Search
Search results
iDoctor Pro - Medical Record
Medical and Health & Fitness
App
iDoctor Pro Medical History is the most complete database for control patients, designed especially...
My Pain Diary & Symptom Tracker: Gold Edition
Medical and Health & Fitness
App
This is the successor the the popular, award-winning, best selling, doctor recommended pain tracking...
Lee (2222 KP) rated Every Time I Die (2019) in Movies
Oct 26, 2020
Not to be confused with No Time To Die, this indie supernatural thriller is lacking in big-budget polish and characters that you feel invested in, but manages to get by on an interesting concept and some sharp execution.
We begin with Sam (Drew Fonteiro), seeing what he sees as he gently blinks open his eyes to reveal Mia (Melissa Macedo) alongside him in bed. Sam has had a nightmare, and as he heads into the bathroom, he begins to experience an uncomfortable buzzing in his head, which leads to a blackout. When Sam comes around again, he’s crouched on the floor at work, with no memory as to how he arrived there. He’s wearing a paramedic uniform and holding a photo of two children, a brother and sister. On the back of the photo is written ‘remember Sara’.
Sam’s work colleague and friend, Jay (Marc Menchaca) invites Sam to join him and his wife Poppy (Michelle Macedo) at a lodge for the weekend. Poppy is the twin sister of Mia, who we saw in bed with Sam earlier and both Mia and her husband Tyler are also at the lodge. Tyler is a soldier, suffering from PTSD, and it’s clear that Sam and Mia have been having an affair behind his back, which now puts Sam in a bit of an awkward situation.
By this point, we’ve already witnessed Sam experiencing several more blackouts, including one while driving to the lodge. Each time, Sam has no recollection of what happened during the blackout, although a video recorded during one of the blackouts by his friends, shows that he does remain conscious and able to hold a conversation. Occasionally we get flashbacks and dream sequences which reveal that the brother and sister from the photo earlier are in fact Sam and his sister Sara, who drowned in a terrible accident when they were both children.
The first half of Every Time I Die is a slow, frustrating experience, not helped by the fact that the character of Sam is incredibly dull. Consequently, we feel no emotional connection to Sam, despite the childhood trauma he suffered and the turmoil he now experiences as an adult. Thankfully, the second half picks up when a jealous Tyler discovers that his wife has been cheating on him with Sam and murders Sam out by a lake in the forest. Thanks to the first-person perspective that was utilised earlier, we discover that Sam then transferred into the body of friend Jay, and must now try and convince his friends what Tyler has done. Not an easy task when Jay has a history of mental illness, leading the others to believe he’s had a relapse.
From there, Every Time I Die is just a roller coaster ride of clever ideas and twists, constantly dragged down by further flashbacks and confusing dream sequences, which are meant to help us and Sam understand what happened to him and his sister, but repeatedly stall the narrative momentum instead.
That being said, for the most part, I really enjoyed Every Time I Die. Aside from the slow first half, and the character of Sam, it’s well written, well crafted and with a satisfying, heart-warming finale.
We begin with Sam (Drew Fonteiro), seeing what he sees as he gently blinks open his eyes to reveal Mia (Melissa Macedo) alongside him in bed. Sam has had a nightmare, and as he heads into the bathroom, he begins to experience an uncomfortable buzzing in his head, which leads to a blackout. When Sam comes around again, he’s crouched on the floor at work, with no memory as to how he arrived there. He’s wearing a paramedic uniform and holding a photo of two children, a brother and sister. On the back of the photo is written ‘remember Sara’.
Sam’s work colleague and friend, Jay (Marc Menchaca) invites Sam to join him and his wife Poppy (Michelle Macedo) at a lodge for the weekend. Poppy is the twin sister of Mia, who we saw in bed with Sam earlier and both Mia and her husband Tyler are also at the lodge. Tyler is a soldier, suffering from PTSD, and it’s clear that Sam and Mia have been having an affair behind his back, which now puts Sam in a bit of an awkward situation.
By this point, we’ve already witnessed Sam experiencing several more blackouts, including one while driving to the lodge. Each time, Sam has no recollection of what happened during the blackout, although a video recorded during one of the blackouts by his friends, shows that he does remain conscious and able to hold a conversation. Occasionally we get flashbacks and dream sequences which reveal that the brother and sister from the photo earlier are in fact Sam and his sister Sara, who drowned in a terrible accident when they were both children.
The first half of Every Time I Die is a slow, frustrating experience, not helped by the fact that the character of Sam is incredibly dull. Consequently, we feel no emotional connection to Sam, despite the childhood trauma he suffered and the turmoil he now experiences as an adult. Thankfully, the second half picks up when a jealous Tyler discovers that his wife has been cheating on him with Sam and murders Sam out by a lake in the forest. Thanks to the first-person perspective that was utilised earlier, we discover that Sam then transferred into the body of friend Jay, and must now try and convince his friends what Tyler has done. Not an easy task when Jay has a history of mental illness, leading the others to believe he’s had a relapse.
