Search
Search results
Dean (6925 KP) rated The Gentlemen (2020) in Movies
Jan 14, 2020 (Updated Jan 14, 2020)
Sharp, fun and Witty (2 more)
Hugh Grant
Very similar to Ritchie's Gangster films.
There will be blood and feathers everywhere!
I was interested in this after seeing the trailer as it looked quite fun. Back to what Guy Ritchie does best after various recent efforts with Aladdin and King Arthur. If you are a fan of @Snatch (2001) and @Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (1999) then this is a film you will enjoy. With a great mixed cast, including a fun turn by Hugh Grant. A mix of oddball characters, plenty of funny moments, sharp witty dialogue along with some twists and turns in the plot. This has the same receipe for success as those earlier films. I enjoyed it more than I thought I would and left the cinema with a smile. Catch it while you can.
JT (287 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
This is the film of the year for me. A comic book adaptation like no other. Thought-provoking and difficult to watch it conveys more than just the transformation from abnormal loner to one of the greatest comic villains ever. Joaquin Phoenix’s performance goes some way to matching the psychotic heights of Heath Ledger’s incarnation in The Dark Knight. Ledger was posthumously awarded an Oscar for that performance and I would expect Phoenix to be front and centre when award season comes around.
Arthur Fleck is a clown for hire. Scraping to make ends meet while looking after his ailing mother (Frances Conroy) he has ambitions of making it as a stand-up comedian. Sadly his narcissistic personality and uncontrollable fits of laughter (through no fault of his own) make him a target for society. Gotham City is an unforgiving place and for Arthur, it is a constant struggle of acceptance. He’s belittled and beaten down at every turn and he’s not strong enough to fight back. The bruises on his skeletal frame are a testament to this. He’s an awkward character not least because his quiet personality simmers beneath someone ready to explode – and explode he does.
A comic book adaptation like no other it’s thought-provoking and difficult to watch
But Arthur is sick. That much is clear. Society no longer wants to help. As a result, his social worker explains that the city has cut all funding and the facility and access to his medication he relies on will stop – “All I have are negative thoughts,” he says. When the brutality takes a serious turn he unwittingly becomes a figurehead for Gotham’s society. The clown is a symbol of defiance. Fighting against the rich, of all people Thomas Wayne, who is running for Mayor. Wayne becomes wrapped up in a storyline that brings Arthur together with a familiar young face.
The strong comparisons to Taxi Driver are unavoidable, but there is a definite Scorsese feel to the film. The casting of Robert De Niro as talk show host Murray Franklin is almost a direct nod to King of Comedy in which De Niro stalks and kidnaps his idol to take the spotlight for himself. Here it’s Arthur who lovingly worships Murray. The build up to the clown prince of crime is worth the wait as the transformation builds up to a frenetic and gruesome final act.
One of the biggest takeaways from Joker is its focus on mental illness. Arthur’s battered notebook is not only a journal for his jokes but for his dark thoughts. This is a topic that will hit close to home for many people who might experience similar, with an outward animosity to society.
Arthur Fleck is a clown for hire. Scraping to make ends meet while looking after his ailing mother (Frances Conroy) he has ambitions of making it as a stand-up comedian. Sadly his narcissistic personality and uncontrollable fits of laughter (through no fault of his own) make him a target for society. Gotham City is an unforgiving place and for Arthur, it is a constant struggle of acceptance. He’s belittled and beaten down at every turn and he’s not strong enough to fight back. The bruises on his skeletal frame are a testament to this. He’s an awkward character not least because his quiet personality simmers beneath someone ready to explode – and explode he does.
A comic book adaptation like no other it’s thought-provoking and difficult to watch
But Arthur is sick. That much is clear. Society no longer wants to help. As a result, his social worker explains that the city has cut all funding and the facility and access to his medication he relies on will stop – “All I have are negative thoughts,” he says. When the brutality takes a serious turn he unwittingly becomes a figurehead for Gotham’s society. The clown is a symbol of defiance. Fighting against the rich, of all people Thomas Wayne, who is running for Mayor. Wayne becomes wrapped up in a storyline that brings Arthur together with a familiar young face.
The strong comparisons to Taxi Driver are unavoidable, but there is a definite Scorsese feel to the film. The casting of Robert De Niro as talk show host Murray Franklin is almost a direct nod to King of Comedy in which De Niro stalks and kidnaps his idol to take the spotlight for himself. Here it’s Arthur who lovingly worships Murray. The build up to the clown prince of crime is worth the wait as the transformation builds up to a frenetic and gruesome final act.
