Search
Search results
aSmart HUD 3D +SpeedCams
Navigation and Travel
App
Advanced car digital dashboard combining map, routing, tracking, photo and speed cameras...
Hit it Rich! Casino Slots
Games and Entertainment
App
Hit it Rich! Slots is the biggest collection of slot machine games based off of some of your...
The Bandersnatch (199 KP) rated Dracula in Books
Nov 7, 2019
Dracula was written by author Bram Stoker during the late 1890's and is set around the character of Dracula and his attempt to move from Transylvania to England so he can spread the curse of the undead (I.e. the creation of more vampires). English solicitor Jonathan Harker who'd originally gone to Transylvania to be legal aide for Dracula stops him with the help of Van Helsing and others which ends the life of one of them – Quincey-, the book ends with a note from Jonathan Harker that several people lived happily married and Jonathan has a son nicknamed for Quincey.
Dracula was published in London in May 1897 by Archibald Constable & Company and was later copyrighted in the U.S in 1899 and published by Doubleday & McClure of New York. Despite having decent praise form reviewers it wasn't an immediate bestseller. Although the English newspaper the Daily Mail ranked Stoker's writing prowess in Dracula above that of Mary Shelly, Edgar Allen Poe and Emily Bronte's Wuthering heights. Unfortunately it didn't make Stoker that much money and he'd had to petition for a compassionate grant from the royal literary fund. When he died his widow was forced to sell his notes and outlines of the book at an auction in 1913. It was the unauthorised adaption of Nosferatu by F. W. Murnau in 1922 and the resulting legal battle made when Stokers widow took affront that the novels popularity began to grow.
Before writing Dracula Bram Stoker had been researching European folklore and stories of vampires having been most influenced by Emily Gerard's “Transylvania Superstitions” 1885 essay...which included content about the vampire myth. Some historians insist that Vlad iii Dracula (More commonly known as Vlad the impaler) was the model for Stokers count but there's been no supporting evidence to make that true. According to one expert Stoker only borrowed the barest minimum of information of the Wallachian tyrant and he's not even mentioned in Stokers notes. Stoker was a member of the London library during the 1890's where books by Sabine Baring-Gould, Thomas Browne, AF Crosse and Charles Boner are attributed to Stokers research. Stoker would later claim he'd had a nightmare caused by over-eating crab meat about a “Vampire king” rising from his grave. Whitby on the Yorkshire coast contributed its landscape since Bram Stoker often holidayed there during the summer.
Dracula wasn't Stokers first choice as title for the story since he cycled through The Dead Un-Dead then simply the Un-Dead the count wasn't even supposed to be Count Dracula having had the name Count Wampyr for several drafts before Stoker became intrigued by the name Dracula. After reading “An account of the principles of Wallachia and Moldavia with political observations relative to them” written by author William Wilkinson (Published in 1820). the descendants of Vlad ii of Wallachia took the name Dracula or Dracul after being invested in the Order of the Dragon in 1431. In the old Romanian language the word Dracul mean “the Dragon” and Dracula meant “Son of the Dragon”. Nowadays however Dracul means “the Devil”
Whilst Dracula is known as THE Vampire novel its not the first. Johan Wolfgang Von Goethe had his book the Bride of Corinth published in 1797, 1871's Carmilla (a story about a lesbian vampire) was written by Sheridan Le Frau and James Malcolm Rymer's penny dreadful series Venny the Vampire was a product from the mid Victorian period. Even John Polidori created an image of a vampyric aristocrat in his 1819 story The Vampyre when he spent a summer with Merry Shelly (creator of Frankenstein) and her poet husband Percy Bysshe Shelly and Lord Bryon in 1816.
I really love Dracula. It showed the madness, the ethereal quality and the ultimate danger of what a vampire could do. Like many other goth inclined teenagers trying to find their feet in the world Dracula definitely added its two cents to my self worth and love of all things macabre. The fact it was written by a Victorian writer has added a unusual depth to the story as only a Victorian writer could. The culture of the Vampire has become deep rooted and wide spread in its acceptance and Dracula has definitely spearheaded such a phenomenon.
Abraham “Bram” Stoker was Born in Dublin, Ireland on the 8th of November 1847, He was the third of seven children born to Abraham and Charlotte Stoker and was bedridden with an unknown illness until he recovered at seven. He started schooling at a private school run by the Reverend William Woods and grew up without serious illness. Stoker excelled at sports at Trinity College Dublin having graduated in 1870 with a BA (Bachelor of Arts). He was an Auditor of the College Historical Society and the president of the University Philosophical Society where his first paper was on Sensationalism in fiction and society.
Thanks to his friend Dr. Maunsell, Stoker became interested in the theatre as a student and whilst working for the Irish civil service he became a theatre critic for the Dublin evening mail where he attracted notice for the quality of his reviews. Stoker gave a favourable review of Henry Irving's adaption of Hamlet in December 1876, this prompted Irving to invite him to dinner where they ended up becoming friends. Stoker wrote The Crystal Cup which was published by the London society in 1872 and The chain of Destiny which was released in four parts in the Shamrock. Stoker also wrote the non-fiction book the duties of clerks of petty sessions in Ireland which was published in 1879.
Bram stoker married Florence Balcombe the daughter of a lieutenent-colonel in 1978 and they moved to London. Where Stoker ended up the Business manager of the Lyceum theatre as well as manager for Henry Irving- a position he held for 27 years. Despite being a very busy man Stoker ended up writing several novels (as well as Dracula) Including The Snakes pass in 1890, the lady of the shroud in 1909 and the lair of the white worm in 1911. when Henry Irving died in 1906 he published his personal reminiscences of Henry Irving. Stoker also managed productions at the Prince of Wales theatre.
Bram stoker died after a series of strokes in London on April 20th 1912, the cause of death is split between the possibility of Tertiary Syphilis or overwork. He was cremated and was placed in a display urn at Golders Green Crematorium in North London, he was later joined by the ashes of his Son Irving Noel Stoker in 1961, his wife Florence was meant to join them but her ashes were scattered at the Gardens of rest.
