Search
Search results
Veronica Pena (690 KP) rated The Social Network (2010) in Movies
Apr 24, 2020
I really liked the format of this film. I think in some movies it's really hard to do a jump plot and do it well, but this film does it exquisitely. I loved the cast - Andrew Garfield, Justin Timberlake, Brenda Song, Armie Hammer, Rashida Jones, and obviously Jesse Eisenberg - they all did a phenomenal job.
It's really interesting to watch this movie now, 10 years after its initial release and see how Facebook and even the world, has changed. Especially with all of the drama and the rumors about Facebook and what it's involved in. I suppose it's fitting given the way that it was created.
I enjoyed this film. I'm not sure if I'll ever watch it again, but I know that I can't say I won't so I suppose that's a good thing. My favorite thing about this film is the way the plot roles, going back and forth between the depositions and what happened, it's really seamless and enjoyable.
It's really interesting to watch this movie now, 10 years after its initial release and see how Facebook and even the world, has changed. Especially with all of the drama and the rumors about Facebook and what it's involved in. I suppose it's fitting given the way that it was created.
I enjoyed this film. I'm not sure if I'll ever watch it again, but I know that I can't say I won't so I suppose that's a good thing. My favorite thing about this film is the way the plot roles, going back and forth between the depositions and what happened, it's really seamless and enjoyable.
Kim Pook (101 KP) rated The Social Network (2010) in Movies
Sep 27, 2019
Surprisingly boring
The first 20 mins of the movie confused me as i wasn't really sure what was going on. I understood marks girlfriend broke up with him for being too exhausting or something and then he wrote in his blog about her as well as creating a rating site called facemash where girls at uni were rated depending on who was hotter, he was explaining how he got their pictures and uploaded them onto his site which i thought was unnecessary and wasted a good 5-10 minutes of the movie.
Some uni students wanted to turn his facemash idea into a social networking site similar to myspace and friendster based around people at their university with his help which he agreed to do. Instead of doing this though he created his own networking site called facebook which started a dispute with these uni guys claiming he stole their idea and took him to court and the whole movie is basically centered around that. Personally i lost interest very quickly as i found the storyline very boring.
Some uni students wanted to turn his facemash idea into a social networking site similar to myspace and friendster based around people at their university with his help which he agreed to do. Instead of doing this though he created his own networking site called facebook which started a dispute with these uni guys claiming he stole their idea and took him to court and the whole movie is basically centered around that. Personally i lost interest very quickly as i found the storyline very boring.
Karla Dee (6 KP) rated Kiss & Tell in Books
Apr 5, 2022
I grew up in the 90s with Backstreet Boys, 98 degrees and Nsync. Justin Timberlake would have been my pick but I am def a girl fan of all the 90s chicks and love Jessica Simpson too. This book is boys band but LGBTQ and I am here for it!
The cover is super fun and I love the colors and the energy of the singers on stage. I don't read a lot of famous teen band books that are famous so this was a different YA read that had teens on a strict schedule making them present themselves as model citizens to the public. I love that the love situation in the book is a boy from the opening band and it makes you wonder where are the parents but whatevs teens will be teens.
The book taking place in Canada was also a fun aspect of the story since I have never been and love reading stories of places I haven't visited before. Def recommend this YA read 10 out of ten! The boys are all rock stars for sure<3<3<3
The cover is super fun and I love the colors and the energy of the singers on stage. I don't read a lot of famous teen band books that are famous so this was a different YA read that had teens on a strict schedule making them present themselves as model citizens to the public. I love that the love situation in the book is a boy from the opening band and it makes you wonder where are the parents but whatevs teens will be teens.
The book taking place in Canada was also a fun aspect of the story since I have never been and love reading stories of places I haven't visited before. Def recommend this YA read 10 out of ten! The boys are all rock stars for sure<3<3<3
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Runner Runner (2013) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Many times as a reviewer I watch a film that has so many things going for it that there is every reason to expect that it will be a high-quality product. Sadly the sum of the parts do not always come together and I am left to ponder how such an accumulation of talent went so wrong especially when the concept was strong and intriguing.
Such was the case with the new film âRunner Runnerâ which stars Justin Timberlake, Ben Affleck, and Gemma Arterton and takes a look at the big money yet seedy and dangerous world of online gambling.
Timberlake stars as Richie Furst, a Princeton student who is seeking his Masters degree and earns his income by getting new clients to sign up for a gambling site. Richie is bitter as he was a player about to get the first of several big paydays on Wall Street who lost it all when the market and the economy turned.
Richie hopes that a Masters from Princeton will get him back on solid footing in Wall Street and dreams of getting back the money he believes was owed to him.
When Richie is told that he must give up his gambling income in order to remain at school after a fellow student complains about him, Richie decides to gamble his last $17K online in an effort to get the $60K he needs to pay for his education.
Richie does well early and despite pleas from his friends to take his $50K and call it good, he presses his luck and loses it all.
Richie then learns that he was cheated and sets out to travel to Costa Rica to meet with the mysterious owner of the site, Ivan Block, (Ben Affleck), and tell him about the cheat program that has been running on the popular site.
Richie is able to meet Block and he in time thanks Richie for being discreet and exposing a problem he did not know about. He offers to restore the money Richie lost and pay him a bonus and then offers him a lucrative job working for him.
Seduced by the lure of big money and the charismatic block, Richie soon moves up the ranks and sets his eyes on the comely associate of Block named Rebecca (Gemma Arterton).
The new found success of Richie soon draws the attention of the F.B.I. and an agent named Shavers (Anthony Mackie), who threatens Richie unless he works for him as an informant against Block.
