Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Daddy's Home 2 (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Some good comedy moments drowned in schmaltz.
Comedy and tragedy have always gone together hand-in-hand. Every great comedy tends to have its bitter-sweet moments: Roberts Blossom as the “shovel-killer” grandad in “Home Alone” (who always reminds me of my late Dad… in appearance I might add, not that he was a shovel killer!); John Candy’s depressed shower-ring salesman in “Planes Trains and Automobiles”; Ron Burgundy bawling in a phone box in “Anchorman”. The balance between the two is the key thing and comedies can sometimes get it wrong (the Bird Woman in “Home Alone 2” for example!).
Here is another case in point: “Daddy’s Home 2”, which has some laugh-out-loud comedy moments, but is generally so utterly drenched in schmaltz and sentimentality that the film becomes far harder work than it should be. (By the way, I never saw “Daddy’s Home” (but read the IMDB synopsys): it was not a prerequisite for seeing this movie).
A Christmas cast. From left, Alessandra Ambrosio, Didi Costine, Mark Wahlberg, Scarlett Estevez, Will Ferrell, Owen Vaccaro, Linda Cardellini, Conor or Daphne or Dylan Wise(!) and Mel Gibson.
Will Ferrell (“Get Hard“, “Anchorman“) reprises his role as the somewhat incompetent Brad, ‘sharing’ his family of kids and stepkids with the much more streetwise Dusty (Mark Wahlberg, “Patriot’s Day“). After a poignant school recital, the pair realise the damage that a distributed Christmas is doing to their offspring and they determine to spend Christmas all together this year. In the process they vow to try to put aside their attempts at one-upmanship – “the harbour is closed” – in the interests of giving everyone the best Christmas ever.
But their plans are turned upside down when their fathers also turn up for Christmas: Mel Gibson (in a sublime piece of casting) plays Dusty’s dad, astronaut-hero Kurt, who is even more macho and extreme than Dusty, and John Lithgow (“Miss Sloane“; “The Accountant“) plays Brad’s airy-fairy father Don… the apple has not fallen far from the tree there.
Kurt forces the family to ‘fight’ Christmas on a neutral turf by renting a palatial AirBnB in a snowy wilderness. Tensions rise between the diverse individuals until a breaking point is inevitably reached.
There are some great farcical sight-gags in this movie. Quite a few of the funniest ones are spoiled by the trailer, but there are still a few standout routines that made me guffaw. A hi-tech shower is predictable but funny; and Brad’s use of a snowblower to apocalyptic ends is the funniest scene in the movie.
Wahlberg and Ferrell are a trustworthy double act (after their initial surprise pairing in “The Other Guys”). Gibson and Lithgow also inhabit their roles perfectly, although it was hard of me to relate to either of them. The scene on the airport escalator as they arrive is very well done.
The supporting cast all play their parts well: ER’s Linda Cardellini as Brad’s wife and Dusty’s ex-wife; Brazilian model and actress Alessandra Ambrosio, as Dusty’s (almost unbelievably good-looking) new wife Karen; and WWE star John Cena as Karen’s ex-husband. (Doesn’t ANYONE stay married in the US any more?). The kid stars – Didi Costine, Scarlett Estevez and Owen Vaccaro – are also good, with Estevez being particularly appealing.
Watch out for a funny cameo in the final scene as well, which I found very amusing (“You only have one story” … LoL).
“Will my bum look big in this?” – erm… no! Sara (Linda Cardellini) and Karen (Alessandra Ambrosio) on a shopping trip.
What drowns out the comedy though is the sentimental storyline around a personal tragedy being lived out by one of the family. The angst and nasty back-biting that surrounds this I found neither funny nor pleasant. The story builds to a snow-bound cinema (showing “Missile Tow” starring Liam Neeson… a great “pointless answer” for the BBC’s “Pointless” quiz!) and a finale song that is just so over the top that it has both an “awww” factor and is bile-inducing all at the same time. The screenplay is by Sean Anders and John Morris, with Anders also directing.
Will Ferrell films can be like a game of Russian Roulette, and I fully expected this to be truly awful. It wasn’t, and as a Christmas comedy it is an OK watch… and thankfully significantly above “Jingle all the Way”!
Here is another case in point: “Daddy’s Home 2”, which has some laugh-out-loud comedy moments, but is generally so utterly drenched in schmaltz and sentimentality that the film becomes far harder work than it should be. (By the way, I never saw “Daddy’s Home” (but read the IMDB synopsys): it was not a prerequisite for seeing this movie).
A Christmas cast. From left, Alessandra Ambrosio, Didi Costine, Mark Wahlberg, Scarlett Estevez, Will Ferrell, Owen Vaccaro, Linda Cardellini, Conor or Daphne or Dylan Wise(!) and Mel Gibson.
Will Ferrell (“Get Hard“, “Anchorman“) reprises his role as the somewhat incompetent Brad, ‘sharing’ his family of kids and stepkids with the much more streetwise Dusty (Mark Wahlberg, “Patriot’s Day“). After a poignant school recital, the pair realise the damage that a distributed Christmas is doing to their offspring and they determine to spend Christmas all together this year. In the process they vow to try to put aside their attempts at one-upmanship – “the harbour is closed” – in the interests of giving everyone the best Christmas ever.
But their plans are turned upside down when their fathers also turn up for Christmas: Mel Gibson (in a sublime piece of casting) plays Dusty’s dad, astronaut-hero Kurt, who is even more macho and extreme than Dusty, and John Lithgow (“Miss Sloane“; “The Accountant“) plays Brad’s airy-fairy father Don… the apple has not fallen far from the tree there.
Kurt forces the family to ‘fight’ Christmas on a neutral turf by renting a palatial AirBnB in a snowy wilderness. Tensions rise between the diverse individuals until a breaking point is inevitably reached.
