Search
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated The Chaos of Stars in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<i>The Chaos of Stars</i> may have landed as the weirdest mythology book I've ever read.
It's different from other mythology books, as Isadora, being the daughter of Egyptian gods, is actually a human and not a goddess or demigoddess. But the whole Egyptian family history Isadora had was just really, really weird. There's incest here, incest there, incest, well, everywhere – all smushed in together with Isis' "fabulousness" throughout history. Huzzah.
It's also a smidge different from White's <i>Paranormalcy</i> series (not that I read the entire series), which I really couldn't help but compare <i>The Chaos of Stars</i> to.
Early on in the book, it's obvious Isadora has an extreme passion for art like Evie did, particularly in interior designing. There were just moments in the book that she jabbers on and on about how she would improve a room in her brother Sirus's house or the museum that I had a tendency to just skip the parts where she talked about interior designing. Like I mentioned earlier, it's obvious from reading those parts that Isadora is extremely passionate about art and interior designing, but my eyes just glazed over it. Reading about how Isadora would change a room or two just felt completely unnecessary in the overall plot, but completely necessary in getting to know Isadora as a character.
Among the incest business (I feel really weird for saying that) smushed with tales of le fabulous Isis, there's probably one thing that makes Isadora different from Evie: Isadora is absolutely stubborn in the love department. "OMG, I'm scared to fall in love, so I'm just going to vow off all men. If any cutie decides to hit on me, I'll probably kick them in the shenanigans that'll render them useless in reproduction," is quite literally laced throughout the entire book.
Disclaimer: It's not Isadora's <i>exact</i> words, but it might as well be implied.
Ironically enough, Isadora does fall in love. She doesn't kick said guy in the shenanigans as she happily implied, which apparently contradicts the entire mantra she chanted so strongly for most of the book. Basically, it's "I hate men. I hate men. I hate men." – BAM. Falls in love. "Oops."
<i>The Chaos of Stars</i> might as well be a parallel world to <a title="Paranormalcy" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-paranormalcy-by-kiersten-white/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener"><i>Paranormalcy</i></a> – both books just ooze in cuteness.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-the-chaos-of-stars-by-kiersten-white/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
It's different from other mythology books, as Isadora, being the daughter of Egyptian gods, is actually a human and not a goddess or demigoddess. But the whole Egyptian family history Isadora had was just really, really weird. There's incest here, incest there, incest, well, everywhere – all smushed in together with Isis' "fabulousness" throughout history. Huzzah.
It's also a smidge different from White's <i>Paranormalcy</i> series (not that I read the entire series), which I really couldn't help but compare <i>The Chaos of Stars</i> to.
Early on in the book, it's obvious Isadora has an extreme passion for art like Evie did, particularly in interior designing. There were just moments in the book that she jabbers on and on about how she would improve a room in her brother Sirus's house or the museum that I had a tendency to just skip the parts where she talked about interior designing. Like I mentioned earlier, it's obvious from reading those parts that Isadora is extremely passionate about art and interior designing, but my eyes just glazed over it. Reading about how Isadora would change a room or two just felt completely unnecessary in the overall plot, but completely necessary in getting to know Isadora as a character.
Among the incest business (I feel really weird for saying that) smushed with tales of le fabulous Isis, there's probably one thing that makes Isadora different from Evie: Isadora is absolutely stubborn in the love department. "OMG, I'm scared to fall in love, so I'm just going to vow off all men. If any cutie decides to hit on me, I'll probably kick them in the shenanigans that'll render them useless in reproduction," is quite literally laced throughout the entire book.
Disclaimer: It's not Isadora's <i>exact</i> words, but it might as well be implied.
Ironically enough, Isadora does fall in love. She doesn't kick said guy in the shenanigans as she happily implied, which apparently contradicts the entire mantra she chanted so strongly for most of the book. Basically, it's "I hate men. I hate men. I hate men." – BAM. Falls in love. "Oops."
<i>The Chaos of Stars</i> might as well be a parallel world to <a title="Paranormalcy" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-paranormalcy-by-kiersten-white/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener"><i>Paranormalcy</i></a> – both books just ooze in cuteness.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-the-chaos-of-stars-by-kiersten-white/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Angel Has Fallen (2019) in Movies
Jul 4, 2020
Honestly, if you put a gun to my head and asked me to recite what actually happens either Olympus Has Fallen or London Has Fallen, then I'd be shit out of luck. The recent third entry Angel Has Fallen will be no different in a week or two...
