Search
Mein Rant - A Summary in Light Verse of 'Mein Kampf'
R.F. Patterson and Heath Robinson
Book
R F Paterson was a great fan of Gilbert and Sullivan, and when Germany invaded Poland on 1st...
The Chocolate Lady (94 KP) rated Lilac Girls in Books
Oct 5, 2020
This novel is very nicely written, with interesting characters. In particular, the protagonist Caroline is beautifully formed, with a life that is fascinating for those who know little about how Americans tried to help those who became unwitting refugees in the US after Hitler invaded their homelands. However, we must remember that Holocaust novels are a dime a dozen. This is why I was hoping that this novel would be different, particularly since the blurb for this book talks about Christine and her helping two survivors of the women's camp Ravensbruck. Unfortunately, the detailed information about the two other women in this story, and their introduction to Ravensbruck was, in my opinion, too much back-story. Although retelling the grim and gory ways that the Nazis treated their prisoners is a necessary evil, I somehow felt that this book included these scenes only to evoke pity for these characters. I don't want to pity characters, I want to have empathy for them, to care about them, and the author let me down with this.
In addition - and I hope this doesn't sound racist or snobbish - as a Jew, I have a hard time with Holocaust novels that seem to outwardly ignore how the Nazis treated the Jews, and only focuses on the other "undesirables." I realize that the Nazis didn't only kill Jews, but they were their primary target, and to avoid that altogether was disingenuous, to say the least. However, I was glad that this book didn't focus on any overtly Christian themes, even though I believe that there is a market for Holocaust stories within the Christian Fiction genre (see my review of the novel The Butterfly and the Violin by Kristy Cambron here http://drchazan.blogspot.com/2014/07/beauty-out-of-ugliness.html for more on my feelings about this).
Furthermore, the only Jewish reference I found in this novel was a passing reference to visiting the Ghetto and a remembrance of eating a Hanukkah delicacy. Unfortunately, the author didn't do her research properly, and the character said she remembered eating a type of doughnut that the Jewish bakers made for the holiday. Those doughnuts - known as "sufganiot" were never part of any Eastern European Hanukkah celebration at that time. In fact, sufganiot that are popular among Jews today, come from the Jews of North Africa and Arab countries. The word, sufganiot, comes from the Arabic and Hebrew words that mean sponge. While Jews in Poland did make something similar, their popularity as a particularly Hanukkah delicacy among Easter European Jews only coincided after Ashkenazi and Mizrahi Jews came together in Israel (i.e., post-1948). All of this is why I cannot give this book a rating of more than two and a half stars out of five, but I'm certain that it will find a much more sympathetic audience among non-Jewish readers.
In addition - and I hope this doesn't sound racist or snobbish - as a Jew, I have a hard time with Holocaust novels that seem to outwardly ignore how the Nazis treated the Jews, and only focuses on the other "undesirables." I realize that the Nazis didn't only kill Jews, but they were their primary target, and to avoid that altogether was disingenuous, to say the least. However, I was glad that this book didn't focus on any overtly Christian themes, even though I believe that there is a market for Holocaust stories within the Christian Fiction genre (see my review of the novel The Butterfly and the Violin by Kristy Cambron here http://drchazan.blogspot.com/2014/07/beauty-out-of-ugliness.html for more on my feelings about this).
Furthermore, the only Jewish reference I found in this novel was a passing reference to visiting the Ghetto and a remembrance of eating a Hanukkah delicacy. Unfortunately, the author didn't do her research properly, and the character said she remembered eating a type of doughnut that the Jewish bakers made for the holiday. Those doughnuts - known as "sufganiot" were never part of any Eastern European Hanukkah celebration at that time. In fact, sufganiot that are popular among Jews today, come from the Jews of North Africa and Arab countries. The word, sufganiot, comes from the Arabic and Hebrew words that mean sponge. While Jews in Poland did make something similar, their popularity as a particularly Hanukkah delicacy among Easter European Jews only coincided after Ashkenazi and Mizrahi Jews came together in Israel (i.e., post-1948). All of this is why I cannot give this book a rating of more than two and a half stars out of five, but I'm certain that it will find a much more sympathetic audience among non-Jewish readers.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Hidden Gold: A True Story of the Holocaust in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<b><i>I received this book for free from Publisher in exchange for an honest review. This does not affect my opinion of the book or the content of my review.</i></b>
I'm generally not a memoir person. But if I'm going to read a memoir (or even nonfiction), I'll choose anything about the Holocaust (I find that time period sadistically interesting).
<i>Hidden Gold</i> deserves about as much praise as Anne Frank's <i>Diary of a Young Girl</i>. A story set in another part of Europe (Poland) during Hitler's reign, Burakowski tells us her family's survival, hidden away from society in the hopes that they won't be found out.
For two years, the Golds hid with the Lanskis in a small part of a barn in Kolkow, surviving with very little sustenance. During that time, their hope dwindles little by little, but the two families still cling on to their pasts, even if that life will be impossible to get back to after everything blows over.
