Search
BookInspector (124 KP) rated All This Has Nothing to Do with Me in Books
Sep 24, 2020
Well this one was weird… This book has a stunning cover, it is a tiny book, and I knew that this is going to be a quick read, and I bought it for only 10p when a couple of my nearby Poundlands were closing down. I thought it has a fun chick lit story for me, but I was very wrong… I kept reading it because I don’t like to DNF books, but till the last page, I have no idea what was it about.
The main character in this book is MS, and sometimes referred to as Monica, so it gives me a very strong feeling that this is some sort of memoir maybe? The one thing I could grasp was that MS is kind of psychologically unstable, she writes letters to the dead author, her relationship with XX is an absolute mess, but she kind of tries to explain her behaviour, by going back to the past and talking about her mother and stepdad. Yes, she had a difficult childhood, and if the story and format (it is a mash of letters, SMS, pictures, normal text etc.) would’ve been differently presented, it could’ve been an awesome memoir.
The writing style of this book was very unique and original, and it should’ve been really hard to write this book because it is filled with a huge amount of pictures. No, not some nice pictures, but pictures of random things e.g. a lighter taken from XX; sweaters worn on dates; 4pages of scooter pictures which might belong to XX, and many more. I think it took years to collect this amount of pictures, so props to the author for the patience and detail.
So, let me just jump to the conclusions here. This book won France’s Prix de Flore 2013 award, so it has to have something that I am not seeing, right? One thing I know, it wasn’t for me, but if you like award-winning books, which are different and really original, give this book a go, and you might enjoy it.
The main character in this book is MS, and sometimes referred to as Monica, so it gives me a very strong feeling that this is some sort of memoir maybe? The one thing I could grasp was that MS is kind of psychologically unstable, she writes letters to the dead author, her relationship with XX is an absolute mess, but she kind of tries to explain her behaviour, by going back to the past and talking about her mother and stepdad. Yes, she had a difficult childhood, and if the story and format (it is a mash of letters, SMS, pictures, normal text etc.) would’ve been differently presented, it could’ve been an awesome memoir.
The writing style of this book was very unique and original, and it should’ve been really hard to write this book because it is filled with a huge amount of pictures. No, not some nice pictures, but pictures of random things e.g. a lighter taken from XX; sweaters worn on dates; 4pages of scooter pictures which might belong to XX, and many more. I think it took years to collect this amount of pictures, so props to the author for the patience and detail.
So, let me just jump to the conclusions here. This book won France’s Prix de Flore 2013 award, so it has to have something that I am not seeing, right? One thing I know, it wasn’t for me, but if you like award-winning books, which are different and really original, give this book a go, and you might enjoy it.
Magic Eraser - Remove Photo Background & Create Transparent PNG
Business and Utilities
App
It has never been easier to create transparent background images! Featuring automated background...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Gemini Man (2019) in Movies
Dec 8, 2019
I saw the trailers for this and thought it looked pretty good, the story sounded interesting and even though the effects in the clips looked a little dubious I was excited for one reason... Jerry Bruckheimer was involved, and I've never seen anything he's done that I didn't enjoy.
Henry Brogan is a master assassin, his whole life has been dedicated to perfecting his craft, but when he discovers he's been misled about a recent kill he decides it's time to hang up his gun. Such a high profile asset can't just retire from his life though and he soon finds himself being pursued. His would-be killer is agile and surprisingly capable, Henry is impressed by the improvising skills, and so he should be... they're his.
I've only just learnt that this film has been on the cards for 20 odd years. When it was first discussed technology wasn't up for the task the idea was pitching. Knowing that fact makes me wonder if they kept a 90's/00's script because the action does have that nostalgic quality. There have been lots of directors and actors attached to it and there's a fun thought experiment to have by exploring the possible outcomes it could have had.
Before I talk about my thoughts on the film I want to touch on the experience I had. Being out of town for the release meant that I was able to go to a cinema showing it in HFR 3D. This is the way it was filmed and intended to be seen but hardly any cinemas (in the world it seems) are able to show it that way. Cineworld Crawley were one of the cinemas that could, initially I wasn't bothered about seeing it in this format, but to be so close and have it snatched away was a real trauma.
I saw roughly the first 3 minutes of the film in HFR 3D and it seems this was the same fate of the screening before too. What I saw of it was mind-blowing, Will Smith was so crystal clear that he probably wouldn't have even looked that good if he was performing it in the room with me. But as I say, (several) 3-minute viewings were all we got before they had to give up and show us the 2D version. I'd be interested to know if anyone has a successful HFR screening. I would like to have seen it all the way through to see how it changed the visuals, sadly that's unlikely to happen now.
Let me put this out there straight away... this film is not good, and yet somehow good.
Gemini Man is a conventional idea with a twist and has an average script, but there's something engaging about the action. Oh, and while the script wasn't great it's entirely accurate when it states "Everyone hates cilantro." Yes, quite right.
