Search
Search results
Annie Chanse (15 KP) rated Lovecraft's Monsters in Books
Dec 19, 2017
I received an ARC copy of this anthology in exchange for my honest opinion, and regrettably, I wasn't overly impressed with it. I made notes as I read, and those notes are what I will be posting here now:
Well, I'm about to start the third story, but I thought I'd keep a running commentary on each story so that when it came time to review it, I wouldn't forget how I felt about each individual one.
"Only the End of the World Again" by Neil Gaiman was good. Probably 4 stars. It wasn't the typical greatness that I USUALLY associate with Gaiman, but it was still a quick and enjoyable read. I read it aloud to my eight year old son (editing out the few naughty words, of course) and even he really loved it. There were a few places where he didn't understand what was going on, but overall, he thought it was a great story.
"Bulldozer" by Laird Barron was terrible. I couldn't make it through the story. The writing style was AWFUL. I know that it was supposed to be written -- in parts -- in a stream of consciousness style, but it was awful. I stopped about halfway through and just said screw it. I wouldn't even give this story a star at all.
Finished "Red Goat Black Goat" by Nadia Bulkin. While it had some nice creepy vibes, it was, overall, a 2 star story. I realize, as a short story, it is limited by length and time constraints, but the story just starts in the middle of a world about which the reader has no idea whatsoever. It's not what I would call a good story, although, as I said, there were a couple of moments when I had to look up from my completely dark bedroom and make sure I didn't hear bumps in the night, so it gets one extra star for that.
"The Same Deep Waters As You" was actually fantastic. It's been the best story in the anthology so far. I know, I know... me saying something is better than a Gaiman story is almost unheard of, but this story by Hodge was truly good from beginning to end. It was completely unique, and even though it was a short story, it was completely self-contained. It didn't leave me wondering what happened before the story started to get us to this place, and it ended perfectly, not in a 'to be continued' style. Also, just wow. The ending was a killer. I did NOT see it coming AT ALL. Five stars.
"A Quarter to Three" gets 2.5 stars simply because of Newman's writing style. She is very articulate, and I loved the tone of this story. The content of the story, however, wasn't that great. However, I feel compelled to give it an extra half a star -- bumping it up to 3 stars -- for this one, perfect line:
"It was easy to see what she had seen in him; it left a thin damp trail between his scuffed footprints." Ha. Loved it
"The Dappled Things" was a total bust. 1 star, and that is being generous. So boring I nearly fell asleep twice trying to get through the first two pages. Not worth the time it took to read it.
"Inelastic Collisions" was decent. I have nothing really bad to say about it, but I have nothing super great to say about it either. Three stars.
"Remnants" deserves about 3.5 stars. It's pretty decent. I like the story and the way the plot developed. However, I dislike how abruptly it ended. If the ending had been a little more well-rounded, it could have easily been a 4.5 star story.
"Love is Forbidden We Croak and Howl" -- eh. Two stars. Didn't really hold my interest that much. I kept drifting off...
"The Sect of the Idiot" was a solid three stars. Overall the story wasn't super, but I really, really, REALLY did love the detail paid to the dream sequence. It was beautiful and creepy and dark. Lovely bit of storytelling, that was.
"Jar of Salts" is easily 4.5 stars. Short little Lovecraftian poem, but such a pleasure to read.
Well, I'm finally finished with Lovecraft's Monsters, but honestly, after the last update I made, none of the other stories were really worth reading. I was, overall, a bit disappointed with the book. :-/
Well, I'm about to start the third story, but I thought I'd keep a running commentary on each story so that when it came time to review it, I wouldn't forget how I felt about each individual one.
"Only the End of the World Again" by Neil Gaiman was good. Probably 4 stars. It wasn't the typical greatness that I USUALLY associate with Gaiman, but it was still a quick and enjoyable read. I read it aloud to my eight year old son (editing out the few naughty words, of course) and even he really loved it. There were a few places where he didn't understand what was going on, but overall, he thought it was a great story.
"Bulldozer" by Laird Barron was terrible. I couldn't make it through the story. The writing style was AWFUL. I know that it was supposed to be written -- in parts -- in a stream of consciousness style, but it was awful. I stopped about halfway through and just said screw it. I wouldn't even give this story a star at all.
Finished "Red Goat Black Goat" by Nadia Bulkin. While it had some nice creepy vibes, it was, overall, a 2 star story. I realize, as a short story, it is limited by length and time constraints, but the story just starts in the middle of a world about which the reader has no idea whatsoever. It's not what I would call a good story, although, as I said, there were a couple of moments when I had to look up from my completely dark bedroom and make sure I didn't hear bumps in the night, so it gets one extra star for that.
"The Same Deep Waters As You" was actually fantastic. It's been the best story in the anthology so far. I know, I know... me saying something is better than a Gaiman story is almost unheard of, but this story by Hodge was truly good from beginning to end. It was completely unique, and even though it was a short story, it was completely self-contained. It didn't leave me wondering what happened before the story started to get us to this place, and it ended perfectly, not in a 'to be continued' style. Also, just wow. The ending was a killer. I did NOT see it coming AT ALL. Five stars.
