Search
Search results
The Foreign Correspondent
Book
From Alan Furst, whom The New York Times calls “America’s preeminent spy novelist,” comes an...
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) created a post
Feb 26, 2022
Merissa (12066 KP) rated Starboard (Voyagers #2) in Books
Jun 12, 2023
STARBOARD is the second book in the Voyagers series and it is Dylan's turn. He is Rowan and Drew's best friend and has been to hell and back. He has been offered a book deal; to write his biography with the help of a ghostwriter. Max is divorced but still has communication with his ex due to their child, Blake. She is a brilliant character with a wise head on her shoulders for a thirteen-year-old. To keep the press away from them, they go on Rowan's boat in French waters. Romance strikes again.
Drew makes a joke in this that a spell has been put on the boat. When he said that, all I could remember was the cheesy TV series, The Love Boat 🤣. Surrounded by all that luxury, romance isn't hard but when real life intrudes, I loved the way Max and Dylan worked together.
I loved Drew and Rowan's book but this one... Oh, man; I loved it! The stories of Dylan's past he shared were done in such a sensitive manner. It was both heartbreaking and emotional to read. Max was the perfect person to tell it to, with his reactions being non-judgemental.
I also loved how both of them had had complaints about being too distant, too cold, and yet, with each other, the softness came out. Their endearments - and subsequent grumbles - were wonderful.
Not only did we get Drew and Rowan showing up, but we also have Rafe (who's next up) plus two other "couples" (and I use that term loosely right now) that I need to know more about. There is Jared and Alex, plus Reed and Tate. I don't know if they are in any other of Ava Olsen's books, but I will be searching through the backlist to see. I really want to read their stories as the sparks were just flying.
Tender, emotional, heartbreaking, and funny; this book is guaranteed to give you the warm fuzzies. HIGHLY recommended by me.
** same worded review will appear elsewhere **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Jun 12, 2023
Drew makes a joke in this that a spell has been put on the boat. When he said that, all I could remember was the cheesy TV series, The Love Boat 🤣. Surrounded by all that luxury, romance isn't hard but when real life intrudes, I loved the way Max and Dylan worked together.
I loved Drew and Rowan's book but this one... Oh, man; I loved it! The stories of Dylan's past he shared were done in such a sensitive manner. It was both heartbreaking and emotional to read. Max was the perfect person to tell it to, with his reactions being non-judgemental.
I also loved how both of them had had complaints about being too distant, too cold, and yet, with each other, the softness came out. Their endearments - and subsequent grumbles - were wonderful.
Not only did we get Drew and Rowan showing up, but we also have Rafe (who's next up) plus two other "couples" (and I use that term loosely right now) that I need to know more about. There is Jared and Alex, plus Reed and Tate. I don't know if they are in any other of Ava Olsen's books, but I will be searching through the backlist to see. I really want to read their stories as the sparks were just flying.
Tender, emotional, heartbreaking, and funny; this book is guaranteed to give you the warm fuzzies. HIGHLY recommended by me.
** same worded review will appear elsewhere **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Jun 12, 2023
Lee (2222 KP) rated The Aeronauts (2019) in Movies
Mar 19, 2020
As my cinema bookings started to be cancelled, and upcoming releases delayed as part of the chaos that's currently unfolding globally, I thought it was time to start tackling some of those streaming site watch-lists that have been slowly growing in size over recent years. First up, a movie that I managed to miss late last year when released in cinemas, and is now available to stream on Amazon Prime.
The Aeronauts is set in the 1860s and sees Eddie Redmayne and Felicity Jones, last seen together playing husband and wife in The Theory of Everything, reuniting for a story that is inspired by true events. Redmayne plays James Glaisher, a scientist studying and presenting theories surrounding weather prediction, in particular how a trip to the skies in a gas balloon could help us to understand more about it. It's a science very much in it's infancy, which is why Glaisher has become such a laughing stock among his peers within the science community, all of whom declare meteorology to be fortune telling rather than science. Felicity Jones plays the fictional character of Amelia Wren, an aeronaut who lost her husband in a balloon accident and has been convinced by Glaisher to return to the skies and join him as pilot onboard the balloon as they explore some of his theories.