One of the biggest takeaways from Joker is its focus on mental illness. Arthur’s battered notebook is not only a journal for his jokes but for his dark thoughts. This is a topic that will hit close to home for many people who might experience similar, with an outward animosity to society.
Merissa (11805 KP) rated Enchanted Guardian (Camelot Reborn #2) in Books
Dec 17, 2018
Enchanted Guardian is the tale of two names that are familiar with anyone who has even the faintest inkling of the King Arthur legends - Lancelot du Lac and Nimueh. We last saw Nimueh in Enchanted Warrior when she helped Tamsin and Gawain. Subsequently, she is on the run from Morgan LaFaye. Even considering binding her magic to stop from being found, she nevertheless does one last discreet service to Arthur, and finds Lancelot's statue. Nimueh is planning on disappearing, but fate wants her and Lancelot to have a second chance, so the timing is always 'wrong'.
I love the mythology of Camelot, and by putting it into a modern setting, with the twist of the Fae losing their emotions, is simply wonderful reading! The story weaves itself around you, drawing you into a feud that is centuries old, but with fresh hurts.
It is incredibly well written, with a smooth and flowing pace. There are 'hot spots' where Lancelot and Nimueh spend time exploring each other again, but nothing too descriptive. With no editing or grammatical issues to contend with, I can definitely recommend this book to all fans of the legends of Camelot, or Fantasy/Romance fans.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book and my comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
I love the mythology of Camelot, and by putting it into a modern setting, with the twist of the Fae losing their emotions, is simply wonderful reading! The story weaves itself around you, drawing you into a feud that is centuries old, but with fresh hurts.
It is incredibly well written, with a smooth and flowing pace. There are 'hot spots' where Lancelot and Nimueh spend time exploring each other again, but nothing too descriptive. With no editing or grammatical issues to contend with, I can definitely recommend this book to all fans of the legends of Camelot, or Fantasy/Romance fans.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book and my comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
David McK (3251 KP) rated Outlaw (The Outlaw Chronicles, #1) in Books
Jan 30, 2019
"Robin Hood, Robin Hood, Riding throught the Glenn
Robin Hood, Robin Hood, and his bunch of blood-thirsty murderous outlaws ..."
Doesn't have quite the same ring, does it?
"Outlaw" is the story of Robin Hood, told from the perspective of Alan Dale. Like Bernard Cornwell's series of books about King Arthur (indeed, my copy of the book even had a "As good as Bernard Cornwell or your money back" sticker on it), Outlaw is a more earthy, more 'real', telling of the famous tale. All the famous characters are here: Robin Hood, Maid Marie-Anne (Marion), Little John, Friar Tuck, Guy of Gisbourne, and (obviously) Alan Dale himself.
Forget the recent BBC adaptation, or even the '91 film starring a not-very-English Kevin Costner; this is more what Robin Hood would have been like (if he ever existed) than the over-romanticised legendary figure.
Worth a read? If you like Cornwell (or Simon Scarrow's) style of historical fiction, then my answer is a definite yes.
Robin Hood, Robin Hood, and his bunch of blood-thirsty murderous outlaws ..."
Doesn't have quite the same ring, does it?
"Outlaw" is the story of Robin Hood, told from the perspective of Alan Dale. Like Bernard Cornwell's series of books about King Arthur (indeed, my copy of the book even had a "As good as Bernard Cornwell or your money back" sticker on it), Outlaw is a more earthy, more 'real', telling of the famous tale. All the famous characters are here: Robin Hood, Maid Marie-Anne (Marion), Little John, Friar Tuck, Guy of Gisbourne, and (obviously) Alan Dale himself.
Forget the recent BBC adaptation, or even the '91 film starring a not-very-English Kevin Costner; this is more what Robin Hood would have been like (if he ever existed) than the over-romanticised legendary figure.
Worth a read? If you like Cornwell (or Simon Scarrow's) style of historical fiction, then my answer is a definite yes.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975) in Movies
Jan 26, 2020
Probably my favourite of the Python movies, in that it has a genuine cinematic feel to it while still retaining the creativity and willingness to be just plain weird that characterised the TV series at its best. King Arthur and his knights are sent by God to find the Holy Grail; various absurd adventures ensue. The Dark Ages prove a fruitful backdrop for the Pythons' brand of grotesque surrealism.
