Search
Search results
Sassy Brit (97 KP) rated Write Yourself Happy: The Art of Positive Journalling in Books
Jun 5, 2019
With the book Write Yourself Happy: The Art of Positive Journalling, Megan C. Hayes reveals just how we can use practical and scientifically proven methods to increase our happiness through journalling. She’s an academic in Positive Psychology and Creative Writing, and that shows via her knowledge and understanding in this well-written and enlightening book.
I enjoy the process of writing and feel like I am quite a creative person. I’ve read many books like this, and ‘Artist’s Way’ by Julia Cameron and the companion workbook , are just two of them, so I was really happy to learn about this, and keen to read it myself.
The first thing I cannot help but tell you is how the cover has been printed in a way that is is raised in some places, making it very tactile. And yes, I can’t help touching it! The second thing I noticed, before I even began to read it, was how the pages inside are as colourful as the front cover, and filled with the same pastel shades within.
I found it quite amazing how we can use diary writing to discover more about ourselves, overcome difficulties and experience a positive way to reflect on our lives through both good and bad times. It makes sense, when you think about it, how talking to someone about problems can help, so why not express yourself in the form of writing? And this is just what this book encourages you to do in a way that we can reflect on our writing to positively assess our day. It’s not about bigging yourself up and writing only positive things, it’s about really letting go and understanding the psychology behind the case studies and ‘take-away’ lessons to practice for yourself.
Megan has an encouraging, reassuring and uplifting tone, and I really enjoy reading about the psychological and beneficial aspects of journalling. The author uses eight of our most commonly experienced and life-affirming emotions to journal about; joy, gratitude, serenity, interest, hope, pride awe and love. Now some of these may sound a bit new-agey and put some of you off, but it’s set out in a down-to-earth way, that I found very inspiring and not preachy at all.
To conclude, I’d like to explain that writing this way is like reading an engrossing book. When you’re totally immersed it’s like you can actually feel the emotions, experiences and senses of your character. In the same way, writing down evokes similar sensations, memories, smells and feelings. It’s no wonder this positive journalling is a scientifically proven way to support our wellbeing, through personal expression and creativity.
Write Yourself Happy is a thoroughly researched, empowering, positive read.
I enjoy the process of writing and feel like I am quite a creative person. I’ve read many books like this, and ‘Artist’s Way’ by Julia Cameron and the companion workbook , are just two of them, so I was really happy to learn about this, and keen to read it myself.
The first thing I cannot help but tell you is how the cover has been printed in a way that is is raised in some places, making it very tactile. And yes, I can’t help touching it! The second thing I noticed, before I even began to read it, was how the pages inside are as colourful as the front cover, and filled with the same pastel shades within.
I found it quite amazing how we can use diary writing to discover more about ourselves, overcome difficulties and experience a positive way to reflect on our lives through both good and bad times. It makes sense, when you think about it, how talking to someone about problems can help, so why not express yourself in the form of writing? And this is just what this book encourages you to do in a way that we can reflect on our writing to positively assess our day. It’s not about bigging yourself up and writing only positive things, it’s about really letting go and understanding the psychology behind the case studies and ‘take-away’ lessons to practice for yourself.
Megan has an encouraging, reassuring and uplifting tone, and I really enjoy reading about the psychological and beneficial aspects of journalling. The author uses eight of our most commonly experienced and life-affirming emotions to journal about; joy, gratitude, serenity, interest, hope, pride awe and love. Now some of these may sound a bit new-agey and put some of you off, but it’s set out in a down-to-earth way, that I found very inspiring and not preachy at all.
To conclude, I’d like to explain that writing this way is like reading an engrossing book. When you’re totally immersed it’s like you can actually feel the emotions, experiences and senses of your character. In the same way, writing down evokes similar sensations, memories, smells and feelings. It’s no wonder this positive journalling is a scientifically proven way to support our wellbeing, through personal expression and creativity.
Write Yourself Happy is a thoroughly researched, empowering, positive read.
Sassy Brit (97 KP) rated Every Wicked Man in Books
Jun 5, 2019
With the book Write Yourself Happy: The Art of Positive Journalling, Megan C. Hayes reveals just how we can use practical and scientifically proven methods to increase our happiness through journalling. She’s an academic in Positive Psychology and Creative Writing, and that shows via her knowledge and understanding in this well-written and enlightening book.
