the ridiculous story is that the character of Pixie has to have the beauty and charisma to utterly enslave the poor men she crosses paths with: taking a "Kalashnikov to their hearts" as drug dealer Daniel (Chris Walley) puts it. And Olivia Cooke - so good in "Ready Player One" - absolutely and completely nails the role. I'm utterly in love with her after this movie, and she's thirty years too young for me! There's a sparkle and a mischief behind her that reminded me strongly of a young Audrey Hepburn.
Supporting her really well are the "Harry and Ron" to Cooke's Hermione - Ben Hardy (Roger Taylor in "Bohemian Rhapsody") and Daryl McCormack. And the trio make a truly memorable "love triangle". A bedroom scene manages to be both quietly erotic and excruciatingly funny in equal measure.
The direction here is by Barnaby Thompson, who's better known as a producer with the only previous movie directing credits being the St Trinian's reboots in 2007/09. Here he manages to channel some of the quirky camera shots of the likes of Guy Ritchie and Matthew Vaughn and mix them with the black humour and comedic gore of Quentin Tarantino. The taciturn hit-man Seamus (Ned Dennehy) typifies the comedy on offer, using a Land Rover to drag a poor victim round in a figure of eight on a soggy moor to make him talk!
Where I think the movie wimps out a bit is in an ecclesiastical shoot-out finale. Vaughn's "Kingsman: The Secret Service" set the bar here for completely outrageous and out-there church-based violence. Here, the scene is both tame by comparison (not necessarily a bad thing!), but also highly predictable. Given this is supposed to be "a plan", none of it feels to be very well thought-through! As such, belief can only be suspended for so long.
The visuals and music are fab. The cinematography - by veteran John de Borman - makes the west Ireland coast look utterly glorious and the Irish tourist board must have been delighted. There are also some beautifully-framed shots: a boot-eye (US: trunk-eye) perspective is fabulous, and there's a gasp-inducing fade-back to Pixie's face following a flashback. And a shout-out too to the editing by Robbie Morrison, since some of the plot twists are delivered as expert surprises.
The music - by Gerry Diver and David Holmes - is also spectacularly good at propelling the action and maintaining the feel-good theme.
Where I did have issues was with the audio mix. I'm sure there were a bunch of clever one-liners buried in there, but the combination of the accents (and I've worked in Northern Ireland for 20 years and am "tuned in"!) and the sound quality meant I missed a number of them. I will need another watch with subtitles to catch them all.
Thanks to ANOTHER WRETCHED LOCKDOWN in the UK this was my last trip to the cinema for at least a month: I was one of only four viewers in the "Odeon" cinema for this showing. Because it's a great shame that so few people will get to see this (at least for a while), since its the sort of feelgood movie that we all need right now. Slick and utterly entertaining, I'll quietly predict that this one will gain a following as a mini-cult-classic when it gets to streaming services. Recommended.
(For the full graphical review, please check-out the bob the movie man review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/11/02/pixie-once-upon-a-time-in-the-west-of-ireland/. Thanks.)
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
Tyler Fletcher (8 KP) rated Artemis Fowl (2020) in Movies
Jun 14, 2020
Character development (1 more)
Forgettable story
Another Live-Action Disney Adaption Bomb
Contains spoilers, click to show
What is it about fantasy novels that makes them so difficult to translate effectively to the silver screen? It’s not impossible – J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series and Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings adaptations are proof that it can be done. More often than not, however, the result is as limp and truncated as Kenneth Branagh’s Artemis Fowl – a few standout moments set adrift in a sea of underdeveloped characters, incomplete backstory elements, and abbreviated world building. Although the problem lies primarily in the difficulties associated with condensing an epic tale into a short-ish movie, the lack of elegance with which that is accomplished makes Artemis Fowl a failure for anyone hoping for the next great fantasy film.
The treatment accorded to Artemis Fowl (the movie condenses elements from the first two volumes of an eight-novel cycle into a single film) recalls a Disney misfire from more than three decades ago. Although The Black Cauldron was animated, it suffered from many of the same problems evident in Artemis Fowl: an oversimplification of the backstory, a rushed narrative with poorly realized characters, and a overall lack of faithfulness to the source material. The Black Cauldron worked better because it at least had a clean ending. Artemis Fowl suffers by trying to both provide a credible stopping point (in case there are no additional films) and offering a lead-in to additional adventures (in case there are additional films).
