Search
Search results
Honest Review for Free Copy of Book
Readers should not be fooled by the title The Geek Who Came From The Cold: Surviving The Post-USSR Era On A Hollywood Diet by Leon Kaminsky has nothing to do with food or dieting at all. The “Hollywood Diet” mentioned in the title is movies, mainly those from the US. A little bit of knowledge about Russia and their policies would be helpful when reading this book but is not required.
Leon is a young boy growing up in Russia at the end of the 1900s. He has a nervous problem (possibly anxiety) and has a hard time at school and with other people in general. Leon quickly falls in love with movies, specifically those from Hollywood after seeing them for the first time. Like so many other people who are not exactly social for one reason or another, he trades social interaction for watching films. His love for movies over the years borders on the edge of obsession as he knows not only actors and directors but also the Russian’s who voice over the tapes to translate them. His daily and weekly schedule revolves around what movies are being played on TV or at the theaters.
He takes readers through the difficulty of obtaining some of the popular movies that can be found just about anywhere here in the United States. This difficulty is not only because of how much Russia censored movies from just about anywhere but because the titles are often changed as well. Leon shares his excitement and the challenges he faced to get his first VCR play and to transport his VHS collection when his family moved. He even talks about when owning a VCR was illegal in Russia and when people would give anything to have one, including offering to trade a boat for a VCR.
What I liked best was that the informative quality of the book was wonderful and the author clearly did his research (I even wondered at times if the book was based on the author’s own childhood). I appreciated the human qualities of the book, such as the struggles Leon faces at school. New facts about Russia was presented to the readers in a way that prevented anything from feeling too overly informative. What I did not like was the fact that the book ends fairly abruptly. I would have liked to see at least one chapter about after the family’s move to Germany. There were also multiple sections where it would begin on one topic and end on another, seemingly unrelated topic.
Movie fans will enjoy this book but it is recommended that they be somewhat familiar with movies from the 1980s (I think was the time period of most movies mentioned in the book, I myself am far from a movie buff at all) and newer. High school students may not be able to fully appreciate the cinematic history in this book and may feel more like a history book to them. It should also be noted as VHS tapes are already a thing of the past (I am holding on to a few to show my children in the future) upcoming generations may not know what the book is talking about without asking their parents or google. Finally, I give this book a rating of 3 out of 4. This book is very informative about a topic not many people are probably aware of. Sadly this gives it a very narrow target audience. The way the book is written makes it feel like it is an autobiography about a movie lover growing up where movies are largely controlled. The plot of the book is frequently lost through during all the movie talk.
https://www.facebook.com/nightreaderreviews
Leon is a young boy growing up in Russia at the end of the 1900s. He has a nervous problem (possibly anxiety) and has a hard time at school and with other people in general. Leon quickly falls in love with movies, specifically those from Hollywood after seeing them for the first time. Like so many other people who are not exactly social for one reason or another, he trades social interaction for watching films. His love for movies over the years borders on the edge of obsession as he knows not only actors and directors but also the Russian’s who voice over the tapes to translate them. His daily and weekly schedule revolves around what movies are being played on TV or at the theaters.
He takes readers through the difficulty of obtaining some of the popular movies that can be found just about anywhere here in the United States. This difficulty is not only because of how much Russia censored movies from just about anywhere but because the titles are often changed as well. Leon shares his excitement and the challenges he faced to get his first VCR play and to transport his VHS collection when his family moved. He even talks about when owning a VCR was illegal in Russia and when people would give anything to have one, including offering to trade a boat for a VCR.
What I liked best was that the informative quality of the book was wonderful and the author clearly did his research (I even wondered at times if the book was based on the author’s own childhood). I appreciated the human qualities of the book, such as the struggles Leon faces at school. New facts about Russia was presented to the readers in a way that prevented anything from feeling too overly informative. What I did not like was the fact that the book ends fairly abruptly. I would have liked to see at least one chapter about after the family’s move to Germany. There were also multiple sections where it would begin on one topic and end on another, seemingly unrelated topic.
Movie fans will enjoy this book but it is recommended that they be somewhat familiar with movies from the 1980s (I think was the time period of most movies mentioned in the book, I myself am far from a movie buff at all) and newer. High school students may not be able to fully appreciate the cinematic history in this book and may feel more like a history book to them. It should also be noted as VHS tapes are already a thing of the past (I am holding on to a few to show my children in the future) upcoming generations may not know what the book is talking about without asking their parents or google. Finally, I give this book a rating of 3 out of 4. This book is very informative about a topic not many people are probably aware of. Sadly this gives it a very narrow target audience. The way the book is written makes it feel like it is an autobiography about a movie lover growing up where movies are largely controlled. The plot of the book is frequently lost through during all the movie talk.
https://www.facebook.com/nightreaderreviews
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Trial of the Chicago 7 (2020) in Movies
Oct 24, 2020
The epic ensemble cast (1 more)
The direction from Aaron Sorkin
“Trial” is a less wordy triumph for Sorkin
So, "The Trial of the Chicago 7" is one which I was unfortunately unable to catch on its short "Oscar-nom" cinema release, but is now on Netflix. And boy, for older viewers who prefer historical drama over wham-bam action, this is definitely worth the watch.
I know a decent bit of 20th century history, but this is a story I knew nothing about. At the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago, anti-Vietnam protests resulted in a violent and brutal confrontation with the police. Eight of the ring-leaders were rounded up and charged with inciting the violence. What happens in the court with the eight convicted men, in front of an old and partisan judge (the wonderful Frank Langella), is simply amazing.
