Search
Search results
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Sea of Lost Girls in Books
Mar 19, 2020
Tessa has started her life over at Haywood, an elite boarding school in coastal Maine. She teaches English there and is married to a well-respected fellow professor, Harmon. Her seventeen-year-old son, Rudy, while troubled in the past, seems to be doing well. This is much in part to his girlfriend, Lila Zeller, a smart and focused teen. But then Tessa gets an early morning text from Rudy, asking her to pick him up. He and Lila had a fight, and Tessa finds him wet and shivering. Later that morning they receive the devastating news that Lila's dead body was found on the beach, not far from where Tessa picked Rudy up. Soon there are whispers of murder surrounding Lila's death, and both Tessa's husband and son find themselves under investigation. And the more she delves into Haywood's past, the more she realizes she isn't the only one keeping secrets.
"When we landed here in this pretty harbor town with its sailboats and white clapboard houses I'd thought we'd come to a place where we'd always be safe. But Rudy has always had a nose for darkness."
I love Carol Goodman's books, and I'm always into a good boarding school book, so picking up this one was a no-brainer. She doesn't disappoint. This is a quick, captivating story that keeps you guessing the entire time. While Tessa isn't always the most likeable character, I was certainly invested in her story.
Goodman deftly weaves two storylines together--the present, featuring Tessa's family and Lila's death and the past, which revolves around the titular lost girls, whom tie back to Haywood in its earlier days. We also learn more about Tessa's past and her long-hidden secrets, many of which also link into Haywood itself. Somehow all of this works together. It's a mysterious, sometimes dark story, and one that keeps you wondering. I changed my mind several times about who could have harmed Lila. I love a book that keeps me on my toes. I also enjoyed the story of the lost girls and the school's eerie stories.
Goodman is a master storyteller, and this book flies by. She brings in links such as "The Crucible," which the Haywood students are performing, and ties to the #metoo movement. They all augment this strong story about the power of lies and hidden secrets. The parallels between the past and present are expertly woven together. 4 stars.
"When we landed here in this pretty harbor town with its sailboats and white clapboard houses I'd thought we'd come to a place where we'd always be safe. But Rudy has always had a nose for darkness."
I love Carol Goodman's books, and I'm always into a good boarding school book, so picking up this one was a no-brainer. She doesn't disappoint. This is a quick, captivating story that keeps you guessing the entire time. While Tessa isn't always the most likeable character, I was certainly invested in her story.
Goodman deftly weaves two storylines together--the present, featuring Tessa's family and Lila's death and the past, which revolves around the titular lost girls, whom tie back to Haywood in its earlier days. We also learn more about Tessa's past and her long-hidden secrets, many of which also link into Haywood itself. Somehow all of this works together. It's a mysterious, sometimes dark story, and one that keeps you wondering. I changed my mind several times about who could have harmed Lila. I love a book that keeps me on my toes. I also enjoyed the story of the lost girls and the school's eerie stories.
Goodman is a master storyteller, and this book flies by. She brings in links such as "The Crucible," which the Haywood students are performing, and ties to the #metoo movement. They all augment this strong story about the power of lies and hidden secrets. The parallels between the past and present are expertly woven together. 4 stars.
Mediocre sequel
I received a free copy from Netgalley in exchange for an honest review.
Shorefall picks up around three years after the events of Foundryside, when a small crew stand up against the mighty, powerful families of the city, stop their evil plotting and strike out on their own. They have set up their own, independent scriving house, making magical machinery, and helping others to do the same. A bit like BrewDog, but without the financially dubious shareholder arrangements.
In this world, magic comes in the form of scriving - bending reality to make objects behave in a certain way (persuading a door it cannot open without a specific person being present, convincing an arrow it is falling, so must accelerate accordingly, albeit in a straight line, etc). Most of the book's plot and action centre around this, and it becomes quite draining, and a stretch at times. I forgave the first book quite a lot in this regard, because it was world-building, but this much world-building in a second book seems wrong. And the mechanics of it are so much like coding that that is all you can think of. At times it is like watching an episode of 24, but instead of following Jack Bauer's thrilling escapades, you are watching Chloe coding a macro to speed up her timesheets while being vaguely aware that something exciting is happening.
The book starts very strongly, we are in the company of Sancia and Orso as they appear to be down on their luck and having to sell their work to make ends meet. Cue: exciting espionage scenes as Sancia sneaks off to steal.
Sadly, this opening chapter in which we had no idea what was happening was the best one. So many times throughout the book the crew were on some mission or other for some reason, but I couldn't for the life of me remember what or why, and nor did I particularly care. The plot just seemed to be in a backseat with the world-building driving with no sat-nav. And so was character development, as all the main characters just completely plateaud and didn't change in the slightest.
In short, I found the book very dull and drawn out and the second half was a real chore.
Shorefall picks up around three years after the events of Foundryside, when a small crew stand up against the mighty, powerful families of the city, stop their evil plotting and strike out on their own. They have set up their own, independent scriving house, making magical machinery, and helping others to do the same. A bit like BrewDog, but without the financially dubious shareholder arrangements.
