Search
Search results
Montessori Preschool
Education and Games
App
Looking for an engaging digital preschool app based on a proven teaching method? Montessori...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Game Night (2018) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021 (Updated Sep 29, 2021)
Miss Scarlett at the Airport with the Jet Engine.
“Game Night” is an American comedy film starring Jason Bateman (“Horrible Bosses”, “Central Intelligence“) as Max and Rachel McAdams (“Spotlight“, “Doctor Strange“) as Annie: two hyper-competitive professionals who invite other couples around to their house for a weekly night of charades and board games. The regulars are long-term couple Kevin and Michelle (Lamorne Morris and Kylie Bunbury) and complete buffoon Ryan (Billy Magnussen, “The Big Short“) and his revolving door of generally vacant girlfriends. Estranged from the group, after his divorce, is the creepy police officer Gary (Jesse Plemons, “The Post“, “American Made“) who lives next door.
Auditions for the next Spiderman movie were not going well.
But Max is not content (affecting the mobility of his fishes!) as he has a severe inferiority complex about his enormously successful and cocky older brother Brooks (Kyle Chandler, “Manchester by the Sea“) who beats him at EVERYTHING. When Brooks barges into their game night things get heated and after he organises the next game night as “something different” things take a sharp left into The Twilight Zone.
Bateman, McAdams and Chandler, with game night about to go in an odd direction.
As befits the quality of most modern American comedy films, its all complete nonsense of course. But actually, this is quite good nonsense. The script by Mark Perez (his first movie script in 12 years!) while following a fairly predictable path early in the film is littered with some good one-liners and funny scenes (a bullet-removal is a high-spot) and includes a memorable twist in the final real that I didn’t see coming.
Ryan and Sarah (Billy Magnussen and Sharon Horgan) about to get egged on. (There is a certain lack of logic in the action that follows).
Much of this is powered by the chemistry between Bateman and McAdams. McAdams in particular should do more comedy, as she is very adept at it. Playing the one bright spark in a parade of vacuousness, English comedienne Sharon Horgan also adds a butt to Magnussen’s one-tone joke very effectively. The surprising comedy player though is Jesse Plemons who I thought was just uncomfortably hilarious.
Jesse Plemons and his very white hairy friend.
It is normally unusual to find special effects in a film like this, but here the team (headed up by Dean Tyrrell) should be congratulated for some very subtle but effective effects. Most of the long shots in the film of the neighbourhood/streets etc. are of models which only fade to live action as you zoom in. In the opening drone-fly-over of Max and Annie driving home I thought all the housing looked model-like but as we zoomed into them arriving home I thought I must have imagined in. Only in the subsequent scenes did I realise I was right after all! But it’s so very subtle. I suspect many of the audience were similarly fooled (and many who’ve seen the film and are reading this will be still going “what??”)! There’s a kind of explanation for the randomness of these effects during the (very entertaining) end-titles.
Bullet removal with squeaky toy gag… very funny.
It’s unusual for me to laugh at a comedy so much, but this one I really did. Every comedy film is allowed a little latitude to get the odd strand wrong, and this one is no exception (I didn’t think the spat between Kevin and Michelle really worked)… so it’s not perfect, but novice directors John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein (who’s only previous film project was 2015’s clearly missable “Vacation”) have pulled off a really entertaining watch here.
Auditions for the next Spiderman movie were not going well.
But Max is not content (affecting the mobility of his fishes!) as he has a severe inferiority complex about his enormously successful and cocky older brother Brooks (Kyle Chandler, “Manchester by the Sea“) who beats him at EVERYTHING. When Brooks barges into their game night things get heated and after he organises the next game night as “something different” things take a sharp left into The Twilight Zone.
Bateman, McAdams and Chandler, with game night about to go in an odd direction.
As befits the quality of most modern American comedy films, its all complete nonsense of course. But actually, this is quite good nonsense. The script by Mark Perez (his first movie script in 12 years!) while following a fairly predictable path early in the film is littered with some good one-liners and funny scenes (a bullet-removal is a high-spot) and includes a memorable twist in the final real that I didn’t see coming.
Ryan and Sarah (Billy Magnussen and Sharon Horgan) about to get egged on. (There is a certain lack of logic in the action that follows).
Much of this is powered by the chemistry between Bateman and McAdams. McAdams in particular should do more comedy, as she is very adept at it. Playing the one bright spark in a parade of vacuousness, English comedienne Sharon Horgan also adds a butt to Magnussen’s one-tone joke very effectively. The surprising comedy player though is Jesse Plemons who I thought was just uncomfortably hilarious.
Jesse Plemons and his very white hairy friend.
It is normally unusual to find special effects in a film like this, but here the team (headed up by Dean Tyrrell) should be congratulated for some very subtle but effective effects. Most of the long shots in the film of the neighbourhood/streets etc. are of models which only fade to live action as you zoom in. In the opening drone-fly-over of Max and Annie driving home I thought all the housing looked model-like but as we zoomed into them arriving home I thought I must have imagined in. Only in the subsequent scenes did I realise I was right after all! But it’s so very subtle. I suspect many of the audience were similarly fooled (and many who’ve seen the film and are reading this will be still going “what??”)! There’s a kind of explanation for the randomness of these effects during the (very entertaining) end-titles.
Bullet removal with squeaky toy gag… very funny.