"A Quarter to Three" gets 2.5 stars simply because of Newman's writing style. She is very articulate, and I loved the tone of this story. The content of the story, however, wasn't that great. However, I feel compelled to give it an extra half a star -- bumping it up to 3 stars -- for this one, perfect line:
"It was easy to see what she had seen in him; it left a thin damp trail between his scuffed footprints." Ha. Loved it
"The Dappled Things" was a total bust. 1 star, and that is being generous. So boring I nearly fell asleep twice trying to get through the first two pages. Not worth the time it took to read it.
"Inelastic Collisions" was decent. I have nothing really bad to say about it, but I have nothing super great to say about it either. Three stars.
"Remnants" deserves about 3.5 stars. It's pretty decent. I like the story and the way the plot developed. However, I dislike how abruptly it ended. If the ending had been a little more well-rounded, it could have easily been a 4.5 star story.
"Love is Forbidden We Croak and Howl" -- eh. Two stars. Didn't really hold my interest that much. I kept drifting off...
"The Sect of the Idiot" was a solid three stars. Overall the story wasn't super, but I really, really, REALLY did love the detail paid to the dream sequence. It was beautiful and creepy and dark. Lovely bit of storytelling, that was.
"Jar of Salts" is easily 4.5 stars. Short little Lovecraftian poem, but such a pleasure to read.
Well, I'm finally finished with Lovecraft's Monsters, but honestly, after the last update I made, none of the other stories were really worth reading. I was, overall, a bit disappointed with the book. :-/
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Cruella (2021) in Movies
Jun 11, 2021
The two Emmas (2 more)
The rest of the ensemble cast
The technical team: cinematography, hair & make-up; costuming
An astonishing attack on the senses as Disney goes to the dark side.
Positives:
- The battle of the Emmas! It's really difficult to say who wins, since both Emma Thompson and Emma Stone give such fabulous performances here. You might think that Thompson steals a scene at one minute, only for Stone to come surfing in on a garbage truck and outdo her! I think it would be a surprise if both were not nominated for Actress and Supporting Actress Oscars for this.
- The supporting cast is also very strong. Paul Walter Hauser picks up the 'comedy villain' role as Horace Badun, and is so entertaining I could just about forgive his 'gor-blimey-guvnor' cockney accent: one that gives Dick Van Dyke a run for his money. Joel Fry - most recognisable to me as the useless roadie from "Yesterday" - plays the straight man in the duo, and does it very well. Mark Strong, cast against type as an evil henchman (#humour) is as good as always. And Kirby Howell-Baptiste and John McCrea round off the strong ensemble cast. But a particular shout-out I think should go to young Tipper Seifert-Cleveland who plays the young Estrella: she's way down the cast list, but I thought she gave a knock-out performance to ground the dramatic opening scenes of the movie.
- Technically, the film is marvellous and surely in line for a slew of technical Oscars next awards season. In fact, I think - even at this early point in the year - you would be a VERY brave person to bet against Cruella picking up the awards for Hair and Makeup (Nadia Stacey), Costume (Jenny Beavan and Tom Davies) and Production Design (Fiona Crombie). It's a stunning technical achievement - a real attack on the senses.
- The cinematography (Nicholas Karakatsanis) is also spectacular. A 'single-take' fly-through of the Liberty store from top to bottom is a tour-de-force, worthy of "1917"-style applause.
- And we should also add to this list a truly banging soundtrack from Nicholas Britell. Many of the tracks chosen - although regular visitors to cinema screen - catch the mood of the movie brilliantly and add to what is a joy-ride of a flick.
- The script is deliciously dark in places for a Disney film. Definitely NOT one for young children. Perhaps - given that it went down some of the roads it did, it could have been made EVEN BLACKER in places. (Did we REALLY need to see the Dalmatians again!) But some of the twists are delightful, especially 'mothageddon' which made me howl with laughter (even though I rather saw a variation of it coming).
Negatives:
- At 134 minutes, I felt the movie was a bit too long. There's a point (at about 100 minutes, where Emma Stone does her "I am Cruella" speech) which felt to me like the perfect end to a (first) film. I was delighted, happy and very content with the movie, thank-you very much. But then we dived back into the third reel. And, don't get me wrong, the ending was really entertaining. But, given that I suspect Disney KNEW that this was likely to be a big hit, I think a shorter film teasing for the sequel would have worked better.
Additional Notes:
- It's 12A certificate for a reason. Although a Disney, this is the dark-side of Disney and is not suitable for younger children.
- Yes, this one has a mid-credit scene - and for once its worth staying for: an introduction to two of the stars of the original cartoon that we haven't met yet, and for a rendition of a well-known tune (a TERRIBLE ear-worm that I've been quietly humming to myself ever since!).
Summary Thoughts on "Cruella": The cinema summer's still young, but it's already had some tricks up its sleeve. First "Nobody" came out of nowhere to delight me. And now, what a surprise! "Cruella" is a blisteringly funny, gloriously colourful and hugely entertaining blockbuster.