Stoker was honoured with a Google Doogle (the banner on goggles homepage) on November 8th 2012 commemorating the 165th anniversary of his birth. An annual festival in honour of Bram Stoker happens in Dublin, its supported by the Bram stoker estate and was/is usually funded by Dublin City Council and Failte Ireland.
My opinion of Bran stoker is that of a decent hard working man who loved life. Stoker epitomises the phrases of “a man on a mission” and “a man who hussles”. Having worked extremely hard both creatively as a novelist and business wise as a theatre manager Stoker pretty much showed that if you work hard you could pretty much do anything you set your mind to.
And there you have it a book for all the ages, definitely under the banner of AWESOME!!!.
Dracula was published in London in May 1897 by Archibald Constable & Company and was later copyrighted in the U.S in 1899 and published by Doubleday & McClure of New York. Despite having decent praise form reviewers it wasn't an immediate bestseller. Although the English newspaper the Daily Mail ranked Stoker's writing prowess in Dracula above that of Mary Shelly, Edgar Allen Poe and Emily Bronte's Wuthering heights. Unfortunately it didn't make Stoker that much money and he'd had to petition for a compassionate grant from the royal literary fund. When he died his widow was forced to sell his notes and outlines of the book at an auction in 1913. It was the unauthorised adaption of Nosferatu by F. W. Murnau in 1922 and the resulting legal battle made when Stokers widow took affront that the novels popularity began to grow.
Before writing Dracula Bram Stoker had been researching European folklore and stories of vampires having been most influenced by Emily Gerard's “Transylvania Superstitions” 1885 essay...which included content about the vampire myth. Some historians insist that Vlad iii Dracula (More commonly known as Vlad the impaler) was the model for Stokers count but there's been no supporting evidence to make that true. According to one expert Stoker only borrowed the barest minimum of information of the Wallachian tyrant and he's not even mentioned in Stokers notes. Stoker was a member of the London library during the 1890's where books by Sabine Baring-Gould, Thomas Browne, AF Crosse and Charles Boner are attributed to Stokers research. Stoker would later claim he'd had a nightmare caused by over-eating crab meat about a “Vampire king” rising from his grave. Whitby on the Yorkshire coast contributed its landscape since Bram Stoker often holidayed there during the summer.
Dracula wasn't Stokers first choice as title for the story since he cycled through The Dead Un-Dead then simply the Un-Dead the count wasn't even supposed to be Count Dracula having had the name Count Wampyr for several drafts before Stoker became intrigued by the name Dracula. After reading “An account of the principles of Wallachia and Moldavia with political observations relative to them” written by author William Wilkinson (Published in 1820). the descendants of Vlad ii of Wallachia took the name Dracula or Dracul after being invested in the Order of the Dragon in 1431. In the old Romanian language the word Dracul mean “the Dragon” and Dracula meant “Son of the Dragon”. Nowadays however Dracul means “the Devil”
Whilst Dracula is known as THE Vampire novel its not the first. Johan Wolfgang Von Goethe had his book the Bride of Corinth published in 1797, 1871's Carmilla (a story about a lesbian vampire) was written by Sheridan Le Frau and James Malcolm Rymer's penny dreadful series Venny the Vampire was a product from the mid Victorian period. Even John Polidori created an image of a vampyric aristocrat in his 1819 story The Vampyre when he spent a summer with Merry Shelly (creator of Frankenstein) and her poet husband Percy Bysshe Shelly and Lord Bryon in 1816.
I really love Dracula. It showed the madness, the ethereal quality and the ultimate danger of what a vampire could do. Like many other goth inclined teenagers trying to find their feet in the world Dracula definitely added its two cents to my self worth and love of all things macabre. The fact it was written by a Victorian writer has added a unusual depth to the story as only a Victorian writer could. The culture of the Vampire has become deep rooted and wide spread in its acceptance and Dracula has definitely spearheaded such a phenomenon.
Abraham “Bram” Stoker was Born in Dublin, Ireland on the 8th of November 1847, He was the third of seven children born to Abraham and Charlotte Stoker and was bedridden with an unknown illness until he recovered at seven. He started schooling at a private school run by the Reverend William Woods and grew up without serious illness. Stoker excelled at sports at Trinity College Dublin having graduated in 1870 with a BA (Bachelor of Arts). He was an Auditor of the College Historical Society and the president of the University Philosophical Society where his first paper was on Sensationalism in fiction and society.
Thanks to his friend Dr. Maunsell, Stoker became interested in the theatre as a student and whilst working for the Irish civil service he became a theatre critic for the Dublin evening mail where he attracted notice for the quality of his reviews. Stoker gave a favourable review of Henry Irving's adaption of Hamlet in December 1876, this prompted Irving to invite him to dinner where they ended up becoming friends. Stoker wrote The Crystal Cup which was published by the London society in 1872 and The chain of Destiny which was released in four parts in the Shamrock. Stoker also wrote the non-fiction book the duties of clerks of petty sessions in Ireland which was published in 1879.
Bram stoker married Florence Balcombe the daughter of a lieutenent-colonel in 1978 and they moved to London. Where Stoker ended up the Business manager of the Lyceum theatre as well as manager for Henry Irving- a position he held for 27 years. Despite being a very busy man Stoker ended up writing several novels (as well as Dracula) Including The Snakes pass in 1890, the lady of the shroud in 1909 and the lair of the white worm in 1911. when Henry Irving died in 1906 he published his personal reminiscences of Henry Irving. Stoker also managed productions at the Prince of Wales theatre.
Bram stoker died after a series of strokes in London on April 20th 1912, the cause of death is split between the possibility of Tertiary Syphilis or overwork. He was cremated and was placed in a display urn at Golders Green Crematorium in North London, he was later joined by the ashes of his Son Irving Noel Stoker in 1961, his wife Florence was meant to join them but her ashes were scattered at the Gardens of rest.
Stoker was honoured with a Google Doogle (the banner on goggles homepage) on November 8th 2012 commemorating the 165th anniversary of his birth. An annual festival in honour of Bram Stoker happens in Dublin, its supported by the Bram stoker estate and was/is usually funded by Dublin City Council and Failte Ireland.
My opinion of Bran stoker is that of a decent hard working man who loved life. Stoker epitomises the phrases of “a man on a mission” and “a man who hussles”. Having worked extremely hard both creatively as a novelist and business wise as a theatre manager Stoker pretty much showed that if you work hard you could pretty much do anything you set your mind to.