There are some great farcical sight-gags in this movie. Quite a few of the funniest ones are spoiled by the trailer, but there are still a few standout routines that made me guffaw. A hi-tech shower is predictable but funny; and Brad’s use of a snowblower to apocalyptic ends is the funniest scene in the movie.
Wahlberg and Ferrell are a trustworthy double act (after their initial surprise pairing in “The Other Guys”). Gibson and Lithgow also inhabit their roles perfectly, although it was hard of me to relate to either of them. The scene on the airport escalator as they arrive is very well done.
The supporting cast all play their parts well: ER’s Linda Cardellini as Brad’s wife and Dusty’s ex-wife; Brazilian model and actress Alessandra Ambrosio, as Dusty’s (almost unbelievably good-looking) new wife Karen; and WWE star John Cena as Karen’s ex-husband. (Doesn’t ANYONE stay married in the US any more?). The kid stars – Didi Costine, Scarlett Estevez and Owen Vaccaro – are also good, with Estevez being particularly appealing.
Watch out for a funny cameo in the final scene as well, which I found very amusing (“You only have one story” … LoL).
“Will my bum look big in this?” – erm… no! Sara (Linda Cardellini) and Karen (Alessandra Ambrosio) on a shopping trip.
What drowns out the comedy though is the sentimental storyline around a personal tragedy being lived out by one of the family. The angst and nasty back-biting that surrounds this I found neither funny nor pleasant. The story builds to a snow-bound cinema (showing “Missile Tow” starring Liam Neeson… a great “pointless answer” for the BBC’s “Pointless” quiz!) and a finale song that is just so over the top that it has both an “awww” factor and is bile-inducing all at the same time. The screenplay is by Sean Anders and John Morris, with Anders also directing.
Will Ferrell films can be like a game of Russian Roulette, and I fully expected this to be truly awful. It wasn’t, and as a Christmas comedy it is an OK watch… and thankfully significantly above “Jingle all the Way”!
Illeana Douglas recommended Ride the Pink Horse (1947) in Movies (curated)
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Rango (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Y’all want to know what Rango is about? Have a seat by the camp fire and I’ll tell ya. The chameleon that would one day be known as Rango (voiced by Johnny Depp) begins the movie as a pet, traveling across the desert with a human family in their SUV. However, fate or perhaps the Spirit of the West (voiced by Timothy Olyphant) has other plans for him. Soon he is separated from his human family and he meets a wise armadillo named Roadkill (voiced by Alfred Molina) who tells him about the Spirit of the West, fate and, more importantly to him, where to find water.
Fans of Johnny Depp will recognize an amazing reference, tribute if you will, to the 1998 movie Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas that starred the actor. On his way to the nearest town where he can get some water, he meets one of the locals, a young lady lizard named Beans (voiced by Isla Fisher) who offers him a ride to the edge of town, a town aptly named Dirt. As he tries to fit in with the locals he realizes that he can reinvent himself here, so he gives himself the name Rango but thanks to a lie that he told to the guys in the saloon he soon finds himself in a showdown with one of the meanest gangs in town. Through a very funny turn of events he not only survives but becomes the town hero. In honor of his victory the Mayor (voiced by Ned Beatty) offers him the job of sheriff which Rango gladly accepts.
Soon after, the limited water supply in town disappears and it is up to Rango (along with some quirky townfolk) to solve the mystery and save Dirt. Along his journey, Rango eventually comes to a point where he must decide what kind of lizard he wants to be, a hero of the people or a person who just plays one. Will he make the right choices? Will he find the water? Will he save the town? See the movie to find out the answers to these questions and more.
I have seen many family movies that were very entertaining for the kids but extremely boring for the adults. Luckily Rangois not one of those movies. Not only does the movie have a very talented voice cast, it also has entertaining action that enhances the story instead of over-powering or taking away from it. The visuals were so realistic that at times I almost forgot it was an animated film and it has plenty of humor to make the audience laugh, regardless of age.
At the end of the movie as we all were heading towards the exit I overhead a person saying to their friends how the movie actually felt like the old westerns that they had watched growing up and I found myself agreeing. The story unfolded with a natural flow, beautiful scenery and wild west action that kept the audience engaged from start to finish.
Fans of Johnny Depp will recognize an amazing reference, tribute if you will, to the 1998 movie Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas that starred the actor. On his way to the nearest town where he can get some water, he meets one of the locals, a young lady lizard named Beans (voiced by Isla Fisher) who offers him a ride to the edge of town, a town aptly named Dirt. As he tries to fit in with the locals he realizes that he can reinvent himself here, so he gives himself the name Rango but thanks to a lie that he told to the guys in the saloon he soon finds himself in a showdown with one of the meanest gangs in town. Through a very funny turn of events he not only survives but becomes the town hero. In honor of his victory the Mayor (voiced by Ned Beatty) offers him the job of sheriff which Rango gladly accepts.
Soon after, the limited water supply in town disappears and it is up to Rango (along with some quirky townfolk) to solve the mystery and save Dirt. Along his journey, Rango eventually comes to a point where he must decide what kind of lizard he wants to be, a hero of the people or a person who just plays one. Will he make the right choices? Will he find the water? Will he save the town? See the movie to find out the answers to these questions and more.
I have seen many family movies that were very entertaining for the kids but extremely boring for the adults. Luckily Rangois not one of those movies. Not only does the movie have a very talented voice cast, it also has entertaining action that enhances the story instead of over-powering or taking away from it. The visuals were so realistic that at times I almost forgot it was an animated film and it has plenty of humor to make the audience laugh, regardless of age.