The movie begins with a large crowd who have gathered in London to watch the departure of the Glaisher and Wren. Glaisher is making some last minute checks and adjustments to the numerous pieces of equipment that will provide all of the data and readings he needs while they ascend up into the clouds, while Wren is currently nowhere to be seen. When she does eventually arrive, she's brash and loud, making a big entrance and playing up to the crowds, entertaining them with cartwheels and her parachuting dog. “Do you take anything seriously?" Glaisher asks.
As the balloon gently sets off, we get a beautiful view of 1860s London and a simple on-screen graph begins plotting the duration of their journey against their current height, something which returns every so often to keep us nicely updated with their progress. Before this expedition, the greatest altitude ever reached by a human being was 23,000ft, a record achieved by a French team. So, in addition to gaining some valuable scientific data along the way, there is the added incentive to try and beat the French too!
The whole expedition is followed pretty much in real time, but broken up by a series of flashbacks which give us some additional insight into our main characters and what brought them together. A look at the balloon trip which resulted in the death of her husband shows us just how seriously Amelia takes her role on this particular adventure. Meanwhile, we get more of a glimpse into the ridicule Glaisher received from his scientific colleagues, and an introduction to his dementia suffering father (Tom Courtenay).
As beautiful and exhilarating as it is to see the balloon as it continues up through the clouds and storms, floating peacefully through blue skies and swarms of butterflies, it wouldn't be much of a movie without some additional drama and tension to spice things up. So, as Glaisher and Wren argue about whether to push on way beyond the 23,000ft record or begin their descent, the temperature drops down to five degrees, and snow and ice begin to form on the balloon and basket. The thinning oxygen and cold temperatures starts to affect their judgement, their equipment and their health, and would you believe it, neither of them thought to bring along their gloves either!
When the pigeons they've brought along for sending instrument readings back down to base either start to die, or drop like rocks when launched from the balloon basket, it's clear that it's time to start heading back down. But, a problem with the balloon means that Wren must venture outside the basket and up on top of the balloon itself, in some of the most vertigo inducing scenes I've seen since watching The Walk on the big screen.
The Aeronauts was a lot more enjoyable than I was expecting. It's two stars, as you'd expect, more than capably carry the story and are both hugely entertaining. The effects used for rendering the balloon and it's surroundings, particularly during adverse weather conditions, are very effective and at times had me on the edge of my seat too.
The Aeronauts is set in the 1860s and sees Eddie Redmayne and Felicity Jones, last seen together playing husband and wife in The Theory of Everything, reuniting for a story that is inspired by true events. Redmayne plays James Glaisher, a scientist studying and presenting theories surrounding weather prediction, in particular how a trip to the skies in a gas balloon could help us to understand more about it. It's a science very much in it's infancy, which is why Glaisher has become such a laughing stock among his peers within the science community, all of whom declare meteorology to be fortune telling rather than science. Felicity Jones plays the fictional character of Amelia Wren, an aeronaut who lost her husband in a balloon accident and has been convinced by Glaisher to return to the skies and join him as pilot onboard the balloon as they explore some of his theories.
The movie begins with a large crowd who have gathered in London to watch the departure of the Glaisher and Wren. Glaisher is making some last minute checks and adjustments to the numerous pieces of equipment that will provide all of the data and readings he needs while they ascend up into the clouds, while Wren is currently nowhere to be seen. When she does eventually arrive, she's brash and loud, making a big entrance and playing up to the crowds, entertaining them with cartwheels and her parachuting dog. “Do you take anything seriously?" Glaisher asks.
