Search
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Clover Moon in Books
Dec 7, 2018
<i>This eBook was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review </i>
Although now in her seventies, the Nation’s favourite children’s author, Dame Jacqueline Wilson, is continuing to write after surpassing one hundred novels. Many children (mostly girls) grow up reading her stories, myself being amongst that number. Even my sister, who hated reading, purchased a number of her books. It has been well over a decade since I last read a Jacqueline Wilson, however after seeing her latest novel was available for review, I thought I would give it a go.
<i>Clover Moon</i> is set in poverty-stricken Victorian London, where eleven-year-old Clover, the eldest of six siblings, lives with her father and stepmother. Like many stepmother’s in children’s literature, Clover’s treats her like a slave – a position she is destined to stay in unless she gets a job in a factory. With no school to attend, Clover becomes a second mother to her younger brother’s and sisters, yet nothing can prepare her for the devastating impact a wave of Scarlet Fever brings. With only an old doll maker who cares about her, Clover is desperate to get out of her situation; so after a chance meeting with an artist who tells her about a home for destitute girls, Clover decides to seek out the help and life she deserves.
Although only eleven, Clover has the responsibilities of someone of a more mature age. It is hard to imagine sending a child out to work, or trusting them to look after a newborn baby. Children reading this book will learn the difference between their lives and the life of a child in the 1800s.
As always, Jacqueline Wilson gives her main character a happy ending – although in this instance it still remains a bit uncertain. Despite the horrible circumstances, Wilson manages to pump her story full of enthusiastic optimism, thus portraying Clover as a strong, determined heroine.
Most of Jacqueline Wilson’s earlier books were set in the present day; there were still unhappy situations, but the settings were based on ideas the reader would be familiar with. In the case of <i>Clover Moon</i>, unless children have been educated about the poor in Victorian England, it is unlikely that they will be able to fully comprehend Clover’s predicament. As a result, the book is more suitable for young teenagers than the usual target audience of eight to twelve year olds.
Comparing my memories of Jacqueline Wilson books I read as a child with her latest publication, <i>Clover Moon</i> felt like something different; a new direction. As I have not read any of her work between the early 2000s and now, I am not sure when this change occurred, but it feels as though Wilson is delving deeper into her main character’s thoughts and feelings, and creating a more insightful storyline. On the other hand, I may simply be more intuitive as an adult than I was a child.
Although <i>Clover Moon</i> did not turn out to be the style of writing I was expecting I thoroughly enjoyed it. In fact, this difference made it possible to distance myself from the author’s renown, and treat it as an individual story. Clover is an admirable character who, through her narration, provides both an entertaining story and brief historical education. Fans of Jacqueline Wilson will not be disappointed with this latest publication; and if you are a new reader, <i>Clover Moon</i> is a great place to start.
Although now in her seventies, the Nation’s favourite children’s author, Dame Jacqueline Wilson, is continuing to write after surpassing one hundred novels. Many children (mostly girls) grow up reading her stories, myself being amongst that number. Even my sister, who hated reading, purchased a number of her books. It has been well over a decade since I last read a Jacqueline Wilson, however after seeing her latest novel was available for review, I thought I would give it a go.
<i>Clover Moon</i> is set in poverty-stricken Victorian London, where eleven-year-old Clover, the eldest of six siblings, lives with her father and stepmother. Like many stepmother’s in children’s literature, Clover’s treats her like a slave – a position she is destined to stay in unless she gets a job in a factory. With no school to attend, Clover becomes a second mother to her younger brother’s and sisters, yet nothing can prepare her for the devastating impact a wave of Scarlet Fever brings. With only an old doll maker who cares about her, Clover is desperate to get out of her situation; so after a chance meeting with an artist who tells her about a home for destitute girls, Clover decides to seek out the help and life she deserves.
Although only eleven, Clover has the responsibilities of someone of a more mature age. It is hard to imagine sending a child out to work, or trusting them to look after a newborn baby. Children reading this book will learn the difference between their lives and the life of a child in the 1800s.