I loved how Burakowski introduces us to her family and the people that the Golds were involved with, giving us lots of background information on how Leib met Hanna and how the Golds lived their life in the early parts of the war. Burakowski also gives us insight on the growing hypocrisy and horrors among society as Hitler's power and anti-Semitism grew, giving us visuals on how life was like for the Jews back in the late 1930s and early 1940s. We're also shown the inner turmoils going on with those who had good relations with Jews and now having to choose whether or not they should help Jews, or give in to the propaganda.
Shoshana, Hanna's daughter, is extremely admirable. She's willing to go out to the Germans, pretending to be one of them, to buy her family time. She is also willing to risk her life a few times to get her family's money from Pi?czów, and going back again <em>while</em> she felt ill. If I were in her place, I'd probably continue to curl up in a fetal little ball. (Despite the fact I'm considered living in "poverty," I'm pretty much a lucky duckling. Also, being an only child, I'm probably a <em>little</em> spoiled.)
David is perhaps one of those where all the feels will come. Like any little kid, he's full of mischief and mayhem, but going through such a dark time at a really young age, he's extremely brave, confident, and has the most hope for the family getting out alive.
Although most of <i>Hidden Gold</i> is focused on the Gold's survival during Hitler running rampant with the final solution, Burakowski finalizes the story from David's viewpoint with how each of the family members were impacted years later in the future. For those interested in what happened in other parts of Europe or a survival story outside of concentration camps, Ella Burakowski's <i>Hidden Gold</i> makes a fantastic contribution depicting the horrors of the Holocaust.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/arc-review-hidden-gold-by-ella-burakowski/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
I'm generally not a memoir person. But if I'm going to read a memoir (or even nonfiction), I'll choose anything about the Holocaust (I find that time period sadistically interesting).
<i>Hidden Gold</i> deserves about as much praise as Anne Frank's <i>Diary of a Young Girl</i>. A story set in another part of Europe (Poland) during Hitler's reign, Burakowski tells us her family's survival, hidden away from society in the hopes that they won't be found out.
For two years, the Golds hid with the Lanskis in a small part of a barn in Kolkow, surviving with very little sustenance. During that time, their hope dwindles little by little, but the two families still cling on to their pasts, even if that life will be impossible to get back to after everything blows over.
I loved how Burakowski introduces us to her family and the people that the Golds were involved with, giving us lots of background information on how Leib met Hanna and how the Golds lived their life in the early parts of the war. Burakowski also gives us insight on the growing hypocrisy and horrors among society as Hitler's power and anti-Semitism grew, giving us visuals on how life was like for the Jews back in the late 1930s and early 1940s. We're also shown the inner turmoils going on with those who had good relations with Jews and now having to choose whether or not they should help Jews, or give in to the propaganda.
Shoshana, Hanna's daughter, is extremely admirable. She's willing to go out to the Germans, pretending to be one of them, to buy her family time. She is also willing to risk her life a few times to get her family's money from Pi?czów, and going back again <em>while</em> she felt ill. If I were in her place, I'd probably continue to curl up in a fetal little ball. (Despite the fact I'm considered living in "poverty," I'm pretty much a lucky duckling. Also, being an only child, I'm probably a <em>little</em> spoiled.)
David is perhaps one of those where all the feels will come. Like any little kid, he's full of mischief and mayhem, but going through such a dark time at a really young age, he's extremely brave, confident, and has the most hope for the family getting out alive.
Although most of <i>Hidden Gold</i> is focused on the Gold's survival during Hitler running rampant with the final solution, Burakowski finalizes the story from David's viewpoint with how each of the family members were impacted years later in the future. For those interested in what happened in other parts of Europe or a survival story outside of concentration camps, Ella Burakowski's <i>Hidden Gold</i> makes a fantastic contribution depicting the horrors of the Holocaust.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/arc-review-hidden-gold-by-ella-burakowski/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
BookInspector (124 KP) rated Berlin Calling in Books
Sep 24, 2020
I am quite a bit of a fan, when it comes to books about World War II, add women in it, and I’m intrigued. That was what drew me to this book, a woman figure in the context of war and not just woman, a foreigner. The description above, describes this novel quite well. It started with very romantic notes, how Maggie met Kurt, and how she ended up in Berlin, landing a job in Propaganda House. Maggie is very interesting character in this book, and I really loved her in this novel. She is beautiful, pleasant to be around, incredibly hard working and independent. I’m kind of used to these disturbed characters which are used in most of the books, and it was very refreshing to read about one, who is not mentally or emotionally messed up. Other characters were interesting to read about as well, and all of them where quite the personalities. I really enjoyed, that author did not make this book from one characters perspective, and included most of the characters by allowing them to speak. This made the book more pleasant to read, and more interesting.