In the books, 12-year old Artemis (played by Ferdia Shaw, the grandson of Robert Shaw) is presented as an anti-hero (although, over the course of the saga, his villainous attributes fade to be replaced by heroic ones). Here, he’s more of a misunderstood boy-genius whose role as the protagonist is never in question. All of his edges have been smoothed out. The story focuses on Artemis’ efforts to locate and rescue his father, Artemis Fowl Sr. (Colin Farrell), an infamous art thief who has been kidnapped by the twisted evil fairy Opal Koboi. Her ransom for releasing him is that Artemis must locate and obtain a powerful McGuffin. He is joined in his efforts by Lower Elements Police (LEP) fairy police officer Holly Short (Lara McDonnell), giant dwarf Mulch Diggums (Josh Gad), and strongman Domovoi Butler (Nonso Anozie).
Artemis Fowl diverges considerably from the two books that form its basis, Artemis Fowl and Artemis Fowl and the Arctic Incident. Although author Eoin Colfer reportedly “approved” the changes, they push the film into an alternate universe from the one occupied by the novels. Even with the pruning of subplots and condensation of the narrative, 100 minutes is too short to tell the story effectively. None of the characters are well-developed, including Artemis. The boy’s relationship with Holly Short evolves with whiplash-inducing rapidity – one moment, they’re enemies (actually, she’s his prisoner), the next they’re friends. The film’s frenetic pace might work for ADD viewers and preteens but there’s no time for world-building or anything more than the most basic exposition. As a result, Artemis Fowl feels rushed to the point of being exhausting and strangely confusing despite the relatively straightforward storyline.
Kenneth Branagh was undoubtedly selected to direct the film based on his success with two earlier Disney properties: the live-action Cinderella and Marvel’s Thor. Perhaps because Branagh had no input into the screenplay (which was completed before he came on board), the movie lacks the complex psychological qualities he normally brings to his films. Visually, Artemis Fowl is impressive. However, although the fairy world of Haven is beautifully rendered, it appears all-too-briefly. The film’s most impressive sequence, a throwdown with a seemingly invincible troll, is a standout by any definition, but it represents only about five minutes of screen time and there’s nothing else that comes close – not even the muted climax.
As is often the case, Branagh’s presence at the top results in some impressive names in the cast. The young leads are newcomers – this is Ferdia Shaw’s first movie (and it shows – his performance is occasionally wooden) and Lara McDonnell’s third (she’s better, evidencing an indomitable pluckiness) – but the rest of the cast is populated with veterans. Josh Gad, another Disney regular, has the most openly comedic role of the film as Mulch Diggums. Colin Farrell is called on for limited duty as Artemis’ mostly-absent father. Nonso Anozie, who has a history with Branagh, plays Artemis’ protector and advisor. Finally, Judi Dench adds a dose of class as Holly’s no-nonsense boss.
It has taken Artemis Fowl nearly 20 years to traverse the route from page to screen and one senses that neither fans nor newcomers will be especially pleased with the end result. Recognizing that the film faced rough seas, Disney postponed the movie’s originally planned August 2019 release to May 2020 then, when the coronavirus made that impossible, the studio elected to shift the film to its Disney+ platform. Although partially a face-saving gesture (Artemis Fowl would likely have had a similar box office reception to Disney’s underwhelming 2018 release, The Nutcracker and the Four Realms), it at least allows the film to find a large audience in a low-pressure situation.
The bottom line seems to be that, while Disney has shown an aptitude for making many different kinds of movies, fantasy epics aren’t among them. This is one genre the Magic Kingdom should perhaps avoid, leaving such properties to studios that have shown better success (such as Warner Brothers). Artemis Fowl could have been the beginning of a movie franchise but, based on the first installment, it’s more likely a one-and-done outing. Disney can't quite get away from the John Carters can they?
THIS FILM IS AN EXCEPTIONAL BOMB
The treatment accorded to Artemis Fowl (the movie condenses elements from the first two volumes of an eight-novel cycle into a single film) recalls a Disney misfire from more than three decades ago. Although The Black Cauldron was animated, it suffered from many of the same problems evident in Artemis Fowl: an oversimplification of the backstory, a rushed narrative with poorly realized characters, and a overall lack of faithfulness to the source material. The Black Cauldron worked better because it at least had a clean ending. Artemis Fowl suffers by trying to both provide a credible stopping point (in case there are no additional films) and offering a lead-in to additional adventures (in case there are additional films).
