Search
Search results
Reckless Racing HD
Games and Entertainment
5.0
Rate It
App
THE BEST DOWN ‘N DIRTY RACER YOU EVER SAW! Made to maximize the Retina Display, the...
Audio Evolution Mobile Studio
Music
App Watch
Record your ideas on the go or create entire music productions from scratch, we'll leave it up to...
music
Shonen Jump Manga Reader
Book and Magazines & Newspapers
App
The official English source to read Weekly Shonen Jump, the world's most popular manga magazine! You...
Searching For A Soul To Love (Manx Cat Guardians #4)
10.0
Rate It
Book
Greg has lived an ordinary life until one fateful morning when all that changes. Greg has no clue...
Cosmic Run: Regeneration
8.0
Rate It
Tabletop Game
The year is 2123 and the planet earth is becoming uninhabitable. New powers of interstellar travel...
Having read, loved and recommended The Bees many times (and The Ice, too!), I thought I knew what to expect from Laline Paull. Well, I was right and wrong!
Firstly, I loved Pod.
Secondly, it gave me a lot to think about.
Thirdly, how does Laline Paull put herself in a dolphins shoes (flippers? Sorry…) and not make it sound like a children’s book? And I should stress: this is NOT a children’s book.
Paull may have anthropomorphised dolphins, various fish, all and any sea life, but she has stayed pretty close to what I’ve learnt is their true nature (thank you David Attenborough!). Dolphins are very intelligent, playful and seem to know what humans want (maybe that’s just me reading more into these things). But they’re also hunters, they have a pecking order, and I don’t think you’d want to be at the bottom of it if you were a dolphin!
This novel shows the joyful side of being a dolphin, the way that they must work together for the greater good of the pod. It also shows how violent they are - there’s even a dolphin rape scene that was every bit as upsetting as if it had been a human.
In amongst all the dolphin drama is a message for us humans. We see the damage the human race is doing to the oceans: pollution, over-fishing, capturing dolphins for food, entertainment, or warfare.
Pod is graphic in places. It most definitely doesn’t pull its punches - and why should it?
This novel is not sentimental, jam packed with happy, child-friendly dolphins. Pod looks at the real struggles of sea life (and there’s not just dolphins involved). These dolphins are fighters, authoritarian, protective of one another, followers of tradition as well as migration routes, they deal with the results of humanity’s selfishness and cost-cutting.
The imagination and empathy that must have gone in to writing this: I’ve seen how a dolphin, a whale, a wrasse, a clam, a remora and a sea anemone feel and behave (I like to think so, anyway!).
How could I NOT love this book? 🤷🏼♀️
Firstly, I loved Pod.
Secondly, it gave me a lot to think about.
Thirdly, how does Laline Paull put herself in a dolphins shoes (flippers? Sorry…) and not make it sound like a children’s book? And I should stress: this is NOT a children’s book.
Paull may have anthropomorphised dolphins, various fish, all and any sea life, but she has stayed pretty close to what I’ve learnt is their true nature (thank you David Attenborough!). Dolphins are very intelligent, playful and seem to know what humans want (maybe that’s just me reading more into these things). But they’re also hunters, they have a pecking order, and I don’t think you’d want to be at the bottom of it if you were a dolphin!
This novel shows the joyful side of being a dolphin, the way that they must work together for the greater good of the pod. It also shows how violent they are - there’s even a dolphin rape scene that was every bit as upsetting as if it had been a human.
In amongst all the dolphin drama is a message for us humans. We see the damage the human race is doing to the oceans: pollution, over-fishing, capturing dolphins for food, entertainment, or warfare.
Pod is graphic in places. It most definitely doesn’t pull its punches - and why should it?
This novel is not sentimental, jam packed with happy, child-friendly dolphins. Pod looks at the real struggles of sea life (and there’s not just dolphins involved). These dolphins are fighters, authoritarian, protective of one another, followers of tradition as well as migration routes, they deal with the results of humanity’s selfishness and cost-cutting.
The imagination and empathy that must have gone in to writing this: I’ve seen how a dolphin, a whale, a wrasse, a clam, a remora and a sea anemone feel and behave (I like to think so, anyway!).