Now this setup combined with the fact that Block starts to show his darker side as well as the seedy world of corruptions, payoffs, and violence would be an ideal formula for success.
Sadly the film plays out without much drama or tension and gives us very little on the background of the characters and why they do what they do beyond simple greed.
The film does not have any dramatic payoff and plods along in a very methodical way without any real twists or turns.
The finale is fairly underwhelming and is not what audiences deserved after investing their time in the film or the characters.
Timberlake does a good job as the ambitious Richie and Affleck is very good as the charismatic Block. Sadly they can only do so much with their thinly written characters and scenarios that we have seen many times before.
In the end âRunner Runnerâ is a great concept that is sadly left stalled at the starting line.
http://sknr.net/2013/10/04/runner-runner/
Such was the case with the new film âRunner Runnerâ which stars Justin Timberlake, Ben Affleck, and Gemma Arterton and takes a look at the big money yet seedy and dangerous world of online gambling.
Timberlake stars as Richie Furst, a Princeton student who is seeking his Masters degree and earns his income by getting new clients to sign up for a gambling site. Richie is bitter as he was a player about to get the first of several big paydays on Wall Street who lost it all when the market and the economy turned.
Richie hopes that a Masters from Princeton will get him back on solid footing in Wall Street and dreams of getting back the money he believes was owed to him.
When Richie is told that he must give up his gambling income in order to remain at school after a fellow student complains about him, Richie decides to gamble his last $17K online in an effort to get the $60K he needs to pay for his education.
Richie does well early and despite pleas from his friends to take his $50K and call it good, he presses his luck and loses it all.
Richie then learns that he was cheated and sets out to travel to Costa Rica to meet with the mysterious owner of the site, Ivan Block, (Ben Affleck), and tell him about the cheat program that has been running on the popular site.
Richie is able to meet Block and he in time thanks Richie for being discreet and exposing a problem he did not know about. He offers to restore the money Richie lost and pay him a bonus and then offers him a lucrative job working for him.
Seduced by the lure of big money and the charismatic block, Richie soon moves up the ranks and sets his eyes on the comely associate of Block named Rebecca (Gemma Arterton).
The new found success of Richie soon draws the attention of the F.B.I. and an agent named Shavers (Anthony Mackie), who threatens Richie unless he works for him as an informant against Block.
Now this setup combined with the fact that Block starts to show his darker side as well as the seedy world of corruptions, payoffs, and violence would be an ideal formula for success.
Sadly the film plays out without much drama or tension and gives us very little on the background of the characters and why they do what they do beyond simple greed.
The film does not have any dramatic payoff and plods along in a very methodical way without any real twists or turns.
The finale is fairly underwhelming and is not what audiences deserved after investing their time in the film or the characters.
Timberlake does a good job as the ambitious Richie and Affleck is very good as the charismatic Block. Sadly they can only do so much with their thinly written characters and scenarios that we have seen many times before.
In the end âRunner Runnerâ is a great concept that is sadly left stalled at the starting line.
http://sknr.net/2013/10/04/runner-runner/
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Friends With Benefits (2011) in Movies
Mar 22, 2018
Sleeper Hit
Friends With Benefits succeeds largely because of the chemistry between Justin Timberlake and Mila Kunis. This movie could have had the most honest of intentions, but would have easily fallen flat without a couple you can get behind. That's not to say that their relationship didn't annoy me at times. Realistically had they just come clean with each other sooner, you could cut the run time of the film by about thirty minutes. It's a movie, however, and alas this is what movies are known to do at times.
Mila's character Jamie continued to win me over as the film progressed. She's spunky, witty, and has a vulnerability that you can appreciate. I appreciate Mila's ability to switch emotion on a dime when she needed to (going from happy to hurt, etc.).
I was surprised by the number of funny moments throughout. The comedy carries from beginning to end successfully which makes it all the more easier to sit back and enjoy. The ongoing Captain Sully joke was a nice touch along with the clever way the film kicked off having the opening Screen Gems intro being a part of a computer screen.
Friends With Benefits is a sleeper hit. It's the story of two friends who start a just-sex relationship that blossoms into something else. Cameos from Andy Samberg and Emma Stone ("We missed 'Your Body is a Wonderland'!") in the first few minutes sets a hilarious tone that never lets up. Highly recommended from me, I give the film a 92.
Mila's character Jamie continued to win me over as the film progressed. She's spunky, witty, and has a vulnerability that you can appreciate. I appreciate Mila's ability to switch emotion on a dime when she needed to (going from happy to hurt, etc.).
I was surprised by the number of funny moments throughout. The comedy carries from beginning to end successfully which makes it all the more easier to sit back and enjoy. The ongoing Captain Sully joke was a nice touch along with the clever way the film kicked off having the opening Screen Gems intro being a part of a computer screen.
Friends With Benefits is a sleeper hit. It's the story of two friends who start a just-sex relationship that blossoms into something else. Cameos from Andy Samberg and Emma Stone ("We missed 'Your Body is a Wonderland'!") in the first few minutes sets a hilarious tone that never lets up. Highly recommended from me, I give the film a 92.
JT (287 KP) rated In Time (2011) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
I wanted to like this, I really did, but it was a film that failed to go anywhere, and time just slipped away to the end credits. Justin Timberlake is a likeable character, and more favourable as an actor I would say, although heâs certainly got a decent voice as we all know â here, he was singing a bit flat.
Heâs immersed in a world where time is literally money, where people are engineered to live one more year after twenty-five. Unless youâre part of the rich elite who enjoy an elongated life of decade after decade, living in another time zone across the city or youâre scrapping for your life in the slums begging for every last second.
