Search
Chambers Dictionary of Great Quotations
Book
With over 25,000 quotations from over 4,000 sources, The Chambers Dictionary of Great Quotations is...
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated Siren in Books
Mar 15, 2018
Read my review here: https://bookbumzuky.wordpress.com/2017/02/22/review-siren-by-annemarie-neary/
<b><i>Dont play the hero, Roisin. Make sure you have your back covered. But when the moments right, make your move.</i></b>
This is a bit different to the sorts of thrillers Im used to reading. With a lean towards politics, this feels a little more highbrow than the normal the-boyfriend-did-it kind of books Im used to. I dont know anything about about the Northern Ireland Troubles, so it was interesting to get a glimpse into the history of it in this novel.
I liked our characters in this novel. It was nice to have someone like Boyle in this. Homeless, stinky and a bit of a pervert, yet still kind of likable. Though I felt like his story wasnt told all that well. Roisin was a well built out character and Neary was really good at making us empathise with her the whole way through.
The plot, overall, was good. As some other reviewers have stated, the thrill subsides a little bit towards the middle and end, but I was still interested in knowing what was going to happen to really take much notice at the slowing pace. When were flashbacked to Roisins past, I was initially interested, but then things got a little drawn out. I felt like that section of the novel could have easily been shortened so we could have gotten back to the current day situation and learnt a bit more about Boyle and the Dutchman, but, hey.
One of my issues with this novel was the situation between Roisin and The Dutchman. Considering she was so wary of everything and kept completely to herself, it didnt make much sense to me, that she let herself get so close to The Dutchman and so quickly. That part of the story felt very inaccurate to how it would have really played out, had this been a true story.
The writing in this novel is well done, with good descriptive imagery, believable dialogue and well developed characters. There are quite a number of Irish terms used that Im not used to, but theyre easy to get. A thing not so well done in this novel was the layout. Within each chapter, we are presented with several POVs that arent very well separated. The only suggestion that our character perspective has changed is a paragraph break, but then sometimes there are paragraph breaks that will carry on with the same character as before. Im hoping its only this confusing as Ive received an ARC copy from Netgalley, because if not, its a major flaw in the editing.
Im a bit miffed at the ending, to be honest. It seemed abrupt and it was unsatisfying after all we went through with Roisin and her story.
<i>Thanks to Netgalley and Random House UK, Cornerstone for giving me the opportunity to read this in exchange for an honest review.</i>
<b><i>Dont play the hero, Roisin. Make sure you have your back covered. But when the moments right, make your move.</i></b>
This is a bit different to the sorts of thrillers Im used to reading. With a lean towards politics, this feels a little more highbrow than the normal the-boyfriend-did-it kind of books Im used to. I dont know anything about about the Northern Ireland Troubles, so it was interesting to get a glimpse into the history of it in this novel.
I liked our characters in this novel. It was nice to have someone like Boyle in this. Homeless, stinky and a bit of a pervert, yet still kind of likable. Though I felt like his story wasnt told all that well. Roisin was a well built out character and Neary was really good at making us empathise with her the whole way through.
The plot, overall, was good. As some other reviewers have stated, the thrill subsides a little bit towards the middle and end, but I was still interested in knowing what was going to happen to really take much notice at the slowing pace. When were flashbacked to Roisins past, I was initially interested, but then things got a little drawn out. I felt like that section of the novel could have easily been shortened so we could have gotten back to the current day situation and learnt a bit more about Boyle and the Dutchman, but, hey.
One of my issues with this novel was the situation between Roisin and The Dutchman. Considering she was so wary of everything and kept completely to herself, it didnt make much sense to me, that she let herself get so close to The Dutchman and so quickly. That part of the story felt very inaccurate to how it would have really played out, had this been a true story.
The writing in this novel is well done, with good descriptive imagery, believable dialogue and well developed characters. There are quite a number of Irish terms used that Im not used to, but theyre easy to get. A thing not so well done in this novel was the layout. Within each chapter, we are presented with several POVs that arent very well separated. The only suggestion that our character perspective has changed is a paragraph break, but then sometimes there are paragraph breaks that will carry on with the same character as before. Im hoping its only this confusing as Ive received an ARC copy from Netgalley, because if not, its a major flaw in the editing.