One of those films which has entered the collective consciousness of generations - 'Tis but a scratch!', the Knights who say 'Ni', the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch, and so on. Whether the film's willingness to totally rip up the cinema rulebook (opening with the titles from a completely different film, completely dispensing with a conventional ending) is inspired or just slightly annoying is probably up to the individual viewer, but this is the work of a team working at the height of their powers. Very, very funny.
One of those films which has entered the collective consciousness of generations - 'Tis but a scratch!', the Knights who say 'Ni', the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch, and so on. Whether the film's willingness to totally rip up the cinema rulebook (opening with the titles from a completely different film, completely dispensing with a conventional ending) is inspired or just slightly annoying is probably up to the individual viewer, but this is the work of a team working at the height of their powers. Very, very funny.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated King Arthur: Legend Of The Sword (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Schrodinger's Film
There is a thought experiment that is used to help make sense of the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Say you have a cat, a box and a fragile vial of poison. You put the cat and the poison in the box knowing that the vial may break, you lunatic.
At this point, so goes the thought experiment, until we can perceive whether or not the cat is dead, the cat is dead AND alive simultaneously, and it is only when you look into the box that you know whether you have a friend for life or a Korean meal.
I bring this up because I often insist that I prefer a bad movie with great moments than a movie that’s adequate across the board, but Guy Ritchie’s most recent film certainly puts that to the test. It’s almost my favourite film of the year but is full of nigh-unforgiveable blunders that I don’t think I can watch it again. But I don’t regret seeing it. King Arthur is both good and not good and the cat is still in the box.
Well, I might as well start with what’s good about the film. For one, the character of Arthur himself has a pretty interesting arc. Normally interpretations of the Arthur myth focus on the King bit, so despite it being yet another origin story, it at least is for a character who rarely gets one, and it’s an interesting spin on the reluctant hero arc.
In addition, the world itself feels like it desperately needs a hero. You get the sense that this world is falling apart, which is much better than some other chosen one narratives like Harry Potter, where even when Voldemort took over the wizarding world he didn’t seem to do anything. Also, this is a fantasy film that isn’t just Lord of the Rings again, but a more Celtic mystic mythology that is ripe for exploration.
Then there’s Jude Law, who is so moustache-twirlingly evil that he’s hilarious. He’s clearly having the time of his life playing this cartoon super villain and making him campy enough to be fun while still threatening and compelling when he needs to be.
Shame about the rest of the cast, who all have the same personality, that of “Ah’m just one o’ tha lads, apples and pears, apples and pears.” It’s like a Chelsea game but set in the Dark Ages. So it’s identical to a Chelsea game. The only exception is Astrid Frizbee’s mage, whose intense magic power is so devastating that she manages to put a sleep spell on the audience every time she opens her noise-hole and lets out a monotone bored drone.
There’s also the action, and Hollywood, we need to talk. I thought that shaky cam was just a phase, but I’ve seen you doing it again, and you need to stop. I’ve played VR games where you do nothing but ride particularly unstable cows and came out the other end less motion sick than your sword fighting scenes. Come on, you’re better than this, and we just what’s best for you, so just buy a steady-cam already.
Maybe it’s Guy Ritchie himself, though. Nothing in the film seems to last longer than three minutes aside Arthur’s whining. Sometimes it works, like the very snappy but informative way we see Arthur grow from stupid baby to stupid adult, and sometimes it’s stupid, like when an entire other movie’s worth of content gets squashed into an uninspired montage.
But that’s the great dilemma; the montages are good and bad, like the movie itself. You will only enjoy the movie if you enjoy the movie but if you don’t then you won’t. I write this piece a defeated critic, ladies and gentlemen. Is it worth seeing? I don’t really know. A bigger fan of Guy Ritchie or quantum mechanics than I will probably get something out of it and there are worse movies out there, but it also can’t help but disappoint somehow. The cat isn’t dead, but it has a bit of a cold.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/05/25/schrodingers-film-king-arthur-legend-of-the-sword-review/
At this point, so goes the thought experiment, until we can perceive whether or not the cat is dead, the cat is dead AND alive simultaneously, and it is only when you look into the box that you know whether you have a friend for life or a Korean meal.