De-aging technology has come a long way recently, but it has ups and downs depending on budget. In this respect Gemini Man had me stumped. The CGI in the trailer didn't look great and I assumed that was maybe early footage to get it out in front of audiences, but the film genuinely wasn't much better. There are moments where you don't notice it, you could almost pass Little Will off as the original, but the main problem is he's too familiar. On a lesser-known actor this might have played off better in more scenes. There are several moments where Little Will is lit with a flashlight and those moments caused me the most problems because that lighting looked wrong, particularly on his neck, and any quality work that may have been there was lost with the one bad piece. Most other effects are pretty reasonable until we get to the parkour ninja assassin towards the end... that sequence appears to be CG and everything is too fast and very cartoony.
I don't feel much of a need to talk about acting, it's all... fine. Without an epic script there's not much to work with but everyone makes it work as it needs to. It's a little sad that with 20 years to play with this wasn't a masterpiece on all fronts, or at least the script.
Gemini Man may have had a lot of issues for me but in the moment it's good to watch... even with the cheesy ending and the point where I thought it was directed by John Woo. I won't feel the need to buy this when it comes out but I'll definitely watch it again while hoping to see the HFR version in full.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/11/gemini-man-movie-review.html
Henry Brogan is a master assassin, his whole life has been dedicated to perfecting his craft, but when he discovers he's been misled about a recent kill he decides it's time to hang up his gun. Such a high profile asset can't just retire from his life though and he soon finds himself being pursued. His would-be killer is agile and surprisingly capable, Henry is impressed by the improvising skills, and so he should be... they're his.
I've only just learnt that this film has been on the cards for 20 odd years. When it was first discussed technology wasn't up for the task the idea was pitching. Knowing that fact makes me wonder if they kept a 90's/00's script because the action does have that nostalgic quality. There have been lots of directors and actors attached to it and there's a fun thought experiment to have by exploring the possible outcomes it could have had.
Before I talk about my thoughts on the film I want to touch on the experience I had. Being out of town for the release meant that I was able to go to a cinema showing it in HFR 3D. This is the way it was filmed and intended to be seen but hardly any cinemas (in the world it seems) are able to show it that way. Cineworld Crawley were one of the cinemas that could, initially I wasn't bothered about seeing it in this format, but to be so close and have it snatched away was a real trauma.
I saw roughly the first 3 minutes of the film in HFR 3D and it seems this was the same fate of the screening before too. What I saw of it was mind-blowing, Will Smith was so crystal clear that he probably wouldn't have even looked that good if he was performing it in the room with me. But as I say, (several) 3-minute viewings were all we got before they had to give up and show us the 2D version. I'd be interested to know if anyone has a successful HFR screening. I would like to have seen it all the way through to see how it changed the visuals, sadly that's unlikely to happen now.
Let me put this out there straight away... this film is not good, and yet somehow good.
Gemini Man is a conventional idea with a twist and has an average script, but there's something engaging about the action. Oh, and while the script wasn't great it's entirely accurate when it states "Everyone hates cilantro." Yes, quite right.
De-aging technology has come a long way recently, but it has ups and downs depending on budget. In this respect Gemini Man had me stumped. The CGI in the trailer didn't look great and I assumed that was maybe early footage to get it out in front of audiences, but the film genuinely wasn't much better. There are moments where you don't notice it, you could almost pass Little Will off as the original, but the main problem is he's too familiar. On a lesser-known actor this might have played off better in more scenes. There are several moments where Little Will is lit with a flashlight and those moments caused me the most problems because that lighting looked wrong, particularly on his neck, and any quality work that may have been there was lost with the one bad piece. Most other effects are pretty reasonable until we get to the parkour ninja assassin towards the end... that sequence appears to be CG and everything is too fast and very cartoony.
I don't feel much of a need to talk about acting, it's all... fine. Without an epic script there's not much to work with but everyone makes it work as it needs to. It's a little sad that with 20 years to play with this wasn't a masterpiece on all fronts, or at least the script.
Gemini Man may have had a lot of issues for me but in the moment it's good to watch... even with the cheesy ending and the point where I thought it was directed by John Woo. I won't feel the need to buy this when it comes out but I'll definitely watch it again while hoping to see the HFR version in full.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/11/gemini-man-movie-review.html
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Finding Steve McQueen (2019) in Movies
Nov 9, 2020
This heist comedy (we'll come to that later) sounds pretty good from the synopsis, I can't really elaborate much on it like I normally would because, for once, it's spot on!
I had a big issue almost straight off the bat... "In 1972"... that's how the synopsis starts. I had reread it just before starting the film and as it begins it actually flashes up "1980", very quickly it's explained (and it makes sense) but I didn't enjoy starting the film with that confusion. Now, if I was seeing this in the cinema it wouldn't have been an issue because you don't tend to sit there in the trailers reading the synopsis before it starts, but with it hitting digital you will be instantly seeing it before you press play... I know it's a really minor thing to be bugged by... but it did bug me.
