Search
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated My Trip to Adele in Books
Oct 5, 2020
My Trip To Adele is a book unlike any other. We are introduced to three different life stories, all of them connected to Adele in a wonderful way, and every one of them will teach us many lessons, bring tears or laughs on our faces and remind us who we are and why we exist in this world. This is a book of how a singer or a song can connect so many people and touch so many hearts in a way no one else could. A book about keeping traditions and breaking them, a book about love, bravery and most of all - HOPE.
Let’s meet Elias. A Moroccan man that has lived in Rome long enough to believe he is Italian, with a Moroccan dust left in his soul. Through Elias, we will find out about how many years ago, he paid a prostitute for her services and fell in love. His love for Malika is undescribable. While other men would pay hundreds to only have her body, he would pay thousands more to have her soul, even for just one night. He would never touch her body, but they would spend hours and hours talking about meaningful and meaningless things, about what it is like outside this city, outside this country, what can the world offer…
Malika has so many wishes and hopes, she sells her body so one day she would be able to leave this town, leave her family, and explore the world. Get married and have children, and be successful, and learn the English language. When life parts them from each other for eight years, Elias goes back to the same old city to look for her, and Malika has already left town. Sharing one special singer, there is only one place where he can find her - an Adele concert in Rome.
In Las Vegas, we have Yaser and Mariam, a married couple that lost its sparkle many years ago. Both are surgeons and spend a lot of time at work. And when they come home to the kids - everything is a routine. Yaser pretends to enjoy his TV Show evenings and the Prayers that Mariam wants to attend. He pretends to believe in God just to please his wife. They are not a happy family inside the house, but Mariam makes it sound perfect on the outside - they have the perfect social media photos, and they go to the most expensive places on a holiday, what could be so bad? He feels trapped inside a routine and wants to escape, but he also believes in saving his marriage, and following his marriage counselor, they are trying to revive their happiest memories, and that is when they decide to go to an Adele concert in Rome.
On the other side of the world we will meet Nadia and her son Waleed. Nadia is a strong woman that has been coping with her now ex-husband’s betrayals. She raised her son oh her own, and the love she feels for him is indescribable. Only a mother knows how much she adores her son. When her son gets hurt on her ex husband’s third wedding - Nadia decides that she would fight for her and her son, she will no longer be trapped, and she will finally enjoy a lovely holiday with her son - going to Adele’s concert in Rome.
This book is written in an amazing, fast pace, and you will never notice how you have scrolled through the pages and hours have passed. There were times where the character's description was basic, and sometimes Adele’s presence would be too exposed, but all the characters are different in their own way, and every story has its purpose and its lesson.
Let’s meet Elias. A Moroccan man that has lived in Rome long enough to believe he is Italian, with a Moroccan dust left in his soul. Through Elias, we will find out about how many years ago, he paid a prostitute for her services and fell in love. His love for Malika is undescribable. While other men would pay hundreds to only have her body, he would pay thousands more to have her soul, even for just one night. He would never touch her body, but they would spend hours and hours talking about meaningful and meaningless things, about what it is like outside this city, outside this country, what can the world offer…
Malika has so many wishes and hopes, she sells her body so one day she would be able to leave this town, leave her family, and explore the world. Get married and have children, and be successful, and learn the English language. When life parts them from each other for eight years, Elias goes back to the same old city to look for her, and Malika has already left town. Sharing one special singer, there is only one place where he can find her - an Adele concert in Rome.
In Las Vegas, we have Yaser and Mariam, a married couple that lost its sparkle many years ago. Both are surgeons and spend a lot of time at work. And when they come home to the kids - everything is a routine. Yaser pretends to enjoy his TV Show evenings and the Prayers that Mariam wants to attend. He pretends to believe in God just to please his wife. They are not a happy family inside the house, but Mariam makes it sound perfect on the outside - they have the perfect social media photos, and they go to the most expensive places on a holiday, what could be so bad? He feels trapped inside a routine and wants to escape, but he also believes in saving his marriage, and following his marriage counselor, they are trying to revive their happiest memories, and that is when they decide to go to an Adele concert in Rome.
On the other side of the world we will meet Nadia and her son Waleed. Nadia is a strong woman that has been coping with her now ex-husband’s betrayals. She raised her son oh her own, and the love she feels for him is indescribable. Only a mother knows how much she adores her son. When her son gets hurt on her ex husband’s third wedding - Nadia decides that she would fight for her and her son, she will no longer be trapped, and she will finally enjoy a lovely holiday with her son - going to Adele’s concert in Rome.
This book is written in an amazing, fast pace, and you will never notice how you have scrolled through the pages and hours have passed. There were times where the character's description was basic, and sometimes Adele’s presence would be too exposed, but all the characters are different in their own way, and every story has its purpose and its lesson.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Beats (2019) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
When this came up as an Unlimited Screening I shrugged my shoulders and booked my ticket. I didn't know anything about it and the very brief synopsis I read didn't really change that.
Johnno and Spanner are life long friends. Johnno is sensible and has a relatively stable family life while Spanner is suffering from living in his brother's criminal shadow.
When Spanner finds out that Johnno's mum is moving them up in the world to a new house with her policeman boyfriend he's devastated and steals money from his brother to fuel one last great night out for them both.
Firstly, I can't for the life of me work out why this was filmed in black and white, from personal recollections 1994 was pretty colourful, even in Scotland. The only reason I can conclude, as a viewer, is so that they could add a tie-dye electric nightmare at the rave to illustrate the drug-fuelled euphoria in a rather predictable visual way. Neither particularly added anything to the proceedings.
The highlight when it came to the acting in Beats was Lorn Macdonald as Spanner. The different sides of his character were shown so well. We get a peek at the person Johnno knows him to be and not the person he's perceived to be. Macdonald managed to bring a vulnerability to Spanner and reminded us that friends are the family you choose.
Johnno as a character confused me a bit, he was all over the place. Quiet and shy for the most part with the odd outburst that didn't feel like they fit the situation. Cristian Ortega wasn't bad in this part but the muddled character traits throughout left me cold to Johnno.