The plot of this book was really absorbing, and different from most of the WWII books I read. Normally, I encountered the books, which used to describe the tragedy of war, such as concentration camps or Jew’s killings, and their fighting for survival. This book was softer on that part, it mentioned the cruelties’ which happened during the war, but never in so much detail to make it stomach turning. It was written more about the political aspects of it, and how German propaganda was used to influence people from other countries. It’s been a while since I studied history of WWII, and I studied from different countries’ perspective, so to see how it looked from Germany's perspective was quite appealing. I think that author was trying to show, how Germans thought about this war and why most of them supported what Hitler was doing.
I am a big fan of short chapters, and this book didn’t disappoint me with that. The chapters were divided into smaller parts, which made it more pleasant to read. Every chapter was quite detailed, but the meaning and the point of that chapter was very lovely opened, and concluded for the reader. The story was flowing nicely and smoothly. I believe Author has a great personal knowledge about war, and used it greatly in this book. There was a little bit of monotony while reading this book, and lack of twists and turns, that would’ve make it more exciting. The language used was not difficult and easy to read, but I had to look up some German terms used in this book, as I’m not familiar with the language. The ending of the book was really entertaining but not complete. I wished more conclusions, and to know what happened to Dieter. To conclude, it is a great book if you looking for World War II stories of war from German perspective, love, and survival.
The plot of this book was really absorbing, and different from most of the WWII books I read. Normally, I encountered the books, which used to describe the tragedy of war, such as concentration camps or Jew’s killings, and their fighting for survival. This book was softer on that part, it mentioned the cruelties’ which happened during the war, but never in so much detail to make it stomach turning. It was written more about the political aspects of it, and how German propaganda was used to influence people from other countries. It’s been a while since I studied history of WWII, and I studied from different countries’ perspective, so to see how it looked from Germany's perspective was quite appealing. I think that author was trying to show, how Germans thought about this war and why most of them supported what Hitler was doing.
I am a big fan of short chapters, and this book didn’t disappoint me with that. The chapters were divided into smaller parts, which made it more pleasant to read. Every chapter was quite detailed, but the meaning and the point of that chapter was very lovely opened, and concluded for the reader. The story was flowing nicely and smoothly. I believe Author has a great personal knowledge about war, and used it greatly in this book. There was a little bit of monotony while reading this book, and lack of twists and turns, that would’ve make it more exciting. The language used was not difficult and easy to read, but I had to look up some German terms used in this book, as I’m not familiar with the language. The ending of the book was really entertaining but not complete. I wished more conclusions, and to know what happened to Dieter. To conclude, it is a great book if you looking for World War II stories of war from German perspective, love, and survival.
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons From The Twentieth Century in Books
Jan 11, 2018
An excellent book full of warnings
On Tyranny is a short little book. I don't think it needs to be longer - it's easy to read, succinct, and is meant to serve as a warning. If anyone wants to learn more about any of the twenty lessons, there are plenty of resources for that. It's simply "HEY. This happened before. And this happened before. And this happened before and YOU NEED TO SEE THESE SIMILARITIES." It was a very quick read, but has left me with a lot to think about.
The format is simple: Twenty sections, each beginning with a lesson title and a short summary paragraph, then going into more detail in the next two to three pages. For example:
Do Not Obey In Advance.
Most of the power of authoritarianism is freely given. In times like these, individuals think ahead about what a more repressive government will want, and then offer themselves without being asked. A citizen who adapts in this way is teaching power what it can do.
The next few pages talk about Austrian Nazis rounded up Jews and used them as forced labor, before the German government told them to. When Jewish businesses were marked as such, people immediately started avoiding them. Anticipatory obedience. (Relate this to the suddenly overt racism and Nazi marches we're now facing in the US - where that used to be hidden.)
Another example:
Take Responsibility For The Face Of The World.
The symbols of today enable the reality of tomorrow. Notice the swastikas and the other signs of hate. Do not look away, and do not get used to them. Remove them yourself and set an example for others to do so.
The next pages talk about propaganda, and signs. If we tolerate swastikas, we imply that we accept them. That we support them. And if the oppressed groups that those swastikas are aimed at see everyone around them supporting them, who do they look to for help? All it takes is one person deciding to scrub off or paint over the swastika, for people around them to realize that's a thing that can be done. This plays into another section, which talked about Standing Out. Do the thing that makes you stand out - whether that's standing up for a minority, or scrubbing swastikas off walls, or attending a protest. If you don't stand out, you're too easily ignored as part of the problem.
This book had lots of holds at my local library - while I was sad to have to wait so long, I was pleased that so many people wanted to read it. I was 35th in line at one point! Just knowing that so many people want to read it is a little reassuring. The author has written several books on the Holocaust, WWII, and the rise of Hitler, so he knows what he's talking about, and it shows in his writing.
On Tyranny is a quick read and does an amazing job of boiling a lot of complicated concepts down into very succinct little points. I definitely recommend it as a jumping off point. Just don't let it be all you read.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com
The format is simple: Twenty sections, each beginning with a lesson title and a short summary paragraph, then going into more detail in the next two to three pages. For example:
Do Not Obey In Advance.