As always, Jacqueline Wilson gives her main character a happy ending – although in this instance it still remains a bit uncertain. Despite the horrible circumstances, Wilson manages to pump her story full of enthusiastic optimism, thus portraying Clover as a strong, determined heroine.
Most of Jacqueline Wilson’s earlier books were set in the present day; there were still unhappy situations, but the settings were based on ideas the reader would be familiar with. In the case of <i>Clover Moon</i>, unless children have been educated about the poor in Victorian England, it is unlikely that they will be able to fully comprehend Clover’s predicament. As a result, the book is more suitable for young teenagers than the usual target audience of eight to twelve year olds.
Comparing my memories of Jacqueline Wilson books I read as a child with her latest publication, <i>Clover Moon</i> felt like something different; a new direction. As I have not read any of her work between the early 2000s and now, I am not sure when this change occurred, but it feels as though Wilson is delving deeper into her main character’s thoughts and feelings, and creating a more insightful storyline. On the other hand, I may simply be more intuitive as an adult than I was a child.
Although <i>Clover Moon</i> did not turn out to be the style of writing I was expecting I thoroughly enjoyed it. In fact, this difference made it possible to distance myself from the author’s renown, and treat it as an individual story. Clover is an admirable character who, through her narration, provides both an entertaining story and brief historical education. Fans of Jacqueline Wilson will not be disappointed with this latest publication; and if you are a new reader, <i>Clover Moon</i> is a great place to start.
5 Minute Movie Guy (379 KP) rated The Fault In Our Stars (2014) in Movies
Jun 26, 2019 (Updated Jun 26, 2019)
Undoubtedly one of the great love stories of our time. (3 more)
Shailene Woodley and Ansel Elgort are a perfect match.
John Green's novel is brilliantly adapted to the silver screen.
This is a movie that will stay with you long after it's over.
On the surface, it's easy to dismiss The Fault in Our Stars as being a sappy teenage love affair, but I can fortunately say that this is one of the great love stories of our time.
Based on John Green’s popular young adult novel, The Fault in Our Stars is a film that is profoundly beautiful, eloquent and heartfelt. It tells of an extraordinary love between two unforgettable characters who are brought together by similarly ill-fated circumstances. Hazel Grace Lancaster and Augustus Waters are both victims of cancer. Although they do their best to hide it, these two young adults are each afraid of their ominous and unstable futures. They’re just trying to live purposeful lives and experience life like normal teenagers, but the looming threat of an untimely death impedes that desire. However, for a film filled with so much uncertainty, I can fortunately say that there is little doubt that The Fault in Our Stars is one of the great love stories of our time.
On the surface, it’s easy to dismiss The Fault in Our Stars as being a sappy teenage love affair. I’ll confess that I went into the theater expecting to be fully surrounded by crying teenage girls, while I would be quietly laughing to myself at their heartache. What I surely didn’t anticipate, however, was to be so deeply drawn into the film. Even more surprising is the fact that The Fault in Our Stars has actually turned out to be my favorite movie of the year so far. This is a film that is sincerely heartfelt and unflinchingly genuine. It brings truth to the romantic fantasies we have, and teaches us that we can’t let the fear of possible heartache hold us back from the endless potential of love.
Make no mistake about it, The Fault in Our Stars is a tear-jerker. It’s difficult to watch these lovable characters endure such unjustifiable hardship. Hazel and Augustus are each forced to face a formidable fate that they shouldn’t have to. I really felt a strong attachment to both of them, and found them to be remarkably identifiable. This connection makes it all the more unsettling when their situations turn dire. The reason that The Fault in Our Stars manages to be so effective is because of its authenticity and accessibility. The characters are not only admirable, but relatable. They’re not simply reduced to being unfortunate young cancer patients that we’re meant to feel sorry for. While of course we can sympathize with their condition, it is their compassion and the content of their characters that make them so compelling.