From there, Every Time I Die is just a roller coaster ride of clever ideas and twists, constantly dragged down by further flashbacks and confusing dream sequences, which are meant to help us and Sam understand what happened to him and his sister, but repeatedly stall the narrative momentum instead.
That being said, for the most part, I really enjoyed Every Time I Die. Aside from the slow first half, and the character of Sam, it’s well written, well crafted and with a satisfying, heart-warming finale.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Citadel (2012) in Movies
Oct 14, 2019
Characters – Tommy is a father with agoraphobia after he saw his wife attacked by a group of children, he is trying to be the good father for his new born child, but his fears are controlling the situation, he sees children trying to take his child, he needs to face his fears to make it through this trauma he is going through. Priest is a renegade man that is aggressively searching for a way to bring down the feral children, he sees Tommy as a chance to get the job done, even if it is against what his religion states. Marie is one of the social workers that will help Tommy, she is trying to help him through the medical side even if she is the one that puts him in contact with the priest. The Feral Children are the highlight of the film because they are genuinely frightening when they attack.
Performances – Aneurin Barnard in the leading role does make us feel for his character, we believe he has been through the trauma and is the desperation to save his family. James Cosmo is fun to watch as anti-priest figure. Wunmi Mosaku doesn’t do anything wrong in the supporting role, if only we could have seen more from the character.
Story – The story here follows a new father that is dealing with his own trauma while raising his new born child, which will see him needing to face off against feral child that feed on people’s fears. The early thing that must be pointed out here, comes from the idea that we are not full convinced that we are seeing the fears of the character dealt with, for the most part we are seeing one man terrorised but even the people without the fear seem to be targets too, this mostly confuses the rule point in place. the idea that the feral child live in the abandoned flat complex doesn’t improve on things either because you would think more incidents would happen. The part of the story that does standout and is interesting to watch would be seeing how Tommy is dealing with his own traumas while remaining strong facing the possibility of not being able to raise his own child because of his problems, sadly we don’t see enough of this addressed with the horror side of the story taking over, which simply put, isn’t as interesting.
Horror – The horror starts of being home invasion like horror, which worked for the illness Tommy had, but when we enter the flats, it does become the highlight of the action in the film, feeling dark, scary with anything able to jump out to get them.
Settings – The settings show us the run down neighbourhood in which Tommy lives, the support groups around it and most importantly the empty flat block which has the feral children in it.
Special Effects – The effects are used mostly look practical, with the moments surrounding the feral child being the most notable and scary ones.
Scene of the Movie – Inside the flat block.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It breaks the rules it sets up too easily.
Final Thoughts – This is a horror film that does take its time getting going, one the chaos is unleashed with get a highly intense final act which ramps the fear up to the max.
Overall: Slow Start, Strong Finish.
Performances – Aneurin Barnard in the leading role does make us feel for his character, we believe he has been through the trauma and is the desperation to save his family. James Cosmo is fun to watch as anti-priest figure. Wunmi Mosaku doesn’t do anything wrong in the supporting role, if only we could have seen more from the character.
Story – The story here follows a new father that is dealing with his own trauma while raising his new born child, which will see him needing to face off against feral child that feed on people’s fears. The early thing that must be pointed out here, comes from the idea that we are not full convinced that we are seeing the fears of the character dealt with, for the most part we are seeing one man terrorised but even the people without the fear seem to be targets too, this mostly confuses the rule point in place. the idea that the feral child live in the abandoned flat complex doesn’t improve on things either because you would think more incidents would happen. The part of the story that does standout and is interesting to watch would be seeing how Tommy is dealing with his own traumas while remaining strong facing the possibility of not being able to raise his own child because of his problems, sadly we don’t see enough of this addressed with the horror side of the story taking over, which simply put, isn’t as interesting.
Horror – The horror starts of being home invasion like horror, which worked for the illness Tommy had, but when we enter the flats, it does become the highlight of the action in the film, feeling dark, scary with anything able to jump out to get them.
Settings – The settings show us the run down neighbourhood in which Tommy lives, the support groups around it and most importantly the empty flat block which has the feral children in it.
Special Effects – The effects are used mostly look practical, with the moments surrounding the feral child being the most notable and scary ones.
Scene of the Movie – Inside the flat block.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It breaks the rules it sets up too easily.
Final Thoughts – This is a horror film that does take its time getting going, one the chaos is unleashed with get a highly intense final act which ramps the fear up to the max.
Overall: Slow Start, Strong Finish.
Last Day Survival:Survivor
Games
App
Last Day Survival:Survivor is a free end zombie survival strategy, with only one target for all...