As the balloon gently sets off, we get a beautiful view of 1860s London and a simple on-screen graph begins plotting the duration of their journey against their current height, something which returns every so often to keep us nicely updated with their progress. Before this expedition, the greatest altitude ever reached by a human being was 23,000ft, a record achieved by a French team. So, in addition to gaining some valuable scientific data along the way, there is the added incentive to try and beat the French too!
The whole expedition is followed pretty much in real time, but broken up by a series of flashbacks which give us some additional insight into our main characters and what brought them together. A look at the balloon trip which resulted in the death of her husband shows us just how seriously Amelia takes her role on this particular adventure. Meanwhile, we get more of a glimpse into the ridicule Glaisher received from his scientific colleagues, and an introduction to his dementia suffering father (Tom Courtenay).
As beautiful and exhilarating as it is to see the balloon as it continues up through the clouds and storms, floating peacefully through blue skies and swarms of butterflies, it wouldn't be much of a movie without some additional drama and tension to spice things up. So, as Glaisher and Wren argue about whether to push on way beyond the 23,000ft record or begin their descent, the temperature drops down to five degrees, and snow and ice begin to form on the balloon and basket. The thinning oxygen and cold temperatures starts to affect their judgement, their equipment and their health, and would you believe it, neither of them thought to bring along their gloves either!
When the pigeons they've brought along for sending instrument readings back down to base either start to die, or drop like rocks when launched from the balloon basket, it's clear that it's time to start heading back down. But, a problem with the balloon means that Wren must venture outside the basket and up on top of the balloon itself, in some of the most vertigo inducing scenes I've seen since watching The Walk on the big screen.
The Aeronauts was a lot more enjoyable than I was expecting. It's two stars, as you'd expect, more than capably carry the story and are both hugely entertaining. The effects used for rendering the balloon and it's surroundings, particularly during adverse weather conditions, are very effective and at times had me on the edge of my seat too.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Upside (2019) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Not the 5* French classic, but a fun and moving movie nonetheless.
So, the movie-going audience for this film will divide into two categories:
Category A: those that have seen the original 2011 French classic “The Intouchables” that this is based on, and;
Category B: those that haven’t.
2011 is just before I started “One Mann’s Movies”, but “The Intouchables” would have got 5* from me, no problem.
This movie joins a list of standout European movies – for example, “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”; “Let The Right One In”; “Sleepless Night”; etc. – that have had Hollywood “makeovers” that don’t match up to the originals. And this is no exception. However, it’s still been well made and deserves respect as a standalone piece of movie-making.
The Plot
Based on a true story, Phillip Lacasse (Bryan Cranston) is left both paraplegic and widowed by a string of bad luck. Not that money can buy you everything, but his care arrangements are substantially helped by him being a multi-millionaire (“Not rich enough to buy The Yankees; Rich enough to buy The Mets”). This is from success in investments and writing about such investments.
Depressed, cranky and with a “DNR” that his diligent PA Yvonne (Nicole Kidman) seems unable to comply with, Phillip lashes out at anyone and everyone and so dispatches his carers with monotonous regularity. Dell Scott (Kevin Hart) is on parole, with the requirement to seek work. Due to a mix-up, he finds himself in the employ of Phillip: with the suspicion that he’s been hired because he is the very worst candidate imaginable, and thus the most likely to let Phillip shuffle off this mortal coil. But the two men’s antipathy to each other slowly thaws as they teach each other new tricks.
Pin left in the grenade
Those who have seen “The Intouchables” will fondly remember the first 5 minutes of that film: a flash-forward to a manic police car-chase featuring our protagonists (there played by François Cluzet and Omar Sy). It drops like a comedy hand-grenade to open the film. Unfortunately, you can’t help but feel a bit let down by the same re-creation in “The Upside”. It has all the same content but none of the heart.
After that rocky start, the film continues to rather stutter along. Part of the reason for this I think is Kevin Hart. It’s not that he’s particularly bad in the role: it’s just that he IS Kevin Hart, and I was constantly thinking “there’s that comedian playing that role”.
