Search
Search results
My rating: 3.5
<i>I won a copy for free through Totally Random Books on Facebook</i>
<i>Crusher</i> is the first installment and debut novel in a young adult thriller series by Irish born author Niall Leonard. Set in present day London it follows Finn Maguire, an illiterate, 17-year old drop out with no GCSEs, after the murder of his stepfather. Being marked as the prime suspect by the police, Finn is determined to discover who the real murdered was, and just as importantly, what their motive was.
As the story unfolds Finn pursues multiples of potential killers. Could it be someone his father knew? As an ex-actor many people knew him. Or was he writing about something someone would rather no become public knowledge? Perhaps London’s biggest gangster, Joseph McGovern, had something to do with it? As Finn gets involved with these people he finds he has put him self in danger of being killed as well.
Leonard writes well and the story is fast paced and engaging however there was an inconsistency in the narrative. Towards the beginning Finn tells the reader “I put in my password and the laptop grunted and groaned… The cops hadn’t asked for my password… Obviously they’d managed to bypass it some how.” However in the following chapter Finn talks about the same laptop: “Eventually the desktop appeared with a tinny fanfare. I’d never bothered with a password… I found it a huge pain in the arse to enter one.” Hmm, that does not quite add up!
Another issue with this novel is that Finn is meant to be an uneducated, ex-drug dealer however he comes across as more of a semi-polite but witty average teenager who is able to take care of himself. The character portrayal becomes slightly more accurate towards the conclusion of the book, but some may find it difficult to picture Finn the way Leonard intended readers to.
Despite these complaints it is a good read. Many young adults would enjoy it.
<i>I won a copy for free through Totally Random Books on Facebook</i>
<i>Crusher</i> is the first installment and debut novel in a young adult thriller series by Irish born author Niall Leonard. Set in present day London it follows Finn Maguire, an illiterate, 17-year old drop out with no GCSEs, after the murder of his stepfather. Being marked as the prime suspect by the police, Finn is determined to discover who the real murdered was, and just as importantly, what their motive was.
As the story unfolds Finn pursues multiples of potential killers. Could it be someone his father knew? As an ex-actor many people knew him. Or was he writing about something someone would rather no become public knowledge? Perhaps London’s biggest gangster, Joseph McGovern, had something to do with it? As Finn gets involved with these people he finds he has put him self in danger of being killed as well.
Leonard writes well and the story is fast paced and engaging however there was an inconsistency in the narrative. Towards the beginning Finn tells the reader “I put in my password and the laptop grunted and groaned… The cops hadn’t asked for my password… Obviously they’d managed to bypass it some how.” However in the following chapter Finn talks about the same laptop: “Eventually the desktop appeared with a tinny fanfare. I’d never bothered with a password… I found it a huge pain in the arse to enter one.” Hmm, that does not quite add up!
Another issue with this novel is that Finn is meant to be an uneducated, ex-drug dealer however he comes across as more of a semi-polite but witty average teenager who is able to take care of himself. The character portrayal becomes slightly more accurate towards the conclusion of the book, but some may find it difficult to picture Finn the way Leonard intended readers to.
Despite these complaints it is a good read. Many young adults would enjoy it.
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated Before The Devil Knows You're Dead in Books
Nov 8, 2019
It is a snowy Hogmanay in Glasgow. Obstetric Surgeon Gavin Law has made an accusation of malpractice against a colleague, Wallace Maitland, only for an accusation to be made against him. Wallace Maitland doesn't remember Hogmanay but did end up covered in blood. Sean Rafferty is now the head of gangster family having taken over from his violent father Jimmy and is having a party to try to appear respectable.
When Law disappears on that fateful Hogmanay, private detective Charlie Cameron takes on the case to find him. But with no leads he also agrees to look at an apparent suicide for his policeman friend DS Geddes, something will put him on a collision course with Rafferty, a man who has tried to kill Cameron in the past.
