Search
Search results
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2072 KP) rated A Dangerous Man in Books
Sep 20, 2019
“We Know Your Secret.”
Joe Pike’s trip to the bank for a routine deposit ends when he witnesses two men try to kidnap his teller, Isabel Roland. Joe being Joe, he jumps into action and rescues her. However, when the kidnappers are released from jail, they are both murdered. Was kidnapping Isabel a crime of opportunity, or was she a target? Is she safe? Why would someone target her?
Those familiar with the series will notice a similar set up to a previous entry, but that’s where the similarity ends. This book takes off in some unexpected places, and author Robert Crais uses multiple viewpoints well to hook us as events unfold. This is a thriller that kept me glued the entire time. While we don’t learn much new about PI partners Elvis Cole or Joe Pike, it is wonderful to spend time with them and see them in action again. Most of the new characters are wonderful and fully developed, but a few very minor characters are very annoying. Likewise, I don’t find John Chen, a recurring character in the series, that funny. I’m sure the characters who annoy me are supposed to be comic relief, but I just don’t get it. While the book certainly has more language and violence than the cozies I normally read, I didn’t feel it was excessive here. Elvis and Joe have a huge following, and I’m sure there many fans will be thrilled with this book. Pick it up and hang on because it is going to be a very wild ride you won’t want to put down.
Those familiar with the series will notice a similar set up to a previous entry, but that’s where the similarity ends. This book takes off in some unexpected places, and author Robert Crais uses multiple viewpoints well to hook us as events unfold. This is a thriller that kept me glued the entire time. While we don’t learn much new about PI partners Elvis Cole or Joe Pike, it is wonderful to spend time with them and see them in action again. Most of the new characters are wonderful and fully developed, but a few very minor characters are very annoying. Likewise, I don’t find John Chen, a recurring character in the series, that funny. I’m sure the characters who annoy me are supposed to be comic relief, but I just don’t get it. While the book certainly has more language and violence than the cozies I normally read, I didn’t feel it was excessive here. Elvis and Joe have a huge following, and I’m sure there many fans will be thrilled with this book. Pick it up and hang on because it is going to be a very wild ride you won’t want to put down.
Merissa (11704 KP) rated His Witch to Keep (Keepers of the Veil #2) in Books
Apr 19, 2023
This is book 2 in the Keepers of the Veil series and, although I haven't read Book 1, this in no way diminished my enjoyment of this book!
Serenity is doing jobs which she wouldn't usually do, on duff information, as she tries to cooperate with her sister's kidnappers and get her sister returned safely to her. Alexi is there but Serenity doesn't know if it is to help or hinder her, but the sparks are flying from the outset.
I loved how this was written from both perspectives. Serenity isn't just a "woe-is-me damsel in distress". She is a kick-ass alpha female who knows what she wants and isn't afraid to fight for it. Alexi I loved - he has a darkness within him that is not surprising considering his 'job' but his love for Serenity shone through, even if he wouldn't admit to it out loud.
Full of action and a twist that you may or may not see coming, this is a hot and fiery story that will definitely leave you wanting more. I am off to look for book 1 and also see when book 3 is due out. I do hope that Nikolai gets his story told as the banter between him and Serenity allowed you to see more of his character than what he usually allowed his brother to see. Definitely recommended.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Nov 9, 2015
Serenity is doing jobs which she wouldn't usually do, on duff information, as she tries to cooperate with her sister's kidnappers and get her sister returned safely to her. Alexi is there but Serenity doesn't know if it is to help or hinder her, but the sparks are flying from the outset.
I loved how this was written from both perspectives. Serenity isn't just a "woe-is-me damsel in distress". She is a kick-ass alpha female who knows what she wants and isn't afraid to fight for it. Alexi I loved - he has a darkness within him that is not surprising considering his 'job' but his love for Serenity shone through, even if he wouldn't admit to it out loud.
Full of action and a twist that you may or may not see coming, this is a hot and fiery story that will definitely leave you wanting more. I am off to look for book 1 and also see when book 3 is due out. I do hope that Nikolai gets his story told as the banter between him and Serenity allowed you to see more of his character than what he usually allowed his brother to see. Definitely recommended.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Nov 9, 2015
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated 7 Days In Entebbe (2018) in Movies
Mar 22, 2018
Doesn't really work
Most of us (including me), when we heard about the new film 7 DAYS IN ENTEBBE, thought to themselves "didn't they just make this film a few years ago...?" The answer is yes. A similar film to this - RAID ON ENTEBBE - was a TV movie made a few years ago - 42 years ago, to be precise. It starred Peter Finch, Martin Balsam, Jack Warden and good ol' Charles Bronson. Made a mere few months after the true events, this slapped together movie was an old-fashioned "shoot 'em up."
