Search
Search results
BookInspector (124 KP) rated The Wizards of Once in Books
Sep 24, 2020
This novel is told by a third person, the “Unknown Narrator”, who is one of the characters, but I couldn’t figure out who it was. 😀 The main characters are Xar (a wizard) and Wish (a warrior), they belong to two separate tribes, who are at war with each other, and both of these characters are a very naughty thirteen-year-olds. 🙂 I really liked Wish in this book, I think she is quite smart, and I really liked her strangeness. She is not like everybody else, and I think it really suited her. I really didn’t like Xar, I think he is rude, ignorant, absolutely horrible, self-centred brat, and he is a very bad example for kids. :/ I understand that author chose him for a reason and to prove some points to the young generation, but still, I couldn’t stand him. I really liked all the magical creatures, which the author created for this book. They were super fun and gave this “Harry Potter” vibe, which I really liked.
The narrative of this book is filled with plenty of magic and very fun adventures, which I really enjoyed. I liked the way the author was trying to surprise the reader with unexpected twists and turns and an interesting outcome from particular actions.
I kind of liked the writing style of this book, it feels very little edited and quite raw. (Like, when you tell an actual story, and u need to clarify some of the things you say) However, the same thing dragged out the story a little, making the chapters feel quite long sometimes. My most favourite thing about this book was the illustrations. It helped me to understand how all the characters and magical creatures looked like, and in general, they were absolutely stunning. I also liked that the author included quite a few of them in every chapter, it was fun to read and it gave a different texture to the whole story.
The language used in this book was easy to understand and pretty fun, and as I mentioned before, the chapters were quite long, but the illustrations kept the reading experience entertaining and not boring. The ending of this story was quite unexpected and the author creatively hinted about another book to follow. So, to conclude, it is a fun and adventurous story, filled with magic and magnificent creatures. Now, for the recommendation, I think adults should read it first and then decide if they want their kids to dig in. Xar’s attitude might have a negative impact on some of the kids, but I will leave that for the parents to decide. Enjoy! 🙂
The narrative of this book is filled with plenty of magic and very fun adventures, which I really enjoyed. I liked the way the author was trying to surprise the reader with unexpected twists and turns and an interesting outcome from particular actions.
I kind of liked the writing style of this book, it feels very little edited and quite raw. (Like, when you tell an actual story, and u need to clarify some of the things you say) However, the same thing dragged out the story a little, making the chapters feel quite long sometimes. My most favourite thing about this book was the illustrations. It helped me to understand how all the characters and magical creatures looked like, and in general, they were absolutely stunning. I also liked that the author included quite a few of them in every chapter, it was fun to read and it gave a different texture to the whole story.
The language used in this book was easy to understand and pretty fun, and as I mentioned before, the chapters were quite long, but the illustrations kept the reading experience entertaining and not boring. The ending of this story was quite unexpected and the author creatively hinted about another book to follow. So, to conclude, it is a fun and adventurous story, filled with magic and magnificent creatures. Now, for the recommendation, I think adults should read it first and then decide if they want their kids to dig in. Xar’s attitude might have a negative impact on some of the kids, but I will leave that for the parents to decide. Enjoy! 🙂
BookInspector (124 KP) rated Extropia: Mind Game (Extropia, #1) in Books
Sep 24, 2020
More reviews can be found at https://bbookinspector.wordpress.com
The main character in this book was Edvard, a seventeen-year-old school student. His father and brother created Extropia, an artificial reality game, where players can participate themselves. While testing the game, Edwards father and brother got stuck in the game and only Edward can save them. When he gets into the game, he sees that it is run by a dark, cruel and vicious tyrant. Edward needs to save his brother, but it is not that easy as it looks.
This novel brings an awesome clash between modern and medieval ages, bringing in very unique and interesting characters. While reading this book it feels like you are transported back in time, where sword and shield was a form of weapon, and where the characters still follow prophecies. I really enjoyed the wide variety of characters chosen for this book, and Edward was a very realistic boy, without superpowers and with the weaknesses which he was trying to overcome. That was plus and minus at the same time, he was very realistic and believable, but at the same time very dependable on other people in order to succeed. The whole novel was written from Edward’s perspective and even though I would’ve liked different perspectives, I still enjoyed the story as it was.
The plot of this novel is a combination of a lot of similar books and games, we have the games and their setting modifications to fit the book, we have references to Harry Potter and some parts taken from The Hunger Games. However, it has it’s own unique and interesting narrative filled with action, unexpected twists and turns, which kept me glued to this book.