The reason for the jump in years is that we're seeing Harry Barber telling his girlfriend, Molly, the story of his past and the heist. Flashbacks are a time-honoured tradition in films, but they're difficult to get right. The story jumps several times, but there's very little differentiation between time unless the diner is involved on one side of the jump. At one point it jumps because he talks at the camera and we hop back to Molly talking, it stuck out... it either never happened again or it blended in so well that I didn't notice it. It wouldn't be the first film to add something random like that and abandon the style choice. Some else will have to let me know if it happened more than I think it did.
These two things, combined with some free moving camerawork (that you know I hate) meant that I found the beginning of Finding Steve McQueen, especially when the heist that is pushed in the marketing doesn't appear for quite a while.
IMDb lists crime thriller as a guide... thriller is definitely the wrong word. Heist comedy (as per the PR I saw) is definitely more accurate, though I didn't find it particularly funny. It did bring a mild laugh out of me, but not enough to stamp it with the comedy tag. Even "heist" feels like it doesn't fit well, it may be about one but what's presented is much heavier on other parts of the story. It's more like a biopic with romance than crime. In the end that's a little bit disappointing when you're looking forward to crime.
William Fichtner was an instant standout for me, I thought he handled the role of Enzo Rotella particularly well, and there was a great dynamic with Louis Lombardi as Pauly. Rachael Taylor as Molly Murphy was great too, when she wasn't freaking me out with how much she looked like Nicole Kidman. Somehow I've never noticed that before so I'll have to put it down to a cunning makeup artist.
From there though I was underwhelmed. I'm not familiar with Travis Fimmel, and sadly, from this performance I've not been convinced to check out anything in his back catalogue. Apart from two well-played emotional scenes I didn't enjoy the character of Harry Barber at all.
Had this been advertised as a biography instead of a crime/heist then I probably would have had a more favourable opinion, but we're presented with a slow and light film. I'm not expecting all crime films to be gritty and dark, but I do expect them to focus more on the actual crime and investigation. That's also where I found the flashback idea falling apart because we're shown things for context that Harry wouldn't have known and been able to tell Molly.
What I did love about this film was the setting and the look of everything. It had a wonderful freshness about it and that coupled with the costumes felt natural and like it captured the era perfectly.
I by no means hated this film, but I was extremely disappointed. The way the story was balanced means that the heist gets lost in everything else that's happening and although it's hailed as an amazing feat in American history it doesn't feel all that impressive in this portrayal. The only real criminal thing about this film was the underuse of Forest Whitaker.
As a biography I could have seen clear to give this a 3, maybe a 3.5, but as a crime I can't give it more than a 2. It feels entirely misrepresented, had it not been for the few excellent performances, and the hope of exciting crime drama, I think I would have turned it off.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/11/finding-steve-mcqueen-movie-review.html
I had a big issue almost straight off the bat... "In 1972"... that's how the synopsis starts. I had reread it just before starting the film and as it begins it actually flashes up "1980", very quickly it's explained (and it makes sense) but I didn't enjoy starting the film with that confusion. Now, if I was seeing this in the cinema it wouldn't have been an issue because you don't tend to sit there in the trailers reading the synopsis before it starts, but with it hitting digital you will be instantly seeing it before you press play... I know it's a really minor thing to be bugged by... but it did bug me.
The reason for the jump in years is that we're seeing Harry Barber telling his girlfriend, Molly, the story of his past and the heist. Flashbacks are a time-honoured tradition in films, but they're difficult to get right. The story jumps several times, but there's very little differentiation between time unless the diner is involved on one side of the jump. At one point it jumps because he talks at the camera and we hop back to Molly talking, it stuck out... it either never happened again or it blended in so well that I didn't notice it. It wouldn't be the first film to add something random like that and abandon the style choice. Some else will have to let me know if it happened more than I think it did.
These two things, combined with some free moving camerawork (that you know I hate) meant that I found the beginning of Finding Steve McQueen, especially when the heist that is pushed in the marketing doesn't appear for quite a while.
IMDb lists crime thriller as a guide... thriller is definitely the wrong word. Heist comedy (as per the PR I saw) is definitely more accurate, though I didn't find it particularly funny. It did bring a mild laugh out of me, but not enough to stamp it with the comedy tag. Even "heist" feels like it doesn't fit well, it may be about one but what's presented is much heavier on other parts of the story. It's more like a biopic with romance than crime. In the end that's a little bit disappointing when you're looking forward to crime.
William Fichtner was an instant standout for me, I thought he handled the role of Enzo Rotella particularly well, and there was a great dynamic with Louis Lombardi as Pauly. Rachael Taylor as Molly Murphy was great too, when she wasn't freaking me out with how much she looked like Nicole Kidman. Somehow I've never noticed that before so I'll have to put it down to a cunning makeup artist.
From there though I was underwhelmed. I'm not familiar with Travis Fimmel, and sadly, from this performance I've not been convinced to check out anything in his back catalogue. Apart from two well-played emotional scenes I didn't enjoy the character of Harry Barber at all.