However, once the story gets into its swing, giving Cranston more of a chance to shine (which he does), then the film started to motor and my reservations about Hart started to wane. Some of these story set pieces – such as the one about the art work – are punch-the-air funny in their own right. Cranston’s timing in delivering his punchlines is immaculate.
This IS what actors do
There seems to have been some furore about the casting of Bryan Cranston as the role of the disabled millionaire instead of a disabled actor. Lord save us! He’s an actor! That’s what actors do for a living: pretend to be people they’re not! It’s also worth pointing out that François Cluzet was an able-bodied actor as well.
As already mentioned, Bryan Cranston excels in the role. Phillip goes through such a wide range of emotions from despair to pure joy and back again that you can’t help but be impressed by the performance.
On the female side of the cast, it’s really nice to see Nicole Kidman in such a quiet and understated role and it’s nicely done; Aja Naomi King does a nice job as Dell’s protective ex-girlfriend Latrice; and there’s a nice female cameo as well, which I won’t spoil since I wasn’t expecting to see her in the film.
Final Thoughts
As a standalone film it has some laugh-out-loud moments, some feelgood highs and some moments of real pathos. The audience I saw this with was small, but there was still a buzz in the room and sporadic applause as the end titles came up: God only knows that’s unusual for a film!
The director is “Limitless” and “Divergent” director Neil Burger, and it’s a perfectly fun and innocent night out at the flicks that I commend to the house in this month of celluloid awards heavyweights.
Category A: those that have seen the original 2011 French classic “The Intouchables” that this is based on, and;
Category B: those that haven’t.
2011 is just before I started “One Mann’s Movies”, but “The Intouchables” would have got 5* from me, no problem.
This movie joins a list of standout European movies – for example, “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”; “Let The Right One In”; “Sleepless Night”; etc. – that have had Hollywood “makeovers” that don’t match up to the originals. And this is no exception. However, it’s still been well made and deserves respect as a standalone piece of movie-making.
The Plot
Based on a true story, Phillip Lacasse (Bryan Cranston) is left both paraplegic and widowed by a string of bad luck. Not that money can buy you everything, but his care arrangements are substantially helped by him being a multi-millionaire (“Not rich enough to buy The Yankees; Rich enough to buy The Mets”). This is from success in investments and writing about such investments.
Depressed, cranky and with a “DNR” that his diligent PA Yvonne (Nicole Kidman) seems unable to comply with, Phillip lashes out at anyone and everyone and so dispatches his carers with monotonous regularity. Dell Scott (Kevin Hart) is on parole, with the requirement to seek work. Due to a mix-up, he finds himself in the employ of Phillip: with the suspicion that he’s been hired because he is the very worst candidate imaginable, and thus the most likely to let Phillip shuffle off this mortal coil. But the two men’s antipathy to each other slowly thaws as they teach each other new tricks.
Pin left in the grenade
Those who have seen “The Intouchables” will fondly remember the first 5 minutes of that film: a flash-forward to a manic police car-chase featuring our protagonists (there played by François Cluzet and Omar Sy). It drops like a comedy hand-grenade to open the film. Unfortunately, you can’t help but feel a bit let down by the same re-creation in “The Upside”. It has all the same content but none of the heart.
After that rocky start, the film continues to rather stutter along. Part of the reason for this I think is Kevin Hart. It’s not that he’s particularly bad in the role: it’s just that he IS Kevin Hart, and I was constantly thinking “there’s that comedian playing that role”.
However, once the story gets into its swing, giving Cranston more of a chance to shine (which he does), then the film started to motor and my reservations about Hart started to wane. Some of these story set pieces – such as the one about the art work – are punch-the-air funny in their own right. Cranston’s timing in delivering his punchlines is immaculate.