It’s unusual for me to laugh at a comedy so much, but this one I really did. Every comedy film is allowed a little latitude to get the odd strand wrong, and this one is no exception (I didn’t think the spat between Kevin and Michelle really worked)… so it’s not perfect, but novice directors John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein (who’s only previous film project was 2015’s clearly missable “Vacation”) have pulled off a really entertaining watch here.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Cinematic Redbull
Up until a week ago, I was really looking forward to this film. Mad Max as a series has a criminally underestimated impact on our pop culture psyche thanks to its unique aesthetic. Everyone now knows exactly what they want to do in the event of the apocalypse; strap dustbin lids and S&M gear to our bodies.
Then I remembered that other recent reboot of a beloved 80’s sci-fi film, 2014’s Robocop. Specifically, I remembered that it was absolutely awful, a broken train-wreck of a movie that doesn’t understand and full on resents the original film, and drained all the personality out of a film bursting with it. 2012’s Total Recall shared similar problems, so the question came; would this modern reboot of an 80’s genre classic be the first of its kind to match the quality of the original?
The answer is no. It is far, far better.
The original Mad Max films each had the budget of a school nativity play and relied entirely on the scrapyard aesthetic and charismatic villains rather than action. Fury Road, on the other hand, is the cinematic equivalent of Red Bull; fast paced, frenetic and wild. The action sequences are almost constant, only broken up when the audience’s hearts are about to burst, accompanied by one of the most energetic and brilliant soundtracks I’ve ever heard. In the hands of a lesser filmmaker it would be too much to handle, but Miller makes sure to frame and edit each scene in a way that allows the audience to always follow the action.
Visually, the film is much more in line with Alejandro Jodorowsky’s failed Dune adaptation than anything else, with its deformed mutants, impractical clothes and grungy mechanics. Every image on screen is madder than the last; the audience will probably ask “Why does that guy have a flamethrower guitar?” or “Why is there a fat dude in a business suit with his nipples exposed?” and the film just says “Because you wanted to see it and didn’t know you did.” And it is totally right. Like Big Game, the landscapes are achingly beautiful too, turning a barren desert into a sea of colours.
The plot is utter gibberish; there is absolutely no reason that any series of events would lead to the world looking the way it does and the characters looking and acting the way they do. Most films would be ashamed of this and try to handwave it away or explain it; Fury Road, however, takes the smarter option, and full on embraces the insanity. Characters spout lines like “I have seen the three gates” and “You will ride with silver and chrome” without irony, and it all just works, sweeping the audience up into a world where logic is superfluous as long as what you’re saying is cool.
This wouldn’t work if the acting wasn’t on point, but every single actor is completely game for the madcap lunacy that is the
script. Everyone sings their lines, which might be nonsense but just sound so good. The only weak spot is Tom Hardy as Max himself, who tries to be a calming anchor to contrast everyone else but instead seems like he came out of a different, much more boring film. In fact, Max seems here only so the film can be called Mad Max, because really it is Charlize Theron’s movie; Imperator Furiosa is the true main character and Theron easily gives the most nuanced performance.
Upon seeing this film, I genuinely had to go for a jog to get all of the energy out of me. This film is mad glory from beginning to end, a fireworks show for the eyes and ears. One of the best action films of the year in an already good year for the genre. Certainly a much better reboot than Robocop. Now if you excuse me, I’m going to make a suit of armour out of washing machine parts and ball gags.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/05/19/cinematic-red-bull-mad-max-fury-road-review/
Then I remembered that other recent reboot of a beloved 80’s sci-fi film, 2014’s Robocop. Specifically, I remembered that it was absolutely awful, a broken train-wreck of a movie that doesn’t understand and full on resents the original film, and drained all the personality out of a film bursting with it. 2012’s Total Recall shared similar problems, so the question came; would this modern reboot of an 80’s genre classic be the first of its kind to match the quality of the original?
The answer is no. It is far, far better.
The original Mad Max films each had the budget of a school nativity play and relied entirely on the scrapyard aesthetic and charismatic villains rather than action. Fury Road, on the other hand, is the cinematic equivalent of Red Bull; fast paced, frenetic and wild. The action sequences are almost constant, only broken up when the audience’s hearts are about to burst, accompanied by one of the most energetic and brilliant soundtracks I’ve ever heard. In the hands of a lesser filmmaker it would be too much to handle, but Miller makes sure to frame and edit each scene in a way that allows the audience to always follow the action.
Visually, the film is much more in line with Alejandro Jodorowsky’s failed Dune adaptation than anything else, with its deformed mutants, impractical clothes and grungy mechanics. Every image on screen is madder than the last; the audience will probably ask “Why does that guy have a flamethrower guitar?” or “Why is there a fat dude in a business suit with his nipples exposed?” and the film just says “Because you wanted to see it and didn’t know you did.” And it is totally right. Like Big Game, the landscapes are achingly beautiful too, turning a barren desert into a sea of colours.
The plot is utter gibberish; there is absolutely no reason that any series of events would lead to the world looking the way it does and the characters looking and acting the way they do. Most films would be ashamed of this and try to handwave it away or explain it; Fury Road, however, takes the smarter option, and full on embraces the insanity. Characters spout lines like “I have seen the three gates” and “You will ride with silver and chrome” without irony, and it all just works, sweeping the audience up into a world where logic is superfluous as long as what you’re saying is cool.
This wouldn’t work if the acting wasn’t on point, but every single actor is completely game for the madcap lunacy that is the
script. Everyone sings their lines, which might be nonsense but just sound so good. The only weak spot is Tom Hardy as Max himself, who tries to be a calming anchor to contrast everyone else but instead seems like he came out of a different, much more boring film. In fact, Max seems here only so the film can be called Mad Max, because really it is Charlize Theron’s movie; Imperator Furiosa is the true main character and Theron easily gives the most nuanced performance.