And there you have it a book for all the ages, definitely under the banner of AWESOME!!!.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated A Game of Thrones: Hand of the King in Tabletop Games
Jun 12, 2019
I’ll be honest with you. I’m a big A Game of Thrones fan. We watch it religiously on Sunday nights at my dad’s house. Now, when I say “we” I mean my brother Bryan, my dad, and me. My wife has zero interest in it, and it’s really not her style anyway. So imagine my surprise when she agreed to play this little card game featuring the IP and she didn’t hate it! She didn’t really love it either, as shown by her guest score on the graphic above.
A Game of Thrones: Hand of the King (that’s a lot to say/type) is a dueling set collection card game. To setup, you create a grid of randomized character cards that all belong to one of the seven houses (save for Varys, who is our pawn in all this). Also reveal six of the 14 provided companion cards to be used for this game. Each player will control Varys on their turn, spreading influence and intrigue throughout the houses.
On your turn you will announce the house you would like to influence (Stark, Greyjoy, etc), and then move the Varys card in any of the four cardinal directions to a character belonging to your announced house. Any character cards you pass along the way bearing the same house will be collected along with the card on which you stopped. If you now have simple majority of characters in that house, you claim the corresponding house banner and place it in front of you to taunt your opponent. Should you influence the last character of said house you will be able to recruit and use one of the companion cards that are available from the beginning of the game. These cards are game-changers sometimes and provide very powerful abilities. Play continues in this fashion until Varys has no more legal moves. And that’s the game. Each player is trying to have simple majority ownership of the house banners at the end of the game.
Components. This is easy. There are square character cards featuring excellent artwork from The Mico (who always does an amazing job IMO), smaller companion cards, and the house banners. The cards are of good quality, and the banners are good too. I have no complaints about the components at all.
Now, I have only played this with my wife and she can be pretty ruthless when gaming. That’s pretty much expected for a game of this IP. That being said, this is an easy and light filler card game that is enjoyable, but not overly strategic. You really do not have to make many choices, as the placement of characters mostly determine how you are going to attack the grid. The companions, however, make this game much more interesting because they can be loose cannons and otherwise monkey wrenches in your opponent’s plans. Outside of being a simple annoyance, there isn’t a lot of player interaction unless you are specifically hate-drafting (which we typically do not do). After all, it’s not similar to its cousin big boy board game that destroys friendships over a 6 hour+ slog. This one is light and quick and a good filler for two. My wife may not love it, but I don’t think I will be getting rid of it. Kind of a nice surprise from a game I was gifted (and it was not originally on my wish list).
That said, we at Purple Phoenix Games (with the help of my wife Kristin) give this one a 7 / 12. Not the best game based on this IP but worth keeping for a quick filler.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/03/13/a-game-of-thrones-hand-of-the-king-review/
A Game of Thrones: Hand of the King (that’s a lot to say/type) is a dueling set collection card game. To setup, you create a grid of randomized character cards that all belong to one of the seven houses (save for Varys, who is our pawn in all this). Also reveal six of the 14 provided companion cards to be used for this game. Each player will control Varys on their turn, spreading influence and intrigue throughout the houses.
On your turn you will announce the house you would like to influence (Stark, Greyjoy, etc), and then move the Varys card in any of the four cardinal directions to a character belonging to your announced house. Any character cards you pass along the way bearing the same house will be collected along with the card on which you stopped. If you now have simple majority of characters in that house, you claim the corresponding house banner and place it in front of you to taunt your opponent. Should you influence the last character of said house you will be able to recruit and use one of the companion cards that are available from the beginning of the game. These cards are game-changers sometimes and provide very powerful abilities. Play continues in this fashion until Varys has no more legal moves. And that’s the game. Each player is trying to have simple majority ownership of the house banners at the end of the game.
Components. This is easy. There are square character cards featuring excellent artwork from The Mico (who always does an amazing job IMO), smaller companion cards, and the house banners. The cards are of good quality, and the banners are good too. I have no complaints about the components at all.
Now, I have only played this with my wife and she can be pretty ruthless when gaming. That’s pretty much expected for a game of this IP. That being said, this is an easy and light filler card game that is enjoyable, but not overly strategic. You really do not have to make many choices, as the placement of characters mostly determine how you are going to attack the grid. The companions, however, make this game much more interesting because they can be loose cannons and otherwise monkey wrenches in your opponent’s plans. Outside of being a simple annoyance, there isn’t a lot of player interaction unless you are specifically hate-drafting (which we typically do not do). After all, it’s not similar to its cousin big boy board game that destroys friendships over a 6 hour+ slog. This one is light and quick and a good filler for two. My wife may not love it, but I don’t think I will be getting rid of it. Kind of a nice surprise from a game I was gifted (and it was not originally on my wish list).
That said, we at Purple Phoenix Games (with the help of my wife Kristin) give this one a 7 / 12. Not the best game based on this IP but worth keeping for a quick filler.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/03/13/a-game-of-thrones-hand-of-the-king-review/
Hazel (1853 KP) rated This Secret We're Keeping in Books
Dec 7, 2018
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.
A pupil and a teacher. Is it ever right to break the rules?</i> This is the dilemma which debut author Rebecca Done basis her novel on. <i>This Secret We’re Keeping</i> is set seventeen years after a maths teacher began an inappropriate relationship with a schoolgirl; but did he really deserve what happened to him, after all he loved her and she loved him?
Jess has never got over her love for the teacher she ran away with when she was fifteen. Although she has got her life together: living in Norfolk, freelance catering business, a rich boyfriend; she cannot help but think back to way Mr. Landley, Matthew, made her feel. Suddenly, after a chance encounter, Matthew is back in her life with a new name, Will, and a girlfriend and daughter. Delighted to see each other again, it is not long before they fall back into their illicit affair, however the potential consequences are almost as bad as the previous time.
