Search
Search results
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Memoirs of a Neurotic Zombie (Memoirs of a Neurotic Zombie #1) in Books
Dec 17, 2018
<i>This ARC was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review</i>
One day in Ohio Adam Meltzer is celebrating his twelfth birthday when suddenly he dies from a fatal be sting. Then he comes back to life – sort of. Jeff Norton’s children’s book <i>Memoirs of a Neurotic Zombie</i> is a comical tale narrated by Adam who is, as the title suggests, a zombie.
Three months after his death Adam claws his way out of his coffin and heads home where he attempts to carry on with life (afterlife?) even though his sister has taken over his bedroom and all his clothes have been donated to charity. Oh, and his body had already started decomposing. However it is not long until he discovers that he is not the only unnatural being in his neighbourhood. Connected by their weirdness, Adam becomes firm friends with Corina (a half-vampire) and Ernesto (a chupacabra). Inspired by a school science project (being half-dead is no reason for exemption, apparently) the three of them set out to track down the bee that killed Adam and solve the mystery concerning his return from the grave.
<i>Memoirs of Neurotic Zombie</i> is full of humour targeted at nine to twelve year olds, so reviewing this from an adult’s perspective if rather difficult. As people get older child humour becomes less funny, particularly in relation to certain bodily functions – namely poo. Even though being a children’s book limits the amount of seriousness, some of the story line did not feel quite right. Adam’s parents and sister were far too accepting of the situation and the lies he told at school to explain what had happened were rather farfetched.
An important element to the story was that Adam was suffering from OCD and as a result was gripped by a fear of dirt, bacteria and disease – rather ironic considering his physical condition. There is nothing wrong with writing for children about characters with disorders such as OCD, however there was no explanation about the seriousness of this mental illness. Adam’s behaviour was used to make him appear less “normal” than other children his age – something campaigners are encouraging people <u>not</u> to think!
There were some deliberate inaccuracies in Adam’s narrative, which added to the hilarity, although how much the reader will benefit from these will depend on their own intelligence. On the other hand there were one or two errors that may not have been intentional. “I lurched forward like a tweenage Frankenstein” – surely that should be “Frankenstein’s monster”? Unless, of course, Norton intended Adam not to be aware that Frankenstein was the scientist?
The storyline overall is enjoyable and something children, particularly boys, would enjoy. Then again it may not be suitable for the more sensitive child as it deals with themes of death and paranormal creatures. Adam comes across as rather intelligent for his age – despite taking some things too literally – so there are footnotes to explain definitions of difficult words or to clarify something further. In spite of a few misgivings I would recommend this book to its intended target audience.
One day in Ohio Adam Meltzer is celebrating his twelfth birthday when suddenly he dies from a fatal be sting. Then he comes back to life – sort of. Jeff Norton’s children’s book <i>Memoirs of a Neurotic Zombie</i> is a comical tale narrated by Adam who is, as the title suggests, a zombie.
Three months after his death Adam claws his way out of his coffin and heads home where he attempts to carry on with life (afterlife?) even though his sister has taken over his bedroom and all his clothes have been donated to charity. Oh, and his body had already started decomposing. However it is not long until he discovers that he is not the only unnatural being in his neighbourhood. Connected by their weirdness, Adam becomes firm friends with Corina (a half-vampire) and Ernesto (a chupacabra). Inspired by a school science project (being half-dead is no reason for exemption, apparently) the three of them set out to track down the bee that killed Adam and solve the mystery concerning his return from the grave.
<i>Memoirs of Neurotic Zombie</i> is full of humour targeted at nine to twelve year olds, so reviewing this from an adult’s perspective if rather difficult. As people get older child humour becomes less funny, particularly in relation to certain bodily functions – namely poo. Even though being a children’s book limits the amount of seriousness, some of the story line did not feel quite right. Adam’s parents and sister were far too accepting of the situation and the lies he told at school to explain what had happened were rather farfetched.