It's not awful (some of the action is fairly entertaining) but it's so by the numbers and boring. Jesus Christ, even Nick Nolte doing his by-now-expected-crazy-old-guy schtick is tiresome after roughly 5 seconds.
The plot revolves around Gerard Butler's Mike Banning, who is high up in the White Houses security detail, being framed for an assassination attempt on the President (Morgan Freeman). He is then chased down by the FBI, whilst he tries to figure out who is actually behind it, take them down, and clear his name.
I don't even need to spoil who the bad guys are because it's painfully obvious from the precise second we meet them.
I don't mind Gerard Butler by any means, but he seems to be phoning it in at this point, as he goes through the motions and runs through a gauntlet of action movie cliches - including but not limited to:
- a dramatic dimly lit and gun heavy opening scene that is blatantly a training excercise
- the hero throwing down an effective weapon to face of with the villain in hand to hand
- the hero walking away from an important family conversation at a pivotal moment to go and do hero stuff
- Danny Huston playing a smug arsehole
- A political sub plot involving Russia that doesn't actually go anywhere
Etc, etc.
I, like most people, love a good bit of Morgan Freeman, but unfortunately, they did a Leia on him and just had him in a coma for most of the film, yaaaaay. Jada Pinkett-Smith is in here somewhere as well, but I can't even remember what happens to her.
Just to top it all off, some of the effects work in this is terrible by any standard, but considering it's a big budget action film, it's pretty embarrassing.
I mean, I can be a miserable bastard sometimes, and I appreciate that maybe I'm railing too hard on a film that should just be a dumb popcorn film, but honestly, Angel Has Fallen feels like the result of someone forcing a bot to sit through the first two, and then produce a script for a sequel.
It's not awful (some of the action is fairly entertaining) but it's so by the numbers and boring. Jesus Christ, even Nick Nolte doing his by-now-expected-crazy-old-guy schtick is tiresome after roughly 5 seconds.
The plot revolves around Gerard Butler's Mike Banning, who is high up in the White Houses security detail, being framed for an assassination attempt on the President (Morgan Freeman). He is then chased down by the FBI, whilst he tries to figure out who is actually behind it, take them down, and clear his name.
I don't even need to spoil who the bad guys are because it's painfully obvious from the precise second we meet them.
I don't mind Gerard Butler by any means, but he seems to be phoning it in at this point, as he goes through the motions and runs through a gauntlet of action movie cliches - including but not limited to:
- a dramatic dimly lit and gun heavy opening scene that is blatantly a training excercise
- the hero throwing down an effective weapon to face of with the villain in hand to hand
- the hero walking away from an important family conversation at a pivotal moment to go and do hero stuff
- Danny Huston playing a smug arsehole
- A political sub plot involving Russia that doesn't actually go anywhere
Etc, etc.
I, like most people, love a good bit of Morgan Freeman, but unfortunately, they did a Leia on him and just had him in a coma for most of the film, yaaaaay. Jada Pinkett-Smith is in here somewhere as well, but I can't even remember what happens to her.
Just to top it all off, some of the effects work in this is terrible by any standard, but considering it's a big budget action film, it's pretty embarrassing.
I mean, I can be a miserable bastard sometimes, and I appreciate that maybe I'm railing too hard on a film that should just be a dumb popcorn film, but honestly, Angel Has Fallen feels like the result of someone forcing a bot to sit through the first two, and then produce a script for a sequel.
Studs Lonigan
Book
This Library of America volume contains one of the masterpieces of American naturalism and a major...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Creed 3 (2023) in Movies
Mar 5, 2023
Life for Adonis Creed (Michael B. Jordan), is going well. He has a loving
wife (Tessa Thompson), and daughter (Mile Davis-Kent), and has retired
from boxing after defeating an old rival and ensuring his legacy.
Creed spends his time with his family and developing young fighters at his
gym and is prepping the current champion for his next big match against
Viktor Drago.
An unexpected figure from Creed’s past arrives in the form of Damian
Anderson (Jonathan Majors), a friend of Creed’s troubled youth has
just completed eighteen years in prison.
Damian was the current Golden Gloves champion when he was arrested and
believes he is due his title shot and Creed is the one who can make it
happen.
Creed tries to teach his friend that a person without a single professional fight does not get a magical title shot and with his large
the gap from the ring he would need to grind it out to get a shot.
When an incident occurs just before a scheduled fight and without any
established fighters available to make the date of the fight, Creed gives
his friend a shot and sees that his brutal style of boxing is not what he
would endorse.
