Search
Search results
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.
DMV Hub - Permit Practice Test 2017 (DMV Approved)
Education and Reference
App
• Free App with DMV Approved Online Drivers Ed Course (License E4268) • Latest 2017 Questions...
Top City Card - Guide
Shopping and Travel
App
TOP CITY CARD Care este ideea cardului? BCR City Card si Top City Card sunt carduri de reduceri si...
EMT Academy Exam Prep
Medical and Education
App
EMT Academy is a thorough training guide and practice exam for EMT-Basic level EMS personnel. Pass...
Alezaa - Kho sách và tạp chí hơn 10000 tựa
Book and Magazines & Newspapers
App
ALEZAA 2.0 Đọc không giới hạn những tựa sách và tạp chí bạn yêu thích theo...
Fuel Hedging and Risk Management: Strategies for Airlines, Shippers and Other Consumers
S. Mohamed Dafir and Vishnu Nandan Gajjala
Book
A hands-on guide to navigating the new fuel markets Fuel Hedging and Risk Management: Strategies for...
Insight Notes - notes for health professionals
Business and Productivity
App
**As featured in the American Psychological Association’s Monitor on Psychology** Insight Notes...