The film has a unique plot, but itâs executed poorly, Timberlakeâs character Will Salas is implicated in the death of a rich socialite with a lot of time on his hands, of which he gives to Will, then ends his life rather abruptly with nothing more than a âdonât waste my timeâ scrawled on a window pane.
There may be more to this than meets the eye, but itâs never really delved into with any great conviction. So weâre left with Salas on the run from Raymond Leon (Murphy) a timekeeper with a past, of which is again never touched on too much. Salas has one more trick up his sleeve and takes hostage Sylvia Weis (Seyfried) the daughter of a wealthy businessman, and never was there more a wasted character.
The pair then turn into some kind of Bonnie and Clyde, or Robin Hood and Maid Marian, stealing time from the rich and giving to the poor.
This film was the perfect platform for some potentially futuristic action, but director Andrew Niccol is happy enough to choreograph a few abject car chases and a few punches thrown. Instead weâre left with the poor on screen romance of Salas and Weis which in all honesty is not in the least bit convincing, after a while youâll be looking down at your own watch and the time ticking past.
Niccol has left a huge amount of questions unanswered, such as why was time replaced by money in the first place? Quite a big question in the grand scheme of things, maybe he just ran out of time?
Heâs immersed in a world where time is literally money, where people are engineered to live one more year after twenty-five. Unless youâre part of the rich elite who enjoy an elongated life of decade after decade, living in another time zone across the city or youâre scrapping for your life in the slums begging for every last second.
The film has a unique plot, but itâs executed poorly, Timberlakeâs character Will Salas is implicated in the death of a rich socialite with a lot of time on his hands, of which he gives to Will, then ends his life rather abruptly with nothing more than a âdonât waste my timeâ scrawled on a window pane.
There may be more to this than meets the eye, but itâs never really delved into with any great conviction. So weâre left with Salas on the run from Raymond Leon (Murphy) a timekeeper with a past, of which is again never touched on too much. Salas has one more trick up his sleeve and takes hostage Sylvia Weis (Seyfried) the daughter of a wealthy businessman, and never was there more a wasted character.
The pair then turn into some kind of Bonnie and Clyde, or Robin Hood and Maid Marian, stealing time from the rich and giving to the poor.
This film was the perfect platform for some potentially futuristic action, but director Andrew Niccol is happy enough to choreograph a few abject car chases and a few punches thrown. Instead weâre left with the poor on screen romance of Salas and Weis which in all honesty is not in the least bit convincing, after a while youâll be looking down at your own watch and the time ticking past.
Niccol has left a huge amount of questions unanswered, such as why was time replaced by money in the first place? Quite a big question in the grand scheme of things, maybe he just ran out of time?
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Shrek the Third (2007) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
When last we saw the Ogre Shrek, (Mike Meyers), he and his wife Fiona (Cameron Diaz), they were happily celebrating their love and triumph over the dastardly Prince Charmings (Rupert Everett), latest attempt to rule the magical kingdom of Far, Far Away. In the new film Shrek the Third,
Shrek has grown weary of filling in for the ailing King and years to return to his swamp home with Fiona.
When a twist of fate leaves Shrek in line for the throne, he wants no part of it, and seeks to find the next heir, Arthur (Justin
Timberlake), and install him as the next leader of the land. With Donkey (Eddie Murphy), and Puss In Boots (Antonio Banderas), at his side, Shrek sets off to meet Arthur and bring him to his future
kingdom.
Of course things do not go as planned, as upon meeting Arthur, Shrek and his friends are shocked to learn that he is a meek individual who is constantly picked on by his fellow classmates, and is far from King material.
Undaunted, the trio set back home with Arthur and find themselves at odds over Shrekâs claims that Arthur was granted the throne as the last wish of the former monarch. The fact that Shrek was actually the chosen successor is of little concern to Shrek as he is more concerned with returning home and the recent news that he is to become a father.
When fate steps in and strands them during the journey home, Shrek and friends encounter a former
eccentric professor (Eric Idle) of Arthur, who magically whisks the adventurers
back home, but with some unexpected and amusing side effects.
During this time, Prince Charming has mounted an attack on the Kingdom with the aid of several local villains in an attempt to take the crown for himself and rid the world of Shrek. What follows is a Frantic adventure as Shrek and his friends must find a way to save the day and help Arthur find his destiny.
While I was a big fan of the previous two films in the series, this Shrek did not work for me nearly as well as the other two did.
Yes there are some funny moments and I am sure this film will do huge business at the box office, but it is severely lacking.
First and foremost is the humor in the film, which while at times funny, is far to few and far between to make an effective comedy.
The previous films were loaded with laughs and pop culture references which in this one are more subdued and confined. I kept thinking while I watched the film that much of this film could easily have been comprised of outtakes from the previous films as there is precious little new material in the film and many of the jokes just do not seem that inspired.
Another issue with the film is that Murphy and Banderas are far to underused especially since their characters are the most interesting in the film, and they generate the biggest laughs when they are allowed to shine.
The film has a cute quality to it and own its own, it would be a decent family film. However when compared with the previous film in the series, this Shrek is Far, Far and Away the worst of the three.
Shrek has grown weary of filling in for the ailing King and years to return to his swamp home with Fiona.
When a twist of fate leaves Shrek in line for the throne, he wants no part of it, and seeks to find the next heir, Arthur (Justin
Timberlake), and install him as the next leader of the land. With Donkey (Eddie Murphy), and Puss In Boots (Antonio Banderas), at his side, Shrek sets off to meet Arthur and bring him to his future
kingdom.