While the film features its fair share of tragedy, I should make it clear that it’s not heart-wrenchingly malicious in the way it deals with its ensuing sadness. This is not a film that is deliberately trying to make anyone feel bad. It is merely being honest in its depiction of the unfairness that often exists in life. While you very well might cry when watching the film, it’s not entirely depressing and hopeless. In fact, I would argue that The Fault in Our Stars is more pleasant than painful. The sadness it makes you feel ends up all being worthwhile because of the joyous, unforgettable memories the movie creates along the way. This is a film that will stay with you long after seeing it. To answer the question you’re all wondering: no, the movie didn’t make me cry. Though my lack of tears is not a particularly good indicator of the emotional quality of the film. I don’t really allow myself to cry during movies, but I certainly came close, and it undeniably left me deeply touched and forever grateful that I watched it.
Being that this is a romance, I must warn you that this isn’t a movie for everyone. Truth be told, I’m a sucker for a good romance, but I’m aware not everyone has the patience for these kind of movies. The Fault in Our Stars is a slow-burning journey that takes its time to relish in the moments. It does this skillfully, maintaining a steady, balanced pace while building up to a powerful climax. Some may find the film to be a little too cutesy, but I think anyone who approaches it with an open-mind will find that it’s legitimately a really great film. My only real criticism of the movie involves the awkward return of a particular character towards the end of the movie. It makes for a rather unwelcome and perplexing intrusion, although it does at least help to set up the film’s wonderful ending.
John Green’s story is refreshing, witty, and modern. It is not only insightful in its depiction of love and life, but also offers an amazing attention to detail. It nails the feelings of love, and perfectly captures the life of being a teenager. The characters created by Green truly come to life in this film. Divergent star Shailene Woodley shines as Hazel, a young woman suffering from terminal thyroid cancer. Additionally, Ansel Elgort is incredibly charming as Augustus, a high school basketball star whose career ended short when cancer turned him into an amputee. The two of them are a perfect complementary match. Laura Dern also puts in a commendable performance as Hazel’s mom, a selfless, loving parent and companion. The film’s soundtrack is sensational. It’s appropriately fitting and delightful, featuring great work by artists such as Ed Sheeran, Birdy, and Ray LaMontagne. Every aspect of the movie comes together to produce a thoroughly poignant and relevant package.
The Fault in Our Stars is a film that speaks to our generation. It stares boldly into our fears of the eminent death that haunts us all, and makes no attempt to glamorize it. Even though it’s about a pair of teenagers, it’s not afraid to deal with mature content. It’s actually all the more engrossing and troubling because these two characters are young. They’re already facing a pivotal time in their lives and are learning to experience the world on their own accord, and yet their journeys are plagued by the callous complications of cancer. Their age gives the film a stronger emotional impact, emphasizing the preciousness of life and the importance of living it to the fullest. The Fault in Our Stars is a smart and stimulating movie, and just like its star characters, it is wholly worthy of remembrance.
(This review was originally posted at 5mmg.com on 7.12.14.)
On the surface, it’s easy to dismiss The Fault in Our Stars as being a sappy teenage love affair. I’ll confess that I went into the theater expecting to be fully surrounded by crying teenage girls, while I would be quietly laughing to myself at their heartache. What I surely didn’t anticipate, however, was to be so deeply drawn into the film. Even more surprising is the fact that The Fault in Our Stars has actually turned out to be my favorite movie of the year so far. This is a film that is sincerely heartfelt and unflinchingly genuine. It brings truth to the romantic fantasies we have, and teaches us that we can’t let the fear of possible heartache hold us back from the endless potential of love.
Make no mistake about it, The Fault in Our Stars is a tear-jerker. It’s difficult to watch these lovable characters endure such unjustifiable hardship. Hazel and Augustus are each forced to face a formidable fate that they shouldn’t have to. I really felt a strong attachment to both of them, and found them to be remarkably identifiable. This connection makes it all the more unsettling when their situations turn dire. The reason that The Fault in Our Stars manages to be so effective is because of its authenticity and accessibility. The characters are not only admirable, but relatable. They’re not simply reduced to being unfortunate young cancer patients that we’re meant to feel sorry for. While of course we can sympathize with their condition, it is their compassion and the content of their characters that make them so compelling.