Had this been advertised as a biography instead of a crime/heist then I probably would have had a more favourable opinion, but we're presented with a slow and light film. I'm not expecting all crime films to be gritty and dark, but I do expect them to focus more on the actual crime and investigation. That's also where I found the flashback idea falling apart because we're shown things for context that Harry wouldn't have known and been able to tell Molly.
What I did love about this film was the setting and the look of everything. It had a wonderful freshness about it and that coupled with the costumes felt natural and like it captured the era perfectly.
I by no means hated this film, but I was extremely disappointed. The way the story was balanced means that the heist gets lost in everything else that's happening and although it's hailed as an amazing feat in American history it doesn't feel all that impressive in this portrayal. The only real criminal thing about this film was the underuse of Forest Whitaker.
As a biography I could have seen clear to give this a 3, maybe a 3.5, but as a crime I can't give it more than a 2. It feels entirely misrepresented, had it not been for the few excellent performances, and the hope of exciting crime drama, I think I would have turned it off.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/11/finding-steve-mcqueen-movie-review.html
Secret Photo+Folder
Photo & Video and Productivity
App
▶ Ranked #1 App Store Rewind 2011 in Japan ▶ Ranked #3 App Store Rewind 2011 in Korea ▶ Ranked...
5 Minute Movie Guy (379 KP) rated Whiplash (2014) in Movies
Jul 1, 2019
Whiplash makes for a painfully tense and terrifying learning experience that is nothing short of cinematic brilliance. It'll have you on the edge of your seat, with your heart still pounding even after it's over.
I believe that there’s a desire in all of us to achieve greatness. A deep, internal yearning for importance, respect, and acceptance. We want to be remembered and we want to fulfill a sense of purpose in our lives. For Andrew Nieman (Miles Teller), the central character in the 2014 Best Picture nominated film Whiplash, that desire is to be one of the all-time great jazz drummers. Of course, he knows that accomplishing such a goal will require a firmly fixed focus, an uncompromising dedication, and endless hours of practice. What he surely wasn’t expecting was to run into a teacher like Terence Fletcher (J.K. Simmons), who will stop at nothing in order to push his students to strive to be their very best. Whiplash makes for a painfully tense and terrifying learning experience that is nothing short of cinematic brilliance.
Andrew is a first-year student at the prestigious Shaffer Conservatory of Music in New York where the presence of their great head music conductor, Terence Fletcher, looms over everyone. Fletcher is well-known, respected, and feared. More importantly, he is their ticket to success as musicians. Landing a spot in his band is a coveted high honor. Earning his respect is even greater. Though under Fletcher’s guidance, success doesn’t come easy. He rules over the school like a maniacal dictator and he demands absolute perfection from his students. After all, he has a highly revered reputation to preserve, and he’s not about to let anyone jeopardize it. Andrew finds himself lucky enough to be chosen to rehearse with Fletcher’s band, but he’s soon tested, humiliated, abused, and pushed to the limit by his short-tempered instructor.
Already something of a loner, Andrew delves even deeper within due to pressure from his teacher, turning his passion for music into an unhealthy obsession. He cuts off contact with others and devotes himself entirely to practicing. With fingers bloodied from extensive drumming, he simply bandages them up and keeps at it. Not only is his music playing taking control of his life, but it’s also clearly taking a toll on his mental health. Even more troubling for Andrew is that no matter how hard he tries, Fletcher is never satisfied, and he torments his students until they get things right, even if it means practicing all night. Resentment and tension rapidly rise for Andrew as he approaches his breaking point, resulting in the film’s unforgettably tense conclusion.
Whiplash is no walk in the park. It will have you sitting on the edge of your seat in suspense and terror, with your heart still pounding even after it’s over. It’s an emotional horror for young Andrew who is put through Hell by his mad musical conductor. I was legitimately in fear for his life and sanity. While the movie has given me a greater respect for musicians, and jazz bands in particular, it sure makes me feel glad that I was never in band!
Whiplash is remarkable in its design and execution. The film’s cinematography shows a wonderfully adept eye for camera angles, and gives this low-budget film a distinguished look. The director revels in the closeness of the scene, putting us right alongside Andrew as he comes face-to-face with the ever-menacing Fletcher. It’s unbelievably tense and uncomfortable to watch while he’s being verbally and physically assaulted right before your eyes. The film’s Oscar-winning editing finds the right tempo with knowing when to cut and when to linger. It also expertly accompanies the music with its barrage of clear, fast-paced shots. Of course, Whiplash is also very respectful to its music sources, and it does an amazing job in showcasing the outrageous musical talent on display.