How could I NOT love this book? 🤷🏼♀️
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated DC League of Super Pets (2022) in Movies
Aug 2, 2022
I had hoped for something lighthearted and amusing, I definitely didn't expect what I got.
When the safety of Superman, and the world, is threatened by a bald supervillain, Krypto must step in to save the day. Ordinarily, that would be easy, but not today, today he's going to need some help.
You've got to love the classic tail tale of man's best friend. Add in some superpowers and you're really on to something, the whole family well covered. Friendship, loss, insecurity, lots of lessons for the kids, and a surprising amount of bleeped dialogue and jokes for the adults.
Each Super-Pet goes through their own little journey, and though most of the interactions are between the pets, or between the humans, when the two crossover it's handled really well. The simple transition from Kate McKinnon waxing lyrical about villainy, to guinea pig squeaks is surprisingly hilarious.
You can't really find fault with the voice cast. Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart are always wonderful together, and I can honestly visualise them doing some of the recording together with the physical acting. McKinnon's villainy is second to none, and her reactions to scenes... *chef's kiss*.
But can we talk about Keanu? Who has started the petition for him to play IRL Batman? We need it.
The animation is simple, that's not meant in a negative way. It feels very much in line with graphic novels, there's great attention to detail, but it doesn't distract from what's in the foreground. The expressions, the human/pet interactions, every reaction is captured perfectly. Just watch for the ear bouncing and tail twitching if you don't believe me!
I went in hoping for something amusing, I came out having seen one of the best superhero movies I've ever seen. If it had songs I may have bumped it up above Teen Titans GO! To The Movies... but also, they play no crystals. So it's a very close second place.
Oh, and, just saying... if they wanted to scrap everything live action in the DCEU, animate it, and add Super-Pets... I wouldn't be mad.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2022/07/dc-league-of-super-pets-movie-review.html
When the safety of Superman, and the world, is threatened by a bald supervillain, Krypto must step in to save the day. Ordinarily, that would be easy, but not today, today he's going to need some help.
You've got to love the classic tail tale of man's best friend. Add in some superpowers and you're really on to something, the whole family well covered. Friendship, loss, insecurity, lots of lessons for the kids, and a surprising amount of bleeped dialogue and jokes for the adults.
Each Super-Pet goes through their own little journey, and though most of the interactions are between the pets, or between the humans, when the two crossover it's handled really well. The simple transition from Kate McKinnon waxing lyrical about villainy, to guinea pig squeaks is surprisingly hilarious.
You can't really find fault with the voice cast. Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart are always wonderful together, and I can honestly visualise them doing some of the recording together with the physical acting. McKinnon's villainy is second to none, and her reactions to scenes... *chef's kiss*.
But can we talk about Keanu? Who has started the petition for him to play IRL Batman? We need it.
The animation is simple, that's not meant in a negative way. It feels very much in line with graphic novels, there's great attention to detail, but it doesn't distract from what's in the foreground. The expressions, the human/pet interactions, every reaction is captured perfectly. Just watch for the ear bouncing and tail twitching if you don't believe me!
I went in hoping for something amusing, I came out having seen one of the best superhero movies I've ever seen. If it had songs I may have bumped it up above Teen Titans GO! To The Movies... but also, they play no crystals. So it's a very close second place.
Oh, and, just saying... if they wanted to scrap everything live action in the DCEU, animate it, and add Super-Pets... I wouldn't be mad.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2022/07/dc-league-of-super-pets-movie-review.html
TacoDave (3640 KP) rated Funhouse (2019) in Movies
Feb 15, 2022 (Updated Feb 15, 2022)
Editing (2 more)
Writing
Acting (mostly)
This movie is better than it has any right to be...
Contains spoilers, click to show
I like to watch bad horror movies. I'm not sure why. I'm not a big fan of many modern horror movies (often referred to as "torture porn") like Hostel and Saw, but rather I like small, independent horror movies that focus on a single central conceit.
I go into these movies with rock-bottom expectations, hoping against hope that they will be slightly better than expected. "Funhouse" was suprisingly entertaining, when compared to similar genre films.
The premise is simple: eight wannabe famous people (think: influencers, normal people who married celebrities, low-level MMA fighters, etc.) sign up for a reality TV show in the vein of Big Brother where they will be locked in a house together and voted out by the public.