There's a nice wiki article on the history you can look up. But its worth watching the movie blind, since it's a great rollercoaster ride.
If you read my blog regularly, you'll know that one of my favourite of the awards in award season is the "Ensemble Cast" award from the Screen Actor's Guild (SAG). I think a good measure of which movies might be good candidates for this award is when you find it difficult to single out particular actors for an individual award when they all work so well together. For this is a cast to die for:
- Sacha Baron Cohen, as Abbie Hoffman: an intelligent 'straight' role, poles apart from Borat and Bruno, that he delivers on 100%;
- Jeremy Strong as Hoffman's buddy Jerry Rubin, doing an enormously entertaining turn;
- Eddie Redmayne as the apparently 'sensible one' Tom Hayden. A bit similar to his role in "Les Miserables", but diving off in a different direction at a key point;
- John Carroll Lynch as the genuine 'boy scout' David Dellinger, so good in "The Founder" and here as the only family man under the judgmental stare of his wife and son;
- Yahya Abdul-Mateen II as Black Panther member Bobby Seale - the "minus 1" from the title - in an astonishingly powerful performance;
- Joseph Gordon-Levitt as the prosecutor Richard Schultz - always quietly dependable;
- And the fantastic Mark Rylance as the defense attorney William Kunstler. I appreciate I am having a tendency to gush in this review, but Rylance expresses such a range of frustration and disgust here that his performance is nothing short of electrifying.
There's also a cracking cameo from Michael Keaton playing the former US Attorney General, Ramsey Clark.
I would think that any of these performances might be Oscar-worthy (somewhere in the Actor/Supporting Actor categories) but my personal choices would be Rylance for Best Actor and Baron Cohen and Langella for Best Supporting Actor nods.
One of my issues with the scripts of Aaron Sorkin is that they tend to be overly dense and wordy. In epic TV like "The West Wing" he could spread the dialogue over a whole series, but in a feature film it can become very dense and verbose. I found that in both of his last two films - "Molly's Game" and "Steve Jobs".
Here, in "The Trial of the Chicago 7", even though there's a lot of speechifying, to me it never felt over the top. Although an epic courtroom drama (akin to his debut script "A Few Good Men") the characters are given time to breath between the lines. And many of those lines are real zingers, particularly out of the mouth of stand-up anarchist Abbie Hoffman (Sacha Baron Cohen).
Aside from the script being a zinger, the direction here from Aaron Sorkin is also top-notch. If you thought a courtroom drama was going to be static and boring, think again. The camera never rests, and inserted flashbacks (excellent film editing from Alan Baumgarten) maintain the momentum of the story.
Overall, this is a movie tour-de-force from Sorkin, and a fantastic watch. Could this be a writing/directing double Oscar nom for Sorkin?
(For the full graphical review, check out the bob the movie man review here - https://rb.gy/y6bxtf . Thanks.)
I know a decent bit of 20th century history, but this is a story I knew nothing about. At the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago, anti-Vietnam protests resulted in a violent and brutal confrontation with the police. Eight of the ring-leaders were rounded up and charged with inciting the violence. What happens in the court with the eight convicted men, in front of an old and partisan judge (the wonderful Frank Langella), is simply amazing.
There's a nice wiki article on the history you can look up. But its worth watching the movie blind, since it's a great rollercoaster ride.
If you read my blog regularly, you'll know that one of my favourite of the awards in award season is the "Ensemble Cast" award from the Screen Actor's Guild (SAG). I think a good measure of which movies might be good candidates for this award is when you find it difficult to single out particular actors for an individual award when they all work so well together. For this is a cast to die for:
- Sacha Baron Cohen, as Abbie Hoffman: an intelligent 'straight' role, poles apart from Borat and Bruno, that he delivers on 100%;
- Jeremy Strong as Hoffman's buddy Jerry Rubin, doing an enormously entertaining turn;
- Eddie Redmayne as the apparently 'sensible one' Tom Hayden. A bit similar to his role in "Les Miserables", but diving off in a different direction at a key point;
- John Carroll Lynch as the genuine 'boy scout' David Dellinger, so good in "The Founder" and here as the only family man under the judgmental stare of his wife and son;
- Yahya Abdul-Mateen II as Black Panther member Bobby Seale - the "minus 1" from the title - in an astonishingly powerful performance;
- Joseph Gordon-Levitt as the prosecutor Richard Schultz - always quietly dependable;
- And the fantastic Mark Rylance as the defense attorney William Kunstler. I appreciate I am having a tendency to gush in this review, but Rylance expresses such a range of frustration and disgust here that his performance is nothing short of electrifying.
There's also a cracking cameo from Michael Keaton playing the former US Attorney General, Ramsey Clark.
I would think that any of these performances might be Oscar-worthy (somewhere in the Actor/Supporting Actor categories) but my personal choices would be Rylance for Best Actor and Baron Cohen and Langella for Best Supporting Actor nods.
One of my issues with the scripts of Aaron Sorkin is that they tend to be overly dense and wordy. In epic TV like "The West Wing" he could spread the dialogue over a whole series, but in a feature film it can become very dense and verbose. I found that in both of his last two films - "Molly's Game" and "Steve Jobs".
Here, in "The Trial of the Chicago 7", even though there's a lot of speechifying, to me it never felt over the top. Although an epic courtroom drama (akin to his debut script "A Few Good Men") the characters are given time to breath between the lines. And many of those lines are real zingers, particularly out of the mouth of stand-up anarchist Abbie Hoffman (Sacha Baron Cohen).