I enjoy the process of writing and feel like I am quite a creative person. I’ve read many books like this, and ‘Artist’s Way’ by Julia Cameron and the companion workbook , are just two of them, so I was really happy to learn about this, and keen to read it myself.
The first thing I cannot help but tell you is how the cover has been printed in a way that is is raised in some places, making it very tactile. And yes, I can’t help touching it! The second thing I noticed, before I even began to read it, was how the pages inside are as colourful as the front cover, and filled with the same pastel shades within.
I found it quite amazing how we can use diary writing to discover more about ourselves, overcome difficulties and experience a positive way to reflect on our lives through both good and bad times. It makes sense, when you think about it, how talking to someone about problems can help, so why not express yourself in the form of writing? And this is just what this book encourages you to do in a way that we can reflect on our writing to positively assess our day. It’s not about bigging yourself up and writing only positive things, it’s about really letting go and understanding the psychology behind the case studies and ‘take-away’ lessons to practice for yourself.
Megan has an encouraging, reassuring and uplifting tone, and I really enjoy reading about the psychological and beneficial aspects of journalling. The author uses eight of our most commonly experienced and life-affirming emotions to journal about; joy, gratitude, serenity, interest, hope, pride awe and love. Now some of these may sound a bit new-agey and put some of you off, but it’s set out in a down-to-earth way, that I found very inspiring and not preachy at all.
To conclude, I’d like to explain that writing this way is like reading an engrossing book. When you’re totally immersed it’s like you can actually feel the emotions, experiences and senses of your character. In the same way, writing down evokes similar sensations, memories, smells and feelings. It’s no wonder this positive journalling is a scientifically proven way to support our wellbeing, through personal expression and creativity.
Write Yourself Happy is a thoroughly researched, empowering, positive read.
I enjoy the process of writing and feel like I am quite a creative person. I’ve read many books like this, and ‘Artist’s Way’ by Julia Cameron and the companion workbook , are just two of them, so I was really happy to learn about this, and keen to read it myself.
The first thing I cannot help but tell you is how the cover has been printed in a way that is is raised in some places, making it very tactile. And yes, I can’t help touching it! The second thing I noticed, before I even began to read it, was how the pages inside are as colourful as the front cover, and filled with the same pastel shades within.
I found it quite amazing how we can use diary writing to discover more about ourselves, overcome difficulties and experience a positive way to reflect on our lives through both good and bad times. It makes sense, when you think about it, how talking to someone about problems can help, so why not express yourself in the form of writing? And this is just what this book encourages you to do in a way that we can reflect on our writing to positively assess our day. It’s not about bigging yourself up and writing only positive things, it’s about really letting go and understanding the psychology behind the case studies and ‘take-away’ lessons to practice for yourself.
Megan has an encouraging, reassuring and uplifting tone, and I really enjoy reading about the psychological and beneficial aspects of journalling. The author uses eight of our most commonly experienced and life-affirming emotions to journal about; joy, gratitude, serenity, interest, hope, pride awe and love. Now some of these may sound a bit new-agey and put some of you off, but it’s set out in a down-to-earth way, that I found very inspiring and not preachy at all.
To conclude, I’d like to explain that writing this way is like reading an engrossing book. When you’re totally immersed it’s like you can actually feel the emotions, experiences and senses of your character. In the same way, writing down evokes similar sensations, memories, smells and feelings. It’s no wonder this positive journalling is a scientifically proven way to support our wellbeing, through personal expression and creativity.
Write Yourself Happy is a thoroughly researched, empowering, positive read.
Kaysee Hood (83 KP) rated The Mortal Instruments 1: City of Bones in Books
Jan 27, 2018
Characters (2 more)
Diversity
Plot Twists
Some of those Plot Twists (1 more)
Overdone & Prolonged
Another I Wanted to Like
Contains spoilers, click to show
This is more of a overall review for the series, well, up to book 4 as I gave up on trying to get through it all at that point because by then I was tired of the senseless drama.
I wanted to like this series because my friend at the time liked it on top of it sounded interesting. By then the movie was out for it and rumors of the TV show was circling around in the Tumblr community. So, between her and the rest of Booklr I thought why not give it a shot? It couldn't be that bad. Oh how I was wrong.