The performances from Miles Teller and J.K. Simmons are sensational. It is estimated that roughly forty percent of the drumming you see by Andrew in Whiplash was actually performed by Teller. Considering the ridiculous amount of skill involved in these jazz band classics, that statistic should not be understated in the least. Teller puts on an incredible display and pours his heart into this movie. He carries the film, appearing in every single scene, and makes for a believable transition of character under the strict discipline of Fletcher. Even more extraordinary is J.K. Simmons, who won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor with this performance. Simmons injects his character with an intense ferocity that demands your attention. He terrorizes his musicians while conducting with an iron fist. Yet there’s far more to his character than just being a bully. While I disagreed with his abusive methods, I couldn’t argue against his intended result. His character’s extreme conduct will no doubt take things too far for some viewers, but despite all of his anger, I still found Fletcher to be remarkably fascinating. In the end, as deserving of hatred as he may be, I couldn’t help but feel some level of respect for him, and I think that really speaks to the quality of the film.
Whiplash is an emotionally stirring masterpiece that questions how much is too much when it comes to pushing someone to be their best. It also explores the emotional and psychological harm that can result from that level of pressure and abuse. The movie is bolstered by two tense and energetic performances from Miles and Simmons, who are deserving of all of their praise and accolades. You don’t have to be a fan of jazz music to enjoy this phenomenal film. I found the music to be intoxicating, but the real strength of the movie is the teacher and student dynamic between Andrew and Fletcher. With a diabolically delightful and brilliant ending, these two characters have achieved an esteemed level of movie greatness that make Whiplash a must-see!
Andrew is a first-year student at the prestigious Shaffer Conservatory of Music in New York where the presence of their great head music conductor, Terence Fletcher, looms over everyone. Fletcher is well-known, respected, and feared. More importantly, he is their ticket to success as musicians. Landing a spot in his band is a coveted high honor. Earning his respect is even greater. Though under Fletcher’s guidance, success doesn’t come easy. He rules over the school like a maniacal dictator and he demands absolute perfection from his students. After all, he has a highly revered reputation to preserve, and he’s not about to let anyone jeopardize it. Andrew finds himself lucky enough to be chosen to rehearse with Fletcher’s band, but he’s soon tested, humiliated, abused, and pushed to the limit by his short-tempered instructor.
Already something of a loner, Andrew delves even deeper within due to pressure from his teacher, turning his passion for music into an unhealthy obsession. He cuts off contact with others and devotes himself entirely to practicing. With fingers bloodied from extensive drumming, he simply bandages them up and keeps at it. Not only is his music playing taking control of his life, but it’s also clearly taking a toll on his mental health. Even more troubling for Andrew is that no matter how hard he tries, Fletcher is never satisfied, and he torments his students until they get things right, even if it means practicing all night. Resentment and tension rapidly rise for Andrew as he approaches his breaking point, resulting in the film’s unforgettably tense conclusion.
Whiplash is no walk in the park. It will have you sitting on the edge of your seat in suspense and terror, with your heart still pounding even after it’s over. It’s an emotional horror for young Andrew who is put through Hell by his mad musical conductor. I was legitimately in fear for his life and sanity. While the movie has given me a greater respect for musicians, and jazz bands in particular, it sure makes me feel glad that I was never in band!
Whiplash is remarkable in its design and execution. The film’s cinematography shows a wonderfully adept eye for camera angles, and gives this low-budget film a distinguished look. The director revels in the closeness of the scene, putting us right alongside Andrew as he comes face-to-face with the ever-menacing Fletcher. It’s unbelievably tense and uncomfortable to watch while he’s being verbally and physically assaulted right before your eyes. The film’s Oscar-winning editing finds the right tempo with knowing when to cut and when to linger. It also expertly accompanies the music with its barrage of clear, fast-paced shots. Of course, Whiplash is also very respectful to its music sources, and it does an amazing job in showcasing the outrageous musical talent on display.
The performances from Miles Teller and J.K. Simmons are sensational. It is estimated that roughly forty percent of the drumming you see by Andrew in Whiplash was actually performed by Teller. Considering the ridiculous amount of skill involved in these jazz band classics, that statistic should not be understated in the least. Teller puts on an incredible display and pours his heart into this movie. He carries the film, appearing in every single scene, and makes for a believable transition of character under the strict discipline of Fletcher. Even more extraordinary is J.K. Simmons, who won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor with this performance. Simmons injects his character with an intense ferocity that demands your attention. He terrorizes his musicians while conducting with an iron fist. Yet there’s far more to his character than just being a bully. While I disagreed with his abusive methods, I couldn’t argue against his intended result. His character’s extreme conduct will no doubt take things too far for some viewers, but despite all of his anger, I still found Fletcher to be remarkably fascinating. In the end, as deserving of hatred as he may be, I couldn’t help but feel some level of respect for him, and I think that really speaks to the quality of the film.
Whiplash is an emotionally stirring masterpiece that questions how much is too much when it comes to pushing someone to be their best. It also explores the emotional and psychological harm that can result from that level of pressure and abuse. The movie is bolstered by two tense and energetic performances from Miles and Simmons, who are deserving of all of their praise and accolades. You don’t have to be a fan of jazz music to enjoy this phenomenal film. I found the music to be intoxicating, but the real strength of the movie is the teacher and student dynamic between Andrew and Fletcher. With a diabolically delightful and brilliant ending, these two characters have achieved an esteemed level of movie greatness that make Whiplash a must-see!