Aside from the script being a zinger, the direction here from Aaron Sorkin is also top-notch. If you thought a courtroom drama was going to be static and boring, think again. The camera never rests, and inserted flashbacks (excellent film editing from Alan Baumgarten) maintain the momentum of the story.
Overall, this is a movie tour-de-force from Sorkin, and a fantastic watch. Could this be a writing/directing double Oscar nom for Sorkin?
(For the full graphical review, check out the bob the movie man review here - https://rb.gy/y6bxtf . Thanks.)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Jackie (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Spoiler! Her husband gets shot.
“Jackie” tells the story of the spiralling grief, loss and anger of Jackie Kennedy driven by the assassination of JFK in Dallas in November 1963. Hopping backwards and forwards in flashback, the film centres on the first interview given by Jackie (Natalie Portman, “Black Swan”) to a ‘Time’ journalist (Billy Crudup, “Watchmen”, “Spotlight”).
Through this interview we flashback to see Jackie as the young First Lady engaged in recording a TV special for a tour of the White House: nervous, unsure of herself and with a ‘baby girl’ voice. This contrasts with her demeanour in the interview which – although subject to emotional outburst and grief – is assured, confident and above all extremely assertive. We live the film through Jackie’s eyes as she experiences the arrival in Dallas, the traumatic events of November 22nd in Dealey Plaza, the return home to Washington and the complicated arrangement of the President’s funeral.
This is an acting tour de force for Natalie Portman, who is astonishingly emotional as the grief-stricken ex-first lady. She nails this role utterly and completely. Having already won the Golden Globe for an actress in a dramatic role, you would be a foolish man to bet against her not taking the Oscar. (I know I said just the other week that I though Emma Stone should get it for “La La Land” – as another Golden Globe winner, for the Comedy/Musical category – and a large part of my heart would still really like to see Stone win it…. But excellent as that performance was, this is a far more challenging role.)
In a key supporting role is Peter Sarsgaard (“The Magnificent Seven”) as Bobby Kennedy (although his lookalike is not one of the best: that accolade I would give to Gaspard Koenig, in an un-speaking role, as the young Ted Kennedy).
Also providing interesting support as Jackie’s priest is John Hurt (“Alien”, “Dr Who”) and, as Jackie’s close friend, the artist Bill Walton, is Richard E Grant (“Withnail and I”, who as he grows older is looking more and more like Geoffrey Rush – I was sure it was him!).
Director Pablo Larraín (whose previous work I am not familiar with) automatically assumes that EVERYONE has the background history to understand the narrative without further explanation: perhaps as this happened 54 years ago, this is a bit of a presumption for younger viewers? Naturally for people of my advanced years, these events are as burned into our collective psyches as the images in the Zapruder film.
While the film focuses predominantly, and brilliantly, on Jackie’s mental state, the film does gently question (via an outburst from Bobby) as to what JFK actually achieved in his all too short presidency – ‘Will he be remembered for resolving the Cuban missile crisis: something he originally created?’ rants Bobby. In reality, JFK is remembered in history for this assassination and the lost potential for what he might have done. I would have liked the script to have delved a little bit further into that collective soul-searching.
This is a very sombre movie in tone, from the bleak opening, with a soundtrack of sonorous strings, to the bleak weather-swept scenes at Arlington cemetery. The cinematography (by Stéphane Fontaine, “Rust and Bone”) cleverly contrasts between the vibrant hues of Jackie’s “Camelot” to the washed-out blueish tones of the post-assassination events. If you don’t feel depressed going into this film, you probably will be coming out! But the journey is a satisfying one nonetheless, and the script by Noah Oppenheim – in a SIGNIFICANT departure from his previous teen-flick screenplays for “Allegiant” and “The Maze Runner” – is both tight and thought-provoking.
Overall, a recommended watch which comes with a prediction: “And the Oscar goes to… Natalie Portman”.
Finally, note that for those of a squeamish disposition, there is a very graphic depiction of the assassination from Jackie’s point-of-view…. but this is not until nearly the end of the film, so you are reasonably safe until then!
Also as a final general whinge, could directors PLEASE place an embargo on the logos of more than two production companies coming up at the start of a film? This has about six of them and is farcical, aping the (very amusing) parody in “Family Guy” (as shown here).
Through this interview we flashback to see Jackie as the young First Lady engaged in recording a TV special for a tour of the White House: nervous, unsure of herself and with a ‘baby girl’ voice. This contrasts with her demeanour in the interview which – although subject to emotional outburst and grief – is assured, confident and above all extremely assertive. We live the film through Jackie’s eyes as she experiences the arrival in Dallas, the traumatic events of November 22nd in Dealey Plaza, the return home to Washington and the complicated arrangement of the President’s funeral.
This is an acting tour de force for Natalie Portman, who is astonishingly emotional as the grief-stricken ex-first lady. She nails this role utterly and completely. Having already won the Golden Globe for an actress in a dramatic role, you would be a foolish man to bet against her not taking the Oscar. (I know I said just the other week that I though Emma Stone should get it for “La La Land” – as another Golden Globe winner, for the Comedy/Musical category – and a large part of my heart would still really like to see Stone win it…. But excellent as that performance was, this is a far more challenging role.)
In a key supporting role is Peter Sarsgaard (“The Magnificent Seven”) as Bobby Kennedy (although his lookalike is not one of the best: that accolade I would give to Gaspard Koenig, in an un-speaking role, as the young Ted Kennedy).
Also providing interesting support as Jackie’s priest is John Hurt (“Alien”, “Dr Who”) and, as Jackie’s close friend, the artist Bill Walton, is Richard E Grant (“Withnail and I”, who as he grows older is looking more and more like Geoffrey Rush – I was sure it was him!).