Im a bit miffed at the ending, to be honest. It seemed abrupt and it was unsatisfying after all we went through with Roisin and her story.
<i>Thanks to Netgalley and Random House UK, Cornerstone for giving me the opportunity to read this in exchange for an honest review.</i>
Those Conspiracy Guys
Podcast
Those Conspiracy Guys is a weekly podcast where we discuss all types and genres of conspiracy...
iTranslate Translator
Productivity and Reference
App
iTranslate is the leading translation and dictionary app. Easily translate text, websites, or start...
Inis
7.8
Rate It
Tabletop Game
Inis is a game deeply rooted in Celtic history and lore in which players win by being elected King...
CelticGames BoardGames 2016Games
Translate Voice - Language Translator & Dictionary
Travel and Reference
App
To watch a demo video on YouTube, search for "myLanguage Pro". myLanguage is the premier language...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Censor (2021) in Movies
Sep 3, 2021
Niamh Algar is fabulous (1 more)
Novel story and great direction
A genuinely original story (at last!)
Positives:
- I often whinge on about there being no novelty in movies anymore, with everything being derivative of everything else. Well here's a case for the defence. There have been movies before about the mental effect of working in the horror movie business (Toby Jones in "Berberian Sound Studio" comes to mind). But none (as far as I'm aware) from the viewpoint of a film censor. This novelty gave the movie the scope to go in a number of different directions - including as a historical drama. But it focuses on a study of how loss and grief can suddenly emerge in dramatic ways even after many years. Director Prano Bailey-Bond co-wrote this and directs it with such verve that she is very much added to my "one to watch" list for writer-directors.
- Irish actress Niamh Algar is just brilliant here, reminiscent of Morfydd Clark's fantastic performance in "Saint Maud" (not the only parallel to be drawn in this review). The acting during the dramatic conclusion is utterly chilling.
- While the ending of the movie might be polarising, I loved it. No spoilers, but it's one of my favourite endings of any movie so far this year. It reminded me strongly of the ending of "Saint Maud".
- The editing is by Mark Towns (who also did "Saint Maud"). And it's bloody marvellous, particularly during that finale! While it doesn't shy away from showing some pretty horrible stuff, Towns shows much of this subliminally in the edit (shades of the "Psycho" shower scene). This probably helped with its certification (of which more later).
- The music by Emilie Levienaise-Farrouch is quirky and fitting for the movie. I loved the jaunty end-title music.
- Has one of the best impalings since Timothy Dalton fell on that model church spire in "Hot Fuzz"!
Negatives:
- While Algar is utterly fabulous, I was less convinced by the acting of some of her fellow censors in the office. Some of this felt a bit wooden to me.
Summary Thoughts on "Censor": The workings of the UK film censors have always fascinated me, and here's a novel insight into their work during a very difficult period in their history: the National Viewers and Listener's Association, headed by the fearsome Mary Whitehouse, was up in arms at the potential damage to people's (and particularly children's) mental wellbeing from the influx of "video nasties" arriving in homes on VHS tapes. The film needs to be applauded for coming up with such a novel storyline.
What I found surprising (and ironic) is that this got away with only a "15" certificate. Editor Mark Towns suggested to me, in a private communication on Twitter, that the BBFC rated it thus due to the "context" in which the violence was set. But I remember the first 'X' film I saw. It was Brian De Palma's "The Fury", which (from memory) was purely rated as such for the final scene in which John Cassavetes's character explodes in a gory fountain. Judging from "Censor"'s "15" certificate, things have become significantly more permissive in recent years!
(For the full graphical review check out onemannsmovies on the web, facebook and (for the video review) Tiktok. Thanks)
- I often whinge on about there being no novelty in movies anymore, with everything being derivative of everything else. Well here's a case for the defence. There have been movies before about the mental effect of working in the horror movie business (Toby Jones in "Berberian Sound Studio" comes to mind). But none (as far as I'm aware) from the viewpoint of a film censor. This novelty gave the movie the scope to go in a number of different directions - including as a historical drama. But it focuses on a study of how loss and grief can suddenly emerge in dramatic ways even after many years. Director Prano Bailey-Bond co-wrote this and directs it with such verve that she is very much added to my "one to watch" list for writer-directors.