Most of the power of authoritarianism is freely given. In times like these, individuals think ahead about what a more repressive government will want, and then offer themselves without being asked. A citizen who adapts in this way is teaching power what it can do.
The next few pages talk about Austrian Nazis rounded up Jews and used them as forced labor, before the German government told them to. When Jewish businesses were marked as such, people immediately started avoiding them. Anticipatory obedience. (Relate this to the suddenly overt racism and Nazi marches we're now facing in the US - where that used to be hidden.)
Another example:
Take Responsibility For The Face Of The World.
The symbols of today enable the reality of tomorrow. Notice the swastikas and the other signs of hate. Do not look away, and do not get used to them. Remove them yourself and set an example for others to do so.
The next pages talk about propaganda, and signs. If we tolerate swastikas, we imply that we accept them. That we support them. And if the oppressed groups that those swastikas are aimed at see everyone around them supporting them, who do they look to for help? All it takes is one person deciding to scrub off or paint over the swastika, for people around them to realize that's a thing that can be done. This plays into another section, which talked about Standing Out. Do the thing that makes you stand out - whether that's standing up for a minority, or scrubbing swastikas off walls, or attending a protest. If you don't stand out, you're too easily ignored as part of the problem.
This book had lots of holds at my local library - while I was sad to have to wait so long, I was pleased that so many people wanted to read it. I was 35th in line at one point! Just knowing that so many people want to read it is a little reassuring. The author has written several books on the Holocaust, WWII, and the rise of Hitler, so he knows what he's talking about, and it shows in his writing.
On Tyranny is a quick read and does an amazing job of boiling a lot of complicated concepts down into very succinct little points. I definitely recommend it as a jumping off point. Just don't let it be all you read.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Darkest Hour (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
As the Nazi’s sweep through Europe at the beginning of World War II the British face the difficult issue of replacing their Prime Minister. The people and members of Parliament have become disenchanted with Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain (Ronald Pickup). They feel his lack of action lead to the rise of Hitler and the Nazis. He agrees to step down and has to name a replacement. While he would prefer to have his protégé, Foreign Secretary Viscount Halifax (Stephen Dillane), there is only one member of his party that all of Parliament will accept, Winston Churchill (Gary Oldman). King George VI (Ben Mendelsohn) is also opposed to the brash and opinionated Churchill. Bowing to the will of the opposition Churchill the King agrees to appoint him the next Prime Minister. Although he is thrilled at finally achieving his lifelong dream he has no delusions that he is facing extremely difficult times ahead. The Nazis are tearing through Europe. They have already taken Belgium and Holland they now are invading France. The Nazis have also managed to surround nearly the entire British ground force on the French beaches with no way home. Not only does he have to worry about foreign foes but also his numerous political enemies in his own party. Many oppose his brash and unpredictable nature, while others think of him as heavy drinker that is no more than an exceptional orator with little capacity to make hard decisions. He must overcome all of this to protect the English people and prepare them for the tough days ahead.
Winston Churchill is a very well know historically figure. He was known for his powerful speeches and bigger than life personality. This film takes a look at the early days of him being Prime Minister, during some of the most volatile days in the history of Europe. Not only does the story delve into the politics and struggles of Churchill to put forth his agenda in a hostile climate but also shows him at his most vulnerable. One example is after delivering his first radio address to the nation he walks home alone and to talk with and be reassured by his wife, Clementine Churchill (Kristin Scott Thomas), that his speech was good and people could hear him.
Gary Oldman is spectacular in his role as Chruchill. From the iconic speeches to the light moments with his family and personal secretary, Elizabeth Layton (Lily James), he puts forth a great performance. The supporting cast is great as well, highlighted by Mendelsohn, Scott Thomas and James. The flow of the film really worked, under direction of Joe Wright (Atonement, The Soloist, and Pan). The two hour and five minute run time felt shorter and the movie really moved along. There were some points that they showed some battle scenes, after all it is a World War II era film, which did feel like afterthoughts and didn’t really add anything to the movie. The tension of the moment was well done even without these scenes. Besides those scenes the movie was shot well and added to the overall feel of the movie.
This film will appeal to those who are fans of history, the World War II era specifically, and historical figures. It also is powerful and heartfelt. Really the performances of the cast are what really stuck with me and will be the reason that I watch it again.
Winston Churchill is a very well know historically figure. He was known for his powerful speeches and bigger than life personality. This film takes a look at the early days of him being Prime Minister, during some of the most volatile days in the history of Europe. Not only does the story delve into the politics and struggles of Churchill to put forth his agenda in a hostile climate but also shows him at his most vulnerable. One example is after delivering his first radio address to the nation he walks home alone and to talk with and be reassured by his wife, Clementine Churchill (Kristin Scott Thomas), that his speech was good and people could hear him.