Upon winning the title Damian lets it go to his head and gloats at how Creed
had the life he should have had and blames Creed for his past issues and
for not visiting him or staying in contact.
Naturally, this puts the two former friends on a path of no return with a
climatic boxing match being the solution.
“Creed III” does not have the benefit of Sylvester Stallone but you can
still get whips of his character’s influence on Creed and Jordan does a
very solid job Directing the film. He produces strong character moments
which help define the struggles and motivations that each of them faces and
the boxing sequences are very engaging and will have you cheering along.
Majors does a great job in what could have been a routine bad guy
performance. He gives Damian a drive and purpose but also shows the path
that Creed could easily have followed had fate not gone as it did and how
watching someone get everything you dreamed of while you are in prison can
turn even the best of a man cold and bitter.
The film satisfies from start to finish and the character moments and
boxing blend to make not only a very enjoyable film but one that shows
that there is plenty of life in the franchise.
4 stars out of 5
wife (Tessa Thompson), and daughter (Mile Davis-Kent), and has retired
from boxing after defeating an old rival and ensuring his legacy.
Creed spends his time with his family and developing young fighters at his
gym and is prepping the current champion for his next big match against
Viktor Drago.
An unexpected figure from Creed’s past arrives in the form of Damian
Anderson (Jonathan Majors), a friend of Creed’s troubled youth has
just completed eighteen years in prison.
Damian was the current Golden Gloves champion when he was arrested and
believes he is due his title shot and Creed is the one who can make it
happen.
Creed tries to teach his friend that a person without a single professional fight does not get a magical title shot and with his large
the gap from the ring he would need to grind it out to get a shot.
When an incident occurs just before a scheduled fight and without any
established fighters available to make the date of the fight, Creed gives
his friend a shot and sees that his brutal style of boxing is not what he
would endorse.
Upon winning the title Damian lets it go to his head and gloats at how Creed
had the life he should have had and blames Creed for his past issues and
for not visiting him or staying in contact.
Naturally, this puts the two former friends on a path of no return with a
climatic boxing match being the solution.
“Creed III” does not have the benefit of Sylvester Stallone but you can
still get whips of his character’s influence on Creed and Jordan does a
very solid job Directing the film. He produces strong character moments
which help define the struggles and motivations that each of them faces and
the boxing sequences are very engaging and will have you cheering along.
Majors does a great job in what could have been a routine bad guy
performance. He gives Damian a drive and purpose but also shows the path
that Creed could easily have followed had fate not gone as it did and how
watching someone get everything you dreamed of while you are in prison can
turn even the best of a man cold and bitter.
The film satisfies from start to finish and the character moments and
boxing blend to make not only a very enjoyable film but one that shows
that there is plenty of life in the franchise.
4 stars out of 5
Dragon's Mate Volume Two: Books 4-7
6.0
Rate It
Book
Enjoy the Dragon’s Mate series in this convenient bundle. Witch Mate? Anthony is in trouble....
MM Paranormal Romance Shifters Dragons
Sophie Wink (11 KP) rated It's Kind of a Funny Story in Books
Jun 20, 2019
"Insightful and utterly authentic... This is an important book." - The New York Times Book Review
I do very much agree with this comment as it is insightful reading about a mind that is depressed as it can be very hard to compute if you are not depressed yourself, even though this is just one story of an individual with depression it does give you a really good indication of what it's like. And from what I've just read, it sounds horrendous and I would never wish it on anybody.
I really like how the story is set out as even though it only takes place over a few days, the flashbacks convey the depth of the story and really show the development of the main character Craig. I love the way the novel helps the reader understand the mental illness with the little man in his stomach, the soldier in his head, over-sweating, his tentacles, and anchors, it is a clear projection of what it is like. Overall the portrayal of this increasingly common illness is beautifully done.
The character Craig is very likable, even the title immediately portrays the kind of guy that he is; funny and good yet complex. Correct me if I am wrong but he is kind of a walking contradiction as while he can be quite melodramatic he also plays things down, he can be very funny but inside his mind is cluttered with sadness. While he sometimes seems angry he can never actually convey that through his actions. The depth of this character is very thorough, it works really well as even though this character is so complex Vizzini portrays him in such an understandable way. The majority of the characters have two common traits; they're likable yet deeply troubled. I enjoyed reading about everyone in the hospital as there was something about the way they're described and portrayed that makes them, somehow familiar and very much likable. I think the development of the main character is truly fantastic and it made me smile, that's all I can really say without giving too much of the story away.
