Search
Search results
Deborah (162 KP) rated Seeking Mr Hare in Books
Dec 21, 2018
I've not read anything by Maurice Leitch before, but like most people I've heard of Burke & Hare, so thought this would be worth a read.
Overall it was very well written. As well as the historical Mr Hare, Thomas de Quincey (Confessions of An English Opium Eater) makes an appearance. The novel starts with Hare still held in gaol and we see him turn King's Evidence and be allowed to go free while his partner in crime (pun intended!) goes to the gallows. A plaster cast is taken of Hare's head and a phrenologist has a good feel of his skull!
Being somewhat notorious and with many people being outraged with his perceived escape from justice, Hare has some difficulty in getting away and he has little money and few possessions to his name.
So much for Hare's half of the narrative. His account is interspersed with chapters in the form of letters or journal entries from Mr Speed, a former police detective. He had been charged by a Lord with an interest in science and criminology to track Hare down. This is the weak point for me - I don't quite understand why. Hare was imprisoned while the trial was going on, so why is it only after he is released he has to be tracked down. What is Speed supposed to do for him employer if and when he catches up with Hare? What exact;y does he want to know? This isn't clear to me and so the book as a whole rather loses its point. I can't say much more as it will end up spoiling things, but the ending did seem very anti-climactic to me.
Overall it was very well written. As well as the historical Mr Hare, Thomas de Quincey (Confessions of An English Opium Eater) makes an appearance. The novel starts with Hare still held in gaol and we see him turn King's Evidence and be allowed to go free while his partner in crime (pun intended!) goes to the gallows. A plaster cast is taken of Hare's head and a phrenologist has a good feel of his skull!
Being somewhat notorious and with many people being outraged with his perceived escape from justice, Hare has some difficulty in getting away and he has little money and few possessions to his name.
So much for Hare's half of the narrative. His account is interspersed with chapters in the form of letters or journal entries from Mr Speed, a former police detective. He had been charged by a Lord with an interest in science and criminology to track Hare down. This is the weak point for me - I don't quite understand why. Hare was imprisoned while the trial was going on, so why is it only after he is released he has to be tracked down. What is Speed supposed to do for him employer if and when he catches up with Hare? What exact;y does he want to know? This isn't clear to me and so the book as a whole rather loses its point. I can't say much more as it will end up spoiling things, but the ending did seem very anti-climactic to me.
Andy K (10823 KP) rated Upgrade (2018) in Movies
Aug 16, 2019
Robocop meets All of Me?
I found this film in a bargain bin at my local video shop for only $1 to purchase and after reading many good reviews I thought I couldn't go wrong and I was right.
Maybe a sci-fi/horror version of "The Six Million Dollar Man" is more appropriate.
In the future, a man and his wife have a car accident. Afterwards the woman is murdered and the man is shot leaving him paralyzed. Rather than living life with a severe handicap, the man decides to undergo an experimental medical procedure which would give him augmented abilities through the implantation of a mysterious computer chip which would control his ability to walk and use his arms.
Once he is back to "normal" he feels compelled to investigate the circumstances of his wife's death and hunt down those responsible. His ability start to manifest themselves once he is interacting with his new friend STEM.
His quest for vengeance and justice leads him through some interesting twists and turns before its unexpected conclusion.
This films pulls no punches (literally) and some of the fight scenes are not only well choreographed, but downright vicious and gory. The inaction between the main character and his mind are cool and unexpected. Even though you feel like you have seen this before in other movies, this one takes a fresh spin and keeps you guessing the majority of the time.
It appears writer/director Leigh Whannell (who also wrote the original Saw) is headed for great things probably because of this film as IMDb lists remakes of The Invisible Man and Escape From New York as his next projects.
Maybe a sci-fi/horror version of "The Six Million Dollar Man" is more appropriate.
In the future, a man and his wife have a car accident. Afterwards the woman is murdered and the man is shot leaving him paralyzed. Rather than living life with a severe handicap, the man decides to undergo an experimental medical procedure which would give him augmented abilities through the implantation of a mysterious computer chip which would control his ability to walk and use his arms.