This, roughly, is the setting for the third of the Charlie Cameron crime thrillers. Detective novels require their plot and characterisation to be convincing and Mullen delivers both. Cameron is always convincing, and an entertaining narrator of the events as he witnesses them. The usual supporting cast of Pat Logue and Geddes are in fine form and Rafferty seems even more of a threat when in the role of a respectable businessman. The various others involved in the cases all ring true as well. Mullen has a knack for not only making his characters believable but very human and realistic as well.
The plotting did not disappoint either with the Law case especially baffling as all avenues of investigation peter out to nothing, and Cameron's frustration at this is clear. The final reveal caught me by surprise but fits everything together perfectly. It certainly kept me guessing, although to be honest I was enjoying simply following Cameron around and seeing his world too much to spend much time worrying about who did it.
This was a book that I enjoyed reading enormously. Mullen is a terrific writer and Cameron and the world he inhabits is a living breathing thing in his hands. Very very highly recommended.
When Law disappears on that fateful Hogmanay, private detective Charlie Cameron takes on the case to find him. But with no leads he also agrees to look at an apparent suicide for his policeman friend DS Geddes, something will put him on a collision course with Rafferty, a man who has tried to kill Cameron in the past.
This, roughly, is the setting for the third of the Charlie Cameron crime thrillers. Detective novels require their plot and characterisation to be convincing and Mullen delivers both. Cameron is always convincing, and an entertaining narrator of the events as he witnesses them. The usual supporting cast of Pat Logue and Geddes are in fine form and Rafferty seems even more of a threat when in the role of a respectable businessman. The various others involved in the cases all ring true as well. Mullen has a knack for not only making his characters believable but very human and realistic as well.
The plotting did not disappoint either with the Law case especially baffling as all avenues of investigation peter out to nothing, and Cameron's frustration at this is clear. The final reveal caught me by surprise but fits everything together perfectly. It certainly kept me guessing, although to be honest I was enjoying simply following Cameron around and seeing his world too much to spend much time worrying about who did it.
This was a book that I enjoyed reading enormously. Mullen is a terrific writer and Cameron and the world he inhabits is a living breathing thing in his hands. Very very highly recommended.
JT (287 KP) rated The Gentlemen (2020) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020
Guy Richie back to doing what he does best (1 more)
Excellent cast
Twists, turns and carnage
Since Snatch Guy Richie hasn’t covered himself in glory with some of his recent films. The likes of Swept Away, Revolver and King Arthur: Legend of the Sword did little to enhance his street cred.
While Sherlock Holmes and The Man From U.N.C.L.E were certainly enjoyable romps they didn’t have the cutting edge to what Richie does best, the gangster flick. Thankfully The Gentlemen provides everything you could want from that genre and Richie is back on familiar ground.
Mickey Pearson (Matthew McConaughey) is looking to retire from his current criminal life and plans to sell off his highly profitable marijuana empire in London. However, when rival gangs get wind of his plans there is blackmail, bribery and double-crossing aplenty.
One of the stars of the film is Hugh Grant, who for once is not playing a bumbling English gentry. Instead, he plays a slimy cockney called Fletcher with inside knowledge of what Mickey’s plans are and attempts to use them for his own financial gain.
Grant adds a subtle level of humour to the proceedings and spends most of the time in dialogue with Ray (Charlie Hunnam) Mickey’s right-hand man, who actually delivers a half-decent performance.
The Gentlemen has Richie’s aggressive dialogue which is bathed in neat action set pieces. It’s foul-mouthed and the characters all have their own unique and very distinct personalities. From Colin Farrell’s Coach to Henry Golding’s psychotic Dry Eye they can stand happily alongside some of the greats from Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch.
The film has a cool swagger about it where everything clicks nicely. There are a few twists and turns along the way which is expected from the British director and it is filled with his trademarks that hit the right notes at the right time. For me, this is by far and away his best film for quite some time.