Virtual Families for iPad
Games and Entertainment
App
Happy Holidays from the LDW Team! The full, original version of Virtual Families from your desktop...
Garrett (1099 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies
May 18, 2020
Set design (2 more)
Costumes
Most of the acting
Story (2 more)
Theme
Message/meaning
I think I need to note a few things about my review before I actually get into it. First, I got this for free in a giveaway. Second, having watched the trailers for this I thought I wasn't going to like it and I didn't see it in theaters, the buzz and good reviews made me want to enter the giveaway so I could see it because I likely wouldn't have paid for it. Third, I know that I can "grade" movies I don't like harsher than maybe they deserve. Finally, in an effort to prevent me from being too harsh I "forced" my sister to watch it with me and some of her views of the movie and review are mixed in with my opinion of it.
It was apparent to me, and my sister, that this movie was not an attempt at a comic book movie or even a movie about the Joker but a character study and a look into mental illness. This is confirmed in the special features with an interview with the director/writer/producer. I think that if this wasn't a "Joker" movie I would have liked it a little bit more. The biggest problem that this movie has, and many others like it, when the main character is a "bad guy" and they try to make you understand/sympathize with them and it doesn't work it messes up the movie's feel. It did that for both of us.
As a "DC" movie and set in the Batman "universe" this fails in almost every way possible. The actor and character are way too old (mid 30's to 40's at best), when compared to how young Bruce Wayne is (about 8). Joker is malnourished, frail, weak, incapable of planning anything out, and I can't stress this enough famous throughout the country for the actions in this movie with his real name... None of that fits the Joker from any Batman in the comics.
There are good to great parts in this movie but they are few and far between. Within this movie are the bones of a much better movie. Many of the choices the director made, that he is proud of, I think severely damage this movie. Chief among them is the dancing. With the exception of the celebrating down the stairs which is one of the most famous and favorite scenes in the movie (and that's how I saw it as celibating not dancing) the rest of them are useless, don't fit with the actual character (the Joker), and add to the run time of an already bloated and often very slow movie.
In the end I know I'm probably in the minority with my opinion on this movie, of those that have seen it, but I do think there is a good lesson here. If you see the trailers for this movie and it looks up your alley or it interests you then see it, but maybe just on streaming or renting. If you see the trailers for this and don't think you'd like it you are probably very right and shouldn't waste your money on it. If you get a chance to see it for free and you want to see what all the "hype" is about maybe check it out... but there are probably many better options that you should see before trying this out.
It was apparent to me, and my sister, that this movie was not an attempt at a comic book movie or even a movie about the Joker but a character study and a look into mental illness. This is confirmed in the special features with an interview with the director/writer/producer. I think that if this wasn't a "Joker" movie I would have liked it a little bit more. The biggest problem that this movie has, and many others like it, when the main character is a "bad guy" and they try to make you understand/sympathize with them and it doesn't work it messes up the movie's feel. It did that for both of us.
As a "DC" movie and set in the Batman "universe" this fails in almost every way possible. The actor and character are way too old (mid 30's to 40's at best), when compared to how young Bruce Wayne is (about 8). Joker is malnourished, frail, weak, incapable of planning anything out, and I can't stress this enough famous throughout the country for the actions in this movie with his real name... None of that fits the Joker from any Batman in the comics.
There are good to great parts in this movie but they are few and far between. Within this movie are the bones of a much better movie. Many of the choices the director made, that he is proud of, I think severely damage this movie. Chief among them is the dancing. With the exception of the celebrating down the stairs which is one of the most famous and favorite scenes in the movie (and that's how I saw it as celibating not dancing) the rest of them are useless, don't fit with the actual character (the Joker), and add to the run time of an already bloated and often very slow movie.
In the end I know I'm probably in the minority with my opinion on this movie, of those that have seen it, but I do think there is a good lesson here. If you see the trailers for this movie and it looks up your alley or it interests you then see it, but maybe just on streaming or renting. If you see the trailers for this and don't think you'd like it you are probably very right and shouldn't waste your money on it. If you get a chance to see it for free and you want to see what all the "hype" is about maybe check it out... but there are probably many better options that you should see before trying this out.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated David Brent: Life on the Road (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
A squirm-athon from beginning to end.
“Life on the Road” is a mockumentary sequel to the classic British version of the TV comedy “The Office” (obviously later remade for the US market and featuring Steve Carell). Ricky Gervais played the ego-centric David Brent, a monster of a character who exercised what little control he had in his managerial role at a Slough paper company.
Here in “Life on the Road” we join Brent 15 years later where he has taken a rung or two down the career ladder and is working as a sales rep for Lavachem, a sanitary goods manufacturer, also based in Slough.