Once he is back to "normal" he feels compelled to investigate the circumstances of his wife's death and hunt down those responsible. His ability start to manifest themselves once he is interacting with his new friend STEM.
His quest for vengeance and justice leads him through some interesting twists and turns before its unexpected conclusion.
This films pulls no punches (literally) and some of the fight scenes are not only well choreographed, but downright vicious and gory. The inaction between the main character and his mind are cool and unexpected. Even though you feel like you have seen this before in other movies, this one takes a fresh spin and keeps you guessing the majority of the time.
It appears writer/director Leigh Whannell (who also wrote the original Saw) is headed for great things probably because of this film as IMDb lists remakes of The Invisible Man and Escape From New York as his next projects.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated The Walking Dead - Season 3 in TV
Aug 16, 2019 (Updated Oct 25, 2019)
Contains spoilers, click to show
The third season of The Walking Dead is fairly up and down.
It's not as consistent as the first two for sure.
It's still pretty decent television however.
There's a large Shane shaped hole left after the finale of season 2 - filled by none other than The Governor. He's a piece of work for sure.
I enjoyed The Governor throughout season 3, although a lot of my friends who are fans of the comic protest that he's a far cry from the source material. As someone who is yet to catch up with the comic series, this wasn't a problem for me. He's played with aplomb by David Morrissey, who's obviously having a great time. On the surface, he's a nice guy, who's trying to help his people thrive in a post apocalyptic world - but there's certainly something sinister underneath.
We're also given back Merle, which is great because Michael Rooker. No other reason needed!
After a very brief appearance at the end of season 2, we also get a lot of fan favourite Michonne here, one of my favourite characters in the whole show, played by Danai Gurira.
As in the first two seasons, the cast are pretty great all round. No complaints from me in that respect.
It's the story which takes a bit of a hit. The majority of the season is set in a Prison, and the Governor's story is pretty slow burning as he grows to hate Rick. Some of the episodes feel like filler, with some really strong episodes dotted throughout (the fourth episode in particular is a blinder)
This is an issue that becomes more obvious as the series draw on but at this point isn't severe enough to make a huge impact.
It's still good, gory, bleak, fun? I guess?
#Justice4HershelsFoot
It's not as consistent as the first two for sure.
It's still pretty decent television however.
There's a large Shane shaped hole left after the finale of season 2 - filled by none other than The Governor. He's a piece of work for sure.
I enjoyed The Governor throughout season 3, although a lot of my friends who are fans of the comic protest that he's a far cry from the source material. As someone who is yet to catch up with the comic series, this wasn't a problem for me. He's played with aplomb by David Morrissey, who's obviously having a great time. On the surface, he's a nice guy, who's trying to help his people thrive in a post apocalyptic world - but there's certainly something sinister underneath.
We're also given back Merle, which is great because Michael Rooker. No other reason needed!
After a very brief appearance at the end of season 2, we also get a lot of fan favourite Michonne here, one of my favourite characters in the whole show, played by Danai Gurira.
As in the first two seasons, the cast are pretty great all round. No complaints from me in that respect.
It's the story which takes a bit of a hit. The majority of the season is set in a Prison, and the Governor's story is pretty slow burning as he grows to hate Rick. Some of the episodes feel like filler, with some really strong episodes dotted throughout (the fourth episode in particular is a blinder)
This is an issue that becomes more obvious as the series draw on but at this point isn't severe enough to make a huge impact.
It's still good, gory, bleak, fun? I guess?
#Justice4HershelsFoot
Darren (64 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies
Oct 27, 2019
People misunderstand this film.
Watching Joker, I knew that this would not be your average DC film. Knowing this, I think this is why i enjoyed it and i can understand why a lot of people didn't. Arthur Fleck is isolated and bullied by society, He has dreams of being a comedian except,He's not very funny. Arthur takes jobs to earn money and also cares for his mum. Arthur is already a man on the edge, He takes pills every day to suppress a personality disorder. The further we go into the film the further, we feel Arthur's Pain. He does not fit in anywhere. Arthur just wants to be accepted and to make people happy through comedy. When a social service program receives funding cuts which stops him from having his medication. Arthur finds out a shattering piece of news, which, in his fragile state of mind, tips him over the edge.