Director Pablo Larraín (whose previous work I am not familiar with) automatically assumes that EVERYONE has the background history to understand the narrative without further explanation: perhaps as this happened 54 years ago, this is a bit of a presumption for younger viewers? Naturally for people of my advanced years, these events are as burned into our collective psyches as the images in the Zapruder film.
While the film focuses predominantly, and brilliantly, on Jackie’s mental state, the film does gently question (via an outburst from Bobby) as to what JFK actually achieved in his all too short presidency – ‘Will he be remembered for resolving the Cuban missile crisis: something he originally created?’ rants Bobby. In reality, JFK is remembered in history for this assassination and the lost potential for what he might have done. I would have liked the script to have delved a little bit further into that collective soul-searching.
This is a very sombre movie in tone, from the bleak opening, with a soundtrack of sonorous strings, to the bleak weather-swept scenes at Arlington cemetery. The cinematography (by Stéphane Fontaine, “Rust and Bone”) cleverly contrasts between the vibrant hues of Jackie’s “Camelot” to the washed-out blueish tones of the post-assassination events. If you don’t feel depressed going into this film, you probably will be coming out! But the journey is a satisfying one nonetheless, and the script by Noah Oppenheim – in a SIGNIFICANT departure from his previous teen-flick screenplays for “Allegiant” and “The Maze Runner” – is both tight and thought-provoking.
Overall, a recommended watch which comes with a prediction: “And the Oscar goes to… Natalie Portman”.
Finally, note that for those of a squeamish disposition, there is a very graphic depiction of the assassination from Jackie’s point-of-view…. but this is not until nearly the end of the film, so you are reasonably safe until then!
Also as a final general whinge, could directors PLEASE place an embargo on the logos of more than two production companies coming up at the start of a film? This has about six of them and is farcical, aping the (very amusing) parody in “Family Guy” (as shown here).
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Stork Mountain in Books
May 25, 2017
Captivating
I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.
Bulgarian-born, short storywriter Miroslav Penkov has turned to full-length novels with this captivating book, Stork Mountain. Set in the Bulgarian Strandja Mountains on the border of Turkey, he explores religion, mythology, the past and the present in a society affected by long-term political unrest.
The narrator, a young man who remains nameless throughout, relocated to the United States of America as a child after the fall of Communism. Now he returns to his home country to find his grandfather, an elderly man he lost contact with three years ago. However his real motive is purely for self gain: to sell his section of the family land in order to pay off student loans and his rising debt.
Naturally, things do not go according to plan. The protagonist finds his grandfather hiding in the village of Klisura, a place divided between the Christians and the Muslims. He also discovers that there is no longer any land for him to sell, making his journey fairly pointless. Instead of returning to the Western world, he stays in his grandfather’s house and, very slowly, begins to learn the truth about his family’s past, the man his grandfather once was, and the superstitious pagan activities still affecting some of the village’s inhabitants today.
Stork Mountain is full of the history, folklore and mythology of a little known about European country. Although ultimately a contemporary novel, there is a lot to learn about events that led up to southern Bulgaria’s current condition. As well as being informative, Penkov plays with his readers’ hearts by including a Romeo and Juliet-esque relationship between the narrator and a Muslim girl, and also reveals a similar affair between a younger Grandfather and the girl of his dreams.
Books containing politics are often reserved for those with particular interest in the topic, however Stork Mountain is suitable for a much larger audience. The inclusion of Bulgarian folklore adds a dark fairytale-like quality to the story; and the romance, something for the reader to latch onto.
On reading the blurb I jumped to the conclusion that this book would be boring. I was wrong. Whereas stories with similar themes can be hard going, Stork Mountain was fast paced and easy to read. There were a few confusions about who was talking or whether the narrative was about the past or the future, but these issues may be something that is improved upon as the author finds his groove in full-length novels.
Even if, like me, you have prejudged this book to be boring, I urge you to give it a go. You may find yourself pleasantly surprised. Miroslav Penkov definitely has a future in the world of literature.
Bulgarian-born, short storywriter Miroslav Penkov has turned to full-length novels with this captivating book, Stork Mountain. Set in the Bulgarian Strandja Mountains on the border of Turkey, he explores religion, mythology, the past and the present in a society affected by long-term political unrest.
The narrator, a young man who remains nameless throughout, relocated to the United States of America as a child after the fall of Communism. Now he returns to his home country to find his grandfather, an elderly man he lost contact with three years ago. However his real motive is purely for self gain: to sell his section of the family land in order to pay off student loans and his rising debt.
Naturally, things do not go according to plan. The protagonist finds his grandfather hiding in the village of Klisura, a place divided between the Christians and the Muslims. He also discovers that there is no longer any land for him to sell, making his journey fairly pointless. Instead of returning to the Western world, he stays in his grandfather’s house and, very slowly, begins to learn the truth about his family’s past, the man his grandfather once was, and the superstitious pagan activities still affecting some of the village’s inhabitants today.
Stork Mountain is full of the history, folklore and mythology of a little known about European country. Although ultimately a contemporary novel, there is a lot to learn about events that led up to southern Bulgaria’s current condition. As well as being informative, Penkov plays with his readers’ hearts by including a Romeo and Juliet-esque relationship between the narrator and a Muslim girl, and also reveals a similar affair between a younger Grandfather and the girl of his dreams.
Books containing politics are often reserved for those with particular interest in the topic, however Stork Mountain is suitable for a much larger audience. The inclusion of Bulgarian folklore adds a dark fairytale-like quality to the story; and the romance, something for the reader to latch onto.