This film is most definitely not.
7 DAYS IN ENTEBBE tells the true story of the 1976 Air France Hijacking of (mostly) Israeli citizens that settle in Entebbe, Uganda (under the leadership of crazed dictator Idi Amin) - refusing to negotiate with terrorists, the Israeli government plan, stage and execute a daring rescue mission.
Sounds like a pretty good plot for a Charles Bronson shoot-em-up.
In this version, Director Jose Padilha (the 2014 remake of ROBOCOP) decides to focus most of his attention not on the hijacked Israeli citizens, but rather, a pair of German hijackers juxtaposed against the political infighting in Israel between Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Defense Minister Shimon Peres. The Israeli governmental infighting was interesting to watch with intriguing characters and cat-and-mouse back-stabbing politics while the plight of the kidnappers was underwritten and underwhelming. Consequently, this film was "just okay".
Oh...and it had about an hour-fifteen minutes of content stretched over an hour-forty-five minutes, so to stretch things out, Padilha decided to cut back and forth between the action (what there was of it) and a modern dance recital. Clearly he was trying a metaphor of the dance punctuating the emotions and actions elsewhere. It just didn't work for me.
Neither did this film. Skip this one and check out the Charles Bronson shoot-em-up.
Letter Grade C+
5 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
This film is most definitely not.
7 DAYS IN ENTEBBE tells the true story of the 1976 Air France Hijacking of (mostly) Israeli citizens that settle in Entebbe, Uganda (under the leadership of crazed dictator Idi Amin) - refusing to negotiate with terrorists, the Israeli government plan, stage and execute a daring rescue mission.
Sounds like a pretty good plot for a Charles Bronson shoot-em-up.
In this version, Director Jose Padilha (the 2014 remake of ROBOCOP) decides to focus most of his attention not on the hijacked Israeli citizens, but rather, a pair of German hijackers juxtaposed against the political infighting in Israel between Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Defense Minister Shimon Peres. The Israeli governmental infighting was interesting to watch with intriguing characters and cat-and-mouse back-stabbing politics while the plight of the kidnappers was underwritten and underwhelming. Consequently, this film was "just okay".
Oh...and it had about an hour-fifteen minutes of content stretched over an hour-forty-five minutes, so to stretch things out, Padilha decided to cut back and forth between the action (what there was of it) and a modern dance recital. Clearly he was trying a metaphor of the dance punctuating the emotions and actions elsewhere. It just didn't work for me.
Neither did this film. Skip this one and check out the Charles Bronson shoot-em-up.
Letter Grade C+
5 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Graceland (2013) in Movies
Apr 3, 2018
Amazing
Graceland is one of those films you remember for a long time after you've watched it. Set in the Philippines, the story revolves around Marlon Villar (Arnold Reyes) who is ambushed while driving his daughter and his boss' daughter home. Things spin wildly out of control when the kidnappers demand a ransom.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
The more I thought about Graceland as a whole, the more it made me think about how well things were filmed. The film is shot in a dark style, giving it a fitting gritty feel that sets the tone throughout. Particularly effective for me were the jarring moments that occur in close quarters, powerful and shocking at the same time. There are a number of points in the film that, due to how things were shot, will stick in my head for years to come.
Conflict: 10
Graceland is jarring and real because of the conflict created. The film never really gives you a chance to catch your breath at any point. You expect things to go one way and then are thrown for another loop. There was never a point where I felt like I could relax, which is exactly the feeling I look for in these type of films.
Genre: 8
Very interesting, original spin on your typical kidnapping story. While you empathize with the main character, you wonder if he's doing the right thing at the same time. He is faced with some tough decisions which you find out very early on in the story. You can never really tell up from down at any point. I can honestly say that I haven't really seen anything like it.
Memorability: 7
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
Overall: 91
Besides seeing film classics, Movies 365 has been all about me finding hidden gems like this one. Watch Graceland currently on Vudu for free. You won't regret it.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
The more I thought about Graceland as a whole, the more it made me think about how well things were filmed. The film is shot in a dark style, giving it a fitting gritty feel that sets the tone throughout. Particularly effective for me were the jarring moments that occur in close quarters, powerful and shocking at the same time. There are a number of points in the film that, due to how things were shot, will stick in my head for years to come.