<i>This Secret We’re Keeping</i> causes the reader to question strong personal beliefs, primarily whether a teacher-student relationship is as wrong as it sounds. If certain events in this novel were to be made public through the media, the majority would instantly hate Matthew, deem him a paedophile, and be satisfied with his punishment. However on reading the situation from his point of view, initial opinions begin to crumble. It appears he genuinely loved Jess, and she him; there were no abusive occurrences, and it was Jess that instigated the relationship in the first place. Did Matthew truly deserve to go to prison for something that would have been legal in a year’s time?
Matthew/Will’s narrative helps to show that it is virtually impossible to pinpoint a single moment that changes a life forever. At which point did he know that he had stepped over the line from right to wrong? In hindsight it is fairly obvious, but at the time the warning signs are not so clear.
Due to the challenging of preset judgments, <i>This Secret We’re Keeping</i> can often be difficult to read. Whilst on the one hand logic will be screaming, “This is wrong!” Done plays with her readers’ sentimentalities to consider the other side of the argument. As the novel progresses it becomes easier to fall in line with Jess and Matthew/Will’s viewpoints, however a brief interaction towards the end forces readers to temporarily reconsider their forgone conclusion. After all, how much can a first person narrative really be trusted?
Having read the blurb I admit I was a bit wary about reading this book. For one, it falls under the genre of Chick Lit, which I am not all that fond of, but secondly the book’s theme appeared rather controversial. On the whole, <i>This Secret We’re Keeping</i> was much better than I was anticipating, however I began to lose interest towards the end as nothing much had changed throughout the present day chapters, and it was already obvious how the past narrative would pan out. The ending is also frustratingly ambiguous, as we never find out whether either of the key characters gets a “happy ever after.”
If you are someone who enjoys Chick Lit, do not let the themes of the book put you off. <i>This Secret We’re Keeping</i> is essentially a romance story, one that is written remarkably well for a first time author. Rebecca Done will be a name to look out for in the world of contemporary literature.
A pupil and a teacher. Is it ever right to break the rules?</i> This is the dilemma which debut author Rebecca Done basis her novel on. <i>This Secret We’re Keeping</i> is set seventeen years after a maths teacher began an inappropriate relationship with a schoolgirl; but did he really deserve what happened to him, after all he loved her and she loved him?
Jess has never got over her love for the teacher she ran away with when she was fifteen. Although she has got her life together: living in Norfolk, freelance catering business, a rich boyfriend; she cannot help but think back to way Mr. Landley, Matthew, made her feel. Suddenly, after a chance encounter, Matthew is back in her life with a new name, Will, and a girlfriend and daughter. Delighted to see each other again, it is not long before they fall back into their illicit affair, however the potential consequences are almost as bad as the previous time.
<i>This Secret We’re Keeping</i> causes the reader to question strong personal beliefs, primarily whether a teacher-student relationship is as wrong as it sounds. If certain events in this novel were to be made public through the media, the majority would instantly hate Matthew, deem him a paedophile, and be satisfied with his punishment. However on reading the situation from his point of view, initial opinions begin to crumble. It appears he genuinely loved Jess, and she him; there were no abusive occurrences, and it was Jess that instigated the relationship in the first place. Did Matthew truly deserve to go to prison for something that would have been legal in a year’s time?
Matthew/Will’s narrative helps to show that it is virtually impossible to pinpoint a single moment that changes a life forever. At which point did he know that he had stepped over the line from right to wrong? In hindsight it is fairly obvious, but at the time the warning signs are not so clear.
Due to the challenging of preset judgments, <i>This Secret We’re Keeping</i> can often be difficult to read. Whilst on the one hand logic will be screaming, “This is wrong!” Done plays with her readers’ sentimentalities to consider the other side of the argument. As the novel progresses it becomes easier to fall in line with Jess and Matthew/Will’s viewpoints, however a brief interaction towards the end forces readers to temporarily reconsider their forgone conclusion. After all, how much can a first person narrative really be trusted?
Having read the blurb I admit I was a bit wary about reading this book. For one, it falls under the genre of Chick Lit, which I am not all that fond of, but secondly the book’s theme appeared rather controversial. On the whole, <i>This Secret We’re Keeping</i> was much better than I was anticipating, however I began to lose interest towards the end as nothing much had changed throughout the present day chapters, and it was already obvious how the past narrative would pan out. The ending is also frustratingly ambiguous, as we never find out whether either of the key characters gets a “happy ever after.”
If you are someone who enjoys Chick Lit, do not let the themes of the book put you off. <i>This Secret We’re Keeping</i> is essentially a romance story, one that is written remarkably well for a first time author. Rebecca Done will be a name to look out for in the world of contemporary literature.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Ali (2001) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: Ali starts on the brink of Cassius Clay (Smith) first title match in 1964, a match he wins to become heavyweight champion of the world, with his place on top of the world ready, Cassius joins forces with Malcolm X (Peebles) becoming a Muslim in the process, changing his name to Muhammad Ali.
With the Vietnam war drafting men from America, Muhammad is drafted, but he refuses to go and fight which leads him to be stripped of the title and banned from fighting in certain states, Ali uses his to create one of the biggest fights in history, The Rumble in the Jungle.
Thoughts on Ali
Characters – Muhammad Ali is one if not the most famous boxers in the world, in the history of the sport, he help shape the sport to be what we know now, with his charisma and loud behaviour against his opponents, we follow just ten years of his life, from his first title win, through his religious change, the battle against the government about fighting in the Vietnam war, to being part of one of the biggest fights in boxing history. When we focus on the rest of the real-life people we get to see the loyal people in his life, reporter Howard Cosell that seemed to have a wonderful relationship which included banter between the two and the promoters that make the fight possible.
Performances – Will Smith in the role of Ali is brilliant, this is easily his best performance of his career showing the world that he can have his wise cracking side mixed with the serious side. We have an unrecognizable Jon Voight who is shows us all that how easily he can morph into any role. The rest of the supporting cast are good without being fantastic or taking away anything from Smith in the leading role.
Story – The story here takes us into Muhammed Ali’s life for ten years, we get to see from the night he first won the title till the famous Rumble in the Jungle match. We do see the obstacles he must overcome to remain the man he was which in itself is an incredible story during late 60s America. My issues with the story come from not seeing everything that Ali went through in this career, mostly the rise to the top, which could have been an even more interesting story. for the story to only cover 10- years is interesting because we could have seen so much more of the legal battle against the government, the religious battles he faced because of his stance on war and action with the women. The truth is, Ali lived an amazing life and there are so many story we could learn about him from his career any film just can’t cover them all.