Beats obviously contains a lot of music and I was pleased that it wasn't always played a full volume. We open with the pair dancing to music and you expect it to be excessively loud. They kept it at a relatively low level but managed to give you the impression it was louder by the way everyone reacted to it. I can't work out whether that was a good or a bad way to start because I keep pondering on that point, being loud would have been accurate but I probably would have been grumbling about that fact right now.
The rave itself felt very accurate but it was tremendously difficult to watch. It really gave you the impression that you were in it, the only trouble with that is that when you are actually in it you're not trying to watch what's happening. Perhaps we could have cranked it up and had audience participation.
Beats is a story of friendship that happens to coincide with a time of change for the music scene in Scotland. There are touching moments in it, mainly around Spanner, but the rest of the film felt like it was trying to be too artistic. There's probably a very niche audience of music lovers out there for this but there were just too many moments that made me frown to give this a higher rating.
On the topic of ratings, as a final point... Beats was rated 18 and I would assume that this was for the drug use and domestic violence. This is me being numb to all things offensive I guess but it really didn't feel like it needed an 18.
What you should do
If you were/are partial to a rave then give this a go, but it's not something I'd generally recommend.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I'd love the energy to party like that... what a distant memory.
Johnno and Spanner are life long friends. Johnno is sensible and has a relatively stable family life while Spanner is suffering from living in his brother's criminal shadow.
When Spanner finds out that Johnno's mum is moving them up in the world to a new house with her policeman boyfriend he's devastated and steals money from his brother to fuel one last great night out for them both.
Firstly, I can't for the life of me work out why this was filmed in black and white, from personal recollections 1994 was pretty colourful, even in Scotland. The only reason I can conclude, as a viewer, is so that they could add a tie-dye electric nightmare at the rave to illustrate the drug-fuelled euphoria in a rather predictable visual way. Neither particularly added anything to the proceedings.
The highlight when it came to the acting in Beats was Lorn Macdonald as Spanner. The different sides of his character were shown so well. We get a peek at the person Johnno knows him to be and not the person he's perceived to be. Macdonald managed to bring a vulnerability to Spanner and reminded us that friends are the family you choose.
Johnno as a character confused me a bit, he was all over the place. Quiet and shy for the most part with the odd outburst that didn't feel like they fit the situation. Cristian Ortega wasn't bad in this part but the muddled character traits throughout left me cold to Johnno.
Beats obviously contains a lot of music and I was pleased that it wasn't always played a full volume. We open with the pair dancing to music and you expect it to be excessively loud. They kept it at a relatively low level but managed to give you the impression it was louder by the way everyone reacted to it. I can't work out whether that was a good or a bad way to start because I keep pondering on that point, being loud would have been accurate but I probably would have been grumbling about that fact right now.
The rave itself felt very accurate but it was tremendously difficult to watch. It really gave you the impression that you were in it, the only trouble with that is that when you are actually in it you're not trying to watch what's happening. Perhaps we could have cranked it up and had audience participation.
Beats is a story of friendship that happens to coincide with a time of change for the music scene in Scotland. There are touching moments in it, mainly around Spanner, but the rest of the film felt like it was trying to be too artistic. There's probably a very niche audience of music lovers out there for this but there were just too many moments that made me frown to give this a higher rating.
On the topic of ratings, as a final point... Beats was rated 18 and I would assume that this was for the drug use and domestic violence. This is me being numb to all things offensive I guess but it really didn't feel like it needed an 18.
What you should do
If you were/are partial to a rave then give this a go, but it's not something I'd generally recommend.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I'd love the energy to party like that... what a distant memory.
Darren (1599 KP) rated The Book of Henry (2017) in Movies
Oct 2, 2019
Characters – Susan is the mother of the house, though she doesn’t have the full responsibility in the house as she lets her genius son Henry handle the finances in the home. She is a single working mother that does everything she can to help her kids, enjoys a drink with her best friend Sheila and videos to release the stress, she must go through a difficult process when Henry becomes sick and wants to follow his book to do the right thing. Henry is a genius 12-year-old boy, he keeps his family together while trying to leave his own legacy, he knows how to work the stock market which keeps the family a float and when he sees wrong in the world he wants to help change it, this brings him to write a book to stop the abuse of his neighbour by her stepfather. Peter is the younger brother to Henry, he always looks up to him and wants to help him with his innocent being the only thing that lets Henry have fun. Sheila is the best friend and work colleague of Susan, she enjoys herself a drink and has great banter with Henry. Glenn is the neighbour and police chief living next door to the Carpenter family, he has a stepdaughter that he is abusing though he position of power makes it nearly impossible for him to get investigated. Dr Daniels is the man that must treat Henry, he must help the family through the difficult decision.
Performances – Naomi Watts in the leading role is great through this film, we see how her character needs to develop after what happens to Henry. Jaeden continues to show us he is a fast-rising child star along with Jacob Tremblay who are both going to be talked about as a couple of the best of the current generations. Silverman, Morris and Pace give us good supporting performances throughout the film too.
Story – The story here follows a genius son that helps run the family to help take the pressure of his single mother, he plans long term and wants to make the world a better place, though when sees abuse he wants to step in and help. He doesn’t expect the short term though, leaving his legacy to his mother to help solve the abuse he sees the neighbour going through. We do have moments that make the children feel like they are in ‘Pay it Forward’ which does have a better message about, doing something to make the world a better place, this story does get that message over and does make you want to help bring calm to the world. if I was being honest with the way the story is told, I feel it would have been nice to mix the planning Henry does with the actual plan rather than showing his plan before the incident.
Crime – The film does have a crime base to everything going on, we get to see how Henry sees a crime being committed and the only way he can solve it is to have someone commit a crime for him.
Settings – The film shows us the simple life the Carpenter family are currently living and how Henry is happy with this even though he can make them rich with a blink of an eye, he wants family over anything.
Scene of the Movie – Take the shot.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The kids are way to talent in the talent contest.