While the film features its fair share of tragedy, I should make it clear that it’s not heart-wrenchingly malicious in the way it deals with its ensuing sadness. This is not a film that is deliberately trying to make anyone feel bad. It is merely being honest in its depiction of the unfairness that often exists in life. While you very well might cry when watching the film, it’s not entirely depressing and hopeless. In fact, I would argue that The Fault in Our Stars is more pleasant than painful. The sadness it makes you feel ends up all being worthwhile because of the joyous, unforgettable memories the movie creates along the way. This is a film that will stay with you long after seeing it. To answer the question you’re all wondering: no, the movie didn’t make me cry. Though my lack of tears is not a particularly good indicator of the emotional quality of the film. I don’t really allow myself to cry during movies, but I certainly came close, and it undeniably left me deeply touched and forever grateful that I watched it.
Being that this is a romance, I must warn you that this isn’t a movie for everyone. Truth be told, I’m a sucker for a good romance, but I’m aware not everyone has the patience for these kind of movies. The Fault in Our Stars is a slow-burning journey that takes its time to relish in the moments. It does this skillfully, maintaining a steady, balanced pace while building up to a powerful climax. Some may find the film to be a little too cutesy, but I think anyone who approaches it with an open-mind will find that it’s legitimately a really great film. My only real criticism of the movie involves the awkward return of a particular character towards the end of the movie. It makes for a rather unwelcome and perplexing intrusion, although it does at least help to set up the film’s wonderful ending.
John Green’s story is refreshing, witty, and modern. It is not only insightful in its depiction of love and life, but also offers an amazing attention to detail. It nails the feelings of love, and perfectly captures the life of being a teenager. The characters created by Green truly come to life in this film. Divergent star Shailene Woodley shines as Hazel, a young woman suffering from terminal thyroid cancer. Additionally, Ansel Elgort is incredibly charming as Augustus, a high school basketball star whose career ended short when cancer turned him into an amputee. The two of them are a perfect complementary match. Laura Dern also puts in a commendable performance as Hazel’s mom, a selfless, loving parent and companion. The film’s soundtrack is sensational. It’s appropriately fitting and delightful, featuring great work by artists such as Ed Sheeran, Birdy, and Ray LaMontagne. Every aspect of the movie comes together to produce a thoroughly poignant and relevant package.
The Fault in Our Stars is a film that speaks to our generation. It stares boldly into our fears of the eminent death that haunts us all, and makes no attempt to glamorize it. Even though it’s about a pair of teenagers, it’s not afraid to deal with mature content. It’s actually all the more engrossing and troubling because these two characters are young. They’re already facing a pivotal time in their lives and are learning to experience the world on their own accord, and yet their journeys are plagued by the callous complications of cancer. Their age gives the film a stronger emotional impact, emphasizing the preciousness of life and the importance of living it to the fullest. The Fault in Our Stars is a smart and stimulating movie, and just like its star characters, it is wholly worthy of remembrance.
(This review was originally posted at 5mmg.com on 7.12.14.)
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Lucid in Books
Jun 7, 2018
(This review can also be found on my blog <a href="http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.co.uk">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a>).
When I first heard of Lucid by Adrienne Stoltz and Ron Bass, I knew it was one of those books that I definitely had to read. At first I thought I was going to be disappointed with this book, but it completely took me by surprise!
Lucid tells the story of two girls - Maggie and Sloane. They are as different as night and day except for one thing, they each dream of each other. As the story progresses, each girl falls in love and is afraid that maybe theirs is the world that is actually just a dream. The question is which girl is just a dream and which one is real?