While Sherlock Holmes and The Man From U.N.C.L.E were certainly enjoyable romps they didn’t have the cutting edge to what Richie does best, the gangster flick. Thankfully The Gentlemen provides everything you could want from that genre and Richie is back on familiar ground.
Mickey Pearson (Matthew McConaughey) is looking to retire from his current criminal life and plans to sell off his highly profitable marijuana empire in London. However, when rival gangs get wind of his plans there is blackmail, bribery and double-crossing aplenty.
One of the stars of the film is Hugh Grant, who for once is not playing a bumbling English gentry. Instead, he plays a slimy cockney called Fletcher with inside knowledge of what Mickey’s plans are and attempts to use them for his own financial gain.
Grant adds a subtle level of humour to the proceedings and spends most of the time in dialogue with Ray (Charlie Hunnam) Mickey’s right-hand man, who actually delivers a half-decent performance.
The Gentlemen has Richie’s aggressive dialogue which is bathed in neat action set pieces. It’s foul-mouthed and the characters all have their own unique and very distinct personalities. From Colin Farrell’s Coach to Henry Golding’s psychotic Dry Eye they can stand happily alongside some of the greats from Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch.
The film has a cool swagger about it where everything clicks nicely. There are a few twists and turns along the way which is expected from the British director and it is filled with his trademarks that hit the right notes at the right time. For me, this is by far and away his best film for quite some time.
Gareth von Kallenbach (968 KP) rated Lawless (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Prohibition means profit to the bootlegging Bondurant brothers, until a new deputy appears wanting a cut of the action. When the family, led by oldest brother Forrest (Tom Hardy), refuses, it ignites a pattern of violent lawless retribution between the corrupt local authorities and the moonshine-selling brothers.
While adapted from the pages of a successful book, the plot of “Lawless” portrays a familiar story. A young romance slated against the challenges of a family who is literally and metaphorically, sticking to their guns. The brilliance of the film exists in the vivid set work, understated characterization, and graphic portrayals of unbridled yet historically accurate punishments.
There are bullet holes everywhere in this wild land of violence. The depictions of torture, while not the most graphically intensive in cinema, are characterized by psychological malice. The result is a film that manages to entirely pull the viewer into a different, much less civilized, time.
Led and narrated by seasoned actor, Shia LaBeouf, as the youngest brother, Jack Bondurant, the role is hardly a challenge. Yet his performances only stands out when supported by other cast members, such as the gangster Floyd Banner, played by Gary Oldman. And while LaBeouf’s performance is not a great as it could be, it shines next to his lackluster costar, Mia Wasikowska as Bertha Minnix the forbidden preacher’s daughter and object of young Jack’s eye.
The best performance in the film is not the lead, but that of his brother Forrest who dispenses well-timed wisdom or humor even in direst situations. Further helping in the films success are the supporting characters; the third Bondurant brother, Howard (Jason Clarke), mechanically gifted family friend, Cricket Pate (Dane DeHaan), and city wise beauty Maggie Beauford (Jessica Chastain).
While not as impressive as expected, the slow but steady story and complex visceral nature of “Lawless”, make it a film that is worth the price of a ticket, for anyone who can make it through the squeamish bits.
While adapted from the pages of a successful book, the plot of “Lawless” portrays a familiar story. A young romance slated against the challenges of a family who is literally and metaphorically, sticking to their guns. The brilliance of the film exists in the vivid set work, understated characterization, and graphic portrayals of unbridled yet historically accurate punishments.
There are bullet holes everywhere in this wild land of violence. The depictions of torture, while not the most graphically intensive in cinema, are characterized by psychological malice. The result is a film that manages to entirely pull the viewer into a different, much less civilized, time.