Final Thoughts – This is a film that has taken a beating by the critics and sure there are a couple of weaknesses in this film, but the core of the story is one of the most interesting ways to show a child genius doing the right thing in life, well-acted and one people should be giving a chance too.
Overall: Nice story about leaving a legacy.
Performances – Naomi Watts in the leading role is great through this film, we see how her character needs to develop after what happens to Henry. Jaeden continues to show us he is a fast-rising child star along with Jacob Tremblay who are both going to be talked about as a couple of the best of the current generations. Silverman, Morris and Pace give us good supporting performances throughout the film too.
Story – The story here follows a genius son that helps run the family to help take the pressure of his single mother, he plans long term and wants to make the world a better place, though when sees abuse he wants to step in and help. He doesn’t expect the short term though, leaving his legacy to his mother to help solve the abuse he sees the neighbour going through. We do have moments that make the children feel like they are in ‘Pay it Forward’ which does have a better message about, doing something to make the world a better place, this story does get that message over and does make you want to help bring calm to the world. if I was being honest with the way the story is told, I feel it would have been nice to mix the planning Henry does with the actual plan rather than showing his plan before the incident.
Crime – The film does have a crime base to everything going on, we get to see how Henry sees a crime being committed and the only way he can solve it is to have someone commit a crime for him.
Settings – The film shows us the simple life the Carpenter family are currently living and how Henry is happy with this even though he can make them rich with a blink of an eye, he wants family over anything.
Scene of the Movie – Take the shot.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The kids are way to talent in the talent contest.
Final Thoughts – This is a film that has taken a beating by the critics and sure there are a couple of weaknesses in this film, but the core of the story is one of the most interesting ways to show a child genius doing the right thing in life, well-acted and one people should be giving a chance too.
Overall: Nice story about leaving a legacy.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Unhinged (2020) in Movies
Sep 2, 2020
The opening credits for Unhinged paint a pretty bleak and horrific snapshot of human life, just to get us in the mood for what’s to come. Footage of actual road rage incidents, supermarket disagreements and brawls, cars crashing into each other, all while recordings of news readers talk about how stressed and angry we all are these days. I think that in the current climate, we can all appreciate just how angry the world seems to have become these last few months, and some of these scenes really hit home.
We’d already seen just how angry Russell Crowe’s character is (billed as ‘The Man’, although he later introduces himself as Tom Cooper), courtesy of a shocking little pre-credits scene. Sitting in his car at night, rain beating down on the car as he breathes heavily and pops some pills into his mouth. Slowly turning a wedding ring on his finger, he removes it, tossing it behind him onto the backseat. Taking a hammer, he gets out of the car and walks to the front door of the house he’d parked outside, before smashing it down and proceeding to use the hammer on the occupants. He’s clearly not the kind of person you want to get on the wrong side of.
The person that does manage to get on his wrong side is Rachel (Caren Pistorius), who’s also having a pretty bad day of her own. Waking up late on the sofa, we learn that she’s currently going through a divorce, with her ex-husband wanting her house. She’s also late in taking her son to school, so when they hit heavy traffic along the way, it’s the last thing she needs.
At some traffic lights, the large SUV she’s sitting behind doesn’t budge when the lights turn green, so Rachel lets out a series of long beeps on the horn, before eventually pulling around the SUV to continue on her way. Unfortunately for her though, when they hit more traffic further down the road, the SUV pulls up alongside her, and when the window rolls down, we see that it’s ‘The Man’ behind the wheel. He’s calm at first, if a little on edge, but after apologising for his mistake, demands the same from Rachel before they go their separate ways. Unfortunately though, Rachel isn’t prepared to offer an apology. “I need you to learn what a bad day is and I need you to learn how to say sorry” he growls, before Rachel pulls away, believing that to be the end of it.
What follows is an intense game of cat and mouse, as ‘The Man’ relentlessly stalks Rachel through the roads and highways. Just to make things worse, ‘The Man’ manages to get hold of Rachel’s phone and starts to threaten and target her close friends and family. We’ve already seen just how Unhinged he can be, and there’s more of that as the movie progresses and he gets a chance to carry out some of those threats. He’s not just out to kill Rachel, but to give her the worst possible day he can before that moment arrives.
Crowe is suitably menacing – overweight and sweaty, taking out anyone who gets in his way and methodical in his determination to catch Rachel. The movie does try to humanise him a little at times though, as we discover that he’s been through a relationship breakdown, and was laid off work just a few weeks short of retiring, as if trying to provide some justification for his behaviour.
Unhinged comes in at just over 90 minutes and proved to be a real intense, gut wrenching roller-coaster ride. I don’t know if I was just a bit giddy at being back in the cinema for the first time since March, but I found it to be a lot of fun.
We’d already seen just how angry Russell Crowe’s character is (billed as ‘The Man’, although he later introduces himself as Tom Cooper), courtesy of a shocking little pre-credits scene. Sitting in his car at night, rain beating down on the car as he breathes heavily and pops some pills into his mouth. Slowly turning a wedding ring on his finger, he removes it, tossing it behind him onto the backseat. Taking a hammer, he gets out of the car and walks to the front door of the house he’d parked outside, before smashing it down and proceeding to use the hammer on the occupants. He’s clearly not the kind of person you want to get on the wrong side of.
The person that does manage to get on his wrong side is Rachel (Caren Pistorius), who’s also having a pretty bad day of her own. Waking up late on the sofa, we learn that she’s currently going through a divorce, with her ex-husband wanting her house. She’s also late in taking her son to school, so when they hit heavy traffic along the way, it’s the last thing she needs.
At some traffic lights, the large SUV she’s sitting behind doesn’t budge when the lights turn green, so Rachel lets out a series of long beeps on the horn, before eventually pulling around the SUV to continue on her way. Unfortunately for her though, when they hit more traffic further down the road, the SUV pulls up alongside her, and when the window rolls down, we see that it’s ‘The Man’ behind the wheel. He’s calm at first, if a little on edge, but after apologising for his mistake, demands the same from Rachel before they go their separate ways. Unfortunately though, Rachel isn’t prepared to offer an apology. “I need you to learn what a bad day is and I need you to learn how to say sorry” he growls, before Rachel pulls away, believing that to be the end of it.