But Brent still harbours a dream of making it big in the rock world with his middle-of-the-road band called ‘Foregone Conclusion (2)’. Gathering around him his ethnic rapper ‘friend’ Dom Johnson (Doc Brown) and a band of session musicians (who can’t stand him), Brent cashes in “several pensions” to fund a tour of the venues of Berkshire… or at least, those that will give stage time over to a “shite band”. As the tour delivers predictably diminishing returns, and no record-company interest (at least, not in him) Brent is forced to face his inner demons and some uncomfortable truths.
Bringing TV comedy characters to screen is fraught with difficulty, and few have successfully done it. Even legends like Morecambe and Wise struggled with a series of lacklustre films. Perhaps in recent times Steve Coogan’s Alan Partridge has come closest with “Alan Partridge – Alpha Papa” and indeed there are a lot of similarities visible between Partridge and Brent: both have extreme ego issues and self-centredness. But there are significant differences as well, for while Partridge is just an irritatingly loud and obnoxious minor-celebrity Brent – as this film makes much clearer – has real mental illness.
Brent - the sun shines out of his earhole.
Brent – the sun shines out of his earhole.
Is this therefore a comedy at all? Well, yes, but in a very black way. There are certainly moments of excellent humour, with the tattooing scene being a high-point. But the result of watching Brent’s progressive decline, with his nervous laugh as a constant ‘fingernails on chalk board’ reminder of his insecurity, results in a level of audience squirming that is palpable. Everything he does is perverse, from describing in excruciating detail every song before singing it, to spending his money on multiple hotel rooms when every gig is within the County of Berkshire.
As a black comedy its important that it doesn’t outstay its welcome, and at 96 minutes it doesn’t. However, the film lacks the courage of its own dark convictions, and unnecessarily switches tack in the last reel to provide a degree of redemption for Brent. Whilst ‘sweet’, it is also implausible given what’s happened before and I would have suspected the interference of the director in lightening the mood of the writer’s original intent. However, as Gervais is both writer and director, there is no such excuse. That’s a shame.
So, in summary, an uncomfortable watch that aligns appropriately with the high squirm factor of the original TV show. Prepare to laugh, but feel a bit guilty in doing so.
Here in “Life on the Road” we join Brent 15 years later where he has taken a rung or two down the career ladder and is working as a sales rep for Lavachem, a sanitary goods manufacturer, also based in Slough.
But Brent still harbours a dream of making it big in the rock world with his middle-of-the-road band called ‘Foregone Conclusion (2)’. Gathering around him his ethnic rapper ‘friend’ Dom Johnson (Doc Brown) and a band of session musicians (who can’t stand him), Brent cashes in “several pensions” to fund a tour of the venues of Berkshire… or at least, those that will give stage time over to a “shite band”. As the tour delivers predictably diminishing returns, and no record-company interest (at least, not in him) Brent is forced to face his inner demons and some uncomfortable truths.
Bringing TV comedy characters to screen is fraught with difficulty, and few have successfully done it. Even legends like Morecambe and Wise struggled with a series of lacklustre films. Perhaps in recent times Steve Coogan’s Alan Partridge has come closest with “Alan Partridge – Alpha Papa” and indeed there are a lot of similarities visible between Partridge and Brent: both have extreme ego issues and self-centredness. But there are significant differences as well, for while Partridge is just an irritatingly loud and obnoxious minor-celebrity Brent – as this film makes much clearer – has real mental illness.
Brent - the sun shines out of his earhole.
Brent – the sun shines out of his earhole.
Is this therefore a comedy at all? Well, yes, but in a very black way. There are certainly moments of excellent humour, with the tattooing scene being a high-point. But the result of watching Brent’s progressive decline, with his nervous laugh as a constant ‘fingernails on chalk board’ reminder of his insecurity, results in a level of audience squirming that is palpable. Everything he does is perverse, from describing in excruciating detail every song before singing it, to spending his money on multiple hotel rooms when every gig is within the County of Berkshire.
As a black comedy its important that it doesn’t outstay its welcome, and at 96 minutes it doesn’t. However, the film lacks the courage of its own dark convictions, and unnecessarily switches tack in the last reel to provide a degree of redemption for Brent. Whilst ‘sweet’, it is also implausible given what’s happened before and I would have suspected the interference of the director in lightening the mood of the writer’s original intent. However, as Gervais is both writer and director, there is no such excuse. That’s a shame.
So, in summary, an uncomfortable watch that aligns appropriately with the high squirm factor of the original TV show. Prepare to laugh, but feel a bit guilty in doing so.