I can't really say anymore with spoilers and i don't want to spoil the film for anyone who has not yet seen it. For me personally, I went in with the mindset of watching Joker as a film about a mentally ill and unstable man rejected by society. That's why i enjoyed it. If you go in expecting Batman to pop up then , My friends, You will be seriously disappointed.
All i can say is, it's a slow burner of a film and that is for good reason so we fully understand the trauma of being Arthur. I've no doubt if nominated Joaquin Phoenix will win all awards given out in awards season. His performance is that brilliant. Is he the best Joker though? ....We'll leave that up for debate.
I can't really say anymore with spoilers and i don't want to spoil the film for anyone who has not yet seen it. For me personally, I went in with the mindset of watching Joker as a film about a mentally ill and unstable man rejected by society. That's why i enjoyed it. If you go in expecting Batman to pop up then , My friends, You will be seriously disappointed.
All i can say is, it's a slow burner of a film and that is for good reason so we fully understand the trauma of being Arthur. I've no doubt if nominated Joaquin Phoenix will win all awards given out in awards season. His performance is that brilliant. Is he the best Joker though? ....We'll leave that up for debate.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Date Night (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
Date Night, directed by Shawn Levy (Night at the Museum), is a surprisingly funny film. More often than not, you can determine the quality of a film by the time you finish watching its trailer. This movie was a nice wake-up call that what you see isn’t always what you get.
Steve Carell and Tiny Fey have an unexpected amount of on-screen chemistry. This affinity is most evident in a clever dining scene in the beginning of the film, during which they each ad-lib other restaurant patrons’ conversations (be sure to stay in your seats during the credits for several hilarious out-takes of this scene). Carell and Fey genuinely feel like a couple in a bit of a slump in their marriage. Romantic comedies are often guilty of betraying a stunning lack of subtlety when it comes to heartfelt dialogue, but not in this case. The way they work through it during the countless shenanigans of their date night never comes across as trite or clichéd.
I was surprised the type of humor varied quite a bit during this film. Each of us have a different type of funny bone, so while some jokes fell relatively flat on me personally, these same moments were met with a good amount of laughter from others in the theater. Don’t come into this movie expecting a singular form of comedy. Visual humor, situational comedy, unexpected irony, running gags (involving Mark Wahlberg), and several obviously bad jokes told with fearless gusto pushed this movie to unanticipated levels of laughter.
After a few questionable plot events, the ending was something of a deus ex machina. The writer, Josh Klausner, ended up working the implausibility into the story nicely for a decent finish to a funny film.
Steve Carell and Tiny Fey have an unexpected amount of on-screen chemistry. This affinity is most evident in a clever dining scene in the beginning of the film, during which they each ad-lib other restaurant patrons’ conversations (be sure to stay in your seats during the credits for several hilarious out-takes of this scene). Carell and Fey genuinely feel like a couple in a bit of a slump in their marriage. Romantic comedies are often guilty of betraying a stunning lack of subtlety when it comes to heartfelt dialogue, but not in this case. The way they work through it during the countless shenanigans of their date night never comes across as trite or clichéd.
I was surprised the type of humor varied quite a bit during this film. Each of us have a different type of funny bone, so while some jokes fell relatively flat on me personally, these same moments were met with a good amount of laughter from others in the theater. Don’t come into this movie expecting a singular form of comedy. Visual humor, situational comedy, unexpected irony, running gags (involving Mark Wahlberg), and several obviously bad jokes told with fearless gusto pushed this movie to unanticipated levels of laughter.
After a few questionable plot events, the ending was something of a deus ex machina. The writer, Josh Klausner, ended up working the implausibility into the story nicely for a decent finish to a funny film.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Fourth Kind (2009) in Movies
Aug 9, 2019
Based on true events, “The Fourth Kind” is a thriller/semi-documentary covering the seemingly unexplained true events that occurred to psychologist Abigail Turner, portrayed in the film by Milla Jovovich. “The Fourth Kind” presents Abby’s story merging dramatic renditions with actual video and audio footage of the strange occurrences.