Of course things do not go as planned, as upon meeting Arthur, Shrek and his friends are shocked to learn that he is a meek individual who is constantly picked on by his fellow classmates, and is far from King material.
Undaunted, the trio set back home with Arthur and find themselves at odds over Shrekâs claims that Arthur was granted the throne as the last wish of the former monarch. The fact that Shrek was actually the chosen successor is of little concern to Shrek as he is more concerned with returning home and the recent news that he is to become a father.
When fate steps in and strands them during the journey home, Shrek and friends encounter a former
eccentric professor (Eric Idle) of Arthur, who magically whisks the adventurers
back home, but with some unexpected and amusing side effects.
During this time, Prince Charming has mounted an attack on the Kingdom with the aid of several local villains in an attempt to take the crown for himself and rid the world of Shrek. What follows is a Frantic adventure as Shrek and his friends must find a way to save the day and help Arthur find his destiny.
While I was a big fan of the previous two films in the series, this Shrek did not work for me nearly as well as the other two did.
Yes there are some funny moments and I am sure this film will do huge business at the box office, but it is severely lacking.
First and foremost is the humor in the film, which while at times funny, is far to few and far between to make an effective comedy.
The previous films were loaded with laughs and pop culture references which in this one are more subdued and confined. I kept thinking while I watched the film that much of this film could easily have been comprised of outtakes from the previous films as there is precious little new material in the film and many of the jokes just do not seem that inspired.
Another issue with the film is that Murphy and Banderas are far to underused especially since their characters are the most interesting in the film, and they generate the biggest laughs when they are allowed to shine.
The film has a cute quality to it and own its own, it would be a decent family film. However when compared with the previous film in the series, this Shrek is Far, Far and Away the worst of the three.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated The Social Network (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
Itâs hard to find anyone who doesnât know about Facebook. On any given day, at least 250 million active users log on to Facebook and spend over 700 billion minutes per month updating their status, posting pictures or playing casual games. So dominant is this social network, the name itself is both a brand and a verb. Who would have thought that sharing inanities about what weâre currently thinking, eating, reading, watching with our friends would garner such interest? In the new movie The Social Network, director David Fincher sets out to show how, from the very humblest beginnings, Facebook became the juggernaut that it is today.
In 2003, after a debate and breakup with his girlfriend, fueled by his frustration at his exclusion from the social elite, Harvard undergrad and computer programming genius, Mark Zuckerberg, sits at his computer one night and changes the face of the internet. In just a few hours Zuckerberg, deftly played by Jesse Eisenberg, circumvents the firewalls and security of Harvard and creates a website that allows visitors to rate the ladies of the campus. Within a few hours, the thousands of hits crash the vaunted computer network of the university.
While Harvard staff was not impressed with his efforts, it certainly caught the attention of his fellow students, most notably the Winklevoss brothers, who seek out Zuckerberg with the intention of creating an exclusive website for Harvard students. While seemingly mulling over the proposal of the new site, Zuckerberg rapidly, and obsessively, develops his own. The early version of what would eventually become Facebook soon becomes a campus sensation, much to the dismay of the Winklevoss brothers.
Andrew Garfield plays Zuckerbergâs friend Eduardo Severin who funds Zuckerbergâs efforts. Facebook rapidly became the height of social hipness as its exclusivity widened to more colleges and universities. College students across the country created profiles and quickly spread news of the site simply by word of mouth. Or rather word of email. The success of Facebook soon gains the attention of Sean Parker, played by Justin Timberlake. Parker had risen to prominence as the creator of the popular file sharing site Napster and was eager to become involved with the growing success of Facebook. While Mark is fascinated and inspired by Seanâs slick style, Eduardo isnât impressed and is highly suspicious of Seanâs motives as well as his shady reputation. As the trailers and posters have touted, you canât get to 500 million friends without making a few enemies. Jealousy feeds insecurities that feed accusations that eventually lead to lawsuits.
Eisenberg is fantastic as the egotistical, neurotic, and highly intelligent Mark Zuckerberg, but the true breakout performance of the film has to be that of Andrew Garfield, who has been cast to play Spiderman in the next trilogy of the very popular film series. The British actor who was born and raised in Los Angeles has an understated charisma and appears very capable of becoming a leading man. He infuses Eduardo with class and humanism as he tries to be the friend Zuckerberg doesnât think he needs.
The film is told largely through flashbacks during a deposition hearing between the parties involved in the lawsuits. Director Fincher skillfully allows his characters to drive the film, letting the story unfold in telling scenes, giving the characters ample room to shine without becoming preachy or resorting to grandstanding.
The characters, despite their flaws, do come across as very believable and sympathetic, even though itâs difficult to imagine going from students to inventors of a pop culture phenomenon, to billionaires in just a few short years. Very few corporations that become dominant in their industry do so without critics, challengers, and those that claim they were responsible for whatever success a company gained.
While The Social Network does not overtly place blame, the light it shines on Zuckerberg isnât altogether flattering. Surprisingly, the film does not go to the extreme with tech talk. It instead focuses on the relationship between the characters and how they handled the drastic and sudden changes in their lives brought on by a simple program called Face Mash, which became the basis for Facebook.
Strong supporting work in the film combined with the great performances of the lead characters makes The Social Networkâa very solid and entertaining film that, for my money, is one of the better films of the year.
While it would be easy to jump to judgment and brand many in the film as egotistical rich people who should be grateful for what they have, I remembered that absolute power corrupts absolutely and I wondered just how well any of us in the audience would react if we were ever faced with a similar situation.