On reading the blurb I jumped to the conclusion that this book would be boring. I was wrong. Whereas stories with similar themes can be hard going, Stork Mountain was fast paced and easy to read. There were a few confusions about who was talking or whether the narrative was about the past or the future, but these issues may be something that is improved upon as the author finds his groove in full-length novels.
Even if, like me, you have prejudged this book to be boring, I urge you to give it a go. You may find yourself pleasantly surprised. Miroslav Penkov definitely has a future in the world of literature.
Connor Sheffield (293 KP) rated Treasure Planet (2002) in Movies
Jun 6, 2017
A fun take on the classic Treasure Island tale (1 more)
A very gripping story with a lot of heart
(Personal opinion) I'm not a huge fan of 'space' pirates (1 more)
Predictable even without knowing the story
A fun film for the family
This is probably only the 3rd time I've seen this film in my life. I'm currently reading the classic novel 'Treasure Island' written by Robert Louis Stevenson, and I wanted to watch something similar to it, without watching the actual adaptations of the same name as I do not wish to spoil the events of the few chapters I have not yet read. I knew that Treasure Planet was different in many ways and so I knew it wouldn't be completely true to the story.
So, I would describe Treasure Planet to someone by saying "Think of space pirates, all of whom are different weird looking species of aliens, and a cyborg with one young human looking character who's a stereotypical rebellious teen, even including a history of trespassing with his hover board (referencing a skateboarding rebellious teen).
The film has a lot of connections to the source material with it's story, such as names, and roles within the story, but it has a lot of it's own to offer. As a Disney film you expect certain aspects with the story, and you know what's going to happen moments before it happens, which might take away some of the entertainment factor for some, but if you don't mind it, then it's a decent film. Adapting the classic tale and setting it in space, gives the writers a lot of freedom to make the characters look and act how they want. There's a spider like character, a cat humanoid, a dog humanoid, frog humanoids, a character who appears to be made of stone, and John Silver himself, known in the story for having one leg, actually has robotic replacements for his left side. He has a robotic leg, arm and eye, which add to his somewhat villainous appearance and attitude.
The voice cast for the film is good and each character certainly seems to sound how they look, and when there are the heart filled moments as there are in every Disney film, it really hits you and makes you sympathize with the characters.
Overall this would be a fun film to watch with the kids, and if you grew up with Disney, as I'm sure most people have, but you haven't seen this, I recommend at least giving it a chance. If you don't like it, it's understandable, but it is a fun take on Treasure Island, and the pirate theme as a whole.
So, I would describe Treasure Planet to someone by saying "Think of space pirates, all of whom are different weird looking species of aliens, and a cyborg with one young human looking character who's a stereotypical rebellious teen, even including a history of trespassing with his hover board (referencing a skateboarding rebellious teen).
The film has a lot of connections to the source material with it's story, such as names, and roles within the story, but it has a lot of it's own to offer. As a Disney film you expect certain aspects with the story, and you know what's going to happen moments before it happens, which might take away some of the entertainment factor for some, but if you don't mind it, then it's a decent film. Adapting the classic tale and setting it in space, gives the writers a lot of freedom to make the characters look and act how they want. There's a spider like character, a cat humanoid, a dog humanoid, frog humanoids, a character who appears to be made of stone, and John Silver himself, known in the story for having one leg, actually has robotic replacements for his left side. He has a robotic leg, arm and eye, which add to his somewhat villainous appearance and attitude.
The voice cast for the film is good and each character certainly seems to sound how they look, and when there are the heart filled moments as there are in every Disney film, it really hits you and makes you sympathize with the characters.
Overall this would be a fun film to watch with the kids, and if you grew up with Disney, as I'm sure most people have, but you haven't seen this, I recommend at least giving it a chance. If you don't like it, it's understandable, but it is a fun take on Treasure Island, and the pirate theme as a whole.
Debbiereadsbook (1110 KP) rated Skin and Bone (Digging Up Bones #2) in Books
Mar 7, 2019
fabulous second book!
I was lucky enough to win an ARC of this book.
This is book TWO in the Digging Up Bones series, and you really SHOULD read book one, Bone To Pick, before you read this one. You'll need it to get a feel for Javi and Cloister before this book.
I'm not gonna write a blurby bit, cos if I'm honest (and I'm ALL about the honest!) I got a bit lost with the Janet Morrow storyline, and once I decided I would just read those bits, and not pay much attention, I liked this a lot better. Also being honest, this is highly likely to be ME (since I'm a bit of a mess at the moment) rather than this book, because I really did LOVE catching up with Javi, Cloister and Bournville!
They are such damaged, broken men, and it really is a pleasure watching them fall. Because they HAVE fallen, they just can't admit, not even to themselves, how much the other man means to him. Javi nearly does, but he shuts that thought down right quick! Cloister does admit he LIKES Javi, but I read far more into that, than was actually said.
It's the little things that tell a lot, you know? Like how Javi looks after Clositer when he gets hit by the truck. Like how Cloister tells Javi not to get shot. The random thoughts that make you giggle how they come out of nowhere, about they think about the other, about how they feel. They DO admit to feeling, at least to themselves, sorta, kinds, and it's those out of nowhere things I LOVE about these two! There is no way to predict where the comments and thoughts will come from. Love being kept on my toes.
We get more of Cloister's history, about his family and some of my questions (that I had after book one) are answered here. We get why Javi was sent to town, to work, after what happened in Phoenix.
I hope there is at least one more book, I really do! These guys NEED to be happy, like REALLY happy with each other and at the moment, while . . . . . content . . . .they aren't really happy. And you know, we don't know what's going to happen to Javi when his replacement comes to twon, a woman who does NOT have happy thoughts about Javi! And there is something going on in Javi's head about higher ups in the food chain, so I need to know about that!