What follows is an intense game of cat and mouse, as ‘The Man’ relentlessly stalks Rachel through the roads and highways. Just to make things worse, ‘The Man’ manages to get hold of Rachel’s phone and starts to threaten and target her close friends and family. We’ve already seen just how Unhinged he can be, and there’s more of that as the movie progresses and he gets a chance to carry out some of those threats. He’s not just out to kill Rachel, but to give her the worst possible day he can before that moment arrives.
Crowe is suitably menacing – overweight and sweaty, taking out anyone who gets in his way and methodical in his determination to catch Rachel. The movie does try to humanise him a little at times though, as we discover that he’s been through a relationship breakdown, and was laid off work just a few weeks short of retiring, as if trying to provide some justification for his behaviour.
Unhinged comes in at just over 90 minutes and proved to be a real intense, gut wrenching roller-coaster ride. I don’t know if I was just a bit giddy at being back in the cinema for the first time since March, but I found it to be a lot of fun.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Lady In The Van (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019 (Updated Jun 11, 2019)
Like a particularly lethargic sloth
Cinema has a long lasting love of people having their homes invaded by unwanted intruders, and not just because that’s how most directors view anyone who tries to tell them their opinion on filmmaking. It’s because there’s a lot of different directions one can take with the drama and excitement of home invasion. The horror of Wait Until Dark, the brutality of Straw Dogs, the silliness of Home Alone, the potential is quite large. And now throwing in its own interpretation of this theme is The Lady in the Van, based on the somewhat true story of Alan Bennett’s relationship with a transient woman who parked her van on his driveway. So, how does he and the audience respond?
With a dull, mild curiosity.
Despite being from the viewpoint of two Alan Bennetts, described as one being the writer and the other living the life, the main character is Miss Sheppard, the lady in the van. The film insists that we should be interested in her mysterious life, her past as a pianist and a nun, and why she chooses to live in the van, but throughout most of the film I was only thinking “Oh, let’s just go back and hear Alan Bennett be cynical some more.” The words are witty and sharp, but it’s mostly said about things we don’t care about. Miss Sheppard is a flat, mostly dull character, and the audience is unwillingly handcuffed to her.
The highlight of the film is its acting, with the cast being a veritable who’s who of Britain’s finest talent, and James Corden. What dimension Miss Sheppard has is provided almost entirely by the volatile yet vulnerable performance by Maggie Smith, and Alex Jennings is as real an Alan Bennett as the actual Alan Bennett. Even in the small roles, everyone from Roger Allam to Gwen Taylor manage to force themselves to shine. The only bad performance is from, of all people, Jim Broadbent, who pops up to antagonise Miss Sheppard but appears less like a real human being and more like a cartoon supervillain. For a second, I thought the character’s name was Baron von Drakkhen.
But great players cannot save a bad game, and the story of the film is flat, predictable and boring. If you don’t immediately care about Miss Sheppard, then the film becomes more tedious and lifeless by the second. I guessed long before the end the mystery behind Miss Sheppard, but even if I hadn’t I would still have been bored due to the lack of any interest. The film believes that the existence of a mystery to be motivation enough to solve it, which just isn’t the case; I don’t know what John McCririck had for breakfast, but I’m not going to stare at his stools to find out.
Not helping matters is a very by the numbers direction by Nicholas Hytner. While not incompetent, there’s very little in the way of style or flair without being casual. The only parts that show any sort of imagination are the fourth wall breaks, but the best only happen towards the end. It’s a shame that the potential of having two Alan Bennetts and seeing the film from the perspective of the writer only starts to be explored as the film is drawing to a close. Otherwise, a robot could’ve directed this film.
Alan Bennett is a highly praised writer, and rightfully so, but The Lady in the Van just isn’t his best. The above-average but by no means stellar script is tied to a plot as lifeless and sluggish as a particularly lethargic sloth. If you’re really hurting to see Bennett at his best, it’d be a lot cheaper and a lot more entertaining to rent The Madness of King George or The History Boys or even one of The Secret Policeman’s Ball’s, plus you can order some pizza from your sofa. Otherwise, The Lady in the Van, unlike the real Miss Sheppard, can very safely be ignored.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/11/19/like-a-particularly-lethargic-sloth-the-lady-in-the-van-review/
With a dull, mild curiosity.
Despite being from the viewpoint of two Alan Bennetts, described as one being the writer and the other living the life, the main character is Miss Sheppard, the lady in the van. The film insists that we should be interested in her mysterious life, her past as a pianist and a nun, and why she chooses to live in the van, but throughout most of the film I was only thinking “Oh, let’s just go back and hear Alan Bennett be cynical some more.” The words are witty and sharp, but it’s mostly said about things we don’t care about. Miss Sheppard is a flat, mostly dull character, and the audience is unwillingly handcuffed to her.
The highlight of the film is its acting, with the cast being a veritable who’s who of Britain’s finest talent, and James Corden. What dimension Miss Sheppard has is provided almost entirely by the volatile yet vulnerable performance by Maggie Smith, and Alex Jennings is as real an Alan Bennett as the actual Alan Bennett. Even in the small roles, everyone from Roger Allam to Gwen Taylor manage to force themselves to shine. The only bad performance is from, of all people, Jim Broadbent, who pops up to antagonise Miss Sheppard but appears less like a real human being and more like a cartoon supervillain. For a second, I thought the character’s name was Baron von Drakkhen.
But great players cannot save a bad game, and the story of the film is flat, predictable and boring. If you don’t immediately care about Miss Sheppard, then the film becomes more tedious and lifeless by the second. I guessed long before the end the mystery behind Miss Sheppard, but even if I hadn’t I would still have been bored due to the lack of any interest. The film believes that the existence of a mystery to be motivation enough to solve it, which just isn’t the case; I don’t know what John McCririck had for breakfast, but I’m not going to stare at his stools to find out.