Gary Oldman is spectacular in his role as Chruchill. From the iconic speeches to the light moments with his family and personal secretary, Elizabeth Layton (Lily James), he puts forth a great performance. The supporting cast is great as well, highlighted by Mendelsohn, Scott Thomas and James. The flow of the film really worked, under direction of Joe Wright (Atonement, The Soloist, and Pan). The two hour and five minute run time felt shorter and the movie really moved along. There were some points that they showed some battle scenes, after all it is a World War II era film, which did feel like afterthoughts and didn’t really add anything to the movie. The tension of the moment was well done even without these scenes. Besides those scenes the movie was shot well and added to the overall feel of the movie.
This film will appeal to those who are fans of history, the World War II era specifically, and historical figures. It also is powerful and heartfelt. Really the performances of the cast are what really stuck with me and will be the reason that I watch it again.
The Last Collection
Book
An American woman becomes entangled in the intense rivalry between iconic fashion designers Coco...
Historical Romance
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Knives Out (2019) in Movies
Dec 4, 2019
If they were to give it a go, this movie should justifiably be Rian's redemption from the harshest of his previous critics. For this is a really entertaining film. I found myself smiling with glee through a sizable proportion of the running time.
Multi-millionaire crime-fiction author Harlan Thrombey (the wonderful Christopher Plummer) is celebrating his 85th birthday with three generations of his family in his "Cludo-like" mansion. But all is not well with the family harmonic and the next morning Harlan is found dead in his room by his nurse Marta (Ana de Armas). Apparently, it's a suicide, but when private detective Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig) arrives on the scene he starts turning over stones "oin seearch ov tha troooth" (sic) and dark secrets begin to emerge.
Key to success of this Agatha Christie-style movie is a dense portmanteau cast and a well-plotted script. Both are here present.
In terms of the cast, this is another candidate for the SAG Ensemble Cast award. For the cast is suitably stellar with Chris "Cap" Evans, Toni Collette, Michael Shannon, Jamie Lee Curtis and Don Johnson vying for the top billing with Craig and Plummer. They bounce off each other joyously, with Collette taking my prize for top acting kudos. She's just deliciously over the top as the scheming hippy chick with the rasping voice and the cutting one-liners.
With a starring role is Cuban bombshell Ana de Armas, here notching down the glamour to play the plainly dressed nurse. But she has a magnetic screen presence and is perfectly cast as the girl at the heart of all the action. She has the doe-eyed innocence that Alfred Hitchcock was always looking for in his leading ladies. Interestingly, she is soon to appear with Craig again as Bond-girl Paloma in "No Time to Die".
Elsewhere in the cast are some interesting cameos: the family's lawyer is none other than Frank "Yoda" Oz; and the ancient security guard is M. Emmet Walsh, who has an amazing filmography going back to the late 60's.
Writer/director is clearly his 'thing'. But Rian Johnson here pulls off a neat trick with the script which is brilliantly twisty and turny and 100% entertaining. Although it's presented as cuts between the 'present time' and versions of the night in question, the whole doughnut is never entirely in view until the final reel. It's a satisfying story, and some of the dialogue is laugh-out-loud funny.
A nice plot point is the inability for young Marta to tell a lie without vomiting. Wouldn't the UK General Elections be Sooooo much more colourful if that was a general trait!!
I've only the one real criticism of the movie, and that's Daniel Craig's appalling Southern drawl. It's really quite distracting. Aside from some witty lines of dialogue ("What is this? CSI KFC?") nothing would have been lost to cast him as an urbane English detective instead. They could have slipped in some Brexit jokes instead! I appreciate Craig wants to distance himself from Bond somewhat. He did the same thing as Joe Bang in "Logan Lucky". But - sorry - it didn't really work for me then and it doesn't work now either.
In summary, this is a really fun movie that a whole family with older children (the rating is 12+) can go and enjoy together. There's limited violence; limited swearing and sexual innuendo; and no sex (save for the Hitler youth in the bathroom!). But there is a whole lot of sleuthing fun to be had. Bravo Mr Johnson, bravo! For that reason it comes with a bob-the-movie-man "Highly recommended" tag.
(For the full graphical review please check out https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2019/12/04/one-manns-movies-film-review-knives-out-2019/).
Multi-millionaire crime-fiction author Harlan Thrombey (the wonderful Christopher Plummer) is celebrating his 85th birthday with three generations of his family in his "Cludo-like" mansion. But all is not well with the family harmonic and the next morning Harlan is found dead in his room by his nurse Marta (Ana de Armas). Apparently, it's a suicide, but when private detective Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig) arrives on the scene he starts turning over stones "oin seearch ov tha troooth" (sic) and dark secrets begin to emerge.
Key to success of this Agatha Christie-style movie is a dense portmanteau cast and a well-plotted script. Both are here present.
In terms of the cast, this is another candidate for the SAG Ensemble Cast award. For the cast is suitably stellar with Chris "Cap" Evans, Toni Collette, Michael Shannon, Jamie Lee Curtis and Don Johnson vying for the top billing with Craig and Plummer. They bounce off each other joyously, with Collette taking my prize for top acting kudos. She's just deliciously over the top as the scheming hippy chick with the rasping voice and the cutting one-liners.