There's one catch, of course: the guy running the show - who uses a digital avatar of a panda to speak to the "contestants" - is a nutjob and the loser of the public vote gets killed in a gruesome way.
Is it real? Is it fake entertainment for the online era? Will reacters on Youtube believe it is real? How does society treat the death of someone who really, really wants to be famous, but is only barely-known?
These questions are good ones and the movie doesn't shy away from them. In fact, after each "kill" there is a cut to people in the real world reacting to it that gives the movie a lot more nuance than a typical horror film.
The kills are very graphic and gruesome and I actually looked away for a couple of them because (as I said before) I'm not a fan of torture porn. And there is some female nudity in the movie, specifically when one character decides to strip to earn viewer votes to stay alive.
Still, all in all I was entertained. And that's all I wanted for those 90 minutes - to shut off my logical brain and just watch something different. This movie fit the bill.
I go into these movies with rock-bottom expectations, hoping against hope that they will be slightly better than expected. "Funhouse" was suprisingly entertaining, when compared to similar genre films.
The premise is simple: eight wannabe famous people (think: influencers, normal people who married celebrities, low-level MMA fighters, etc.) sign up for a reality TV show in the vein of Big Brother where they will be locked in a house together and voted out by the public.
There's one catch, of course: the guy running the show - who uses a digital avatar of a panda to speak to the "contestants" - is a nutjob and the loser of the public vote gets killed in a gruesome way.
Is it real? Is it fake entertainment for the online era? Will reacters on Youtube believe it is real? How does society treat the death of someone who really, really wants to be famous, but is only barely-known?
These questions are good ones and the movie doesn't shy away from them. In fact, after each "kill" there is a cut to people in the real world reacting to it that gives the movie a lot more nuance than a typical horror film.
The kills are very graphic and gruesome and I actually looked away for a couple of them because (as I said before) I'm not a fan of torture porn. And there is some female nudity in the movie, specifically when one character decides to strip to earn viewer votes to stay alive.
Still, all in all I was entertained. And that's all I wanted for those 90 minutes - to shut off my logical brain and just watch something different. This movie fit the bill.
Cyn Armistead (14 KP) rated American Gods in Books
Mar 1, 2018
I'm trying to remember whether or not I've read any of Gaiman's other novels before, and I'm fairly certain that I haven't. I read [b:Good Omens|12067|Good Omens|Terry Pratchett|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1266659394s/12067.jpg|4110990], but that was co-written with [a:Terry Pratchett|1654|Terry Pratchett|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1235562205p2/1654.jpg], and the collaboration was genius. I know that the entire world seems to love Sandman, of course, but I'm just not a fan of graphic novels. In fact, it took me a while to realize that the Good Omens co-author and the Sandman author were one and the same.
I've certainly read some short stories, too. The most memorable, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow,_Glass,_Apples">"Snow, Glass, Apples"</a> was reprinted in an anthology I read recently. I find it disturbing, so I won't re-read it. Well-written, of course—it wouldn't be so very memorably distressing if it weren't so masterfully done! (I found the <a href="http://www.holycow.com/dreaming/stories/snow-glass-apples">text online</a> if you care to read it, but please understand that the story deals with pedophilia, necrophilia, and incest here. It is the polar opposite of all things Disney.) Snow White was never one of of my favorite fairy tales, and Gaiman definitely pushed it much farther down the list.
In any case, I don't know what I was expecting from Gaiman, but <i>American Gods</i> wasn't it. I like stories with happy endings, and within the first few chapters I was fairly sure that there wouldn't be one. Is Gaiman fundamentally opposed to joy, or is it just happiness that he doesn't allow?
The novel is epic. It is masterful. All that stuff from the big critics is dead on. The book could be used as the backbone of a mythological scavenger hunt if a teacher were willing to run a very unstructured but engaging course that way. I certainly enjoyed that aspect of it, and it made me glad that I was reading it on my iTouch so that I could look up anything I liked online at any time, no matter where I happened to be (which was almost always at home or somewhere else that had wifi access, happily).
I seldom want to see illustrations in any book, but yes, I think I would like to see good pictures of some of the characters Gaiman described in this one. On the other hand, without artwork I spent time imagining what the characters looked like based on the descriptions. I don't normally stop to do that, as such matters as seldom relevant to a plot, but these beings caught my fancy. Not enough that I would sit through an entire graphic novel, I'm afraid, but if I saw one now I might flip through it to see how the artist's renderings compare with my versions.