The writing style of this book was very creative and easy to read, however, it has these names and places which were a bit difficult to pronounce for me. But still, I think it gives the charm and medieval feel to this novel. The chapters have a decent length and it did not drag to me, as there are a lot of things happening in every chapter. I really liked the ending of this novel, but I think it could’ve had more suspense to it. Nevertheless, I am waiting for the next part, because I wanna know what will happen next. So to conclude, if you like computer games and you loved The Maze Runner, you will definitely enjoy this book. It is filled with diverse and complex characters, interesting turns and unexpected twists, which makes it a great read. I do recommend this book and I hope you will enjoy as much as I did. 🙂
The main character in this book was Edvard, a seventeen-year-old school student. His father and brother created Extropia, an artificial reality game, where players can participate themselves. While testing the game, Edwards father and brother got stuck in the game and only Edward can save them. When he gets into the game, he sees that it is run by a dark, cruel and vicious tyrant. Edward needs to save his brother, but it is not that easy as it looks.
This novel brings an awesome clash between modern and medieval ages, bringing in very unique and interesting characters. While reading this book it feels like you are transported back in time, where sword and shield was a form of weapon, and where the characters still follow prophecies. I really enjoyed the wide variety of characters chosen for this book, and Edward was a very realistic boy, without superpowers and with the weaknesses which he was trying to overcome. That was plus and minus at the same time, he was very realistic and believable, but at the same time very dependable on other people in order to succeed. The whole novel was written from Edward’s perspective and even though I would’ve liked different perspectives, I still enjoyed the story as it was.
The plot of this novel is a combination of a lot of similar books and games, we have the games and their setting modifications to fit the book, we have references to Harry Potter and some parts taken from The Hunger Games. However, it has it’s own unique and interesting narrative filled with action, unexpected twists and turns, which kept me glued to this book.
The writing style of this book was very creative and easy to read, however, it has these names and places which were a bit difficult to pronounce for me. But still, I think it gives the charm and medieval feel to this novel. The chapters have a decent length and it did not drag to me, as there are a lot of things happening in every chapter. I really liked the ending of this novel, but I think it could’ve had more suspense to it. Nevertheless, I am waiting for the next part, because I wanna know what will happen next. So to conclude, if you like computer games and you loved The Maze Runner, you will definitely enjoy this book. It is filled with diverse and complex characters, interesting turns and unexpected twists, which makes it a great read. I do recommend this book and I hope you will enjoy as much as I did. 🙂
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated The Lego Movie 2: The Second Part (2019) in Movies
Aug 28, 2020
Fun Film
The heroes of Bricksburg are back to save their city from the evil invaders LEGO DUPLO. Though not nearly as good as the first movie, The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part packs enough punch to be an entertaining watch.
Acting: 10
Chris Pratt is back playing the lovable Emmet. The depth of voice-acting in animated movies has grown stronger over the years and this movie is no exception. So many great actors and actresses lend their voices, my favorite of which being Will Arnett as Batman. Seriously, he just might be the best Batman out of all the Batmen that have graced the big screen.
Beginning: 2
Weak start for me. Not that it lacked action, it just didn’t quite suck me into the world as successfully as the first managed to do. I was mildly entertained after watching the first ten minutes.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The movie is surprisingly ambitious, sprawling across a number of different worlds that are visually stunning. From wasteland to spaceworld, you get a taste of a little bit of everything. I especially enjoyed Emmet’s home (and all of its features) out in the middle of nowhere, really nice touch.
Conflict: 7
Entertainment Value: 9
In addition to its creative setpieces, the movie succeeds in hilarity. It’s not perfect by any means, but I’m happy to say that it’s funny from start to finish. I was also pleasantly impressed with how creative some of the action sequences were. Sure, they were nods to other movies, but they did it with their own LEGO spin.
Memorability: 10
I commend the movie for going the extra mile to leave a mark. It was nice seeing appearances from characters like Gary Payton and members of the Harry Potter crew. I also appreciated the messaging around growing up but still keeping your childlike spirit.
Pace: 6
Plot: 10
Clever story that keeps the world fresh. I thought they would have a hard time matching the originality of the first, but they definitely succeeded here. Loved how they incorporate things like Ourmomaggedon to keep the tie to the real world. The story seamlessly provided a clear growth for the characters overall.
Resolution: 10
Great ending that was even better than the overall story itself. Makes up for the weak start. It had me looking forward to a potential third movie. Potential? Let’s be honest, there will be a third without a doubt.
Overall: 84
A part of what made the first movie so successful is not finding out about the tie to the real world until its conclusion. Knowing that throughout made the movie just slightly less enjoyable. For the most part, I liked this new addition to the franchise and I’m excited to see where it goes from here.
Acting: 10
Chris Pratt is back playing the lovable Emmet. The depth of voice-acting in animated movies has grown stronger over the years and this movie is no exception. So many great actors and actresses lend their voices, my favorite of which being Will Arnett as Batman. Seriously, he just might be the best Batman out of all the Batmen that have graced the big screen.
Beginning: 2
Weak start for me. Not that it lacked action, it just didn’t quite suck me into the world as successfully as the first managed to do. I was mildly entertained after watching the first ten minutes.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The movie is surprisingly ambitious, sprawling across a number of different worlds that are visually stunning. From wasteland to spaceworld, you get a taste of a little bit of everything. I especially enjoyed Emmet’s home (and all of its features) out in the middle of nowhere, really nice touch.