With a starring role is Cuban bombshell Ana de Armas, here notching down the glamour to play the plainly dressed nurse. But she has a magnetic screen presence and is perfectly cast as the girl at the heart of all the action. She has the doe-eyed innocence that Alfred Hitchcock was always looking for in his leading ladies. Interestingly, she is soon to appear with Craig again as Bond-girl Paloma in "No Time to Die".
Elsewhere in the cast are some interesting cameos: the family's lawyer is none other than Frank "Yoda" Oz; and the ancient security guard is M. Emmet Walsh, who has an amazing filmography going back to the late 60's.
Writer/director is clearly his 'thing'. But Rian Johnson here pulls off a neat trick with the script which is brilliantly twisty and turny and 100% entertaining. Although it's presented as cuts between the 'present time' and versions of the night in question, the whole doughnut is never entirely in view until the final reel. It's a satisfying story, and some of the dialogue is laugh-out-loud funny.
A nice plot point is the inability for young Marta to tell a lie without vomiting. Wouldn't the UK General Elections be Sooooo much more colourful if that was a general trait!!
I've only the one real criticism of the movie, and that's Daniel Craig's appalling Southern drawl. It's really quite distracting. Aside from some witty lines of dialogue ("What is this? CSI KFC?") nothing would have been lost to cast him as an urbane English detective instead. They could have slipped in some Brexit jokes instead! I appreciate Craig wants to distance himself from Bond somewhat. He did the same thing as Joe Bang in "Logan Lucky". But - sorry - it didn't really work for me then and it doesn't work now either.
In summary, this is a really fun movie that a whole family with older children (the rating is 12+) can go and enjoy together. There's limited violence; limited swearing and sexual innuendo; and no sex (save for the Hitler youth in the bathroom!). But there is a whole lot of sleuthing fun to be had. Bravo Mr Johnson, bravo! For that reason it comes with a bob-the-movie-man "Highly recommended" tag.
(For the full graphical review please check out https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2019/12/04/one-manns-movies-film-review-knives-out-2019/).
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Jojo Rabbit (2019) in Movies
Jan 22, 2021
Another favourite from the awards season that came with some strong acclaim from amongst friends and trusted reviewers, WWII satire Jojo Rabbit, from the likeable and unique mind of Taika Waititi, was always high on my list as a must see movie.
I have followed the Kiwi’s original output since way back, and always enjoyed his quirky sense of humour and childlike charm. Either Eagle vs Shark or The Flight of the Conchords would have been my first encounter; and by the time of Hunt for the Wilderpeople and Thor: Ragnarok I had become a tentative fan. Never entirely bowled over by his style and content in the same way as, say, Wes Anderson (to whom some compare his outlook on the creative world), and never rolling around on the floor in hysterics at his naivety and comedy of manners, nevertheless, I like the guy a lot.
So when I heard he had adapted a fantasy novel about Nazi Germany from the point of view of a child, and would be playing Hitler himself, I knew instantly where he would be pitching this. The idea of it being offensive in any way was not a concern or even a thought, and anyone that did react that way is just… ridiculous and deliberately missing the point for the sake of finding something to be outraged about.
Of course subjects of genocide, political repression and evil existing in the world should and must be treated with a sensitivity to a degree, and amongst the silly lampooning and most extreme moments of satire that care is evident. There are moments of real gravity and tenderness in the mix here, thanks in large to some wonderful performances from the adult actors, notably the ever reliable Sam Rockwell and the increasingly strong and impressive Scarlett Johansson, who picked up her second Oscar nomination for this, after Marriage Story ticked the box for true drama.
The film focuses and relies on young Roman Griffin Davis as the eponymous Jojo, a happy little boy who sees goodness and light in an ever darkening world around him. Waititi as director works well with kids, placing the idea of charm and likability above acting prowess per se. And that is both the strength and ultimate weakness of this premise. He is charming and likeable, and cute and sweet and very watchable, but his inexperience in front of the camera and ability to find a range of emotions is often tested beyond his tender years, and can therefore break the magic spell that is woven in the best scenes.
The humour itself also doesn’t always hit the mark. Sometimes it is merely amusing rather than something laugh out loud funny, much as an average Mel Brooks film always was. And that can lead to a feel of something uneven and rambling, as the story struggles to find what it really wants to say. In its final moments it does land on an overlying message that leaves you with a winning impression, and you leave feeling that you saw something you enjoyed, but not something you would unreservedly recommend to everyone. In fact if someone said they didn’t enjoy it, or get the joke at all, then I would respect that view.
Under a microscope of scrutiny it doesn’t hold up that well, and I wonder how a few years of distance will treat it, once our sensibilities shift again with time. There are a few moments when the heart of the film connects with it’s silly bone and resonates, but not nearly enough. I personally wanted more of that. But, sadly, whenever JoJo threatens to grow up it retreats back into childhood and shies away from commenting on anything serious or truly meaningful. But, of course, that is not the point. As an entertainment it is a wonderful, unique and lovely film. And that should really be all that it is judged by.