In the books, 12-year old Artemis (played by Ferdia Shaw, the grandson of Robert Shaw) is presented as an anti-hero (although, over the course of the saga, his villainous attributes fade to be replaced by heroic ones). Here, he’s more of a misunderstood boy-genius whose role as the protagonist is never in question. All of his edges have been smoothed out. The story focuses on Artemis’ efforts to locate and rescue his father, Artemis Fowl Sr. (Colin Farrell), an infamous art thief who has been kidnapped by the twisted evil fairy Opal Koboi. Her ransom for releasing him is that Artemis must locate and obtain a powerful McGuffin. He is joined in his efforts by Lower Elements Police (LEP) fairy police officer Holly Short (Lara McDonnell), giant dwarf Mulch Diggums (Josh Gad), and strongman Domovoi Butler (Nonso Anozie).
Artemis Fowl diverges considerably from the two books that form its basis, Artemis Fowl and Artemis Fowl and the Arctic Incident. Although author Eoin Colfer reportedly “approved” the changes, they push the film into an alternate universe from the one occupied by the novels. Even with the pruning of subplots and condensation of the narrative, 100 minutes is too short to tell the story effectively. None of the characters are well-developed, including Artemis. The boy’s relationship with Holly Short evolves with whiplash-inducing rapidity – one moment, they’re enemies (actually, she’s his prisoner), the next they’re friends. The film’s frenetic pace might work for ADD viewers and preteens but there’s no time for world-building or anything more than the most basic exposition. As a result, Artemis Fowl feels rushed to the point of being exhausting and strangely confusing despite the relatively straightforward storyline.
Kenneth Branagh was undoubtedly selected to direct the film based on his success with two earlier Disney properties: the live-action Cinderella and Marvel’s Thor. Perhaps because Branagh had no input into the screenplay (which was completed before he came on board), the movie lacks the complex psychological qualities he normally brings to his films. Visually, Artemis Fowl is impressive. However, although the fairy world of Haven is beautifully rendered, it appears all-too-briefly. The film’s most impressive sequence, a throwdown with a seemingly invincible troll, is a standout by any definition, but it represents only about five minutes of screen time and there’s nothing else that comes close – not even the muted climax.
As is often the case, Branagh’s presence at the top results in some impressive names in the cast. The young leads are newcomers – this is Ferdia Shaw’s first movie (and it shows – his performance is occasionally wooden) and Lara McDonnell’s third (she’s better, evidencing an indomitable pluckiness) – but the rest of the cast is populated with veterans. Josh Gad, another Disney regular, has the most openly comedic role of the film as Mulch Diggums. Colin Farrell is called on for limited duty as Artemis’ mostly-absent father. Nonso Anozie, who has a history with Branagh, plays Artemis’ protector and advisor. Finally, Judi Dench adds a dose of class as Holly’s no-nonsense boss.
It has taken Artemis Fowl nearly 20 years to traverse the route from page to screen and one senses that neither fans nor newcomers will be especially pleased with the end result. Recognizing that the film faced rough seas, Disney postponed the movie’s originally planned August 2019 release to May 2020 then, when the coronavirus made that impossible, the studio elected to shift the film to its Disney+ platform. Although partially a face-saving gesture (Artemis Fowl would likely have had a similar box office reception to Disney’s underwhelming 2018 release, The Nutcracker and the Four Realms), it at least allows the film to find a large audience in a low-pressure situation.
The bottom line seems to be that, while Disney has shown an aptitude for making many different kinds of movies, fantasy epics aren’t among them. This is one genre the Magic Kingdom should perhaps avoid, leaving such properties to studios that have shown better success (such as Warner Brothers). Artemis Fowl could have been the beginning of a movie franchise but, based on the first installment, it’s more likely a one-and-done outing. Disney can't quite get away from the John Carters can they?
THIS FILM IS AN EXCEPTIONAL BOMB
Jessica - Where the Book Ends (15 KP) rated Take My Hand (Take My Hand, #1) in Books
Jan 30, 2019
This is my first experience with a book by Nicola Haken. The synopsis sounded promising and I have been looking for a new series to read, so I thought I would give this one a go.