Upon seeing this film, I genuinely had to go for a jog to get all of the energy out of me. This film is mad glory from beginning to end, a fireworks show for the eyes and ears. One of the best action films of the year in an already good year for the genre. Certainly a much better reboot than Robocop. Now if you excuse me, I’m going to make a suit of armour out of washing machine parts and ball gags.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/05/19/cinematic-red-bull-mad-max-fury-road-review/
Cyn Armistead (14 KP) rated Moon Fever (Includes: Primes, #6.5) in Books
Mar 1, 2018
This was one of those "I finished the last thing I was reading and I'm bored, what's already loaded on the iTouch?" reads. It was on there because the anthology includes [a:Lori Handeland|17060|Lori Handeland|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1236700197p2/17060.jpg]'s "Cobwebs Over the Moon" (Nightcreatures, #10) and I read all of that series a while back. I didn't care to read the rest of the anthology at the time, but I hadn't gotten around to deleting the book. Ah, happy digital packrat am I!
If I've read anything by [a:Susan Sizemore|88608|Susan Sizemore|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1254303347p2/88608.jpg] other than "Tempting Fate" (Primes #6.5), it was eminently forgettable. I'm absolutely sure that I haven't read anything else in her <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/series/41947-primes">Primes</a>; series, because I probably would have thrown said material firmly into the nearest hard surface (or whatever the equivalent is with bytes) because of the insanely annoying number of times Sizemore feels it necessary to remind us that her vampires are Primes! Alpha Primes! They are! Really! And that means they fight a lot! Especially over women! Otherwise, it's a Mary Jane story set in New Orleans. I have a strong feeling that most of the Primes series is Mary Jane-ish, but I may at some point be trapped and forced with the prospect of staring at the inside of my eyeballs or reading more of Sizemore's stuff. I'm not sure which would be worse right now. I'll get back to you on that.
"The Darkness Within" by [a:Maggie Shayne|17064|Maggie Shayne|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1215028948p2/17064.jpg] feels terribly familiar, although I'm sure I haven't read it before. I have, however, read other Shayne novellas in other anthologies, and this story follows a familiar pattern. Sexy gal who doesn't think she's attractive has had a run of hard luck and may lose the house she has bought relatively recently and loves. Said house has a spooky past that she didn't know about when she bought it. Stalwart too-sexy-for-her man gets involved somehow, preferably in a way that allows her to question his motives. They are inexplicably drawn to each other and screw like bunnies (or near as makes no difference), then blame their lapse in judgement on whatever weirdness is going on in the house. (Yep, that's what they all say - and no safer sex anywhere! Does paranormal activity preclude discussion of sexual history and prevent STD transmission?)
"Cobwebs Over the Moon" by [a:Lori Handeland|17060|Lori Handeland|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1236700197p2/17060.jpg] (<a href="http://www.goodreads.com/series/41626-nightcreature">Nightcreatures</a>;, #10) isn't the most logical entry in that series. Neither is it the most illogical - but by the tenth entry, the series' mythology has gotten a bit ridiculous, so I don't know why I even bother bringing up something as irrelevant as logic. Silly me! In every book, we're introduced to a woman who is in some way tangled up with werewolves, then to a man who is tangled up with her and/or the creatures and, of course, whose loyalties are uncertain. There is always an element of danger to add spice to the romance that has to grow between the two. The formula never changes at all. There are always evil werewolves, but sometimes there are also good ones. If you like predictability in your paranormal romance, <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/series/41626-nightcreature">Nightcreatures</a>; is a great series for you.
I suppose [a:Caridad Piñeiro|2944621|Caridad Piñeiro|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1305975476p2/2944621.jpg]'s "Crazy for the Cat" isn't technically any better or worse than any of the other three stories. There's more variety in the shapeshifting and the main setting is the Amazon jungle. I couldn't get past the bigotry and colonialism, though. Dark is bad, light is good, of course! Those poor benighted natives couldn't possibly handle a few rogues without that white woman, could they? Spare me.
If I've read anything by [a:Susan Sizemore|88608|Susan Sizemore|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1254303347p2/88608.jpg] other than "Tempting Fate" (Primes #6.5), it was eminently forgettable. I'm absolutely sure that I haven't read anything else in her <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/series/41947-primes">Primes</a>; series, because I probably would have thrown said material firmly into the nearest hard surface (or whatever the equivalent is with bytes) because of the insanely annoying number of times Sizemore feels it necessary to remind us that her vampires are Primes! Alpha Primes! They are! Really! And that means they fight a lot! Especially over women! Otherwise, it's a Mary Jane story set in New Orleans. I have a strong feeling that most of the Primes series is Mary Jane-ish, but I may at some point be trapped and forced with the prospect of staring at the inside of my eyeballs or reading more of Sizemore's stuff. I'm not sure which would be worse right now. I'll get back to you on that.
"The Darkness Within" by [a:Maggie Shayne|17064|Maggie Shayne|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1215028948p2/17064.jpg] feels terribly familiar, although I'm sure I haven't read it before. I have, however, read other Shayne novellas in other anthologies, and this story follows a familiar pattern. Sexy gal who doesn't think she's attractive has had a run of hard luck and may lose the house she has bought relatively recently and loves. Said house has a spooky past that she didn't know about when she bought it. Stalwart too-sexy-for-her man gets involved somehow, preferably in a way that allows her to question his motives. They are inexplicably drawn to each other and screw like bunnies (or near as makes no difference), then blame their lapse in judgement on whatever weirdness is going on in the house. (Yep, that's what they all say - and no safer sex anywhere! Does paranormal activity preclude discussion of sexual history and prevent STD transmission?)