In conclusion, a curiosity I will look forward to watching again, but don’t think quite makes the grade as an instant classic. It only reinforced however how much I like Rockwell and Johansson, and will always be curious about what Waititi is up to next.
I have followed the Kiwi’s original output since way back, and always enjoyed his quirky sense of humour and childlike charm. Either Eagle vs Shark or The Flight of the Conchords would have been my first encounter; and by the time of Hunt for the Wilderpeople and Thor: Ragnarok I had become a tentative fan. Never entirely bowled over by his style and content in the same way as, say, Wes Anderson (to whom some compare his outlook on the creative world), and never rolling around on the floor in hysterics at his naivety and comedy of manners, nevertheless, I like the guy a lot.
So when I heard he had adapted a fantasy novel about Nazi Germany from the point of view of a child, and would be playing Hitler himself, I knew instantly where he would be pitching this. The idea of it being offensive in any way was not a concern or even a thought, and anyone that did react that way is just… ridiculous and deliberately missing the point for the sake of finding something to be outraged about.
Of course subjects of genocide, political repression and evil existing in the world should and must be treated with a sensitivity to a degree, and amongst the silly lampooning and most extreme moments of satire that care is evident. There are moments of real gravity and tenderness in the mix here, thanks in large to some wonderful performances from the adult actors, notably the ever reliable Sam Rockwell and the increasingly strong and impressive Scarlett Johansson, who picked up her second Oscar nomination for this, after Marriage Story ticked the box for true drama.
The film focuses and relies on young Roman Griffin Davis as the eponymous Jojo, a happy little boy who sees goodness and light in an ever darkening world around him. Waititi as director works well with kids, placing the idea of charm and likability above acting prowess per se. And that is both the strength and ultimate weakness of this premise. He is charming and likeable, and cute and sweet and very watchable, but his inexperience in front of the camera and ability to find a range of emotions is often tested beyond his tender years, and can therefore break the magic spell that is woven in the best scenes.
The humour itself also doesn’t always hit the mark. Sometimes it is merely amusing rather than something laugh out loud funny, much as an average Mel Brooks film always was. And that can lead to a feel of something uneven and rambling, as the story struggles to find what it really wants to say. In its final moments it does land on an overlying message that leaves you with a winning impression, and you leave feeling that you saw something you enjoyed, but not something you would unreservedly recommend to everyone. In fact if someone said they didn’t enjoy it, or get the joke at all, then I would respect that view.
Under a microscope of scrutiny it doesn’t hold up that well, and I wonder how a few years of distance will treat it, once our sensibilities shift again with time. There are a few moments when the heart of the film connects with it’s silly bone and resonates, but not nearly enough. I personally wanted more of that. But, sadly, whenever JoJo threatens to grow up it retreats back into childhood and shies away from commenting on anything serious or truly meaningful. But, of course, that is not the point. As an entertainment it is a wonderful, unique and lovely film. And that should really be all that it is judged by.
In conclusion, a curiosity I will look forward to watching again, but don’t think quite makes the grade as an instant classic. It only reinforced however how much I like Rockwell and Johansson, and will always be curious about what Waititi is up to next.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Bridget Jones's Baby (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Come the F*** on Bridget… who’s the Daddy?
The world’s favourite lonely-hearts diarist is back. Bridget (Renée Zellweger) once again starts the film ‘all by herself’, haunted by occasional meetings with ex-flame Mark D’Arcy (Colin Firth) – now married to Camilla (Agni Scott) – and facing the natural discomfort of the early funeral of another friend who has died way too young. And at 43, Bridget’s biological clock is also ticking towards parental midnight.
Proving that enormous ditzyness and lack of talent need not be an impediment to a successful career, Bridget is now a top TV floor manager on a cable news station, anchored by friend Miranda (an excellent Sarah Solemani). In an effort to shake Bridget out of her malaise, Miranda takes her to a music festival (featuring some fun cameos!) where she has a one-night-stand with the delectable (speaking at least for all the women in my audience) Jack (Patrick Dempsey). Following another one-night-stand with D’Arcy and finding herself pregnant, a comedy of farce follows with one expectant mother and two prospective fathers competing for Bridget’s affections.
OK. So it’s not bloody Shakespeare. But it is an extremely well-crafted comedy, and as a British rom-com it significantly out-does many of the efforts of the rom-com king – Richard Curtis – in recent years. As a series its just amazing how many of the original cast have been reunited after 2004’s rather lacklustre “Bridget Jones: Edge of Reason”. Particularly effective are Bridget’s parents, played by the delectably Tory Gemma Jones and the ever-perfect Jim Broadbent. And Bridget’s trio of irreverent friends: Shazzer (Sally Phillips), Jude (Shirley Henderson) and Tom (James Callis) are all back. All are either well into parenthood or have impending parenthood, adding to the pressure on Bridget’s aching ovaries.