So, thank you, Ms Moore, for my copy, I'm sorry I got a bit lost, but I'm still giving it the rating it deserves.
5 stars
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
This is book TWO in the Digging Up Bones series, and you really SHOULD read book one, Bone To Pick, before you read this one. You'll need it to get a feel for Javi and Cloister before this book.
I'm not gonna write a blurby bit, cos if I'm honest (and I'm ALL about the honest!) I got a bit lost with the Janet Morrow storyline, and once I decided I would just read those bits, and not pay much attention, I liked this a lot better. Also being honest, this is highly likely to be ME (since I'm a bit of a mess at the moment) rather than this book, because I really did LOVE catching up with Javi, Cloister and Bournville!
They are such damaged, broken men, and it really is a pleasure watching them fall. Because they HAVE fallen, they just can't admit, not even to themselves, how much the other man means to him. Javi nearly does, but he shuts that thought down right quick! Cloister does admit he LIKES Javi, but I read far more into that, than was actually said.
It's the little things that tell a lot, you know? Like how Javi looks after Clositer when he gets hit by the truck. Like how Cloister tells Javi not to get shot. The random thoughts that make you giggle how they come out of nowhere, about they think about the other, about how they feel. They DO admit to feeling, at least to themselves, sorta, kinds, and it's those out of nowhere things I LOVE about these two! There is no way to predict where the comments and thoughts will come from. Love being kept on my toes.
We get more of Cloister's history, about his family and some of my questions (that I had after book one) are answered here. We get why Javi was sent to town, to work, after what happened in Phoenix.
I hope there is at least one more book, I really do! These guys NEED to be happy, like REALLY happy with each other and at the moment, while . . . . . content . . . .they aren't really happy. And you know, we don't know what's going to happen to Javi when his replacement comes to twon, a woman who does NOT have happy thoughts about Javi! And there is something going on in Javi's head about higher ups in the food chain, so I need to know about that!
So, thank you, Ms Moore, for my copy, I'm sorry I got a bit lost, but I'm still giving it the rating it deserves.
5 stars
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Goodbye, Vitamin in Books
Jan 21, 2018
Funny (2 more)
Sweet moments
Well-written
Lovely, touching read
After a rough breakup with her fiance, Ruth reluctantly accepts her mother's request to return home and help care for her father, Howard, who is suffering from Alzheimer's disease. Once home, Ruth realizes that Howard--an extremely well-respected professor of history--has his good days and bad days, while her mother has stopped cooking (blaming the aluminum in cookware for Howard's illness). Floundering at first, Ruth eventually steps up, cooking for her family, helping her father, and generally trying to regain her footing. But even she cannot ignore that her father's condition is worsening.
This is an interesting novel, told in short bits and pieces, as if Ruth is talking to her father and describing their days. It covers one year after she comes to stay and comes across almost as if a diary, with a very conversational tone (interspersed with her random thoughts). It's oddly compelling and often humorous, despite the serious subject matter. Occasionally, we get a few snippets from a journal Ruth's father kept during her childhood, chronicling funny things she did or said as a child.
As for Ruth, there's a lightness to many of her stories and observations, but also a sadness: she's watching her beloved, intelligent father fall prey to Alzheimer's; there is a darkness as well, as she grapples with finding out imperfections about her parents' marriage and life. The character list is limited, but all we need, including Ruth's younger brother, Linus; Howard's former teaching assistant, Theo; and a few of Ruth's friends. Ruth comes across as a very real person: she doesn't have it all together, but that's okay. A few pieces of the overall story path are predictable, but do not detract from your overall enjoyment of the book.
The few portions we get from Howard's journal regarding young Ruth are amazing: they humanize him and definitely capture parenthood perfectly. They also so well illustrate how Ruth and Howard are slowly switching roles from child to parent, as Ruth almost begins to have similar observations about her own failing father. The way Khong depicts the sadness and poignancy in these moments is just beautiful and brilliant.
In the end, this is a different kind of book: you have to have the patience for it. It doesn't necessarily tell a story in a full arc, but it's sweet and moving. I very much liked Ruth and the novel (even I did wonder how both Ruth and eventually Linus could afford to stay with their parents, while jobless, but oh well.). Lovely and touching - certainly worth picking up.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you!) in return for an unbiased review
This is an interesting novel, told in short bits and pieces, as if Ruth is talking to her father and describing their days. It covers one year after she comes to stay and comes across almost as if a diary, with a very conversational tone (interspersed with her random thoughts). It's oddly compelling and often humorous, despite the serious subject matter. Occasionally, we get a few snippets from a journal Ruth's father kept during her childhood, chronicling funny things she did or said as a child.
As for Ruth, there's a lightness to many of her stories and observations, but also a sadness: she's watching her beloved, intelligent father fall prey to Alzheimer's; there is a darkness as well, as she grapples with finding out imperfections about her parents' marriage and life. The character list is limited, but all we need, including Ruth's younger brother, Linus; Howard's former teaching assistant, Theo; and a few of Ruth's friends. Ruth comes across as a very real person: she doesn't have it all together, but that's okay. A few pieces of the overall story path are predictable, but do not detract from your overall enjoyment of the book.
The few portions we get from Howard's journal regarding young Ruth are amazing: they humanize him and definitely capture parenthood perfectly. They also so well illustrate how Ruth and Howard are slowly switching roles from child to parent, as Ruth almost begins to have similar observations about her own failing father. The way Khong depicts the sadness and poignancy in these moments is just beautiful and brilliant.