Led and narrated by seasoned actor, Shia LaBeouf, as the youngest brother, Jack Bondurant, the role is hardly a challenge. Yet his performances only stands out when supported by other cast members, such as the gangster Floyd Banner, played by Gary Oldman. And while LaBeouf’s performance is not a great as it could be, it shines next to his lackluster costar, Mia Wasikowska as Bertha Minnix the forbidden preacher’s daughter and object of young Jack’s eye.
The best performance in the film is not the lead, but that of his brother Forrest who dispenses well-timed wisdom or humor even in direst situations. Further helping in the films success are the supporting characters; the third Bondurant brother, Howard (Jason Clarke), mechanically gifted family friend, Cricket Pate (Dane DeHaan), and city wise beauty Maggie Beauford (Jessica Chastain).
While not as impressive as expected, the slow but steady story and complex visceral nature of “Lawless”, make it a film that is worth the price of a ticket, for anyone who can make it through the squeamish bits.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Batman (1989) in Movies
Oct 10, 2019
Batman- i love this movie, i have seen it about 7-9 times. I love michael Keaton as bruce wayne/batman. I love jack nicholson as the joker. This movie has action, comedy, suspense, laughing gas, a prince song, adventure and so much more. Also you have darkness, romance, lots of screaming from Vicki Vale played by Kim Basinger. Did i mention that Tim Burton directed this film.
The Plot: Having witnessed his parents' brutal murder as a child, millionaire philanthropist Bruce Wayne (Michael Keaton) fights crime in Gotham City disguised as Batman, a costumed hero who strikes fear into the hearts of villains. But when a deformed madman who calls himself "The Joker" (Jack Nicholson) seizes control of Gotham's criminal underworld, Batman must face his most ruthless nemesis ever while protecting both his identity and his love interest, reporter Vicki Vale (Kim Basinger).
Keaton's casting caused a controversy since, by 1988, he had become typecast as a comedic actor and many observers doubted he could portray a serious role. Nicholson accepted the role of the Joker under strict conditions that dictated top billing, a high salary, a portion of the box office profits and his own shooting schedule.
The tone and themes of the film were influenced in part by Alan Moore and Brian Bolland's The Killing Joke and Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns. The film primarily adapts the "Red Hood" origin story for the Joker, in which Batman inadvertently creates the Joker by causing him to fall into Axis Chemical acid, resulting in his transformation into a psychopath, but it adds a unique twist in presenting him specifically as a gangster named Jack Napier.
Considered the role of Batman, including Mel Gibson, Kevin Costner, Charlie Sheen, Tom Selleck, Bill Murray, Harrison Ford and Dennis Quaid.
Brad Dourif, Tim Curry, David Bowie, John Lithgow and James Woods were considered for the Joker.
This film is great and should be watched.
The Plot: Having witnessed his parents' brutal murder as a child, millionaire philanthropist Bruce Wayne (Michael Keaton) fights crime in Gotham City disguised as Batman, a costumed hero who strikes fear into the hearts of villains. But when a deformed madman who calls himself "The Joker" (Jack Nicholson) seizes control of Gotham's criminal underworld, Batman must face his most ruthless nemesis ever while protecting both his identity and his love interest, reporter Vicki Vale (Kim Basinger).
Keaton's casting caused a controversy since, by 1988, he had become typecast as a comedic actor and many observers doubted he could portray a serious role. Nicholson accepted the role of the Joker under strict conditions that dictated top billing, a high salary, a portion of the box office profits and his own shooting schedule.
The tone and themes of the film were influenced in part by Alan Moore and Brian Bolland's The Killing Joke and Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns. The film primarily adapts the "Red Hood" origin story for the Joker, in which Batman inadvertently creates the Joker by causing him to fall into Axis Chemical acid, resulting in his transformation into a psychopath, but it adds a unique twist in presenting him specifically as a gangster named Jack Napier.
Considered the role of Batman, including Mel Gibson, Kevin Costner, Charlie Sheen, Tom Selleck, Bill Murray, Harrison Ford and Dennis Quaid.