In this world, magic comes in the form of scriving - bending reality to make objects behave in a certain way (persuading a door it cannot open without a specific person being present, convincing an arrow it is falling, so must accelerate accordingly, albeit in a straight line, etc). Most of the book's plot and action centre around this, and it becomes quite draining, and a stretch at times. I forgave the first book quite a lot in this regard, because it was world-building, but this much world-building in a second book seems wrong. And the mechanics of it are so much like coding that that is all you can think of. At times it is like watching an episode of 24, but instead of following Jack Bauer's thrilling escapades, you are watching Chloe coding a macro to speed up her timesheets while being vaguely aware that something exciting is happening.
The book starts very strongly, we are in the company of Sancia and Orso as they appear to be down on their luck and having to sell their work to make ends meet. Cue: exciting espionage scenes as Sancia sneaks off to steal.
Sadly, this opening chapter in which we had no idea what was happening was the best one. So many times throughout the book the crew were on some mission or other for some reason, but I couldn't for the life of me remember what or why, and nor did I particularly care. The plot just seemed to be in a backseat with the world-building driving with no sat-nav. And so was character development, as all the main characters just completely plateaud and didn't change in the slightest.
In short, I found the book very dull and drawn out and the second half was a real chore.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Klaus (2019) in Movies
Jul 28, 2020 (Updated Dec 24, 2020)
Visually Interesting - with strong voice performances
We have seen the Origin story of Santa Claus many times and in many ways over the years, so it was with some trepidation that the BankoMarquis ventured forth to check out the Netflix original film KLAUS which covers some very similar territory.
And I need not worry, for KLAUS is a visually interesting film with some very good voice performances that elevates a (relatively) by-the-book story into quite a delightful film experience.
Directed and Written by Sergio Pablos - a veteran animator with credits like Disney’s Tarzan, Despicable Me, Rio and Smallfoot - KLAUS tells the tale of…Jesper, a mailman who is also a privileged youth who’s lackluster ways runs him afoul of his father and he is banished to a remote, Northern country where her runs afoul of…KLAUS.
And…you can probably figure out where the story goes from there, but it is not the story - or the destination - that matters, it is the journey. And…what a wonderful journey it is.
Let’s start with the best part - this film is GORGEOUS to look at. Pablos uses hand drawn animation with lighting techniques taken from digital animation and the result is crisp, clean and stunning to look at. I will watch this film again, just to look at the visuals.
As for the voice casting - it is stellar - with one, small quibble. The great J.K. Simmon is…well…GREAT as Klaus. His deep baritone voice is perfect for the enigmatic hermit that is hiding secrets - and a heart of gold. Rashida Jones, Will Sasso, Norm MacDonald and the always brilliant Joan Cusack add their tremendous voices to the proceedings very well. My only quibble is with the work of Jason Schwartzman as Jesper, the character we follow throughout the film. I found his voice and character grating at times (I know this is on purpose, so Schwartzman did a good job in his work) but, I would have liked to have Pablos “tone down” the lead character just a bit.
But that is a “quibble” in a very entertaining movie that is a wonderful family film that can be enjoyed on different levels - and for different reasons - by children and adults alike.
Letter Grade: A-
8 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And I need not worry, for KLAUS is a visually interesting film with some very good voice performances that elevates a (relatively) by-the-book story into quite a delightful film experience.
Directed and Written by Sergio Pablos - a veteran animator with credits like Disney’s Tarzan, Despicable Me, Rio and Smallfoot - KLAUS tells the tale of…Jesper, a mailman who is also a privileged youth who’s lackluster ways runs him afoul of his father and he is banished to a remote, Northern country where her runs afoul of…KLAUS.
And…you can probably figure out where the story goes from there, but it is not the story - or the destination - that matters, it is the journey. And…what a wonderful journey it is.
Let’s start with the best part - this film is GORGEOUS to look at. Pablos uses hand drawn animation with lighting techniques taken from digital animation and the result is crisp, clean and stunning to look at. I will watch this film again, just to look at the visuals.
As for the voice casting - it is stellar - with one, small quibble. The great J.K. Simmon is…well…GREAT as Klaus. His deep baritone voice is perfect for the enigmatic hermit that is hiding secrets - and a heart of gold. Rashida Jones, Will Sasso, Norm MacDonald and the always brilliant Joan Cusack add their tremendous voices to the proceedings very well. My only quibble is with the work of Jason Schwartzman as Jesper, the character we follow throughout the film. I found his voice and character grating at times (I know this is on purpose, so Schwartzman did a good job in his work) but, I would have liked to have Pablos “tone down” the lead character just a bit.
But that is a “quibble” in a very entertaining movie that is a wonderful family film that can be enjoyed on different levels - and for different reasons - by children and adults alike.
Letter Grade: A-
8 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The King (2019) in Movies
Oct 29, 2019
There has been a lot of talk about The King, it's not one that I would necessarily have picked but I do enjoy historical films and who doesn't like a good battle scene? With Timothée Chalamet in the lead and Robert Pattinson in a supporting role I had my doubts, I'm not a fan of either one particularly but in the end it changed my opinion... partly. What surprised me was that this was a Netflix film, from all the hype I had been expecting a general release and I think it would have done incredibly well at the cinema, but we shall see how it fairs online.