"Cobwebs Over the Moon" by [a:Lori Handeland|17060|Lori Handeland|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1236700197p2/17060.jpg] (<a href="http://www.goodreads.com/series/41626-nightcreature">Nightcreatures</a>;, #10) isn't the most logical entry in that series. Neither is it the most illogical - but by the tenth entry, the series' mythology has gotten a bit ridiculous, so I don't know why I even bother bringing up something as irrelevant as logic. Silly me! In every book, we're introduced to a woman who is in some way tangled up with werewolves, then to a man who is tangled up with her and/or the creatures and, of course, whose loyalties are uncertain. There is always an element of danger to add spice to the romance that has to grow between the two. The formula never changes at all. There are always evil werewolves, but sometimes there are also good ones. If you like predictability in your paranormal romance, <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/series/41626-nightcreature">Nightcreatures</a>; is a great series for you.
I suppose [a:Caridad Piñeiro|2944621|Caridad Piñeiro|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1305975476p2/2944621.jpg]'s "Crazy for the Cat" isn't technically any better or worse than any of the other three stories. There's more variety in the shapeshifting and the main setting is the Amazon jungle. I couldn't get past the bigotry and colonialism, though. Dark is bad, light is good, of course! Those poor benighted natives couldn't possibly handle a few rogues without that white woman, could they? Spare me.
Cassie Osbourne (6 KP) rated The Hazel Wood in Books
Nov 9, 2018
Alice and her mother, Ella, have been on the road for as long as she can remember, constantly followed by some kind of freak bad luck. When word reaches them that Ella’s mother, famous fairytale author Althea Proserpine, has died, they think they’re safe...until Ella gets kidnapped by the Hinterlands. To save her, Alice must venture into the Hazel Wood.
I LOVE fairy tales, the darker, the better as far as I’m concerned. So when I’m told about a book that is based around dark, original fairytales, naturally I wanted to read it as soon as I could get my hands on it. However, it wasn’t quite what I expected.
Although this is a book about fairy tales and their characters being real, we are only told two stories: ‘Alice Three Times’ and ‘The Door That Wasn’t There’. This means that when we meet the Nightwalkers, Twice-Killed-Katherine, the Briar King and Hansa the Traveller, we don’t know what to make of them because we don’t know their stories. Now, I am all for discovering more about characters and their motivations as the story unfolds, but we never get that with these characters - it’s almost just assumed that we know who they are. I even checked online to see if I was reading the second book in the series by mistake! There is a book being written called ‘Tales From The Hinterland’ which is the collection of stories that these characters are from, but it is set to be published in 2020 when really it should have come first. Having said all of that, I did really like the ‘real world’ characters, and I thought that Janet and Spinner were super cool.
The atmosphere was really good throughout, even in the middle section when I found it hard to read because I couldn’t connect were really atmospheric. I loved the strange surrealness and dreamlike writing that was very fairy tale-ish, and it was brilliant. I also really enjoyed the writing style. I don’t think that I’ve properly ever read a book with so many current references and I quite like it. It makes the book feel very contemporary (after all it was only published in January) and in our world, while still having the other world, the Hinterland, mixed in which gives it a slight feeling of invasion and overlap. It also really suits Alice’s character and voice since she is narrating the story and was brought up very much in our world.
The plot was good on the whole. My main issue, once again, comes down to the fact that the stories weren’t told - or rather that the wrong one was. ‘Alice Three Times’ was great because it became relevant but ‘The Door That Wasn’t There’ seemed not to have any purpose. Surely if there was one story that Finch would have told Alice, it would have been ‘Twice-Killed-Katherine’ as she is following them for most of the first half of the book (and then just disappears for no real reason).
While the beginning and end of the book are really great and really gripping, I found most of the middle section really difficult to read because, guess what, we didn’t know the stories! When I started reading this book, I thought that I would finish it in the same week I started it...that was two weeks ago. The middle of the book is when Alice actually enters the Hinterland, but since we don’t know anything about the characters or the world, it feels like we’re constantly playing catch up. Whenever I decided what I was going to sit down, grit my teeth and get through it, it felt like it was a chore and I could only manage one or two chapters at a time. It gets very gripping again from chapter twenty-eight when Alice starts to get sucked into the story, but that’s because we’ve already been told ‘Alice Three Times”.
Although I did like ‘The Hazel Wood’, a middle did take a lot of the enjoyment out of reading it. Maybe when ‘Tales From The Hinterland’ comes out, I’ll read that then give this book another shot when I am more informed.
Characters: 6/10
Atmosphere: 8/10
Writing Style: 8/10
Plot: 7/10
Intrigue: 6/10
Logic: 7/10
Enjoyment: 7/10
I LOVE fairy tales, the darker, the better as far as I’m concerned. So when I’m told about a book that is based around dark, original fairytales, naturally I wanted to read it as soon as I could get my hands on it. However, it wasn’t quite what I expected.