In 2003, after a debate and breakup with his girlfriend, fueled by his frustration at his exclusion from the social elite, Harvard undergrad and computer programming genius, Mark Zuckerberg, sits at his computer one night and changes the face of the internet. In just a few hours Zuckerberg, deftly played by Jesse Eisenberg, circumvents the firewalls and security of Harvard and creates a website that allows visitors to rate the ladies of the campus. Within a few hours, the thousands of hits crash the vaunted computer network of the university.
While Harvard staff was not impressed with his efforts, it certainly caught the attention of his fellow students, most notably the Winklevoss brothers, who seek out Zuckerberg with the intention of creating an exclusive website for Harvard students. While seemingly mulling over the proposal of the new site, Zuckerberg rapidly, and obsessively, develops his own. The early version of what would eventually become Facebook soon becomes a campus sensation, much to the dismay of the Winklevoss brothers.
Andrew Garfield plays Zuckerbergâs friend Eduardo Severin who funds Zuckerbergâs efforts. Facebook rapidly became the height of social hipness as its exclusivity widened to more colleges and universities. College students across the country created profiles and quickly spread news of the site simply by word of mouth. Or rather word of email. The success of Facebook soon gains the attention of Sean Parker, played by Justin Timberlake. Parker had risen to prominence as the creator of the popular file sharing site Napster and was eager to become involved with the growing success of Facebook. While Mark is fascinated and inspired by Seanâs slick style, Eduardo isnât impressed and is highly suspicious of Seanâs motives as well as his shady reputation. As the trailers and posters have touted, you canât get to 500 million friends without making a few enemies. Jealousy feeds insecurities that feed accusations that eventually lead to lawsuits.
Eisenberg is fantastic as the egotistical, neurotic, and highly intelligent Mark Zuckerberg, but the true breakout performance of the film has to be that of Andrew Garfield, who has been cast to play Spiderman in the next trilogy of the very popular film series. The British actor who was born and raised in Los Angeles has an understated charisma and appears very capable of becoming a leading man. He infuses Eduardo with class and humanism as he tries to be the friend Zuckerberg doesnât think he needs.
The film is told largely through flashbacks during a deposition hearing between the parties involved in the lawsuits. Director Fincher skillfully allows his characters to drive the film, letting the story unfold in telling scenes, giving the characters ample room to shine without becoming preachy or resorting to grandstanding.
The characters, despite their flaws, do come across as very believable and sympathetic, even though itâs difficult to imagine going from students to inventors of a pop culture phenomenon, to billionaires in just a few short years. Very few corporations that become dominant in their industry do so without critics, challengers, and those that claim they were responsible for whatever success a company gained.
While The Social Network does not overtly place blame, the light it shines on Zuckerberg isnât altogether flattering. Surprisingly, the film does not go to the extreme with tech talk. It instead focuses on the relationship between the characters and how they handled the drastic and sudden changes in their lives brought on by a simple program called Face Mash, which became the basis for Facebook.
Strong supporting work in the film combined with the great performances of the lead characters makes The Social Networkâa very solid and entertaining film that, for my money, is one of the better films of the year.
While it would be easy to jump to judgment and brand many in the film as egotistical rich people who should be grateful for what they have, I remembered that absolute power corrupts absolutely and I wondered just how well any of us in the audience would react if we were ever faced with a similar situation.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated In Time (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
t is said that time is money and in the new film âIn Timeâ this statement takes on an entirely new meaning. In the future we learn that humans have been genetically created to stop aging at the age of 25. Once they reach this selected age, a clock starts to count down from one year. People can obtain more time via work, stealing it from others, or being gifted more time but once their clock hits zero, they expire or âTime Outâ as it is called.
As the film opens, we are introduced to Will Salas (Justin Timberlake), a man who is three years past twenty five who lives at home with his mother (Olivia Wilde). Will starts each day with barely enough time on his clock for another day, so he dutifully heads off to work each day to earn more time. As does his mother and everyone he knows since workers are paid at the end of their shifts by having more time added to their accounts. Many need to work daily in order to see the next day. To stop working is to die and since everything from food to rent and clothing is paid for in time from an individualâs account, they often have to make the choice between a transaction or more hours of life.
One evening after work, Will encounters a man named Henry (Matt Bomer), with over 100 years remaining on his clock and cautions the man that in this area he is likely to attract thieves. Willâs warnings go unheeded and soon a group of thugs arrive forcing Will to whisk the man away to safety. During their night in hiding, the man tells Will that after living for over a century, he is tired of the way the system is and how the rich can live forever while the working poor suffer just to live another day.
Will awakens the next morning to find the man gone and that his clock has now been credited the 100 years. Will locates the man just in time to watch him time out with a smile as he watches the sun rise. Flush with new wealth, Will plans to move his mother out of the slums and into a better life but when tragedy strikes, Will decides to move to where the wealth is as to take them for all he can.
Will soon finds himself in a high stakes card game at a casino and in a desperate move finds himself wealthier than he ever imagined. His actions impress very wealthy banking magnet Philippie Weiss (Vincent Kartheiser), who introduces him to his daughter Sylvia (Amanda Seyfried). Will and Sylvia hit it off as she is intrigued by someone who came into money rather than being born with it and imagines what life would be like with some excitement.
Will and Sylvia soon have their worlds turned upside down when Will is suspected in the death of Henry and find themselves on the run from a Timekeeper named Raymond (Cillian Murphy), who wants to bring Will to justice. In a rapid series of events, Will and Sylvia must contend with Raymond, criminals, and a series of unsavory characters to regain their lost time before it is to late so they can implement their master plan to truly make a difference.