I shocked a series like this has gained such popularity when really it's good at most. It's not amazing. It's not stunning. It's not special. It's an okay book, with an okay plot, and your basic set of characters.
A girl is average at best, her best friend loves her, and she's being thrown into a world where she's "the one". Oh, did I mention there is a perfect, hot guy with his pals who appear to both be jealous of her? AND THERE'S MORE! The totally hot guy is falling for her...... but they're brother and sister. Oh and they are okay with hooking up despite that. Sort of. It's major conflict. Until you learn they are related and her father was simply messing with them to cause problems in the hopes it would help him have both of them on his side.
As much as Clare offers different types of paranormal things it's all overdone and overplayed. Many times the moments that are suppose to change the whole game in the series are dragged out to the point you're bored to death. Sure, there are gay characters, but they feel more like a "come look at me I'm for your rights even though I'm using your suffering as a way to promote my books as me accepting you" rather than the characters written as simply real. Most of the time that's how secondary characters feel in the series as they are there to be there but not actually meant to be there. Yes, let that idea settle for a second.
I felt like many if Clare had a better team of people proof reading her drafts, pointed out some of these things were not okay (Incest for one), and had people guide her to make the characters more real this could have been a better set of books to me. Maybe it is me still wanting to like it. I'm not sure honestly. I just wish for such a popular series it was worthy of it for everyone.
I wanted to like this series because my friend at the time liked it on top of it sounded interesting. By then the movie was out for it and rumors of the TV show was circling around in the Tumblr community. So, between her and the rest of Booklr I thought why not give it a shot? It couldn't be that bad. Oh how I was wrong.
I shocked a series like this has gained such popularity when really it's good at most. It's not amazing. It's not stunning. It's not special. It's an okay book, with an okay plot, and your basic set of characters.
A girl is average at best, her best friend loves her, and she's being thrown into a world where she's "the one". Oh, did I mention there is a perfect, hot guy with his pals who appear to both be jealous of her? AND THERE'S MORE! The totally hot guy is falling for her...... but they're brother and sister. Oh and they are okay with hooking up despite that. Sort of. It's major conflict. Until you learn they are related and her father was simply messing with them to cause problems in the hopes it would help him have both of them on his side.
As much as Clare offers different types of paranormal things it's all overdone and overplayed. Many times the moments that are suppose to change the whole game in the series are dragged out to the point you're bored to death. Sure, there are gay characters, but they feel more like a "come look at me I'm for your rights even though I'm using your suffering as a way to promote my books as me accepting you" rather than the characters written as simply real. Most of the time that's how secondary characters feel in the series as they are there to be there but not actually meant to be there. Yes, let that idea settle for a second.
I felt like many if Clare had a better team of people proof reading her drafts, pointed out some of these things were not okay (Incest for one), and had people guide her to make the characters more real this could have been a better set of books to me. Maybe it is me still wanting to like it. I'm not sure honestly. I just wish for such a popular series it was worthy of it for everyone.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated The Problem with Forever in Books
Dec 7, 2018
3.5
<i>This ARC was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review </i>
Jennifer L. Armentrout is an American author best known for her young adult novel<i> Obsidian</i>. Although her previous books have contained fantasy elements, <i>The Problem With Forever</i> tackles a contemporary, realistic situation. It is a story of two teenage abuse survivors, and the ways they try to break free from their past.
Mallory has spent four years in therapy since being adopted/rescued by a couple of doctors, Carl and Rosa. Struggling with selective mutism as a result of her past, she has been unable to live a “normal” life. However, Mallory has ambitions to go to college, but in order to do this she must be able to cope being around and speaking to other people. So she takes what feels like the biggest step of her life and enrolls in high school for her senior year.
Of course high school was going to be a life changing experience for Mallory but she got even more than she bargained for. On her very first day she meets Rider, or rather is reunited; the boy she was in a foster home with. Neither believed they would ever see each other again and are delighted about being able to rekindle their strong friendship; except there are many obstacles in the way of their ‘happy ever after.’ A jealous girlfriend, over-protective parents, contrasting social circumstances, and, perhaps most importantly, the effects their challenging past has had on the pair.
The horror of Mallory and Rider’s past makes The Problem With Forever a heart-wrenching tale. It is shocking to think that children in real life have gone through, or are going through, similar experiences. Readers will want a happy ending for both characters, yet will undergo a foreboding sense that something will go wrong.