Brad Dourif, Tim Curry, David Bowie, John Lithgow and James Woods were considered for the Joker.
This film is great and should be watched.
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Suicide Squad (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2020
Entirely crackbrained and nonsensical - I'm not even sure there's a single theme in either this nor the extended cut - but way better than 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘷𝘦𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘳𝘴 for the chief purposes that it doesn't look like pure ass and doesn't really try to act like it's anything more than religiously entertaining dirtpunk grit-fetish trash. It's just about as thinly-written as the former, but if you're going to make one-note characters and a bullshit plot I'd rather them sport this sort of wildly memorable, freakish cringe rather than the flat, market-tested cringe of most modern day Marvel. There's more meme-worthy, hilariously dumbass quotes in here than you can shake a stick at and the designwork on display is simply delicious imo - the lush, matted mess of CGI is actually quite stunning and the production is exquisite: the sickly makeup + vibrant costuming against the sets where you often see opulent golds and corporate lucre juxtaposed with a dank coat of dirt and graffiti - it's total eye candy. The image of Harley Quinn and Joker laughing in the chemical bath while Kehlani's "Gangster" blasts in the background and the colors from their clothes melt away is nothing less than a knockout piece of moving imagery. Smith is the weak link, not only horribly miscast but it also seems like he isn't even trying - otherwise everyone else does a bangup job from Jared Leto's "Pimp Daddy" chilling street tweaker Joker to Viola Davis' business-casual demon Waller to Cara Delevingne's gonzo, always sauntering, Meryl Streep-sounding Enchantress. Very dynamically idiotic in that random fun shit is just allowed to happen because it's clear this isn't at all concerned with making any sort of sense to begin with. All this and with a soundtrack that can only be described as epic, I truly believe this is a fascinating curio that got way too bad of a rap. As dumb as everyone says but also better than the last five MCU entries.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Birds of Prey (And the Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn) (2020) in Movies
Feb 15, 2020
A lot of squawking birds
Although not saying much, Margot Robbie’s Harley Quinn was one of the best thing in the lacklustre D.C. outing “Suicide Squad” of 2016. Now, she returns in her own vehicle. Jared Leto’s Joker is a thing of the past (clearly he wasn’t keen on dredging up the past for even a cameo in this one).
Harley had spent years building up a catalog of enemies in Gotham, with no-one daring to lift a finger for fear of “the big J’s” retribution. With that now a thing of the past, the streets are no longer safe for Harley. Whereas most characters have a reason to want to kill Harley, mid-level gangster Roman Sionis (Ewan McGregor) has a list as long as his arm (a blurred list that will probably make freeze-framing of the blu-ray entertaining!). Roman, who has a penchant for having his right-hand man Victor (Chris Messina) de-glove his victim’s faces, has his heart set on obtaining a missing diamond that (McGuffin-alert) is engraved with account details to $billions.
Through a convoluted and messy plot, Harley meets various ‘birds of prey’ who are either friend or foe: notably young pickpocket Cassandra (Ella Jay Basco); cop Renée Montoya (Rosie Perez); the “Crossbow Killer” (Mary Elizabeth Winstead); and the “Black Canary” (Jurnee Smollett-Bell), who you don’t want to let near your best glasses.
As you might expect from your knowledge of Harley Quinn’s character, the movie is bat-shit crazy, with periodic breaking of the 4th wall; much acrobatic kick-boxing; and some random dream sequences….. Robbie as Marilyn is particularly entertaining, although at times (the ‘egg sandwich’ sequence in particular) the gurning made me muse to myself about just what a good film “I, Tonya” was.
It all comes across as something of a “Deadpool” sequel. Actually, I’d more describe it as “Deadpool-lite” since it’s not powered here by the charisma of Ryan Reynolds. However, I did find myself quite enjoying the first reel of the movie.
Unfortunately, it didn’t last.