At the end of the movie as we all were heading towards the exit I overhead a person saying to their friends how the movie actually felt like the old westerns that they had watched growing up and I found myself agreeing. The story unfolded with a natural flow, beautiful scenery and wild west action that kept the audience engaged from start to finish.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Little Comfort in Books
Oct 14, 2019
Hester Thursby is a Harvard research librarian with a knack for finding things. She's good at research, so when Lila Blaine comes to her, asking for help finding her long-lost brother, Sam, Hester figures it will be another easy job in what has become a side-business for her. Hester has some extra time, as she's on leave from her job as she and her partner, Morgan, try to navigate life with his niece, Kate, whom they are caring for since her own mom has disappeared. But finding Sam--who may have left with his friend Gabe, a foster kid, isn't as easy as it seems. Sam has no wish to be found. He's now a con man who cozies up to the rich and his latest mark, Wendy Richards, a Boston socialite, has the ability to give him all he's ever dreamed of: wealth, status, security, and more. When Hester's investigation threatens this, there's no limit to what Sam and Gabe may do.
This was an intriguing mystery that definitely held my interest. Somehow it was darker and grittier than I expected (sorry, I probably wasn't giving librarians enough credit here), but that certainly didn't diminish my interest at all. The opposite really. Hester is a fascinating character, to say the least. A lot of toughness, smarts, and dedication wrapped into a tiny package (she's 4'9"). She's dealing with a lot, taking on care of three-year-old Kate and a leave of absence, but that doesn't stop her from tracking down subjects and tangling with whomever she meets. She, Kate, and their basset hound, Waffles, are on the case.
The book is told from multiple POV, so we hear from a whole host of characters, including Gabe and Sam. Hill is a wonderful storyteller, and really puts you in the shoes of his characters. And boy, are some of these folks creepy. Terrible things happen in this story, and some of these people are downright despicable. Yet, he still captures the intense longing of Gabe, a foster child, and shows how Hester, who also had a tough childhood, can identify with him. Each character is an individual with their own voice. It's incredibly easy to get caught up in the tale of Gabe, Sam, and Lila and their past at Little Comfort, a lake house, plus Hester, Morgan, and Kate (oh sweet little Kate). I read the second half of the book in one determined setting, fascinated to find out what was going to happen. It's not edge-of-your-seat suspense, per se, but it's wonderful characterization and dark, mesmerizing plotting. So many secrets, so many lies to unravel.
Overall, while this one was more complicated and edgier than I was planning going into it, that was fine with me. Hester is a great character, and I'm really excited that this is a series. Hill is an excellent writer, who knows how to hold my interest with a well-paced thriller. I'm quite looking forward to seeing what Hester is up to next.
This was an intriguing mystery that definitely held my interest. Somehow it was darker and grittier than I expected (sorry, I probably wasn't giving librarians enough credit here), but that certainly didn't diminish my interest at all. The opposite really. Hester is a fascinating character, to say the least. A lot of toughness, smarts, and dedication wrapped into a tiny package (she's 4'9"). She's dealing with a lot, taking on care of three-year-old Kate and a leave of absence, but that doesn't stop her from tracking down subjects and tangling with whomever she meets. She, Kate, and their basset hound, Waffles, are on the case.
The book is told from multiple POV, so we hear from a whole host of characters, including Gabe and Sam. Hill is a wonderful storyteller, and really puts you in the shoes of his characters. And boy, are some of these folks creepy. Terrible things happen in this story, and some of these people are downright despicable. Yet, he still captures the intense longing of Gabe, a foster child, and shows how Hester, who also had a tough childhood, can identify with him. Each character is an individual with their own voice. It's incredibly easy to get caught up in the tale of Gabe, Sam, and Lila and their past at Little Comfort, a lake house, plus Hester, Morgan, and Kate (oh sweet little Kate). I read the second half of the book in one determined setting, fascinated to find out what was going to happen. It's not edge-of-your-seat suspense, per se, but it's wonderful characterization and dark, mesmerizing plotting. So many secrets, so many lies to unravel.
Overall, while this one was more complicated and edgier than I was planning going into it, that was fine with me. Hester is a great character, and I'm really excited that this is a series. Hill is an excellent writer, who knows how to hold my interest with a well-paced thriller. I'm quite looking forward to seeing what Hester is up to next.
Hadley (567 KP) rated The Walking Dead Rise of the Governor (Book #1) in Books
May 27, 2019
Characters (1 more)
Story telling
Too many author afterthoughts (1 more)
Overusage of scientific words for the brain
I love the Walking Dead. And,personally, I love any book that has a great apocalyptic world in it, and even more so if it has some pretty good characters in it, too.
Cue Brian and Philip Blake: in The Walking Dead's 'The Rise of the Governor,' we meet two brothers who barely have anything in common; Brian is a laid back, music-loving hippie, while Philip is a hard-headed, tough guy. In the story, we follow both brothers along with two of Philip's best buddies and his daughter, Penny. The focus is on the brothers almost the entire time, and quickly, the reader finds out that, surprisingly, Brian is the oldest of the pair, but yet, Philip is the one making all of the decisions. As we continue on, the dynamic between the brothers becomes clear - we start to understand that Brian has always been the cautious one of the family, while Philip quickly learned to be a fearless leader from an early age, making this odd dynamic seem right.
Most importantly, what the two have in common is their love for Penny. If you have ever watched the TV show, The Walking Dead, then you will recognize the little girl and the tragic fate that became her. But, we never knew the backstory of how Penny was turned into a zombie, which is one of the few reasons this book series was made. Penny spends much of the time as a background character, but her part plays a very important role on the development of the man we know becomes 'the Governor.' She reacts as most children would be expected to if the world were ever to suffer from a zombie apocalypse- she withdraws, barely speaking and hardly eats. When one of Philip's longtime friends gets bit by a zombie, Penny reacts with a cool casualness that seems troubling from early on. On another note, if it wasn't for her uncle, Brian, Penny would have probably died much earlier in the book, but because of his father-like protectiveness of her, she is kept alive until the end of the book. But when it does happen, I don't think I could blame Philip for keeping his daughter as a zombie-type of pet.