One thing I really did love within the book was the connection between school and stress with these illnesses as far too often it takes up a good portion of why the individual has a mental illness. From personal experience I know that it is beyond difficult to balance everything between, socialising, family time, the school itself, homework, revision, exams, hobbies, extracurricular activities and jobs and then within that you have to eat, drink and sleep. I definitely connected with the story and Craig himself considering this theme. Another aspect of the story I really love is him finding his love for art. That really made me smile, as it was sometimes my anchor too.
As for the movie... It was terrible. I feel bad for saying it but it really was awful. A lot of the acting in it was really bad, a lot of the plot taken from the story was wrong and mixed up which to an extent I understand as obviously you cannot have every detail of the book in the film but it was too muddled. I think the only character that I thought was portrayed quite well in the movie was Bobby, played by Zach Galifianakis as I connected with him and really felt sympathy and joy for him, there is also a lot of humour associated with him too that I liked and really did laugh out loud at. I thought that the guy who played Craig was really bad, I felt nothing for the character in the movie compared to the book, the acting overall was bad and his chemistry with the other actors wasn't all that great either. I apologise for the bad review of the movie but I have to be honest, as an aspiring actor myself I would want to know if I had done well or not.
Overall the novel is incredibly insightful and beautifully written.
I do very much agree with this comment as it is insightful reading about a mind that is depressed as it can be very hard to compute if you are not depressed yourself, even though this is just one story of an individual with depression it does give you a really good indication of what it's like. And from what I've just read, it sounds horrendous and I would never wish it on anybody.
I really like how the story is set out as even though it only takes place over a few days, the flashbacks convey the depth of the story and really show the development of the main character Craig. I love the way the novel helps the reader understand the mental illness with the little man in his stomach, the soldier in his head, over-sweating, his tentacles, and anchors, it is a clear projection of what it is like. Overall the portrayal of this increasingly common illness is beautifully done.
The character Craig is very likable, even the title immediately portrays the kind of guy that he is; funny and good yet complex. Correct me if I am wrong but he is kind of a walking contradiction as while he can be quite melodramatic he also plays things down, he can be very funny but inside his mind is cluttered with sadness. While he sometimes seems angry he can never actually convey that through his actions. The depth of this character is very thorough, it works really well as even though this character is so complex Vizzini portrays him in such an understandable way. The majority of the characters have two common traits; they're likable yet deeply troubled. I enjoyed reading about everyone in the hospital as there was something about the way they're described and portrayed that makes them, somehow familiar and very much likable. I think the development of the main character is truly fantastic and it made me smile, that's all I can really say without giving too much of the story away.
One thing I really did love within the book was the connection between school and stress with these illnesses as far too often it takes up a good portion of why the individual has a mental illness. From personal experience I know that it is beyond difficult to balance everything between, socialising, family time, the school itself, homework, revision, exams, hobbies, extracurricular activities and jobs and then within that you have to eat, drink and sleep. I definitely connected with the story and Craig himself considering this theme. Another aspect of the story I really love is him finding his love for art. That really made me smile, as it was sometimes my anchor too.
As for the movie... It was terrible. I feel bad for saying it but it really was awful. A lot of the acting in it was really bad, a lot of the plot taken from the story was wrong and mixed up which to an extent I understand as obviously you cannot have every detail of the book in the film but it was too muddled. I think the only character that I thought was portrayed quite well in the movie was Bobby, played by Zach Galifianakis as I connected with him and really felt sympathy and joy for him, there is also a lot of humour associated with him too that I liked and really did laugh out loud at. I thought that the guy who played Craig was really bad, I felt nothing for the character in the movie compared to the book, the acting overall was bad and his chemistry with the other actors wasn't all that great either. I apologise for the bad review of the movie but I have to be honest, as an aspiring actor myself I would want to know if I had done well or not.
Overall the novel is incredibly insightful and beautifully written.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Cider House Rules (1999) in Movies
Apr 26, 2020
Great acting, great writing, great directing
When we do our "Secret Cinema" adventures at our house (one person picks the film and the rest of the family doesn't know what it is until it starts running), we try to give clues. This film was nominated for 7 Oscars for the 1999 season, winning 2 - including a 2nd BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR OSCAR for a veteran actor. It is based on a wonderful novel and features 3 young actors well before they became stars.
Sound interesting? Then check out THE CIDER HOUSE RULES.
Based on the novel by John Irving, THE CIDER HOUSE RULES follows the life of Homer Wells (a pre-SPIDERMAN Tobey Maguire), a young orphan who is raised/mentored by the head of his Orphanage, Dr. Wilbur Larch (Michael Caine). When Homer decides to leave the orphanage and experience the world, he learns quite a bit about life including THE CIDER HOUSE RULES.