The film has some great social commentary and a great cast but is hindered by trying to be too many things. It works well as a science fiction film with elements of action and romance. Sadly the film goes off course by having Will and Sylvia act as a modern day Robin Hood duo taking on the powers-that-be to save the downtrodden masses. While it is a noble effort it derailed the momentum of the story as much of the tension and mystery of the story was lost. If one is wanted by thugs and the authorities, I would think that knocking over one high profile time bank after another would not be the way to keep a low profile.
That being said, despite the flaws, the film works and I found myself thinking about the characters and the setting they lived in days after the I screened the film. I had been concerned that the film would be nothing more than a knockoff of âLoganâs Runâ but thankfully the film had enough new content to keep it fresh and interesting. In many ways, âIn Timeâ is science fiction at its best as it allows for timely social commentary and provides a disturbing look at many age old debates on societyâs endless quests for wealth, power, and youth.
As the film opens, we are introduced to Will Salas (Justin Timberlake), a man who is three years past twenty five who lives at home with his mother (Olivia Wilde). Will starts each day with barely enough time on his clock for another day, so he dutifully heads off to work each day to earn more time. As does his mother and everyone he knows since workers are paid at the end of their shifts by having more time added to their accounts. Many need to work daily in order to see the next day. To stop working is to die and since everything from food to rent and clothing is paid for in time from an individualâs account, they often have to make the choice between a transaction or more hours of life.
One evening after work, Will encounters a man named Henry (Matt Bomer), with over 100 years remaining on his clock and cautions the man that in this area he is likely to attract thieves. Willâs warnings go unheeded and soon a group of thugs arrive forcing Will to whisk the man away to safety. During their night in hiding, the man tells Will that after living for over a century, he is tired of the way the system is and how the rich can live forever while the working poor suffer just to live another day.
Will awakens the next morning to find the man gone and that his clock has now been credited the 100 years. Will locates the man just in time to watch him time out with a smile as he watches the sun rise. Flush with new wealth, Will plans to move his mother out of the slums and into a better life but when tragedy strikes, Will decides to move to where the wealth is as to take them for all he can.
Will soon finds himself in a high stakes card game at a casino and in a desperate move finds himself wealthier than he ever imagined. His actions impress very wealthy banking magnet Philippie Weiss (Vincent Kartheiser), who introduces him to his daughter Sylvia (Amanda Seyfried). Will and Sylvia hit it off as she is intrigued by someone who came into money rather than being born with it and imagines what life would be like with some excitement.
Will and Sylvia soon have their worlds turned upside down when Will is suspected in the death of Henry and find themselves on the run from a Timekeeper named Raymond (Cillian Murphy), who wants to bring Will to justice. In a rapid series of events, Will and Sylvia must contend with Raymond, criminals, and a series of unsavory characters to regain their lost time before it is to late so they can implement their master plan to truly make a difference.
The film has some great social commentary and a great cast but is hindered by trying to be too many things. It works well as a science fiction film with elements of action and romance. Sadly the film goes off course by having Will and Sylvia act as a modern day Robin Hood duo taking on the powers-that-be to save the downtrodden masses. While it is a noble effort it derailed the momentum of the story as much of the tension and mystery of the story was lost. If one is wanted by thugs and the authorities, I would think that knocking over one high profile time bank after another would not be the way to keep a low profile.
That being said, despite the flaws, the film works and I found myself thinking about the characters and the setting they lived in days after the I screened the film. I had been concerned that the film would be nothing more than a knockoff of âLoganâs Runâ but thankfully the film had enough new content to keep it fresh and interesting. In many ways, âIn Timeâ is science fiction at its best as it allows for timely social commentary and provides a disturbing look at many age old debates on societyâs endless quests for wealth, power, and youth.
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated Sweet Valley Confidential: Ten Years Later in Books
Feb 15, 2019
<b><i>"What a stupid book."</i></b>
That was my initial thought after turning the final page of <b>Sweet Valley Confidential: Ten Years Later</b>.
As a pre-teen, I was addicted to the <u>Sweet Valley High</u> series, and then later, the <u>Sweet Valley University</u> series as well. Before that even, I had read some of the Twins and Kids series, so when I heard this was coming out last year, I just knew I had to read it. I was excited beyond compare and went into full geek-out mode. Where are the perfect size-six Wakefield twins, and their friends and enemies, now? What are their occupations? Who are they dating or who'd they marry? And my questions kept going on and on. What has inspired this obsession? It's not like these books were high literature, but somehow they became ingrained into my life to this very day and I cannot help but remember SVH fondly.
It is nearly impossible to review the story within the covers without spoilers, but I am going to try my darnedest. Some cursing may or may not be involved.