<i>The Problem With Forever</i> is also a love story – however this is where I think the novel falls down. The romance that blooms between Mallory and Rider seems to happen far too quickly, especially as they have only recently been reunited. That is not the only problem: Mallory and Rider grew up like foster siblings, which makes their new relationship feel somewhat wrong. The overall story could have been just as good without love coming into play.
Overall, I am sure readers will agree, Armentrout’s latest novel is a heart-wrenching story that comes with a strong message about letting go of the past and becoming someone new, someone better. You may have had a bad past, but you will have new experiences if you let yourself. You will not feel this way forever. Full of powerful statements, <i>The Problem With Forever</i> is likely to move many to tears – so be prepared!
<i>This ARC was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review </i>
Jennifer L. Armentrout is an American author best known for her young adult novel<i> Obsidian</i>. Although her previous books have contained fantasy elements, <i>The Problem With Forever</i> tackles a contemporary, realistic situation. It is a story of two teenage abuse survivors, and the ways they try to break free from their past.
Mallory has spent four years in therapy since being adopted/rescued by a couple of doctors, Carl and Rosa. Struggling with selective mutism as a result of her past, she has been unable to live a “normal” life. However, Mallory has ambitions to go to college, but in order to do this she must be able to cope being around and speaking to other people. So she takes what feels like the biggest step of her life and enrolls in high school for her senior year.
Of course high school was going to be a life changing experience for Mallory but she got even more than she bargained for. On her very first day she meets Rider, or rather is reunited; the boy she was in a foster home with. Neither believed they would ever see each other again and are delighted about being able to rekindle their strong friendship; except there are many obstacles in the way of their ‘happy ever after.’ A jealous girlfriend, over-protective parents, contrasting social circumstances, and, perhaps most importantly, the effects their challenging past has had on the pair.
The horror of Mallory and Rider’s past makes The Problem With Forever a heart-wrenching tale. It is shocking to think that children in real life have gone through, or are going through, similar experiences. Readers will want a happy ending for both characters, yet will undergo a foreboding sense that something will go wrong.
<i>The Problem With Forever</i> is also a love story – however this is where I think the novel falls down. The romance that blooms between Mallory and Rider seems to happen far too quickly, especially as they have only recently been reunited. That is not the only problem: Mallory and Rider grew up like foster siblings, which makes their new relationship feel somewhat wrong. The overall story could have been just as good without love coming into play.
Overall, I am sure readers will agree, Armentrout’s latest novel is a heart-wrenching story that comes with a strong message about letting go of the past and becoming someone new, someone better. You may have had a bad past, but you will have new experiences if you let yourself. You will not feel this way forever. Full of powerful statements, <i>The Problem With Forever</i> is likely to move many to tears – so be prepared!
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 (980 KP) rated Salt (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
Angelina Jolie, as Agent Evelyn Salt, plays the sexy spy role well, but the charm she displayed in Mr. and Mrs Smith isn’t present here at all. This is unfortunate because her emotional ties to the rest of the cast are integral to the plot. As seen in the trailers, Salt is a CIA agent who is accused by a defector of being a Russian spy. Salt is forced to run and uses her training and skills to evade capture while trying to prove her innocence.
Her years of experience as a covert operative are supposed to make viewers believe that this slight woman can take down ayone, but some of her fight scenes expected too much benefit of the doubt from the audience, and didn’t feel real. It wasn’t very convincing having such a thin woman carry on in a full fight scene with heavier built men. Despite harsh sound effects and fast camera edits, it honestly didn’t look like she was hitting the baddies hard enough to hurt, let alone knock them out.
Salt has some great twists and turns that kept me entertained and guessing, but that wasn’t enough to keep the whole movie afloat. Before long, these twists began to feel forced, and because I was snapped out of the movie several times after realizing how confused I was, it began to be aggravating to wait for the film to give the audience its bearings again. Phillip Noyce, who also directed the 1997 Val Kilmer spy film The Saint could have imbued the movie with subtle foreshadowing, or at least some foreshadowing as it was nonexistent.