This IS what actors do
There seems to have been some furore about the casting of Bryan Cranston as the role of the disabled millionaire instead of a disabled actor. Lord save us! He’s an actor! That’s what actors do for a living: pretend to be people they’re not! It’s also worth pointing out that François Cluzet was an able-bodied actor as well.
As already mentioned, Bryan Cranston excels in the role. Phillip goes through such a wide range of emotions from despair to pure joy and back again that you can’t help but be impressed by the performance.
On the female side of the cast, it’s really nice to see Nicole Kidman in such a quiet and understated role and it’s nicely done; Aja Naomi King does a nice job as Dell’s protective ex-girlfriend Latrice; and there’s a nice female cameo as well, which I won’t spoil since I wasn’t expecting to see her in the film.
Final Thoughts
As a standalone film it has some laugh-out-loud moments, some feelgood highs and some moments of real pathos. The audience I saw this with was small, but there was still a buzz in the room and sporadic applause as the end titles came up: God only knows that’s unusual for a film!
The director is “Limitless” and “Divergent” director Neil Burger, and it’s a perfectly fun and innocent night out at the flicks that I commend to the house in this month of celluloid awards heavyweights.
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated Paris Ever After in Books
Apr 9, 2019
Amy has been staying in Paris for the past few months. After the death of her best friend, she had to fulfill their dream of going to Paris. The problem, she took off without saying anything to anyone, including her husband. When she returns home, he says he doesn't want to see her anymore, so she goes back to Paris. She makes new friends, finds a place to live and even finds a little job to keep her busy. But as she is gathering items for her birthday celebration, she sees her husband in Paris. What is he doing here? Why didn't he tell her he was coming? Why hasn't he replied to any of her texts or phone calls? And why does he look like that? Over the few days he is in Paris, Amy's life will change dramatically. Will she return to the States with him, or will she stay in Paris, ever after?
Thank you to KSR Burns for a copy of this book and the opportunity to read and review it.
When I first started reading this book, I was sure I was going to love it. Amy and I share the same birthday so I was bound to connect to her. But for me the story fell flat. There were good parts to it, like learning more about Paris and the sights there. Some of the plot seemed a bit far-fetched. I can't say too much without giving away the story. I did read the book from cover to cover though and it didn't make me want to stop reading it, which is why I gave it 3 stars.
I think other readers may enjoy this story more than I did. If you like Paris and are familiar with French, maybe this will speak to you better than it did me. Sometimes I find that books with a lot of foreign phrases that aren't translated are difficult. This book did explain the phrases a lot, but their were parts that left me confused. Maybe because this is a sequel the story fell flat for me, I'm not sure.
I will read other books by KSR Burns. In fact, I'm going to go back and read this first book The Paris Effect by K.S.R. Burns to see if that helps.
Thank you to KSR Burns for a copy of this book and the opportunity to read and review it.
When I first started reading this book, I was sure I was going to love it. Amy and I share the same birthday so I was bound to connect to her. But for me the story fell flat. There were good parts to it, like learning more about Paris and the sights there. Some of the plot seemed a bit far-fetched. I can't say too much without giving away the story. I did read the book from cover to cover though and it didn't make me want to stop reading it, which is why I gave it 3 stars.
I think other readers may enjoy this story more than I did. If you like Paris and are familiar with French, maybe this will speak to you better than it did me. Sometimes I find that books with a lot of foreign phrases that aren't translated are difficult. This book did explain the phrases a lot, but their were parts that left me confused. Maybe because this is a sequel the story fell flat for me, I'm not sure.
I will read other books by KSR Burns. In fact, I'm going to go back and read this first book The Paris Effect by K.S.R. Burns to see if that helps.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated The Upside (2019) in Movies
May 8, 2019 (Updated May 8, 2019)
On The Up and Up
This movie had a bit of a strange release, at least in my area. It was one of those movies that only had two showings a day on it's opening weekend and they were both at really obscure times like 10:30am and 2:40pm, - times that would suggest that this movie was being put out to die. This was disappointing as, after seeing the trailers, I was looking forward to seeing it and never got the chance while it was in cinemas. Anyway, I finally got around to seeing it upon it's home release and I really enjoyed it.