I bring this up because I often insist that I prefer a bad movie with great moments than a movie that’s adequate across the board, but Guy Ritchie’s most recent film certainly puts that to the test. It’s almost my favourite film of the year but is full of nigh-unforgiveable blunders that I don’t think I can watch it again. But I don’t regret seeing it. King Arthur is both good and not good and the cat is still in the box.
Well, I might as well start with what’s good about the film. For one, the character of Arthur himself has a pretty interesting arc. Normally interpretations of the Arthur myth focus on the King bit, so despite it being yet another origin story, it at least is for a character who rarely gets one, and it’s an interesting spin on the reluctant hero arc.
In addition, the world itself feels like it desperately needs a hero. You get the sense that this world is falling apart, which is much better than some other chosen one narratives like Harry Potter, where even when Voldemort took over the wizarding world he didn’t seem to do anything. Also, this is a fantasy film that isn’t just Lord of the Rings again, but a more Celtic mystic mythology that is ripe for exploration.
Then there’s Jude Law, who is so moustache-twirlingly evil that he’s hilarious. He’s clearly having the time of his life playing this cartoon super villain and making him campy enough to be fun while still threatening and compelling when he needs to be.
Shame about the rest of the cast, who all have the same personality, that of “Ah’m just one o’ tha lads, apples and pears, apples and pears.” It’s like a Chelsea game but set in the Dark Ages. So it’s identical to a Chelsea game. The only exception is Astrid Frizbee’s mage, whose intense magic power is so devastating that she manages to put a sleep spell on the audience every time she opens her noise-hole and lets out a monotone bored drone.
There’s also the action, and Hollywood, we need to talk. I thought that shaky cam was just a phase, but I’ve seen you doing it again, and you need to stop. I’ve played VR games where you do nothing but ride particularly unstable cows and came out the other end less motion sick than your sword fighting scenes. Come on, you’re better than this, and we just what’s best for you, so just buy a steady-cam already.
Maybe it’s Guy Ritchie himself, though. Nothing in the film seems to last longer than three minutes aside Arthur’s whining. Sometimes it works, like the very snappy but informative way we see Arthur grow from stupid baby to stupid adult, and sometimes it’s stupid, like when an entire other movie’s worth of content gets squashed into an uninspired montage.
But that’s the great dilemma; the montages are good and bad, like the movie itself. You will only enjoy the movie if you enjoy the movie but if you don’t then you won’t. I write this piece a defeated critic, ladies and gentlemen. Is it worth seeing? I don’t really know. A bigger fan of Guy Ritchie or quantum mechanics than I will probably get something out of it and there are worse movies out there, but it also can’t help but disappoint somehow. The cat isn’t dead, but it has a bit of a cold.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/05/25/schrodingers-film-king-arthur-legend-of-the-sword-review/
Dean (6925 KP) rated Aladdin (2019) in Movies
May 22, 2019 (Updated May 22, 2019)
Very entertaining family film
Well I have to say I was a bit surprised when I saw Guy Ritchie come up as the director at the start, especially after the King Arthur film. Gladly none of his usual editing techniques are on show here. I can only just remember the cartoon version when I was younger. The humour of the genie voiced by Robin Williams made the film for me.
So a tough act to follow. The film is visually dazzling, in the costumes, sets, CGI and SFX in general. It all looks very realistic. I'm not a big fan of the songs, some are better than others. Overall it's a bit unfair to compare it to the original. It's a fun and light hearted film that goes by at a good pace and doesn't feel like a long film. Naomi Scott does look like a Disney princess. Maybe not as funny as the original but it's still a film all ages should enjoy.
So a tough act to follow. The film is visually dazzling, in the costumes, sets, CGI and SFX in general. It all looks very realistic. I'm not a big fan of the songs, some are better than others. Overall it's a bit unfair to compare it to the original. It's a fun and light hearted film that goes by at a good pace and doesn't feel like a long film. Naomi Scott does look like a Disney princess. Maybe not as funny as the original but it's still a film all ages should enjoy.
Dana (24 KP) rated The Romances of Chretien de Troyes in Books
Mar 23, 2018
I really enjoyed reading these Medieval stories. My favorite one was Erec and Enide. I had to read these for one of my college classes on Medieval Literature and it was very interesting to be able to read.
I loved, in Erec and Enide, how it was set up into three acts and how all of them were so different from each other.