- Irish actress Niamh Algar is just brilliant here, reminiscent of Morfydd Clark's fantastic performance in "Saint Maud" (not the only parallel to be drawn in this review). The acting during the dramatic conclusion is utterly chilling.
- While the ending of the movie might be polarising, I loved it. No spoilers, but it's one of my favourite endings of any movie so far this year. It reminded me strongly of the ending of "Saint Maud".
- The editing is by Mark Towns (who also did "Saint Maud"). And it's bloody marvellous, particularly during that finale! While it doesn't shy away from showing some pretty horrible stuff, Towns shows much of this subliminally in the edit (shades of the "Psycho" shower scene). This probably helped with its certification (of which more later).
- The music by Emilie Levienaise-Farrouch is quirky and fitting for the movie. I loved the jaunty end-title music.
- Has one of the best impalings since Timothy Dalton fell on that model church spire in "Hot Fuzz"!
Negatives:
- While Algar is utterly fabulous, I was less convinced by the acting of some of her fellow censors in the office. Some of this felt a bit wooden to me.
Summary Thoughts on "Censor": The workings of the UK film censors have always fascinated me, and here's a novel insight into their work during a very difficult period in their history: the National Viewers and Listener's Association, headed by the fearsome Mary Whitehouse, was up in arms at the potential damage to people's (and particularly children's) mental wellbeing from the influx of "video nasties" arriving in homes on VHS tapes. The film needs to be applauded for coming up with such a novel storyline.
What I found surprising (and ironic) is that this got away with only a "15" certificate. Editor Mark Towns suggested to me, in a private communication on Twitter, that the BBFC rated it thus due to the "context" in which the violence was set. But I remember the first 'X' film I saw. It was Brian De Palma's "The Fury", which (from memory) was purely rated as such for the final scene in which John Cassavetes's character explodes in a gory fountain. Judging from "Censor"'s "15" certificate, things have become significantly more permissive in recent years!
(For the full graphical review check out onemannsmovies on the web, facebook and (for the video review) Tiktok. Thanks)
BookwormMama14 (18 KP) rated The Bachelor Girl's Guide to Murder (Herringford and Watts, #1) in Books
Jan 2, 2019
In a time when women never wore trousers and most definitely did not solve murders...Herringford & Watts break every rule in the book of propriety and pave their own future. The year is 1910. Toronto has seen it's share of progress and changes over the last few years. Yet, a woman's duty is still to marry, keep house and raise a family. Merinda Herringford and Jemima Watts are best friends, flatmates...and...detectives. These women do not fit the mold for a "Proper Lady". However, they are living out their dreams and following their passion. And to that I say, "Brava!" When the Herringford & Watts Detective Agency opens for business, mischief, madness and mayhem follow wherever these two go. When the mystery of the deaths of two Irish girls is brushed over by the police and press, Herringford & Watts step in to solve the case. The Morality Squad is on the prowl looking for an excuse to cart women away in the name of, "Cleaning up the town". Reasons may include, but are not limited to: a hemline too short, being out without an escort and sticking their nose in the wrong people's business. For this reason, Merinda and Jem masquerade as men with bowler hats on a fairly regular basis. This offers them the freedom of movement that would otherwise be denied them as women. Leading them to new depths and new heights. Joining forces with Constable Jasper Forth and Ray DeLuca, a reporter, will this team see that justice is served? Will their adventures take them too far? And will these bachelor girls be the voice for the women who have none?
I can honestly say that by page 10 of the novella (A Singular & Whimsical Problem), I was addicted to Herringford & Watts! From the cover design of the book to the quirky traits of these two women, I will treasure their story for many years to come. Let's talk about the book itself for a minute. There are several different aspects to the layout that intrigued me. First of all, the silhouettes on the cover (aren't they gorgeous), can be found at the beginning of each chapter as well, with artwork. Giving a deeper impression of the era. There are lovely quotes at the beginning of each chapter as well. Throughout the book you will find footnotes. Not referencing history books, but referencing our characters and addressing the reader personally. This dynamic didn't just draw me into the story, oh no, it gobbled me up and left me wandering the streets of Toronto, trying to walk without using my hips...Through these footnotes we learn a lot about all of our characters, without the need of an extra hundred pages, although I wouldn't have complained about that either.