During the book, 'Rise of the Governor,' the group with the Blake brothers travel to Atlanta, Georgia in hopes of finding a refugee camp to hunker down at, but instead, they find that Atlanta has practically been turned over to the walkers. It's here that they fortunately meet a trio that is held up in an apartment building- this trio is the Chalmers family, which consists of David and his two grown daughters, April and Tara. The transition between the group fighting their way through the hordes in Atlanta to meeting the Chalmers family is done perfectly to the point that is it very believable that this could actually happen in real life.
One of the few problems I did have with this book were the authors' afterthoughts: too many times throughout the book, characters would suddenly show up with a new weapon or item that the authors would literally backtrack to explain how they found it, when it could have been easily shown while the character was in the area of where it was found.
Much of the story, appropriately, shows our main group of characters killing zombies with an array of weapons and such, but Kirkman - or co-writer, Bonansinga- seem to like to show off their knowledge of the brain a little too much:
"The business end of Philip's pickaxe lands squarely in the monster's head, cracking the coconutlike shell of the old man's skull, piercing the dense, fibrous membrane of the dura mater and sinking into the gelatinous parietal lobe. " The use of scientific terms just seems like an egotistical move, one that could have been avoided if they weren't used throughout the book.
In the middle of the book, there is an odd thing that happens which the reader may connect to the story or may not, when David Chalmers is meeting his end (Chalmers was suffering from advanced lung cancer before the group meets him), gives almost a prophetic speech on his death bed. We can either take this as he was speaking about who Philip was going to become or he was talking about the apocalypse as a whole, but the reader is never really told and the dying words are never discussed among any of the characters:
" 'The devil has plans for us.'... The voice that comes out of David Chalmers is low and gravelly, an engine dieseling: 'The day of reckoning is drawing near... the Deceiver walks among us.' "
Eventually, the group is forcefully thrown out of the Chalmers' apartment building due to a horrible mistake between Philip and April. To not give too much away, here is the part where Tara tells them to go away: " He whirls around and comes face-to-face with Tara Chalmers, who holds the Ruger pistol, the muzzle raised and aimed directly at Philip. "
The story continues on with the Blake brothers, Penny and Philip's friend, Nick, as they try to find shelter once again in the dead congested Atlanta. Early on, we learn that Philip has a bad temper, and as the book continues, his temper becomes more volatile and more important to the characters and the reader. Philip's personality changes are understandable in the story, but Kirkman/Bonansinga suddenly make Brian unafraid of his brother at a point where Philip's anger is almost at its worse; this isn't believable to the readers, especially because a few pages later, Brian changes back to being scared to even speak to his brother.
Overall, the story isn't about the zombies or Penny's tragic death, but rather about Brian and Philip; how the family dynamic plays out when everything is at it's worst. Also, when you read the story, there is a point where it seems that Brian is more of a father to Penny than Philip ever was, showing also the Uncle and Niece dynamics- something that will make complete sense near the end of the book. Whether you like The Walking Dead or not, the book is well done, but I believe it would only appeal to those who like survival type stories.
Cue Brian and Philip Blake: in The Walking Dead's 'The Rise of the Governor,' we meet two brothers who barely have anything in common; Brian is a laid back, music-loving hippie, while Philip is a hard-headed, tough guy. In the story, we follow both brothers along with two of Philip's best buddies and his daughter, Penny. The focus is on the brothers almost the entire time, and quickly, the reader finds out that, surprisingly, Brian is the oldest of the pair, but yet, Philip is the one making all of the decisions. As we continue on, the dynamic between the brothers becomes clear - we start to understand that Brian has always been the cautious one of the family, while Philip quickly learned to be a fearless leader from an early age, making this odd dynamic seem right.
Most importantly, what the two have in common is their love for Penny. If you have ever watched the TV show, The Walking Dead, then you will recognize the little girl and the tragic fate that became her. But, we never knew the backstory of how Penny was turned into a zombie, which is one of the few reasons this book series was made. Penny spends much of the time as a background character, but her part plays a very important role on the development of the man we know becomes 'the Governor.' She reacts as most children would be expected to if the world were ever to suffer from a zombie apocalypse- she withdraws, barely speaking and hardly eats. When one of Philip's longtime friends gets bit by a zombie, Penny reacts with a cool casualness that seems troubling from early on. On another note, if it wasn't for her uncle, Brian, Penny would have probably died much earlier in the book, but because of his father-like protectiveness of her, she is kept alive until the end of the book. But when it does happen, I don't think I could blame Philip for keeping his daughter as a zombie-type of pet.
During the book, 'Rise of the Governor,' the group with the Blake brothers travel to Atlanta, Georgia in hopes of finding a refugee camp to hunker down at, but instead, they find that Atlanta has practically been turned over to the walkers. It's here that they fortunately meet a trio that is held up in an apartment building- this trio is the Chalmers family, which consists of David and his two grown daughters, April and Tara. The transition between the group fighting their way through the hordes in Atlanta to meeting the Chalmers family is done perfectly to the point that is it very believable that this could actually happen in real life.
One of the few problems I did have with this book were the authors' afterthoughts: too many times throughout the book, characters would suddenly show up with a new weapon or item that the authors would literally backtrack to explain how they found it, when it could have been easily shown while the character was in the area of where it was found.
Much of the story, appropriately, shows our main group of characters killing zombies with an array of weapons and such, but Kirkman - or co-writer, Bonansinga- seem to like to show off their knowledge of the brain a little too much:
"The business end of Philip's pickaxe lands squarely in the monster's head, cracking the coconutlike shell of the old man's skull, piercing the dense, fibrous membrane of the dura mater and sinking into the gelatinous parietal lobe. " The use of scientific terms just seems like an egotistical move, one that could have been avoided if they weren't used throughout the book.