It all just becomes incredibly tiresome. Although Margot Robbie is very good in the role, Harley’s incessant squawking just gets annoying.
Also in this battle of men vs women, the women always win and are (mostly) completely unscathed. In one particular scene there are 5 or 6 burly men taking on Harley: clearly she whips their sorry asses in improbable fashion. What? Only one at a time guys?
If you were confused by the timeline of “Little Women“, this will blow your mind! It makes Greta Gerwig‘s masterpiece look as linear as “News at Ten”! It’s really difficult to follow at times as the timeline flashes forwards and backwards and sideways at random!
Also confusing (for me anyway… did I have a nap?) was the finale. There’s something to do with a ring which made NO SENSE to me at all? Am I alone in that?
Ewan MacGregor has fun with his role as the gay (I assume?) gangster, but it all turns cartoonish at times. But perhaps, that’s the point? However while the violence in “Deadpool” was cartoonishly funny (as in Tom and Jerry) the violence here is decidedly of the vicious and unpleasant variety, with a vindictive edge. It makes you not particularly like any of the movie’s characters.
The movie is written by Christina Hodson, who is slated to write too more upcoming superhero films: “The Flash” and “Batgirl”. The director is Chinese director Cathy Yan in only her second directorial feature.
Summary: It’s loud and brash and at 109 minutes it overstays its welcome by about 20 minutes. Less would have been more. It’s somewhat better than “Suicide Squad” (which I unfathomably seem to have given 2.5 stars to), but it’s still a movie that I will struggle to remember in a month’s time.
(For the full graphical review, check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/02/15/one-manns-movies-film-review-birds-of-prey-and-the-fantabulous-emancipation-of-one-harley-quinn-2020/
Harley had spent years building up a catalog of enemies in Gotham, with no-one daring to lift a finger for fear of “the big J’s” retribution. With that now a thing of the past, the streets are no longer safe for Harley. Whereas most characters have a reason to want to kill Harley, mid-level gangster Roman Sionis (Ewan McGregor) has a list as long as his arm (a blurred list that will probably make freeze-framing of the blu-ray entertaining!). Roman, who has a penchant for having his right-hand man Victor (Chris Messina) de-glove his victim’s faces, has his heart set on obtaining a missing diamond that (McGuffin-alert) is engraved with account details to $billions.
Through a convoluted and messy plot, Harley meets various ‘birds of prey’ who are either friend or foe: notably young pickpocket Cassandra (Ella Jay Basco); cop Renée Montoya (Rosie Perez); the “Crossbow Killer” (Mary Elizabeth Winstead); and the “Black Canary” (Jurnee Smollett-Bell), who you don’t want to let near your best glasses.
As you might expect from your knowledge of Harley Quinn’s character, the movie is bat-shit crazy, with periodic breaking of the 4th wall; much acrobatic kick-boxing; and some random dream sequences….. Robbie as Marilyn is particularly entertaining, although at times (the ‘egg sandwich’ sequence in particular) the gurning made me muse to myself about just what a good film “I, Tonya” was.
It all comes across as something of a “Deadpool” sequel. Actually, I’d more describe it as “Deadpool-lite” since it’s not powered here by the charisma of Ryan Reynolds. However, I did find myself quite enjoying the first reel of the movie.
Unfortunately, it didn’t last.
It all just becomes incredibly tiresome. Although Margot Robbie is very good in the role, Harley’s incessant squawking just gets annoying.
Also in this battle of men vs women, the women always win and are (mostly) completely unscathed. In one particular scene there are 5 or 6 burly men taking on Harley: clearly she whips their sorry asses in improbable fashion. What? Only one at a time guys?
If you were confused by the timeline of “Little Women“, this will blow your mind! It makes Greta Gerwig‘s masterpiece look as linear as “News at Ten”! It’s really difficult to follow at times as the timeline flashes forwards and backwards and sideways at random!