The Bandersnatch (199 KP) rated Dracula in Books
Nov 7, 2019
Dracula was written by author Bram Stoker during the late 1890's and is set around the character of Dracula and his attempt to move from Transylvania to England so he can spread the curse of the undead (I.e. the creation of more vampires). English solicitor Jonathan Harker who'd originally gone to Transylvania to be legal aide for Dracula stops him with the help of Van Helsing and others which ends the life of one of them – Quincey-, the book ends with a note from Jonathan Harker that several people lived happily married and Jonathan has a son nicknamed for Quincey.
Dracula was published in London in May 1897 by Archibald Constable & Company and was later copyrighted in the U.S in 1899 and published by Doubleday & McClure of New York. Despite having decent praise form reviewers it wasn't an immediate bestseller. Although the English newspaper the Daily Mail ranked Stoker's writing prowess in Dracula above that of Mary Shelly, Edgar Allen Poe and Emily Bronte's Wuthering heights. Unfortunately it didn't make Stoker that much money and he'd had to petition for a compassionate grant from the royal literary fund. When he died his widow was forced to sell his notes and outlines of the book at an auction in 1913. It was the unauthorised adaption of Nosferatu by F. W. Murnau in 1922 and the resulting legal battle made when Stokers widow took affront that the novels popularity began to grow.
Before writing Dracula Bram Stoker had been researching European folklore and stories of vampires having been most influenced by Emily Gerard's “Transylvania Superstitions” 1885 essay...which included content about the vampire myth. Some historians insist that Vlad iii Dracula (More commonly known as Vlad the impaler) was the model for Stokers count but there's been no supporting evidence to make that true. According to one expert Stoker only borrowed the barest minimum of information of the Wallachian tyrant and he's not even mentioned in Stokers notes. Stoker was a member of the London library during the 1890's where books by Sabine Baring-Gould, Thomas Browne, AF Crosse and Charles Boner are attributed to Stokers research. Stoker would later claim he'd had a nightmare caused by over-eating crab meat about a “Vampire king” rising from his grave. Whitby on the Yorkshire coast contributed its landscape since Bram Stoker often holidayed there during the summer.
Dracula wasn't Stokers first choice as title for the story since he cycled through The Dead Un-Dead then simply the Un-Dead the count wasn't even supposed to be Count Dracula having had the name Count Wampyr for several drafts before Stoker became intrigued by the name Dracula. After reading “An account of the principles of Wallachia and Moldavia with political observations relative to them” written by author William Wilkinson (Published in 1820). the descendants of Vlad ii of Wallachia took the name Dracula or Dracul after being invested in the Order of the Dragon in 1431. In the old Romanian language the word Dracul mean “the Dragon” and Dracula meant “Son of the Dragon”. Nowadays however Dracul means “the Devil”
Whilst Dracula is known as THE Vampire novel its not the first. Johan Wolfgang Von Goethe had his book the Bride of Corinth published in 1797, 1871's Carmilla (a story about a lesbian vampire) was written by Sheridan Le Frau and James Malcolm Rymer's penny dreadful series Venny the Vampire was a product from the mid Victorian period. Even John Polidori created an image of a vampyric aristocrat in his 1819 story The Vampyre when he spent a summer with Merry Shelly (creator of Frankenstein) and her poet husband Percy Bysshe Shelly and Lord Bryon in 1816.
I really love Dracula. It showed the madness, the ethereal quality and the ultimate danger of what a vampire could do. Like many other goth inclined teenagers trying to find their feet in the world Dracula definitely added its two cents to my self worth and love of all things macabre. The fact it was written by a Victorian writer has added a unusual depth to the story as only a Victorian writer could. The culture of the Vampire has become deep rooted and wide spread in its acceptance and Dracula has definitely spearheaded such a phenomenon.
Abraham “Bram” Stoker was Born in Dublin, Ireland on the 8th of November 1847, He was the third of seven children born to Abraham and Charlotte Stoker and was bedridden with an unknown illness until he recovered at seven. He started schooling at a private school run by the Reverend William Woods and grew up without serious illness. Stoker excelled at sports at Trinity College Dublin having graduated in 1870 with a BA (Bachelor of Arts). He was an Auditor of the College Historical Society and the president of the University Philosophical Society where his first paper was on Sensationalism in fiction and society.
Thanks to his friend Dr. Maunsell, Stoker became interested in the theatre as a student and whilst working for the Irish civil service he became a theatre critic for the Dublin evening mail where he attracted notice for the quality of his reviews. Stoker gave a favourable review of Henry Irving's adaption of Hamlet in December 1876, this prompted Irving to invite him to dinner where they ended up becoming friends. Stoker wrote The Crystal Cup which was published by the London society in 1872 and The chain of Destiny which was released in four parts in the Shamrock. Stoker also wrote the non-fiction book the duties of clerks of petty sessions in Ireland which was published in 1879.