Although this is a book about fairy tales and their characters being real, we are only told two stories: ‘Alice Three Times’ and ‘The Door That Wasn’t There’. This means that when we meet the Nightwalkers, Twice-Killed-Katherine, the Briar King and Hansa the Traveller, we don’t know what to make of them because we don’t know their stories. Now, I am all for discovering more about characters and their motivations as the story unfolds, but we never get that with these characters - it’s almost just assumed that we know who they are. I even checked online to see if I was reading the second book in the series by mistake! There is a book being written called ‘Tales From The Hinterland’ which is the collection of stories that these characters are from, but it is set to be published in 2020 when really it should have come first. Having said all of that, I did really like the ‘real world’ characters, and I thought that Janet and Spinner were super cool.
The atmosphere was really good throughout, even in the middle section when I found it hard to read because I couldn’t connect were really atmospheric. I loved the strange surrealness and dreamlike writing that was very fairy tale-ish, and it was brilliant. I also really enjoyed the writing style. I don’t think that I’ve properly ever read a book with so many current references and I quite like it. It makes the book feel very contemporary (after all it was only published in January) and in our world, while still having the other world, the Hinterland, mixed in which gives it a slight feeling of invasion and overlap. It also really suits Alice’s character and voice since she is narrating the story and was brought up very much in our world.
The plot was good on the whole. My main issue, once again, comes down to the fact that the stories weren’t told - or rather that the wrong one was. ‘Alice Three Times’ was great because it became relevant but ‘The Door That Wasn’t There’ seemed not to have any purpose. Surely if there was one story that Finch would have told Alice, it would have been ‘Twice-Killed-Katherine’ as she is following them for most of the first half of the book (and then just disappears for no real reason).
While the beginning and end of the book are really great and really gripping, I found most of the middle section really difficult to read because, guess what, we didn’t know the stories! When I started reading this book, I thought that I would finish it in the same week I started it...that was two weeks ago. The middle of the book is when Alice actually enters the Hinterland, but since we don’t know anything about the characters or the world, it feels like we’re constantly playing catch up. Whenever I decided what I was going to sit down, grit my teeth and get through it, it felt like it was a chore and I could only manage one or two chapters at a time. It gets very gripping again from chapter twenty-eight when Alice starts to get sucked into the story, but that’s because we’ve already been told ‘Alice Three Times”.
Although I did like ‘The Hazel Wood’, a middle did take a lot of the enjoyment out of reading it. Maybe when ‘Tales From The Hinterland’ comes out, I’ll read that then give this book another shot when I am more informed.
Characters: 6/10
Atmosphere: 8/10
Writing Style: 8/10
Plot: 7/10
Intrigue: 6/10
Logic: 7/10
Enjoyment: 7/10
Bad writing (1 more)
Mostly romance
Drowning is one of the top fears in the world, and it's also one of the top ways to cover up a murder. In Lie to Me, Ward's fourth YA novel, she uses drowning as the basis of the story. Yet, this book fell very short in the thriller/mystery genre: Ward gives away too many hints at the beginning of the book, that most readers will have the murderer figured out by chapter 7; she also focuses too much on romance, something that should have caused this story to be filed under a different category other than mystery/thriller. But luckily she didn't bring in a wide circle of characters to cause confusion, using only one view point from the main character of Lie to Me: Amelia- - - a teen girl who believes she was pushed down a ravine to be left for dead in the raging water below.
Besides her 'accident,' Amelia leads a normal life with her mother, father and brother, Hunter - - - she also has a small group of friends. After her 'fall,' a body of a teen girl from the same town is found in a nearby river, but the town gossips, and makes it seem that this girl committed suicide, leaving Amelia worried that her family would think the same thing about her. Depression is something that Amelia's family has had to deal with before, but the talk of depression is candid and not very enlightening; her brother, Hunter, who is in therapy for such doesn't even talk about it, instead he's usually seen playing soccer or Fortnite, this seems to be a broad attempt to bring mental health into the story,but without going into that subject, it failed as a story line. Yet, one of the main causes of depression today is social media, which we find Amelia stalking one of her best friends/love interest on- - -if Ward was trying to reach the YA community about depression, she went the wrong way about it.
Another mistake that Ward made was when Amelia receives an anonymous text message from someone telling her to 'Just let it go,Amelia,' this occurs after she has started investigating whether her 'accident' was an accident. Amelia tells us that she is always suspicious of everyone, but when this text message comes around, it's as if she could care less. She even tries to take the anonymous message as advice: " 'Or it's advice.' I feel backed into a corner. It's one thing to believe someone hurt me and another thing to have proof of it. I don't want this to be proof. 'I mean, Sky's always telling me I should let my life get back to normal, and she doesn't even know I'm thinking any of this. Maybe someone else feels that way,too.' " In reality, if you believed that someone attempted to murder you, and suddenly you are receiving a cryptic message about letting it go, wouldn't the logic thing to do is go to the police?? Amelia doesn't!
Ward has written three other YA novels, 'Lie to Me' being her fourth. The writing in this story is bad in some places, for example, a scene with Amelia and her best friend, Sky, meeting up at the 'screen' (technically a giant drive-in movie theater screen); Amelia thinks about how this town is a haven for her, that everyone feels safe, but the very next paragraph, she's stating she doesn't feel safe anymore. This makes sense if you haven't read it, but the way it's written could have been in a much better and concise way. This and most scenes makes the story read like a sloppy diary entry. That, and the killer being predictable so early on in the story made me very disappointed with this book. 'Lie to Me' had great potential from the synopsis, but it lacked story, mystery, suspense and diverse characters.
I can't recommend this book to people who love horror stories, like I do. I think the only ones who would enjoy this story are the die-hard YA fans. It has everything that YA is known for: romance and teen drama, but it's lacking in everything else. Other than that, I don't think I'll read another book by Ward, but as far as Point horror books go, I will still give them a shot.