An important element to the story was that Adam was suffering from OCD and as a result was gripped by a fear of dirt, bacteria and disease – rather ironic considering his physical condition. There is nothing wrong with writing for children about characters with disorders such as OCD, however there was no explanation about the seriousness of this mental illness. Adam’s behaviour was used to make him appear less “normal” than other children his age – something campaigners are encouraging people <u>not</u> to think!
There were some deliberate inaccuracies in Adam’s narrative, which added to the hilarity, although how much the reader will benefit from these will depend on their own intelligence. On the other hand there were one or two errors that may not have been intentional. “I lurched forward like a tweenage Frankenstein” – surely that should be “Frankenstein’s monster”? Unless, of course, Norton intended Adam not to be aware that Frankenstein was the scientist?
The storyline overall is enjoyable and something children, particularly boys, would enjoy. Then again it may not be suitable for the more sensitive child as it deals with themes of death and paranormal creatures. Adam comes across as rather intelligent for his age – despite taking some things too literally – so there are footnotes to explain definitions of difficult words or to clarify something further. In spite of a few misgivings I would recommend this book to its intended target audience.
Darren (1599 KP) rated CHIPS (2017) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
Story: CHIPS starts as an undercover FBI agent Ponch (Pena) must joining the California Highway Patrol undercover with rookie officers Jon (Shepard) being his partner as Ponch must discover who is the dirty cop in the unit.
As the two are clearly complete opposites and Jon is the only one in the department that Ponch could trust to uncover the truth about the string of robberies.
Thoughts on CHIPS
Characters – Ponch is the FBI agent that is known for getting the cases closed even if the methods go across the lines, his latest case is becoming part of CHIPS to uncover a string of robberies that is believed to involve the members in the force. Joon is the former stunt man that wants to fix his marriage by joining the CHIPS team, he has had multiply injuries and will do anything to try and keep the job proving his worth to the force. These two are both very different and must put aside their difference to solve the crime. Ray Kruz is the main villain running the operation from within the force. We get plenty of different officers or agents from different levels of the police system which shows us who we will be dealing with through the film.
Performances – This is hard because saying anything bad about Michael Pena is upsetting, here he doesn’t hit the comedy we know he can and as for Dax Shepard we must be blaming him more because he wrote, directed and starred in this insulting comedy, we know he is good when given the right material, here he only lets us down. The rest of the cast just don’t get any moments to shine.
Story – The story here follows two unlikely cops that must work together to uncover who is behind a string of crimes from within the force. This is the simple part of the film, the problems start mounting up easily and quickly, first the humour is insulting for anything that happens as the characters are left doing sex, poop and more lazy sexist jokes. Considering this was a popular TV shows, I feel the creator must feel insulted with what we are given, this fails on capturing any of the Starsky and Hutch or 21 Jump Street humour we enjoyed and just becomes boring quickly, not adding any mystery to who is behind the crimes either.
Action/Comedy/Crime – The action in this film is lazy even if it is the only highlight of the film with a couple of the chases being the most interesting part of the film. the comedy is an insult to comedy while the crime world shows us only police corruption.
Settings – The film is set in LA, I think mostly to use the sewer system for the chases otherwise it could have been any city.
Scene of the Movie – Bike chase.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The comedy.
Final Thoughts – This is one of the comedy movies you really should never be watching, it doesn’t get any laughs and just ends up being left feeling insulting.
Overall: This is why we don’t have comedy hits anymore.
As the two are clearly complete opposites and Jon is the only one in the department that Ponch could trust to uncover the truth about the string of robberies.
Thoughts on CHIPS
Characters – Ponch is the FBI agent that is known for getting the cases closed even if the methods go across the lines, his latest case is becoming part of CHIPS to uncover a string of robberies that is believed to involve the members in the force. Joon is the former stunt man that wants to fix his marriage by joining the CHIPS team, he has had multiply injuries and will do anything to try and keep the job proving his worth to the force. These two are both very different and must put aside their difference to solve the crime. Ray Kruz is the main villain running the operation from within the force. We get plenty of different officers or agents from different levels of the police system which shows us who we will be dealing with through the film.
