Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Dunkirk (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
A war vehicle running low on fuel.
The words “Christopher Nolan” and “disappointment” are not words I would naturally associate… but for me, they apply where “Dunkirk” is concerned.
It promised so much from the trailer: a historical event of epic proportions; Kenneth Branagh; Tom Hardy; Mark Rylance; Hans Zimmer on the keys; the director of such classics as “The Dark Knight”; “Inception” and “Interstellar” : what could go wrong?
But it just doesn’t work and I’ve spent the last 24 hours trying to unpick why.
A key problem for me was the depiction of the beach itself. The film eschews CGI effects – a move that I would normally approve of – in favour of the use of “practical effects” and the involvement of “thousands of extras” (as the rather glutinously positive Wiki entry declares). Unfortunately for the movie, there were some 400,000 troops marooned in this last patch of civilisation ahead of the Nazi hoard, and all of the shots refuse to acknowledge this scale of potential human tragedy. Yes, there are individual scenes of horror, such as the soldier walking into the sea against the impassive stares of the young heroes. But nothing of scale. At times I thought I’d seen more people on the beach on a winter’s day in Bournemouth! In the absence of a co-production with China, and the provision of the volume of extras as in “The Great Wall“, CGI becomes a necessary evil to make the whole exercise believable.
What it was really like…. one of the famous paintings by Charles Cundall (Crown copyright).
My disquiet at this deepened when we got to the sharp end of the rescue by the “small boats”. In my mind (and I’m NOT quite old enough to remember this!) I imagine a sea full of them. A sight to truly merit Branagh’s awed gaze. But no. They might have been “original” vessels…. but there was only about half a dozen of them. A mental vision dashed.
Did I feel a spot of rain? Looking to unfriendly skies on the River Mole.
The film attempts to tell the story from three perspectives: from the land; from the sea and from the air. The sea though gets the lion’s share of the film, and there is much drowning that occurs that (I am aware) was distressing for some in the audience.
Styles going in One Direction…. down.
Nolan also pushes his quirky “timeline” manipulation too far for an audience that largely expects a linear telling of a classic tale. It’s day; it’s night; the minesweeper’s sailing; then sunk; then sailing again; a Spitfire crashes, then crashes again from a different perspective. I know many in the audience just didn’t ‘get’ that: leaving them presumably very confused!
That being said, the film is not a write off, and has its moments of brilliance. Kenneth Branagh (“Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit“, “Valkyrie”) – although having a range of Nolan’s clipped and cheesy lines to say – is impressive as the commanding officer. Mark Rylance (“Bridge of Spies“, “The BFG“) also shines as the captain of the “Moonstone”: one of the small boats out of Weymouth (although here there is a grievous lack of backstory for the civilian efforts). And Tom Hardy (“The Revenant“, “Legend“), although having limited opportunity to act with anything other than his eyes, is impressive as RAF pilot Farrier. His final scene of stoic heroism is memorable.
Fionn Whitehead is also impressive in his movie debut, and even Harry Styles (“This is Us“) equips himself well.
A surfeit of horror leads to a lack of compassion. Harry Styles, Aneurin Barnard and Fionn Whitehead look on as the death toll mounts.
The cinematography by Hoyte Van Hoytema (“Interstellar“) is stunning with some memorable shots: a burning plane on a beach being a highspot for me.
And Hans Zimmer’s score is Oscar-worthy, generating enormous tension with a reverberating score, albeit sometimes let down by unsuitable cutaways (for example, to scenes of boat loading). Elsewhere in the sound department though I had major issues, with a decent percentage of the dialogue being completely inaudible in the sound mix.
Kenneth Branagh, impressive as Commander Bolton RN.
I really wanted this to be a “Battle of Britain”. Or a “Bridge Too Far”. Or even a “Saving Private Ryan”. Unfortunately, for me it was none of these, and this goes down as one of my movie disappointments of the year so far.
It promised so much from the trailer: a historical event of epic proportions; Kenneth Branagh; Tom Hardy; Mark Rylance; Hans Zimmer on the keys; the director of such classics as “The Dark Knight”; “Inception” and “Interstellar” : what could go wrong?
But it just doesn’t work and I’ve spent the last 24 hours trying to unpick why.
A key problem for me was the depiction of the beach itself. The film eschews CGI effects – a move that I would normally approve of – in favour of the use of “practical effects” and the involvement of “thousands of extras” (as the rather glutinously positive Wiki entry declares). Unfortunately for the movie, there were some 400,000 troops marooned in this last patch of civilisation ahead of the Nazi hoard, and all of the shots refuse to acknowledge this scale of potential human tragedy. Yes, there are individual scenes of horror, such as the soldier walking into the sea against the impassive stares of the young heroes. But nothing of scale. At times I thought I’d seen more people on the beach on a winter’s day in Bournemouth! In the absence of a co-production with China, and the provision of the volume of extras as in “The Great Wall“, CGI becomes a necessary evil to make the whole exercise believable.
What it was really like…. one of the famous paintings by Charles Cundall (Crown copyright).
My disquiet at this deepened when we got to the sharp end of the rescue by the “small boats”. In my mind (and I’m NOT quite old enough to remember this!) I imagine a sea full of them. A sight to truly merit Branagh’s awed gaze. But no. They might have been “original” vessels…. but there was only about half a dozen of them. A mental vision dashed.
Did I feel a spot of rain? Looking to unfriendly skies on the River Mole.
The film attempts to tell the story from three perspectives: from the land; from the sea and from the air. The sea though gets the lion’s share of the film, and there is much drowning that occurs that (I am aware) was distressing for some in the audience.
Styles going in One Direction…. down.
Nolan also pushes his quirky “timeline” manipulation too far for an audience that largely expects a linear telling of a classic tale. It’s day; it’s night; the minesweeper’s sailing; then sunk; then sailing again; a Spitfire crashes, then crashes again from a different perspective. I know many in the audience just didn’t ‘get’ that: leaving them presumably very confused!
That being said, the film is not a write off, and has its moments of brilliance. Kenneth Branagh (“Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit“, “Valkyrie”) – although having a range of Nolan’s clipped and cheesy lines to say – is impressive as the commanding officer. Mark Rylance (“Bridge of Spies“, “The BFG“) also shines as the captain of the “Moonstone”: one of the small boats out of Weymouth (although here there is a grievous lack of backstory for the civilian efforts). And Tom Hardy (“The Revenant“, “Legend“), although having limited opportunity to act with anything other than his eyes, is impressive as RAF pilot Farrier. His final scene of stoic heroism is memorable.