Conflict: 10
Graceland is jarring and real because of the conflict created. The film never really gives you a chance to catch your breath at any point. You expect things to go one way and then are thrown for another loop. There was never a point where I felt like I could relax, which is exactly the feeling I look for in these type of films.
Genre: 8
Very interesting, original spin on your typical kidnapping story. While you empathize with the main character, you wonder if he's doing the right thing at the same time. He is faced with some tough decisions which you find out very early on in the story. You can never really tell up from down at any point. I can honestly say that I haven't really seen anything like it.
Memorability: 7
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
Overall: 91
Besides seeing film classics, Movies 365 has been all about me finding hidden gems like this one. Watch Graceland currently on Vudu for free. You won't regret it.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Game Night (2018) in Movies
Feb 28, 2018
Funny film with Intelligent humor
Heading into GAME NIGHT, I was trying to remember the last time I saw a good, funny film that did not rely on Gross-Out Humor or Sex & Fart jokes to mine it's laughs.
No need to try to remember now, for GAME NIGHT is a very funny, mostly clean, good old-fashioned comedy where the comedy comes out of how the characters react and interact with each other as an increasingly complex and out-of-control series of events batter them from every possible angle.
Co-Directed by John Francis Daley & Jonathan Goldstein (the duo previously co-Directed the remake of VACATION in 2015), GAME NIGHT tells the story of an ultra-competitive couple, Max & Annie (Jason Bateman & Rachel McAdams) who's weekly GAME NIGHT is upended by Max' much more successful older brother, Brooks (Kyle Chandler) who promises to "up the ante" on game night by providing a "murder-mystery" type kidnapping. When real kidnappers show up and kidnap Brooks, the clueless couple - and their friends - try to solve what they think is a make believe mystery.
As Directed by Daley & Goldstein and with the subtle comedic stylings of Bateman & McAdams, this film succeeds very well in a calm, funny manner. The humorous parts of this film are viewed with kind of a sideways glance vs. the usual temptation to bash the audience over the head with it. It's as if the filmmakers and actors are relying on the intelligence of the audience to mine their humor. It was quite refreshing for me, as an audience member, to be treated with this respect. And...it was darned funny.
Joining Bateman and McAdams are Sharon Horgan, Billy Magnussen, Lamorne Morris & Kylie Bunbury as the other 2 couples competing to solve the mystery. All are funny in their own way, but Magnussen rises slightly above the rest for his take on "the dumb blonde." But, surprisingly, the person who steals the film is Jessie Plemons as Max & Annie's strange neighbor. Plemons, heretofore known to me only as a dramatic actor, plays his character with such a deadpan earnestness, that I started chuckling whenever he just showed up on the screen - a very good sign, indeed.
If you are looking for a good, funny, film (one where you would be comfortable sitting through with your spouse), then run, don't walk to GAME NIGHT, it will be well worth your time.
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
P.S.: Stay through the end of the credits, it will be worth it.
No need to try to remember now, for GAME NIGHT is a very funny, mostly clean, good old-fashioned comedy where the comedy comes out of how the characters react and interact with each other as an increasingly complex and out-of-control series of events batter them from every possible angle.
Co-Directed by John Francis Daley & Jonathan Goldstein (the duo previously co-Directed the remake of VACATION in 2015), GAME NIGHT tells the story of an ultra-competitive couple, Max & Annie (Jason Bateman & Rachel McAdams) who's weekly GAME NIGHT is upended by Max' much more successful older brother, Brooks (Kyle Chandler) who promises to "up the ante" on game night by providing a "murder-mystery" type kidnapping. When real kidnappers show up and kidnap Brooks, the clueless couple - and their friends - try to solve what they think is a make believe mystery.
As Directed by Daley & Goldstein and with the subtle comedic stylings of Bateman & McAdams, this film succeeds very well in a calm, funny manner. The humorous parts of this film are viewed with kind of a sideways glance vs. the usual temptation to bash the audience over the head with it. It's as if the filmmakers and actors are relying on the intelligence of the audience to mine their humor. It was quite refreshing for me, as an audience member, to be treated with this respect. And...it was darned funny.