In the middle of the book, there is an odd thing that happens which the reader may connect to the story or may not, when David Chalmers is meeting his end (Chalmers was suffering from advanced lung cancer before the group meets him), gives almost a prophetic speech on his death bed. We can either take this as he was speaking about who Philip was going to become or he was talking about the apocalypse as a whole, but the reader is never really told and the dying words are never discussed among any of the characters:
" 'The devil has plans for us.'... The voice that comes out of David Chalmers is low and gravelly, an engine dieseling: 'The day of reckoning is drawing near... the Deceiver walks among us.' "
Eventually, the group is forcefully thrown out of the Chalmers' apartment building due to a horrible mistake between Philip and April. To not give too much away, here is the part where Tara tells them to go away: " He whirls around and comes face-to-face with Tara Chalmers, who holds the Ruger pistol, the muzzle raised and aimed directly at Philip. "
The story continues on with the Blake brothers, Penny and Philip's friend, Nick, as they try to find shelter once again in the dead congested Atlanta. Early on, we learn that Philip has a bad temper, and as the book continues, his temper becomes more volatile and more important to the characters and the reader. Philip's personality changes are understandable in the story, but Kirkman/Bonansinga suddenly make Brian unafraid of his brother at a point where Philip's anger is almost at its worse; this isn't believable to the readers, especially because a few pages later, Brian changes back to being scared to even speak to his brother.
Overall, the story isn't about the zombies or Penny's tragic death, but rather about Brian and Philip; how the family dynamic plays out when everything is at it's worst. Also, when you read the story, there is a point where it seems that Brian is more of a father to Penny than Philip ever was, showing also the Uncle and Niece dynamics- something that will make complete sense near the end of the book. Whether you like The Walking Dead or not, the book is well done, but I believe it would only appeal to those who like survival type stories.
FilmIntuition (33 KP) rated Picture Us In The Light in Books
May 23, 2018
A Book of the Heart
While many novelists refer to their latest works as “the book of my heart,” in the case of young adult author Kelly Loy Gilbert’s finely crafted, humanistic new effort Picture Us In the Light, that description is entirely justified.
Sensitively penned within the immediately convincing first person point-of-view of our main character, high school senior and aspiring artist Danny Cheng, the author pulls us into Picture’s picturesque world within the very first chapter.
After stumbling upon a mysterious box of his father's and going through it with gusto, Danny begins to wonder just how much his loving but secretive parents have been keeping from him.
Unable to come of age until he can come to terms with unexplained gaps and tragedies in his past, he enlists the help of his two best friends - only to discover that he can’t examine the lives of those closest to him without doing the same himself.
Balancing wry observations and deft characterizations with heavy subject matter, Loy Gilbert foreshadows big twists to come as we move further into the novel. And although it begins with a steady climb, Picture slows down just long enough to ensure that we feel as connected to the characters as they are to each other.
Now sure she’s got you, the author returns to full speed - moving like a bullet train from roughly the hundred page mark all the way through to its bittersweet but very satisfying final chapter.
Written during the tumultuous 2016 election and revised afterward, Loy Gilbert is right on YouTube when she acknowledges the vital role that stories play in this post election world where “facts don't matter,” due to fiction’s empathetic ability to introduce us to people, places, and plights we might not encounter otherwise.
Filled with so much internal and external dramatic mystery that in less gifted hands, Picture could’ve easily resulted in a messy collision of conflicts, although there are a few revelations about both the plot and our protagonist that we’re able to deduce long before he does, the author wraps things up artfully.
Dropping hints and red herrings into sentences and passages so gorgeous that I found myself making multiple notes throughout, Kelly Loy Gilbert never once lets us feel as though she’s taking a shortcut on her way to the book’s resolution.
Relatively new to twenty-first century post-Harry Potter young adult fiction, if I had not received this stunning Picture through the Bookish First raffle, I would’ve completely missed what’s since become one of the best novels I’ve read so far this year.
To put it another way, it’s a book of the heart indeed.
Sensitively penned within the immediately convincing first person point-of-view of our main character, high school senior and aspiring artist Danny Cheng, the author pulls us into Picture’s picturesque world within the very first chapter.
After stumbling upon a mysterious box of his father's and going through it with gusto, Danny begins to wonder just how much his loving but secretive parents have been keeping from him.
Unable to come of age until he can come to terms with unexplained gaps and tragedies in his past, he enlists the help of his two best friends - only to discover that he can’t examine the lives of those closest to him without doing the same himself.
Balancing wry observations and deft characterizations with heavy subject matter, Loy Gilbert foreshadows big twists to come as we move further into the novel. And although it begins with a steady climb, Picture slows down just long enough to ensure that we feel as connected to the characters as they are to each other.
Now sure she’s got you, the author returns to full speed - moving like a bullet train from roughly the hundred page mark all the way through to its bittersweet but very satisfying final chapter.
Written during the tumultuous 2016 election and revised afterward, Loy Gilbert is right on YouTube when she acknowledges the vital role that stories play in this post election world where “facts don't matter,” due to fiction’s empathetic ability to introduce us to people, places, and plights we might not encounter otherwise.
Filled with so much internal and external dramatic mystery that in less gifted hands, Picture could’ve easily resulted in a messy collision of conflicts, although there are a few revelations about both the plot and our protagonist that we’re able to deduce long before he does, the author wraps things up artfully.
Dropping hints and red herrings into sentences and passages so gorgeous that I found myself making multiple notes throughout, Kelly Loy Gilbert never once lets us feel as though she’s taking a shortcut on her way to the book’s resolution.
Relatively new to twenty-first century post-Harry Potter young adult fiction, if I had not received this stunning Picture through the Bookish First raffle, I would’ve completely missed what’s since become one of the best novels I’ve read so far this year.
To put it another way, it’s a book of the heart indeed.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Last Witch Hunter (2015) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Over 800 years ago, a group of warriors and Clergy set off on a journey to destroy a witch and her minions in her lair. The witch had unleashed a plague upon the human race and she was determined to wipe them from the face of the planet.
During the battle, the witch is defeated but with her dying breath, she curses the one who vanquished her to a life of eternity, destined to be alone and never know peace.