Biopic/Sports – Ten years of one of the great boxers in the history of the sport, one of the men that changed the sport almost doesn’t give it enough justice. The sports side of the film comes from the boxing scenes which are incredibly real through the film we do get a couple and they do go on a long time.
Settings – The film here takes us to the important locations in Ali’s life, the ring of course is the most important one while we get scenes away from the ring to as we look at his church and his personal life.
Scene of the Movie – Rumble in the Jungle.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – I would have like to see more of his life and career
Final Thoughts – This is one of those biopics which is great to watch and has wonderful scenes, only for it to be missing that big it factor about it. The fights do feel real which is key and the performances are flawless, we could only have learnt more.
Overall: Biopic to enjoy.
https://moviesreview101.com/2019/05/01/abc-film-challenge-biopic-a-ali-2001/
With the Vietnam war drafting men from America, Muhammad is drafted, but he refuses to go and fight which leads him to be stripped of the title and banned from fighting in certain states, Ali uses his to create one of the biggest fights in history, The Rumble in the Jungle.
Thoughts on Ali
Characters – Muhammad Ali is one if not the most famous boxers in the world, in the history of the sport, he help shape the sport to be what we know now, with his charisma and loud behaviour against his opponents, we follow just ten years of his life, from his first title win, through his religious change, the battle against the government about fighting in the Vietnam war, to being part of one of the biggest fights in boxing history. When we focus on the rest of the real-life people we get to see the loyal people in his life, reporter Howard Cosell that seemed to have a wonderful relationship which included banter between the two and the promoters that make the fight possible.
Performances – Will Smith in the role of Ali is brilliant, this is easily his best performance of his career showing the world that he can have his wise cracking side mixed with the serious side. We have an unrecognizable Jon Voight who is shows us all that how easily he can morph into any role. The rest of the supporting cast are good without being fantastic or taking away anything from Smith in the leading role.
Story – The story here takes us into Muhammed Ali’s life for ten years, we get to see from the night he first won the title till the famous Rumble in the Jungle match. We do see the obstacles he must overcome to remain the man he was which in itself is an incredible story during late 60s America. My issues with the story come from not seeing everything that Ali went through in this career, mostly the rise to the top, which could have been an even more interesting story. for the story to only cover 10- years is interesting because we could have seen so much more of the legal battle against the government, the religious battles he faced because of his stance on war and action with the women. The truth is, Ali lived an amazing life and there are so many story we could learn about him from his career any film just can’t cover them all.
Biopic/Sports – Ten years of one of the great boxers in the history of the sport, one of the men that changed the sport almost doesn’t give it enough justice. The sports side of the film comes from the boxing scenes which are incredibly real through the film we do get a couple and they do go on a long time.
Settings – The film here takes us to the important locations in Ali’s life, the ring of course is the most important one while we get scenes away from the ring to as we look at his church and his personal life.
Scene of the Movie – Rumble in the Jungle.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – I would have like to see more of his life and career
Final Thoughts – This is one of those biopics which is great to watch and has wonderful scenes, only for it to be missing that big it factor about it. The fights do feel real which is key and the performances are flawless, we could only have learnt more.
Overall: Biopic to enjoy.
https://moviesreview101.com/2019/05/01/abc-film-challenge-biopic-a-ali-2001/
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Mario Party in Video Games
Nov 5, 2019
Ready To Party
Mario Party- you got to love it but at the same time you got to hate it. Cough - Chance Time. Anways Mario Party is a game that if you havent played yet, than i highly reccordmend it. Its fun, entertaining, fustrating, you will get a blister from rotating your plam from those rotating minigames and also chance time.
Lets talk more about it...
Mario Party is a party video game with six playable characters: Mario, Luigi, Princess Peach, Yoshi, Wario, or Donkey Kong. In the game's storyline, Mario and his friends argue about which of them is the Super Star. To settle their dispute, they set out for adventure to determine which of them is best.
Upon starting a board, players each hit a dice block to determine turn order, with the highest number going first on each turn and the lowest number going last.
Blue spaces give three coins to any player who lands on them, and red spaces take away three coins (both increased to six coins during the last five turns). Bowser also has his own spaces on the board map which hinder the players' progress.
Each player's goal is to collect the most stars. Purchasing stars requires coins, which can be earned through mini-games that are played once at the end of each turn. Each mini-game is chosen randomly. Mario Party features more than 50 mini-games, divided into several categories:
1. 4-player mini-game: each player competes against one another
2. 1 vs. 3 mini-game: a team of three players competes against a lone competitor.
3. 2 vs. 2 mini-game: competing teams of two against two.
4. 1-player mini-game: a lone player works toward a goal to win the mini-game.
Several characters appear throughout each board map, and each character can have an effect on players who reach them. Stars can be purchased from Toad for 20 coins. Boo can steal coins or a star from another player on behalf of anyone who requests it; stealing coins is free, but stealing a star costs 50 coins. Koopa Troopa appears at the starting point on board maps and will give 10 coins to each player who passes him. Bowser tries to foil the efforts of any player who passes him by taking coins.
Three bonus stars are awarded at the end of each board map: two are given to the player(s) who collected the most coins in mini-games and throughout the board map game, and the third is given to the player(s) who landed on the most "?" spaces.
In Mario Party, certain minigames required players to rotate the Nintendo 64 controller's analog stick as fast as they can. Some players reportedly got blisters, friction burns and lacerations from rotating the analog stick using the palms of their hands instead of using their thumb.
complaints were received by New York's attorney general's office and Nintendo of America eventually agreed to a settlement, which included providing gloves for anyone who had hurt their hand(s) while playing the game and paying the state's $75,000 legal fees. At the time, providing gloves for the estimated 1.2 million users of the game who might have been affected could have cost Nintendo up to $80 million.
The analog stick rotation has been used sparingly since Mario Party 2. Despite Nintendo's current analog sticks being better suited to play these games than the hard plastic of the N64 controller, Mario Party has not been re-released for the Virtual Console. For the Wii Virtual Console, Nintendo skipped it and instead re-released Mario Party 2, which was later also made available for the Wii U Virtual Console.