My historical knowledge is terrible, luckily the evening I saw this I was meeting a friend for dinner who would be my phone a friend for all things historical so I picked his brain. We compared notes and it seems like they haven't messed with the actual history of it too much, though he did admit to not being an expert on this period. Do let me know in the comments how it stands up against documented history if you're up to speed on the topic.
The film does a good job of keeping the timeline clear, it doesn't jump around unnecessarily and despite the obvious long time frame of real life the scenes capture and condense everything quite nicely.
I'm going to start covering the acting by talking about Robert Pattinson. I have never heard such a unanimous reaction to a performance in my life. From the sheer volume in the Odean Luxe I believe that as soon as he spoke everyone broke out laughing. It wasn't just the one time either, it was every time. I don't know anything about The Dauphin of France but perhaps he did have the stereotypical accent... I don't know if I want to give RPat the benefit of the doubt. Almost every scene he was in had a rather tragic comedy element, mostly that was the accent but later there's a scene that would have sat well in a silent black and white comedy skit, I did laugh, but it really didn't fit the tone of any part of the film that he wasn't in.
Timothée Chalamet hasn't made much of an impression on me so far in his acting career. Beautiful Boy wasn't my cup of tea and his parts in Lady Bird and Hostiles clearly didn't either as I only remembered them when skimming IMDb. In The King though I found him to be excellent, I didn't make a single negative note about his performance. Every scene, every emotion, every moment in battle landed perfectly. This really did turn my opinion of him around and I'll be looking forward to his next role a lot more.
Joel Edgerton as Sir John Falstaff is the comic relief this film needed, his moments were light and broke the tension in the perfect way. He's a very consistent actor whose a pleasure to watch on screen and he's a multi-talented fella to boot... writer, producer and actor in this, well played sir, well played.
Sean Harris will also be a familiar face to most of us, and I suspect the main go to for people would be the MI franchise though he's got over 50 acting credits including the UK actors' traditional stint on The Bill. Yet another great actor in the mix and he managed to bring the characteristics of William out with great effect in his performance.
Overall the cast was excellent, though a couple of performances may have been a little on the irritating side for me, that did feel more intentional than anything else when you took the scenes into consideration.
It's difficult to know whether I'm spoiling something or not, but this is based on historical fact so I'm going to say not... The build up to the battle seemed fitting and yet somehow understated for what was to follow. The sound and the visuals are stunning, I'm getting goosebumps just remembering it. The rumble of the horses, the arrows... the sound in the cinema was so powerful and it makes me a little sad that this is going straight to Netflix where that part won't meet its full potential for most of its streams.
The other worry is that the battle won't get the same impact on a smaller screen. The camera work in The King is amazing, you got the sense of claustrophobia and the crush of the fight as we were brought into the mob of actors. I was in awe watching it. I genuinely don't know how they successfully managed to film that whole sequence in what was essentially a pool of mud. It makes my mind boggle.
While I can't really get on board with Robert Pattinson in this film everyone else was a joy to watch. It's a shame it's a Netflix film, I commend them for making something this impressive but it really deserves a cinema experience, I'm thankful to LFF for giving me that honour.
Full review originally posted on: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/10/the-king-movie-review.html
My historical knowledge is terrible, luckily the evening I saw this I was meeting a friend for dinner who would be my phone a friend for all things historical so I picked his brain. We compared notes and it seems like they haven't messed with the actual history of it too much, though he did admit to not being an expert on this period. Do let me know in the comments how it stands up against documented history if you're up to speed on the topic.
The film does a good job of keeping the timeline clear, it doesn't jump around unnecessarily and despite the obvious long time frame of real life the scenes capture and condense everything quite nicely.
I'm going to start covering the acting by talking about Robert Pattinson. I have never heard such a unanimous reaction to a performance in my life. From the sheer volume in the Odean Luxe I believe that as soon as he spoke everyone broke out laughing. It wasn't just the one time either, it was every time. I don't know anything about The Dauphin of France but perhaps he did have the stereotypical accent... I don't know if I want to give RPat the benefit of the doubt. Almost every scene he was in had a rather tragic comedy element, mostly that was the accent but later there's a scene that would have sat well in a silent black and white comedy skit, I did laugh, but it really didn't fit the tone of any part of the film that he wasn't in.
Timothée Chalamet hasn't made much of an impression on me so far in his acting career. Beautiful Boy wasn't my cup of tea and his parts in Lady Bird and Hostiles clearly didn't either as I only remembered them when skimming IMDb. In The King though I found him to be excellent, I didn't make a single negative note about his performance. Every scene, every emotion, every moment in battle landed perfectly. This really did turn my opinion of him around and I'll be looking forward to his next role a lot more.
Joel Edgerton as Sir John Falstaff is the comic relief this film needed, his moments were light and broke the tension in the perfect way. He's a very consistent actor whose a pleasure to watch on screen and he's a multi-talented fella to boot... writer, producer and actor in this, well played sir, well played.
Sean Harris will also be a familiar face to most of us, and I suspect the main go to for people would be the MI franchise though he's got over 50 acting credits including the UK actors' traditional stint on The Bill. Yet another great actor in the mix and he managed to bring the characteristics of William out with great effect in his performance.
Overall the cast was excellent, though a couple of performances may have been a little on the irritating side for me, that did feel more intentional than anything else when you took the scenes into consideration.