Fionn Whitehead is also impressive in his movie debut, and even Harry Styles (“This is Us“) equips himself well.
A surfeit of horror leads to a lack of compassion. Harry Styles, Aneurin Barnard and Fionn Whitehead look on as the death toll mounts.
The cinematography by Hoyte Van Hoytema (“Interstellar“) is stunning with some memorable shots: a burning plane on a beach being a highspot for me.
And Hans Zimmer’s score is Oscar-worthy, generating enormous tension with a reverberating score, albeit sometimes let down by unsuitable cutaways (for example, to scenes of boat loading). Elsewhere in the sound department though I had major issues, with a decent percentage of the dialogue being completely inaudible in the sound mix.
Kenneth Branagh, impressive as Commander Bolton RN.
I really wanted this to be a “Battle of Britain”. Or a “Bridge Too Far”. Or even a “Saving Private Ryan”. Unfortunately, for me it was none of these, and this goes down as one of my movie disappointments of the year so far.
JT (287 KP) rated Green Lantern (2011) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
You feel that had The Green Lantern arrived on the scene in 2011 not competing with a host of other super hero films, such as Thor, X-Men: First Class and Captain America, it might have had a better welcome.
For me the super hero genre really is bordering a mass overkill, what with this years upcoming Avengers getting so much press its hard to turn a corner without seing one of Iron Man, Hulk or Thor adoring a billboard or poster somewhere.
So it’s a shame then that Hollywood’s Mr. Nice guy, Ryan Reynolds, was given a role so bland and pointless it was almost insulting.
Director Martin Campbell’s previous outings Casino Royale and Edge if Darkness were deep gritty affairs and he really should have carried that over into this, there was so much flamboyant colour you wondered if Joel Schumacher had some how been a part of it.
That isn’t to say that during some stages the film was not enjoyable. Test pilot Hal Jordan is given the power bestowed on him by a mysterious ring with a back story shoe horned into an opening five minute monologue, if you’re not paying attention its going to be a little confusing.
The action and special effects are very good, with the Green Lantern able to concoct a wide range of objects from his mind ranging from missile launchers, swords and even a necklace, all transferred through the power and energy of the ring.
The less so, well Reynolds is surrounded by characters that only really dip their toe into the water of the film. With thousands of Green Lanterns we only really here from two, Tomar-Re and Kilowog voiced by Geoffrey Rush and Michael Clarke Duncan respectively.
Mark Strong as Sinestro on first glance has the look of someone bound to step over to the evil side, and maybe that is to come if a sequel is due at some point.
Peter Sarsgaard’s large headed villain only serves as an entrée before Hal has to tackle the large bellowing cloud that is Parallax, an entity that thrives on sucking out the fear of its victims.
The film has its moments, but it never really has the energy that so many other super hero films have. Perhaps that fact that the back story of Hal is not nearly as exciting as say Spider-man, Batman or any of the Avengers for that matter.
For me the super hero genre really is bordering a mass overkill, what with this years upcoming Avengers getting so much press its hard to turn a corner without seing one of Iron Man, Hulk or Thor adoring a billboard or poster somewhere.
So it’s a shame then that Hollywood’s Mr. Nice guy, Ryan Reynolds, was given a role so bland and pointless it was almost insulting.
Director Martin Campbell’s previous outings Casino Royale and Edge if Darkness were deep gritty affairs and he really should have carried that over into this, there was so much flamboyant colour you wondered if Joel Schumacher had some how been a part of it.
That isn’t to say that during some stages the film was not enjoyable. Test pilot Hal Jordan is given the power bestowed on him by a mysterious ring with a back story shoe horned into an opening five minute monologue, if you’re not paying attention its going to be a little confusing.
The action and special effects are very good, with the Green Lantern able to concoct a wide range of objects from his mind ranging from missile launchers, swords and even a necklace, all transferred through the power and energy of the ring.
The less so, well Reynolds is surrounded by characters that only really dip their toe into the water of the film. With thousands of Green Lanterns we only really here from two, Tomar-Re and Kilowog voiced by Geoffrey Rush and Michael Clarke Duncan respectively.
Mark Strong as Sinestro on first glance has the look of someone bound to step over to the evil side, and maybe that is to come if a sequel is due at some point.
Peter Sarsgaard’s large headed villain only serves as an entrée before Hal has to tackle the large bellowing cloud that is Parallax, an entity that thrives on sucking out the fear of its victims.
The film has its moments, but it never really has the energy that so many other super hero films have. Perhaps that fact that the back story of Hal is not nearly as exciting as say Spider-man, Batman or any of the Avengers for that matter.
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.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Gray Man (2022) in Movies
Aug 6, 2022
Entertaining Enough...but...NOTHING NEW
Have you seen the touring company of Hamilton when it came to your town? You liked it, didn’t you? I sure did, but I didn’t like it as much as I liked the Broadway Company of Hamilton that I saw in NYC the year before.
Such is the case with the new Ryan Gosling/Chris Evans action flick THE GRAY MAN. It is reminiscent of the MISSION IMPOSSIBLE, BOURNE and JOHN WICK films - and is very enjoyable - but I like the other movies better.
Directed by THE RUSSO BROTHERS (AVENGERS: ENDGAME) and written by Joe Russo, Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely (writers of AVENGERS: ENDGAME), based on the book by Mark Greaney, THE GRAY MAN stars Gosling (LA LA LAND) as an enigmatic secret agent (is their any other kind) who is sent on a deadly mission that, perhaps isn’t what it seems on the surface (are there any other)?
This is a plot VERY reminiscent of the aforementioned MISSION IMPOSSIBLE, BOURNE and JOHN WICK films and when Chris Evans (CAPTAIN AMERICA, of course) and Ana de Armas (the latest James Bond flick, NO TIME TO DIE) show up as a few other mercenaries who might be on Gosling’s side - or might not - you can’t help but be reminded of those other flicks.
And that’s the trouble with THE GRAY MAN, it just can’t compete (at least in my memory) with those other films, mostly because it doesn’t do anything new. It is your basic “Super Spy” flick, very professionally done, but it isn’t anything you haven’t seen before.