The story is one of the most beautifully crafted books I have ever read. I am a HUGE fan of Sherlock and Murdoch Mysteries. And to have a story similar to those with women playing the lead...Brilliant! While we see the story through the perspective of different characters, it is mainly through Jem's eyes. Throughout their crime solving adventure, we can see the strength and determination of these women to do the right thing. Jem and Ray both look to the Lord for guidance and are comforted and encouraged by His voice and His peace. While God is a puzzle too big to solve for Merinda at this point. If you enjoy a good mystery with a lot of humour and some faith...THIS is the book for you! There are pins and needles that I am sitting on, waiting for the next book to come out!
I can honestly say that by page 10 of the novella (A Singular & Whimsical Problem), I was addicted to Herringford & Watts! From the cover design of the book to the quirky traits of these two women, I will treasure their story for many years to come. Let's talk about the book itself for a minute. There are several different aspects to the layout that intrigued me. First of all, the silhouettes on the cover (aren't they gorgeous), can be found at the beginning of each chapter as well, with artwork. Giving a deeper impression of the era. There are lovely quotes at the beginning of each chapter as well. Throughout the book you will find footnotes. Not referencing history books, but referencing our characters and addressing the reader personally. This dynamic didn't just draw me into the story, oh no, it gobbled me up and left me wandering the streets of Toronto, trying to walk without using my hips...Through these footnotes we learn a lot about all of our characters, without the need of an extra hundred pages, although I wouldn't have complained about that either.
The story is one of the most beautifully crafted books I have ever read. I am a HUGE fan of Sherlock and Murdoch Mysteries. And to have a story similar to those with women playing the lead...Brilliant! While we see the story through the perspective of different characters, it is mainly through Jem's eyes. Throughout their crime solving adventure, we can see the strength and determination of these women to do the right thing. Jem and Ray both look to the Lord for guidance and are comforted and encouraged by His voice and His peace. While God is a puzzle too big to solve for Merinda at this point. If you enjoy a good mystery with a lot of humour and some faith...THIS is the book for you! There are pins and needles that I am sitting on, waiting for the next book to come out!
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Live By Night (2017) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
I’m a sucker for a Prohibition-set yarn. It’s a fascinating period in history and typically yields excellent filmmaking with gritty, no-nonsense performances, gorgeous production design and hard-boiled action. It was De Palma’s The Untouchables that hooked me. Some would call it a guilty pleasure; and sure, Morricone’s score is a little over-the-top, De Niro is more caricature than character actor as Al Capone and I’m not going to argue that Connery’s Oscar was a “sympathy vote”, but it’s got everything I mentioned above in spades and for me it’ll always be the high benchmark of the Prohibition era gangster epic. Ben Affleck’s fourth turn as director has done nothing to change my position on that.
Live by Night is an uninspired mess, from voice-over laden start to disastrously predictable end, bringing nothing new or exciting to the table. Beat for beat, its weak script moves from one sigh-inducing cliché to another, reaching clumsily for moments of high emotion that ring hollow and false. If anyone needs any further proof that Matt Damon did all the heavy lifting on the script for Good Will Hunting, they need look no further. It feels wrong to come down so hard on Affleck after his back-to-back successes as a director, but this is more akin to the first work of a blundering novice, and also certainly not what we’ve come to expect of a Dennis Lehane adaptation (see Mystic River, Shutter Island and Affleck’s own incredible directorial debut, Gone Baby Gone). His decision to wear so many hats on this project, producing, directing, sole screenwriter and lead actor, has to be the reason for this stumble. The script desperately needed another set of eyes and the part of Joe Coughlin was clearly written for someone younger and more capable of performing with the subtlety needed to play someone who has to traverse the number of moral dilemmas he’s faced with. Hopefully, this inevitable failure will be what convinces Affleck that his place should be behind the camera directing other people’s scripts and guiding other people’s performances.