Not helping matters is a very by the numbers direction by Nicholas Hytner. While not incompetent, there’s very little in the way of style or flair without being casual. The only parts that show any sort of imagination are the fourth wall breaks, but the best only happen towards the end. It’s a shame that the potential of having two Alan Bennetts and seeing the film from the perspective of the writer only starts to be explored as the film is drawing to a close. Otherwise, a robot could’ve directed this film.
Alan Bennett is a highly praised writer, and rightfully so, but The Lady in the Van just isn’t his best. The above-average but by no means stellar script is tied to a plot as lifeless and sluggish as a particularly lethargic sloth. If you’re really hurting to see Bennett at his best, it’d be a lot cheaper and a lot more entertaining to rent The Madness of King George or The History Boys or even one of The Secret Policeman’s Ball’s, plus you can order some pizza from your sofa. Otherwise, The Lady in the Van, unlike the real Miss Sheppard, can very safely be ignored.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/11/19/like-a-particularly-lethargic-sloth-the-lady-in-the-van-review/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Loveless (2017) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
Speaking as someone who grew up in the United States, prides themselves on having a vast and diverse movie library, and only leaves the confines of the greater Seattle-area on very rare occasions .. I’m the first to admit that there are times when I don’t fully appreciate the films produced in other countries. It’s amazing how different they can be based on even differences in other cultures. Take films made in Russia for example. Perhaps it’s the cold and bleakness of the country but Russian filmmakers are amongst the best when it comes to tragedies. I imagine it’s a ‘carry over’ in part from the great literary masterpieces to come out of that country. Not to give it all away right from the beginning but if you’re like me, you need to prepare yourself for a good tragedy and that’s exactly what the film is that is up for your consideration.
‘Loveless’ is a 2017 Russian tragedy from noted director Andrey Zvyaginstev and co-written by Zvyaginstev and Oleg Negin. As with Zvyaginstev’s 2014 tragedy ‘Leviathan’, ‘Loveless’ has quickly risen to critical acclaim and already won several accolades including the Jury Prize at 2017 Cannes Film Festival and was nominated for Best Foreign Language Film at the 90th Academy Awards.
‘Loveless’ stars Maryana Spivak, Aleksey Rozin, and Matvey Novikov. It’s the end of the day for 12 year-old Alexey (Novikov). He says farewell to the few friends he has at school and takes the long way home through the woods following a river on the outskirts of Moscow. It’s a cold, dreary afternoon yet it’s preferable to what awaits him at home. His parents Zhenya (Spivak) and Boris (Rozin) are separated and engaged in bitter divorce proceedings but to both, the marriage was over long ago. The only difference is now are that they are living separately and they’re also trying to shrug parental responsibilities off on one another. They seem to have no issue vocalizing their mutual belief that having Alexey was a mistake. Their only real concerns seem to be getting their son out of their lives so they can move on with their new spouses and each begin a whole new family obliterating any connection they ever had or made. All this in a country that that is engaged in a war against its own people and against the Ukraine. The destruction of a family with parents at war with one another leaving the child as the innocent victim.
Zhenya returns to her apartment after spending time with her new lover to find Alexey gone and messages from his school stating he had not been there in two days. She calls Boris in an attempt to locate Alexey and after another argument over the phone finally decides to call in the police. After starting to show the smallest amount of concern for Alexey and disgust over the low priority that the police are assigning their son’s case, Zhenya and Boris call in a special volunteer unit specializing in searching for missing persons. While the parents actively participate in searching for their son, they continue to fight and engage in hostilities towards one another showing such selfishness and a blatant disregard for their son’s well being that you begin to wonder how far they can take it.
Although the film isn’t my ‘normal cup of tea’, i’m going to give it 4 out of 5 stars Zvyaginstev has crafted another tragic masterpiece putting ‘Loveless’ almost on par with ‘Leviathan’. The film highlights the lack of empathy displayed by families in modern society. Although the film has a ‘predictability’ given Zvyaginstev’s past work it is beautifully shot and well written. Watching the downward spiral of the family in this film is almost like reading a piece sheet music. It’s ominous. It’s not just name calling and insults … it’s as though it’s being disassembled piece by piece which although dark and bleak is still quite intriguing. I’d personally recommend you catch it in an independent movie theater or a small art house theater. It’s a 2 hour movie so I’d recommend catching it at a small theater.
‘Loveless’ is a 2017 Russian tragedy from noted director Andrey Zvyaginstev and co-written by Zvyaginstev and Oleg Negin. As with Zvyaginstev’s 2014 tragedy ‘Leviathan’, ‘Loveless’ has quickly risen to critical acclaim and already won several accolades including the Jury Prize at 2017 Cannes Film Festival and was nominated for Best Foreign Language Film at the 90th Academy Awards.
‘Loveless’ stars Maryana Spivak, Aleksey Rozin, and Matvey Novikov. It’s the end of the day for 12 year-old Alexey (Novikov). He says farewell to the few friends he has at school and takes the long way home through the woods following a river on the outskirts of Moscow. It’s a cold, dreary afternoon yet it’s preferable to what awaits him at home. His parents Zhenya (Spivak) and Boris (Rozin) are separated and engaged in bitter divorce proceedings but to both, the marriage was over long ago. The only difference is now are that they are living separately and they’re also trying to shrug parental responsibilities off on one another. They seem to have no issue vocalizing their mutual belief that having Alexey was a mistake. Their only real concerns seem to be getting their son out of their lives so they can move on with their new spouses and each begin a whole new family obliterating any connection they ever had or made. All this in a country that that is engaged in a war against its own people and against the Ukraine. The destruction of a family with parents at war with one another leaving the child as the innocent victim.
Zhenya returns to her apartment after spending time with her new lover to find Alexey gone and messages from his school stating he had not been there in two days. She calls Boris in an attempt to locate Alexey and after another argument over the phone finally decides to call in the police. After starting to show the smallest amount of concern for Alexey and disgust over the low priority that the police are assigning their son’s case, Zhenya and Boris call in a special volunteer unit specializing in searching for missing persons. While the parents actively participate in searching for their son, they continue to fight and engage in hostilities towards one another showing such selfishness and a blatant disregard for their son’s well being that you begin to wonder how far they can take it.