The actors (Gosling, de Armas and Evans) are very good in their roles and have enigmatic (Gosling), out of control (Evans) and mysterious (de Armas) down very well and are ably assisted by wily veterans like Alfre Woodard (CROSS CREEK) and good ol’ Billy Bob Thornton (SLINGBLADE) who seem to having a good time going along for the ride.
And…it’s a fun ride…the action scenes are well done, set-up and choreographed professionally with just enough unique ways to take out a henchman or blow-up some sort of transport to make it interesting to watch, but…again…it’s really nothing new.
An entertaining 2 hours of film-making - and a film that will have a sequel on the way - there are worst ways to spend your time and with good (enough) action sequences and interesting and charismatic performers to watch - THE GRAY MAN suits its purpose…it entertains.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Such is the case with the new Ryan Gosling/Chris Evans action flick THE GRAY MAN. It is reminiscent of the MISSION IMPOSSIBLE, BOURNE and JOHN WICK films - and is very enjoyable - but I like the other movies better.
Directed by THE RUSSO BROTHERS (AVENGERS: ENDGAME) and written by Joe Russo, Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely (writers of AVENGERS: ENDGAME), based on the book by Mark Greaney, THE GRAY MAN stars Gosling (LA LA LAND) as an enigmatic secret agent (is their any other kind) who is sent on a deadly mission that, perhaps isn’t what it seems on the surface (are there any other)?
This is a plot VERY reminiscent of the aforementioned MISSION IMPOSSIBLE, BOURNE and JOHN WICK films and when Chris Evans (CAPTAIN AMERICA, of course) and Ana de Armas (the latest James Bond flick, NO TIME TO DIE) show up as a few other mercenaries who might be on Gosling’s side - or might not - you can’t help but be reminded of those other flicks.
And that’s the trouble with THE GRAY MAN, it just can’t compete (at least in my memory) with those other films, mostly because it doesn’t do anything new. It is your basic “Super Spy” flick, very professionally done, but it isn’t anything you haven’t seen before.
The actors (Gosling, de Armas and Evans) are very good in their roles and have enigmatic (Gosling), out of control (Evans) and mysterious (de Armas) down very well and are ably assisted by wily veterans like Alfre Woodard (CROSS CREEK) and good ol’ Billy Bob Thornton (SLINGBLADE) who seem to having a good time going along for the ride.
And…it’s a fun ride…the action scenes are well done, set-up and choreographed professionally with just enough unique ways to take out a henchman or blow-up some sort of transport to make it interesting to watch, but…again…it’s really nothing new.
An entertaining 2 hours of film-making - and a film that will have a sequel on the way - there are worst ways to spend your time and with good (enough) action sequences and interesting and charismatic performers to watch - THE GRAY MAN suits its purpose…it entertains.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Goosebumps (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
I think I speak for most of my generation when I say I grew up on Goosebumps. Many a night I lay terrified and awake after reading one of the twisty tales concocted from the mind of R.L. Stine. Naturally, when Sony announced a Goosebumps movie, I was fearful. But they also had many different stories to tell as there were countless books in the series, all with a different monster. And then they went gave us the plot to the film… I was still fearful.
Goosebumps introduces us to Zach (Dylan Minnette) who, along with his mother, Gale (Amy Ryan), moved to the small town of Madison, Delaware one year after his father passed away. With quick resolve, Zach meets his neighbor, Hannah (Odeya Rush), whom he finds very intriguing. And as any protective father would do, Hannah’s creepy father (Jack Black) tries to scare off Zach. But as Zach is trying to get to the bottom of exactly who this family is, he discovers locked Goosebumps manuscripts in Hannah’s father’s study. Accidentally opening The Abominable Snowman of Pasadena, Zach soon discovers that there is something special about these manuscripts as the stories themselves, or rather the monsters from them, begin to come to life… for real. Can Zach, Hannah and her Father, along with the bumbling Champ (Ryan Lee), save Madison from the monsters? Watch and see.
I had to constantly remind myself of the target audience for this film for about an hour after seeing it. I was hoping for so much more, and while it had mildly entertaining moments, I have feeling that this film is going to fall flat for most adults. Jack Black played the same part he has become really good at over the years, and it almost seems like he is basically playing it straight now. But it was kind of awesome to see some of the ideas of these books come to life, and with the evil Slappy the dummy (voiced by Black) at the helm, things did truly get out of hand. But I just found myself picking out plot holes and inconsistencies in the movie, which is highly unlike me. I may realize things like that much later after watching for most films, but this one I was noticing everything as I was watching it. This doesn’t bode well at all. For example, Hannah takes Zach to an abandoned carnival that was right in the middle of the woods. Hannah explains that they ran out of money before they finished building. So first, no one builds a permanent carnival like this in the middle of the woods, where the trees would interfere with pretty much everything the way it was set up. And it’s not like the trees grew up around the carnival, the technology was too new and the trees too big for that to make any sense. The other thing is, Hannah pulls a big lever and gets power to the carnival to light it up. First, why is there even power to an abandoned carnival? And let’s say we just accept that there is power to this place, we’re missing the second part. Hannah indicates that she visits the place often, but why haven’t the cops showed up to investigate why there was power at this abandoned carnival. The lights were clearly visible for miles, especially from up on top of the Ferris Wheel where we find Hannah and Zach.
But again… I remind myself of the intended audience. There were many youngsters in the screening with us. And most, if not all, really enjoyed the film. There was a continuous stream of laughter or gasps, as appropriate for the feel of the movie, and many after the film were incredibly happy. So I cannot say they missed their mark.
Ultimately, I ask myself the same question I always do: will I buy the movie on home release? The answer is probably yes, as I know a couple kids who would really enjoy the film, but I wouldn’t be making the purchase if it were just me in the picture. I give it 3 out of 5 stars. I would have given it a two, but I bring myself back to thinking about the target audience. And they definitely knocked it out of the water in that demographic.
Goosebumps introduces us to Zach (Dylan Minnette) who, along with his mother, Gale (Amy Ryan), moved to the small town of Madison, Delaware one year after his father passed away. With quick resolve, Zach meets his neighbor, Hannah (Odeya Rush), whom he finds very intriguing. And as any protective father would do, Hannah’s creepy father (Jack Black) tries to scare off Zach. But as Zach is trying to get to the bottom of exactly who this family is, he discovers locked Goosebumps manuscripts in Hannah’s father’s study. Accidentally opening The Abominable Snowman of Pasadena, Zach soon discovers that there is something special about these manuscripts as the stories themselves, or rather the monsters from them, begin to come to life… for real. Can Zach, Hannah and her Father, along with the bumbling Champ (Ryan Lee), save Madison from the monsters? Watch and see.