Merriam-Webster defines the world lucid as "having full use of one's faculties: sane." I think the title of this book definitely suits it. Everyone around Maggie and Sloane think they may be going insane. Also, since this is a book about dreaming, Lucid works well.
I don't really like the cover besides the fact that it's shiny. Other than being shiny, the cover is a bit to boring and plain for my liking. I wish it was a bit more decorative instead of just a girl lying in a bed upside down.
The world building for Maggie and Sloane was fantastic! I love how the authors made each girl seem real and like their reality was the real one. It was difficult to tell who was real and who wasn't right up until the very end.
The pacing started out so very slowly for the first half of the book. In fact, it was so slow, that I felt like I was torturing myself reading it, but I really hate not finishing a book. Plus, I was hoping it would get better. Luckily, it get way better. It was almost as if I was reading a whole different book with how suddenly the pacing changed! I found myself reading the second half of the book like there was no tomorrow. It was just so good!!
I enjoyed both the characters of Sloane and Maggie. Although, if I'm honest, I did like Sloane a bit better than Maggie. Sloane seemed to be more grounded whilst Maggie was just a bit too all over the place for my liking. Plus, I felt more like I could be friends with Sloane. There are a few points in the book where the characters come across as being older then they are judging by their language. Plus, Maggie's seven year old sister sounded more like she was Maggie's age. I've never known a seven year old to speak and act like her!
The dialogue was a bit boring at the beginning of the book, but like the pacing, it definitely gets better in the second half. As I stated in the previous paragraph, there were times when the characters appeared to be much older than they actually were. I think the authors seemed to forgot how teenagers talk (as well as seven year olds). There's some acting terminology that's not really explained like the word "flunky" which I still don't know really what that means. There's quite a bit of swearing in this book, so this is definitely more on the side of mature young adult.
Overall, I did really enjoy this book even if the first half was painfully slow. The ending of the book was quite good and unpredictable albeit a bit confusing. I'm still a bit confused about the ending, but maybe that's just me.
I'd recommend this book to everyone aged 16+ due to the language and themes.
When I first heard of Lucid by Adrienne Stoltz and Ron Bass, I knew it was one of those books that I definitely had to read. At first I thought I was going to be disappointed with this book, but it completely took me by surprise!
Lucid tells the story of two girls - Maggie and Sloane. They are as different as night and day except for one thing, they each dream of each other. As the story progresses, each girl falls in love and is afraid that maybe theirs is the world that is actually just a dream. The question is which girl is just a dream and which one is real?
Merriam-Webster defines the world lucid as "having full use of one's faculties: sane." I think the title of this book definitely suits it. Everyone around Maggie and Sloane think they may be going insane. Also, since this is a book about dreaming, Lucid works well.
I don't really like the cover besides the fact that it's shiny. Other than being shiny, the cover is a bit to boring and plain for my liking. I wish it was a bit more decorative instead of just a girl lying in a bed upside down.
The world building for Maggie and Sloane was fantastic! I love how the authors made each girl seem real and like their reality was the real one. It was difficult to tell who was real and who wasn't right up until the very end.
The pacing started out so very slowly for the first half of the book. In fact, it was so slow, that I felt like I was torturing myself reading it, but I really hate not finishing a book. Plus, I was hoping it would get better. Luckily, it get way better. It was almost as if I was reading a whole different book with how suddenly the pacing changed! I found myself reading the second half of the book like there was no tomorrow. It was just so good!!
I enjoyed both the characters of Sloane and Maggie. Although, if I'm honest, I did like Sloane a bit better than Maggie. Sloane seemed to be more grounded whilst Maggie was just a bit too all over the place for my liking. Plus, I felt more like I could be friends with Sloane. There are a few points in the book where the characters come across as being older then they are judging by their language. Plus, Maggie's seven year old sister sounded more like she was Maggie's age. I've never known a seven year old to speak and act like her!