Although I did like the look of this project from the trailer and I am a big fan of Bryan Cranston, I was wary of Kevin Hart starring opposite him in this role. It looked like a role that would require a more serious actor than Kevin Hart and I was concerned that Hart had been miscast and only chosen because of the recognition of his name rather than whether or not he was the right actor for the part.
Surprisingly and thankfully, I was proven entirely wrong. Hart shows here that he is in fact very capable in a more serious role such as this and doesn't just have to resort to screaming in every film he is in. I hope that he takes on more serious stuff following this as I much prefer it to any of his 'comedic,' roles. The rest of the cast are also great, Cranston gives a sublime performance as he always does and Nicole Kidman works well as Cranston's character's secretary/ potential love interest.
This film is a remake of a French film called The Intouchables and there are other elements of it that bear similarities to other movies that we have seen before, but it is a well told story that has various worthwhile messages littered throughout it. The script is witty and snappy enough that the film never feels slow or boring.
Overall, I really enjoyed my time with this one. It isn't the most original thing I have ever seen, but it was entertaining and it had heart. The script was well written and the direction was solid. The performances from the entire cast also help elevate the already funny script even further.
Although I did like the look of this project from the trailer and I am a big fan of Bryan Cranston, I was wary of Kevin Hart starring opposite him in this role. It looked like a role that would require a more serious actor than Kevin Hart and I was concerned that Hart had been miscast and only chosen because of the recognition of his name rather than whether or not he was the right actor for the part.
Surprisingly and thankfully, I was proven entirely wrong. Hart shows here that he is in fact very capable in a more serious role such as this and doesn't just have to resort to screaming in every film he is in. I hope that he takes on more serious stuff following this as I much prefer it to any of his 'comedic,' roles. The rest of the cast are also great, Cranston gives a sublime performance as he always does and Nicole Kidman works well as Cranston's character's secretary/ potential love interest.
This film is a remake of a French film called The Intouchables and there are other elements of it that bear similarities to other movies that we have seen before, but it is a well told story that has various worthwhile messages littered throughout it. The script is witty and snappy enough that the film never feels slow or boring.
Overall, I really enjoyed my time with this one. It isn't the most original thing I have ever seen, but it was entertaining and it had heart. The script was well written and the direction was solid. The performances from the entire cast also help elevate the already funny script even further.
Ross (3284 KP) rated The Nutcracker and the Four Realms (2018) in Movies
Nov 5, 2018 (Updated Nov 5, 2018)
Slight variation on the Alice in Wonderland reboot
I'm guessing Disney want to keep going with their live action Princess films, and thought they'd hit gold with the rights to the Nutcracker for a Christmas release. Similar to the 2010 Alice in Wonderland, the film intends to act as a sequel to the original tale of the Nutcracker, where the world has fallen into disarray. Clara is the daughter of the original story's Marie, who has passed away, and looking to open the intriguing present left by her mother she finds herself following a mouse (not a rabbit!) into a strange world. She is introduced to the world her mother was made queen of, though sadly learns that the "fourth realm" (led by Helen Mirren as Mother Ginger) is at war with the other three (among them are realms led by Keira Knightley and an underused Richard E Grant).
Here Disney have taken some liberties as Clara's brother and sister take the roles and names of her mother's siblings in the original, and for no apparent reason the film based on the Russian ballet that was based on the French adaptation of the German fairy tale, is set in London. I can only assume this was to up the Festive quotient, but seems a very odd choice, despite keeping a number of the German themes.
Keira Knightley is very irritating, doing an ear-piercing impression of Queenie from Blackadder.
Neither of the actors playing Clara or the Nutcracker are very good or likeable and you find yourself bored and starting to root for Mother Ginger just to end it.