New to the cast, and brilliant in every scene she’s in, is the ever-radiant Emma Thompson as Bridget’s doctor. Is there any actress in the movies today that can deliver a comic line better-timed than Thompson? I doubt it. Just superb. And Thompson also co-wrote the screenplay, together with Bridget author Helen Fielding and – an unlikely contributor – Ali G collaborator Dan Mazer. All contribute to a sizzling script – not based on Fielding’s poorly received story – that zips along and makes the 123 minute run-time fly by. My one reservation would be – despite the film being set in the current day – lapses into internet memes like Hitler Cats and song crazes that are at least five years out of date. But I forgive that for the Colin Firth ‘Gangnam’ line, for me the funniest in the whole film.
Zellweger looks fantastic, pulling off the 4 year age difference from her character with ease. And isn’t it wonderful to see a middle-aged character as the centre of a rom-com for once? Hollywood would be well to remember that romance is not restricted to the 20-somethings. Certainly the packed cinema – filled with probably 90% (well oiled) women – certainly thought so, in what was a raucous and entertaining showing!
The music is superbly supported by an epic soundtrack of well-chosen tracks from Ellie Goulding, Years and Years, Jess Glynne, Lily Allen (with very funny adult content!) and classic oldies, all wrappered with nice themes by the brilliant and underrated Craig “Love Actually” Armstrong.
Sharon Maguire – the director of the original “Diary” – has delivered here a fun, absorbing and enormously entertaining piece of fluff that deserves to do well. And it has in the UK, making $11M in its opening weekend here and playing to packed showings. However – incomprehensibly – it has bombed in the US with only $8M coming in. Hopefully it might prove a bit of a sleeper hit there: come on America… we go to see all of the rubbish rom-coms you send over here, and this is way better than most of those!
This was a film I was determined to be sniffy about with my rating. But as a) I enjoyed it very much and b) a packed audience of women can’t be wrong…
Proving that enormous ditzyness and lack of talent need not be an impediment to a successful career, Bridget is now a top TV floor manager on a cable news station, anchored by friend Miranda (an excellent Sarah Solemani). In an effort to shake Bridget out of her malaise, Miranda takes her to a music festival (featuring some fun cameos!) where she has a one-night-stand with the delectable (speaking at least for all the women in my audience) Jack (Patrick Dempsey). Following another one-night-stand with D’Arcy and finding herself pregnant, a comedy of farce follows with one expectant mother and two prospective fathers competing for Bridget’s affections.
OK. So it’s not bloody Shakespeare. But it is an extremely well-crafted comedy, and as a British rom-com it significantly out-does many of the efforts of the rom-com king – Richard Curtis – in recent years. As a series its just amazing how many of the original cast have been reunited after 2004’s rather lacklustre “Bridget Jones: Edge of Reason”. Particularly effective are Bridget’s parents, played by the delectably Tory Gemma Jones and the ever-perfect Jim Broadbent. And Bridget’s trio of irreverent friends: Shazzer (Sally Phillips), Jude (Shirley Henderson) and Tom (James Callis) are all back. All are either well into parenthood or have impending parenthood, adding to the pressure on Bridget’s aching ovaries.
New to the cast, and brilliant in every scene she’s in, is the ever-radiant Emma Thompson as Bridget’s doctor. Is there any actress in the movies today that can deliver a comic line better-timed than Thompson? I doubt it. Just superb. And Thompson also co-wrote the screenplay, together with Bridget author Helen Fielding and – an unlikely contributor – Ali G collaborator Dan Mazer. All contribute to a sizzling script – not based on Fielding’s poorly received story – that zips along and makes the 123 minute run-time fly by. My one reservation would be – despite the film being set in the current day – lapses into internet memes like Hitler Cats and song crazes that are at least five years out of date. But I forgive that for the Colin Firth ‘Gangnam’ line, for me the funniest in the whole film.
Zellweger looks fantastic, pulling off the 4 year age difference from her character with ease. And isn’t it wonderful to see a middle-aged character as the centre of a rom-com for once? Hollywood would be well to remember that romance is not restricted to the 20-somethings. Certainly the packed cinema – filled with probably 90% (well oiled) women – certainly thought so, in what was a raucous and entertaining showing!
The music is superbly supported by an epic soundtrack of well-chosen tracks from Ellie Goulding, Years and Years, Jess Glynne, Lily Allen (with very funny adult content!) and classic oldies, all wrappered with nice themes by the brilliant and underrated Craig “Love Actually” Armstrong.
Sharon Maguire – the director of the original “Diary” – has delivered here a fun, absorbing and enormously entertaining piece of fluff that deserves to do well. And it has in the UK, making $11M in its opening weekend here and playing to packed showings. However – incomprehensibly – it has bombed in the US with only $8M coming in. Hopefully it might prove a bit of a sleeper hit there: come on America… we go to see all of the rubbish rom-coms you send over here, and this is way better than most of those!
This was a film I was determined to be sniffy about with my rating. But as a) I enjoyed it very much and b) a packed audience of women can’t be wrong…