Flash forward to modern day New York, and we find that man is now an elite Witch Hunter named Kaulder (Vin Diesel), who toils his trade working for a group who along with Witches maintain the peace. The Witches promise not to practice their craft against humans and in turn they are left alone. But when one does not follow the rules or is a threat to humanity, Kaulder and his ability to heal from injury via his immortality is dispatched to dispense justice.
When his Dolan (Michael Caine) is found dead the day after he retires, Koulder and his new Dolan (Elijah Wood), set out to find the Witch who is responsible which in turn leads to a discovery that his former Dolan is not dead but deeply cursed. In a race against time, Koulder must find the Witch who issues the curse and make an uneasy alliance with a witch named Chloe (Rose Leslie) to get to the bottom of a mystery darker and more deadly than they could have ever imagined.
One would think with the presence of Diesel and the interesting premise of the film, “The Last Witch Hunter”, would be more than it is. The film sadly plods along and has no real tension or surprises and at times, plays out more like a direct to DVD release or something one would find on cable late at night. I think the presence of Diesel is what got the film a theatrical release but one would hope with such a fine supporting cast it would have been better.
That is not to say the film is bad, as it was better than I thought it would be, but sadly as it went along, it simply failed to deliver on the potential of the premise.
In many ways I see this like “Hansel and Gretel” in that it will likely play better to the foreign market but after the total box office, DVD, and Pay Per View are factored in, do not be shocked if a second outing for the characters arrives someday as Diesel has shown a fondness for franchise characters.
For now the film is a decent distraction and offers entertainment as long as you set your expectations accordingly.
http://sknr.net/2015/10/23/the-last-witch-hunter/
During the battle, the witch is defeated but with her dying breath, she curses the one who vanquished her to a life of eternity, destined to be alone and never know peace.
Flash forward to modern day New York, and we find that man is now an elite Witch Hunter named Kaulder (Vin Diesel), who toils his trade working for a group who along with Witches maintain the peace. The Witches promise not to practice their craft against humans and in turn they are left alone. But when one does not follow the rules or is a threat to humanity, Kaulder and his ability to heal from injury via his immortality is dispatched to dispense justice.
When his Dolan (Michael Caine) is found dead the day after he retires, Koulder and his new Dolan (Elijah Wood), set out to find the Witch who is responsible which in turn leads to a discovery that his former Dolan is not dead but deeply cursed. In a race against time, Koulder must find the Witch who issues the curse and make an uneasy alliance with a witch named Chloe (Rose Leslie) to get to the bottom of a mystery darker and more deadly than they could have ever imagined.
One would think with the presence of Diesel and the interesting premise of the film, “The Last Witch Hunter”, would be more than it is. The film sadly plods along and has no real tension or surprises and at times, plays out more like a direct to DVD release or something one would find on cable late at night. I think the presence of Diesel is what got the film a theatrical release but one would hope with such a fine supporting cast it would have been better.
That is not to say the film is bad, as it was better than I thought it would be, but sadly as it went along, it simply failed to deliver on the potential of the premise.
In many ways I see this like “Hansel and Gretel” in that it will likely play better to the foreign market but after the total box office, DVD, and Pay Per View are factored in, do not be shocked if a second outing for the characters arrives someday as Diesel has shown a fondness for franchise characters.
For now the film is a decent distraction and offers entertainment as long as you set your expectations accordingly.
http://sknr.net/2015/10/23/the-last-witch-hunter/
Lee (2222 KP) rated She Dies Tomorrow (2020) in Movies
Sep 2, 2020
Pretentious waste of time
On paper, the concept behind She Dies Tomorrow is an intriguing one – “Amy thinks she’s dying tomorrow…and it’s contagious..”. And the trailer provided just enough mystery to make me want to seek it out too. Is it a portrayal of paranoia and anxiety, or is there something more sinister or supernatural at work, that they carefully and cleverly avoided showing us in the trailer?
We join Amy, already convinced that she is going to die tomorrow. She wanders aimlessly around her flat at night, drinking wine. Lying on the wooden floor, she traces her finger along the wood veins in the floorboards and presses herself against the wall, as if she is at one with the world and her surroundings. She also repeatedly drops the needle on a score by Mozart – a piece of music that I do not initially dislike, but come to loathe by the end of the movie.
Her close friend Jane pays a visit, but is dismissive of Amy and her insistence that tomorrow she will die. However, after Jane returns home to continue working, a sudden realisation crosses her face, and she also then has the feeling that she will die tomorrow. When Jane later joins a small party at her brother’s house, a similar pattern occurs, with everyone thinking she’s gone crazy. But eventually, they all start to think the same, with each realisation accompanied by a strange neon purple light flashing across their faces. It certainly does seem to be contagious…
The remainder of the movie deals with each character coming to terms with their impending death and passing the feeling onto a few other people. We see Amy trying to make the most of her remaining time, and we also flip back a few days to learn a bit more about her in the run up to today.
As I mentioned earlier – on paper, there’s definitely a great idea at the heart of She Dies Tomorrow, and reading back through my review certainly confirms that. Unfortunately though, nothing about this movie worked for me at all. I found the acting terrible, and was unable to connect with any of the characters. It’s less than 90 minutes long, but is such a dull, pretentious and badly written slow-burn that all mystery and intrigue generated by that trailer quickly vanishes. For a movie that wants you to ponder on your remaining time on this earth, it certainly does a pretty good job of wasting it. Oh and if you’re expecting some kind of explanation and ending that might help redeem the painful build-up, you’re going to be seriously disappointed.
We join Amy, already convinced that she is going to die tomorrow. She wanders aimlessly around her flat at night, drinking wine. Lying on the wooden floor, she traces her finger along the wood veins in the floorboards and presses herself against the wall, as if she is at one with the world and her surroundings. She also repeatedly drops the needle on a score by Mozart – a piece of music that I do not initially dislike, but come to loathe by the end of the movie.