Besides her 'accident,' Amelia leads a normal life with her mother, father and brother, Hunter - - - she also has a small group of friends. After her 'fall,' a body of a teen girl from the same town is found in a nearby river, but the town gossips, and makes it seem that this girl committed suicide, leaving Amelia worried that her family would think the same thing about her. Depression is something that Amelia's family has had to deal with before, but the talk of depression is candid and not very enlightening; her brother, Hunter, who is in therapy for such doesn't even talk about it, instead he's usually seen playing soccer or Fortnite, this seems to be a broad attempt to bring mental health into the story,but without going into that subject, it failed as a story line. Yet, one of the main causes of depression today is social media, which we find Amelia stalking one of her best friends/love interest on- - -if Ward was trying to reach the YA community about depression, she went the wrong way about it.
Another mistake that Ward made was when Amelia receives an anonymous text message from someone telling her to 'Just let it go,Amelia,' this occurs after she has started investigating whether her 'accident' was an accident. Amelia tells us that she is always suspicious of everyone, but when this text message comes around, it's as if she could care less. She even tries to take the anonymous message as advice: " 'Or it's advice.' I feel backed into a corner. It's one thing to believe someone hurt me and another thing to have proof of it. I don't want this to be proof. 'I mean, Sky's always telling me I should let my life get back to normal, and she doesn't even know I'm thinking any of this. Maybe someone else feels that way,too.' " In reality, if you believed that someone attempted to murder you, and suddenly you are receiving a cryptic message about letting it go, wouldn't the logic thing to do is go to the police?? Amelia doesn't!
Ward has written three other YA novels, 'Lie to Me' being her fourth. The writing in this story is bad in some places, for example, a scene with Amelia and her best friend, Sky, meeting up at the 'screen' (technically a giant drive-in movie theater screen); Amelia thinks about how this town is a haven for her, that everyone feels safe, but the very next paragraph, she's stating she doesn't feel safe anymore. This makes sense if you haven't read it, but the way it's written could have been in a much better and concise way. This and most scenes makes the story read like a sloppy diary entry. That, and the killer being predictable so early on in the story made me very disappointed with this book. 'Lie to Me' had great potential from the synopsis, but it lacked story, mystery, suspense and diverse characters.
I can't recommend this book to people who love horror stories, like I do. I think the only ones who would enjoy this story are the die-hard YA fans. It has everything that YA is known for: romance and teen drama, but it's lacking in everything else. Other than that, I don't think I'll read another book by Ward, but as far as Point horror books go, I will still give them a shot.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Star Trek Into Darkness (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
The best movie of the summer has arrived, and it’s Star Trek Into Darkness!
There are so many cool things about J.J. Abrams second adventure in the beloved universe created all those years ago by Gene Roddenberry. But the best way to experience this movie is cold, devoid of any internet spoilers, if such a thing is possible in this day and age. That being said, here’s what I got for you.
The movie begins with Captain James Tiberius Kirk (Chris Pine) getting in to trouble with Starfleet for violating the Prime Directive. The Prime Directive is the United Federation of Plants number one rule against alerting primitive cultures to things that they are not nearly ready to grasp (i.e. space travel). But Kirk manages to avoid his punishment because Starfleet has a bigger problem on its hands: a rogue agent, named John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch) is attacking Federation facilities on Earth.
Admiral Markus (Peter Weller) gives Jim Kirk orders to kill Harrison, who has managed to escape Earth and hide on Kronos, the Klingon homeworld. So Kirk, along with his trusty crew including the ever-logical Mr. Spock (Zachary Quinto), James “Bones” McCoy (Karl Urban) and Uhura (Zoe Saldana), warp to the Neutral Zone that separates Federation space from the Klingon Empire. Only they discover that this mission – including the identity of the fugitive Harrison – is not what it seems.
That’s all I am giving you for plot details. Go see the movie!
And when you do, watch for the cleverness of the screenwriters. There are many classic Trek littered throughout the film including characters, place names and alien species that a Trekkie, excuse me… Trekker, will be hooting and hollering at. But this movie isn’t solely for the die hard Trekkers. There is enough action and excitement to keep even the most hard to please moviegoer entertained.
Abrams got a lot of flack for his 2009 reboot of the franchise, and most likely he will get it again for this film. But this time around, Abrams does stay closer to the virtues of the original universe including the bond of the Enterprise crew and the close friendships among Kirk, Spock and Bones. Abrams manages to draw nice moments of tension and comedy alike from the entire crew.
Our main characters do shine through though. Pine brings just the right amount of swagger to Kirk, Quinto gives both the humor and emotional intensity within Spock’s struggle to balance logic and emotion. But both of these actors have to work overtime to even be on the same level as Cumberbatch, who brings muscle and old-school, butt kicking style to the villain’s role.
The other thing that I really enjoyed, again without giving too much of the plot away, is the films willingness to acknowledge that we have strayed from the original story of Kirk and crew, and how the plot can draw on that to help strengthen the story. Once you see it, you will know what I am talking about.
I saw the movie in 3D, though I am of the impression that 3D is getting a little overrated these days. I am just not blown out of the water by the 3D effects that we are seeing in movies. The one thing that I was truly grateful for is that they didn’t throw it in your face, too much. There were moments where they had things fly at you, but for the most part it wasn’t the emphasis which allowed it to play out nicely.