It's difficult to know whether I'm spoiling something or not, but this is based on historical fact so I'm going to say not... The build up to the battle seemed fitting and yet somehow understated for what was to follow. The sound and the visuals are stunning, I'm getting goosebumps just remembering it. The rumble of the horses, the arrows... the sound in the cinema was so powerful and it makes me a little sad that this is going straight to Netflix where that part won't meet its full potential for most of its streams.
The other worry is that the battle won't get the same impact on a smaller screen. The camera work in The King is amazing, you got the sense of claustrophobia and the crush of the fight as we were brought into the mob of actors. I was in awe watching it. I genuinely don't know how they successfully managed to film that whole sequence in what was essentially a pool of mud. It makes my mind boggle.
While I can't really get on board with Robert Pattinson in this film everyone else was a joy to watch. It's a shame it's a Netflix film, I commend them for making something this impressive but it really deserves a cinema experience, I'm thankful to LFF for giving me that honour.
Full review originally posted on: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/10/the-king-movie-review.html
Sensitivemuse (246 KP) rated The Grim Company in Books
Aug 27, 2018
Great Start to the Series
Contains spoilers, click to show
***Spoilers ahead you’ve been warned***
It’s been a while since a good fantasy has come by my way and with anti heroes! It’s different and nice to see even though the world building and plot is typical fantasy but it’s written so well that it’s enjoyable and with some occasional funny parts you’re left with a memorable book and want to keep going in the series.
The world building is well done. Mages are dictators of their own cities and have the general populace under their thumb. Magic is pretty much only done by Magelords (not including the band of sorceresses that are mentioned). Dorminia is protected by Augmentors (elite units that have enhanced magical items) which is a fine idea. The mindhawks (birds that can read your mind to see if you’re thinking thoughts to overthrow the Magelord) is also a really neat concept that I liked.
The plot itself is intricate and it takes time to get fully immersed in it. Once you’re familiar with the world and setting it’s well worth the time invested and although it may be a bit hard to keep track of everyone at first, the action scenes are well written, the dialogue is real albeit vulgar at times (but it keeps it real), and the battle at the end is epic. Everything is somewhat interconnected and once the pieces all come together it makes for one great story.
The characters are a mixed bag and you have a variety to choose as a favorite. Cole seems to be the butt of many jokes despite his main role in the story. I found myself bursting out laughing at some moments that featured him - although I have to add, he’s not a very likable character. He’s naive, arrogant, and a bit of a dolt. But that’s what makes his role more interesting. Even I had to agree with Jerek when he said: “The boy’s a hero after all.”
My favorite would be Brodar and Jerek. Their background stories are interesting and they compliment each other. Brodar is the cool headed fighter who’s going on past his prime, whereas Jerek is the hot headed one that has a constant chip on his shoulder. They make a great duo and even while fighting together it makes for an exciting battle scene to read.
I sympathize with Barandas even though he was for the ‘bad guys’. He was loyal to a fault and was your model soldier. But he had a nice likable personality and although he was loyal to the Magelord you had to admire that in him. He’s good at his job and he was also trying to set things right. It made me sad on his demise. It was worth reading his one on one fight with Brodar.
There are so many questions to be answered! Lots of things were left hanging and I am looking forward to reading book two of this series. If you like a good fantasy with anti heroes with various flaws, some bits of dark humor, hefty battle scenes and blood coming from all over this is definitely for you.
It’s been a while since a good fantasy has come by my way and with anti heroes! It’s different and nice to see even though the world building and plot is typical fantasy but it’s written so well that it’s enjoyable and with some occasional funny parts you’re left with a memorable book and want to keep going in the series.
The world building is well done. Mages are dictators of their own cities and have the general populace under their thumb. Magic is pretty much only done by Magelords (not including the band of sorceresses that are mentioned). Dorminia is protected by Augmentors (elite units that have enhanced magical items) which is a fine idea. The mindhawks (birds that can read your mind to see if you’re thinking thoughts to overthrow the Magelord) is also a really neat concept that I liked.
The plot itself is intricate and it takes time to get fully immersed in it. Once you’re familiar with the world and setting it’s well worth the time invested and although it may be a bit hard to keep track of everyone at first, the action scenes are well written, the dialogue is real albeit vulgar at times (but it keeps it real), and the battle at the end is epic. Everything is somewhat interconnected and once the pieces all come together it makes for one great story.
The characters are a mixed bag and you have a variety to choose as a favorite. Cole seems to be the butt of many jokes despite his main role in the story. I found myself bursting out laughing at some moments that featured him - although I have to add, he’s not a very likable character. He’s naive, arrogant, and a bit of a dolt. But that’s what makes his role more interesting. Even I had to agree with Jerek when he said: “The boy’s a hero after all.”
My favorite would be Brodar and Jerek. Their background stories are interesting and they compliment each other. Brodar is the cool headed fighter who’s going on past his prime, whereas Jerek is the hot headed one that has a constant chip on his shoulder. They make a great duo and even while fighting together it makes for an exciting battle scene to read.
I sympathize with Barandas even though he was for the ‘bad guys’. He was loyal to a fault and was your model soldier. But he had a nice likable personality and although he was loyal to the Magelord you had to admire that in him. He’s good at his job and he was also trying to set things right. It made me sad on his demise. It was worth reading his one on one fight with Brodar.