This is one of those "coming of age/follow a person through their life"-type films that relies heavily on style, substance and the performance of the actors on the screen. And under the Direction of Swedish Director Lasse Hallstrom and with words of the Screenplay by the author of the novel, John Irving, and with terrific actors like Maguire and Caine (amongst others) speaking those lines - a spell is cast and a heartwarming, life-affirming experience unfolds.
Caine won his 2nd Oscar for his role as Dr. Larch. This is a complex character who has his own, very certain, views on the world and is uncompromising in his care for others. It is a wonderful performance - even taking into account the peculiar Maine/United States accent Caine puts on. His character's empathy, strength and vulnerability are at play throughout this performance and he is a very deserving recipient of the Oscar.
A very young Charlize Theron and a (then) unknown Paul Rudd are engaging, charming and extremely photogenic as a young couple that Homer leaves the orphanage to see the world with. Rudd is the embodiment of the "nice guy" in this film - you can see the seeds of a career of playing "the nice guy" in this performance. Theron radiates beauty, power and a self-reliance that shows the strong actress she will become. While Homer's relationship with Dr. Larch is the heart and conflict of this film, the trio of McGuire/Theron/Rudd are the soul. The film also features a bevy of strong character actors in smaller roles that prop this film up. Jane Alexander, Kathy Baker, J.K. Simmons, Kate Nelligan and Delroy Lindo all shine in smaller roles - as do some of the child actors that portray other orphans like Keiran Caulkin and (especially) Per Erik Sullivan as the physically compromised Fuzzy.
But...none of this works if Maguire doesn't hold this film together (for we see this world/film through his eyes and he is in every scene) and he brings it. He has a quiet charm and innocence that helps bring us into his world in a welcoming way. Certainly, the awkwardness that Homer shows around Theron will be in evidence when he plays Peter Parker years later, but it is the inner strength that Maguire shows that really makes this character shine.
John Irving wrote the screen play based on his novel - and the results are satisfying, both to those who've never read the book (or have encountered an Irving novel/book before) or veteran readers/lovers of Irving's work (like myself).
All of this is wrapped in a package by Director Lasse Hallstrom (MY LIFE AS A DOG) in a charming, loving way that show the people, events and times through a lens that amplifies the proceedings in a way that is welcoming and engaging.
It is always a bit of a concern of mine to revisit a film that I remember fondly, but in this case, I am glad I jumped at the chance to revisit this charming film.
And you'll be glad you did, too.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Sound interesting? Then check out THE CIDER HOUSE RULES.
Based on the novel by John Irving, THE CIDER HOUSE RULES follows the life of Homer Wells (a pre-SPIDERMAN Tobey Maguire), a young orphan who is raised/mentored by the head of his Orphanage, Dr. Wilbur Larch (Michael Caine). When Homer decides to leave the orphanage and experience the world, he learns quite a bit about life including THE CIDER HOUSE RULES.
This is one of those "coming of age/follow a person through their life"-type films that relies heavily on style, substance and the performance of the actors on the screen. And under the Direction of Swedish Director Lasse Hallstrom and with words of the Screenplay by the author of the novel, John Irving, and with terrific actors like Maguire and Caine (amongst others) speaking those lines - a spell is cast and a heartwarming, life-affirming experience unfolds.
Caine won his 2nd Oscar for his role as Dr. Larch. This is a complex character who has his own, very certain, views on the world and is uncompromising in his care for others. It is a wonderful performance - even taking into account the peculiar Maine/United States accent Caine puts on. His character's empathy, strength and vulnerability are at play throughout this performance and he is a very deserving recipient of the Oscar.
A very young Charlize Theron and a (then) unknown Paul Rudd are engaging, charming and extremely photogenic as a young couple that Homer leaves the orphanage to see the world with. Rudd is the embodiment of the "nice guy" in this film - you can see the seeds of a career of playing "the nice guy" in this performance. Theron radiates beauty, power and a self-reliance that shows the strong actress she will become. While Homer's relationship with Dr. Larch is the heart and conflict of this film, the trio of McGuire/Theron/Rudd are the soul. The film also features a bevy of strong character actors in smaller roles that prop this film up. Jane Alexander, Kathy Baker, J.K. Simmons, Kate Nelligan and Delroy Lindo all shine in smaller roles - as do some of the child actors that portray other orphans like Keiran Caulkin and (especially) Per Erik Sullivan as the physically compromised Fuzzy.