Liev Schreiber, playing Salt’s trusted colleague, did a great job. His imposing yet friendly and sly demeanor fit his part very well. Chiwetel Ejiofor did a good job as well, but his role as another fellow agent was too small. It needed to be bigger for him to really shine. After watching him in Talk to Me, I believe him to be a headline star who needs more screen time to show what he’s capable of. In this smaller role, he does the job effectively, but left me wanting to see more of him.
The special effects were effective and not distracting except for one particular “walk away from the camera during an explosion” moment. It’s not that it was cliche, it’s that any explosion (at that distance, in that environment) would knock someone unconscious. There’s pushing the boundaries of realism for artistic effect, and then there’s that step that’s one step too far.
Overall, the film was enjoyable, but I had higher hopes for this movie. If you’re looking for action with twists, this movie has them in spades.
Her years of experience as a covert operative are supposed to make viewers believe that this slight woman can take down ayone, but some of her fight scenes expected too much benefit of the doubt from the audience, and didn’t feel real. It wasn’t very convincing having such a thin woman carry on in a full fight scene with heavier built men. Despite harsh sound effects and fast camera edits, it honestly didn’t look like she was hitting the baddies hard enough to hurt, let alone knock them out.
Salt has some great twists and turns that kept me entertained and guessing, but that wasn’t enough to keep the whole movie afloat. Before long, these twists began to feel forced, and because I was snapped out of the movie several times after realizing how confused I was, it began to be aggravating to wait for the film to give the audience its bearings again. Phillip Noyce, who also directed the 1997 Val Kilmer spy film The Saint could have imbued the movie with subtle foreshadowing, or at least some foreshadowing as it was nonexistent.
Liev Schreiber, playing Salt’s trusted colleague, did a great job. His imposing yet friendly and sly demeanor fit his part very well. Chiwetel Ejiofor did a good job as well, but his role as another fellow agent was too small. It needed to be bigger for him to really shine. After watching him in Talk to Me, I believe him to be a headline star who needs more screen time to show what he’s capable of. In this smaller role, he does the job effectively, but left me wanting to see more of him.
The special effects were effective and not distracting except for one particular “walk away from the camera during an explosion” moment. It’s not that it was cliche, it’s that any explosion (at that distance, in that environment) would knock someone unconscious. There’s pushing the boundaries of realism for artistic effect, and then there’s that step that’s one step too far.
Overall, the film was enjoyable, but I had higher hopes for this movie. If you’re looking for action with twists, this movie has them in spades.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated After Life in TV
Mar 3, 2020
As Ricky Gervais cheekily crow-barred in to his opening speech at the 2020 Golden Globes a few weeks ago, it is possible to watch all of After Life series one in less time than it takes to watch The Irishman. And that is exactly what I did; binged the whole thing on autoplay until it was done! Not to get it over with as soon as possible, but rather because it is hard to turn off – you just keep wanting more.
It’s not a complicated idea – Tony’s wife has died of cancer and he wishes he was dead too. Surrounded by tedious work colleagues in a dead end job, a father in a home with dementia, and having only a very hungry dog to lean on, he is filled with such bitterness and grief that he decides there is no point not doing anything he wants and being as nasty as possible to all around him.
The show glides effortlessly between hilarious situations, filled with sharp dialogue / small moments of comedy genius, and genuinely sad moments that leave a lump in the throat. It is a trick Gervais has been honing in all his shows since The Office, and now he has it down to a work of art you just have to applaud. No matter how ridiculous, it always seems rooted in truth and real emotion. Each vitriolic outburst is written so well we empathise with Tony almost every time, because he is usually right; and when he isn’t right, that moment of awkwardness is used with almost preternatural understanding of the audience to demonstrate the point of the whole conceit.
It boils down to the truth that no matter how much you want to give up on life and people, you can’t forget that happiness is a gift. Not just yours, but anyone’s. And to go around being an arsehole, wallowing in self-pity is entirely selfish, even if you have good reason to be that way. Distilled into less than 3 hours in total, After Life is no less than a magic trick, in not only achieving the passing on of that message, but in entertaining us every single minute in the meantime!
Thinking of how to rate it, I just can’t find much fault in what it sets out to be. It isn’t a grand or expensive production, it feels humble and economical, but oh so very focused. Do we want more bells and whistles? Have we come to expect that from our entertainment now. Is that what is missing? I feel I would recommend this show to anyone, and am very much looking forward to a second season in the Spring, but I also feel like it doesn’t need to have its trumpet over-blown; it’s just a lovely, funny, simple show about being alive.