Also confusing (for me anyway… did I have a nap?) was the finale. There’s something to do with a ring which made NO SENSE to me at all? Am I alone in that?
Ewan MacGregor has fun with his role as the gay (I assume?) gangster, but it all turns cartoonish at times. But perhaps, that’s the point? However while the violence in “Deadpool” was cartoonishly funny (as in Tom and Jerry) the violence here is decidedly of the vicious and unpleasant variety, with a vindictive edge. It makes you not particularly like any of the movie’s characters.
The movie is written by Christina Hodson, who is slated to write too more upcoming superhero films: “The Flash” and “Batgirl”. The director is Chinese director Cathy Yan in only her second directorial feature.
Summary: It’s loud and brash and at 109 minutes it overstays its welcome by about 20 minutes. Less would have been more. It’s somewhat better than “Suicide Squad” (which I unfathomably seem to have given 2.5 stars to), but it’s still a movie that I will struggle to remember in a month’s time.
(For the full graphical review, check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/02/15/one-manns-movies-film-review-birds-of-prey-and-the-fantabulous-emancipation-of-one-harley-quinn-2020/
The Marinated Meeple (1848 KP) created a post in Oscars Discussion
Jan 29, 2020
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Snatch (2001) in Movies
May 8, 2020
A Movie Carried By Brilliant Performances
In Snatch, three separate groups of characters revolve around a missing diamond.
Acting: 10
In a movie like this where the character list looks more like a laundry list, you have to count on a number of solid performances to carry the film from large to small. Every performance is on point here, right down to smaller showings from guys like Ade playing the role of Tyrone the overweight getaway driver. You get to see a guy like Brad Pitt step out of his comfort zone playing a gypsy boxer by the name of Mickey O’Neil. Meanwhile Benicio Del Toro absolutely crushes his role as gangster Franky Four Fingers. None of these characters succeed without the great actors behind them.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Each of the three groups of characters have no shortage of their share of problems in the film. The film grows and relies on conflict to keep it afloat. It’s a movie that keeps you guessing as you never know what’s going to happen next or who’s going to live to see the next scene. The conflict within ultimately gives you the motive to care about what’s happening to each of these guys.
Entertainment Value: 9
Memorability: 6
Pace: 8
Barring a couple of lulls, the movie moves at a consistent clip. There are occasions where things are happening too quickly and I wish they would slow down just a tad but, for the most part, the pace is on point. I was impressed by how quickly it moved while still managing to develop the plight of each character.
Plot: 6
Resolution: 8
Solid ending that could have been a tad better. I was hoping for a bit more closure. All things considered, it will do.
Overall: 87
Snatch kicks off with an original robbery and it’s off to the races from there. I can’t wait to watch it again to catch some of the things I might have missed. I can definitely see why the movie is beloved.
Acting: 10
In a movie like this where the character list looks more like a laundry list, you have to count on a number of solid performances to carry the film from large to small. Every performance is on point here, right down to smaller showings from guys like Ade playing the role of Tyrone the overweight getaway driver. You get to see a guy like Brad Pitt step out of his comfort zone playing a gypsy boxer by the name of Mickey O’Neil. Meanwhile Benicio Del Toro absolutely crushes his role as gangster Franky Four Fingers. None of these characters succeed without the great actors behind them.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Each of the three groups of characters have no shortage of their share of problems in the film. The film grows and relies on conflict to keep it afloat. It’s a movie that keeps you guessing as you never know what’s going to happen next or who’s going to live to see the next scene. The conflict within ultimately gives you the motive to care about what’s happening to each of these guys.
Entertainment Value: 9
Memorability: 6
Pace: 8
Barring a couple of lulls, the movie moves at a consistent clip. There are occasions where things are happening too quickly and I wish they would slow down just a tad but, for the most part, the pace is on point. I was impressed by how quickly it moved while still managing to develop the plight of each character.