<b>Short synopsis</b> (snarky comments in parentheses ;P):
Jessica has betrayed Elizabeth. <i>(Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what she did. Anyone who's read the books could make an accurate guess.)</i> The Ultimate Betrayal. <i>(Oooooh!)</i> Elizabeth flees to New York. Elizabeth is a slightly sympathetic bitter victim/martyr who craves revenge throughout the book. Jessica is supposed to be a sympathetic betrayer/victim who's heartsick at destroying her sister. <i>(I don't buy it.)</i> Tons of reminiscing flashbacks ensue throughout the book, sometimes the same ones told by different characters, and take up about half of it, so there's barely any plot. Book ends with a thirteen-page <i>Where Are They Now?</i>-type epilogue that tells old fans what has happened to many major supporting characters from the original high school series. <i>(Apparently no one is allowed to be happy. And anyone you may have originally liked from SVH has turned into a big dick. WTF?)</i>
I expected to enjoy this as the usual over-the-top, soap opera stories I remember, but revamped a bit. Sadly, I was left feeling underwhelmed, disappointed, annoyed, and rather pissed off. For one thing, I could not buy the main betrayal -- <spoiler>Jessica and Todd?! In love!!?? Really? In what surreal dimension does that make any kind of sense? This broke the book for me. How can I believe anything else if this doesn't ring true. A passionate affair, sure. A one-night stand, why not? But actual 'til death do us part nonsense? Bull. Not when it's almost always been the Elizabeth and Todd, "made-for-each-other" type of thing. I actually wouldn't have minded if E & T hadn't ended up together, but for Todd to be with Jessica, that's just madness, plain and simple.</spoiler> -- it was just so unbelievable. And I mean that in a Sweet Valley way, which we all know is not steeped in any form of actual reality, so my standards are quite low and I expect the extraordinary and overwrought. So from this point on, which is within the first two chapters, I struggled, but somehow managed to read on. I admit, I gagged more than few times throughout the book. Who wouldn't when faced with passages such as this one,
<blockquote>"And what faces they were.
Gorgeous. Absolutely amazing. The kind you couldn't stop looking at. Their eyes were shades of aqua that danced in the light like shards of precious stones, oval and fringed with thick, light brown lashes long enough to cast a shadow on their cheeks. Their silky blond hair, the cascading kind, fell just below their shoulders. And to complete the perfection, their rosy lips looked as if they were penciled on. There wasn't a thing wrong with their figures, either. It was if billions of possibilities all fell together perfectly.
Twice."
-page 9/10</blockquote>
I hope you managed to hold onto your last meal. I barely did. I also had to endure "his beloved," "his love," and other similar nauseating descriptions.
This is not the PG-rated books from the past, the word "orgasm" is actually used. So is the F-bomb and other expletives. *gasp* Seriously, it does push the boundaries more than the innocent SVH series, but it's not very shocking by today's standards. Except that it does involve the Wakefield Twins, which was strange at first. Of course, current trends had to pop up, like Twitter and Facebook, Justin Timberlake and Beyonce, which always makes a book better and doesn't date it in the least. (That was heavy sarcasm in case you weren't sure.) The book does refer to some incidents and people from the SVU series, but only certain elements, otherwise it's mainly a continuation of high school and no one from the university days actually appears in the book.
Neither Elizabeth nor Jessica felt true to form, especially Jessica, and in fact, none of the characters, whether seen or just talked about, were right. Sure, some people change and some don't, but not a one was recognizable. Where did these strangers with the same names come from? Why couldn't there have been some semblance of the original shining through? Again, I have a hard time with the basis of the book, so that has severely colored my view of the entire thing, but as it stands, it was a complete waste of a good idea. I'd be willing to bet that any fan of SVH could come up with something a million times better than this dreck. Wasn't there an original ghostwriter available? You know, someone who might actually know the world and characters, and have the skill to develop them both in a believable manner?
The writing is rather clunky and purple-ly, often managing both at the same time. Redundancy abounds, editing mistakes, including wrong names and inconsistencies to previous events in SVH-iverse, and lots of use of the words "like" and "so", more-so in Jessica's narrative than anywhere else, which was really, really, so, like, irritating. Like, really. Ms. Pascal must have had a thesaurus at the ready, because there were big words awkwardly thrown into the narrative. While I appreciate authors utilizing lesser known or used words, some just don't blend well with the rest of the text and they pop-out unflatteringly. The structure needed fine-tuning and tenses were oddly used to differentiate the flashbacks from present day.
To put it succinctly, the writing isn't great and neither is the storyline, what there is of it. This was a bizarre read even by Sweet Valley standards and an insult to fans. Seriously, does Francine Pascal hate this universe and its readers? I think I'll stick to the <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/series/58723-sweet-valley-high">Sweet Valley High</a> series and make up my own stories about what happened afterward.
Slightly spoiler-ish lesson learned from this book:
<spoiler>Betrayal is okay as long as it's "Twu Luv."</spoiler>
Second lesson learned:
Everything always turns up fucking sunshine and roses and unicorns and lollipops for the worst person (or people) in the end.
I'd like to leave you with another winning description,
<blockquote>"There were no tears, but her mouth was twisted in a silent sob."
-page 17</blockquote>
<u>A thought a few hours after having finished this book:</u>
Maybe another "sequel" will eventually come out and it'll begin with Elizabeth waking up from the nightmare that is this book and we'll get the real ten years later story. Ahh, sweet dreams.
<u>Update: April 26, 2011:</u>
Oh yes, always good to blame the fans/readers for not liking their terrible book. By pointing out minor, petty reasons, I might add. <b>Warning:</b> book spoilers in article.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/business/media/17sweet.html?_r=1
That was my initial thought after turning the final page of <b>Sweet Valley Confidential: Ten Years Later</b>.
As a pre-teen, I was addicted to the <u>Sweet Valley High</u> series, and then later, the <u>Sweet Valley University</u> series as well. Before that even, I had read some of the Twins and Kids series, so when I heard this was coming out last year, I just knew I had to read it. I was excited beyond compare and went into full geek-out mode. Where are the perfect size-six Wakefield twins, and their friends and enemies, now? What are their occupations? Who are they dating or who'd they marry? And my questions kept going on and on. What has inspired this obsession? It's not like these books were high literature, but somehow they became ingrained into my life to this very day and I cannot help but remember SVH fondly.
It is nearly impossible to review the story within the covers without spoilers, but I am going to try my darnedest. Some cursing may or may not be involved.