It’s not a complicated idea – Tony’s wife has died of cancer and he wishes he was dead too. Surrounded by tedious work colleagues in a dead end job, a father in a home with dementia, and having only a very hungry dog to lean on, he is filled with such bitterness and grief that he decides there is no point not doing anything he wants and being as nasty as possible to all around him.
The show glides effortlessly between hilarious situations, filled with sharp dialogue / small moments of comedy genius, and genuinely sad moments that leave a lump in the throat. It is a trick Gervais has been honing in all his shows since The Office, and now he has it down to a work of art you just have to applaud. No matter how ridiculous, it always seems rooted in truth and real emotion. Each vitriolic outburst is written so well we empathise with Tony almost every time, because he is usually right; and when he isn’t right, that moment of awkwardness is used with almost preternatural understanding of the audience to demonstrate the point of the whole conceit.
It boils down to the truth that no matter how much you want to give up on life and people, you can’t forget that happiness is a gift. Not just yours, but anyone’s. And to go around being an arsehole, wallowing in self-pity is entirely selfish, even if you have good reason to be that way. Distilled into less than 3 hours in total, After Life is no less than a magic trick, in not only achieving the passing on of that message, but in entertaining us every single minute in the meantime!
Thinking of how to rate it, I just can’t find much fault in what it sets out to be. It isn’t a grand or expensive production, it feels humble and economical, but oh so very focused. Do we want more bells and whistles? Have we come to expect that from our entertainment now. Is that what is missing? I feel I would recommend this show to anyone, and am very much looking forward to a second season in the Spring, but I also feel like it doesn’t need to have its trumpet over-blown; it’s just a lovely, funny, simple show about being alive.
Veronica Pena (690 KP) rated I Still Believe (2020) in Movies
Apr 25, 2020 (Updated Apr 25, 2020)
rip my heart out why don't you
Contains spoilers, click to show
Hear me out. The thing about this film is that if you know anything about Jeremy Camp and his story, you know that Melissa dies. Spoiler alert - but I don't think that's news to anyone. I think what makes this film so good is that it's about a love story but it's almost four different love stories. It's about Melissa's blind, unwavering, awe-inspiring love for God. It's about Jeremy's renewal in that faith and in his belief and his love of God after Melissa dies. It's about Melissa and Jeremy's incredible love story - to walk through the fire together, until the end, to put it the way his dad does in the film. But it's also about God's love. And this is coming from a girl who is unsure about what to believe in the slightest. I'm not the preaching, church-going, praying person. I'm not even sure if there is a God, but I believe that people believe it and I respect them for it. Maybe I'll find it one day, maybe I won't. Regardless, this film is beautiful.
What annoys me about the critics that watched this film and their reviews is that they're almost surprised that she dies and that it's a Christian film. Like, do you know anything about Jeremy Camp and who he is? He's literally a Christian singer - for a living. I think this is one of those films where the audience is way more insightful than critics. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I feel like it's so easy for critics to critique and not just escape in the film. But I digress.
K.J. Apa and Britt Robinson are forces in this film. I think that they already have long, successful careers in front of them, without a doubt, but when they work together, they make some serious magic. This is their second film together and I could watch them in a million more. Shania Twain was a nice plug. I think sometimes when you put big country stars in films - Trace Adkins, Shania, etc. - it can be kind of overpowering (depending on the film), but she's very understated but memorable. The standout though, to me, other than the leads was Gary Sinise as Jeremy's dad. There's a moment towards the end of the film where he's just overcome and he leans against the wall and there's a picture of K.J. (meant to be Jeremy) under him and it just hits you. I feel like that was his strongest moment and one of the best moments of the film.
Overall, I think this film is really beautiful. I'm sure I'll come back to it a million times more. I definitely recommend watching it, just have tissues.
What annoys me about the critics that watched this film and their reviews is that they're almost surprised that she dies and that it's a Christian film. Like, do you know anything about Jeremy Camp and who he is? He's literally a Christian singer - for a living. I think this is one of those films where the audience is way more insightful than critics. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I feel like it's so easy for critics to critique and not just escape in the film. But I digress.