When I was rereading some other fiction that I really enjoy, I noticed some allusions to the Erec and Enide story, specifically the hunt of the White Stag which I thought was very cool. I'm not sure whether or not the author meant to do it, but it was definitely there.
I had to do a paper on Erec and Enide, so I was able to analyze their relationship and how i changes over the course of the story.
I'm keeping this review pretty short and I may come back to add more later.
I recommend this to anyone who really likes Medieval literature and stories about King Arthur and his court.
I loved, in Erec and Enide, how it was set up into three acts and how all of them were so different from each other.
When I was rereading some other fiction that I really enjoy, I noticed some allusions to the Erec and Enide story, specifically the hunt of the White Stag which I thought was very cool. I'm not sure whether or not the author meant to do it, but it was definitely there.
I had to do a paper on Erec and Enide, so I was able to analyze their relationship and how i changes over the course of the story.
I'm keeping this review pretty short and I may come back to add more later.
I recommend this to anyone who really likes Medieval literature and stories about King Arthur and his court.
Merissa (11805 KP) rated The Du Lac Chronicles (The Du Lac Chronicles #1) by Mary Anne Yarde in Books
Dec 17, 2018 (Updated Jun 8, 2023)
This is a young adult, historical romance, set after Arthur and Lancelot. Alden is Lancelot's son and, at eighteen years of age, is King of Cerniw. However, he is King in name only as he has just had his fortress and country razed by Cedric. The story starts with him tied to a whipping post, facing death and generally not in the best of health! Annis is Cedric's daughter and makes the decision to save him, for reasons that you learn about as the story progresses.
Full of action, chases, betrayal and mystery, this is a wonderful story that will keep you on your toes as you try to figure out just who will do what next.
If I had anything negative to say, it would be that Alden and Annis both change their minds so often, it gets both hard to follow and also a tad monotonous. Basically, both of them love each other, neither thinks they are good enough, and both try to do 'the right thing' - even to the detriment of their own feelings. This is just a small part of the larger story though, so it doesn't distract too much.
All in all, this was an epic historical saga with well-rounded characters and situations. Well written, with no editing or grammatical errors that I found, I would have no hesitation in recommending this.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
May 20, 2016
Full of action, chases, betrayal and mystery, this is a wonderful story that will keep you on your toes as you try to figure out just who will do what next.
If I had anything negative to say, it would be that Alden and Annis both change their minds so often, it gets both hard to follow and also a tad monotonous. Basically, both of them love each other, neither thinks they are good enough, and both try to do 'the right thing' - even to the detriment of their own feelings. This is just a small part of the larger story though, so it doesn't distract too much.
All in all, this was an epic historical saga with well-rounded characters and situations. Well written, with no editing or grammatical errors that I found, I would have no hesitation in recommending this.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
May 20, 2016
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Robin Hood (2018) in Movies
Dec 5, 2018
A Lacklustre take on the legend
I’d expected this to be very similar to the recent King Arthur adaptation, and sadly I wasn’t too far off. Never before have I seen such a dull and lacklustre adaptation of the story of Robin Hood - even the Kevin Costner version was better than this!
The action was dull, the script cheesy and even some decent actors couldn’t make this likeable. I like Taron Egerton, but even he doesn’t come off well in this. His Robin comes across as a love sick puppy and i cringed every time him and Marian are on screen together. A lot of the slow motion was unnecessary (slow mo shots of the Sheriff getting dressed?) and I didn’t understand the costume design and makeup on this. Some of the costumes seemed in keeping with the time this is meant to be set, but a lot, especially Marian’s, just seemed quite inappropriate. Even the script wasn’t quite “of the times” and some of the language didn’t fit in.
If you want to watch a decent film about Robin Hood, choose the Disney version. Or even Men in Tights, they’re far superior to this mess.
The action was dull, the script cheesy and even some decent actors couldn’t make this likeable. I like Taron Egerton, but even he doesn’t come off well in this. His Robin comes across as a love sick puppy and i cringed every time him and Marian are on screen together. A lot of the slow motion was unnecessary (slow mo shots of the Sheriff getting dressed?) and I didn’t understand the costume design and makeup on this. Some of the costumes seemed in keeping with the time this is meant to be set, but a lot, especially Marian’s, just seemed quite inappropriate. Even the script wasn’t quite “of the times” and some of the language didn’t fit in.
If you want to watch a decent film about Robin Hood, choose the Disney version. Or even Men in Tights, they’re far superior to this mess.