I had to constantly remind myself of the target audience for this film for about an hour after seeing it. I was hoping for so much more, and while it had mildly entertaining moments, I have feeling that this film is going to fall flat for most adults. Jack Black played the same part he has become really good at over the years, and it almost seems like he is basically playing it straight now. But it was kind of awesome to see some of the ideas of these books come to life, and with the evil Slappy the dummy (voiced by Black) at the helm, things did truly get out of hand. But I just found myself picking out plot holes and inconsistencies in the movie, which is highly unlike me. I may realize things like that much later after watching for most films, but this one I was noticing everything as I was watching it. This doesn’t bode well at all. For example, Hannah takes Zach to an abandoned carnival that was right in the middle of the woods. Hannah explains that they ran out of money before they finished building. So first, no one builds a permanent carnival like this in the middle of the woods, where the trees would interfere with pretty much everything the way it was set up. And it’s not like the trees grew up around the carnival, the technology was too new and the trees too big for that to make any sense. The other thing is, Hannah pulls a big lever and gets power to the carnival to light it up. First, why is there even power to an abandoned carnival? And let’s say we just accept that there is power to this place, we’re missing the second part. Hannah indicates that she visits the place often, but why haven’t the cops showed up to investigate why there was power at this abandoned carnival. The lights were clearly visible for miles, especially from up on top of the Ferris Wheel where we find Hannah and Zach.
But again… I remind myself of the intended audience. There were many youngsters in the screening with us. And most, if not all, really enjoyed the film. There was a continuous stream of laughter or gasps, as appropriate for the feel of the movie, and many after the film were incredibly happy. So I cannot say they missed their mark.
Ultimately, I ask myself the same question I always do: will I buy the movie on home release? The answer is probably yes, as I know a couple kids who would really enjoy the film, but I wouldn’t be making the purchase if it were just me in the picture. I give it 3 out of 5 stars. I would have given it a two, but I bring myself back to thinking about the target audience. And they definitely knocked it out of the water in that demographic.
JT (287 KP) rated Vehicle 19 (2013) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Paul Walker can’t seem to stay away from cars at the moment, in between Fast Five and the recently released Fast and Furious 6 Walker took the lead in Vehicle 19.
Walker plays Michael Woods whose recently jumped parole and heads out to South Africa to see his girlfriend, in the hope of rekindling their relationship. Picking up a rental car, a minivan, which is hardly fast or furious, it turns out to be the wrong choice as during his journey he’s chased down by the local police for the murder of a young woman.
The film for the majority of its entirety is shot from the inside of the car, with Walker rarely stepping out of the driver’s seat as he tries to navigate his way through a city he is totally unfamiliar with. Films that capture one location need to rely on a number of things, firstly the acting has got to be top draw and secondly you’ve got to pull out the tension and hook the audience.
Phone Booth and Buried which placed its protagonists in a confined space paid off pretty well, but here Vehicle 19 struggles and almost splutters as if gasping for more fuel. The problem is the despite Walker putting in a decent performance as a man with a goal who is pushed to the edge it lacks any real bite or conviction.
For the opening twenty minutes we see him converse with his girlfriend via phone, complain he’s got the wrong rental car and try to remember which side of the road he has to drive on. It’s dull, and when you compare it with Ryan Reynolds’s opening twenty minutes in Buried where he’s confined to a 6 foot box, Vehicle 19 is way off the mark.
Relative unknown director Mukunda Michael Dewil leaves it too late, and when Woods discovers a phone and gun in the glove box as well as a bound and gagged girl in the trunk many of us have already turned the ignition off. Woods is hunted by Detective Smith, a man with a terrifying accent that leaves genuine chills down your spine, for someone who only gets a minimal amount of screen time at the end he does leave a lasting impression.
It does have its rare moments and of course Walker gets to use his driving skills to full capacity as he’s perused through the townships and city streets by police cars that you’d expect would be able to catch up with a minivan.
It’s short but not so sharp, the surrounding locations begged for so much more than what was delivered. I’d much rather have seen Walker behind the wheel of a high performance vehicle…oh wait I can!
Walker plays Michael Woods whose recently jumped parole and heads out to South Africa to see his girlfriend, in the hope of rekindling their relationship. Picking up a rental car, a minivan, which is hardly fast or furious, it turns out to be the wrong choice as during his journey he’s chased down by the local police for the murder of a young woman.
The film for the majority of its entirety is shot from the inside of the car, with Walker rarely stepping out of the driver’s seat as he tries to navigate his way through a city he is totally unfamiliar with. Films that capture one location need to rely on a number of things, firstly the acting has got to be top draw and secondly you’ve got to pull out the tension and hook the audience.
Phone Booth and Buried which placed its protagonists in a confined space paid off pretty well, but here Vehicle 19 struggles and almost splutters as if gasping for more fuel. The problem is the despite Walker putting in a decent performance as a man with a goal who is pushed to the edge it lacks any real bite or conviction.
For the opening twenty minutes we see him converse with his girlfriend via phone, complain he’s got the wrong rental car and try to remember which side of the road he has to drive on. It’s dull, and when you compare it with Ryan Reynolds’s opening twenty minutes in Buried where he’s confined to a 6 foot box, Vehicle 19 is way off the mark.
Relative unknown director Mukunda Michael Dewil leaves it too late, and when Woods discovers a phone and gun in the glove box as well as a bound and gagged girl in the trunk many of us have already turned the ignition off. Woods is hunted by Detective Smith, a man with a terrifying accent that leaves genuine chills down your spine, for someone who only gets a minimal amount of screen time at the end he does leave a lasting impression.
It does have its rare moments and of course Walker gets to use his driving skills to full capacity as he’s perused through the townships and city streets by police cars that you’d expect would be able to catch up with a minivan.
It’s short but not so sharp, the surrounding locations begged for so much more than what was delivered. I’d much rather have seen Walker behind the wheel of a high performance vehicle…oh wait I can!
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Cold Pursuit (2019) in Movies
Mar 15, 2020
Comments on revenge are best kept on the screen.