K.J. Apa and Britt Robinson are forces in this film. I think that they already have long, successful careers in front of them, without a doubt, but when they work together, they make some serious magic. This is their second film together and I could watch them in a million more. Shania Twain was a nice plug. I think sometimes when you put big country stars in films - Trace Adkins, Shania, etc. - it can be kind of overpowering (depending on the film), but she's very understated but memorable. The standout though, to me, other than the leads was Gary Sinise as Jeremy's dad. There's a moment towards the end of the film where he's just overcome and he leans against the wall and there's a picture of K.J. (meant to be Jeremy) under him and it just hits you. I feel like that was his strongest moment and one of the best moments of the film.
Overall, I think this film is really beautiful. I'm sure I'll come back to it a million times more. I definitely recommend watching it, just have tissues.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
Fast and Furious Johnson/Statham Style
Fast And Furious Presents Hobbs & Shaw is a 2019 action movie directed by David Leitch and written by Chris Morgan and Drew Pearce from a story by Morgan. It was produced by Seven Bucks Productions and Chris Morgan Productions and distributed by Universal Pictures. The film also had Jason Statham, Dwayne Johnson, Chris Morgan and Hiram Garcia as producers. The movie stars Dwayne Johnson, Jason Statham, Idris Elba, Vanessa Kirby and Ryan Reynolds.
When a team of MI6 agents try to retrieve a virus called "Snowflake", which could kill millions, from terrorist organization Eteon; Brixton Lore (Idris Elba), a cybernetically enhanced member of Eteon, arrives killing all the agents except Hattie Shaw (Vanessa Kirby). She is able to inject herself with the virus and escape but Brixton forces her to go on the run by framing her as a traitor who killed her team and stole "Snowflake". Luke Hobbs (Dwayne Johnson) and Deckard Shaw (Jason Statham) are both recruited by the CIA, to work together to track it down and recover it.
This movie definitely fit in with the Fast and Furious series and was what you expected from a spin-off of the main franchise. That being said, it also didn't feel like a good fit in a lot of ways. Dwayne Johnson's character Hobbs felt diminished in a way because of how they tried to humanize him and make him more relatable by introducing family like his daughter. Also Deckard Shaw, Statham's character was given the same treatment by introducing family characters as well. Since the Fast and Furious franchise is all about family, I guess this was to be expected but it came off as contrived and "trope-ish". Vanessa Kirby did an awesome job as kick ass Hattie Shaw and delivered a strong performance as did Idris Elba although his character felt like a stereo-typed villain. The stunts and action sequences of course were crazy as hell but if you like the Fast and Furious movies than you will like this film. For me though, I'm with most fans and feel that the team up with Shaw is a stab in the back to Han since he was killed by Shaw in the franchise. But I guess the movie makers didn't really care or maybe they'll do something else about it later and he'll wind up being alive. All in all, it's a decent movie but just didn't do it for me, even with the great action, the funny dialogue/banter between Statham and Johnson and solid performances from some of the actors. I give this movie a 6/10.
When a team of MI6 agents try to retrieve a virus called "Snowflake", which could kill millions, from terrorist organization Eteon; Brixton Lore (Idris Elba), a cybernetically enhanced member of Eteon, arrives killing all the agents except Hattie Shaw (Vanessa Kirby). She is able to inject herself with the virus and escape but Brixton forces her to go on the run by framing her as a traitor who killed her team and stole "Snowflake". Luke Hobbs (Dwayne Johnson) and Deckard Shaw (Jason Statham) are both recruited by the CIA, to work together to track it down and recover it.
This movie definitely fit in with the Fast and Furious series and was what you expected from a spin-off of the main franchise. That being said, it also didn't feel like a good fit in a lot of ways. Dwayne Johnson's character Hobbs felt diminished in a way because of how they tried to humanize him and make him more relatable by introducing family like his daughter. Also Deckard Shaw, Statham's character was given the same treatment by introducing family characters as well. Since the Fast and Furious franchise is all about family, I guess this was to be expected but it came off as contrived and "trope-ish". Vanessa Kirby did an awesome job as kick ass Hattie Shaw and delivered a strong performance as did Idris Elba although his character felt like a stereo-typed villain. The stunts and action sequences of course were crazy as hell but if you like the Fast and Furious movies than you will like this film. For me though, I'm with most fans and feel that the team up with Shaw is a stab in the back to Han since he was killed by Shaw in the franchise. But I guess the movie makers didn't really care or maybe they'll do something else about it later and he'll wind up being alive. All in all, it's a decent movie but just didn't do it for me, even with the great action, the funny dialogue/banter between Statham and Johnson and solid performances from some of the actors. I give this movie a 6/10.