Conflict: 7
Entertainment Value: 9
In addition to its creative setpieces, the movie succeeds in hilarity. It’s not perfect by any means, but I’m happy to say that it’s funny from start to finish. I was also pleasantly impressed with how creative some of the action sequences were. Sure, they were nods to other movies, but they did it with their own LEGO spin.
Memorability: 10
I commend the movie for going the extra mile to leave a mark. It was nice seeing appearances from characters like Gary Payton and members of the Harry Potter crew. I also appreciated the messaging around growing up but still keeping your childlike spirit.
Pace: 6
Plot: 10
Clever story that keeps the world fresh. I thought they would have a hard time matching the originality of the first, but they definitely succeeded here. Loved how they incorporate things like Ourmomaggedon to keep the tie to the real world. The story seamlessly provided a clear growth for the characters overall.
Resolution: 10
Great ending that was even better than the overall story itself. Makes up for the weak start. It had me looking forward to a potential third movie. Potential? Let’s be honest, there will be a third without a doubt.
Overall: 84
A part of what made the first movie so successful is not finding out about the tie to the real world until its conclusion. Knowing that throughout made the movie just slightly less enjoyable. For the most part, I liked this new addition to the franchise and I’m excited to see where it goes from here.
LEGO® Star Wars™: The Complete Saga
Games and Entertainment
App
LEGO® Star Wars™: The Complete Saga is available on iOS for the first time! ***Episode I Story...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Tragedy of Macbeth (2021) in Movies
Jan 25, 2022
Good...not Great...kind of like Macbeth
The history of cinema is littered with adaptations of William Shakespeare plays. Some are very successful - Olivier’s HAMLET (1948), Zeffirelli’s ROMEO & JULIET (1968) and, especially, Kenneth Branagh’s HENRY V (1989), my favorite film Shakespeare adaptation. And, of course, some are less than successful, like HAMLET starring Mel Gibson (1990).
Joel Cohen’s adaptation of MACBETH falls somewhere in between, more for the former but veering towards the latter.
Based on my favorite Shakespeare play, THE TRAGEDY OF MACBETH follows the rise and fall of a Scottish Thane who becomes King thanks to the help (and backstage machinations) of his wife…and a murderous deed. This adaptation should really be called “THE BEST OF MACBETH” as it takes a fairly lengthy stage play and compresses it into 1 hour and 47 minutes of Cinema time.
There is plenty here that works, starting with the sense of unreality that Cohen sets this version of this story in. He filmed the entire movie on a soundstage that has a constant haziness to the background, making one think that everything going on is a dream…or maybe a memory…or maybe taking place on some parallel ethereal plane and the black and white cinematography emphasizes this point to a perfect degree.
The performances are stellar - starting with the choice to cast both Macbeth and Lady with older actors. Usually, these 2 are cast as “ambitious up and comers” in their late 20’s/early 30’s, but by using 60-something actors Denzel Washington and Frances McDormand, it makes these 2 characters more desperate for one last chance at the brass ring and makes the choices these 2 make more understandable. Of course, having Denzel and Frances play these 2 certainly helps, as both are superb thespians who are mesmerizing in their speeches (such as Macbeth’s “Is this a dagger I see before me” and Lady Macbeth’s “Out, out damn spot”).
Along for the ride - and performing strongly in this film - is Brendan Gleeson (King Duncan), Corey Hawkins (MacDuff), Bertie Carvel (Banquo) and Harry Melling (yes, Dudley Dursley of Harry Potter fame) as Malcolm. Also…it was fun to see Ralph Ineson (the Captain that pretty much starts the show), Stephen Root (the Porter) and Jefferson Mayes (the Doctor) showing up in brief, one scene cameos along the way.
But, special notice needs to be paid to Kathryn Hunter (the Witches) and Alex Hassell (Ross) who elevate both of these roles to something more than I’ve seen previously. Sure, the Witches…with such speeches as “Bubble, Bubble, Toil and Trouble”…are the “showey” roles in this script, but in the hands of veteran Stage Actor Hunter, it turns into something much, much more. Cohen does more with the Witches than I’ve seen previously done and it works well - quite possibly to the tune of an Academy Award Nomination as Best Supporting Actress for her. Also working well is the use of the character Ross as sort of an “agent” of the Witches. This role, as written by The Bard of Avon, is pretty much a throw away, but Cohen uses it as something more and Hassell delivers the goods in an interesting way.
So, if the acting is good, the setting appropriately mysterious and the Direction generally strong, why did I not connect more with this film? I think it falls to the adaptation of the play by Mr. Cohen. By necessity, he pares down the film and it feels like it just jumps from speech to speech. As I’ve said earlier, each speech is terrific and the performers present these words very, very well, but they didn’t coalesce into anything whole that I could get emotionally attached to. This film is an “abridged” version of the Scottish play and it shows, Cohen opts to keep in the speeches (as is necessary) but that comes at the cost of losing the scenes between characters that would more strongly tie this film apart.