Plot: 6
Resolution: 8
Solid ending that could have been a tad better. I was hoping for a bit more closure. All things considered, it will do.
Overall: 87
Snatch kicks off with an original robbery and it’s off to the races from there. I can’t wait to watch it again to catch some of the things I might have missed. I can definitely see why the movie is beloved.
Ross (3282 KP) rated Smoke and Summons in Books
Mar 18, 2019 (Updated Mar 18, 2019)
Flintlock Tangled
It took me a while to realise, but this book is basically a re-telling of Tangled, the Rapunzel Disney film.
We have the young girl with magical powers who is held prisoner (though she has been trained to appreciate her captor's benevolence) by someone wanting to benefit from her powers. She meets a ne'er-do-well thief looking for that one last score before he can move and settle down. They travel together trying to find somewhere safe for her to go but are tracked down at all stops, until finally the male protagonist is persuaded to hand her in and reap the rewards, before the inevitable emotional rescue.
Rather than magical healing hair, however, Sandis has the ability to act as a vessel to demons, and is linked to a specific one (a fire horse). Her captor, Kazen, uses her abilities to bolster his gangster crew and lead the city's underworld. Upon sensing Kazen's desire to summon a more powerful demon (which is likely to kill her) she escapes and becomes embroiled with Rone, a young thief.
Together they try to track down a family member Sandis has become aware of, who may be able to help save her.
The story flows quite well, with enough strength in the main characters to engage the reader. Their travails, and Kazen's crew's neverending chase, are enjoyable and thrilling.
The narrative is good, swapping between Sandis' and Rone's perspectives and telling of their increasing tiredness and running out of options. At times, the author's American tone slips in (words like "Mom", "they were a ways from their lodgings" etc), which would normally be fine, I'm not that big of a snob, but it really comes at odds with the majority of the narrative and does stand out.
The setting is more early industrial revolution than more medieval, so there is the use of firearms to spice up the action.
A few times, events become a little hard to accept - quite how quickly and persistently Kazen's goons catch up with them, and how easily Rone manages to accomplish his rescue seem quite hard to believe.
Overall, the story is good and while the format of "lets go here, oh they've somehow found us again" becomes a little tiring, the book is short enough for this not to be too much of an issue.
We have the young girl with magical powers who is held prisoner (though she has been trained to appreciate her captor's benevolence) by someone wanting to benefit from her powers. She meets a ne'er-do-well thief looking for that one last score before he can move and settle down. They travel together trying to find somewhere safe for her to go but are tracked down at all stops, until finally the male protagonist is persuaded to hand her in and reap the rewards, before the inevitable emotional rescue.
Rather than magical healing hair, however, Sandis has the ability to act as a vessel to demons, and is linked to a specific one (a fire horse). Her captor, Kazen, uses her abilities to bolster his gangster crew and lead the city's underworld. Upon sensing Kazen's desire to summon a more powerful demon (which is likely to kill her) she escapes and becomes embroiled with Rone, a young thief.
Together they try to track down a family member Sandis has become aware of, who may be able to help save her.
The story flows quite well, with enough strength in the main characters to engage the reader. Their travails, and Kazen's crew's neverending chase, are enjoyable and thrilling.
The narrative is good, swapping between Sandis' and Rone's perspectives and telling of their increasing tiredness and running out of options. At times, the author's American tone slips in (words like "Mom", "they were a ways from their lodgings" etc), which would normally be fine, I'm not that big of a snob, but it really comes at odds with the majority of the narrative and does stand out.
The setting is more early industrial revolution than more medieval, so there is the use of firearms to spice up the action.
A few times, events become a little hard to accept - quite how quickly and persistently Kazen's goons catch up with them, and how easily Rone manages to accomplish his rescue seem quite hard to believe.
Overall, the story is good and while the format of "lets go here, oh they've somehow found us again" becomes a little tiring, the book is short enough for this not to be too much of an issue.