What are you doing still reading? Get out there and see this movie. If you don’t, you will be sorry you hadn’t as everyone and their mom will be talking about this movie come Monday. I, myself, will be seeing it for a second time this Friday hoping to spot things I missed this first time around. The movie made people laugh, cry, and hang on to the edge of your seat. As a Star Wars fan, I loved this movie. And really can’t wait to see what Abrams does with the next installment (as well as Episode 7).
There are so many cool things about J.J. Abrams second adventure in the beloved universe created all those years ago by Gene Roddenberry. But the best way to experience this movie is cold, devoid of any internet spoilers, if such a thing is possible in this day and age. That being said, here’s what I got for you.
The movie begins with Captain James Tiberius Kirk (Chris Pine) getting in to trouble with Starfleet for violating the Prime Directive. The Prime Directive is the United Federation of Plants number one rule against alerting primitive cultures to things that they are not nearly ready to grasp (i.e. space travel). But Kirk manages to avoid his punishment because Starfleet has a bigger problem on its hands: a rogue agent, named John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch) is attacking Federation facilities on Earth.
Admiral Markus (Peter Weller) gives Jim Kirk orders to kill Harrison, who has managed to escape Earth and hide on Kronos, the Klingon homeworld. So Kirk, along with his trusty crew including the ever-logical Mr. Spock (Zachary Quinto), James “Bones” McCoy (Karl Urban) and Uhura (Zoe Saldana), warp to the Neutral Zone that separates Federation space from the Klingon Empire. Only they discover that this mission – including the identity of the fugitive Harrison – is not what it seems.
That’s all I am giving you for plot details. Go see the movie!
And when you do, watch for the cleverness of the screenwriters. There are many classic Trek littered throughout the film including characters, place names and alien species that a Trekkie, excuse me… Trekker, will be hooting and hollering at. But this movie isn’t solely for the die hard Trekkers. There is enough action and excitement to keep even the most hard to please moviegoer entertained.
Abrams got a lot of flack for his 2009 reboot of the franchise, and most likely he will get it again for this film. But this time around, Abrams does stay closer to the virtues of the original universe including the bond of the Enterprise crew and the close friendships among Kirk, Spock and Bones. Abrams manages to draw nice moments of tension and comedy alike from the entire crew.
Our main characters do shine through though. Pine brings just the right amount of swagger to Kirk, Quinto gives both the humor and emotional intensity within Spock’s struggle to balance logic and emotion. But both of these actors have to work overtime to even be on the same level as Cumberbatch, who brings muscle and old-school, butt kicking style to the villain’s role.
The other thing that I really enjoyed, again without giving too much of the plot away, is the films willingness to acknowledge that we have strayed from the original story of Kirk and crew, and how the plot can draw on that to help strengthen the story. Once you see it, you will know what I am talking about.
I saw the movie in 3D, though I am of the impression that 3D is getting a little overrated these days. I am just not blown out of the water by the 3D effects that we are seeing in movies. The one thing that I was truly grateful for is that they didn’t throw it in your face, too much. There were moments where they had things fly at you, but for the most part it wasn’t the emphasis which allowed it to play out nicely.
What are you doing still reading? Get out there and see this movie. If you don’t, you will be sorry you hadn’t as everyone and their mom will be talking about this movie come Monday. I, myself, will be seeing it for a second time this Friday hoping to spot things I missed this first time around. The movie made people laugh, cry, and hang on to the edge of your seat. As a Star Wars fan, I loved this movie. And really can’t wait to see what Abrams does with the next installment (as well as Episode 7).
Proofs and Fundamentals: A First Course in Abstract Mathematics
Book
"Proofs and Fundamentals: A First Course in Abstract Mathematics" 2nd edition is designed as a...
The Wheels On The Bus Musical
Education and Games
App
~~> 12 fabulous games including the full sing along in one great kids app! ~~> 11 beautiful verses...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Fate of the Furious (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Blood is thicker than Diesel.
All work and no play makes bob-the-movie-man a tardy reviewer. Still, what better way to break the fast than with “Fast and Furious 8” (aka “The Fate of the Furious”)?
Well, quite a lot of things actually!
Now, I have a confession to make (and I know for some this will be the equivalent of an appalling statement like “I’ve never seen Star Wars”). I have actually never ever seen Fast and Furious 1 through 7! (If it’s any mitigation to this cinematic crime, I did see the F-and-F wannabe “Need for Speed“).
So I was going to be completely lost with the “plot” right? Well actually, no. It was pretty easy to jump in and follow as a piece of popcorn nonsense.
The M25 water main burst was a real bitch for the Monday morning rush-hour.
For nonsense it is (hence the “rabbit ears” round the word “plot” above). The story isn’t just a bit far-fetched. It’s bat-shit crazy where the bat in question has downed a questionable vindaloo two hours earlier!
Dom (Vin Diesel) has turned on his “family”, including his squeeze, the lovely Letty (Michelle Rodriguez), and Hobbs (Dwayne Johnson, “San Andreas“), to team with the above-the-law (and above the clouds) cyber-super-terrorist Cipher (Charlize Theron, “Mad Max: Fury Road“). They have teamed up, apparently, for no other reason than to allow Cipher to ‘kick some global ass’ with a nuclear threat. But given his caring and sharing side, why the sudden betrayal of his nearest and dearest by Dom?
Ice Queen Metallica fan Theron, showing off her hardware.