Speaking of the performances, there is a massive curve in this collection of acting that swings wildly from the cartoonish to the nuanced. To start with, we have Matthew Maher as a KKK member out for his cut and Robert Glenister as an Irish mob boss, both of whom are supposed to be playing dangerous and threatening but can’t do any better than laughable and two-dimensional. Then there’s Chris Messina and Affleck himself as the hoods on the rise, their chemistry is ill-advised at best as they both seem to think they’re in a buddy comedy as opposed to a serious piece of gangster melodrama A favorite of mine, Brendan Gleeson, sadly leaves the screen within the first twenty minutes and that left me with only the inimitable Chris Cooper to look forward to. The subplot involving him and Elle Fanning, as his born-again daughter speaking out against Coughlin’s sinful ways is not without problems of its own, but at least they sell it. That should be no surprise on Cooper’s part, but now between this and The Neon Demon last summer; Fanning is firmly on my radar as one to watch. My hope was that we were going to get some tremendous battle of wills between her and Affleck’s character akin to Paul Dano and Daniel Day-Lewis’ conflict in There Will Be Blood, but that was definitely asking too much. Fanning’s role, like Gleeson’s, is unfortunately cut short just as it gets good.
I guess The Untouchables is starting to sound less like a guilty pleasure and more like a masterpiece when compared to this regrettable misfire.
Live by Night is an uninspired mess, from voice-over laden start to disastrously predictable end, bringing nothing new or exciting to the table. Beat for beat, its weak script moves from one sigh-inducing cliché to another, reaching clumsily for moments of high emotion that ring hollow and false. If anyone needs any further proof that Matt Damon did all the heavy lifting on the script for Good Will Hunting, they need look no further. It feels wrong to come down so hard on Affleck after his back-to-back successes as a director, but this is more akin to the first work of a blundering novice, and also certainly not what we’ve come to expect of a Dennis Lehane adaptation (see Mystic River, Shutter Island and Affleck’s own incredible directorial debut, Gone Baby Gone). His decision to wear so many hats on this project, producing, directing, sole screenwriter and lead actor, has to be the reason for this stumble. The script desperately needed another set of eyes and the part of Joe Coughlin was clearly written for someone younger and more capable of performing with the subtlety needed to play someone who has to traverse the number of moral dilemmas he’s faced with. Hopefully, this inevitable failure will be what convinces Affleck that his place should be behind the camera directing other people’s scripts and guiding other people’s performances.
Speaking of the performances, there is a massive curve in this collection of acting that swings wildly from the cartoonish to the nuanced. To start with, we have Matthew Maher as a KKK member out for his cut and Robert Glenister as an Irish mob boss, both of whom are supposed to be playing dangerous and threatening but can’t do any better than laughable and two-dimensional. Then there’s Chris Messina and Affleck himself as the hoods on the rise, their chemistry is ill-advised at best as they both seem to think they’re in a buddy comedy as opposed to a serious piece of gangster melodrama A favorite of mine, Brendan Gleeson, sadly leaves the screen within the first twenty minutes and that left me with only the inimitable Chris Cooper to look forward to. The subplot involving him and Elle Fanning, as his born-again daughter speaking out against Coughlin’s sinful ways is not without problems of its own, but at least they sell it. That should be no surprise on Cooper’s part, but now between this and The Neon Demon last summer; Fanning is firmly on my radar as one to watch. My hope was that we were going to get some tremendous battle of wills between her and Affleck’s character akin to Paul Dano and Daniel Day-Lewis’ conflict in There Will Be Blood, but that was definitely asking too much. Fanning’s role, like Gleeson’s, is unfortunately cut short just as it gets good.
I guess The Untouchables is starting to sound less like a guilty pleasure and more like a masterpiece when compared to this regrettable misfire.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Dolittle (2020) in Movies
Feb 23, 2020
A complete mess, but kids will probably love it.
With the words of Mark Kermode's review ringing in my ears ("It's shockingly poor... and that's the same in any language") I was bracing myself when I went to see this latest incarnation of Hugh Lofting's famous animal-chatting character. And I have to agree that it is a shocking mess of a film, given $175 million was poured into this thing. But, and I say this cautiously without first-hand empirical evidence, I *think* this is a movie that kids in the 6 to 10 age range might fall in love with.
Doctor Doolittle (Robert Downey Jnr) - famed animal doctor, with the unique ability to communicate with any animal - is now holed up in his animal sanctuary, a recluse. His beloved wife - adventurer Lily - was lost at sea (in a cartoon sequence that could have just used the same clip from "Frozen"). He's lost the will to practice; and almost lost the will to live.