It’s still a worthy entry in the “Shakespeare on Film” canon - and one that is “above average” but falls far short of greatness - kind of like Macbeth himself.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Joel Cohen’s adaptation of MACBETH falls somewhere in between, more for the former but veering towards the latter.
Based on my favorite Shakespeare play, THE TRAGEDY OF MACBETH follows the rise and fall of a Scottish Thane who becomes King thanks to the help (and backstage machinations) of his wife…and a murderous deed. This adaptation should really be called “THE BEST OF MACBETH” as it takes a fairly lengthy stage play and compresses it into 1 hour and 47 minutes of Cinema time.
There is plenty here that works, starting with the sense of unreality that Cohen sets this version of this story in. He filmed the entire movie on a soundstage that has a constant haziness to the background, making one think that everything going on is a dream…or maybe a memory…or maybe taking place on some parallel ethereal plane and the black and white cinematography emphasizes this point to a perfect degree.
The performances are stellar - starting with the choice to cast both Macbeth and Lady with older actors. Usually, these 2 are cast as “ambitious up and comers” in their late 20’s/early 30’s, but by using 60-something actors Denzel Washington and Frances McDormand, it makes these 2 characters more desperate for one last chance at the brass ring and makes the choices these 2 make more understandable. Of course, having Denzel and Frances play these 2 certainly helps, as both are superb thespians who are mesmerizing in their speeches (such as Macbeth’s “Is this a dagger I see before me” and Lady Macbeth’s “Out, out damn spot”).
Along for the ride - and performing strongly in this film - is Brendan Gleeson (King Duncan), Corey Hawkins (MacDuff), Bertie Carvel (Banquo) and Harry Melling (yes, Dudley Dursley of Harry Potter fame) as Malcolm. Also…it was fun to see Ralph Ineson (the Captain that pretty much starts the show), Stephen Root (the Porter) and Jefferson Mayes (the Doctor) showing up in brief, one scene cameos along the way.
But, special notice needs to be paid to Kathryn Hunter (the Witches) and Alex Hassell (Ross) who elevate both of these roles to something more than I’ve seen previously. Sure, the Witches…with such speeches as “Bubble, Bubble, Toil and Trouble”…are the “showey” roles in this script, but in the hands of veteran Stage Actor Hunter, it turns into something much, much more. Cohen does more with the Witches than I’ve seen previously done and it works well - quite possibly to the tune of an Academy Award Nomination as Best Supporting Actress for her. Also working well is the use of the character Ross as sort of an “agent” of the Witches. This role, as written by The Bard of Avon, is pretty much a throw away, but Cohen uses it as something more and Hassell delivers the goods in an interesting way.
So, if the acting is good, the setting appropriately mysterious and the Direction generally strong, why did I not connect more with this film? I think it falls to the adaptation of the play by Mr. Cohen. By necessity, he pares down the film and it feels like it just jumps from speech to speech. As I’ve said earlier, each speech is terrific and the performers present these words very, very well, but they didn’t coalesce into anything whole that I could get emotionally attached to. This film is an “abridged” version of the Scottish play and it shows, Cohen opts to keep in the speeches (as is necessary) but that comes at the cost of losing the scenes between characters that would more strongly tie this film apart.
It’s still a worthy entry in the “Shakespeare on Film” canon - and one that is “above average” but falls far short of greatness - kind of like Macbeth himself.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Solomon Wendt (30 KP) rated The Big Book of Madness in Tabletop Games
May 5, 2019
Cooperation (3 more)
Spell Casting
Some randomization
Multiple Difficulties
Small cards (1 more)
Unclear rules/mechanics
This game is made by iello games, makers of Mountains of Madness and King of Tokyo. It is about student magicians that feel they aren't learning enough in their classes and decide to sneak into a library to learn new spells. There, they find a grimoire that contains monsters and accidentally releases them. They must work together to defeat the monsters and seal the book, learning from the books around them to learn new spells and collect elements to cast the spells, all while trying not to give into madness.
The game mechanics feature deck building, spell casting, cooperation, and some randomization of spells available and monsters to defeat. There are schools of magic related to the four elements; air, earth, fire, and water. Each element has two magician students that specializes in that element for a total of 8 different characters, each with their own special ability. There are four decks of spells, again related to the elements, that is randomized during set up, changing what spells are available game to game. Similarly, the monsters you must face are randomized, so the chance of having the same exact game as another is rare. The gameplay remains consistent, though.