The film is too long, and drags in large parts, and all three of my kids were restless for a lot of it. And there was a definite lack of large-scale special effects, some impressive scenes but audiences expect spectacles (not 3D glasses, I mean big scenes!) these days and those were lacking.
The most enjoyable scene was the use of ballet to get Clara up to date with the world she found herself in, being quite respectful to the medium it was adapting (though I can't say how authentic it was!).
Here Disney have taken some liberties as Clara's brother and sister take the roles and names of her mother's siblings in the original, and for no apparent reason the film based on the Russian ballet that was based on the French adaptation of the German fairy tale, is set in London. I can only assume this was to up the Festive quotient, but seems a very odd choice, despite keeping a number of the German themes.
Keira Knightley is very irritating, doing an ear-piercing impression of Queenie from Blackadder.
Neither of the actors playing Clara or the Nutcracker are very good or likeable and you find yourself bored and starting to root for Mother Ginger just to end it.
The film is too long, and drags in large parts, and all three of my kids were restless for a lot of it. And there was a definite lack of large-scale special effects, some impressive scenes but audiences expect spectacles (not 3D glasses, I mean big scenes!) these days and those were lacking.
The most enjoyable scene was the use of ballet to get Clara up to date with the world she found herself in, being quite respectful to the medium it was adapting (though I can't say how authentic it was!).
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Papillon (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
Henry “Papillon” Charriere (Charlie Hunnam) is a safecracker making his name in the Parisian underworld. But when he decides to keep some diamonds from a big score to himself his luck changes. He is framed for a murder and given a life sentence. Even worse for Papillon is that he is being shipped to the Devil’s Island penal colony in French Giana. With no chance at an appeal his only chance at freedom is to escape. On the long boat ride from France to South America he finds an unlikely ally in the form of the forger Louis Dega (Rami Malek). The slight and awkward Dega does not want to escape but rather just survive long enough to have his appeal heard. Papillon agrees to protect Dega in exchange for financing any escape plan Papillon can devise. With Dega’s financial backing Papillon now only has to figure out how to escape from prison no one has been known to escape from on an island surrounded by rivers and ocean, unforgiving jungle and guards who shoot to kill.
Papillon is based on a true story and adapted from the novels “Papillon” and “Banco” written by Charriere himself. This is the second film adaptation of these novels. The other film, also Papillon, is from 1973 stared Steve McQueen and Dustin Hoffman. I have not seen the 1973 version but I did enjoy the story and could be worth viewing to get another directors vision.
The 2018 version is powered but a captivating story of survival and the unlikely friendship of two men thrust together in a harsh environment. Both Hunnam (King Arthur, Pacific Rim) and Malek (Mr. Robot – TV Series, Night at the Museum) give excellent performances. The rest of the cast is okay but these two stars give great performances. Danish director Michael Noer (R, Northwest) does a decent job in the telling of the story visually. There was blood in one scene that was a pink colored and did not look anything like blood and that was a little distracting. The prison seemed realistic and grimy, but also weirdly bright.
Overall I enjoyed this film. I didn’t have any expectations going in and was pleasantly surprised but interesting story. At 2 hours and 13 minutes it does seem a bit too long. This would be a film I would enjoy watching at home and not necessarily something I would spend theater money on.
Papillon is based on a true story and adapted from the novels “Papillon” and “Banco” written by Charriere himself. This is the second film adaptation of these novels. The other film, also Papillon, is from 1973 stared Steve McQueen and Dustin Hoffman. I have not seen the 1973 version but I did enjoy the story and could be worth viewing to get another directors vision.
The 2018 version is powered but a captivating story of survival and the unlikely friendship of two men thrust together in a harsh environment. Both Hunnam (King Arthur, Pacific Rim) and Malek (Mr. Robot – TV Series, Night at the Museum) give excellent performances. The rest of the cast is okay but these two stars give great performances. Danish director Michael Noer (R, Northwest) does a decent job in the telling of the story visually. There was blood in one scene that was a pink colored and did not look anything like blood and that was a little distracting. The prison seemed realistic and grimy, but also weirdly bright.