I'm seldom able to identify an overall Theme to the books I read. Most of them, honestly, are fluff. I'm fine with that. I read them because they entertain me. <i>American Gods</i> is different. It is entertaining, but it isn't light or fluffy in the least. It definitely has an easily identifiably Theme and Tropes and all those elements that I recall from long-ago classes, the sorts of things that put me off from my original English major because I hated tearing other author's works apart instead of writing anything original. (Now, I begin to understand that we were being taught to recognize what makes for good writing so we might have some hope of possibly creating some of it one day.)
I somewhat timidly conclude that <i>American Gods</i> is the first piece of Literature I've read in a very long time, and well worth the time spent reading it. (I find it rather amusing that it would be British Literature, despite its title, due to the author's nationality.) I'm not going to state the theme, because that would be a spoiler, and I hate putting those in reviews—but it's something that I see as a Truth, and one that needs to be stated far more often, especiallly today. It's even more interesting that it took a Brit to say it.
The book is dark, although it does have some very bright spots in it. I will acknowledge that I was going through a particularly bad time with regards to my health when I was reading it, but I still think it might be best for some people to read this one when in a fairly positive state of mind.
I've certainly read some short stories, too. The most memorable, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow,_Glass,_Apples">"Snow, Glass, Apples"</a> was reprinted in an anthology I read recently. I find it disturbing, so I won't re-read it. Well-written, of course—it wouldn't be so very memorably distressing if it weren't so masterfully done! (I found the <a href="http://www.holycow.com/dreaming/stories/snow-glass-apples">text online</a> if you care to read it, but please understand that the story deals with pedophilia, necrophilia, and incest here. It is the polar opposite of all things Disney.) Snow White was never one of of my favorite fairy tales, and Gaiman definitely pushed it much farther down the list.
In any case, I don't know what I was expecting from Gaiman, but <i>American Gods</i> wasn't it. I like stories with happy endings, and within the first few chapters I was fairly sure that there wouldn't be one. Is Gaiman fundamentally opposed to joy, or is it just happiness that he doesn't allow?
The novel is epic. It is masterful. All that stuff from the big critics is dead on. The book could be used as the backbone of a mythological scavenger hunt if a teacher were willing to run a very unstructured but engaging course that way. I certainly enjoyed that aspect of it, and it made me glad that I was reading it on my iTouch so that I could look up anything I liked online at any time, no matter where I happened to be (which was almost always at home or somewhere else that had wifi access, happily).
I seldom want to see illustrations in any book, but yes, I think I would like to see good pictures of some of the characters Gaiman described in this one. On the other hand, without artwork I spent time imagining what the characters looked like based on the descriptions. I don't normally stop to do that, as such matters as seldom relevant to a plot, but these beings caught my fancy. Not enough that I would sit through an entire graphic novel, I'm afraid, but if I saw one now I might flip through it to see how the artist's renderings compare with my versions.
I'm seldom able to identify an overall Theme to the books I read. Most of them, honestly, are fluff. I'm fine with that. I read them because they entertain me. <i>American Gods</i> is different. It is entertaining, but it isn't light or fluffy in the least. It definitely has an easily identifiably Theme and Tropes and all those elements that I recall from long-ago classes, the sorts of things that put me off from my original English major because I hated tearing other author's works apart instead of writing anything original. (Now, I begin to understand that we were being taught to recognize what makes for good writing so we might have some hope of possibly creating some of it one day.)
I somewhat timidly conclude that <i>American Gods</i> is the first piece of Literature I've read in a very long time, and well worth the time spent reading it. (I find it rather amusing that it would be British Literature, despite its title, due to the author's nationality.) I'm not going to state the theme, because that would be a spoiler, and I hate putting those in reviews—but it's something that I see as a Truth, and one that needs to be stated far more often, especiallly today. It's even more interesting that it took a Brit to say it.
The book is dark, although it does have some very bright spots in it. I will acknowledge that I was going through a particularly bad time with regards to my health when I was reading it, but I still think it might be best for some people to read this one when in a fairly positive state of mind.