Joining Bateman and McAdams are Sharon Horgan, Billy Magnussen, Lamorne Morris & Kylie Bunbury as the other 2 couples competing to solve the mystery. All are funny in their own way, but Magnussen rises slightly above the rest for his take on "the dumb blonde." But, surprisingly, the person who steals the film is Jessie Plemons as Max & Annie's strange neighbor. Plemons, heretofore known to me only as a dramatic actor, plays his character with such a deadpan earnestness, that I started chuckling whenever he just showed up on the screen - a very good sign, indeed.
If you are looking for a good, funny, film (one where you would be comfortable sitting through with your spouse), then run, don't walk to GAME NIGHT, it will be well worth your time.
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
P.S.: Stay through the end of the credits, it will be worth it.
Debbiereadsbook (1084 KP) rated When Darkness Turns to Light (Dark River Stone Collective #2) in Books
Jun 18, 2021
I'm not ready for you to leave. . . .me!
Independent reviewer for Archaeolibrarian, I was gifted my copy of this book.
This is book 2 in the Dark River Stone Collective series, and I STRONGLY urge you to read book one, The Light Beneath The Dark, before this one. There is much referenced in this book that refers to that book, and not all is fully recapped.
I enjoyed book one, I gave it 4 stars, but THIS book far surpasses that one! A single line broke me.
“I’m not ready for you to leave....me” Sid says to Toad. At this point in the book, this is the closest Sid comes to admitting his feelings out loud and that man, oh that man!
Neither of these guys had a stellar upbringing, they are bad in very different ways. But you don’t get it all in one go, it comes out in snippets and little comments dropped here and there, and putting it all together takes time. During this time, Toad’s past comes back to haunt him and Sid? Well, let face it, Sid was all in from Toad right from the start, he just needed his head to catch up with his heart.
What I loved about these two is the fight they put up! The fight against how they feel, how they think they should act and the fight against that past of Toad’s.
The MC activities are more front and centre here, than in book one. Linc is still trying to bring things around but some things need dealing with in the old manner. Mason helps with some of it, doing things all legal . .ish. . .but some things won’t be sorted that way.
It’s heavy on the emotions, these guys don’t think they deserve to be happy, or loved. It’s heavy on the steam! Oh yes ma’am! Heat wave outside ain’t a touch on these two when they get going! There is violence, but dealing with kidnappers, torture and blackmail is not ever gonna be a picnic in the park, now is it? But I think here, that violence is totally needed to get the point across.
Loved what Toad does at the end! That was so cool!
I’m NOT a rereader, but I am fairly certain at some point I WILL be reading this again. I loved these guys! I know this review is short, but if I go on too much, I’ll start to give it all away, and I don’t want to spoil Toad and Sid for you!
5 stars, but more if I could!
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
This is book 2 in the Dark River Stone Collective series, and I STRONGLY urge you to read book one, The Light Beneath The Dark, before this one. There is much referenced in this book that refers to that book, and not all is fully recapped.
I enjoyed book one, I gave it 4 stars, but THIS book far surpasses that one! A single line broke me.
“I’m not ready for you to leave....me” Sid says to Toad. At this point in the book, this is the closest Sid comes to admitting his feelings out loud and that man, oh that man!
Neither of these guys had a stellar upbringing, they are bad in very different ways. But you don’t get it all in one go, it comes out in snippets and little comments dropped here and there, and putting it all together takes time. During this time, Toad’s past comes back to haunt him and Sid? Well, let face it, Sid was all in from Toad right from the start, he just needed his head to catch up with his heart.
What I loved about these two is the fight they put up! The fight against how they feel, how they think they should act and the fight against that past of Toad’s.
The MC activities are more front and centre here, than in book one. Linc is still trying to bring things around but some things need dealing with in the old manner. Mason helps with some of it, doing things all legal . .ish. . .but some things won’t be sorted that way.
It’s heavy on the emotions, these guys don’t think they deserve to be happy, or loved. It’s heavy on the steam! Oh yes ma’am! Heat wave outside ain’t a touch on these two when they get going! There is violence, but dealing with kidnappers, torture and blackmail is not ever gonna be a picnic in the park, now is it? But I think here, that violence is totally needed to get the point across.
Loved what Toad does at the end! That was so cool!
I’m NOT a rereader, but I am fairly certain at some point I WILL be reading this again. I loved these guys! I know this review is short, but if I go on too much, I’ll start to give it all away, and I don’t want to spoil Toad and Sid for you!
5 stars, but more if I could!