Her close friend Jane pays a visit, but is dismissive of Amy and her insistence that tomorrow she will die. However, after Jane returns home to continue working, a sudden realisation crosses her face, and she also then has the feeling that she will die tomorrow. When Jane later joins a small party at her brother’s house, a similar pattern occurs, with everyone thinking she’s gone crazy. But eventually, they all start to think the same, with each realisation accompanied by a strange neon purple light flashing across their faces. It certainly does seem to be contagious…
The remainder of the movie deals with each character coming to terms with their impending death and passing the feeling onto a few other people. We see Amy trying to make the most of her remaining time, and we also flip back a few days to learn a bit more about her in the run up to today.
As I mentioned earlier – on paper, there’s definitely a great idea at the heart of She Dies Tomorrow, and reading back through my review certainly confirms that. Unfortunately though, nothing about this movie worked for me at all. I found the acting terrible, and was unable to connect with any of the characters. It’s less than 90 minutes long, but is such a dull, pretentious and badly written slow-burn that all mystery and intrigue generated by that trailer quickly vanishes. For a movie that wants you to ponder on your remaining time on this earth, it certainly does a pretty good job of wasting it. Oh and if you’re expecting some kind of explanation and ending that might help redeem the painful build-up, you’re going to be seriously disappointed.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Avengers: Infinity War (2018) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
14,000,605:1 …. or perhaps 50:50!
So, it’s been a week of full-on work and family commitments…. which means it’s also been a week of ducking and dodging of film reviews in case of spoilers! (Actually, all my favourite bloggers have been pretty good!). This review will also be spoiler free,but there is just SO MUCH that can be discussed there will be a Spoiley McSpoiler section after the trailer video.
Upfront I have to admit that I’m not the world’s greatest MCU fan, but even I felt a twinge of anticipation on going into this 19th instalment: a film that has had fan-boys frothing at the loins for years. And the film doesn’t disappoint, drawing together most (but not all) threads of the disparate MCU universe into a sprawling epic adventure.
Thanos (which inappropriately always seems to autocorrect to “Thanks”!) is played by a CGI’d Josh Brolin, first glimpsed as a “monkey” after the original “Avengers” movie where his quest for the “infinity stones” was first mooted. This particular McGuffin has been revealed in parts throughout the series, with others being surreptitiously slipped into this instalment. With all six stones, Thanos will be able to fully exercise his God fixation over the Universe. Will the Avengers and their new Guardian friends (“Who the hell are you guys?” LOL) be able to stop him?
There are shocks and surprises aplenty. Most of these come courtesy of Thanos who, although like all megalomaniac Bond villains is as mad as a box of frogs, has a backstory and a depth of character that is several cuts above most movie villains.
All of the cast seem to have great fun bouncing off each other. The only performance I found out of kilter was Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner who (to me) seemed to be really off his game and false, at least for the early scenes in the movie.
The special effects are – naturally – top-notch and are clever in trying to smooth the joins between the ‘traditional’ view of the Avengers world and the garish world of the Guardians of the Galaxy crew.
Cinema staff must hate a Marvel movie as they have to wait til the very end of the credits before they can move in to clean! And there is a “monkey” (and a good one) at the very end of the credits here, but the credits are very, very long!
So, in summary, it’s complete nonsense as normal, but it’s high-class nonsense, well-written, suitably humorous and provides excellent popcorn entertainment. Directors Anthony and Joe Russo are to be congratulated in pulling off what could have been a disaster. Recommended.
Upfront I have to admit that I’m not the world’s greatest MCU fan, but even I felt a twinge of anticipation on going into this 19th instalment: a film that has had fan-boys frothing at the loins for years. And the film doesn’t disappoint, drawing together most (but not all) threads of the disparate MCU universe into a sprawling epic adventure.
Thanos (which inappropriately always seems to autocorrect to “Thanks”!) is played by a CGI’d Josh Brolin, first glimpsed as a “monkey” after the original “Avengers” movie where his quest for the “infinity stones” was first mooted. This particular McGuffin has been revealed in parts throughout the series, with others being surreptitiously slipped into this instalment. With all six stones, Thanos will be able to fully exercise his God fixation over the Universe. Will the Avengers and their new Guardian friends (“Who the hell are you guys?” LOL) be able to stop him?
There are shocks and surprises aplenty. Most of these come courtesy of Thanos who, although like all megalomaniac Bond villains is as mad as a box of frogs, has a backstory and a depth of character that is several cuts above most movie villains.
All of the cast seem to have great fun bouncing off each other. The only performance I found out of kilter was Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner who (to me) seemed to be really off his game and false, at least for the early scenes in the movie.
The special effects are – naturally – top-notch and are clever in trying to smooth the joins between the ‘traditional’ view of the Avengers world and the garish world of the Guardians of the Galaxy crew.
Cinema staff must hate a Marvel movie as they have to wait til the very end of the credits before they can move in to clean! And there is a “monkey” (and a good one) at the very end of the credits here, but the credits are very, very long!
So, in summary, it’s complete nonsense as normal, but it’s high-class nonsense, well-written, suitably humorous and provides excellent popcorn entertainment. Directors Anthony and Joe Russo are to be congratulated in pulling off what could have been a disaster. Recommended.
Rob Bell's book wins on pathos and good intentions, but not on solid argumentation or exegesis. He has a heart for the lost and the suffering, which is admirable. But he has to turn the Bible into theological silly putty to make his case.