Bram stoker married Florence Balcombe the daughter of a lieutenent-colonel in 1978 and they moved to London. Where Stoker ended up the Business manager of the Lyceum theatre as well as manager for Henry Irving- a position he held for 27 years. Despite being a very busy man Stoker ended up writing several novels (as well as Dracula) Including The Snakes pass in 1890, the lady of the shroud in 1909 and the lair of the white worm in 1911. when Henry Irving died in 1906 he published his personal reminiscences of Henry Irving. Stoker also managed productions at the Prince of Wales theatre.
Bram stoker died after a series of strokes in London on April 20th 1912, the cause of death is split between the possibility of Tertiary Syphilis or overwork. He was cremated and was placed in a display urn at Golders Green Crematorium in North London, he was later joined by the ashes of his Son Irving Noel Stoker in 1961, his wife Florence was meant to join them but her ashes were scattered at the Gardens of rest.
Stoker was honoured with a Google Doogle (the banner on goggles homepage) on November 8th 2012 commemorating the 165th anniversary of his birth. An annual festival in honour of Bram Stoker happens in Dublin, its supported by the Bram stoker estate and was/is usually funded by Dublin City Council and Failte Ireland.
My opinion of Bran stoker is that of a decent hard working man who loved life. Stoker epitomises the phrases of “a man on a mission” and “a man who hussles”. Having worked extremely hard both creatively as a novelist and business wise as a theatre manager Stoker pretty much showed that if you work hard you could pretty much do anything you set your mind to.
And there you have it a book for all the ages, definitely under the banner of AWESOME!!!.
Dracula was published in London in May 1897 by Archibald Constable & Company and was later copyrighted in the U.S in 1899 and published by Doubleday & McClure of New York. Despite having decent praise form reviewers it wasn't an immediate bestseller. Although the English newspaper the Daily Mail ranked Stoker's writing prowess in Dracula above that of Mary Shelly, Edgar Allen Poe and Emily Bronte's Wuthering heights. Unfortunately it didn't make Stoker that much money and he'd had to petition for a compassionate grant from the royal literary fund. When he died his widow was forced to sell his notes and outlines of the book at an auction in 1913. It was the unauthorised adaption of Nosferatu by F. W. Murnau in 1922 and the resulting legal battle made when Stokers widow took affront that the novels popularity began to grow.
Before writing Dracula Bram Stoker had been researching European folklore and stories of vampires having been most influenced by Emily Gerard's “Transylvania Superstitions” 1885 essay...which included content about the vampire myth. Some historians insist that Vlad iii Dracula (More commonly known as Vlad the impaler) was the model for Stokers count but there's been no supporting evidence to make that true. According to one expert Stoker only borrowed the barest minimum of information of the Wallachian tyrant and he's not even mentioned in Stokers notes. Stoker was a member of the London library during the 1890's where books by Sabine Baring-Gould, Thomas Browne, AF Crosse and Charles Boner are attributed to Stokers research. Stoker would later claim he'd had a nightmare caused by over-eating crab meat about a “Vampire king” rising from his grave. Whitby on the Yorkshire coast contributed its landscape since Bram Stoker often holidayed there during the summer.
Dracula wasn't Stokers first choice as title for the story since he cycled through The Dead Un-Dead then simply the Un-Dead the count wasn't even supposed to be Count Dracula having had the name Count Wampyr for several drafts before Stoker became intrigued by the name Dracula. After reading “An account of the principles of Wallachia and Moldavia with political observations relative to them” written by author William Wilkinson (Published in 1820). the descendants of Vlad ii of Wallachia took the name Dracula or Dracul after being invested in the Order of the Dragon in 1431. In the old Romanian language the word Dracul mean “the Dragon” and Dracula meant “Son of the Dragon”. Nowadays however Dracul means “the Devil”
Whilst Dracula is known as THE Vampire novel its not the first. Johan Wolfgang Von Goethe had his book the Bride of Corinth published in 1797, 1871's Carmilla (a story about a lesbian vampire) was written by Sheridan Le Frau and James Malcolm Rymer's penny dreadful series Venny the Vampire was a product from the mid Victorian period. Even John Polidori created an image of a vampyric aristocrat in his 1819 story The Vampyre when he spent a summer with Merry Shelly (creator of Frankenstein) and her poet husband Percy Bysshe Shelly and Lord Bryon in 1816.
I really love Dracula. It showed the madness, the ethereal quality and the ultimate danger of what a vampire could do. Like many other goth inclined teenagers trying to find their feet in the world Dracula definitely added its two cents to my self worth and love of all things macabre. The fact it was written by a Victorian writer has added a unusual depth to the story as only a Victorian writer could. The culture of the Vampire has become deep rooted and wide spread in its acceptance and Dracula has definitely spearheaded such a phenomenon.