Over the course of 6 rounds, players work together to defeat monsters. It is a pure cooperation game. No one has any secret objective and should communicate with other players. Games of this fashion, such as Pandemic, tend to end up having one or two people make all the decisions for the group. It my many plays of the game, I have only had that happen once or twice. The variation in spells, magicians, and elements usually make a player uniquely helpful to the group, allowing players to choose how they want to build their character. Although each magician has an elemental alignment, you can choose to focus on different elements and spells and are not limited to one type of role. Each element of magic has a different role to deal the challenges players face, meaning a good balance can be very beneficial. However, due to the randomization, it is possible either the spells or the monsters leave one of the elements non-essential, but that is fairly uncommon.
Overall, the game is very enjoyable and can be played multiple times with different variations. The difficulty can be adjusted if ot feels it is too hard or easy. My group that plays about once a week are clearing the 2nd difficulty 50% of the time and haven't cleared it with a variation yet. It can be a challenge and has elements of luck and strategy. It is a fun game to play with friends, especially because it is cooperative, and I would recommend adding it to your collection.
The game is 2-5 players and runs 60-90 minutes. It is family friendly and a great game for those who love magic fandoms such as Harry Potter.
The game mechanics feature deck building, spell casting, cooperation, and some randomization of spells available and monsters to defeat. There are schools of magic related to the four elements; air, earth, fire, and water. Each element has two magician students that specializes in that element for a total of 8 different characters, each with their own special ability. There are four decks of spells, again related to the elements, that is randomized during set up, changing what spells are available game to game. Similarly, the monsters you must face are randomized, so the chance of having the same exact game as another is rare. The gameplay remains consistent, though.
Over the course of 6 rounds, players work together to defeat monsters. It is a pure cooperation game. No one has any secret objective and should communicate with other players. Games of this fashion, such as Pandemic, tend to end up having one or two people make all the decisions for the group. It my many plays of the game, I have only had that happen once or twice. The variation in spells, magicians, and elements usually make a player uniquely helpful to the group, allowing players to choose how they want to build their character. Although each magician has an elemental alignment, you can choose to focus on different elements and spells and are not limited to one type of role. Each element of magic has a different role to deal the challenges players face, meaning a good balance can be very beneficial. However, due to the randomization, it is possible either the spells or the monsters leave one of the elements non-essential, but that is fairly uncommon.
Overall, the game is very enjoyable and can be played multiple times with different variations. The difficulty can be adjusted if ot feels it is too hard or easy. My group that plays about once a week are clearing the 2nd difficulty 50% of the time and haven't cleared it with a variation yet. It can be a challenge and has elements of luck and strategy. It is a fun game to play with friends, especially because it is cooperative, and I would recommend adding it to your collection.
The game is 2-5 players and runs 60-90 minutes. It is family friendly and a great game for those who love magic fandoms such as Harry Potter.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated A Little Chaos (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Better suited to T.V.
From the mind of director Alan Rickman, everyone’s favourite Slytherin, A Little Chaos follows the story of a gardener as she tries to prove her worth, creating a fountain at the beautiful Gardens of Versailles. But does this historical drama have any depth?
Kate Winslet takes on the role of Sabine De Barra, a visionary landscape gardener who is tasked with creating the stunning piece of architecture in Versailles for King Louis XIV, portrayed by a typically on-point Rickman.
8379_poster_iphoneThe plot is stretched out into a film that lasts a little over two hours and despite some breath-taking scenery and excellent performances, A Little Chaos couldn’t be further removed from its title – in fact it’s all a little flat and Saturday night TV drama-esque.
A promising supporting cast that includes Stanley Tucci as Louis XIV’s gay brother and Matthias Schoenaerts, a former Cesar award-winner, as the king’s principal gardener, is wasted as the film spends much of its running time trying to tie together numerous loose ends, from a tragedy plot to a new-found romance.
Rickman’s direction is admirable and he certainly knows how to get the best out of his landscapes, but like the many shrubs in A Little Chaos, it all needed pruning back slightly more with at least 20 minutes of exposition being completely unnecessary.
Moreover, for a film that has its secondary focus on horticulture, there is very little in the way of gardening, and I for one was hoping for more beautiful shots of the stunning grounds rather than rain-soaked Winslet and admittedly impressive hair pieces.
Nevertheless, both Winslet and Rickman are superb in their roles and it’s nice to see the latter take on something a little less sinister after his well-received performances in the Harry Potter franchise and of course his brilliant turn in Die Hard.
The former is, alongside Meryl Streep and Julianne Moore, one of the most reliable actresses in cinema. Her performance here is excellent and through her tragic past, we see more to the character of Sabine the further we get into the picture.
It’s just a shame that none of it registers. After a disappointingly slow first half, things only moderately gain pace as the film
reaches its poorly CGI finished conclusion. Winslet’s character is given more depth than she needs and the audience faces the difficult task of dealing with numerous bits of information that don’t really come together.
Overall, Alan Rickman’s latest effort in the director’s chair lacks the magic and sparkle that he brings to his acting and despite mesmerising performances from Kate Winslet and Rickman himself, A Little Chaos is more at home on the small screen, rather than the big.