Overall I enjoyed this film. I didn’t have any expectations going in and was pleasantly surprised but interesting story. At 2 hours and 13 minutes it does seem a bit too long. This would be a film I would enjoy watching at home and not necessarily something I would spend theater money on.
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated The Kingdom Beyond the Waves in Books
Nov 18, 2019
Professor Amelia Harsh is a discredited academic, shunned by any university she could work for because of her obsession for the lost city of Camlantis which is dismissed by most as a myth. When all her other avenues dry up she grabs a lifeline from a rich industrialist to lead an expedition to find the last evidence of the city.
Meanwhile, why is someone graverobbing obsolete steamman corpses from cemetaries? And why has Furnace-breath Nick - scourge of Quatershift - been asked to break a prisoner free?
For those unfamiliar with Hunt's incredibly imaginative world - revealed in this book to likely be a far future version of our own which somehow mirrors certain aspects such as Victorian England and the French Revolution - would soon be at home in this book, particularly as half of the book involves a trip up a native-infested jungle river worthy of Conrad. Meanwhile the trail is being followed from the other end and the smoggy streets of Middlesteel in the country of Jackals by Furnace-breath Nick's not so mild mannered alter ego, Cornelius Fortune.
The way the story unfolds is very reminiscent of Saturday morning serials that used to be popular when not everyone had a television. There are a series of episodes where our heroes are put into peril and yet somehow (mostly) break free. The difference is in the mostly. Hunt is not afraid of killing off a character and that keeps the reader on the edge of their seat and turning the pages to see if that really was the end or there is a miraculous escape on the cards.
The inventiveness Hunt showed in The Court of the Air is very much still evident with a fiendish plot and fantastic ideas zinging off the page together with very clever dialog. Once again this is a book to read carefully and not to skim, it will be so much more rewarding.
All in all this is a stronger book than the first and the characters in it are terrific, heroes and villains alike. There are still Deus Ex Machina escapes here and there but they are on the whole consistent with the world of Jackals.
I would very much recommend this to anyone who likes their science fiction broad and heading to steam punk rather than space opera (although it's not really steam punk) and their adventure old-school swashbuckling. Terrific work.
Meanwhile, why is someone graverobbing obsolete steamman corpses from cemetaries? And why has Furnace-breath Nick - scourge of Quatershift - been asked to break a prisoner free?
For those unfamiliar with Hunt's incredibly imaginative world - revealed in this book to likely be a far future version of our own which somehow mirrors certain aspects such as Victorian England and the French Revolution - would soon be at home in this book, particularly as half of the book involves a trip up a native-infested jungle river worthy of Conrad. Meanwhile the trail is being followed from the other end and the smoggy streets of Middlesteel in the country of Jackals by Furnace-breath Nick's not so mild mannered alter ego, Cornelius Fortune.
The way the story unfolds is very reminiscent of Saturday morning serials that used to be popular when not everyone had a television. There are a series of episodes where our heroes are put into peril and yet somehow (mostly) break free. The difference is in the mostly. Hunt is not afraid of killing off a character and that keeps the reader on the edge of their seat and turning the pages to see if that really was the end or there is a miraculous escape on the cards.
The inventiveness Hunt showed in The Court of the Air is very much still evident with a fiendish plot and fantastic ideas zinging off the page together with very clever dialog. Once again this is a book to read carefully and not to skim, it will be so much more rewarding.
All in all this is a stronger book than the first and the characters in it are terrific, heroes and villains alike. There are still Deus Ex Machina escapes here and there but they are on the whole consistent with the world of Jackals.
I would very much recommend this to anyone who likes their science fiction broad and heading to steam punk rather than space opera (although it's not really steam punk) and their adventure old-school swashbuckling. Terrific work.