Mario Party is a must play game, like i said before its fun, enteraining, fustrating and you can either play with your friends or your family.
Lets talk more about it...
Mario Party is a party video game with six playable characters: Mario, Luigi, Princess Peach, Yoshi, Wario, or Donkey Kong. In the game's storyline, Mario and his friends argue about which of them is the Super Star. To settle their dispute, they set out for adventure to determine which of them is best.
Upon starting a board, players each hit a dice block to determine turn order, with the highest number going first on each turn and the lowest number going last.
Blue spaces give three coins to any player who lands on them, and red spaces take away three coins (both increased to six coins during the last five turns). Bowser also has his own spaces on the board map which hinder the players' progress.
Each player's goal is to collect the most stars. Purchasing stars requires coins, which can be earned through mini-games that are played once at the end of each turn. Each mini-game is chosen randomly. Mario Party features more than 50 mini-games, divided into several categories:
1. 4-player mini-game: each player competes against one another
2. 1 vs. 3 mini-game: a team of three players competes against a lone competitor.
3. 2 vs. 2 mini-game: competing teams of two against two.
4. 1-player mini-game: a lone player works toward a goal to win the mini-game.
Several characters appear throughout each board map, and each character can have an effect on players who reach them. Stars can be purchased from Toad for 20 coins. Boo can steal coins or a star from another player on behalf of anyone who requests it; stealing coins is free, but stealing a star costs 50 coins. Koopa Troopa appears at the starting point on board maps and will give 10 coins to each player who passes him. Bowser tries to foil the efforts of any player who passes him by taking coins.
Three bonus stars are awarded at the end of each board map: two are given to the player(s) who collected the most coins in mini-games and throughout the board map game, and the third is given to the player(s) who landed on the most "?" spaces.
In Mario Party, certain minigames required players to rotate the Nintendo 64 controller's analog stick as fast as they can. Some players reportedly got blisters, friction burns and lacerations from rotating the analog stick using the palms of their hands instead of using their thumb.
complaints were received by New York's attorney general's office and Nintendo of America eventually agreed to a settlement, which included providing gloves for anyone who had hurt their hand(s) while playing the game and paying the state's $75,000 legal fees. At the time, providing gloves for the estimated 1.2 million users of the game who might have been affected could have cost Nintendo up to $80 million.
The analog stick rotation has been used sparingly since Mario Party 2. Despite Nintendo's current analog sticks being better suited to play these games than the hard plastic of the N64 controller, Mario Party has not been re-released for the Virtual Console. For the Wii Virtual Console, Nintendo skipped it and instead re-released Mario Party 2, which was later also made available for the Wii U Virtual Console.
Mario Party is a must play game, like i said before its fun, enteraining, fustrating and you can either play with your friends or your family.
Night Reader Reviews (683 KP) rated Final Notice: A Political Thriller in Books
Jan 9, 2020
Honest Review for Free Copy of Book
Final Notice by Van Flesher was a very conflicting book for me. I was excited to read this book after I read over the description but found myself to be extremely disappointed. The concept was good but the way the book was written completely lost my interest. I debated a few different times about putting the book down but felt that I owed it to the author to give the book a chance. That being said, just because I did not like it does not mean that other readers would not find it enjoyable.
A company creates a watch called the VT2 and it can monitor a person's health with surprising accuracy. It also has the capability of giving a person a Final Notice when it detect a change that will ultimately lead to death. At the same time the NRA started offering a discount to senior citizens to buy guns in order to defend themselves in their families. On top of these two events, many states are being pushed to have loser laws that will make it easier for people to get guns. These three factors together line up to create a series of horrible events.
The Final Notice feature was intended to give people a chance to get their affairs in order. However, for some once they get their notice they realize with having nothing to lose they can get revenge on people who have wronged them in the past. Some seniors lash out at others, specifically younger people who insulted them in some way. Other people go after political figures that they do not agree with. People who work for the company that created VT2 even joke about how if they knew they were going to die they had a list of people that they would try to take with them. The company ends up working with the FBI and a journalist to offset the negative impact of the VT2 and market it to the public in a positive light.
Many books did not include specifics about religion but that's one does. I found that to be a nice change as it made some of the characters feel more authentic. It also tackled some hard issues, not just the gun laws but also refugees and immigration focusing on those from Syria. With how anti-gun and anti-NRA this book is I was surprised at how casually other issues are mentioned. I would think topic such as underage drinking, fake IDs, and teen pregnancy would also be shown in a more negative light and not just as a passing memory. There were also a few attempt at humor towards the end of the book that just felt weird, in fact I am not even completely sure if it was supposed to be humor. The author says " the author feel sorry..." and " the author was tempted..." and as these are the only time this writing style is used it feels out of place. Morals are also called into question a three different times over the course of this book. It makes the reader question just because you can make money off of something and it is legal does that automatically make it alright?
The target readers for this book would be adult to our supporters of gun control. High school teachers might find this book interesting to teach with topics for group discussion by the students. Also people who are against the NRA in general would probably find this books topics to be enjoyable. After much the bay I have decided to give this book a 2 out of 4. Originally, I was only going to give the book a 1 but the concept of the watch is too interesting. Many chapters or paragraph felt repetitive of previous statements and I think that was largely what turned me away from this book.
A company creates a watch called the VT2 and it can monitor a person's health with surprising accuracy. It also has the capability of giving a person a Final Notice when it detect a change that will ultimately lead to death. At the same time the NRA started offering a discount to senior citizens to buy guns in order to defend themselves in their families. On top of these two events, many states are being pushed to have loser laws that will make it easier for people to get guns. These three factors together line up to create a series of horrible events.
The Final Notice feature was intended to give people a chance to get their affairs in order. However, for some once they get their notice they realize with having nothing to lose they can get revenge on people who have wronged them in the past. Some seniors lash out at others, specifically younger people who insulted them in some way. Other people go after political figures that they do not agree with. People who work for the company that created VT2 even joke about how if they knew they were going to die they had a list of people that they would try to take with them. The company ends up working with the FBI and a journalist to offset the negative impact of the VT2 and market it to the public in a positive light.