In the end, this is a different kind of book: you have to have the patience for it. It doesn't necessarily tell a story in a full arc, but it's sweet and moving. I very much liked Ruth and the novel (even I did wonder how both Ruth and eventually Linus could afford to stay with their parents, while jobless, but oh well.). Lovely and touching - certainly worth picking up.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you!) in return for an unbiased review
Kyera (8 KP) rated A Wild and Unremarkable Thing in Books
Feb 1, 2018
A Wild and Unremarkable Thing had a very interesting premise that blended fantasy aspects like dragons, with Greek mythology and medieval lore. I love history and mythology, so this book immediately called to me. Unfortunately, it didn't entirely live up to my expectations for it although I did still enjoy my read. I believe that the biggest reason why it stumbled for me is how short the book is. At 238 pages, the author did not have enough time to adequately flesh out the plotline and characters leaving the story feeling rushed and the supporting characters unexplored.
The book is written through alternating points of view, which was a nice way to delve deeper into the character's psyche despite the short text. The main character is Cody, a girl who was born Cayda but has been forced by her father to train and lie her entire life with the hopes that she will slay a Fire Scale. She accepts the pain and commitment because the most important thing is to be able to provide for her family, especially her sisters. I wish that we had been able to get to know the sisters more so that we could form that bond with them and the book would have had more emotional weight.
The other two main characters were Penn and Wolfe. Penn was certainly the most interesting aspect of the story and I enjoyed seeing things from his perspective. Wolfe, on the other hand, was not a character that I related to or enjoyed reading. It was nice however to see things from his perspective as it offered a completely different life experience to view the hunt through.
The book also fell prey to the trope of insta-love, which I believe was also the fault of the story being so short. There was not adequate time to explore the relationship or infatuation between two characters before it seemed as if they were suddenly in love. It almost felt as if chapters of the story were missing because the development of bonds between characters or the plot would jump forward without sufficient explanation. The ending of the book felt incredibly rushed and I wish that it had been given the longer, more detailed conclusion that it deserved.
As a casual reader, I found that I enjoyed the overall story and the weaving of Greek mythology into the plot. Unfortunately, critically there were a number of different aspects that detracted from my enjoyment of the book or drew me out of the story. Despite that, I felt that the author's writing was well done and hope that she can bring more detail to her books in the future.
The book is written through alternating points of view, which was a nice way to delve deeper into the character's psyche despite the short text. The main character is Cody, a girl who was born Cayda but has been forced by her father to train and lie her entire life with the hopes that she will slay a Fire Scale. She accepts the pain and commitment because the most important thing is to be able to provide for her family, especially her sisters. I wish that we had been able to get to know the sisters more so that we could form that bond with them and the book would have had more emotional weight.
The other two main characters were Penn and Wolfe. Penn was certainly the most interesting aspect of the story and I enjoyed seeing things from his perspective. Wolfe, on the other hand, was not a character that I related to or enjoyed reading. It was nice however to see things from his perspective as it offered a completely different life experience to view the hunt through.
The book also fell prey to the trope of insta-love, which I believe was also the fault of the story being so short. There was not adequate time to explore the relationship or infatuation between two characters before it seemed as if they were suddenly in love. It almost felt as if chapters of the story were missing because the development of bonds between characters or the plot would jump forward without sufficient explanation. The ending of the book felt incredibly rushed and I wish that it had been given the longer, more detailed conclusion that it deserved.
As a casual reader, I found that I enjoyed the overall story and the weaving of Greek mythology into the plot. Unfortunately, critically there were a number of different aspects that detracted from my enjoyment of the book or drew me out of the story. Despite that, I felt that the author's writing was well done and hope that she can bring more detail to her books in the future.
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated Gender Outlaw: On Men, Women and the Rest of Us in Books
Jul 23, 2019
This book has one of the best forewords I've ever seen. Bornstein explains that since 1994, when the book was first published, language has changed a lot, and terms that were used regularly then, like transsexual, are highly offensive now. So she has heavily rewritten the book to change the language, but she goes on to say that language is an always-changing thing, and in five or six years this edition, too, might be offensive in the language used. Then she apologizes for that. My favorite lines are one of the last paragraphs of the foreword:
"Now, if anything you read in this book makes you feel bad or wrong or small and weak, then please know that I said something wrong. This book was written many years ago, and the culture I wrote it in is not the culture in which you're reading it. So, if you find anything to be personally insulting, please accept my apology and keep reading with the knowledge that your identity and how you express your gender are correct only when you feel they are correct."
It was a wonderful note to start the book on. I just loved "if you are offended, if this invalidates your identity, then I AM WRONG." Bornstein transitioned in the 80s, and has been an outspoken advocate of queer and trans people most of her life. She is definitely a figure in queer history that more people should read about.
The rest of the book is every bit as good as the foreword. Bornstein absolutely destroys the concept of gender in this book, dissecting it and looking at all the parts and pieces to attempt to figure out why society is so set on the binary system. She more than makes her case that gender is a spectrum, not an either/or. And not just a spectrum between "more male" and "more female" but a colorful kaleidoscope of gender expression and identity. She does not shy away from sensitive topics like surgeries and anatomy. She talks to the reader like she's your favorite outrageous aunt, sitting in the family room gossiping over heavily-spiked tea.
The formatting was occasionally confusing; she has the usual justified text, but then she has left-aligned passages (usually quotes from other people) and right-aligned passages (side-bar like content; I'm unclear if these are notes she made on the original text or what, but it generally clarifies or alters what the main text is talking about.)