I'd completely forgotten the furore about Liam Neeson's comments back last February during the press-tour preceding the film's release. In discussing the destructive feelings of revenge experienced by his character, Nels Coxman, Neeson revealed something he did 40 years ago: after the rape of a friend by "a black man", Neeson went out on the streets to find another "black man" and do them harm. (As a fellow Ballymena-born man, David Moody (from the "Mark and Dave" blog) has an interesting theory about this... that it was not a "rascist" statement in the true sense, but something else entirely. See here - ).
The comments undoubtedly impacted the movie at the box office. Which is a shame. Because in his catalogue of bonkers and violent revenge-porn flicks, this is one of Neeson's more entertaining ones.
Revenge is a dish best served cold. And where colder to serve it than in the ski-resort of Kehoe where Nels Coxman is the local snowplow operative and "man of the year" for his services to the community. But the tracks are about to fall off his orderly life. For his son Kyle (Micheál Richardson) winds up dead through a drugs overdose and his strained marriage with wife Grace (Laura Dern) disintegrates. (One of the most cutting and best-written "Bye" notes ever seen in the movies).
With revenge in mind, Coxman pursues the Denver-based drugs lord Trevor Calcote (Tom Bateman) who dished out the drugs to his son. But he inadvertently manages to stay just below the parapet as he sets in train a gang war between Calcote and a Kehoe-based native-American drugs gang led by White Bull (Tom Jackson). The snow turned progressively pinker as the body count rises.
Calcote (aka "Viking") is painted as a colourful family man, with an annoyingly bright son Ryan (Nicholas Holmes) that he controls with a rod of iron. Viking is estranged from wife Aya (Julia Jones), who seems completely unafraid of him and happily embarrasses him in front of his men. This relationship never really works. Since given all the terrible and irrational things Viking does to people, whether they obstruct him or help him in equal measure, putting a quiet bullet into Aya's head seems to be to least he could do!
Where there is fun to be had is in the "Stockholm syndrome" linkage between young Ryan and Coxman. When his father insists on controlling his diet, feeding him the same insipidly healthy meals morning, noon and night, the alternative of being kidnapped and fed burgers seems eminently more preferable!
The film is at times really difficult to follow. There are lots of inexplicable leaps of logic and really inexplicably bonkers scenes that you can only patch together later. It's as if the filmmakers randomly filmed 5 hours of footage and then tried to edit it all into a cohesive plot!
As one example of this, the relationship between Coxman and "Wingman" (William Forsythe) was poorly introduced such that I was left baffled by a later plot twist.
In another scene, Neeson smashes the head of enforcer "Santa" (Michael Adamthwaite) into his steering wheel, but in the next scene collapses with him utterly exhausted in the snow. There was clearly a significant fight here that was cut out of the finished cut. But as a result the final cut makes no sense at all!
Of course, the local law enforcement team are average at best. Average because although young and keen-as-mustard detective Kim Dash (Emmy Rossum) is hot on the trail of the truth, her partner Gip (John Doman) is f*ckin' useless... wanting to do nothing but drink coffee and eat donuts in true Simpsons style.
Normally with these sort of films, it's difficult to keep track of the body count. No such problem here. Every death is celebrated with a tombstone graphic so it's easy to keep count! Needless to say, there are a lot of tombstones registered.
Directed by Norwegian Hans Petter Moland, it's all good violent cartoonish fun, that keeps its tongue firmly in its cheek for most of the running time. The snowy setting, the partly native-American cast and the presence of Julia Jones brings to mind the truly excellent Jeremy Renner / Elizabeth Olsen movie "Wind River". But there the similarities (and quality levels) definitely stop. It's not a clever movie; it's borderline bonkers for most of its running time (never more so than with a totally bizarre "joke" final shot); but it is entertaining. As a 'park brain at door' action comedy it just about makes the grade.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/03/15/one-manns-movies-dvd-review-cold-pursuit-2019/. Thanks.)
The comments undoubtedly impacted the movie at the box office. Which is a shame. Because in his catalogue of bonkers and violent revenge-porn flicks, this is one of Neeson's more entertaining ones.
Revenge is a dish best served cold. And where colder to serve it than in the ski-resort of Kehoe where Nels Coxman is the local snowplow operative and "man of the year" for his services to the community. But the tracks are about to fall off his orderly life. For his son Kyle (Micheál Richardson) winds up dead through a drugs overdose and his strained marriage with wife Grace (Laura Dern) disintegrates. (One of the most cutting and best-written "Bye" notes ever seen in the movies).
With revenge in mind, Coxman pursues the Denver-based drugs lord Trevor Calcote (Tom Bateman) who dished out the drugs to his son. But he inadvertently manages to stay just below the parapet as he sets in train a gang war between Calcote and a Kehoe-based native-American drugs gang led by White Bull (Tom Jackson). The snow turned progressively pinker as the body count rises.
Calcote (aka "Viking") is painted as a colourful family man, with an annoyingly bright son Ryan (Nicholas Holmes) that he controls with a rod of iron. Viking is estranged from wife Aya (Julia Jones), who seems completely unafraid of him and happily embarrasses him in front of his men. This relationship never really works. Since given all the terrible and irrational things Viking does to people, whether they obstruct him or help him in equal measure, putting a quiet bullet into Aya's head seems to be to least he could do!
Where there is fun to be had is in the "Stockholm syndrome" linkage between young Ryan and Coxman. When his father insists on controlling his diet, feeding him the same insipidly healthy meals morning, noon and night, the alternative of being kidnapped and fed burgers seems eminently more preferable!
The film is at times really difficult to follow. There are lots of inexplicable leaps of logic and really inexplicably bonkers scenes that you can only patch together later. It's as if the filmmakers randomly filmed 5 hours of footage and then tried to edit it all into a cohesive plot!
As one example of this, the relationship between Coxman and "Wingman" (William Forsythe) was poorly introduced such that I was left baffled by a later plot twist.
In another scene, Neeson smashes the head of enforcer "Santa" (Michael Adamthwaite) into his steering wheel, but in the next scene collapses with him utterly exhausted in the snow. There was clearly a significant fight here that was cut out of the finished cut. But as a result the final cut makes no sense at all!