The dialogue was a bit boring at the beginning of the book, but like the pacing, it definitely gets better in the second half. As I stated in the previous paragraph, there were times when the characters appeared to be much older than they actually were. I think the authors seemed to forgot how teenagers talk (as well as seven year olds). There's some acting terminology that's not really explained like the word "flunky" which I still don't know really what that means. There's quite a bit of swearing in this book, so this is definitely more on the side of mature young adult.
Overall, I did really enjoy this book even if the first half was painfully slow. The ending of the book was quite good and unpredictable albeit a bit confusing. I'm still a bit confused about the ending, but maybe that's just me.
I'd recommend this book to everyone aged 16+ due to the language and themes.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Soul (2020) in Movies
Jan 22, 2021
When Disney Pixar launches a big new title it comes with a lot of expectation – there are just so many titles in the back catalogue now that will forever be considered classics. Movies that raised and re-raised the bar of what animation and family film storytelling can be at the very, very best.
So, when it was announced that Soul would be shown worldwide on the excellent Disney plus channel on Christmas Day, it was something of a coup that made it The movie event of the year, as many of us would now have the shared memory of watching it post lunch, as we struggled to keep our own cosy souls and eyelids awake enough to properly enjoy it.
I must admit that my opinion of it after one watch is tinted by being very close to a complete food coma shutdown. I will need to watch it again to fully appreciate it, I think. The main thing about doing it at all was how perfect and special it felt to be doing it on Christmas Day – nothing has felt more Christmassy to me film-wise since they first aired Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade on BBC1 in 1992. Such a treat with quality assured is rare indeed. The question was how good would it be in comparison to our favourites?
There were rumours from early reviews that it was more mature and adult themed than usual, and this seemed entirely true from the get go. Jazz music, a mellow vibe not racing headlong after easy laughs and the themes of existential angst and, well, death… it is quite grown up, to an extent. Not that young ones won’t enjoy it at all. It is as colourful and busy and joyous as any of them. Even if they can’t take in the concepts of the story in a deeper way, there is plenty to enjoy.
What it seems like Pixar were going for here is a film families of many generations can enjoy together; the older parents and grandparents explaining and reassuring in the deeper moments, and the young ones reminding the older ones to laugh at the silly bits! It was ever thus, but now the ambition to make it really about something significant seems achievable.
The theme of separation, loss and yes, even death is all over Pixar if you look for it. Especially with the recent Coco, which I thought was their best effort for several years. What they did with the theme of death in that one and here also is view it without fear, but as a celebration of the life that came before it, and the people that were touched by that life. It is the perennial Pixar message, that something which at first seems scary and sad is actually beautiful and wonderful if you look closer and choose to see it that way. And to their work in educating kids with that message I can only applaud in awe.
The animation itself is surprising. The “real” world being almost photo real to a jaw dropping degree, whilst the characters remain stylised. But it is the choices of simpler, somehow old fashioned styles in the before and after life sections that are striking. The semi luminous colours are also breath-taking: all calm aquamarine and soft pink, for every bright red and orange of Coco, but just as vibrant.
Pete Doctor who was responsible on this scale for Monster’s Inc, Up and Inside Out, holds the dual reigns of directing and writing expertly yet again, making things that are very hard to achieve look like cracking eggs! The voice talents of Jamie Foxx and Tina Fey do exactly what is needed in the roles without ever standing out as spectacular, as do minor roles for the likes of Graham Norton and Richard Ayoade. Spectacular is not what Soul is about, it is much more about solid qualities with deeper resonance. Personally, I never arrived at the tears in the eyes revelation moment. But that might be more about how warm and full and content I was than any criticism of something missing. There is every chance it is me that missed it.
Look, I don’t think anyone is going to be putting this amongst their top 5 Pixars any time soon, but I also can’t see anyone saying they didn’t enjoy it. The consensus seems to be “hmm, interesting, I need to think about that a while and see it again a few times”. So, for now, that is exactly what I am saying too. It may well be a classic that grows in appreciation over the years, or it may be one where you go, “nah, let’s watch Monster’s Inc. again instead”. Not sure. I’ll add a postscript right here when I have seen it a second time…
So, when it was announced that Soul would be shown worldwide on the excellent Disney plus channel on Christmas Day, it was something of a coup that made it The movie event of the year, as many of us would now have the shared memory of watching it post lunch, as we struggled to keep our own cosy souls and eyelids awake enough to properly enjoy it.