Impinging on his morose life come two humans: Tommy Stubbings (Harry Collett), a reluctant hunter with a wounded squirrel, and Lady Rose (Carmel Laniado), daughter of the Queen of England. (We'll quietly ignore the coincidence that, after what looks like several years of mourning, these two independently pitch up at Chez Doolittle within ten minutes of each other!).
For the Queen (the omnipresent Jessie Buckley) is dying, and noone (other than us viewers, let in on the deal) suspect foul play might be at work in the form of Lord Thomas Badgley (the ever-reliable Jim Broadbent) and the Queen's old leech-loving doctor Blair Müdfly (a moustache-twiddling Michael Sheen).
Doolittle must engage in a perilous journey to find the only cure that will save both the Queen and his animal sanctuary - the fruit of the tree on a missing island that his long lost love was searching for.
Let's start with the most obvious point first up. Robert Downey Jnr's Welsh accent is quite the most terrible, most preposterous, most unintelligible, most offensive (to the Welsh) attempt at an accent in a mainstream film in movie history. And that's really saying something when you have Laurence Olivier's Jewish father from "The Jazz Singer" and Russell Crowe's English cum Irish cum Scottish cum Yugoslavian "Robin Hood" in the list. Why? Just why? Was it to distance this version from Rex Harrison's? (Since most younger movie goers will be going "Rex who?" at this point, this seems unlikely). It's a wholly curious decision.
It turns RDj's presence in the movie from being an asset to a liability.
The movie has had a tortuous history. Filmed in 2018 at enormous expense, the film completely bombed at test screenings so they brought in more script writers to make it funnier and did extensive additional filming.
I actually disagree with the general view that the film is unfunny. For there are a few points in the movie where I laughed out loud. A fly's miraculous, if temporary, escape was one such moment. The duck laying an egg in fright, another.
However, these seem to stand out starkly in isolation as 'the funny bits they inserted'. Much of the rest of the movie's comedy falls painfully flat.
In terms of the acting, there are the obvious visual talents on show of Michael Sheen (doing a great English accent for a Welshman.... #irony), Jim Broadbent, Jessie Buckley, Joanna Page (blink and you'll miss her) and Antonio Banderas, as the swashbuckling pirate king cum father-in-law.
But the end titles are an amazing array of "Ah!" moments as the vocal performances are revealed: Emma Thompson as the parrot; Rami Malek as the gorilla; John Cena as the polar bear; Kumail Nanjiani at the ostrich; Octavia Spencer at the duck; Tom Holland as the dog; Selena Gomez as the giraffe; Marion Cotillade as the fox, Frances de la Tour as a flatulent dragon and Ralph Fiennes as an evil tiger with mummy issues. It's a gift for future contestants on "Pointless"!
There are a lot of poe-faced critics throwing brick-bats at this movie, and to a degree it's deserved. They lavished $175 million on it, and it looked like it was going to be a thumping loss. (However, against all the odds, at the time of writing it has grossed north of $184 million. And it only opened yesterday in China. So although not stellar in the world of blockbuster movies it's not going to be a studio-killer like "Heaven's Gate").
And I suspect there's a good reason for that latent salvation. I think kids are loving this movie, driving repeat viewings and unexpected word of mouth. It is certainly a family friendly experience. There are no truly terrifying scenes that will haunt young children. A dragon-induced death, not seen on screen, is - notwithstanding the intro Frozen-esque cartoon sequence - the only obvious one in the movie and is (as above) played for laughs. There are fantastical sets and landscapes. Performing whales. A happy-ending (albeit not the one I was cynically expecting). And an extended dragon-farting scene, and what kids are not going to love that!!
Directed by Stephen Gaghan ("Syriana", but better known as a writer than a director) it's a jumbled messy bear of a movie but is in no way an unpleasant watch. I would take a grandkid along to watch this again. It even has some nuggets of gold hidden within its matted coat.
As this is primarily one for the kids, I'm giving the movie two ratings: 4/10 for adults and 8/10 for kids... the Smashbomb rating is the mean of these.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the review on One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/02/22/doolittle-2019/ . Thanks).
Doctor Doolittle (Robert Downey Jnr) - famed animal doctor, with the unique ability to communicate with any animal - is now holed up in his animal sanctuary, a recluse. His beloved wife - adventurer Lily - was lost at sea (in a cartoon sequence that could have just used the same clip from "Frozen"). He's lost the will to practice; and almost lost the will to live.