Performances – This is hard because saying anything bad about Michael Pena is upsetting, here he doesn’t hit the comedy we know he can and as for Dax Shepard we must be blaming him more because he wrote, directed and starred in this insulting comedy, we know he is good when given the right material, here he only lets us down. The rest of the cast just don’t get any moments to shine.
Story – The story here follows two unlikely cops that must work together to uncover who is behind a string of crimes from within the force. This is the simple part of the film, the problems start mounting up easily and quickly, first the humour is insulting for anything that happens as the characters are left doing sex, poop and more lazy sexist jokes. Considering this was a popular TV shows, I feel the creator must feel insulted with what we are given, this fails on capturing any of the Starsky and Hutch or 21 Jump Street humour we enjoyed and just becomes boring quickly, not adding any mystery to who is behind the crimes either.
Action/Comedy/Crime – The action in this film is lazy even if it is the only highlight of the film with a couple of the chases being the most interesting part of the film. the comedy is an insult to comedy while the crime world shows us only police corruption.
Settings – The film is set in LA, I think mostly to use the sewer system for the chases otherwise it could have been any city.
Scene of the Movie – Bike chase.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The comedy.
Final Thoughts – This is one of the comedy movies you really should never be watching, it doesn’t get any laughs and just ends up being left feeling insulting.
Overall: This is why we don’t have comedy hits anymore.
Ronnie (304 KP) rated Supernatural - Season 5 in TV
Apr 3, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
Supernatural follows 2 brothers, Sam and Dean Winchester, who have been raised by their dad in a lifestyle of moving across country fighting supernatural beings, ever since their mum was killed by a yellow eyed demon in Sam’s nursery when he was only 6months old. At the end of season 4 Sam accidentally frees the devil from his cage in hell, kickstarting the apocalypse and then in season 5 Sam and Dean have to try and stop the apocalypse, but the apocalypse can’t happen without Sam and Dean’s help. Sam’s body is to be the vessel used by the devil, and Dean’s body is to be the vessel of the angel Michael. Once the two angels have gotten Sam and Dean to say “yes” to being the vessels, they are to have a battle, and should the devil win, the apocalypse will begin.
I have very mixed feelings about this season. There were parts of it I loved and parts of it I disliked. The brothers have always had a rocky relationship, but in this season, we see them split up more than once, which I didn’t like, I’ve always enjoyed the two brothers being together. An element of the season that I have very mixed feelings about is the angels. The angel we see the most is Castiel, who has rebelled from heaven and is helping the brothers. He is my favourite character, but that’s where the good parts of the angels stop. The other angel we see frequently throughout the show is Zackariah, who is just annoying. And the third angel, who is only in one episode is Gabriel. He has been in the show multiple times before in earlier seasons, but he was pretending to be a Trickster, and even then, I didn’t like him. Another element I have mixed feelings about is the actual content. The main focus of the season was trying to stop the apocalypse and tracking down the horsemen. In previous seasons a large amount of the episodes were about the brothers’ encounters with supernatural beings that weren’t angels or demons. Two of my favourite episodes were “The End” and “Changing Channels”. In “The End” Dean gets sent five years into the future and in “Changing Channels” Sam and Dean get stuck in Tv shows, or TV Land as they like to call it. Although not obvious at first, these two episodes link back to the angels, which really disappoints me. Something I did like was one of the demons they introduced, called Crowley. He helped the brothers out in a couple of the episodes, and I think he might become a larger part of the show in later seasons. Another thing I liked was that there seemed to be more humour in this season. There has always been bizarre deaths and witty one liners from Dean but there was definitely more humour, which I really enjoyed. Another thing I disliked was the ending. They ended it with Sam in hell and Dean finally having the nice, normal life he always wanted, but you knew that wouldn’t last because there’s 11 more seasons. Overall, I think the season was good, but not hugely enjoyable.