Although the film isn’t my ‘normal cup of tea’, i’m going to give it 4 out of 5 stars Zvyaginstev has crafted another tragic masterpiece putting ‘Loveless’ almost on par with ‘Leviathan’. The film highlights the lack of empathy displayed by families in modern society. Although the film has a ‘predictability’ given Zvyaginstev’s past work it is beautifully shot and well written. Watching the downward spiral of the family in this film is almost like reading a piece sheet music. It’s ominous. It’s not just name calling and insults … it’s as though it’s being disassembled piece by piece which although dark and bleak is still quite intriguing. I’d personally recommend you catch it in an independent movie theater or a small art house theater. It’s a 2 hour movie so I’d recommend catching it at a small theater.
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated Demon Seed: A novel of terror to horrify you this Halloween in Books
May 16, 2018
One of the things I’ve noticed when I’m running around between thrift stores is an abundance of Dean Koontz novels. That said, I’ve definitely been stockpiling them up, and the first one I read out of my Koontz pile is Demon Seed. Demon Seed is told from a rather peculiar perspective: that of a computer with artificial intelligence. Before I delve deeper into my thoughts on Demon Seed, I would like to note that this is a copy of the 1997 release, and not the original novel published in 1973. There are differences in the two books, however because I have not happened to lay hands upon the original version, I am unable to compare or contrast their contents. As such, my review is based solely upon the second version of the book, which is told solely from the perspective of Proteus, the artificial intelligence program that is all too frighteningly real.
The idea of a computer striking fear into someone’s heart is a bit of an oddball, but with the idea of artificial intelligence an all too possible reality, fear over what could happen should the AI take control of itself and evolve is real. In Demon Seed that science is taken too far when Proteus takes control of his own programming and not only stalks the recently divorced Susan Harris, but holds her captive within her own home. With a plan for the ideal race of humans on its mind, Proteus sets forth on a horrifying adventure to create for himself the perfect body, and poor Susan is a key player in his endeavor.
As a premise, especially for something originally written in the early 70’s, the idea behind Demon Seed is intriguing. I find Proteus to be a very disturbing character, and the way in which Koontz pens Proteus gives me chills. I remember once, a long time ago, having a similar feeling while reading a novel by P. T. Deutermann, in which the occasional chapter was in the killer’s perspective. I don’t remember the name of the book, only the fact that I was left nerve-wracked. Koontz’s Proteus is not too far off from that mark and the mere fact that Koontz is able to capture that essence of a true sociopath with an inanimate object (if I can really call Proteus that) probably factors into my opinion on the book the most. The other characters, and to some degree Susan as well, strike me as a bit one-dimensional. They have a single, solitary purpose and while they possess wildly different backgrounds, the way in which the story progresses does not leave room for the development of feelings toward the characters.
Demon Seed is an extremely quick read, and if you’ve got the time to sit for a few hours and thumb through its pages, I’d definitely recommend it. While it isn’t among my favorite books, and only receives a passing “meh” score from me, it was enjoyable. The linear plot line, told from a single, solitary perspective, makes it an easy read as well. There is also a movie adaptation of the novel, but it is not presently on my to-watch list.
The idea of a computer striking fear into someone’s heart is a bit of an oddball, but with the idea of artificial intelligence an all too possible reality, fear over what could happen should the AI take control of itself and evolve is real. In Demon Seed that science is taken too far when Proteus takes control of his own programming and not only stalks the recently divorced Susan Harris, but holds her captive within her own home. With a plan for the ideal race of humans on its mind, Proteus sets forth on a horrifying adventure to create for himself the perfect body, and poor Susan is a key player in his endeavor.
As a premise, especially for something originally written in the early 70’s, the idea behind Demon Seed is intriguing. I find Proteus to be a very disturbing character, and the way in which Koontz pens Proteus gives me chills. I remember once, a long time ago, having a similar feeling while reading a novel by P. T. Deutermann, in which the occasional chapter was in the killer’s perspective. I don’t remember the name of the book, only the fact that I was left nerve-wracked. Koontz’s Proteus is not too far off from that mark and the mere fact that Koontz is able to capture that essence of a true sociopath with an inanimate object (if I can really call Proteus that) probably factors into my opinion on the book the most. The other characters, and to some degree Susan as well, strike me as a bit one-dimensional. They have a single, solitary purpose and while they possess wildly different backgrounds, the way in which the story progresses does not leave room for the development of feelings toward the characters.
Demon Seed is an extremely quick read, and if you’ve got the time to sit for a few hours and thumb through its pages, I’d definitely recommend it. While it isn’t among my favorite books, and only receives a passing “meh” score from me, it was enjoyable. The linear plot line, told from a single, solitary perspective, makes it an easy read as well. There is also a movie adaptation of the novel, but it is not presently on my to-watch list.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated On the Basis of Sex (2018) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
What a great way to start this film. Ginsburg walking through the crowd of men all set to the Harvard fight song "Ten Thousand Men Of Harvard", it sums up the message of the film so well and makes you realise just how much of a challenge she was up against.
With such a wide career to work with I was pleased to see that for the most part the film concentrated on that main case. The preamble up to that point was interesting and seemed to be well chosen, I did initially find it slightly confusing initially as I think I blinked slightly too long and missed the point where it showed the year change.
I liked the changing dynamic of Ruth and Martin, it showed an amazingly supportive relationship, when he couldn't see the light at the end of the tunnel she was there for him and when she thought she was failing he was her rock. The emotion between the two showed throughout and was a welcome addition to the film and there's one moment that's just so amazing where Ruth looks up at Martin and I wondered for one second if Jones and Hammer were actually in love.