You'll know I'm not a fan of these Disney live-action re-imaginings of classic cartoons (although of course this one has previously had the Glenn Close treatment in two previous films in 1996 and 2000). But this is an origin story I really thought I didn't want... but now feel that I was wrong.
I've seen it described as "Devil Wears Prada meets Joker". The Prada analogy is well-deserved. But I'm not sure I agree with the Joker analogy. In Joker, our anti-hero was an everyman (albeit a disturbed one) driven to madness and anarchy by others. In Cruella, it's all inbred and that makes it perhaps even more deliciously dark. The fact that Disney released this - forewarned by a distinctly sombre and stormy castle logo at the start - is a minor miracle, and hopefully signs of more spice and adventure to come.
If you haven't caught it yet, it's highly recommended. As well as being in cinemas, its also available to buy on Disney+ streaming.
(Please check out the full graphical review at One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/06/11/cruella-an-astonishing-attack-on-the-senses-as-disney-goes-to-the-dark-side/. Thanks).
- The battle of the Emmas! It's really difficult to say who wins, since both Emma Thompson and Emma Stone give such fabulous performances here. You might think that Thompson steals a scene at one minute, only for Stone to come surfing in on a garbage truck and outdo her! I think it would be a surprise if both were not nominated for Actress and Supporting Actress Oscars for this.
- The supporting cast is also very strong. Paul Walter Hauser picks up the 'comedy villain' role as Horace Badun, and is so entertaining I could just about forgive his 'gor-blimey-guvnor' cockney accent: one that gives Dick Van Dyke a run for his money. Joel Fry - most recognisable to me as the useless roadie from "Yesterday" - plays the straight man in the duo, and does it very well. Mark Strong, cast against type as an evil henchman (#humour) is as good as always. And Kirby Howell-Baptiste and John McCrea round off the strong ensemble cast. But a particular shout-out I think should go to young Tipper Seifert-Cleveland who plays the young Estrella: she's way down the cast list, but I thought she gave a knock-out performance to ground the dramatic opening scenes of the movie.
- Technically, the film is marvellous and surely in line for a slew of technical Oscars next awards season. In fact, I think - even at this early point in the year - you would be a VERY brave person to bet against Cruella picking up the awards for Hair and Makeup (Nadia Stacey), Costume (Jenny Beavan and Tom Davies) and Production Design (Fiona Crombie). It's a stunning technical achievement - a real attack on the senses.
- The cinematography (Nicholas Karakatsanis) is also spectacular. A 'single-take' fly-through of the Liberty store from top to bottom is a tour-de-force, worthy of "1917"-style applause.
- And we should also add to this list a truly banging soundtrack from Nicholas Britell. Many of the tracks chosen - although regular visitors to cinema screen - catch the mood of the movie brilliantly and add to what is a joy-ride of a flick.
- The script is deliciously dark in places for a Disney film. Definitely NOT one for young children. Perhaps - given that it went down some of the roads it did, it could have been made EVEN BLACKER in places. (Did we REALLY need to see the Dalmatians again!) But some of the twists are delightful, especially 'mothageddon' which made me howl with laughter (even though I rather saw a variation of it coming).
Negatives:
- At 134 minutes, I felt the movie was a bit too long. There's a point (at about 100 minutes, where Emma Stone does her "I am Cruella" speech) which felt to me like the perfect end to a (first) film. I was delighted, happy and very content with the movie, thank-you very much. But then we dived back into the third reel. And, don't get me wrong, the ending was really entertaining. But, given that I suspect Disney KNEW that this was likely to be a big hit, I think a shorter film teasing for the sequel would have worked better.
Additional Notes:
- It's 12A certificate for a reason. Although a Disney, this is the dark-side of Disney and is not suitable for younger children.
- Yes, this one has a mid-credit scene - and for once its worth staying for: an introduction to two of the stars of the original cartoon that we haven't met yet, and for a rendition of a well-known tune (a TERRIBLE ear-worm that I've been quietly humming to myself ever since!).
Summary Thoughts on "Cruella": The cinema summer's still young, but it's already had some tricks up its sleeve. First "Nobody" came out of nowhere to delight me. And now, what a surprise! "Cruella" is a blisteringly funny, gloriously colourful and hugely entertaining blockbuster.
You'll know I'm not a fan of these Disney live-action re-imaginings of classic cartoons (although of course this one has previously had the Glenn Close treatment in two previous films in 1996 and 2000). But this is an origin story I really thought I didn't want... but now feel that I was wrong.
I've seen it described as "Devil Wears Prada meets Joker". The Prada analogy is well-deserved. But I'm not sure I agree with the Joker analogy. In Joker, our anti-hero was an everyman (albeit a disturbed one) driven to madness and anarchy by others. In Cruella, it's all inbred and that makes it perhaps even more deliciously dark. The fact that Disney released this - forewarned by a distinctly sombre and stormy castle logo at the start - is a minor miracle, and hopefully signs of more spice and adventure to come.
If you haven't caught it yet, it's highly recommended. As well as being in cinemas, its also available to buy on Disney+ streaming.
(Please check out the full graphical review at One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/06/11/cruella-an-astonishing-attack-on-the-senses-as-disney-goes-to-the-dark-side/. Thanks).