But...none of this works if Maguire doesn't hold this film together (for we see this world/film through his eyes and he is in every scene) and he brings it. He has a quiet charm and innocence that helps bring us into his world in a welcoming way. Certainly, the awkwardness that Homer shows around Theron will be in evidence when he plays Peter Parker years later, but it is the inner strength that Maguire shows that really makes this character shine.
John Irving wrote the screen play based on his novel - and the results are satisfying, both to those who've never read the book (or have encountered an Irving novel/book before) or veteran readers/lovers of Irving's work (like myself).
All of this is wrapped in a package by Director Lasse Hallstrom (MY LIFE AS A DOG) in a charming, loving way that show the people, events and times through a lens that amplifies the proceedings in a way that is welcoming and engaging.
It is always a bit of a concern of mine to revisit a film that I remember fondly, but in this case, I am glad I jumped at the chance to revisit this charming film.
And you'll be glad you did, too.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated Unraveling (Unraveling, #1) in Books
Feb 15, 2019
Within the first ten pages of <i>Unraveling</i>, the main character, Janelle Tenner, dies from a runaway pick-up. A fellow student from her school, Ben Michaels, revives her and then runs off before she fully awakens. Convinced there's more than meets the eye with Ben, Janelle won't give up trying to figure out how and what he did to her and why she isn't dead, even facing her best friend's refusal to believe she died and Ben's denial of ever resurrecting her. As she pieces together that puzzle, Janelle plays detective on a case her F.B.I. agent father is working on, by rifling through top secret files and eavesdropping, that involves a mysterious countdown and people dying of radiation poisoning, which are somehow connected to the man behind the wheel of the vehicle that hit her and possibly even to Ben as well.
The author did a great job setting up the story with a slow build that introduces Janelle's life, both at home and at school, along with any free time she may have, and accelerates once it hits the halfway point until it reaches the book's climactic ending. In particular, the development of her home life was interesting and had depth. She has a mother who's bi-polar and not "there" most of the time and a father who seemingly avoids dealing with the realities of his wife's mental illness by being a workaholic, so all the household responsibilities fall on Janelle's shoulders. She takes care of her family and does the majority of the cleaning, cooking, laundry, and most importantly of all, being a mother to her younger brother, Jared. She makes sure he does his homework, has meals, and gets to school on time. What's nice about their relationship is that he actually respects his sister and there isn't much in the way of petty arguments, which was refreshing. I liked the whole interrelationships of the core family: Janelle, Jared, and their father. They all loved each other, faults and all, and even adding in the situation that Janelle's mother is in, they felt like a genuine family. Adding to that, both Alex (Janelle's best friend and my favorite character) and Struz (her dad's partner/friend) were a part of the family too. If there was anything that stood out in the book for me, it was how people related to each other in it, for good or ill. I loved Alex and Janelle's friendship, again it was really authentic, and they were just that, best friends. No romantic agenda going on, no secret one-sided yearning, only true friendship where they looked out for one another.
Janelle herself was a strong character, but not so strong she never showed her feelings. She could be quick-tempered, but usually for good reason, she stood up for herself when necessary, and was sensible, so while she could be judgmental and at times conceited, those flaws made her realistic. Nobody's perfect. The experiences she's had to live through have molded her, so every action and reaction she made made perfect sense to who she is, whether it's flying off the handle or falling into pieces. While I can't say I ever totally liked her, I understood and respected her; there aren't many YA characters I can say that about. Every character in the book had their own identity, whether they had a small role to play or a bigger one, so there was no confusion to who they were. Ben, the mysterious "stoner", is of course the love interest. He could have been more fully fleshed out, but I still got a basic idea of who he was and he's at least a nice guy, which is a novel idea these days. The love story between Janelle and Ben felt like it could actually happen that way. The chemistry between the two was well-written so the magnetic attraction between them is palpable. I remember how it is to be a teenager (scary but true), and I hate to be such a broken record, but it felt realistic. Do I think it was love? No, not yet, but they have a connection and it's a start towards something serious.