I have very mixed feelings about this season. There were parts of it I loved and parts of it I disliked. The brothers have always had a rocky relationship, but in this season, we see them split up more than once, which I didn’t like, I’ve always enjoyed the two brothers being together. An element of the season that I have very mixed feelings about is the angels. The angel we see the most is Castiel, who has rebelled from heaven and is helping the brothers. He is my favourite character, but that’s where the good parts of the angels stop. The other angel we see frequently throughout the show is Zackariah, who is just annoying. And the third angel, who is only in one episode is Gabriel. He has been in the show multiple times before in earlier seasons, but he was pretending to be a Trickster, and even then, I didn’t like him. Another element I have mixed feelings about is the actual content. The main focus of the season was trying to stop the apocalypse and tracking down the horsemen. In previous seasons a large amount of the episodes were about the brothers’ encounters with supernatural beings that weren’t angels or demons. Two of my favourite episodes were “The End” and “Changing Channels”. In “The End” Dean gets sent five years into the future and in “Changing Channels” Sam and Dean get stuck in Tv shows, or TV Land as they like to call it. Although not obvious at first, these two episodes link back to the angels, which really disappoints me. Something I did like was one of the demons they introduced, called Crowley. He helped the brothers out in a couple of the episodes, and I think he might become a larger part of the show in later seasons. Another thing I liked was that there seemed to be more humour in this season. There has always been bizarre deaths and witty one liners from Dean but there was definitely more humour, which I really enjoyed. Another thing I disliked was the ending. They ended it with Sam in hell and Dean finally having the nice, normal life he always wanted, but you knew that wouldn’t last because there’s 11 more seasons. Overall, I think the season was good, but not hugely enjoyable.
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Airplane! (1980) in Movies
Dec 8, 2020
Surely you can't be serious?
Film #6 on the 100 Movies Bucket List: Airplane!
Airplane! is a well known comedy classic, but for me I’m ashamed to admit that aside from the infamous “Don’t call me Shirley” line, I could barely remember a thing about this film. Airplane! is undoubtedly the mother, and master, of all comedy spoof films. Written and directed by Jim Abrahams and David and Jerry Zucker, this focuses Ted Striker (Robert Hays) who despite his fear of flying boards a plane to win back his girlfriend Elaine (Julie Hagerty), only to wind up having to ensure the plane lands safely when the pilots get sick.
The plot is definitely basic, but what it lacks in proper story it more than makes up for in laughs. I’ve never seen a film so chock full of jokes and gags, and in such a wide variety too. This features everything from subtle(ish) background jokes to witty and smart dialogue and obvious physical humour, and aside for a few misses, the majority of these jokes land perfectly. There’s the crude and hilarious auto pilot scene, to the incredibly funny and smart lines like when stewardess Elaine asks Doctor Rumack (Leslie Nielsen) about the onboard illness, “A hospital? What is it?”, to which he replies “It’s a big building with patients”. There’s something incredibly simple about the humour in this film that works so well, and yet aside from those few misses, it never resorts to crudeness that becomes disgusting and overbearing like most modern comedies do. These gags paired with the spoofing and sending up of disaster movies (plus many other genres) is a winning formula that has been emulated many times over by the likes of The Naked Gun and Hot Shots films since this was released in 1980. Admittedly there are some jokes that nowadays would be considered unacceptable and would never see the light of day, but fortunately these are a small minority and don’t spoil the overall enjoyment of the film, even now 40 years later.