This story is of two people trying to start their lives over after terrible events that occurred in each of their lives. They get thrown together and together they learn how to love...again.
The story is primarily set in London, so that's amazing! I'm obsessed with London and all things British, so I was SOOOOO excited for this book. I wanted to fall in LOVE with this book, and these characters, but at best I only fell in LIKE with this book. Sigh.
Dexter and Emily are great characters. They have the tormented past, the rocky relationship, and undying love for one another. Okay so it sounds like this book has everything a book needs. But still... I just couldn't fall in love, and let me tell you why.
1) Dexter is from the U.S.A. so when he moves to London, he clearly doesn't understand all of the lingo and slang that the English use. Which is fine. Emily used a lot of these slang words, "ginger minger" being an example of one, and so the narrator would pause and explain what each one meant. This was very helpful throughout the story. However, this is the part that bothers me. Throughout the story when Dex would have a chapter and be talking sometimes I would get confused and he started to sound like Emily to me. I felt like the two were blending together.
2) There were several times throughout this book I wanted to literally reach into my kindle and slap Emily. I understand she's never really been in a relationship before, and I understand she's socially awkward, but my god! It's like this girl is from another planet and she doesn't understand human interactions, AT ALL! She blushes at everything - even when it's not sexual, she doesn't know how to talk to people, and she doesn't know how to be in a relationship. If the guy is a alcoholic and throws stuff at the wall, and runs out on you every time he's scared. You drop him and run. It just didn't seem realistic at all.
He drank and ran out on her when she was in a strange country with a strange woman she'd never met, and he was just like, peace out. Then she had the nerve to feel sorry. He kept secrets from her and she had the nerve to scold herself for feeling that way. It just didn't feel real to me. I felt like she gave in to him too easily. Now, before you all comment like crazy about how I don't understand alcoholics and how I don't know how they operate and how I don't understand addiction, let me just tell you this... You're wrong. I understand, and I understand better than some. I was a teenage alcoholic. It ruined my life and it took me YEARS to get it back together. SO I GET IT.
3) Now that all that's out of the way on to the next. I didn't like that Emily was so clearly afraid to say SEX or PENIS, or VAGINA. If you can't say it or talk about it, you shouldn't be doing it. She really needed to grow up. I understand that some people just don't feel comfortable talking about it, but at some point you need to draw a line. Emily was just a little too chaste for my preference and I think the description of the sex scenes from Emily's perspective were out of place for this very reason. The chapters where she was the narrator, she shouldn't have been comfortable describing what was going down. I feel like the scene should have been set up and then a fade to black would have been more appropriate.
4) Lastly, Rachel... UHHHH MOST ANNOYING CHARACTER EVER!! At first I thought she was badass! Here you have this girl who has lived her life in a wheelchair and has had to compensate for it by being independent, coloring her hair funky colors, and getting tattoos. Awesome! Right... WRONG. She then opened her mouth. OMG! She's not independent and trying to stand out, she's just down right offensive, and she didn't seem to fit at all in this story.
I know by now you're probably thinking "Why did you give this book three stars if you clearly hated it." Right? Well, I didn't hate it, at all. I liked it, it evoked emotion, it made me think and it made me feel. Those things are SOOO important when writing a book. This author has some definite promise, and I know there are a couple more books in this series. I will probably read them since this book ended on a cliffhanger (which was awesome, btw). I want to know what happens to these characters, and I'm hoping they both grow up a bit in the upcoming books.
My one last thing I'd like to point out is the editing. Now, I don't know if I got a pre-edited copy or if I got the final draft. So, I'm not considering the editing in my rating, because I can't be certain. I do feel that this book needs some serious proofreading, but again it may not be that way in a purchased copy so again don't hold that minor detail against the author, because no one is perfect.
I will definitely read other books by this author. She has a great writing style, her story flows very nicely, there aren't any dull moments, and her story is one that tears at the heartstrings. I in no way mean this review to sound as if I'm attacking her, when in fact its the complete opposite. I commend her for writing this book, and I think she did it well. Plus, the most important thing EVER, her writing made me think and feel which is what good writing should do. So, I implore you to give this book a chance don't let my feelings and observations deter you from reading a book with great potential that you may absolutely love!