The plot is intriguing and has a lot of good ideas that generally mesh well together. Each short chapter, some less than a page long, features numbers counting down to the big event that's at the core of the novel. I'm not going to go into details since it'd be too hard to do without giving anything away, but I will say that I enjoyed how the story was told and how it unfolded. While this is sci-fi, it's light on the 'sci' part and not everything is explained as well as it could be, but hopefully the sequel will tackle some of the bigger components. Most of my complaints are trivial: the ending was rushed for an almost 450 page book, there was a passing comment about AAA that wasn't right, the phrase 'junior detective' was used just a little too much, an info dump that would have worked better as dialogue, and a couple of other inconsistencies that hopefully were caught before the final copy was printed. However, I admit to some ire at an event that happened at the end, I just didn't feel there was any need for it plot-wise and thought it total overkill. That was unfortunate but overall I still enjoyed the book cover to cover. A solid four-star book that's a cut above the rest and left me looking forward to the sequel.
The author did a great job setting up the story with a slow build that introduces Janelle's life, both at home and at school, along with any free time she may have, and accelerates once it hits the halfway point until it reaches the book's climactic ending. In particular, the development of her home life was interesting and had depth. She has a mother who's bi-polar and not "there" most of the time and a father who seemingly avoids dealing with the realities of his wife's mental illness by being a workaholic, so all the household responsibilities fall on Janelle's shoulders. She takes care of her family and does the majority of the cleaning, cooking, laundry, and most importantly of all, being a mother to her younger brother, Jared. She makes sure he does his homework, has meals, and gets to school on time. What's nice about their relationship is that he actually respects his sister and there isn't much in the way of petty arguments, which was refreshing. I liked the whole interrelationships of the core family: Janelle, Jared, and their father. They all loved each other, faults and all, and even adding in the situation that Janelle's mother is in, they felt like a genuine family. Adding to that, both Alex (Janelle's best friend and my favorite character) and Struz (her dad's partner/friend) were a part of the family too. If there was anything that stood out in the book for me, it was how people related to each other in it, for good or ill. I loved Alex and Janelle's friendship, again it was really authentic, and they were just that, best friends. No romantic agenda going on, no secret one-sided yearning, only true friendship where they looked out for one another.
Janelle herself was a strong character, but not so strong she never showed her feelings. She could be quick-tempered, but usually for good reason, she stood up for herself when necessary, and was sensible, so while she could be judgmental and at times conceited, those flaws made her realistic. Nobody's perfect. The experiences she's had to live through have molded her, so every action and reaction she made made perfect sense to who she is, whether it's flying off the handle or falling into pieces. While I can't say I ever totally liked her, I understood and respected her; there aren't many YA characters I can say that about. Every character in the book had their own identity, whether they had a small role to play or a bigger one, so there was no confusion to who they were. Ben, the mysterious "stoner", is of course the love interest. He could have been more fully fleshed out, but I still got a basic idea of who he was and he's at least a nice guy, which is a novel idea these days. The love story between Janelle and Ben felt like it could actually happen that way. The chemistry between the two was well-written so the magnetic attraction between them is palpable. I remember how it is to be a teenager (scary but true), and I hate to be such a broken record, but it felt realistic. Do I think it was love? No, not yet, but they have a connection and it's a start towards something serious.
The plot is intriguing and has a lot of good ideas that generally mesh well together. Each short chapter, some less than a page long, features numbers counting down to the big event that's at the core of the novel. I'm not going to go into details since it'd be too hard to do without giving anything away, but I will say that I enjoyed how the story was told and how it unfolded. While this is sci-fi, it's light on the 'sci' part and not everything is explained as well as it could be, but hopefully the sequel will tackle some of the bigger components. Most of my complaints are trivial: the ending was rushed for an almost 450 page book, there was a passing comment about AAA that wasn't right, the phrase 'junior detective' was used just a little too much, an info dump that would have worked better as dialogue, and a couple of other inconsistencies that hopefully were caught before the final copy was printed. However, I admit to some ire at an event that happened at the end, I just didn't feel there was any need for it plot-wise and thought it total overkill. That was unfortunate but overall I still enjoyed the book cover to cover. A solid four-star book that's a cut above the rest and left me looking forward to the sequel.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Downhill (2020) in Movies
Mar 8, 2020
I'm not going to lie, the trailer did not look good. I went in expecting something that would hopefully be mildly amusing to pass the time before seeing The Invisible Man, thank goodness I saw this one first, ending my double bill with this would have been heart-breaking.
Pete and Billie are taking their two boys away for a skiing trip, things have been tough recently and they all need a chance to unwind. When a controlled explosion on the slopes gets a little too close for comfort the family are shaken. When the snow settles Billie, who instinctively went to protect her sons looks around and Pete is nowhere to be seen. Tensions run high between the could and they both start to wonder what the situation means for their family.