It is a creepy film filled with close up shots of spooky owls and the hauntingly foggy skies of Nome, Alaska. All this imagery creates a mystical scene but it left me wondering whether is it the films content or an extremely good knowledge of camera angles that created the lingering possibility of truth?
Furthering my dislike of the film are the unnecessary plot deviations, such as the start and conclusion by Jovovich, and the slow and disjointed family sequences which make the characters hard to relate to. Moreover, it seems as if much of the film’s content could be removed and possibly presented as a stronger case for an encounter of the fourth kind as short film or even television episode.
But the most glaring objection to the film’s premise is that it is built on a very small amount of evidence. Sure, the evidence that is presented is disturbing but the limited actual video and audio clips utilized make the film feel gimmicky. Dr. Turner’s story is intriguing but it does not support a satisfying a full-length film, especially for audiences hoping to see something that will force them to reexamine their stance on alien life forms.
In the end what you probably want to know is if this movie significantly change my views on the possibility of alien life forms or if it scared me to my core. The simple answer is no, but it did make me less enthusiastic about visiting to Nome, Alaska.
It is a creepy film filled with close up shots of spooky owls and the hauntingly foggy skies of Nome, Alaska. All this imagery creates a mystical scene but it left me wondering whether is it the films content or an extremely good knowledge of camera angles that created the lingering possibility of truth?
Furthering my dislike of the film are the unnecessary plot deviations, such as the start and conclusion by Jovovich, and the slow and disjointed family sequences which make the characters hard to relate to. Moreover, it seems as if much of the film’s content could be removed and possibly presented as a stronger case for an encounter of the fourth kind as short film or even television episode.
But the most glaring objection to the film’s premise is that it is built on a very small amount of evidence. Sure, the evidence that is presented is disturbing but the limited actual video and audio clips utilized make the film feel gimmicky. Dr. Turner’s story is intriguing but it does not support a satisfying a full-length film, especially for audiences hoping to see something that will force them to reexamine their stance on alien life forms.
In the end what you probably want to know is if this movie significantly change my views on the possibility of alien life forms or if it scared me to my core. The simple answer is no, but it did make me less enthusiastic about visiting to Nome, Alaska.
Kelly (279 KP) rated Ghost Stories (2018) in Movies
Jan 15, 2019
This would not be out of place in the Twilight Zone
In a time where the audience has become accustomed to jumpy Hollywood horrors, it’s hard to create a horror that provokes the viewer. Ghost stories does this well.
The film itself follows paranormal sceptic, professor Phillip Goodman, as he tries to unpick and denounce three separate cases. The bulk of the film centres around these three cases, all three cases play on the audiences inner fears of the unknown - I’m sure we have all scared ourselves at some point by objects that look differently to what they are in the shadows of the night! To me, the second case, Simon’s story, was the most disturbing simply for how jumpy and scared the character Simon clearly was with the situation. I was a little confused by the ending to Mike’s story, although I understand that it was necessary to move the story to the next stage, I did feel that more explanation was needed.
The format of this film played out like an episode of the Twilight Zone, including the unexpected twist in the end. This too me was what made the film more compelling. Following the big reveal, I spent a little time revisiting each of the cases, and some of the unusual behaviours of the characters and apparitions made more sense.
The acting within the film was good and believable- I am a fan of Martin Freeman, which did draw me to the movie, and although some of the script was a little bizarre, he did act well.
In conclusion, the film was not scary enough to lose sleep over, however it is disturbing enough to make me think and consider my own views on the paranormal.
The film itself follows paranormal sceptic, professor Phillip Goodman, as he tries to unpick and denounce three separate cases. The bulk of the film centres around these three cases, all three cases play on the audiences inner fears of the unknown - I’m sure we have all scared ourselves at some point by objects that look differently to what they are in the shadows of the night! To me, the second case, Simon’s story, was the most disturbing simply for how jumpy and scared the character Simon clearly was with the situation. I was a little confused by the ending to Mike’s story, although I understand that it was necessary to move the story to the next stage, I did feel that more explanation was needed.