<b>Short synopsis</b> (snarky comments in parentheses ;P):
Jessica has betrayed Elizabeth. <i>(Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what she did. Anyone who's read the books could make an accurate guess.)</i> The Ultimate Betrayal. <i>(Oooooh!)</i> Elizabeth flees to New York. Elizabeth is a slightly sympathetic bitter victim/martyr who craves revenge throughout the book. Jessica is supposed to be a sympathetic betrayer/victim who's heartsick at destroying her sister. <i>(I don't buy it.)</i> Tons of reminiscing flashbacks ensue throughout the book, sometimes the same ones told by different characters, and take up about half of it, so there's barely any plot. Book ends with a thirteen-page <i>Where Are They Now?</i>-type epilogue that tells old fans what has happened to many major supporting characters from the original high school series. <i>(Apparently no one is allowed to be happy. And anyone you may have originally liked from SVH has turned into a big dick. WTF?)</i>
I expected to enjoy this as the usual over-the-top, soap opera stories I remember, but revamped a bit. Sadly, I was left feeling underwhelmed, disappointed, annoyed, and rather pissed off. For one thing, I could not buy the main betrayal -- <spoiler>Jessica and Todd?! In love!!?? Really? In what surreal dimension does that make any kind of sense? This broke the book for me. How can I believe anything else if this doesn't ring true. A passionate affair, sure. A one-night stand, why not? But actual 'til death do us part nonsense? Bull. Not when it's almost always been the Elizabeth and Todd, "made-for-each-other" type of thing. I actually wouldn't have minded if E & T hadn't ended up together, but for Todd to be with Jessica, that's just madness, plain and simple.</spoiler> -- it was just so unbelievable. And I mean that in a Sweet Valley way, which we all know is not steeped in any form of actual reality, so my standards are quite low and I expect the extraordinary and overwrought. So from this point on, which is within the first two chapters, I struggled, but somehow managed to read on. I admit, I gagged more than few times throughout the book. Who wouldn't when faced with passages such as this one,
<blockquote>"And what faces they were.
Gorgeous. Absolutely amazing. The kind you couldn't stop looking at. Their eyes were shades of aqua that danced in the light like shards of precious stones, oval and fringed with thick, light brown lashes long enough to cast a shadow on their cheeks. Their silky blond hair, the cascading kind, fell just below their shoulders. And to complete the perfection, their rosy lips looked as if they were penciled on. There wasn't a thing wrong with their figures, either. It was if billions of possibilities all fell together perfectly.
Twice."
-page 9/10</blockquote>
I hope you managed to hold onto your last meal. I barely did. I also had to endure "his beloved," "his love," and other similar nauseating descriptions.
This is not the PG-rated books from the past, the word "orgasm" is actually used. So is the F-bomb and other expletives. *gasp* Seriously, it does push the boundaries more than the innocent SVH series, but it's not very shocking by today's standards. Except that it does involve the Wakefield Twins, which was strange at first. Of course, current trends had to pop up, like Twitter and Facebook, Justin Timberlake and Beyonce, which always makes a book better and doesn't date it in the least. (That was heavy sarcasm in case you weren't sure.) The book does refer to some incidents and people from the SVU series, but only certain elements, otherwise it's mainly a continuation of high school and no one from the university days actually appears in the book.
Neither Elizabeth nor Jessica felt true to form, especially Jessica, and in fact, none of the characters, whether seen or just talked about, were right. Sure, some people change and some don't, but not a one was recognizable. Where did these strangers with the same names come from? Why couldn't there have been some semblance of the original shining through? Again, I have a hard time with the basis of the book, so that has severely colored my view of the entire thing, but as it stands, it was a complete waste of a good idea. I'd be willing to bet that any fan of SVH could come up with something a million times better than this dreck. Wasn't there an original ghostwriter available? You know, someone who might actually know the world and characters, and have the skill to develop them both in a believable manner?
The writing is rather clunky and purple-ly, often managing both at the same time. Redundancy abounds, editing mistakes, including wrong names and inconsistencies to previous events in SVH-iverse, and lots of use of the words "like" and "so", more-so in Jessica's narrative than anywhere else, which was really, really, so, like, irritating. Like, really. Ms. Pascal must have had a thesaurus at the ready, because there were big words awkwardly thrown into the narrative. While I appreciate authors utilizing lesser known or used words, some just don't blend well with the rest of the text and they pop-out unflatteringly. The structure needed fine-tuning and tenses were oddly used to differentiate the flashbacks from present day.
To put it succinctly, the writing isn't great and neither is the storyline, what there is of it. This was a bizarre read even by Sweet Valley standards and an insult to fans. Seriously, does Francine Pascal hate this universe and its readers? I think I'll stick to the <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/series/58723-sweet-valley-high">Sweet Valley High</a> series and make up my own stories about what happened afterward.
Slightly spoiler-ish lesson learned from this book:
<spoiler>Betrayal is okay as long as it's "Twu Luv."</spoiler>
Second lesson learned:
Everything always turns up fucking sunshine and roses and unicorns and lollipops for the worst person (or people) in the end.
I'd like to leave you with another winning description,
<blockquote>"There were no tears, but her mouth was twisted in a silent sob."
-page 17</blockquote>
<u>A thought a few hours after having finished this book:</u>
Maybe another "sequel" will eventually come out and it'll begin with Elizabeth waking up from the nightmare that is this book and we'll get the real ten years later story. Ahh, sweet dreams.
<u>Update: April 26, 2011:</u>
Oh yes, always good to blame the fans/readers for not liking their terrible book. By pointing out minor, petty reasons, I might add. <b>Warning:</b> book spoilers in article.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/business/media/17sweet.html?_r=1