There are so many questions to be answered! Lots of things were left hanging and I am looking forward to reading book two of this series. If you like a good fantasy with anti heroes with various flaws, some bits of dark humor, hefty battle scenes and blood coming from all over this is definitely for you.
Gareth von Kallenbach (977 KP) rated Murder on the Orient Express (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
Murder on the Orient Express is a mystery drama directed by, and starring, Kenneth Branagh and is based on the 1934 Agatha Christie novel of the same name. The film brings in a spectacular cast alongside Branagh, including Penelope Cruz, Willem Dafoe, Judi Dench, Johnny Depp, Josh Gad, Michelle Pfeiffer and Daisy Ridley. Also part of the main cast, while not well known, but equally as talented, are Tom Bateman, Derek Jacobi, Leslie Odom Jr. and Lucy Boynton.
For those unfamiliar with the novel, or the 1974 and 2001 adaptations, Murder tells the story of, well… a murder. On a train. It’s really a lot more than that. Branagh portrays Hercule Poirot, a famed Belgian detective who is looking forward to some time off. But during his travels, a most unfortunate thing happens. Two things actually. Someone is murdered aboard the train he is traveling on, the Orient Express (naturally). And the murderer would’ve gotten away free and clear had storm not caused an avalanche, which thanks to a derailed engine, caused the train to become stuck and the body to be discovered. Poirot’s friend, Bouc (Bateman), runs the train and requested that Poirot solve the mystery before the police arrive in fear of someone innocent being accused, and to save himself from a heyday with his father. Can Poirot find out who is the killer between the star-studded cast?
I’ve read the novel. Seen both adaptations. This film blows those earlier adaptations out of the water. There is no contest here. Now clearly, nothing can beat the book. But Murder is about as great a film you can get in the murky land of Hollywood these days. As mentioned, Branagh directed and starred in the film, which he shot on 65 mm. The last time he did this was with Hamlet in 1996. It looked good then, and it looks even better now. With eye-popping visuals throughout the entirety of the film, and a masterful soundtrack that seamlessly blended with the tones and themes of each scene, the film is a modern masterpiece.
It wasn’t without its faults. (Most) every film has them. And there are a lot of people who are upset with Branagh’s portrayal of Poirot, particularly the representation of his eccentric facial hair. I am not one of those people. I believe it, along with other amazing moments, lent a bit of humor to the movie to break up what should otherwise be, and is, a serious whodunit mystery. Also, I felt they changed a few things in the adaptation that didn’t necessarily need to be changed.
I found it hard to sit and write about the film though. Given the nature of a great mystery, I can’t tell you too much about it without risk of giving out crucial details to the plot and outcome. So I will leave you with this, boys, girls, and everything in between and beyond… with a great and talented cast (bravo to Michelle Pfeiffer in particular) who nailed home their characters, to great visuals, and a great score, this movie is definitely one you want to catch.
For those unfamiliar with the novel, or the 1974 and 2001 adaptations, Murder tells the story of, well… a murder. On a train. It’s really a lot more than that. Branagh portrays Hercule Poirot, a famed Belgian detective who is looking forward to some time off. But during his travels, a most unfortunate thing happens. Two things actually. Someone is murdered aboard the train he is traveling on, the Orient Express (naturally). And the murderer would’ve gotten away free and clear had storm not caused an avalanche, which thanks to a derailed engine, caused the train to become stuck and the body to be discovered. Poirot’s friend, Bouc (Bateman), runs the train and requested that Poirot solve the mystery before the police arrive in fear of someone innocent being accused, and to save himself from a heyday with his father. Can Poirot find out who is the killer between the star-studded cast?
I’ve read the novel. Seen both adaptations. This film blows those earlier adaptations out of the water. There is no contest here. Now clearly, nothing can beat the book. But Murder is about as great a film you can get in the murky land of Hollywood these days. As mentioned, Branagh directed and starred in the film, which he shot on 65 mm. The last time he did this was with Hamlet in 1996. It looked good then, and it looks even better now. With eye-popping visuals throughout the entirety of the film, and a masterful soundtrack that seamlessly blended with the tones and themes of each scene, the film is a modern masterpiece.
It wasn’t without its faults. (Most) every film has them. And there are a lot of people who are upset with Branagh’s portrayal of Poirot, particularly the representation of his eccentric facial hair. I am not one of those people. I believe it, along with other amazing moments, lent a bit of humor to the movie to break up what should otherwise be, and is, a serious whodunit mystery. Also, I felt they changed a few things in the adaptation that didn’t necessarily need to be changed.
I found it hard to sit and write about the film though. Given the nature of a great mystery, I can’t tell you too much about it without risk of giving out crucial details to the plot and outcome. So I will leave you with this, boys, girls, and everything in between and beyond… with a great and talented cast (bravo to Michelle Pfeiffer in particular) who nailed home their characters, to great visuals, and a great score, this movie is definitely one you want to catch.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated the PlayStation 4 version of NieR: Automata in Video Games
May 3, 2020 (Updated May 3, 2020)
Hugely enjoyable
I'm a big Final Fantasy fan and whilst Nier: Automata isn't quite the same size and scale RPG as the FF games, I really enjoyed playing this - even if it isn't perfect.