Hearing her listing the reasons she'd been rejected from jobs was mind-boggling and had it been me I'd definitely have ended up in jail after bitchslapping at least one of the interviewers. I think the film handles the sexism quite well, although I'm sure it wasn't quite as "easy" as it appeared. The "unintentional" sexism in the characters was interesting to see and added an extra layer into the story.
I could probably wade around in this film for ages nit-picking about things, it's a perfectly adequate production with nothing massively wrong with it... apart from Martin wearing a short sleeve shirt with his suit, that's still annoying me along with the question: why is she referred to as Ruth Ginsburg all the way through apart from once? I feel like we were being kept out of the loop on some in-joke/secret. I came out feeling let down though, partly because I don't think it was quite what I was expecting and partly because of the ending.
You know you're going to get a showstopper of a speech from Ginsburg but it actually was the showstopper from which we switch to a worded cut screen and voiceovers. This was completely at odds with the rest of the film and it robs us of the gratification of seeing the characters get their win. It almost felt like it was aware that it needed to do something to link it to the modern side of the story but didn't know how.
What you should do
It's not a bad watch, but I wouldn't worry about seeing it at the cinema. I'm going to seek out the RBG documentary next and it might be something to watch that covers a wider history.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Some of those RBG logic and reasoning skills would be absolutely amazing.
With such a wide career to work with I was pleased to see that for the most part the film concentrated on that main case. The preamble up to that point was interesting and seemed to be well chosen, I did initially find it slightly confusing initially as I think I blinked slightly too long and missed the point where it showed the year change.
I liked the changing dynamic of Ruth and Martin, it showed an amazingly supportive relationship, when he couldn't see the light at the end of the tunnel she was there for him and when she thought she was failing he was her rock. The emotion between the two showed throughout and was a welcome addition to the film and there's one moment that's just so amazing where Ruth looks up at Martin and I wondered for one second if Jones and Hammer were actually in love.
Hearing her listing the reasons she'd been rejected from jobs was mind-boggling and had it been me I'd definitely have ended up in jail after bitchslapping at least one of the interviewers. I think the film handles the sexism quite well, although I'm sure it wasn't quite as "easy" as it appeared. The "unintentional" sexism in the characters was interesting to see and added an extra layer into the story.
I could probably wade around in this film for ages nit-picking about things, it's a perfectly adequate production with nothing massively wrong with it... apart from Martin wearing a short sleeve shirt with his suit, that's still annoying me along with the question: why is she referred to as Ruth Ginsburg all the way through apart from once? I feel like we were being kept out of the loop on some in-joke/secret. I came out feeling let down though, partly because I don't think it was quite what I was expecting and partly because of the ending.
You know you're going to get a showstopper of a speech from Ginsburg but it actually was the showstopper from which we switch to a worded cut screen and voiceovers. This was completely at odds with the rest of the film and it robs us of the gratification of seeing the characters get their win. It almost felt like it was aware that it needed to do something to link it to the modern side of the story but didn't know how.
What you should do
It's not a bad watch, but I wouldn't worry about seeing it at the cinema. I'm going to seek out the RBG documentary next and it might be something to watch that covers a wider history.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Some of those RBG logic and reasoning skills would be absolutely amazing.
JT (287 KP) rated Spider-Man: Far From Home (2019) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
With the news that Disney and Sony will no longer co-produce Spider-Man films, it seems apt that the teen web-slinger headed off on a European vacation to get away from it all. A chance to chill out and take in the sights after the traumatic events of Avengers: Endgame.
For Peter Parker (Tom Holland), coming to terms with the loss of his mentor Tony Stark has been an emotional rollercoaster. Add to that the pressure for him to carry the mantle of Iron Man would be too much for any teenager to bear, let alone a quietly spoken superhero. But back in the halls of high-school with his best friend Ned (Jacob Batalon) and eyes still firmly fixed on MJ (Zendaya), Peter feels that life might be calming down – even deciding to leave his iconic suit behind, much to the dismay of his Aunt (Marisa Tomei).
When Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) finally gets through after being ghosted a number of times on the phone, he informs Peter that a new force called the ‘Elementals’ has been leaving a trail of destruction across the world. As luck would have it a new superhero called Mysterio has arrived at just the right time to save the day, albeit it conveniently.
The action is loud, explosive and very impressive giving our friendly neighbourhood ‘on tour’ Spider-Man the chance to flip and twist his way through a number of European locations.
Peter comes face to face with Quentin Beck (Jake Gyllenhaal) aka Mysterio. In Beck, Parker has found someone who sympathises with his problems and straight away sees him as a knee jerk replacement to Stark. Confiding in Beck, as well as handing him a pair of billionaire-dollar high-tech sunglasses which, has the ability to connect to various satellites and weapons, Peter is able to shift responsibility and concentrate on being just your regular love-struck teen.
The action is loud, explosive and very impressive, giving our friendly neighbourhood ‘on tour’ Spider-Man the chance to flip and twist his way through a number of European locations in spectacular fashion. As Spider-Man and Mysterio combine forces to defeat the extraterrestrial Elementals there is something more disturbing about the goldfish-bowl wearing crime fighter.
Spider-Man: Far From Home keeps the humour trickling along and a number of romantic narratives spin-off from the main story. There is the awkward love interest between Happy Hogan (Jon Favreau) and Aunt May, with the former looking to fill the void left by his long-time companion, while Ned is also struck by cupid’s arrow. However, it is Peter and MJ’s on-screen romance that shines through, giving fans what they have wanted since Homecoming.
As to where this leaves the franchise given the recent split by the studios is anyone’s guess. Spider-Man is firmly entrenched in the Marvel Universe and any crossovers with other Marvel characters would probably not be allowed. Could this leave a tantalizing match-up between Spidey and Tom Hardy’s Venom, which despite some harsh criticism was a box office success?
For Peter Parker (Tom Holland), coming to terms with the loss of his mentor Tony Stark has been an emotional rollercoaster. Add to that the pressure for him to carry the mantle of Iron Man would be too much for any teenager to bear, let alone a quietly spoken superhero. But back in the halls of high-school with his best friend Ned (Jacob Batalon) and eyes still firmly fixed on MJ (Zendaya), Peter feels that life might be calming down – even deciding to leave his iconic suit behind, much to the dismay of his Aunt (Marisa Tomei).
When Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) finally gets through after being ghosted a number of times on the phone, he informs Peter that a new force called the ‘Elementals’ has been leaving a trail of destruction across the world. As luck would have it a new superhero called Mysterio has arrived at just the right time to save the day, albeit it conveniently.
The action is loud, explosive and very impressive giving our friendly neighbourhood ‘on tour’ Spider-Man the chance to flip and twist his way through a number of European locations.
Peter comes face to face with Quentin Beck (Jake Gyllenhaal) aka Mysterio. In Beck, Parker has found someone who sympathises with his problems and straight away sees him as a knee jerk replacement to Stark. Confiding in Beck, as well as handing him a pair of billionaire-dollar high-tech sunglasses which, has the ability to connect to various satellites and weapons, Peter is able to shift responsibility and concentrate on being just your regular love-struck teen.
The action is loud, explosive and very impressive, giving our friendly neighbourhood ‘on tour’ Spider-Man the chance to flip and twist his way through a number of European locations in spectacular fashion. As Spider-Man and Mysterio combine forces to defeat the extraterrestrial Elementals there is something more disturbing about the goldfish-bowl wearing crime fighter.
Spider-Man: Far From Home keeps the humour trickling along and a number of romantic narratives spin-off from the main story. There is the awkward love interest between Happy Hogan (Jon Favreau) and Aunt May, with the former looking to fill the void left by his long-time companion, while Ned is also struck by cupid’s arrow. However, it is Peter and MJ’s on-screen romance that shines through, giving fans what they have wanted since Homecoming.
As to where this leaves the franchise given the recent split by the studios is anyone’s guess. Spider-Man is firmly entrenched in the Marvel Universe and any crossovers with other Marvel characters would probably not be allowed. Could this leave a tantalizing match-up between Spidey and Tom Hardy’s Venom, which despite some harsh criticism was a box office success?
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Crazy Rich Asians (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
I was treated to this as an Unlimited Screening at Cineworld, mixing it up with a Saturday night viewing. Just a pre-warning, there is a very minor spoiler below, it's really more of a notice to watch out for something in the film, but if you want to avoid it then you can go over to Letterboxd (link can be found in the left hand menu) and read the review with that omitted.
We have been needing this film for quite some time. It is everything a classic rom-com should be and it feels like we haven't had one of this caliber in quite a while. It has all the ups and downs you want, the emotion and the humour, the serious and the down right ridiculous.
I did wonder if I would feel slightly more disconnected from the film because of the cultural differences... which at the time was mainly because I hadn't really heard much about the film... but the story is that eternal struggle of love that you can just connect with straight away.
The only reason this didn't get the fill five is because of the wacky Goh family. I'm not particularly a fan of Awkwafina or Ken Jeong's characters in it. While funny, I feel that their jokes/situations went on a bit too long taking it from funny to a little irritating.
Despite my issues with the way some of the characters went there's no denying that all of the cast did an amazing job. I particularly loved Gemma Chan as Astrid. The pinnacle of understated grace and kindness but with the side that no one sees apart from Rachel. Her performance was excellent a always and one of the most heartbreaking parts of the movie.
There are so many things to enjoy in this movie. I particularly liked the flashback at the beginning, so well done and really amusing. My second pick of highlights goes to a scene that I'm only partially sure happened. All the way through the film the audience and I seemed to be on the same wave length, laughing and reacting at the same time... but then... I laughed and no one else did. Was I the only one that saw it?! On the boat during the bachelor party when Bernard fires the rocket launcher... did no one else see that model go flying backwards?! Like seriously... why was no one else laughing??
What should you do?
You should definitely go and see this one. Great for a girls night out, and good for a date night too.
You should also probably read the book, it's the first in the Crazy Rich Asians trilogy by Kevin Kwan. Kwan was on board with the film so if the author approves you know you won't be finding massive differences between the two.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Difficult to say what I'd want from this one. There were some lovely cars, but I think I'd still be happier with an Eleanor over any of these ones. It's probably got to be one of the lavish apartments with the stunning views instead.
We have been needing this film for quite some time. It is everything a classic rom-com should be and it feels like we haven't had one of this caliber in quite a while. It has all the ups and downs you want, the emotion and the humour, the serious and the down right ridiculous.
I did wonder if I would feel slightly more disconnected from the film because of the cultural differences... which at the time was mainly because I hadn't really heard much about the film... but the story is that eternal struggle of love that you can just connect with straight away.
The only reason this didn't get the fill five is because of the wacky Goh family. I'm not particularly a fan of Awkwafina or Ken Jeong's characters in it. While funny, I feel that their jokes/situations went on a bit too long taking it from funny to a little irritating.
Despite my issues with the way some of the characters went there's no denying that all of the cast did an amazing job. I particularly loved Gemma Chan as Astrid. The pinnacle of understated grace and kindness but with the side that no one sees apart from Rachel. Her performance was excellent a always and one of the most heartbreaking parts of the movie.
There are so many things to enjoy in this movie. I particularly liked the flashback at the beginning, so well done and really amusing. My second pick of highlights goes to a scene that I'm only partially sure happened. All the way through the film the audience and I seemed to be on the same wave length, laughing and reacting at the same time... but then... I laughed and no one else did. Was I the only one that saw it?! On the boat during the bachelor party when Bernard fires the rocket launcher... did no one else see that model go flying backwards?! Like seriously... why was no one else laughing??
What should you do?
You should definitely go and see this one. Great for a girls night out, and good for a date night too.
You should also probably read the book, it's the first in the Crazy Rich Asians trilogy by Kevin Kwan. Kwan was on board with the film so if the author approves you know you won't be finding massive differences between the two.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Difficult to say what I'd want from this one. There were some lovely cars, but I think I'd still be happier with an Eleanor over any of these ones. It's probably got to be one of the lavish apartments with the stunning views instead.