The format of this film played out like an episode of the Twilight Zone, including the unexpected twist in the end. This too me was what made the film more compelling. Following the big reveal, I spent a little time revisiting each of the cases, and some of the unusual behaviours of the characters and apparitions made more sense.
The acting within the film was good and believable- I am a fan of Martin Freeman, which did draw me to the movie, and although some of the script was a little bizarre, he did act well.
In conclusion, the film was not scary enough to lose sleep over, however it is disturbing enough to make me think and consider my own views on the paranormal.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Happytime Murders (2017) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
As a huge fan of Melissa McCarthy, I wasn’t about to miss out on one of her films involving puppets. Especially when said puppets and film were made by Jim Henson’s son Brian Henson. That being said, just remember that these puppets are absolutely 100% “No Sesame, All Street”. “From the studio formerly sued by Sesame Street” STX presents The Happytime Murders.
Private detective Phil Philipps (Bill Barretta) is a puppet and lives in a world where puppets coexist with but are otherwise hated by humans. After a series of murders including that of his brother it forces his ex-partner Connie Edwards (Melissa McCarthy) to help solve the crime. The murderer seems to be targeting all former cast members of the beloved eighties TV show The Happytime Gang. Two worlds clash as the race is on to find the culprit.
Honestly I feel as though I could do without seeing this film ever again. Yes there are funny moments but it seems overshadowed by the lack of a good storyline. Granted audiences might go just to see puppets act raunchy and use profanity however, is that enough to hold a film together for 90 mins? No it certainly isn’t. As much as I love the comedic stylings of Elizabeth Banks, Mya Rudolph, Joel McHale and especially Melissa McCarthy, the film audiences anticipate being the funniest of the year is surely not. Even with a big cast of comedians couldn’t save this film. Perhaps films involving puppets and ridiculous plots should be left to that of children audiences. If you were to stitch together all of the comical scenes in every trailer for the film, you would basically see it all. In my opinion you might want to skip this one and wait for it to come to a Redbox near you.
Private detective Phil Philipps (Bill Barretta) is a puppet and lives in a world where puppets coexist with but are otherwise hated by humans. After a series of murders including that of his brother it forces his ex-partner Connie Edwards (Melissa McCarthy) to help solve the crime. The murderer seems to be targeting all former cast members of the beloved eighties TV show The Happytime Gang. Two worlds clash as the race is on to find the culprit.
Honestly I feel as though I could do without seeing this film ever again. Yes there are funny moments but it seems overshadowed by the lack of a good storyline. Granted audiences might go just to see puppets act raunchy and use profanity however, is that enough to hold a film together for 90 mins? No it certainly isn’t. As much as I love the comedic stylings of Elizabeth Banks, Mya Rudolph, Joel McHale and especially Melissa McCarthy, the film audiences anticipate being the funniest of the year is surely not. Even with a big cast of comedians couldn’t save this film. Perhaps films involving puppets and ridiculous plots should be left to that of children audiences. If you were to stitch together all of the comical scenes in every trailer for the film, you would basically see it all. In my opinion you might want to skip this one and wait for it to come to a Redbox near you.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Instant Family (2019) in Movies
Nov 18, 2019
Surprise Treat
A couple looking to foster a teenager end up taking on an entire family of three. Instant Family will give you laughs, tears, and, most importantly, insight.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 4
The movie doesn’t exactly come out of the gates swinging. You’re meeting the couple for the first time and you see what their life is like pre-kids. I understand it’s necessary, but definitely not the most fun way to get started.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
I love how director Sean Anders decided to shoot the film. It’s not your average feel-good family movie. There is a real sense of struggle here, real pain, and Anders captures this in great pockets along with the more comedic moments of being a parent. Sometimes the fun and the pain are intermixed and it makes for some beautiful scenes.
Conflict: 10
All three kids within the family pose different challenges that the parents find themselves having to adjust to, besides the challenges of just being new parents. The parental-work-life balance is real and you’re exposed to all of that throughout the duration of the movie.