This game looks amazing. The world they've created here is bleak yet beautifully rendered. The characters are well styled (even if a little inappropriate, but that's to be expected from a Japanese game). The score and music is beautiful. Maybe overly dramatic at times but it really helps build tension and drama in the game. The gameplay itself is a cross between Final Fantasy and a Devil May Cry style game, with a variety of side quests, upgrades and levelling up available alongside a non-turn based open fighting system. For me I actually preferred this style of fighting to the FF games as it's more like a real battle rather than everyone taking turns. There is a lot of detail in this game too, but without going to quite the extremes FF games do. It never quite feels as huge and unmanageable.
The story is different and how the gameplay unfolds took me a while to get used to, especially when you get on to the second and third parts of the story. But when you get over the initial irritation you soon come to love the game play and how you discover all the different aspects to the story. Especially the rather sweet & emotional sides to the characters.
However there are some downsides. The fighting is very repetitive and despite various types of bosses, there is rarely any skill involved to defeating them - continuously shooting and hack and slash seems to be the standard. There's also a lot of grinding involved in this game and it can get a bit irritating. The machines also regenerate very quickly and it can get quite tiresome to run in & out of areas within a space of minutes and have to defeat the same baddies over and over.
Also, unless you're willing to dedicate a large portion of your life then it seems near impossible to get 100% completion. I'm at 72% and have done virtually all of the side quests and endings. Admittedly I havent quite finished yet but when I do I doubt I'll have anywhere near 90% - maxing out weapons and levelling up to level 99 to defeat an otherwise undefeatable machine just doesn't appeal.
Finally, the idea behind the 26 endings to this game is one I'm still undecided on. In a way it feels like a "choose your own ending" style thing like the old Goosebumps books, however it's not obvious how to get these endings (I looked them up). Maybe it's because I'm not a fan of wandering everywhere in an open world trying & hitting absolutely everything, it's a bit of a slog. But knowing where to find the endings for me made them a little more entertaining.
Overall this is a very enjoyable game and definitely an 8/8.5. If they had cut out some of the grinding and slogging commonly found in rpgs to make it more achievable to get 100%, I'd definitely rate it at least a 9.
This game looks amazing. The world they've created here is bleak yet beautifully rendered. The characters are well styled (even if a little inappropriate, but that's to be expected from a Japanese game). The score and music is beautiful. Maybe overly dramatic at times but it really helps build tension and drama in the game. The gameplay itself is a cross between Final Fantasy and a Devil May Cry style game, with a variety of side quests, upgrades and levelling up available alongside a non-turn based open fighting system. For me I actually preferred this style of fighting to the FF games as it's more like a real battle rather than everyone taking turns. There is a lot of detail in this game too, but without going to quite the extremes FF games do. It never quite feels as huge and unmanageable.
The story is different and how the gameplay unfolds took me a while to get used to, especially when you get on to the second and third parts of the story. But when you get over the initial irritation you soon come to love the game play and how you discover all the different aspects to the story. Especially the rather sweet & emotional sides to the characters.
However there are some downsides. The fighting is very repetitive and despite various types of bosses, there is rarely any skill involved to defeating them - continuously shooting and hack and slash seems to be the standard. There's also a lot of grinding involved in this game and it can get a bit irritating. The machines also regenerate very quickly and it can get quite tiresome to run in & out of areas within a space of minutes and have to defeat the same baddies over and over.
Also, unless you're willing to dedicate a large portion of your life then it seems near impossible to get 100% completion. I'm at 72% and have done virtually all of the side quests and endings. Admittedly I havent quite finished yet but when I do I doubt I'll have anywhere near 90% - maxing out weapons and levelling up to level 99 to defeat an otherwise undefeatable machine just doesn't appeal.
Finally, the idea behind the 26 endings to this game is one I'm still undecided on. In a way it feels like a "choose your own ending" style thing like the old Goosebumps books, however it's not obvious how to get these endings (I looked them up). Maybe it's because I'm not a fan of wandering everywhere in an open world trying & hitting absolutely everything, it's a bit of a slog. But knowing where to find the endings for me made them a little more entertaining.
Overall this is a very enjoyable game and definitely an 8/8.5. If they had cut out some of the grinding and slogging commonly found in rpgs to make it more achievable to get 100%, I'd definitely rate it at least a 9.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Moulin Rouge! (2001) in Movies
Apr 15, 2020
In My "ALL TIME TOP 10"
If one would look at the BankofMarquis "All Time Top 10" film list, you will see such stalwarts as THE GODFATHER, SINGIN' IN THE RAIN and CITIZEN KANE. It also would contain a "more modern" film that doesn't, necessarily, find itself on these types of lists - Baz Luhrman's MOULIN ROUGE from 2001.
Yes...it's that good.
Set at the turn of the century (the 19th to the 20th century) during the Bohemian Revolution in Paris, MOULIN ROUGE tells the tale of the...you guessed it...the Moulin Rouge theater/club where a young writer (Ewan McGregor) gets pulled into the lives of the artists and others trying to make a living, falling in love with a young courtesan, Satine (Nicole Kidman) all under the watchful eye of Harold Zidler (Jim Broadbent).