I would HIGHLY recommend this book for anyone who wants to learn more about gender issues. Bornstein has an incredibly entertaining way of writing, and she loves to challenge what we think of as gender.
You can find all my reviews and more at http://goddessinthestacks.com
"Now, if anything you read in this book makes you feel bad or wrong or small and weak, then please know that I said something wrong. This book was written many years ago, and the culture I wrote it in is not the culture in which you're reading it. So, if you find anything to be personally insulting, please accept my apology and keep reading with the knowledge that your identity and how you express your gender are correct only when you feel they are correct."
It was a wonderful note to start the book on. I just loved "if you are offended, if this invalidates your identity, then I AM WRONG." Bornstein transitioned in the 80s, and has been an outspoken advocate of queer and trans people most of her life. She is definitely a figure in queer history that more people should read about.
The rest of the book is every bit as good as the foreword. Bornstein absolutely destroys the concept of gender in this book, dissecting it and looking at all the parts and pieces to attempt to figure out why society is so set on the binary system. She more than makes her case that gender is a spectrum, not an either/or. And not just a spectrum between "more male" and "more female" but a colorful kaleidoscope of gender expression and identity. She does not shy away from sensitive topics like surgeries and anatomy. She talks to the reader like she's your favorite outrageous aunt, sitting in the family room gossiping over heavily-spiked tea.
The formatting was occasionally confusing; she has the usual justified text, but then she has left-aligned passages (usually quotes from other people) and right-aligned passages (side-bar like content; I'm unclear if these are notes she made on the original text or what, but it generally clarifies or alters what the main text is talking about.)
I would HIGHLY recommend this book for anyone who wants to learn more about gender issues. Bornstein has an incredibly entertaining way of writing, and she loves to challenge what we think of as gender.
You can find all my reviews and more at http://goddessinthestacks.com
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated 6 Underground (2019) in Movies
Dec 15, 2019
It’s a Michael Bay film. It’s going to have so many car crashes, explosions, stunts and more of the same. Seriously. It’s Michael Bay…AND Ryan Reynolds. With the script by Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick, who both have worked on Zombieland, Deadpool 1 & 2. Just to clarify, this IS an action movie. It surprises me that it was released at this time of year. I would have thought the typical release would head off the summer blockbuster season. However, Netflix has been sending out an eclectic group of movies to premiere in theaters prior to its streaming release.
The premise that we are set up for: super rich billionaire, Number One (Ryan Reynolds) has curated a team with members that each have a specific set of skills. The small team of specialists are all ghosts in the real world. The work that they do requires the anonymity of nonexistence. Each member of the six -person team have been chosen by Number One. Number Two (Melanie Laurent) is a former CIA Operative, Number Three (Manuel Garcia Rulfo) the very talented assassin, Number Four (Adria Arjona) is the Doctor. She is the one who can remove a bullet while the car is dodging through the traffic at breakneck speed. Number five (Ben Hardy, last seen in Bohemian Rhapsody as Roger Taylor) who is the parkour king. Rounding out the team is Number Six (Dave Franco) the Driver.
To say some parts of the film was subdued would have some people raise their collective eyebrows. However, the characters (Numbers Two to Six), have taken on the witty quips that we, as an audience have long associated with Ryan Reynolds. The writers have dispersed the wit and sarcasm to the other team members. This also helps to provide the comradery and establish the “family” concept that bonds the disparate backgrounds of each member. We are privy to a little bit of information of each team member, but I would have liked to see a little bit more history of each to fill in the personal motivation.
I enjoyed all the car chases, explosions, stunts and the international sites. It’s definitely not the typical fare of the holiday season in the theaters, but it is a very fun action movie that shoots the viewer through the story. The pacing is steady, the humor is a little sarcastic with a side of gentle familial teasing.
If you have had enough of the warm and fuzzies that the season provides in plentitude, Six Underground is a welcomed palate cleanser in this time of Yule. I certainly hope we get to see more of this team in a sequel.
4 out of 5 stars
The premise that we are set up for: super rich billionaire, Number One (Ryan Reynolds) has curated a team with members that each have a specific set of skills. The small team of specialists are all ghosts in the real world. The work that they do requires the anonymity of nonexistence. Each member of the six -person team have been chosen by Number One. Number Two (Melanie Laurent) is a former CIA Operative, Number Three (Manuel Garcia Rulfo) the very talented assassin, Number Four (Adria Arjona) is the Doctor. She is the one who can remove a bullet while the car is dodging through the traffic at breakneck speed. Number five (Ben Hardy, last seen in Bohemian Rhapsody as Roger Taylor) who is the parkour king. Rounding out the team is Number Six (Dave Franco) the Driver.
To say some parts of the film was subdued would have some people raise their collective eyebrows. However, the characters (Numbers Two to Six), have taken on the witty quips that we, as an audience have long associated with Ryan Reynolds. The writers have dispersed the wit and sarcasm to the other team members. This also helps to provide the comradery and establish the “family” concept that bonds the disparate backgrounds of each member. We are privy to a little bit of information of each team member, but I would have liked to see a little bit more history of each to fill in the personal motivation.
I enjoyed all the car chases, explosions, stunts and the international sites. It’s definitely not the typical fare of the holiday season in the theaters, but it is a very fun action movie that shoots the viewer through the story. The pacing is steady, the humor is a little sarcastic with a side of gentle familial teasing.
If you have had enough of the warm and fuzzies that the season provides in plentitude, Six Underground is a welcomed palate cleanser in this time of Yule. I certainly hope we get to see more of this team in a sequel.
4 out of 5 stars