There are a few major errors in Love Wins, which leads to his making other more minor mistakes. The first error is giving precedence to certain biblical themes (to the exclusion of others) over clear and specific biblical teaching. Bell makes much of themes like restoration in Scripture, but ignores themes of final punishment. By dwelling on those themes, he can transition to reading them into texts where they don't belong without being found out by biblical illiterates, such as Jesus' claim that Sodom and Gomorrah will fare better on the day of judgement than cities which rejected the direct revelation of God in Jesus Christ. Instead of reading this in its obvious sense-- that there are degrees of punishment on the final day and those who reject direct revelation of Jesus will suffer most-- he understands Jesus to be saying that there is a great deal of hope for Sodom and Gomorrah's salvation-- that their punishment was corrective instead of destructive. Even though he doesn't get anywhere close to proving his case (certainly only God knows whether or not some in Sodom will be saved, but the story of Abraham bargaining would suggest otherwise), he seems to fall back on the emotionally-driven claim that God saving everyone is a "better story" than damning some and saving others.
On his overuse of the word "story," it is one example where Bell is obnoxiously post-modern and emergent. He uses the word "story/stories" in his short book 138 times. For a book of around 200 pages, large font, and constantly skipped lines/single words on their own lines*, that's an impressive display of post-modernism.
Another major error is that he conflates a strong exclusivism with eternal conscious punishment which has the effect that when he attacks one, he is in effect attacking the other, making his job easier. In addition, he ignores annihilationism as an alternative to eternal conscious torment, which also strengthens the emotional pull of his position, since it is contrasted with an eternal conscious punishment where God damns people for never being able to hear the name of Jesus. (note: while I am annoyed at Bell's misrepresentations of eternal conscious torment, I am myself an annihilationist)
Bell explains that God will eventually win everyone over, but it must be of their accord. However, he doesn't explain how it is that everyone will be saved of their own free will. For emotional effect, Bell criticizes the eternal conscious hell camp with having a God that would turn his back on people in hell who are repenting and turning to God. Of course, this assumes that sinners turn to God on their own instead of by His grace. Bell here appears to be a Pelagian, or else doesn't know enough about soteriology to make such distinctions (a terrifying prospect for a Pastor). In any case, this is another example where he is misrepresenting eternal conscious hell proponents (the first I mentioned was when he claimed they were all strict exclusivists), which makes his book far harder to take seriously.
One strange and interesting point that Rob Bell makes comes from making the afterlife analogous to the parable of the prodigal son. He claims that hell is not being cast out of "the party," (despite Jesus' parable about the marriage supper being like a party where people are cast out of) but being at the party but not enjoying it. "Hell is being at the party," Bell claims. The message to take from that is never go to one of Rob Bell's parties.
*Bell's book is filled with skipped lines and one word sentences sitting on their own lines. I suppose this is done for dramatic effect-- indicating places where Bell would pause if this were one of his Nooma videos. However, it tends to just look irritating and faux artsy. I mostly listened to the book on Kindle's text-to-speech feature, and I could still tell when he was doing it. Like,
You put a series of short sentences on their own lines to make a point?
Really?
You do that?
And it's repetitive?
Extremely?
And annoying?
There are a few major errors in Love Wins, which leads to his making other more minor mistakes. The first error is giving precedence to certain biblical themes (to the exclusion of others) over clear and specific biblical teaching. Bell makes much of themes like restoration in Scripture, but ignores themes of final punishment. By dwelling on those themes, he can transition to reading them into texts where they don't belong without being found out by biblical illiterates, such as Jesus' claim that Sodom and Gomorrah will fare better on the day of judgement than cities which rejected the direct revelation of God in Jesus Christ. Instead of reading this in its obvious sense-- that there are degrees of punishment on the final day and those who reject direct revelation of Jesus will suffer most-- he understands Jesus to be saying that there is a great deal of hope for Sodom and Gomorrah's salvation-- that their punishment was corrective instead of destructive. Even though he doesn't get anywhere close to proving his case (certainly only God knows whether or not some in Sodom will be saved, but the story of Abraham bargaining would suggest otherwise), he seems to fall back on the emotionally-driven claim that God saving everyone is a "better story" than damning some and saving others.
On his overuse of the word "story," it is one example where Bell is obnoxiously post-modern and emergent. He uses the word "story/stories" in his short book 138 times. For a book of around 200 pages, large font, and constantly skipped lines/single words on their own lines*, that's an impressive display of post-modernism.
Another major error is that he conflates a strong exclusivism with eternal conscious punishment which has the effect that when he attacks one, he is in effect attacking the other, making his job easier. In addition, he ignores annihilationism as an alternative to eternal conscious torment, which also strengthens the emotional pull of his position, since it is contrasted with an eternal conscious punishment where God damns people for never being able to hear the name of Jesus. (note: while I am annoyed at Bell's misrepresentations of eternal conscious torment, I am myself an annihilationist)
Bell explains that God will eventually win everyone over, but it must be of their accord. However, he doesn't explain how it is that everyone will be saved of their own free will. For emotional effect, Bell criticizes the eternal conscious hell camp with having a God that would turn his back on people in hell who are repenting and turning to God. Of course, this assumes that sinners turn to God on their own instead of by His grace. Bell here appears to be a Pelagian, or else doesn't know enough about soteriology to make such distinctions (a terrifying prospect for a Pastor). In any case, this is another example where he is misrepresenting eternal conscious hell proponents (the first I mentioned was when he claimed they were all strict exclusivists), which makes his book far harder to take seriously.
One strange and interesting point that Rob Bell makes comes from making the afterlife analogous to the parable of the prodigal son. He claims that hell is not being cast out of "the party," (despite Jesus' parable about the marriage supper being like a party where people are cast out of) but being at the party but not enjoying it. "Hell is being at the party," Bell claims. The message to take from that is never go to one of Rob Bell's parties.
*Bell's book is filled with skipped lines and one word sentences sitting on their own lines. I suppose this is done for dramatic effect-- indicating places where Bell would pause if this were one of his Nooma videos. However, it tends to just look irritating and faux artsy. I mostly listened to the book on Kindle's text-to-speech feature, and I could still tell when he was doing it. Like,
You put a series of short sentences on their own lines to make a point?
Really?
You do that?
And it's repetitive?
Extremely?
And annoying?