The cast excel too in pulling off the over the top cheesiness you’d expect from a parody, and this is no mean feat. Whilst Julie Hagerty and Robert Hays do well as the main characters, it’s the smaller supporting roles that really stand out especially as they appear to have been given the best lines. You have Leslie Nielsen as the deadpan Doctor Rumack who delivers some hilarious dialogue with such a straight face, Lloyd Bridges as Steve McCroskey with his immortal lines beginning with “Looks like I picked the wrong week to stop…” and my absolute favourite background character Johnny (Stephen Stucker) who has some of the funniest moments you’ll ever see from such a minor character. And a notable mention has to go to Otto the automatic pilot, who even gets a feature in the credits.
Airplane! is a rightful comedy classic that could beat modern comedy films hands down, and it truly is a shame they don’t make spoofs like this anymore. It’s hilariously funny, right until the very end of the credits and an entirely unforgettable comedy experience.
Airplane! is a well known comedy classic, but for me I’m ashamed to admit that aside from the infamous “Don’t call me Shirley” line, I could barely remember a thing about this film. Airplane! is undoubtedly the mother, and master, of all comedy spoof films. Written and directed by Jim Abrahams and David and Jerry Zucker, this focuses Ted Striker (Robert Hays) who despite his fear of flying boards a plane to win back his girlfriend Elaine (Julie Hagerty), only to wind up having to ensure the plane lands safely when the pilots get sick.
The plot is definitely basic, but what it lacks in proper story it more than makes up for in laughs. I’ve never seen a film so chock full of jokes and gags, and in such a wide variety too. This features everything from subtle(ish) background jokes to witty and smart dialogue and obvious physical humour, and aside for a few misses, the majority of these jokes land perfectly. There’s the crude and hilarious auto pilot scene, to the incredibly funny and smart lines like when stewardess Elaine asks Doctor Rumack (Leslie Nielsen) about the onboard illness, “A hospital? What is it?”, to which he replies “It’s a big building with patients”. There’s something incredibly simple about the humour in this film that works so well, and yet aside from those few misses, it never resorts to crudeness that becomes disgusting and overbearing like most modern comedies do. These gags paired with the spoofing and sending up of disaster movies (plus many other genres) is a winning formula that has been emulated many times over by the likes of The Naked Gun and Hot Shots films since this was released in 1980. Admittedly there are some jokes that nowadays would be considered unacceptable and would never see the light of day, but fortunately these are a small minority and don’t spoil the overall enjoyment of the film, even now 40 years later.
The cast excel too in pulling off the over the top cheesiness you’d expect from a parody, and this is no mean feat. Whilst Julie Hagerty and Robert Hays do well as the main characters, it’s the smaller supporting roles that really stand out especially as they appear to have been given the best lines. You have Leslie Nielsen as the deadpan Doctor Rumack who delivers some hilarious dialogue with such a straight face, Lloyd Bridges as Steve McCroskey with his immortal lines beginning with “Looks like I picked the wrong week to stop…” and my absolute favourite background character Johnny (Stephen Stucker) who has some of the funniest moments you’ll ever see from such a minor character. And a notable mention has to go to Otto the automatic pilot, who even gets a feature in the credits.
Airplane! is a rightful comedy classic that could beat modern comedy films hands down, and it truly is a shame they don’t make spoofs like this anymore. It’s hilariously funny, right until the very end of the credits and an entirely unforgettable comedy experience.
Merissa (12919 KP) rated Lady of Thorns (Two Thrones #3) in Books
Dec 13, 2017
Lady of Thorns (Two Thrones #3) by Nicola M. Cameron
Lady of Thorns is the third book in the Two Thrones series, and we focus on two characters we met in the previous book. Amelie and Alain are about as opposite as you can get - noble-born and street rat who has worked hard and got himself a career. However, their births play no part as the sparks fly between these two. They are evenly matched in intelligence, wit, and humour. And then, through Amelie's courage, they find out they are matched in other areas too. With the Harvest Ball coming up, her mother to contend with, and a husband to find, Amelie is happy to take her chances whilst she can. And of course, it doesn't hurt to have a Queen as your best friend!