Fashion Designer Girls Games - Prom Salon
Lifestyle and Games
App
Are you willing to start making your own clothes collection? Eager to run your own "fashion shop" or...
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated The Merciless in Books
Mar 15, 2018
Also read my review here: http://bookbum.weebly.com/book-reviews/the-merciless-by-danielle-vega
<b><i>Forgive us, Father, for we have sinned.</b></i>
Well, well, well, what can I say? This thoroughly disappointed me, after giving it some more thought, Ive taken this down to 2 stars.
So we have 3 beautiful and popular God-fearing girls who adopt the new girl into their secretive little gang and warn her against demon-possessed Brooklyn. To cure Brooklyn of her devilish ways they decide to kidnap her, stick her in a basement and torture her, or exorcise her Sound like Im giving too much away? Well yes, I probably am, but the blurb tells you the exact same thing, making the whole suspense element of this book completely useless and a waste of the author's time. <b>Dont try to keep us on our toes when youve already told us whats going to happen.</b>
Due to this being a novel aimed at Young Adult readers, the language, for me, felt simple and lack lustre. I can only read so much before it becomes laughable for me, and laughable it became. All the characters speech was so unrealistic and straightforward it was almost impossible to believe anyone would actually talk like that. This unrealistic speech really made it difficult to connect to any of the characters on a deeper level so I had no empathy for any of them.
The plot, overall, is just a little bit completely ridiculous and nonsensical. The blandness of the characters, scenes and speech make the whole thing feel like a pretty demented, but dumb dream. <spoiler>If Brooklyn had just been evil in a normal teenage girl way and didnt rip out Rileys fucking heart, maybe it would have been a better book</spoiler> I didnt find myself shocked, scared or creeped out at any point in the entire book because it was all so juvenile and cheesy. The reasons the girls did what they did was childish and cringy and it just wouldnt happen in the way Vega wrote it down. And lets not get me started on all the loose ends...
Anyone up for reading one of the most predictable endings ever? My God, what an unexciting end to a pretty unexciting novel - at least it was consistent.
I did read this over the period of just one day, so it had me wanting to finish it, but not for any of the right reasons. I wasnt reading it quickly because I wanted to know what was going to happen next, I was reading it quickly because it was getting stupider and stupider and I wanted to get it over and done with. Do I want to put myself through reading the second book in the series? I dont know Ill give it some time first.
<b><i>Forgive us, Father, for we have sinned.</b></i>
Well, well, well, what can I say? This thoroughly disappointed me, after giving it some more thought, Ive taken this down to 2 stars.
So we have 3 beautiful and popular God-fearing girls who adopt the new girl into their secretive little gang and warn her against demon-possessed Brooklyn. To cure Brooklyn of her devilish ways they decide to kidnap her, stick her in a basement and torture her, or exorcise her Sound like Im giving too much away? Well yes, I probably am, but the blurb tells you the exact same thing, making the whole suspense element of this book completely useless and a waste of the author's time. <b>Dont try to keep us on our toes when youve already told us whats going to happen.</b>
Due to this being a novel aimed at Young Adult readers, the language, for me, felt simple and lack lustre. I can only read so much before it becomes laughable for me, and laughable it became. All the characters speech was so unrealistic and straightforward it was almost impossible to believe anyone would actually talk like that. This unrealistic speech really made it difficult to connect to any of the characters on a deeper level so I had no empathy for any of them.
The plot, overall, is just a little bit completely ridiculous and nonsensical. The blandness of the characters, scenes and speech make the whole thing feel like a pretty demented, but dumb dream. <spoiler>If Brooklyn had just been evil in a normal teenage girl way and didnt rip out Rileys fucking heart, maybe it would have been a better book</spoiler> I didnt find myself shocked, scared or creeped out at any point in the entire book because it was all so juvenile and cheesy. The reasons the girls did what they did was childish and cringy and it just wouldnt happen in the way Vega wrote it down. And lets not get me started on all the loose ends...
Anyone up for reading one of the most predictable endings ever? My God, what an unexciting end to a pretty unexciting novel - at least it was consistent.
I did read this over the period of just one day, so it had me wanting to finish it, but not for any of the right reasons. I wasnt reading it quickly because I wanted to know what was going to happen next, I was reading it quickly because it was getting stupider and stupider and I wanted to get it over and done with. Do I want to put myself through reading the second book in the series? I dont know Ill give it some time first.
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Dead In A Week (Or Your Money Back) (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Dark comedy at its finest
This review discusses dark topics such as death and suicide. Reader discretion advised.
Getting comedy right is difficult enough, let alone trying to do it with sensitive topics. But Dead In A Week (or your money back) hits the nail on the head. After several failed suicide attempts, William (Aneurin Barnard) signs a contract with veteran assassin Leslie (Tom Wilkinson), who promises he’ll be dead within the week. This simple concept results in 1 hour and 30 mins of pure entertainment.