Impinging on his morose life come two humans: Tommy Stubbings (Harry Collett), a reluctant hunter with a wounded squirrel, and Lady Rose (Carmel Laniado), daughter of the Queen of England. (We'll quietly ignore the coincidence that, after what looks like several years of mourning, these two independently pitch up at Chez Doolittle within ten minutes of each other!).
For the Queen (the omnipresent Jessie Buckley) is dying, and noone (other than us viewers, let in on the deal) suspect foul play might be at work in the form of Lord Thomas Badgley (the ever-reliable Jim Broadbent) and the Queen's old leech-loving doctor Blair Müdfly (a moustache-twiddling Michael Sheen).
Doolittle must engage in a perilous journey to find the only cure that will save both the Queen and his animal sanctuary - the fruit of the tree on a missing island that his long lost love was searching for.
Let's start with the most obvious point first up. Robert Downey Jnr's Welsh accent is quite the most terrible, most preposterous, most unintelligible, most offensive (to the Welsh) attempt at an accent in a mainstream film in movie history. And that's really saying something when you have Laurence Olivier's Jewish father from "The Jazz Singer" and Russell Crowe's English cum Irish cum Scottish cum Yugoslavian "Robin Hood" in the list. Why? Just why? Was it to distance this version from Rex Harrison's? (Since most younger movie goers will be going "Rex who?" at this point, this seems unlikely). It's a wholly curious decision.
It turns RDj's presence in the movie from being an asset to a liability.
The movie has had a tortuous history. Filmed in 2018 at enormous expense, the film completely bombed at test screenings so they brought in more script writers to make it funnier and did extensive additional filming.
I actually disagree with the general view that the film is unfunny. For there are a few points in the movie where I laughed out loud. A fly's miraculous, if temporary, escape was one such moment. The duck laying an egg in fright, another.
However, these seem to stand out starkly in isolation as 'the funny bits they inserted'. Much of the rest of the movie's comedy falls painfully flat.
In terms of the acting, there are the obvious visual talents on show of Michael Sheen (doing a great English accent for a Welshman.... #irony), Jim Broadbent, Jessie Buckley, Joanna Page (blink and you'll miss her) and Antonio Banderas, as the swashbuckling pirate king cum father-in-law.
But the end titles are an amazing array of "Ah!" moments as the vocal performances are revealed: Emma Thompson as the parrot; Rami Malek as the gorilla; John Cena as the polar bear; Kumail Nanjiani at the ostrich; Octavia Spencer at the duck; Tom Holland as the dog; Selena Gomez as the giraffe; Marion Cotillade as the fox, Frances de la Tour as a flatulent dragon and Ralph Fiennes as an evil tiger with mummy issues. It's a gift for future contestants on "Pointless"!
There are a lot of poe-faced critics throwing brick-bats at this movie, and to a degree it's deserved. They lavished $175 million on it, and it looked like it was going to be a thumping loss. (However, against all the odds, at the time of writing it has grossed north of $184 million. And it only opened yesterday in China. So although not stellar in the world of blockbuster movies it's not going to be a studio-killer like "Heaven's Gate").
And I suspect there's a good reason for that latent salvation. I think kids are loving this movie, driving repeat viewings and unexpected word of mouth. It is certainly a family friendly experience. There are no truly terrifying scenes that will haunt young children. A dragon-induced death, not seen on screen, is - notwithstanding the intro Frozen-esque cartoon sequence - the only obvious one in the movie and is (as above) played for laughs. There are fantastical sets and landscapes. Performing whales. A happy-ending (albeit not the one I was cynically expecting). And an extended dragon-farting scene, and what kids are not going to love that!!
Directed by Stephen Gaghan ("Syriana", but better known as a writer than a director) it's a jumbled messy bear of a movie but is in no way an unpleasant watch. I would take a grandkid along to watch this again. It even has some nuggets of gold hidden within its matted coat.
As this is primarily one for the kids, I'm giving the movie two ratings: 4/10 for adults and 8/10 for kids... the Smashbomb rating is the mean of these.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the review on One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/02/22/doolittle-2019/ . Thanks).