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated All the Money in the World (2017) in Movies
Feb 14, 2018
Bland with the exception of Christopher Plummer
By now, almost everyone knows about the last minute switch of Christopher Plummer in place of current-pariah Kevin Spacey as pivotal Billionaire J. Paul Getty in Ridley Scott's ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD, so when I checked out Plummer's Oscar nominated turn, I couldn't but help see if I could tell when Scott put in a new scene and where he just "augmented" his scenes with Plummer. And then, a funny thing happened...
I stopped looking at this for I was captivated by Plummer's performance.
A 3 time Oscar nominee (he is the oldest person to win an Academy Award - at the age of 82 - for his Supporting Role in BEGINNERS in 2010), the 88 year old Plummer shows that he can still command a movie for anytime he is on screen this film crackles and becomes interesting.
Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the rest of the film.
Telling the story of the kidnapping of Getty's grandson, and the "richest man in the world's" refusal to pay the ransom, ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD stars Charlie Plummer (no relation) as John Paul Getty III (the kidnapped grandson), Mark Wahlberg as "fixer" Fletcher Chase, who was told by Getty to get his grandson back for "the lowest possible cost", Romain Duris as one of the kidnappers and the great Michelle Williams as the mother of the kidnapped boy - and the daughter-in-law of Getty, Gail Harris. Each one of these performances are good, but not great. Doing what needs to be done in what they are given to do but nothing more.
I think the problem with this film is one of focus. It spends about 50% of the time with William's character - and this is fine, but then it jumps to the kidnapped son, to "the fixer", to "the kidnapper", to the grandson and back to the mother, so no real through-line, continuity or strong character development can occur, with the exception of Christopher Plummer's J. Paul Getty. To be fair to Williams, C. Plummer has the showier role and she is just asked to be the center of this tale, the world in which all else revolves and that, ultimately, makes her character somewhat bland.
I place the blame for this on Screenwriter David Scarpa (based on the book by John Pearson) and Director Scott. I think their reach exceeded their grasp on this one. If they could have focused more on one of the characters - instead of spreading things out - perhaps this film would have become more interesting and less bland. It stays on one note - despite jumping to different people in vastly different situations - throughout it's 2 hour and 15 minute time frame.
All in all, a missed opportunity. It is a decent film that had the potential to be VERY good. The only one who was VERY good was Christopher Plummer - and certainly his performance is worth the price of admission.
Letter Grade: B
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (OfMarquis)
I stopped looking at this for I was captivated by Plummer's performance.
A 3 time Oscar nominee (he is the oldest person to win an Academy Award - at the age of 82 - for his Supporting Role in BEGINNERS in 2010), the 88 year old Plummer shows that he can still command a movie for anytime he is on screen this film crackles and becomes interesting.
Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the rest of the film.
Telling the story of the kidnapping of Getty's grandson, and the "richest man in the world's" refusal to pay the ransom, ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD stars Charlie Plummer (no relation) as John Paul Getty III (the kidnapped grandson), Mark Wahlberg as "fixer" Fletcher Chase, who was told by Getty to get his grandson back for "the lowest possible cost", Romain Duris as one of the kidnappers and the great Michelle Williams as the mother of the kidnapped boy - and the daughter-in-law of Getty, Gail Harris. Each one of these performances are good, but not great. Doing what needs to be done in what they are given to do but nothing more.
I think the problem with this film is one of focus. It spends about 50% of the time with William's character - and this is fine, but then it jumps to the kidnapped son, to "the fixer", to "the kidnapper", to the grandson and back to the mother, so no real through-line, continuity or strong character development can occur, with the exception of Christopher Plummer's J. Paul Getty. To be fair to Williams, C. Plummer has the showier role and she is just asked to be the center of this tale, the world in which all else revolves and that, ultimately, makes her character somewhat bland.
I place the blame for this on Screenwriter David Scarpa (based on the book by John Pearson) and Director Scott. I think their reach exceeded their grasp on this one. If they could have focused more on one of the characters - instead of spreading things out - perhaps this film would have become more interesting and less bland. It stays on one note - despite jumping to different people in vastly different situations - throughout it's 2 hour and 15 minute time frame.
All in all, a missed opportunity. It is a decent film that had the potential to be VERY good. The only one who was VERY good was Christopher Plummer - and certainly his performance is worth the price of admission.
Letter Grade: B
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (OfMarquis)
Andy K (10821 KP) rated The Devil's Rejects (2005) in Movies
Oct 16, 2019
Chinese, Japanese, Dirty knees, look at these!