Where do you begin with the nonsensical story? Jumping from Cuba (with some admittedly fun scenes, but shamelessly objectifying scantily-clad women) via Berlin and New York to the icy wastes of Siberia, it’s just an excuse to show fast cars doing ludicrously unlikely things. There is zero logic within any of the script. Here are just a handful of examples:
the team know (through enormous jumps of speculation) to be present at a particular location in the world and at exactly the time that Dom is there (arrive, look through binoculars, “Oh, there he is”!);
all cars can be automatically hijacked and remotely driven (who knew), but NOT those of the team (obviously);
fast cars/tanks/etc can be magicked from New York to Siberia (wot, no Hertz Siberia available?);
Russian nuclear codes are stolen, so obviously they can’t be changed?
a nuclear submarine is out of the water on wooden blocks, but spin the propeller really REALLY fast and it can suddenly be sailing away.
Muscle for muscle it never looked like being a fair fight.
I appreciate I am being enormously po-faced about this, and this is designed as pure escapism. But is there REALLY any need for this to be such mindless escapism? The director (Gary Gray, “The Italian Job”) and writer (Chris Morgan, responsible for parts 6 and 7) should credit their audience with rather more in the way of intelligence.
Diesel and Johnson are never going to set the acting ablaze, but Rodriquez (“Lost”) is as watchable as ever. Theron has fun with her villainy and the supporting turns by Tyrese Gibson and Ludacris are enjoyable. Nathalie Emmanuel though as Ramsey seems as uncomfortable with her “sexy English” stereotype as she should be.
A long way from Brookside. Nathalie Emmanuel uncomfortable as “the sexy one”.
Luke Evans (“The Hobbit“), Kurt Russell (“Deepwater Horizon“) and Helen Mirren (“Eye in the Sky“) turn up in entertaining but underused cameos, but it is Jason Statham as Deckard that has the most fun in the whole film, and his scenes – done largely for comic effect – are the best part of the movie. (But “math” Jason? “MATH”?? I hope your old maths teacher back in London doesn’t get to see this film).
Parking enforcement by the City Council was getting more and more stringent.
If you’re willing to park your brain at the door for two hours then it has some fun moments. But I felt the damage to my IQ might not have been worth the risk, and this really didn’t fill my cinematic tank.
Well, quite a lot of things actually!
Now, I have a confession to make (and I know for some this will be the equivalent of an appalling statement like “I’ve never seen Star Wars”). I have actually never ever seen Fast and Furious 1 through 7! (If it’s any mitigation to this cinematic crime, I did see the F-and-F wannabe “Need for Speed“).
So I was going to be completely lost with the “plot” right? Well actually, no. It was pretty easy to jump in and follow as a piece of popcorn nonsense.
The M25 water main burst was a real bitch for the Monday morning rush-hour.
For nonsense it is (hence the “rabbit ears” round the word “plot” above). The story isn’t just a bit far-fetched. It’s bat-shit crazy where the bat in question has downed a questionable vindaloo two hours earlier!
Dom (Vin Diesel) has turned on his “family”, including his squeeze, the lovely Letty (Michelle Rodriguez), and Hobbs (Dwayne Johnson, “San Andreas“), to team with the above-the-law (and above the clouds) cyber-super-terrorist Cipher (Charlize Theron, “Mad Max: Fury Road“). They have teamed up, apparently, for no other reason than to allow Cipher to ‘kick some global ass’ with a nuclear threat. But given his caring and sharing side, why the sudden betrayal of his nearest and dearest by Dom?
Ice Queen Metallica fan Theron, showing off her hardware.
Where do you begin with the nonsensical story? Jumping from Cuba (with some admittedly fun scenes, but shamelessly objectifying scantily-clad women) via Berlin and New York to the icy wastes of Siberia, it’s just an excuse to show fast cars doing ludicrously unlikely things. There is zero logic within any of the script. Here are just a handful of examples:
the team know (through enormous jumps of speculation) to be present at a particular location in the world and at exactly the time that Dom is there (arrive, look through binoculars, “Oh, there he is”!);
all cars can be automatically hijacked and remotely driven (who knew), but NOT those of the team (obviously);
fast cars/tanks/etc can be magicked from New York to Siberia (wot, no Hertz Siberia available?);
Russian nuclear codes are stolen, so obviously they can’t be changed?
a nuclear submarine is out of the water on wooden blocks, but spin the propeller really REALLY fast and it can suddenly be sailing away.
Muscle for muscle it never looked like being a fair fight.
I appreciate I am being enormously po-faced about this, and this is designed as pure escapism. But is there REALLY any need for this to be such mindless escapism? The director (Gary Gray, “The Italian Job”) and writer (Chris Morgan, responsible for parts 6 and 7) should credit their audience with rather more in the way of intelligence.
Diesel and Johnson are never going to set the acting ablaze, but Rodriquez (“Lost”) is as watchable as ever. Theron has fun with her villainy and the supporting turns by Tyrese Gibson and Ludacris are enjoyable. Nathalie Emmanuel though as Ramsey seems as uncomfortable with her “sexy English” stereotype as she should be.
A long way from Brookside. Nathalie Emmanuel uncomfortable as “the sexy one”.
Luke Evans (“The Hobbit“), Kurt Russell (“Deepwater Horizon“) and Helen Mirren (“Eye in the Sky“) turn up in entertaining but underused cameos, but it is Jason Statham as Deckard that has the most fun in the whole film, and his scenes – done largely for comic effect – are the best part of the movie. (But “math” Jason? “MATH”?? I hope your old maths teacher back in London doesn’t get to see this film).
Parking enforcement by the City Council was getting more and more stringent.
If you’re willing to park your brain at the door for two hours then it has some fun moments. But I felt the damage to my IQ might not have been worth the risk, and this really didn’t fill my cinematic tank.