It was wonderful returning to this world. It is easy to read, and the characters are all superb. It is smoothly written, with no editing or grammatical errors that I found. I would have loved to have heard more about Matthias and Danae, but then I am greedy where they are concerned. All in all, this book was thoroughly enjoyable, and completely un-put-downable. Palace of Scoundrels is still my favourite so far, but Lady of Thorns is absolutely recommended in every way.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and my comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
It was wonderful returning to this world. It is easy to read, and the characters are all superb. It is smoothly written, with no editing or grammatical errors that I found. I would have loved to have heard more about Matthias and Danae, but then I am greedy where they are concerned. All in all, this book was thoroughly enjoyable, and completely un-put-downable. Palace of Scoundrels is still my favourite so far, but Lady of Thorns is absolutely recommended in every way.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and my comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated John Wick: Chapter 3 - Parabellum (2019) in Movies
May 20, 2019
A sequel on par with the first two, making for a fine trilogy
The original John Wick was a bit of a sleeper hit. It seemed to come out of nowhere, and grabbed people's attention immediately with it's revenge story, brutal action scenes, and undercuts of humour.
John Wick Chapter 2 was more of the same, and certainly in a good way.
John Wick Chapter 3, you guessed it, is more of the same, and the thing is, it's still not remotely boring.
The films opening action sequences hit you in the face from the get go (it opens immediately after the events of Chapter 2) and it's pretty relentless from there.
The action scenes themselves are frantic, but the lack of constant quick cuts means you can see what is happening. They are suitably violent, and keeps the John Wick tradition of ammo counting, which sets it apart from most gun orientated action films.
The martial arts stunt work is solid and slick and just all round thrilling to watch.
Keanu Reeves, as before, is great as the mostly-silent protagonist, and Ian McShane, Laurence Fishburne, Lance Reddick, and Halle Berry, all compliment the story pretty well.
The only problem I had with the cast was the completely over the top Adjudicator character. The constant crazy eyes were just a little too comical for me.
John Wick Chapter 3 is a great addition to this trilogy and thankfully leaves it open for another story down the line. I'm certainly ready to see what happens next.
John Wick Chapter 2 was more of the same, and certainly in a good way.
John Wick Chapter 3, you guessed it, is more of the same, and the thing is, it's still not remotely boring.
The films opening action sequences hit you in the face from the get go (it opens immediately after the events of Chapter 2) and it's pretty relentless from there.
The action scenes themselves are frantic, but the lack of constant quick cuts means you can see what is happening. They are suitably violent, and keeps the John Wick tradition of ammo counting, which sets it apart from most gun orientated action films.
The martial arts stunt work is solid and slick and just all round thrilling to watch.
Keanu Reeves, as before, is great as the mostly-silent protagonist, and Ian McShane, Laurence Fishburne, Lance Reddick, and Halle Berry, all compliment the story pretty well.
The only problem I had with the cast was the completely over the top Adjudicator character. The constant crazy eyes were just a little too comical for me.
John Wick Chapter 3 is a great addition to this trilogy and thankfully leaves it open for another story down the line. I'm certainly ready to see what happens next.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Avengers: Infinity War (2018) in Movies
May 24, 2019 (Updated May 24, 2019)
Comic book perfection
It's a moment all comic movie fans have been waiting for - all these beloved characters in one film - and Infinity War delivers on so many levels.
With such a huge roster of well established characters, being played by so many A-List actors, it's an absolute marvel (excuse the pun) how the Russo Brothers manage to pull it off with such aplomb, with every hero being on screen for the right amount of time - it's quite incredible.
On top of all of the reliable heroes throughout, IW also properly introduces us to Thanos, who has been teased several times in the past, and he is a incredibly well realised big villain - you see where he's coming from, he's relatable, and still utterly terrifying and ruthless in how he relentlessly chases what he wants, no matter how much he loses in the process.
The CGI and motion capture used to create him is pretty flawless, and Josh Brolins booming voice completes the package.