Shortly after the events of House of 1,000 Corpses, Sheriff Wydell and his band of deputies approach and surround the homestead occupied by everyone's favorite murderous, diabolical, psychotic family. Inside, lazy slumbering quickly turns to mounting a counter offensive when the family realizes what is about to happen. The ensuring shootout claims several victims before the aid of tear gas precedes a law enforcement home invasion. Unfortunately, only one family member is captured while Baby and Otis escape out the back. Baby calls their father, Captain Spaulding, to inform him of the pending doom on his way so he can meet up with them subsequently.
The two siblings arrive at a local motel only to perform their brand of debauchery on two couples and friends staying there. They are forced to be in constant fear for their lives whilst their kidnappers decide what to do with them while waiting on their matriarch. The torture endured by their victims is heinous, cruel and unnecessary, but is their way of life.
The law is tightly on their trail waiting for that lead which will lead them to the felons. This is growing personal for the sheriff as he discovers the "rejects" were responsible for the death of his brother. The sheriff decides to hire some disreputable men of his own to use whatever methods they can to acquire the location of his targets.
The inevitable stand off leaves other casualties and a position it will be difficult for the sheriff to return from. The "rejects" always seem to find a way to survive no matter their degree of peril.
This film takes a different direction than that of House of 1,000 Corpses. That film being more of a standard "teenagers wander into a house of horrors" situation, whereas this film feels more like a "Natural Born Killers" type.
The total lack of any sort of normal human decency for the family is truly revolting and is on display every time they interact with anyone including women and children. They even don't really like each other very much and are constantly arguing with one other; their visceral hatred always right on the edge of bubbling over.
The unspeakable cruelty they enact on their victims can seem excessive at times; however, if you have lived through the events of the first film, you know what you are getting into here. When they are attached to their motel guests, you are just waiting for the next moment of panic when their guests start to figure out exactly what type of monsters they are dealing with.
I loved the gritty look of the film along with the mostly 1970s classic rock soundtrack. The scenery and landscapes of the sparse countryside fit the film well as well.
Not too many sequels build or are as good or better than their predecessor, but this film could be one of those for sure.
The two siblings arrive at a local motel only to perform their brand of debauchery on two couples and friends staying there. They are forced to be in constant fear for their lives whilst their kidnappers decide what to do with them while waiting on their matriarch. The torture endured by their victims is heinous, cruel and unnecessary, but is their way of life.
The law is tightly on their trail waiting for that lead which will lead them to the felons. This is growing personal for the sheriff as he discovers the "rejects" were responsible for the death of his brother. The sheriff decides to hire some disreputable men of his own to use whatever methods they can to acquire the location of his targets.
The inevitable stand off leaves other casualties and a position it will be difficult for the sheriff to return from. The "rejects" always seem to find a way to survive no matter their degree of peril.
This film takes a different direction than that of House of 1,000 Corpses. That film being more of a standard "teenagers wander into a house of horrors" situation, whereas this film feels more like a "Natural Born Killers" type.
The total lack of any sort of normal human decency for the family is truly revolting and is on display every time they interact with anyone including women and children. They even don't really like each other very much and are constantly arguing with one other; their visceral hatred always right on the edge of bubbling over.
The unspeakable cruelty they enact on their victims can seem excessive at times; however, if you have lived through the events of the first film, you know what you are getting into here. When they are attached to their motel guests, you are just waiting for the next moment of panic when their guests start to figure out exactly what type of monsters they are dealing with.
I loved the gritty look of the film along with the mostly 1970s classic rock soundtrack. The scenery and landscapes of the sparse countryside fit the film well as well.
Not too many sequels build or are as good or better than their predecessor, but this film could be one of those for sure.
Erika (17788 KP) rated Shadow and Bone - Season 1 in TV
Jul 16, 2021
Shadow and Bone is based upon the popular Young Adult series, The Grisha Trilogy, which takes place in a steampunk-ish, Russian fantasy world at war. The story’s main character is Alina Starkov (Jessie Mei Li), an orphan who discovers she has some magical powers when she journeys into something called the Fold with her childhood friend Malyen, “Mal” (Archie Renaux), for short. The witches in this fantasy world are called Grisha and are trained to help with military operations for some king. The General of this witch army is Kirigan, played by Ben Barnes. There are also two other storylines, this group of kidnappers, and a Grisha that’s enslaved.