Of course, the local law enforcement team are average at best. Average because although young and keen-as-mustard detective Kim Dash (Emmy Rossum) is hot on the trail of the truth, her partner Gip (John Doman) is f*ckin' useless... wanting to do nothing but drink coffee and eat donuts in true Simpsons style.
Normally with these sort of films, it's difficult to keep track of the body count. No such problem here. Every death is celebrated with a tombstone graphic so it's easy to keep count! Needless to say, there are a lot of tombstones registered.
Directed by Norwegian Hans Petter Moland, it's all good violent cartoonish fun, that keeps its tongue firmly in its cheek for most of the running time. The snowy setting, the partly native-American cast and the presence of Julia Jones brings to mind the truly excellent Jeremy Renner / Elizabeth Olsen movie "Wind River". But there the similarities (and quality levels) definitely stop. It's not a clever movie; it's borderline bonkers for most of its running time (never more so than with a totally bizarre "joke" final shot); but it is entertaining. As a 'park brain at door' action comedy it just about makes the grade.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/03/15/one-manns-movies-dvd-review-cold-pursuit-2019/. Thanks.)
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Adventureland (2009) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
The summer of 1987 holds some special memories for me as that was the year that I graduated from high school and set about my college studies. In the summer before the start of classes, I had to learn to manage finances, become independent as much as I could and that relationships in the real world are much different than they were in school.
As nice as it would have been to spend that entire summer enjoying the sun and activities and enjoying the abundance of movies, music, and video games, the demands of work and school had to be factored in as I strove to find a balance.
In the new movie “Adventureland” Writer/Director Greg Mottola has given the audience a winning mix of romance and humor that was inspired by his adventures in a Long Island amusement park in 1987.
When recent college graduate James (Jesse Eisenberg), learns that his plans to spend his summer in Europe have fallen through, he is forced to look for work in order to help fund his pending year of graduate studies thanks to his father’s recent demotion.
Despite his degree, James is unable to find work due to his lack of experience and soon finds himself resorting to working as a games operator in the local theme park Adventureland in the Pittsburgh suburbs.
As demeaning as James finds his job, he does strike up friendships with many of his co-workers including an attractive girl named Em (Kristen Stewart) and the older ride mechanic named Mike (Ryan Reynolds).
James is popular at work for his easygoing manner and the fact that he has pot to share makes him go over well with his co-workers who look for an escape from the drudgery of their jobs and the array of park goers who help make their lives difficult.
As the summer unfolds, Em and James become closer which is further complicated by the issues in the lives which stem largely from unhappy home lives and uncertainty over their futures. When other factors come into play, love triangles form which causes James to step out from his comfort zone and take stock of his life, his future, and what truly is important to him.
“Adventureland” is not a comedy nor is it a romance, but rather it is a nostalgic look back at a summer long ago, and how the events that unfolded helped shaped the lives of one man and his friends. There are some funny moments in the film but they are secondary to the stories of growth, pain, and development that mark the final steps from youth into adulthood.
Stewart and Eisenberg have a good chemistry with one another and they portray James and Em with an earnest and honest frailty that makes them come across as real people. They are not the glamorous kids that are so often featured in films with front line wardrobe, plenty of cash, and few if any concerns. They are real people who have issues that they deal with and insecurities about themselves and their futures, and are slow to let their guards down.
The look and sounds of the era are dead on and include an abundance of late 80’s tunes, so much so that a character takes the time to joke about one song being played numerous times a day.
While some may want a bit more closure or humor in the film, it is an enjoyable look at a era gone by and is filled with many moments that viewers of any age will relate to.
As nice as it would have been to spend that entire summer enjoying the sun and activities and enjoying the abundance of movies, music, and video games, the demands of work and school had to be factored in as I strove to find a balance.
In the new movie “Adventureland” Writer/Director Greg Mottola has given the audience a winning mix of romance and humor that was inspired by his adventures in a Long Island amusement park in 1987.
When recent college graduate James (Jesse Eisenberg), learns that his plans to spend his summer in Europe have fallen through, he is forced to look for work in order to help fund his pending year of graduate studies thanks to his father’s recent demotion.
Despite his degree, James is unable to find work due to his lack of experience and soon finds himself resorting to working as a games operator in the local theme park Adventureland in the Pittsburgh suburbs.
As demeaning as James finds his job, he does strike up friendships with many of his co-workers including an attractive girl named Em (Kristen Stewart) and the older ride mechanic named Mike (Ryan Reynolds).
James is popular at work for his easygoing manner and the fact that he has pot to share makes him go over well with his co-workers who look for an escape from the drudgery of their jobs and the array of park goers who help make their lives difficult.
As the summer unfolds, Em and James become closer which is further complicated by the issues in the lives which stem largely from unhappy home lives and uncertainty over their futures. When other factors come into play, love triangles form which causes James to step out from his comfort zone and take stock of his life, his future, and what truly is important to him.
“Adventureland” is not a comedy nor is it a romance, but rather it is a nostalgic look back at a summer long ago, and how the events that unfolded helped shaped the lives of one man and his friends. There are some funny moments in the film but they are secondary to the stories of growth, pain, and development that mark the final steps from youth into adulthood.
Stewart and Eisenberg have a good chemistry with one another and they portray James and Em with an earnest and honest frailty that makes them come across as real people. They are not the glamorous kids that are so often featured in films with front line wardrobe, plenty of cash, and few if any concerns. They are real people who have issues that they deal with and insecurities about themselves and their futures, and are slow to let their guards down.
The look and sounds of the era are dead on and include an abundance of late 80’s tunes, so much so that a character takes the time to joke about one song being played numerous times a day.
While some may want a bit more closure or humor in the film, it is an enjoyable look at a era gone by and is filled with many moments that viewers of any age will relate to.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Big Short (2015) in Movies
Apr 19, 2020
Gets Better On Each Rewatch
Most of you reading this review remember the last time the U.S. had a downturn in it's economy - it was 2008 and the downturn was caused by a bubble that burst in the housing market. Michael Lewis' (author of MONEYBALL) book THE BIG SHORT attempted to explain what happend in lay man's terms. This books was considered "unfilmable" until the most unlikeliest of artists stepped in to make a wonderfully crafted and educational film that was also entertaining.
That person was Adam McKay - up until that time, known as the Director of such Will Ferrell films as STEP BROTHERS and ANCHORMAN.