But it is not the story, but the telling of the story that sets this film apart. It is chaotic, wild, colorful, sexy, grimy, loving, alcoholic and spectacular - all things that not only describe this film, but the Moulin Rouge itself. Directer Baz Luhrman really shines in his vision of this picture that juxtaposes colorful sets and costumes, unique characters and songs and dance and music that tells the tale in a a unique way.
Oh...did I mention that most of this music is MODERN music? From Elton John's YOUR SONG to Roger's and Hammerstein's THE SOUND OF MUSIC to LADY MARMALADE to the ingenious use of Sting's ROXANNE (in a tango scene no less), this film is an amalgam of song that fits each scene perfectly. At what first seems incongruous, upon further viewings, the songs are slyly picked to accent the emotions and dramatic purpose of each scene.
As for the acting, McGregor and Kidman are beautifully cast (pun intended) as the young lovers. Their good looks radiate across the screen and I thought they had great chemistry. John Leguzamo and the other "Bohemians" pop in and out and are uniquely outrageous without being annoying. Richard Roxburgh's antagonist, "the Duke", came across in this viewing as not nearly as annoying as I have found him to be previously. Maybe there is more to this character/performance than meets the eye.
But it is Jim Broadbent's portrayal of the Master Shoman, Harold Zidler, that steals this film for me. He is a cunning and ingenious showman who (more than once) proves that he will stop at nothing for the "show to go on", but there are many notes to Zidler, at once in control and at the same time trying to KEEP control of events spiraling out of his control that actually shows a desperate man doing whatever he can to survive.
Add all these ingredients up and you have a film that gets deeper and richer with each subsequent viewing. I have yet to get tired of this film - and I am looking forward to the next time I immerse myself into this world.
Letter Grade: A +
10 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Yes...it's that good.
Set at the turn of the century (the 19th to the 20th century) during the Bohemian Revolution in Paris, MOULIN ROUGE tells the tale of the...you guessed it...the Moulin Rouge theater/club where a young writer (Ewan McGregor) gets pulled into the lives of the artists and others trying to make a living, falling in love with a young courtesan, Satine (Nicole Kidman) all under the watchful eye of Harold Zidler (Jim Broadbent).
But it is not the story, but the telling of the story that sets this film apart. It is chaotic, wild, colorful, sexy, grimy, loving, alcoholic and spectacular - all things that not only describe this film, but the Moulin Rouge itself. Directer Baz Luhrman really shines in his vision of this picture that juxtaposes colorful sets and costumes, unique characters and songs and dance and music that tells the tale in a a unique way.
Oh...did I mention that most of this music is MODERN music? From Elton John's YOUR SONG to Roger's and Hammerstein's THE SOUND OF MUSIC to LADY MARMALADE to the ingenious use of Sting's ROXANNE (in a tango scene no less), this film is an amalgam of song that fits each scene perfectly. At what first seems incongruous, upon further viewings, the songs are slyly picked to accent the emotions and dramatic purpose of each scene.
As for the acting, McGregor and Kidman are beautifully cast (pun intended) as the young lovers. Their good looks radiate across the screen and I thought they had great chemistry. John Leguzamo and the other "Bohemians" pop in and out and are uniquely outrageous without being annoying. Richard Roxburgh's antagonist, "the Duke", came across in this viewing as not nearly as annoying as I have found him to be previously. Maybe there is more to this character/performance than meets the eye.
But it is Jim Broadbent's portrayal of the Master Shoman, Harold Zidler, that steals this film for me. He is a cunning and ingenious showman who (more than once) proves that he will stop at nothing for the "show to go on", but there are many notes to Zidler, at once in control and at the same time trying to KEEP control of events spiraling out of his control that actually shows a desperate man doing whatever he can to survive.
Add all these ingredients up and you have a film that gets deeper and richer with each subsequent viewing. I have yet to get tired of this film - and I am looking forward to the next time I immerse myself into this world.
Letter Grade: A +
10 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Monster Hunter (2020) in Movies
Jun 25, 2021
Contains spoilers, click to show
First off I'll start by saying that I've never played any of the Monster Hunter games so I went into this with no real point of reference.
For the most part I found 'Monster Hunter' a pretty average film, the story has been done many times before, a group of solders find themselves in another reality and try to find there way back. Excepted (Spoolers) most of the solders are killed off near the beginning and there is no explanation as to why Artemis (Milla Jovovich) comes back to life (or if there is it's a blink and miss it explanation), I'm guessing that this is something explained more in the games.
There is no real investigation to how they got there they just see a storm by a strange tower and figure that a storm brought them there so that must be the way back.
This all leads to there being almost no story, there are hints to back story's, Artemis keeps looking at a wedding ring, the Hunter (Tony Jaa) preys to icons of his (assumed) family and the Admiral (Ron Perlman) states that people from Artemis' world (earth) had been there before. But that's it, apart from one or to other one liners that's all the back story we get.
The essence of 'Monster hunter' is that it's a journey, mostly Artemis and the Hunter going from the dessert to the tower, but a journey with monsters. The monsters are part of what pushes the film (just) above average, TOHO were involved in the production of the film and, for those of you who don't know, TOHO were the people behind the original, Japanese, Godzilla monster and they have continued do monsters eve since so you know that, when they are involved the monsters are going to be more than just cannon fodder.