The battle scenes are slick and tight and flow smoothly with the rest of the film - the humour is on point throughout - the scenes shared between members of the Avengers and Guardians of the Galaxy are so so great - it's hard to think of anything I didn't love about IW.
And just to top it all off, IW delivers an absolute gut punch of an ending, delivering the single biggest disaster to happen so far in the MCU.
As far as comic book movies go, I can't think how this will ever be beaten. A true epic.
With such a huge roster of well established characters, being played by so many A-List actors, it's an absolute marvel (excuse the pun) how the Russo Brothers manage to pull it off with such aplomb, with every hero being on screen for the right amount of time - it's quite incredible.
On top of all of the reliable heroes throughout, IW also properly introduces us to Thanos, who has been teased several times in the past, and he is a incredibly well realised big villain - you see where he's coming from, he's relatable, and still utterly terrifying and ruthless in how he relentlessly chases what he wants, no matter how much he loses in the process.
The CGI and motion capture used to create him is pretty flawless, and Josh Brolins booming voice completes the package.
The battle scenes are slick and tight and flow smoothly with the rest of the film - the humour is on point throughout - the scenes shared between members of the Avengers and Guardians of the Galaxy are so so great - it's hard to think of anything I didn't love about IW.
And just to top it all off, IW delivers an absolute gut punch of an ending, delivering the single biggest disaster to happen so far in the MCU.
As far as comic book movies go, I can't think how this will ever be beaten. A true epic.
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Eleanor Oliphant Is Completely Fine in Books
Jan 20, 2018 (Updated Jan 20, 2018)
Clever, humorous and heartwarmingly sad
It’s very rare for me not to have a single criticism about a book, but Eleanor Oliphant has managed it. This book was nothing like I had expected, and it completely blew me away.
This book is full of sadness, yet also humour and wit. Eleanor is such an endearingly loveable character and reading about her life and her social ineptitude fills you with such empathy. She really connects with you as a reader, to the point where I almost forgot she wasn't real. Maybe it’s because she’s the same age as me, and the social interactions, loneliness and crushes are what everyone goes through in their lifetime, albeit usually at a younger age. I was almost in tears during parts of this book, and then completely thrown into fits of laughter, especially when the cat appears. The ending was part surprise, part predictable, but this book isn’t about the ending, it’s about Eleanor’s journey and it was such a delight to read. Such a heartwarming read and reminds me very much of The Rosie Project.
There’s a lot of fantastic quotes in this book, but there was one very early on that really stuck with me and I knew after reading that that it was going to be a good book;
“What could be more normal than pizza and wine?” - it might not mean much to others, but to me this is a statement that me and my best friend live by!
This book is full of sadness, yet also humour and wit. Eleanor is such an endearingly loveable character and reading about her life and her social ineptitude fills you with such empathy. She really connects with you as a reader, to the point where I almost forgot she wasn't real. Maybe it’s because she’s the same age as me, and the social interactions, loneliness and crushes are what everyone goes through in their lifetime, albeit usually at a younger age. I was almost in tears during parts of this book, and then completely thrown into fits of laughter, especially when the cat appears. The ending was part surprise, part predictable, but this book isn’t about the ending, it’s about Eleanor’s journey and it was such a delight to read. Such a heartwarming read and reminds me very much of The Rosie Project.
There’s a lot of fantastic quotes in this book, but there was one very early on that really stuck with me and I knew after reading that that it was going to be a good book;
“What could be more normal than pizza and wine?” - it might not mean much to others, but to me this is a statement that me and my best friend live by!
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Kinky Boots (2006) in Movies
Sep 4, 2018 (Updated Sep 4, 2018)
Fabulous
This is such a quintessentially British film that it’s hard not to love it. It’s full of humour, laughs, drama and is so heartwarming and entertaining. Whilst judgemental Northerners (well north of London) or backwards small British towns/locales in a film isn’t unusual, this film is a fun take on a slightly different true story.