Set in the timeframe right before - and during - the economic downturn (approx. 2006-2008), THE BIG SHORT follows 4 groups/individuals that begin to see that something is wrong - both with this seemingly "bullet proof" housing market and the institutions/regulations and governance around them.
Christian Bale is outstanding (and was nominated for an Oscar) for his work as Dr. Michael Burry a socially awkward genius who is the first to ferret out that something is wrong and "bets against the market". Bale's portrayal of a non-social (almost) recluse who speaks his mind is engaging and fascinating to watch. It was with this performance that I decided that Bale is, perhaps, the finest actor working today. Also stepping up his game - as a surprise to me - is Ryan Gosling as the narrator of this story. He has the right balance of charm and "smarminess" and often breaks the 4th wall to explain to us what is going on. Also on board, strongly, is Brad Pitt (one of the Producers of this film) as an ex-Wall Street maverick who is pulled back in by the opportunity this impending crash is creating.
But, the surprise to me in this film is the heart-breaking, gut-wrenching turn of Steve Carrell as Wall Street broker Mark Baum who's caustic personality hides some serious scars underneath and who takes the failures of "the system" to protect the people personally. Carrell was nominated for an Oscar the year before in his first major dramatic turn - FOXCATCHER - but I think his work here is stronger, more layered and nuanced and (if there is a hero in this story) had you rooting for this guy throughout the film.
But...none of this would have worked if McKay didn't figure out a way to make the boring-ness and tedium of explaining the housing financial system (tranches, CDO's, default swaps, etc) in such a way that educates and entertains the audience - and find a way he did. By pulling celebrities like Anthony Bordain, Selena Gomez and Margot Robbie in to break the 4th wall and explain extremely dry subject matter in such a way as to make it understandable and enjoyable, he makes this film succeed.
And, succeed it does, as it's 5 Oscar nominations (including Best Picture, Best Director and the aforementioned Best Supporting Actor nomination for Bale - a nomination that I would have been happy had Carrell gotten) would attest to - it did win the Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay (for McKay and Charles Randolph).
This is a film that gets better for me on each rewatch, for I understand just a little more. If this is your 1st time watch - or your 10th - check out the BIG SHORT, it will be worth your time.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
That person was Adam McKay - up until that time, known as the Director of such Will Ferrell films as STEP BROTHERS and ANCHORMAN.
Set in the timeframe right before - and during - the economic downturn (approx. 2006-2008), THE BIG SHORT follows 4 groups/individuals that begin to see that something is wrong - both with this seemingly "bullet proof" housing market and the institutions/regulations and governance around them.
Christian Bale is outstanding (and was nominated for an Oscar) for his work as Dr. Michael Burry a socially awkward genius who is the first to ferret out that something is wrong and "bets against the market". Bale's portrayal of a non-social (almost) recluse who speaks his mind is engaging and fascinating to watch. It was with this performance that I decided that Bale is, perhaps, the finest actor working today. Also stepping up his game - as a surprise to me - is Ryan Gosling as the narrator of this story. He has the right balance of charm and "smarminess" and often breaks the 4th wall to explain to us what is going on. Also on board, strongly, is Brad Pitt (one of the Producers of this film) as an ex-Wall Street maverick who is pulled back in by the opportunity this impending crash is creating.
But, the surprise to me in this film is the heart-breaking, gut-wrenching turn of Steve Carrell as Wall Street broker Mark Baum who's caustic personality hides some serious scars underneath and who takes the failures of "the system" to protect the people personally. Carrell was nominated for an Oscar the year before in his first major dramatic turn - FOXCATCHER - but I think his work here is stronger, more layered and nuanced and (if there is a hero in this story) had you rooting for this guy throughout the film.
But...none of this would have worked if McKay didn't figure out a way to make the boring-ness and tedium of explaining the housing financial system (tranches, CDO's, default swaps, etc) in such a way that educates and entertains the audience - and find a way he did. By pulling celebrities like Anthony Bordain, Selena Gomez and Margot Robbie in to break the 4th wall and explain extremely dry subject matter in such a way as to make it understandable and enjoyable, he makes this film succeed.
And, succeed it does, as it's 5 Oscar nominations (including Best Picture, Best Director and the aforementioned Best Supporting Actor nomination for Bale - a nomination that I would have been happy had Carrell gotten) would attest to - it did win the Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay (for McKay and Charles Randolph).
This is a film that gets better for me on each rewatch, for I understand just a little more. If this is your 1st time watch - or your 10th - check out the BIG SHORT, it will be worth your time.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Daughter of Deep Silence in Books
Jan 23, 2020
You know what happens when you read a little over a hundred pages and rage for two full pages in a reading notebook?
You don't continue the book. You mark it as a DNF because you don't want to spend approximately eight pages raging and raging over a four hundred page book when you can read another book.
As you can see, I did exactly that.
But <b>never, <i>never</i> have I ever wanted to throw a book out the window <i>SO BADLY</i></b> as I want to do with <i>Daughter of Deep Silence</i>. This is <b>an absolute, horrifying mess disguised as a book with a gorgeous cover and an absolutely beautiful interior layout.</b> <i>Daughter of Deep Silence</i> is really about <b>a girl who is so hell-bent on revenge, she's become obsessed and obviously needs to get a move on with her life.</b>
It's obvious from early on in the book. <b>I don't actually know much about Frances as a person</b> from the fourth of the book I read. <b>I know her plans and what happened on the <i>Persephone</i></b> with the flashbacks here and there, but I don't know Frances. The book screams <i>revenge</i>. It also screams <i>obsessed</i>, because <b>what else could it be if you're keeping a bleeping notebook on each of the family members filled with little details among details about each member?</b>
<blockquote>Over the past four years I've become an expert on Grey. An expert on everyone in the Wells family. I have the same kind of notebook on each one of them.</blockquote>
But <i>Daughter of Deep Silence</i> isn't just that. It's a carbon copy. <b>An absolute carbon copy of <i>Revenge</i></b>, and I mean <i>ABSOLUTE</i>. It's worse than <i><a title="Unbreakable by Kami Garcia" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/dnf-audiobook-review-unbreakable-by-kami-garcia/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">Unbreakable</a></i> and <i>Supernatural</i> or <i>The Hunger Games</i> and <i><a title="The Testing by Joelle Charbonneau" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-the-testing-by-joelle-charbonneau/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Testing</a></i> and other dystopian novels put together, because there's actually <i>some</i> difference. <a title="The Moon Dwellers by David Estes" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-the-moon-dwellers-by-david-estes/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">There's a chance that I'll actually like the book.</a> (It's happened. I PROMISE.)