After all, if an overly camp Stanley Tucci fails to generate interest, there’s something seriously amiss.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/04/19/better-suited-to-tv-a-little-chaos-review/
Kate Winslet takes on the role of Sabine De Barra, a visionary landscape gardener who is tasked with creating the stunning piece of architecture in Versailles for King Louis XIV, portrayed by a typically on-point Rickman.
8379_poster_iphoneThe plot is stretched out into a film that lasts a little over two hours and despite some breath-taking scenery and excellent performances, A Little Chaos couldn’t be further removed from its title – in fact it’s all a little flat and Saturday night TV drama-esque.
A promising supporting cast that includes Stanley Tucci as Louis XIV’s gay brother and Matthias Schoenaerts, a former Cesar award-winner, as the king’s principal gardener, is wasted as the film spends much of its running time trying to tie together numerous loose ends, from a tragedy plot to a new-found romance.
Rickman’s direction is admirable and he certainly knows how to get the best out of his landscapes, but like the many shrubs in A Little Chaos, it all needed pruning back slightly more with at least 20 minutes of exposition being completely unnecessary.
Moreover, for a film that has its secondary focus on horticulture, there is very little in the way of gardening, and I for one was hoping for more beautiful shots of the stunning grounds rather than rain-soaked Winslet and admittedly impressive hair pieces.
Nevertheless, both Winslet and Rickman are superb in their roles and it’s nice to see the latter take on something a little less sinister after his well-received performances in the Harry Potter franchise and of course his brilliant turn in Die Hard.
The former is, alongside Meryl Streep and Julianne Moore, one of the most reliable actresses in cinema. Her performance here is excellent and through her tragic past, we see more to the character of Sabine the further we get into the picture.
It’s just a shame that none of it registers. After a disappointingly slow first half, things only moderately gain pace as the film
reaches its poorly CGI finished conclusion. Winslet’s character is given more depth than she needs and the audience faces the difficult task of dealing with numerous bits of information that don’t really come together.
Overall, Alan Rickman’s latest effort in the director’s chair lacks the magic and sparkle that he brings to his acting and despite mesmerising performances from Kate Winslet and Rickman himself, A Little Chaos is more at home on the small screen, rather than the big.
After all, if an overly camp Stanley Tucci fails to generate interest, there’s something seriously amiss.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/04/19/better-suited-to-tv-a-little-chaos-review/
Lilyn G - Sci-Fi & Scary (91 KP) rated Lilac Skully and the Haunted House in Books
Feb 10, 2018
Lilac is a character you can't help but root for.
I don't often comment on covers, but I've got to start this by saying I love the cover for Lilac Skully and the Haunted House. The house is definitely suitably creepy, and the color choice for the sky is absolutely gorgeous. I did pick it up just to look at the cover more than once before it made it’s way to the top of my to-read pile. And at only 168 pages, when I finally did pick it up to read, it was a book that I flew through. Obviously it’ll take the intended age range a bit longer to read than it did for me, but I can’t imagine it being a slow go for anyone. It’s well-written and nicely paced. The story hits the ground running.
I liked Lilac Skully and the Haunted House. Lilac reminded, at least vaguely, of Luna Lovegood from the Harry Potter series. Not as crazy, mind you, but with the blonde hair, the big eyes, and the outcast status, it was hard for her not to feel a little familiar. This was a good thing, as it enabled me to immediately connect with the character a little more quickly than I might have normally. The fact that Lilac was scared of ghosts was perfect. Young readers will definitely be able to empathize with the little girl who does all the sensible things to avoid running into them. Who in their right mind would want to go into a haunted basement, right?
The set up is fairly typical of a kid’s book. A single parent family, with the father additionally and conveniently absent for the majority of the book. The adults that are in the picture for Lilac Skully and the Haunted House are bumbling, sometimes up to no good, and ridiculously easily fooled. Nothing new to see, but still entertaining to read. The formula works for a reason, even if we do celebrate times when things veer from the norm. In this case, it allowed Lilac to participate in some Home Alone-esque shenanigans that had me grinning.
It’s obvious the author has more adventures for Lilac Skully planned (seven, to be exact), and I think she will swiftly gain a loyal fanbase. Lilac Skully and the Haunted House was easy to read, and featured a little girl with a lot of heart. I enjoyed watching Lilac learn that appearances can be deceiving, and that sometimes the people you least expect can become your best friends.
Overall, a very good read for young readers who want something with ghosts, but not something ‘too scary’. Lilac Skully and the Haunted House worth picking up, and something you can let them read on their own, or read with you each evening.
Disclaimer: I received a copy of this book from the author for review consideration.
I liked Lilac Skully and the Haunted House. Lilac reminded, at least vaguely, of Luna Lovegood from the Harry Potter series. Not as crazy, mind you, but with the blonde hair, the big eyes, and the outcast status, it was hard for her not to feel a little familiar. This was a good thing, as it enabled me to immediately connect with the character a little more quickly than I might have normally. The fact that Lilac was scared of ghosts was perfect. Young readers will definitely be able to empathize with the little girl who does all the sensible things to avoid running into them. Who in their right mind would want to go into a haunted basement, right?