Many books did not include specifics about religion but that's one does. I found that to be a nice change as it made some of the characters feel more authentic. It also tackled some hard issues, not just the gun laws but also refugees and immigration focusing on those from Syria. With how anti-gun and anti-NRA this book is I was surprised at how casually other issues are mentioned. I would think topic such as underage drinking, fake IDs, and teen pregnancy would also be shown in a more negative light and not just as a passing memory. There were also a few attempt at humor towards the end of the book that just felt weird, in fact I am not even completely sure if it was supposed to be humor. The author says " the author feel sorry..." and " the author was tempted..." and as these are the only time this writing style is used it feels out of place. Morals are also called into question a three different times over the course of this book. It makes the reader question just because you can make money off of something and it is legal does that automatically make it alright?
The target readers for this book would be adult to our supporters of gun control. High school teachers might find this book interesting to teach with topics for group discussion by the students. Also people who are against the NRA in general would probably find this books topics to be enjoyable. After much the bay I have decided to give this book a 2 out of 4. Originally, I was only going to give the book a 1 but the concept of the watch is too interesting. Many chapters or paragraph felt repetitive of previous statements and I think that was largely what turned me away from this book.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Downsizing (2017) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020
Sweeping up a few older films that I wanted to see but missed at the cinema in the last few years. My current IMDb watch list sits at 488, and, unlike this movie, never seems to shrink! There is a lot to keep up with. Bad reviews have kept me away from Alexander Payne’s Downsizing until now. I have to say, without the burden of expectation, it is a lot better than I thought it would be.
In particular, Sideways and The Descendents from the same Director are two of my absolute favourite light comedy satires of the last 20 years, so I am always interested to see what he is up to. He often has an eye for subtlety and relationships that can break the heart with truth. There is some of that on display here too, it has to be said, however, you do wonder if the sci-fi / CGI element of Downsizing got a little bit in the way?
It isn’t quite the film it could have been, and at times does feel messy and rushed. It also doesn’t follow through entirely with its premise, and perhaps that is what disappointed a lot of the audience. The idea of the small leaving the world of the large behind in search of an environmental solution to the world’s problems is compelling as a joke and allegorical devise… But it just isn’t explored to its full potential, and the visual effects that allow us to see this are years behind what they should have been.
Saying that, the personal journey’s of the main characters are relevent, funny, relatable and often unexpected. Matt Damon is totally fine and well cast; Christoph Waltz adds a counter-point humour and point of view that balances the political ethics of the subject very well; and both Kristen Wiig and Udi Keir offer support of deft pathos in minor roles.
The film truly belongs to Hong Chau, however. Without her multi-layered and show-stealing turn as a Vietnamese refugee, who “downsized” to escape tyranny, losing a limb in the process, the film would be much less than it ends up being. For its many faults, her performance lifts it to something worth watching, as long as you can forgive the argument that her character is a too broadly drawn race stereo-type. Honestly, I can’t see the problem, because I think what she does with it makes the movie – but I am aware of the problems with it…
As a political message and environmental allegory, the film as a whole raises some interesting debate, sometimes because of its (ahem) shortcomings. It is neither intelligent enough, nor funny enough to be a “good” film. But it is an entertaining film. If only to see the sequence of legal and medical procedure that leads to the new world of being small!
What would we be prepared to do to find an answer to a dying world, economic failure and personal unhappiness? Would we risk everything to find ourselves and a solution? Or would we carry on regardless? Feeling lost in a world of fear and looming disaster is a subject worth exploring, and I feel Downsizing asks enough questions well enough to be at least seen and argued with. If that is the only purpose it serves then… OK by me.
The bottom line is, I didn’t hate it. To see it at a rating of 5.7 on IMDb is strange and actually very interesting. It is not a bad film. It just doesn’t completely succeed. I think that score says much more about how vitriolic and opinionated people are becoming about environmental issues. Which is good. A missed opportunity perhaps, and therefore it earns a place in the bin marked “admirable failures”. See it for yourself if you haven’t – it has cult status written all over it, in very small writing.
In particular, Sideways and The Descendents from the same Director are two of my absolute favourite light comedy satires of the last 20 years, so I am always interested to see what he is up to. He often has an eye for subtlety and relationships that can break the heart with truth. There is some of that on display here too, it has to be said, however, you do wonder if the sci-fi / CGI element of Downsizing got a little bit in the way?
It isn’t quite the film it could have been, and at times does feel messy and rushed. It also doesn’t follow through entirely with its premise, and perhaps that is what disappointed a lot of the audience. The idea of the small leaving the world of the large behind in search of an environmental solution to the world’s problems is compelling as a joke and allegorical devise… But it just isn’t explored to its full potential, and the visual effects that allow us to see this are years behind what they should have been.
Saying that, the personal journey’s of the main characters are relevent, funny, relatable and often unexpected. Matt Damon is totally fine and well cast; Christoph Waltz adds a counter-point humour and point of view that balances the political ethics of the subject very well; and both Kristen Wiig and Udi Keir offer support of deft pathos in minor roles.
The film truly belongs to Hong Chau, however. Without her multi-layered and show-stealing turn as a Vietnamese refugee, who “downsized” to escape tyranny, losing a limb in the process, the film would be much less than it ends up being. For its many faults, her performance lifts it to something worth watching, as long as you can forgive the argument that her character is a too broadly drawn race stereo-type. Honestly, I can’t see the problem, because I think what she does with it makes the movie – but I am aware of the problems with it…
As a political message and environmental allegory, the film as a whole raises some interesting debate, sometimes because of its (ahem) shortcomings. It is neither intelligent enough, nor funny enough to be a “good” film. But it is an entertaining film. If only to see the sequence of legal and medical procedure that leads to the new world of being small!
What would we be prepared to do to find an answer to a dying world, economic failure and personal unhappiness? Would we risk everything to find ourselves and a solution? Or would we carry on regardless? Feeling lost in a world of fear and looming disaster is a subject worth exploring, and I feel Downsizing asks enough questions well enough to be at least seen and argued with. If that is the only purpose it serves then… OK by me.