Let me first state that this is a confused mess of genre, I think that was clear even in the trailer, but it became more evident as I sat through the film. It isn't funny enough to be comedy and it's trying so hard to be comedy that it misses drama.
This could turn into a bitch fest if I let it but there are some good points I would like to mention (while I'm not angry at this film).
Both Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Will Ferrell get to have moments that are actually quite moving. In the trailer we see Billie relaying their story to their friends, that complete scene you can tell that Louis-Dreyfus is digging deep for that emotion and it comes through incredibly well. Ferrell, when he finally gets to open up about the event felt very sincere, though he does manage to get upstaged by Billie seconds later.
The setting is obviously very picturesque and they do a great job of showing the contrast between the two different resorts, there are quite a lot of clips of skiing that feel like stock footage and somehow feel out of place with whatever genre this film was. The snow footage that really excited me was that initial avalanche early on, for the briefest moment I thought I'd misjudged the film (it was a fleeting feeling). The rush of the snow, the sound and the reaction of the people on the deck really made for a tense moment.
I'm at a loss for anything apart from that thought. I think I vaguely remember laughing at one point, or more accurately, exhaling slightly more vigorously than normal, but I couldn't tell you which bit that was. The guy across the aisle from me (who arrived nearly 20 minutes late) was roaring with laughter... I just couldn't see any of it. None of the jokes landed and the one character who seemed to only be there for comedic effect was so over the top that it just became annoying.
Will Ferrell's movie career is an interesting thing to scroll through, it has a lot of films you've heard of, most of which I just kind of go "meh" at and will never see again. I honestly don't think I've enjoyed one of his films since Old School. Downhill is sadly no different. I had hoped that this might have been interestingly different with its drama aspect but there was nothing to dig it out of that avalanche.
Julia Louis-Dreyfus wasn't bad, I think mainly because her character wasn't overly burdened with any of the comic stuff to do. A lot of her role was serious and that really helped. But with the film feeling so mediocre/bad around her most of the good acting was lost.
If you can find the good in this film then I'm really pleased for you, but I was left confused and somewhat down about what I'd seen.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/03/downhill-movie-review.html
Pete and Billie are taking their two boys away for a skiing trip, things have been tough recently and they all need a chance to unwind. When a controlled explosion on the slopes gets a little too close for comfort the family are shaken. When the snow settles Billie, who instinctively went to protect her sons looks around and Pete is nowhere to be seen. Tensions run high between the could and they both start to wonder what the situation means for their family.
Let me first state that this is a confused mess of genre, I think that was clear even in the trailer, but it became more evident as I sat through the film. It isn't funny enough to be comedy and it's trying so hard to be comedy that it misses drama.
This could turn into a bitch fest if I let it but there are some good points I would like to mention (while I'm not angry at this film).
Both Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Will Ferrell get to have moments that are actually quite moving. In the trailer we see Billie relaying their story to their friends, that complete scene you can tell that Louis-Dreyfus is digging deep for that emotion and it comes through incredibly well. Ferrell, when he finally gets to open up about the event felt very sincere, though he does manage to get upstaged by Billie seconds later.
The setting is obviously very picturesque and they do a great job of showing the contrast between the two different resorts, there are quite a lot of clips of skiing that feel like stock footage and somehow feel out of place with whatever genre this film was. The snow footage that really excited me was that initial avalanche early on, for the briefest moment I thought I'd misjudged the film (it was a fleeting feeling). The rush of the snow, the sound and the reaction of the people on the deck really made for a tense moment.
I'm at a loss for anything apart from that thought. I think I vaguely remember laughing at one point, or more accurately, exhaling slightly more vigorously than normal, but I couldn't tell you which bit that was. The guy across the aisle from me (who arrived nearly 20 minutes late) was roaring with laughter... I just couldn't see any of it. None of the jokes landed and the one character who seemed to only be there for comedic effect was so over the top that it just became annoying.
Will Ferrell's movie career is an interesting thing to scroll through, it has a lot of films you've heard of, most of which I just kind of go "meh" at and will never see again. I honestly don't think I've enjoyed one of his films since Old School. Downhill is sadly no different. I had hoped that this might have been interestingly different with its drama aspect but there was nothing to dig it out of that avalanche.
Julia Louis-Dreyfus wasn't bad, I think mainly because her character wasn't overly burdened with any of the comic stuff to do. A lot of her role was serious and that really helped. But with the film feeling so mediocre/bad around her most of the good acting was lost.
If you can find the good in this film then I'm really pleased for you, but I was left confused and somewhat down about what I'd seen.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/03/downhill-movie-review.html