This series wasn’t really made for a general audience, it was made for the fans of the book trilogy. The series starts, and the watcher is immediately thrust into this fantasy world that doesn’t really make much sense with no prior knowledge. If you couldn’t tell from the series description, I wasn’t really into it. It took me two months to watch all eight of the episodes. I almost didn’t keep watching after the first two episodes, but my boss encouraged me to keep going.
The storyline is your standard YA novel, a girl who didn’t know her powers, some lame love triangle, and for some reason, the girl is the only one that can save the world. Nothing new to see here. My interest was only piqued by Barnes’ character Kirigan, and Barnes was the main reason I actually kept watching the show. The seventh episode, which features Kirigan’s backstory, was the most interesting.
The whole kidnapping crew storyline wasn’t really all that interesting. The leader, Kaz (Freddy Carter) is a kingpin-type character with an unexplained limp, or I missed the explanation. The crew also had an assassin-type character, Inej (Amita Suman), who might not really have been an assassin, again, missed that explanation. The best member of this crew was Jesper (Kit Young), who was the charmer, expert trick shooter, and the second most interesting character in the series.
The subplot with the whole kidnapping Alina thing was neither here nor there, I don’t even remember the characters’ names that were involved in this subplot. Maybe it meant something to the readers of the novels, or it’ll make sense in the next season, but it certainly didn’t mean anything to me. I think I fast-forwarded through those portions in the last episode.
I think I started liking it after the seventh episode, but two interesting episodes does not make an interesting series. It’s been about a week since I finished it, and I honestly had to look up all the characters’ names. I probably seem flippant about explaining the different plots, but it’s legitimately all I remember. This series also didn’t leave me with a hankering to read the book series, nor would I care to watch any further seasons. I’m sure if you’re a fan of the book series, you’d probably love this, but it was not for me.
This series wasn’t really made for a general audience, it was made for the fans of the book trilogy. The series starts, and the watcher is immediately thrust into this fantasy world that doesn’t really make much sense with no prior knowledge. If you couldn’t tell from the series description, I wasn’t really into it. It took me two months to watch all eight of the episodes. I almost didn’t keep watching after the first two episodes, but my boss encouraged me to keep going.
The storyline is your standard YA novel, a girl who didn’t know her powers, some lame love triangle, and for some reason, the girl is the only one that can save the world. Nothing new to see here. My interest was only piqued by Barnes’ character Kirigan, and Barnes was the main reason I actually kept watching the show. The seventh episode, which features Kirigan’s backstory, was the most interesting.
The whole kidnapping crew storyline wasn’t really all that interesting. The leader, Kaz (Freddy Carter) is a kingpin-type character with an unexplained limp, or I missed the explanation. The crew also had an assassin-type character, Inej (Amita Suman), who might not really have been an assassin, again, missed that explanation. The best member of this crew was Jesper (Kit Young), who was the charmer, expert trick shooter, and the second most interesting character in the series.
The subplot with the whole kidnapping Alina thing was neither here nor there, I don’t even remember the characters’ names that were involved in this subplot. Maybe it meant something to the readers of the novels, or it’ll make sense in the next season, but it certainly didn’t mean anything to me. I think I fast-forwarded through those portions in the last episode.
I think I started liking it after the seventh episode, but two interesting episodes does not make an interesting series. It’s been about a week since I finished it, and I honestly had to look up all the characters’ names. I probably seem flippant about explaining the different plots, but it’s legitimately all I remember. This series also didn’t leave me with a hankering to read the book series, nor would I care to watch any further seasons. I’m sure if you’re a fan of the book series, you’d probably love this, but it was not for me.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated All the Money in the World (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
You can’t take it with you.
The big talking point of this Ridley Scott film is not of course the film itself but the fact that the disgraced Kevin Spacey (“Baby Driver“) was ‘airbrushed’ out of the movie, replaced by the legend that is Christopher Plummer. With that background, and the fact that the re-shoot only took 9 days (NINE DAYS!!!!), I must admit to having been a tad scornful when Plummer was nominated for a Best Supporting Actor Oscar. “Oh” I thought “…it’s Judi Dench’s minimalistic performance in ‘Shakespeare In Love’ all over again”.
But actually on watching the film I take it all back. Plummer’s role is not, like Dench’s, a mere eight minutes of screen time, but extensive and pivotal. Not only was his nomination richly deserved (his performance is cold, eerie and magnificent!) but Ridley Scott deserved an award for getting so much great footage in the can in such a short space of time.