The bottom line is, I didn’t hate it. To see it at a rating of 5.7 on IMDb is strange and actually very interesting. It is not a bad film. It just doesn’t completely succeed. I think that score says much more about how vitriolic and opinionated people are becoming about environmental issues. Which is good. A missed opportunity perhaps, and therefore it earns a place in the bin marked “admirable failures”. See it for yourself if you haven’t – it has cult status written all over it, in very small writing.
156Reviews (7 KP) rated Dark Waters (2019) in Movies
May 1, 2020
Films are important.
Films are important to us all for many different reasons, they show what we are, what we can be, what we aspire to be, of who we are. Sometimes that comes in the form of escapism, of dreaming that we can be better, Mark Ruffalo is no stranger to the genre I'm referring to, sometimes shows us our darkest fears and that we can overcome them, and sometimes, it shows us just how low, we as people can get, and never offer any kind of redemption. Dark Waters manages to be all of these things. A small intro before the film began had me franticly signing up to numerous petitions the second the film ended, joining a cause I didn't even know existed before I sat down to watch. This is why film is important, and why you should watch Dark Waters as soon as you can. So why the 3 out of 5 rating? Surely a film that EVERYONE should watch should get top marks, right? Unfortunately not.
The film begins with Rob Bilott (Mark Ruffalo), a corporate defence attorney, whose office is visited by a farmer from his home town, trying to raise a legal case against DuPont, a multi-billion dollar business, the towns biggest employer, and a chemical company at the heart of potentially poisoning the towns water supply. As Billot investigates the scale of the issue, and its inevitable cover up, it all becomes alarmingly clear. Thousands of people are being poisoned, they're health will likely deteriorate and life threatening illnesses are now a high probability. To take a line from the recent movie Bombshell “somebody has to stand up, somebody has to get mad.”
That anger that should be felt, but for all the terrifying facts about the poisoning these people received on a daily basis, it never comes, the rage should be palpable. Instead it opts for giving us all the information, teaching about regulation and government intervention, or lack thereof, and the only temper in the film shows comes as a heated exchange in a board room that blows over as soon as it comes, and protesters outside courtrooms for fleeting moments throughout the movie. It should be seething instead of showing, giving us the knowledge we need through gritted teeth, not clinical, scientific and impersonal.
Dark Waters is off the mark with its tone, Mark Ruffalo's high-priced lawyer is too uncertain, a little too every-man, never really portrayed a hot-shot or an underdog, and the supporting cast fall into “Good Guy” or “Bad Guy” far too easily with no exploration into any depth of character. One scene has a DuPont representative, shown in great detail, every undisputable, despicable thing that his company has done to these people, and listens attentively, never upset or defiant but instead seeming slightly bored, before getting up and leaving. Every scene feels like it should be emotionally hard-hitting but never raises above a tap on the shoulder.
As the lesson goes on, the complete lack of morals DuPont has, becomes shockingly clear as they drag the case on for as long as they can, making sure Billot's firm spend more money and time than they are willing to pay. Bilot's home life becomes strained, which distracts from the main thread more than adds to it plot, he becomes distant from his wife, a woefully underused Anne Hathaway, and his health deteriorates under the weight of fighting, and in the end, the conclusion is murkier than the water supply. But he still fights, and in real life, Rob Billot is still fighting to this day to help the West Virginia community, and to change the way the corporations are regulated worldwide.
This film is important, and everyone should see it because it's message, just don't see it for its entertainment value, because that's few and far between.
Films are important to us all for many different reasons, they show what we are, what we can be, what we aspire to be, of who we are. Sometimes that comes in the form of escapism, of dreaming that we can be better, Mark Ruffalo is no stranger to the genre I'm referring to, sometimes shows us our darkest fears and that we can overcome them, and sometimes, it shows us just how low, we as people can get, and never offer any kind of redemption. Dark Waters manages to be all of these things. A small intro before the film began had me franticly signing up to numerous petitions the second the film ended, joining a cause I didn't even know existed before I sat down to watch. This is why film is important, and why you should watch Dark Waters as soon as you can. So why the 3 out of 5 rating? Surely a film that EVERYONE should watch should get top marks, right? Unfortunately not.
The film begins with Rob Bilott (Mark Ruffalo), a corporate defence attorney, whose office is visited by a farmer from his home town, trying to raise a legal case against DuPont, a multi-billion dollar business, the towns biggest employer, and a chemical company at the heart of potentially poisoning the towns water supply. As Billot investigates the scale of the issue, and its inevitable cover up, it all becomes alarmingly clear. Thousands of people are being poisoned, they're health will likely deteriorate and life threatening illnesses are now a high probability. To take a line from the recent movie Bombshell “somebody has to stand up, somebody has to get mad.”
That anger that should be felt, but for all the terrifying facts about the poisoning these people received on a daily basis, it never comes, the rage should be palpable. Instead it opts for giving us all the information, teaching about regulation and government intervention, or lack thereof, and the only temper in the film shows comes as a heated exchange in a board room that blows over as soon as it comes, and protesters outside courtrooms for fleeting moments throughout the movie. It should be seething instead of showing, giving us the knowledge we need through gritted teeth, not clinical, scientific and impersonal.
Dark Waters is off the mark with its tone, Mark Ruffalo's high-priced lawyer is too uncertain, a little too every-man, never really portrayed a hot-shot or an underdog, and the supporting cast fall into “Good Guy” or “Bad Guy” far too easily with no exploration into any depth of character. One scene has a DuPont representative, shown in great detail, every undisputable, despicable thing that his company has done to these people, and listens attentively, never upset or defiant but instead seeming slightly bored, before getting up and leaving. Every scene feels like it should be emotionally hard-hitting but never raises above a tap on the shoulder.
As the lesson goes on, the complete lack of morals DuPont has, becomes shockingly clear as they drag the case on for as long as they can, making sure Billot's firm spend more money and time than they are willing to pay. Bilot's home life becomes strained, which distracts from the main thread more than adds to it plot, he becomes distant from his wife, a woefully underused Anne Hathaway, and his health deteriorates under the weight of fighting, and in the end, the conclusion is murkier than the water supply. But he still fights, and in real life, Rob Billot is still fighting to this day to help the West Virginia community, and to change the way the corporations are regulated worldwide.
This film is important, and everyone should see it because it's message, just don't see it for its entertainment value, because that's few and far between.