This story is of two people trying to start their lives over after terrible events that occurred in each of their lives. They get thrown together and together they learn how to love...again.
The story is primarily set in London, so that's amazing! I'm obsessed with London and all things British, so I was SOOOOO excited for this book. I wanted to fall in LOVE with this book, and these characters, but at best I only fell in LIKE with this book. Sigh.
Dexter and Emily are great characters. They have the tormented past, the rocky relationship, and undying love for one another. Okay so it sounds like this book has everything a book needs. But still... I just couldn't fall in love, and let me tell you why.
1) Dexter is from the U.S.A. so when he moves to London, he clearly doesn't understand all of the lingo and slang that the English use. Which is fine. Emily used a lot of these slang words, "ginger minger" being an example of one, and so the narrator would pause and explain what each one meant. This was very helpful throughout the story. However, this is the part that bothers me. Throughout the story when Dex would have a chapter and be talking sometimes I would get confused and he started to sound like Emily to me. I felt like the two were blending together.
2) There were several times throughout this book I wanted to literally reach into my kindle and slap Emily. I understand she's never really been in a relationship before, and I understand she's socially awkward, but my god! It's like this girl is from another planet and she doesn't understand human interactions, AT ALL! She blushes at everything - even when it's not sexual, she doesn't know how to talk to people, and she doesn't know how to be in a relationship. If the guy is a alcoholic and throws stuff at the wall, and runs out on you every time he's scared. You drop him and run. It just didn't seem realistic at all.
He drank and ran out on her when she was in a strange country with a strange woman she'd never met, and he was just like, peace out. Then she had the nerve to feel sorry. He kept secrets from her and she had the nerve to scold herself for feeling that way. It just didn't feel real to me. I felt like she gave in to him too easily. Now, before you all comment like crazy about how I don't understand alcoholics and how I don't know how they operate and how I don't understand addiction, let me just tell you this... You're wrong. I understand, and I understand better than some. I was a teenage alcoholic. It ruined my life and it took me YEARS to get it back together. SO I GET IT.
3) Now that all that's out of the way on to the next. I didn't like that Emily was so clearly afraid to say SEX or PENIS, or VAGINA. If you can't say it or talk about it, you shouldn't be doing it. She really needed to grow up. I understand that some people just don't feel comfortable talking about it, but at some point you need to draw a line. Emily was just a little too chaste for my preference and I think the description of the sex scenes from Emily's perspective were out of place for this very reason. The chapters where she was the narrator, she shouldn't have been comfortable describing what was going down. I feel like the scene should have been set up and then a fade to black would have been more appropriate.
4) Lastly, Rachel... UHHHH MOST ANNOYING CHARACTER EVER!! At first I thought she was badass! Here you have this girl who has lived her life in a wheelchair and has had to compensate for it by being independent, coloring her hair funky colors, and getting tattoos. Awesome! Right... WRONG. She then opened her mouth. OMG! She's not independent and trying to stand out, she's just down right offensive, and she didn't seem to fit at all in this story.
I know by now you're probably thinking "Why did you give this book three stars if you clearly hated it." Right? Well, I didn't hate it, at all. I liked it, it evoked emotion, it made me think and it made me feel. Those things are SOOO important when writing a book. This author has some definite promise, and I know there are a couple more books in this series. I will probably read them since this book ended on a cliffhanger (which was awesome, btw). I want to know what happens to these characters, and I'm hoping they both grow up a bit in the upcoming books.
My one last thing I'd like to point out is the editing. Now, I don't know if I got a pre-edited copy or if I got the final draft. So, I'm not considering the editing in my rating, because I can't be certain. I do feel that this book needs some serious proofreading, but again it may not be that way in a purchased copy so again don't hold that minor detail against the author, because no one is perfect.
I will definitely read other books by this author. She has a great writing style, her story flows very nicely, there aren't any dull moments, and her story is one that tears at the heartstrings. I in no way mean this review to sound as if I'm attacking her, when in fact its the complete opposite. I commend her for writing this book, and I think she did it well. Plus, the most important thing EVER, her writing made me think and feel which is what good writing should do. So, I implore you to give this book a chance don't let my feelings and observations deter you from reading a book with great potential that you may absolutely love!