Abraham “Bram” Stoker was Born in Dublin, Ireland on the 8th of November 1847, He was the third of seven children born to Abraham and Charlotte Stoker and was bedridden with an unknown illness until he recovered at seven. He started schooling at a private school run by the Reverend William Woods and grew up without serious illness. Stoker excelled at sports at Trinity College Dublin having graduated in 1870 with a BA (Bachelor of Arts). He was an Auditor of the College Historical Society and the president of the University Philosophical Society where his first paper was on Sensationalism in fiction and society.
Thanks to his friend Dr. Maunsell, Stoker became interested in the theatre as a student and whilst working for the Irish civil service he became a theatre critic for the Dublin evening mail where he attracted notice for the quality of his reviews. Stoker gave a favourable review of Henry Irving's adaption of Hamlet in December 1876, this prompted Irving to invite him to dinner where they ended up becoming friends. Stoker wrote The Crystal Cup which was published by the London society in 1872 and The chain of Destiny which was released in four parts in the Shamrock. Stoker also wrote the non-fiction book the duties of clerks of petty sessions in Ireland which was published in 1879.
Bram stoker married Florence Balcombe the daughter of a lieutenent-colonel in 1978 and they moved to London. Where Stoker ended up the Business manager of the Lyceum theatre as well as manager for Henry Irving- a position he held for 27 years. Despite being a very busy man Stoker ended up writing several novels (as well as Dracula) Including The Snakes pass in 1890, the lady of the shroud in 1909 and the lair of the white worm in 1911. when Henry Irving died in 1906 he published his personal reminiscences of Henry Irving. Stoker also managed productions at the Prince of Wales theatre.
Bram stoker died after a series of strokes in London on April 20th 1912, the cause of death is split between the possibility of Tertiary Syphilis or overwork. He was cremated and was placed in a display urn at Golders Green Crematorium in North London, he was later joined by the ashes of his Son Irving Noel Stoker in 1961, his wife Florence was meant to join them but her ashes were scattered at the Gardens of rest.
Stoker was honoured with a Google Doogle (the banner on goggles homepage) on November 8th 2012 commemorating the 165th anniversary of his birth. An annual festival in honour of Bram Stoker happens in Dublin, its supported by the Bram stoker estate and was/is usually funded by Dublin City Council and Failte Ireland.
My opinion of Bran stoker is that of a decent hard working man who loved life. Stoker epitomises the phrases of “a man on a mission” and “a man who hussles”. Having worked extremely hard both creatively as a novelist and business wise as a theatre manager Stoker pretty much showed that if you work hard you could pretty much do anything you set your mind to.
And there you have it a book for all the ages, definitely under the banner of AWESOME!!!.
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated Double Love (Sweet Valley High, #1) in Books
Feb 15, 2019
<u><b>SVH: WTF?</b></u>
<b>Cover Models:</b> Jessica and Elizabeth
<b>Page count:</b> 182
<b>Special Event:</b> Some sorority thing.
<b>Number of times "a hundred and thirty-seven" was mentioned:</b> Two, plus five hundred and thirty-seven and seven hundred and thirty-seven. See below.
<b>Mental Illness Winner of the Week:</b> Jessica. Is there any surprise there?
<b>Jessica's Bitchyness scale:</b> ***** (out of five)
<b>WTFery Meter:</b> ****1/2 stars (out of five)
-------------------------
<b>Quotes & Snarky comments:</b>
What a peach:<blockquote>"How can you be best friends with somebody as blah as Eeny Rollins? I don't want you to go over there. Somebody might think it was <i>me</i> talking to her." - Jessica Wakefield, page 18</blockquote>Jessica's thoughts about Liz's lack of enthusiasm at being accepted into the sorority, Pi Beta Alpha: <blockquote>"No big deal? Elizabeth, how can you say that? How can you even think it? You've got to be seven hundred and thirty-seven kinds of idiots not to be excited about associating with the best girls at Sweet Valley High. What's wrong with you?" - page 34/5</blockquote>Isn't she simply the sweetest girl in the world? (note: Enid was also accepted.)
On butting into their brother's, Steven, love life: <blockquote>"You can do whatever you want, Elizabeth Wakefield, but it's just not in my nature to be cold and selfish when it comes to the happiness of a member of my family!" - page 39</blockquote>This as she attempts to steal Todd away from Liz the whole book. Yeah, real selfless of ya, Jess.<blockquote>"He has got to be the most wonderful boy in a hundred and thirty-seven states!" - Jessica, page 108</blockquote> Uh, she does realize there are only 50, right?<blockquote>Elizabeth wondered how her sister could possibly descend from cloud nine with Todd Wilkins to the pits of depression so fast and simply because she had to do a little thing like help fix dinner. - page 108</blockquote>I bet a psychologist (or a whole team of them) is the only one that could help you figure that out, Liz. What follows immediately afterward sees Jessica having a complete meltdown. Seriously.