Though explicit in the way it discusses suicide, there is a reason for this. Right from the start, William is positioned as an incredibly depressed, isolated failed writer, who is struggling to see the point in living. He is very open about this fact, and spends a lot of time planning ways he could do it, accompanied by a darkly funny montage of the ways he’s tried. He is a troubled character that you can’t help but feel sorry for.
What makes this film even more interesting is the way it makes you sympathise with both target and killer. Leslie is trying his best to avoid retirement, and sees William as an answer to his prayers. If he kills him, he’ll fill his quota, and all will be well. This creates a paradox where you want both men to succeed, but you know that’s impossible.
William changes his mind about the contract when a publisher takes interest in his novel, and he begins to fall in love with Ellie (Freya Mavor), the assistant who called him regarding his latest story. This encounter comes with some rather frank and heartwarming messages about life, reminding us how precious life can be if you give it a chance.
Of course, the film doesn’t just end there. After William’s 360, Leslie is having none of it, and for the rest of the film we see this young writer trying to outrun a seasoned assassin. Leslie’s boss Harvey (Christopher Eccleston) is hot on his tail as well, tired of giving the old man too many chances. It’s a classic tale of a failed assassin, flipped entirely on its head.
Filled with some brilliant twists and turns, the script is formulaic yet hugely entertaining, with some laugh out loud moments throughout. It will certainly appeal to those who like their humour a little darker, with its use of comedic timing and deadpan delivery. It addresses so much in a short space of time, adding depth where needed.
Leslie’s wife Penny (Marion Bailey) adds her own comic relief to the situation, with a delightful satire on middle-class culture. Whilst her husband is trying to keep a dangerous job he loves so much, she’s more concerned about beating her church rivals in a cushion competition. The parallels between the couple are simultaneously heartwarming and awkward, and I enjoyed the way they bounced off each other throughout.
This was a thoroughly enjoyable film, with some unexpectedly touching moments. I really connected with certain characters and loathed others, allowing me to become fully invested in the film. The encounter between these two men should have ended one way, but the two embark on a journey that changes their lives for the better. Underneath all the humour comes an understanding of mental health issues, and sympathy for those who struggle.
This was Tom Edmund’s feature length debut, after directing a few short films. It’s an impressive first film with good pacing, solid characters, and a well-polished look throughout. It was an ambitious first feature length, but it certainly delivered.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2019/05/06/dark-comedy-at-its-finest-my-thoughts-on-dead-in-a-week-or-your-money-back/
Getting comedy right is difficult enough, let alone trying to do it with sensitive topics. But Dead In A Week (or your money back) hits the nail on the head. After several failed suicide attempts, William (Aneurin Barnard) signs a contract with veteran assassin Leslie (Tom Wilkinson), who promises he’ll be dead within the week. This simple concept results in 1 hour and 30 mins of pure entertainment.
Though explicit in the way it discusses suicide, there is a reason for this. Right from the start, William is positioned as an incredibly depressed, isolated failed writer, who is struggling to see the point in living. He is very open about this fact, and spends a lot of time planning ways he could do it, accompanied by a darkly funny montage of the ways he’s tried. He is a troubled character that you can’t help but feel sorry for.
What makes this film even more interesting is the way it makes you sympathise with both target and killer. Leslie is trying his best to avoid retirement, and sees William as an answer to his prayers. If he kills him, he’ll fill his quota, and all will be well. This creates a paradox where you want both men to succeed, but you know that’s impossible.
William changes his mind about the contract when a publisher takes interest in his novel, and he begins to fall in love with Ellie (Freya Mavor), the assistant who called him regarding his latest story. This encounter comes with some rather frank and heartwarming messages about life, reminding us how precious life can be if you give it a chance.
Of course, the film doesn’t just end there. After William’s 360, Leslie is having none of it, and for the rest of the film we see this young writer trying to outrun a seasoned assassin. Leslie’s boss Harvey (Christopher Eccleston) is hot on his tail as well, tired of giving the old man too many chances. It’s a classic tale of a failed assassin, flipped entirely on its head.
Filled with some brilliant twists and turns, the script is formulaic yet hugely entertaining, with some laugh out loud moments throughout. It will certainly appeal to those who like their humour a little darker, with its use of comedic timing and deadpan delivery. It addresses so much in a short space of time, adding depth where needed.
Leslie’s wife Penny (Marion Bailey) adds her own comic relief to the situation, with a delightful satire on middle-class culture. Whilst her husband is trying to keep a dangerous job he loves so much, she’s more concerned about beating her church rivals in a cushion competition. The parallels between the couple are simultaneously heartwarming and awkward, and I enjoyed the way they bounced off each other throughout.
This was a thoroughly enjoyable film, with some unexpectedly touching moments. I really connected with certain characters and loathed others, allowing me to become fully invested in the film. The encounter between these two men should have ended one way, but the two embark on a journey that changes their lives for the better. Underneath all the humour comes an understanding of mental health issues, and sympathy for those who struggle.