Joel Edgerton is great as Charlie. I wasn’t expecting him to be, but he did very well and his accent was flawless. I actually spent the entire film doubting myself that he was Australian, because he did that well. The star of this film though is undoubtedly Chiwetel Ejiofor. He is an absolute riot as Lola and brings such joy to every scene that he’s in, from the musical numbers to the factory scenes. He seems to be channeling Tim Curry in parts (which isn’t a bad thing) and he’s such a hoot. I don’t think there are many that could pull off Lola quite as well as he has.
I do have a few minor criticisms though. The story itself is pretty predictable, but then would anyone expect any less from such a premise? The film though for me was for a change a little too short. I would’ve happily watched a lot more of this without getting bored.
I’m going to watch the musical of this in the theatre in a few months, and this has really got me excited. Just a shame Chiwetel Ejiofor isn’t appearing in the theatre version, I’d love to see that!
Joel Edgerton is great as Charlie. I wasn’t expecting him to be, but he did very well and his accent was flawless. I actually spent the entire film doubting myself that he was Australian, because he did that well. The star of this film though is undoubtedly Chiwetel Ejiofor. He is an absolute riot as Lola and brings such joy to every scene that he’s in, from the musical numbers to the factory scenes. He seems to be channeling Tim Curry in parts (which isn’t a bad thing) and he’s such a hoot. I don’t think there are many that could pull off Lola quite as well as he has.
I do have a few minor criticisms though. The story itself is pretty predictable, but then would anyone expect any less from such a premise? The film though for me was for a change a little too short. I would’ve happily watched a lot more of this without getting bored.
I’m going to watch the musical of this in the theatre in a few months, and this has really got me excited. Just a shame Chiwetel Ejiofor isn’t appearing in the theatre version, I’d love to see that!
Sarah (7800 KP) rated A Simple Favor (2018) in Movies
Sep 26, 2018
Confused and dull
Having read other Smashbombers reviews, I did at least go into this film knowing it wasn't an out an out thriller, but that still didn't prepare me for what followed.
This film really can't decide what it is; dark comedy, thriller? It seems to seesaw between the two for the entire 2 hour run time, with very little success in either genre. There are a few funny-ish (I smiled a bit) parts but most of the humour is a little bit cheesy or niche. The thriller side too is very predictable, and most of the twists you can see coming a mile off - this almost feels like a second rate comedy rip off of Gone Girl. And then the final act just goes completely bonkers and ridiculous.
Anna Kendrick plays the same character she always does, and I've finally had enough as shes starting to grate on me. Some of the supporting actors like Andrew Rannells aren't given anywhere near enough screen time (loved him in Girls). The only one to come out of this film unscathed is Blake Lively. She's very charismatic and surprisingly endearing, despite her characters reputation and actions. I have to admit, I have a bit of a girl crush on her - id love to be able to dress like that at work!
For the most part, this film was pretty dull and predictable, and was only entertaining whenever Lively is on screen, which wasn't nearly often enough.
This film really can't decide what it is; dark comedy, thriller? It seems to seesaw between the two for the entire 2 hour run time, with very little success in either genre. There are a few funny-ish (I smiled a bit) parts but most of the humour is a little bit cheesy or niche. The thriller side too is very predictable, and most of the twists you can see coming a mile off - this almost feels like a second rate comedy rip off of Gone Girl. And then the final act just goes completely bonkers and ridiculous.
Anna Kendrick plays the same character she always does, and I've finally had enough as shes starting to grate on me. Some of the supporting actors like Andrew Rannells aren't given anywhere near enough screen time (loved him in Girls). The only one to come out of this film unscathed is Blake Lively. She's very charismatic and surprisingly endearing, despite her characters reputation and actions. I have to admit, I have a bit of a girl crush on her - id love to be able to dress like that at work!
For the most part, this film was pretty dull and predictable, and was only entertaining whenever Lively is on screen, which wasn't nearly often enough.