The set up is fairly typical of a kid’s book. A single parent family, with the father additionally and conveniently absent for the majority of the book. The adults that are in the picture for Lilac Skully and the Haunted House are bumbling, sometimes up to no good, and ridiculously easily fooled. Nothing new to see, but still entertaining to read. The formula works for a reason, even if we do celebrate times when things veer from the norm. In this case, it allowed Lilac to participate in some Home Alone-esque shenanigans that had me grinning.
It’s obvious the author has more adventures for Lilac Skully planned (seven, to be exact), and I think she will swiftly gain a loyal fanbase. Lilac Skully and the Haunted House was easy to read, and featured a little girl with a lot of heart. I enjoyed watching Lilac learn that appearances can be deceiving, and that sometimes the people you least expect can become your best friends.
Overall, a very good read for young readers who want something with ghosts, but not something ‘too scary’. Lilac Skully and the Haunted House worth picking up, and something you can let them read on their own, or read with you each evening.
Disclaimer: I received a copy of this book from the author for review consideration.
OMG!! This book is the feels of FEELS! I loved it and couldn't put it down! Rainbow Rowell is now one of my favourite authors.
Sypnosis:
Fangirl is about identical twins Cath and Wren, these two do everything together even so as going to the same University.
Wren is the more outgoing of the two who just wants to party, make friends and enjoy everything university has to offer. Cath on the other hand is a shy, geeky fan fiction writer that wants to appear invisible to everyone and just get her head down.
Cath has an obsession with a book series called Simon snow and launched her own fan fiction page that carry the story on in different scenes and she is quite a success at it, but it's literally all she can think about
As the girls have two very different ideas of University they decide not to live together so Cath has to share with Reagan, she has a boyfriend that is always there, encouraging Cath to go out bowling and parties.
Then there is the boy in her fiction writing class that wants to be writing buddies.
Cath soon finds love, but with whom?
<blockquote> I don’t just kiss people. Kisses aren’t... just with me.</blockquote>
My thoughts:
Fangirl is written in a 3rd person POV and started off pretty slow for my liking and I couldn't see what all the hype was about! At 100 pages in things started to get interesting and the pace was set.
The characters in this book are so relatable and realistic, with Cath and her social anxiety, daily worries and awkwardness, her fathers mental health and Wren going off the rails.
Levi is just the most amazing character I have come across always happy and just there! when you need him. He's a listener and patient and OMG!! I think I have a fictional crush!
I HATED!! the Simon Snow fan fiction parts I thought it was just a rip off of Harry potter and was not interested in this part at all that I started to skip all these parts and unfortunately there was so much of it
Rainbow Rowell is a contemporary romance genius! I was even thinking about the book at work, trying to think what was going to happen and what I had already read, that's how hooked I was on this book.
I never wanted it to end it just made me all warm and fuzzy inside, this would have been a five star book if it wasn't for the Simon Snow parts
I have read Eleanor and Park by Rainbow Rowell and I loved it, but I definitely will not be picking up carry on as it's all about Simon bloody Snow-sorry!
I recommend this to anyone that enjoys contemporary and romance novels.
I rate this book 4 out of 5 stars
Sypnosis:
Fangirl is about identical twins Cath and Wren, these two do everything together even so as going to the same University.
Wren is the more outgoing of the two who just wants to party, make friends and enjoy everything university has to offer. Cath on the other hand is a shy, geeky fan fiction writer that wants to appear invisible to everyone and just get her head down.
Cath has an obsession with a book series called Simon snow and launched her own fan fiction page that carry the story on in different scenes and she is quite a success at it, but it's literally all she can think about
As the girls have two very different ideas of University they decide not to live together so Cath has to share with Reagan, she has a boyfriend that is always there, encouraging Cath to go out bowling and parties.
Then there is the boy in her fiction writing class that wants to be writing buddies.
Cath soon finds love, but with whom?
<blockquote> I don’t just kiss people. Kisses aren’t... just with me.</blockquote>
My thoughts:
Fangirl is written in a 3rd person POV and started off pretty slow for my liking and I couldn't see what all the hype was about! At 100 pages in things started to get interesting and the pace was set.
The characters in this book are so relatable and realistic, with Cath and her social anxiety, daily worries and awkwardness, her fathers mental health and Wren going off the rails.
Levi is just the most amazing character I have come across always happy and just there! when you need him. He's a listener and patient and OMG!! I think I have a fictional crush!
I HATED!! the Simon Snow fan fiction parts I thought it was just a rip off of Harry potter and was not interested in this part at all that I started to skip all these parts and unfortunately there was so much of it
Rainbow Rowell is a contemporary romance genius! I was even thinking about the book at work, trying to think what was going to happen and what I had already read, that's how hooked I was on this book.