Entertainment Value: 8
Memorability: 8
Pace: 5
Plot: 6
The story itself is pretty straightforward and basic. Twenty minutes in and you pretty much know how it’s going to play out. Still, that doesn’t make it any less enjoyable of a movie.
Resolution: 10
The ending…man, that ending. I’ve only watched this movie once because that damn touching conclusion. Such a great payoff.
Overall: 80
I typically don’t gravitate towards movies with Lifetime plots, but Instant Family is a winner. It heartwarming, endearing, and real from start to finish. Surprise treat of 2018.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 4
The movie doesn’t exactly come out of the gates swinging. You’re meeting the couple for the first time and you see what their life is like pre-kids. I understand it’s necessary, but definitely not the most fun way to get started.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
I love how director Sean Anders decided to shoot the film. It’s not your average feel-good family movie. There is a real sense of struggle here, real pain, and Anders captures this in great pockets along with the more comedic moments of being a parent. Sometimes the fun and the pain are intermixed and it makes for some beautiful scenes.
Conflict: 10
All three kids within the family pose different challenges that the parents find themselves having to adjust to, besides the challenges of just being new parents. The parental-work-life balance is real and you’re exposed to all of that throughout the duration of the movie.
Entertainment Value: 8
Memorability: 8
Pace: 5
Plot: 6
The story itself is pretty straightforward and basic. Twenty minutes in and you pretty much know how it’s going to play out. Still, that doesn’t make it any less enjoyable of a movie.
Resolution: 10
The ending…man, that ending. I’ve only watched this movie once because that damn touching conclusion. Such a great payoff.
Overall: 80
I typically don’t gravitate towards movies with Lifetime plots, but Instant Family is a winner. It heartwarming, endearing, and real from start to finish. Surprise treat of 2018.
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated Letters to the Pianist in Books
Nov 19, 2019
War is hell. Sometimes that hell can be a little closer to home.
14 year old Ruth Goldberg lives with her family in the East End of London during the Second World War with her parents and younger sister and brother. Her life isn't perfect by any means but at least she has her family. When their house takes a direct hit from a German bomb, the children are orphaned and cast adrift to live with strangers.
Meanwhile a man is found in the rubble following the bombing, suffering from total amnesia, who is given the name Edward because cannot even remember his own. He does discover that he is an enormously skilled pianist and soon becomes famous and also rich after marrying the daughter of a well-connected aristocrat millionaire.
The story follows Ruth, her siblings and Edward through the war years and beyond as that one bombing raid changed all their lives forever. Some will find their new lives hold unexpected - even deadly - dangers and all will come to know love and friendship as well as loss and betrayal.
Mayes writes this novel with confidence, moving smoothly between the story lines as they unfold and intertwine. She makes the reader really feel the emotions the characters are going through, good or bad. Edward's story is particularly effective as his previous life slowly starts to come to light and the man he was isn't the person either those around him or Edward himself is comfortable with.
As with her previous book, Stop The World, although very different in subject matter this story is just as deeply affecting and once again I'm sure it will stay with me for some time.
14 year old Ruth Goldberg lives with her family in the East End of London during the Second World War with her parents and younger sister and brother. Her life isn't perfect by any means but at least she has her family. When their house takes a direct hit from a German bomb, the children are orphaned and cast adrift to live with strangers.
Meanwhile a man is found in the rubble following the bombing, suffering from total amnesia, who is given the name Edward because cannot even remember his own. He does discover that he is an enormously skilled pianist and soon becomes famous and also rich after marrying the daughter of a well-connected aristocrat millionaire.
The story follows Ruth, her siblings and Edward through the war years and beyond as that one bombing raid changed all their lives forever. Some will find their new lives hold unexpected - even deadly - dangers and all will come to know love and friendship as well as loss and betrayal.
Mayes writes this novel with confidence, moving smoothly between the story lines as they unfold and intertwine. She makes the reader really feel the emotions the characters are going through, good or bad. Edward's story is particularly effective as his previous life slowly starts to come to light and the man he was isn't the person either those around him or Edward himself is comfortable with.
As with her previous book, Stop The World, although very different in subject matter this story is just as deeply affecting and once again I'm sure it will stay with me for some time.