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Psycho (1960) in Movies
Jan 6, 2021
Contains spoilers, click to show
Ah Psycho, the granddaddy of slashers and a film that I find somehow modern and dated at the same time.
Psycho is a slow burn, at the beginning even the dialogue is sparse as the film builds up to the confrontations with Norman Bates (argued by most as the first modern slasher) and this is part of what makes it dated (and modern), the lack of action and the main character driving around gives Psycho the feel of something that Tarantino might make but it lacks 'something' . It's hard to explain but, by todays standards, parts of Psycho are a bit bland, not necessarily boring but bland. The best example I can think would be the scenes in the car, Psycho has just one character in the car who is imagining what others are saying about her and lots of silence which are filled with dramatic music, where as something like Pulp Fiction you get two characters who are just talking, the music seems to take you out of the situation because, in a modern film it would just be in the background.
As the film progresses we start to pick up on some of the slasher tropes, Norman is strange, again we can't quite explain why but that is sometimes the same in a modern film, we see him spy, once, on Marion and, in a more modern film this would probably be stretched out a bit more.
The kills aren't actually as graphic as most modern day slashers but this doesn't matter as Hitchcock has a talent for making the viewer see what he wants and not just what is happening.
The character of Norman is quite interesting but a lot of 'fleshing out' is just told to the viewer in exposition near the end, however you can see how Norman/Mother could easily be an inspiration for the Jason/Pamela dynamic in the first 'Friday 13th'
Psycho has a lot to answer for, sighted by many as the first modern 'Slasher' movie it caused an uproar for other reasons, the first time a toilet was seen flushing on screen, the first time a 'Leading Lady' was killed off halfway through the film (still a slight oddity now as we normally have one 'final girl') and the fact that the stolen money is just thrown away when it is no longer needed to push the plot along. It is these firsts that help to make the film feel dated, we are used to more graphic kills, toilets are almost irrelevant and there is normally more nudity/sex in a modern slasher.
Apart from being a little dated Psycho is a pretty good and entertain film which has put some thought into it's story and characters
Psycho is a slow burn, at the beginning even the dialogue is sparse as the film builds up to the confrontations with Norman Bates (argued by most as the first modern slasher) and this is part of what makes it dated (and modern), the lack of action and the main character driving around gives Psycho the feel of something that Tarantino might make but it lacks 'something' . It's hard to explain but, by todays standards, parts of Psycho are a bit bland, not necessarily boring but bland. The best example I can think would be the scenes in the car, Psycho has just one character in the car who is imagining what others are saying about her and lots of silence which are filled with dramatic music, where as something like Pulp Fiction you get two characters who are just talking, the music seems to take you out of the situation because, in a modern film it would just be in the background.
As the film progresses we start to pick up on some of the slasher tropes, Norman is strange, again we can't quite explain why but that is sometimes the same in a modern film, we see him spy, once, on Marion and, in a more modern film this would probably be stretched out a bit more.
The kills aren't actually as graphic as most modern day slashers but this doesn't matter as Hitchcock has a talent for making the viewer see what he wants and not just what is happening.
The character of Norman is quite interesting but a lot of 'fleshing out' is just told to the viewer in exposition near the end, however you can see how Norman/Mother could easily be an inspiration for the Jason/Pamela dynamic in the first 'Friday 13th'
Psycho has a lot to answer for, sighted by many as the first modern 'Slasher' movie it caused an uproar for other reasons, the first time a toilet was seen flushing on screen, the first time a 'Leading Lady' was killed off halfway through the film (still a slight oddity now as we normally have one 'final girl') and the fact that the stolen money is just thrown away when it is no longer needed to push the plot along. It is these firsts that help to make the film feel dated, we are used to more graphic kills, toilets are almost irrelevant and there is normally more nudity/sex in a modern slasher.
Apart from being a little dated Psycho is a pretty good and entertain film which has put some thought into it's story and characters