I never wanted it to end it just made me all warm and fuzzy inside, this would have been a five star book if it wasn't for the Simon Snow parts
I have read Eleanor and Park by Rainbow Rowell and I loved it, but I definitely will not be picking up carry on as it's all about Simon bloody Snow-sorry!
I recommend this to anyone that enjoys contemporary and romance novels.
I rate this book 4 out of 5 stars
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Gosford Park (2001) in Movies
Mar 24, 2020
Underneath it all...and Altman film
Do you like DOWNTON ABBEY? Do you like Agatha Christie Murder Mysteries? Do you like the 1970's British television series UPSTAIRS DOWNSTAIRS? If your answer to any of these questions is yes, then do I have a film for you.
GOSFORD PARK is an English Murder Mystery, set in the 1920's, featuring an All Star Cast, Directed by a 7 time Oscar nominee. It received critical acclaim in the year it was released (2001), earned 7 Oscar nominations (including Best Picture) and won the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay (Julian Fellowes...who would go on to create/write DOWNTON ABBEY).
Set in an English Country Manor, overseen by overbearing Lord William McCordle (Michael Gambon, the 2nd Albus Dumbledore in the Harry Potter films), GOSFORD PARK tells of the trials, tribulations, loves and death (yes, there's a murder) of a host of characters both Upstairs (the wealthy) and Downstairs (the servants).
And what a cast it is! Kristin Scott Thomas, Maggie Smith, Charles Dance, Jeremy Northam, Tom Hollander and Bob Balaban lead the group of the wealthy, while Helen Mirren, Alan Bates, Clive Owen, Kelly MacDonald, Eileen Atkins and Emily Watson head up the cast of servants below the stairs.
Both Maggie Smith and Helen Mirren were nominated for an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress for their work in this film (both losing to Jennifer Connelly for A BEAUTIFUL MIND).
Directed by Robert Altman (M*A*S*H, NASHVILLE), GOSFORD PARK is much of what you would expect from an Altman film...many, many people living their lives, sometimes intersecting with others, often times just going off on their own, tied together by the circumstances of being in this giant manor house on a weekend of a murder.
It is an ambitious, "Oscar bait" film that succeeds for the most part. And, if you are into the costumes, sets, Interior Design and intimate scenes of people talking, then you will be richly rewarded by this film.
I loved this film when it first came out and was anxiously looking forward to re-visiting it.
While I still liked it during this viewing, I did find the pacing to be languid and I started finding myself being frustrated by threads and character direction that just sort of petered out or ended all together with no real resolution. I know this was on purpose, for Altman would argue that this is what happens in real life, but I found this frustrating.
But this film has much, much going for it and if you haven't seen this - or haven't seen this in awhile - and are a fan of these types of films, then GOSFORD PARK will be a very rewarding 2 hours and 11 minutes of a movie going experience.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
GOSFORD PARK is an English Murder Mystery, set in the 1920's, featuring an All Star Cast, Directed by a 7 time Oscar nominee. It received critical acclaim in the year it was released (2001), earned 7 Oscar nominations (including Best Picture) and won the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay (Julian Fellowes...who would go on to create/write DOWNTON ABBEY).
Set in an English Country Manor, overseen by overbearing Lord William McCordle (Michael Gambon, the 2nd Albus Dumbledore in the Harry Potter films), GOSFORD PARK tells of the trials, tribulations, loves and death (yes, there's a murder) of a host of characters both Upstairs (the wealthy) and Downstairs (the servants).
And what a cast it is! Kristin Scott Thomas, Maggie Smith, Charles Dance, Jeremy Northam, Tom Hollander and Bob Balaban lead the group of the wealthy, while Helen Mirren, Alan Bates, Clive Owen, Kelly MacDonald, Eileen Atkins and Emily Watson head up the cast of servants below the stairs.
Both Maggie Smith and Helen Mirren were nominated for an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress for their work in this film (both losing to Jennifer Connelly for A BEAUTIFUL MIND).
Directed by Robert Altman (M*A*S*H, NASHVILLE), GOSFORD PARK is much of what you would expect from an Altman film...many, many people living their lives, sometimes intersecting with others, often times just going off on their own, tied together by the circumstances of being in this giant manor house on a weekend of a murder.
It is an ambitious, "Oscar bait" film that succeeds for the most part. And, if you are into the costumes, sets, Interior Design and intimate scenes of people talking, then you will be richly rewarded by this film.
I loved this film when it first came out and was anxiously looking forward to re-visiting it.
While I still liked it during this viewing, I did find the pacing to be languid and I started finding myself being frustrated by threads and character direction that just sort of petered out or ended all together with no real resolution. I know this was on purpose, for Altman would argue that this is what happens in real life, but I found this frustrating.
But this film has much, much going for it and if you haven't seen this - or haven't seen this in awhile - and are a fan of these types of films, then GOSFORD PARK will be a very rewarding 2 hours and 11 minutes of a movie going experience.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)