<blockquote>"This family has got to be the biggest bummer in five hundred and thirty-seven cities!" - Jess, page 111</blockquote><blockquote>"You selfish little twerp," Steven said, glaring at Jessica. - page 114</blockquote>Hear, hear! Way to go Steve!
<blockquote>"I'll never forgive you, not if I live to be a hundred and thirty-seven years." - Jessica, page 182</blockquote>Aah! Please don't live that long, please. 8O
<b>Final thoughts:</b>
Elizabeth = Goody-two-shoes doormat.
Jessica = Satan incarnate.
Sounds like a bad sitcom.
<b>Disclaimer:</b> I am not a teenager or preteen, but an adult. Supposedly. Everyone keeps telling me I am but I'm not sure I'm buying what they're selling. Therefore my views are based from that perspective rather than someone in the target age range. I inhaled these suckers when I was young, hale, and hearty, so in an apparent moment of weakness have decided to re-visit one of my favorite old series in a fondly-remembered, tongue-in-cheek, and mostly sarcastic approach. So since I couldn't manage to devise a rating system for SVH books, I came up with this little way to have some fun, which is in the review form you've (hopefully) just read. Why else would you be reading this if you hadn't read all the way through anyway? Sometimes me not so bright. ;P
Next review: <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/166889313"><b>Secrets</b></a>;
<b>Cover Models:</b> Jessica and Elizabeth
<b>Page count:</b> 182
<b>Special Event:</b> Some sorority thing.
<b>Number of times "a hundred and thirty-seven" was mentioned:</b> Two, plus five hundred and thirty-seven and seven hundred and thirty-seven. See below.
<b>Mental Illness Winner of the Week:</b> Jessica. Is there any surprise there?
<b>Jessica's Bitchyness scale:</b> ***** (out of five)
<b>WTFery Meter:</b> ****1/2 stars (out of five)
-------------------------
<b>Quotes & Snarky comments:</b>
What a peach:<blockquote>"How can you be best friends with somebody as blah as Eeny Rollins? I don't want you to go over there. Somebody might think it was <i>me</i> talking to her." - Jessica Wakefield, page 18</blockquote>Jessica's thoughts about Liz's lack of enthusiasm at being accepted into the sorority, Pi Beta Alpha: <blockquote>"No big deal? Elizabeth, how can you say that? How can you even think it? You've got to be seven hundred and thirty-seven kinds of idiots not to be excited about associating with the best girls at Sweet Valley High. What's wrong with you?" - page 34/5</blockquote>Isn't she simply the sweetest girl in the world? (note: Enid was also accepted.)
On butting into their brother's, Steven, love life: <blockquote>"You can do whatever you want, Elizabeth Wakefield, but it's just not in my nature to be cold and selfish when it comes to the happiness of a member of my family!" - page 39</blockquote>This as she attempts to steal Todd away from Liz the whole book. Yeah, real selfless of ya, Jess.<blockquote>"He has got to be the most wonderful boy in a hundred and thirty-seven states!" - Jessica, page 108</blockquote> Uh, she does realize there are only 50, right?<blockquote>Elizabeth wondered how her sister could possibly descend from cloud nine with Todd Wilkins to the pits of depression so fast and simply because she had to do a little thing like help fix dinner. - page 108</blockquote>I bet a psychologist (or a whole team of them) is the only one that could help you figure that out, Liz. What follows immediately afterward sees Jessica having a complete meltdown. Seriously.
<blockquote>"This family has got to be the biggest bummer in five hundred and thirty-seven cities!" - Jess, page 111</blockquote><blockquote>"You selfish little twerp," Steven said, glaring at Jessica. - page 114</blockquote>Hear, hear! Way to go Steve!
<blockquote>"I'll never forgive you, not if I live to be a hundred and thirty-seven years." - Jessica, page 182</blockquote>Aah! Please don't live that long, please. 8O
<b>Final thoughts:</b>
Elizabeth = Goody-two-shoes doormat.
Jessica = Satan incarnate.
Sounds like a bad sitcom.
<b>Disclaimer:</b> I am not a teenager or preteen, but an adult. Supposedly. Everyone keeps telling me I am but I'm not sure I'm buying what they're selling. Therefore my views are based from that perspective rather than someone in the target age range. I inhaled these suckers when I was young, hale, and hearty, so in an apparent moment of weakness have decided to re-visit one of my favorite old series in a fondly-remembered, tongue-in-cheek, and mostly sarcastic approach. So since I couldn't manage to devise a rating system for SVH books, I came up with this little way to have some fun, which is in the review form you've (hopefully) just read. Why else would you be reading this if you hadn't read all the way through anyway? Sometimes me not so bright. ;P
Next review: <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/166889313"><b>Secrets</b></a>;