This was Tom Edmund’s feature length debut, after directing a few short films. It’s an impressive first film with good pacing, solid characters, and a well-polished look throughout. It was an ambitious first feature length, but it certainly delivered.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2019/05/06/dark-comedy-at-its-finest-my-thoughts-on-dead-in-a-week-or-your-money-back/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Captain Cat in Video Games
Jul 8, 2019
Cats rule! Seriously. Just ask the crazy cat lady that lives with me, err… I mean my wife (cue Doug Benson). Cats are natural fisher… cats? Right? And who doesn’t like a great puzzle game. So why not have all three. Mobile users have been living with this kind of excitement for a while now, and they have finally let us console games have some fun as well.
Joking aside, Captain Cat (“CC”), which originally launched on iOS and Android, has made its way to the Xbox One and Nintendo Switch. With a price tag of $6.99 on both platforms, the big question is, is a mobile to console port even worth that price tag?
CC is super easy to pick up and play with its simplified control scheme. Playing as the titular character, your end goal is to catch fish using your… anchor? The game starts pretty simple, but introduces new obstacles and adversaries to add to the challenge as you progress. With 4 game modes available, there seems to be plenty to do.
Waspfish, the main came mode, has you making your way through 25 levels of casting your anchor, dodging obstructions and catching fish. Watch for those enemies though, as getting hit could cause you to restart your level. Housekeeper is another mode, also having 25 levels, and it’s essentially the same as Waspfish. It has subtle differences including enemies, and your end goal being to catch a snail that can hide in its shell. Try to catch him while he’s hiding and you’ll have to restart the level. As with many games on mobile, you are scored on your performance on each level in both modes. Your aim is to try and nab a three-star rating by completing the level as fast as possible, in as little moves as possible, while collecting all the coins you can.
Our third mode, Infinite, is exactly what it sounds like. The Captain casts out into the sea where your goal is to get as deep as you possibly can while dodging obstacles and enemies. The final mode is called Perfect. This is by far the most difficult of the game modes. Getting only one cast of your anchor, you restart the level if you miss. It requires some trial and error, but the challenge was welcome and a great mode to get you to think strategy in where to cast.
These combination of modes should keep you occupied for a few ours, and are great for a quick pick up and play game when you only have a few minutes to sneak in some gaming. However, I question why you wouldn’t just pick up your phone and play it on there if it’s a game you really want to play. Although a quick look showed me that the game is no longer on the Play Store and can only be side-loaded via APK from other sources. I cannot speak to the availability on iOS.
Overall, Captain Cat is a fun puzzle game (which is surprisingly missing any sort of leaderboard) that provided some challenging moments and kept me engaged while I was playing. So now we get back to our question at hand. Is it worth the $6.99 price tag? If it’s on the Switch, I would say go for it. It’s the version I reviewed, but it also seems to make much more sense to be able to carry the game with you and play anywhere, versus the stationary nature of the Xbox One.
Joking aside, Captain Cat (“CC”), which originally launched on iOS and Android, has made its way to the Xbox One and Nintendo Switch. With a price tag of $6.99 on both platforms, the big question is, is a mobile to console port even worth that price tag?
CC is super easy to pick up and play with its simplified control scheme. Playing as the titular character, your end goal is to catch fish using your… anchor? The game starts pretty simple, but introduces new obstacles and adversaries to add to the challenge as you progress. With 4 game modes available, there seems to be plenty to do.
Waspfish, the main came mode, has you making your way through 25 levels of casting your anchor, dodging obstructions and catching fish. Watch for those enemies though, as getting hit could cause you to restart your level. Housekeeper is another mode, also having 25 levels, and it’s essentially the same as Waspfish. It has subtle differences including enemies, and your end goal being to catch a snail that can hide in its shell. Try to catch him while he’s hiding and you’ll have to restart the level. As with many games on mobile, you are scored on your performance on each level in both modes. Your aim is to try and nab a three-star rating by completing the level as fast as possible, in as little moves as possible, while collecting all the coins you can.
Our third mode, Infinite, is exactly what it sounds like. The Captain casts out into the sea where your goal is to get as deep as you possibly can while dodging obstacles and enemies. The final mode is called Perfect. This is by far the most difficult of the game modes. Getting only one cast of your anchor, you restart the level if you miss. It requires some trial and error, but the challenge was welcome and a great mode to get you to think strategy in where to cast.
These combination of modes should keep you occupied for a few ours, and are great for a quick pick up and play game when you only have a few minutes to sneak in some gaming. However, I question why you wouldn’t just pick up your phone and play it on there if it’s a game you really want to play. Although a quick look showed me that the game is no longer on the Play Store and can only be side-loaded via APK from other sources. I cannot speak to the availability on iOS.
Overall, Captain Cat is a fun puzzle game (which is surprisingly missing any sort of leaderboard) that provided some challenging moments and kept me engaged while I was playing. So now we get back to our question at hand. Is it worth the $6.99 price tag? If it’s on the Switch, I would say go for it. It’s the version I reviewed, but it also seems to make much more sense to be able to carry the game with you and play anywhere, versus the stationary nature of the Xbox One.