<i>Daughter of Deep Silence</i>, on the other hand? <b>I don't even know where <i>Revenge</i> ends and the book actually begins</b> I can distinguish nary a difference, and I'm completely disappointed.
<b>There's revenge obviously.</b> There's a reason <i>behind</i> both Frances' and Emily's vengeance, and <b>this whole revenge idea didn't bother me at all.</b> It's only just one similarity right? <b>This could have gone on an entirely different route from early on</b> and I wouldn't have complained about a single thing. Maybe not a single thing, but there would be less rage. But I should have seen the signs from the moment I picked up the book.
<blockquote>*peruses new books shelves, sees book*
Hey, didn't I want to read this? *picks up book and reads synopsis again*
Sounds like Revenge. I'll come back and think about it. *looks at other books and chooses two more*
Screw it. Let's give this a whirl. If I don't like it, I've got plenty of papery ammunition.</blockquote>
<b>There's a disguise involved.</b> It's revealed in a later season View Spoiler »Emily is actually disguised as someone else. Frances is asked by her best friend's father to change her identity to Libby O'Martin so she can be protected and be able to find a way to exploit the truth behind the fate of <i>Persephone</i>.
<blockquote>"It's the only way to keep you sage." He pushes the ring toward me. "It's the only way to figure out who did this and make them pay."</blockquote>
<b>There's a politically powerful family.</b> Both are senators, both are planning on running for president, both are famous, both have a mansion with French doors (at least, I'm pretty sure <i>Revenge</i> had the French doors). And both have a son named...
...wait for it...
Greyson. *whistles* Imagine that! I mean, so much is similar, and the son had to be named the <i>exact same name as the one in the show I'm comparing this to?</i> You have got to be seriously kidding me. View Spoiler »I started expecting Ryan to actually throw in a secret son or something.
I just... can't. Someone pick up my horrified self off the floor. I'll wake up later. Until then, Ella or Lupe can take over.
<b><i>Daughter of Deep Silence</i> is <i>Revenge</i> down to the very basic formula.</b> Enough said.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/dnf-review-daughter-of-deep-silence-by-carrie-ryan/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
You don't continue the book. You mark it as a DNF because you don't want to spend approximately eight pages raging and raging over a four hundred page book when you can read another book.
As you can see, I did exactly that.
But <b>never, <i>never</i> have I ever wanted to throw a book out the window <i>SO BADLY</i></b> as I want to do with <i>Daughter of Deep Silence</i>. This is <b>an absolute, horrifying mess disguised as a book with a gorgeous cover and an absolutely beautiful interior layout.</b> <i>Daughter of Deep Silence</i> is really about <b>a girl who is so hell-bent on revenge, she's become obsessed and obviously needs to get a move on with her life.</b>
It's obvious from early on in the book. <b>I don't actually know much about Frances as a person</b> from the fourth of the book I read. <b>I know her plans and what happened on the <i>Persephone</i></b> with the flashbacks here and there, but I don't know Frances. The book screams <i>revenge</i>. It also screams <i>obsessed</i>, because <b>what else could it be if you're keeping a bleeping notebook on each of the family members filled with little details among details about each member?</b>
<blockquote>Over the past four years I've become an expert on Grey. An expert on everyone in the Wells family. I have the same kind of notebook on each one of them.</blockquote>
But <i>Daughter of Deep Silence</i> isn't just that. It's a carbon copy. <b>An absolute carbon copy of <i>Revenge</i></b>, and I mean <i>ABSOLUTE</i>. It's worse than <i><a title="Unbreakable by Kami Garcia" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/dnf-audiobook-review-unbreakable-by-kami-garcia/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">Unbreakable</a></i> and <i>Supernatural</i> or <i>The Hunger Games</i> and <i><a title="The Testing by Joelle Charbonneau" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-the-testing-by-joelle-charbonneau/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Testing</a></i> and other dystopian novels put together, because there's actually <i>some</i> difference. <a title="The Moon Dwellers by David Estes" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-the-moon-dwellers-by-david-estes/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">There's a chance that I'll actually like the book.</a> (It's happened. I PROMISE.)
<i>Daughter of Deep Silence</i>, on the other hand? <b>I don't even know where <i>Revenge</i> ends and the book actually begins</b> I can distinguish nary a difference, and I'm completely disappointed.
<b>There's revenge obviously.</b> There's a reason <i>behind</i> both Frances' and Emily's vengeance, and <b>this whole revenge idea didn't bother me at all.</b> It's only just one similarity right? <b>This could have gone on an entirely different route from early on</b> and I wouldn't have complained about a single thing. Maybe not a single thing, but there would be less rage. But I should have seen the signs from the moment I picked up the book.
<blockquote>*peruses new books shelves, sees book*
Hey, didn't I want to read this? *picks up book and reads synopsis again*
Sounds like Revenge. I'll come back and think about it. *looks at other books and chooses two more*
Screw it. Let's give this a whirl. If I don't like it, I've got plenty of papery ammunition.</blockquote>
<b>There's a disguise involved.</b> It's revealed in a later season View Spoiler »Emily is actually disguised as someone else. Frances is asked by her best friend's father to change her identity to Libby O'Martin so she can be protected and be able to find a way to exploit the truth behind the fate of <i>Persephone</i>.
<blockquote>"It's the only way to keep you sage." He pushes the ring toward me. "It's the only way to figure out who did this and make them pay."</blockquote>
<b>There's a politically powerful family.</b> Both are senators, both are planning on running for president, both are famous, both have a mansion with French doors (at least, I'm pretty sure <i>Revenge</i> had the French doors). And both have a son named...
...wait for it...
Greyson. *whistles* Imagine that! I mean, so much is similar, and the son had to be named the <i>exact same name as the one in the show I'm comparing this to?</i> You have got to be seriously kidding me. View Spoiler »I started expecting Ryan to actually throw in a secret son or something.
I just... can't. Someone pick up my horrified self off the floor. I'll wake up later. Until then, Ella or Lupe can take over.
<b><i>Daughter of Deep Silence</i> is <i>Revenge</i> down to the very basic formula.</b> Enough said.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/dnf-review-daughter-of-deep-silence-by-carrie-ryan/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>