The film tells the true story of the feckless John Paul Getty III (Charlie Plummer, no relation), grandson to the richest man in the world John Paul Getty I. While in the Piazza Farnese in Rome, JPGIII is kidnapped and a $17 million reward is sought for his release. Whilst claiming to love his offspring, the tycoon is basically a ‘tight git’ and the film concerns the battle of the young heir’s mother Gail (Michelle Williams, “Manchester By The Sea”; “The Greatest Showman”) to persuade JPG1 and his right-hand negotiator Fletcher Chase (Mark Wahlberg, “Patriot’s Day”, “Deep Water Horizon“) to shake the money tree* and get JPGIII released.
*To be fair, JPGIII hasn’t exactly helped his case as it emerges he had previously joked about getting himself kidnapped to get his grandfather’s ransom money!
As I didn’t remember the historical outcome of this, I was in a suitable amount of suspense as to where it would go. It is clear though, from the wiki version of the story, that the ending was significantly ‘sexed-up’ for the movie.
Ridley Scott sensibly balances the views of the Getty’s with the views of the kidnappers, with a semi-sympathetic Italian (Romain Duris) being the focus of those scenes in rural Calabria.
But it’s the scenes with Plummer that really engage. The man as portrayed is an enigma, eccentrically washing his own clothes to save a few pennies and always (ALWAYS) trying to get 20% more on even the most personal of decisions. It makes me really intrigued to see Spacey’s portrayal now… I wonder if the alternate cut might make it onto the Blu-ray? I actually think though that Plummer was the better choice for this: I could see Spacey bringing far too much of Frank Underwood to the role.
Elsewhere in the cast, I think Michelle Williams and Mark Wahlberg are both solid without ever being spectacular and it’s nice to see the talented Andrew Buchan (“The Mercy“; “Broadchurch”) in a more memorable big screen outing as JPG2: his drug-addled son (and JPG3’s father).
Overall, it’s an interesting watch and had me sufficiently engaged to want to watch it again. But without Plummer’s role it wouldn’t really amount to nearly as much.
But actually on watching the film I take it all back. Plummer’s role is not, like Dench’s, a mere eight minutes of screen time, but extensive and pivotal. Not only was his nomination richly deserved (his performance is cold, eerie and magnificent!) but Ridley Scott deserved an award for getting so much great footage in the can in such a short space of time.
The film tells the true story of the feckless John Paul Getty III (Charlie Plummer, no relation), grandson to the richest man in the world John Paul Getty I. While in the Piazza Farnese in Rome, JPGIII is kidnapped and a $17 million reward is sought for his release. Whilst claiming to love his offspring, the tycoon is basically a ‘tight git’ and the film concerns the battle of the young heir’s mother Gail (Michelle Williams, “Manchester By The Sea”; “The Greatest Showman”) to persuade JPG1 and his right-hand negotiator Fletcher Chase (Mark Wahlberg, “Patriot’s Day”, “Deep Water Horizon“) to shake the money tree* and get JPGIII released.
*To be fair, JPGIII hasn’t exactly helped his case as it emerges he had previously joked about getting himself kidnapped to get his grandfather’s ransom money!
As I didn’t remember the historical outcome of this, I was in a suitable amount of suspense as to where it would go. It is clear though, from the wiki version of the story, that the ending was significantly ‘sexed-up’ for the movie.
Ridley Scott sensibly balances the views of the Getty’s with the views of the kidnappers, with a semi-sympathetic Italian (Romain Duris) being the focus of those scenes in rural Calabria.
But it’s the scenes with Plummer that really engage. The man as portrayed is an enigma, eccentrically washing his own clothes to save a few pennies and always (ALWAYS) trying to get 20% more on even the most personal of decisions. It makes me really intrigued to see Spacey’s portrayal now… I wonder if the alternate cut might make it onto the Blu-ray? I actually think though that Plummer was the better choice for this: I could see Spacey bringing far too much of Frank Underwood to the role.
Elsewhere in the cast, I think Michelle Williams and Mark Wahlberg are both solid without ever being spectacular and it’s nice to see the talented Andrew Buchan (“The Mercy“; “Broadchurch”) in a more memorable big screen outing as JPG2: his drug-addled son (and JPG3’s father).
Overall, it’s an interesting watch and had me sufficiently engaged to want to watch it again. But without Plummer’s role it wouldn’t really amount to nearly as much.