The other thing that raises the film up are the action scenes, especially the fights between Artemis and the Hunter.
If you have nothing better to do then maybe give 'Monster Hunter' a watch, just don't expect a master peace, there is nothing wrong with the film but I feel that I've seen it all before in other films.
For the most part I found 'Monster Hunter' a pretty average film, the story has been done many times before, a group of solders find themselves in another reality and try to find there way back. Excepted (Spoolers) most of the solders are killed off near the beginning and there is no explanation as to why Artemis (Milla Jovovich) comes back to life (or if there is it's a blink and miss it explanation), I'm guessing that this is something explained more in the games.
There is no real investigation to how they got there they just see a storm by a strange tower and figure that a storm brought them there so that must be the way back.
This all leads to there being almost no story, there are hints to back story's, Artemis keeps looking at a wedding ring, the Hunter (Tony Jaa) preys to icons of his (assumed) family and the Admiral (Ron Perlman) states that people from Artemis' world (earth) had been there before. But that's it, apart from one or to other one liners that's all the back story we get.
The essence of 'Monster hunter' is that it's a journey, mostly Artemis and the Hunter going from the dessert to the tower, but a journey with monsters. The monsters are part of what pushes the film (just) above average, TOHO were involved in the production of the film and, for those of you who don't know, TOHO were the people behind the original, Japanese, Godzilla monster and they have continued do monsters eve since so you know that, when they are involved the monsters are going to be more than just cannon fodder.
The other thing that raises the film up are the action scenes, especially the fights between Artemis and the Hunter.
If you have nothing better to do then maybe give 'Monster Hunter' a watch, just don't expect a master peace, there is nothing wrong with the film but I feel that I've seen it all before in other films.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Escape Room: Tournament of Champions (2021) in Movies
Jul 21, 2021
Taylor Russell - as in the first film, very watchable (1 more)
Production design of the "games"
The script is lazy, lame and insulting to the audience (1 more)
There are a load of plot holes
Totally clueless
I only gave Adam Robitel's original "Escape Room" 5/10. It was perhaps hoping for too much that his sequel - "Escape Room: Tournament of Champions" - would be better.
Positives:
- As in the first film, Taylor Russell again stands out as a personable, attractive and convincing actress. She deserves a role in something a lot better.
- The production design on the "game sets" is certainly very impressive.
Negatives:
- The fact that SIX people are down with writing credits for this astonishes me. The whole thing comes across as lazily plotted, with virtually no character development of the players. (Yes, even less than the first film.) You might think Nathan (Thomas Cocquerel) as an athletic priest might be an interesting character. I was expecting him at one point to channel the dramatic demise of Gene Hackman's similar character in "The Poseidon Adventure". But no. Nothing much is done with this.
- It's a movie where the more you think about it afterwards, the less sense it makes. Some examples:
-- People are dead, but then again - when inconvenient for the plot - dead no longer.
-- There's some bizarre "daughter kidnap" sub-plot at one point, but that's never referred to again.
-- Acid rain has no effect on a lock... until that is, the rainwater is captured and poured on the lock! Bonkers!
- There's a tragic amount of inane running around and wailing that gets mentally tiresome. You can imagine this written in the script as "Now run down the corridor and adlib some 'teenagers in peril' noises". (This is a best case guess: I'd hate to think that some of the "Quick!"s and "Hurreeeee!"'s had actually been scripted).
Summary Thoughts on "Escape Room: Tournament of Champions": I found this one to be tragically bad. A lame attempt to cash in on the bizarre $155M success of the first B-movie. My personal recommendation: Avoid!
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web, Facebook and Tiktok. Thanks).
Positives:
- As in the first film, Taylor Russell again stands out as a personable, attractive and convincing actress. She deserves a role in something a lot better.
- The production design on the "game sets" is certainly very impressive.
Negatives:
- The fact that SIX people are down with writing credits for this astonishes me. The whole thing comes across as lazily plotted, with virtually no character development of the players. (Yes, even less than the first film.) You might think Nathan (Thomas Cocquerel) as an athletic priest might be an interesting character. I was expecting him at one point to channel the dramatic demise of Gene Hackman's similar character in "The Poseidon Adventure". But no. Nothing much is done with this.
- It's a movie where the more you think about it afterwards, the less sense it makes. Some examples:
-- People are dead, but then again - when inconvenient for the plot - dead no longer.
-- There's some bizarre "daughter kidnap" sub-plot at one point, but that's never referred to again.
-- Acid rain has no effect on a lock... until that is, the rainwater is captured and poured on the lock! Bonkers!
- There's a tragic amount of inane running around and wailing that gets mentally tiresome. You can imagine this written in the script as "Now run down the corridor and adlib some 'teenagers in peril' noises". (This is a best case guess: I'd hate to think that some of the "Quick!"s and "Hurreeeee!"'s had actually been scripted).
Summary Thoughts on "Escape Room: Tournament of Champions": I found this one to be tragically bad. A lame attempt to cash in on the bizarre $155M success of the first B-movie. My personal recommendation: Avoid!
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web, Facebook and Tiktok. Thanks).