I must admit that my opinion of it after one watch is tinted by being very close to a complete food coma shutdown. I will need to watch it again to fully appreciate it, I think. The main thing about doing it at all was how perfect and special it felt to be doing it on Christmas Day – nothing has felt more Christmassy to me film-wise since they first aired Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade on BBC1 in 1992. Such a treat with quality assured is rare indeed. The question was how good would it be in comparison to our favourites?
There were rumours from early reviews that it was more mature and adult themed than usual, and this seemed entirely true from the get go. Jazz music, a mellow vibe not racing headlong after easy laughs and the themes of existential angst and, well, death… it is quite grown up, to an extent. Not that young ones won’t enjoy it at all. It is as colourful and busy and joyous as any of them. Even if they can’t take in the concepts of the story in a deeper way, there is plenty to enjoy.
What it seems like Pixar were going for here is a film families of many generations can enjoy together; the older parents and grandparents explaining and reassuring in the deeper moments, and the young ones reminding the older ones to laugh at the silly bits! It was ever thus, but now the ambition to make it really about something significant seems achievable.
The theme of separation, loss and yes, even death is all over Pixar if you look for it. Especially with the recent Coco, which I thought was their best effort for several years. What they did with the theme of death in that one and here also is view it without fear, but as a celebration of the life that came before it, and the people that were touched by that life. It is the perennial Pixar message, that something which at first seems scary and sad is actually beautiful and wonderful if you look closer and choose to see it that way. And to their work in educating kids with that message I can only applaud in awe.
The animation itself is surprising. The “real” world being almost photo real to a jaw dropping degree, whilst the characters remain stylised. But it is the choices of simpler, somehow old fashioned styles in the before and after life sections that are striking. The semi luminous colours are also breath-taking: all calm aquamarine and soft pink, for every bright red and orange of Coco, but just as vibrant.
Pete Doctor who was responsible on this scale for Monster’s Inc, Up and Inside Out, holds the dual reigns of directing and writing expertly yet again, making things that are very hard to achieve look like cracking eggs! The voice talents of Jamie Foxx and Tina Fey do exactly what is needed in the roles without ever standing out as spectacular, as do minor roles for the likes of Graham Norton and Richard Ayoade. Spectacular is not what Soul is about, it is much more about solid qualities with deeper resonance. Personally, I never arrived at the tears in the eyes revelation moment. But that might be more about how warm and full and content I was than any criticism of something missing. There is every chance it is me that missed it.
Look, I don’t think anyone is going to be putting this amongst their top 5 Pixars any time soon, but I also can’t see anyone saying they didn’t enjoy it. The consensus seems to be “hmm, interesting, I need to think about that a while and see it again a few times”. So, for now, that is exactly what I am saying too. It may well be a classic that grows in appreciation over the years, or it may be one where you go, “nah, let’s watch Monster’s Inc. again instead”. Not sure. I’ll add a postscript right here when I have seen it a second time…
Becs (244 KP) rated The Bone Roses in Books
Apr 5, 2019
the writing (4 more)
the protaganists
the antagonists
the plot and background
the development of the story and characters
Fast-paced, page-turner that will leave you wanting more!
You can read more of this review on my blog: bookingwayreads.wordpress.com and Goodreads!
I received a copy to read and review for my honest opinion from The Parliament Press.
TRIGGER WARNINGS: Violence, Gore, Oppression, Discrimination
I don't generally like Western stories but this is also considered Young Adult/ Fantasy so I figured I would give it a try, especially after reading the very intriguing synopsis. But be warned, this story is geared more towards a mature audience as there are a lot of scenes that are more NA then YA. This is book one(1) of the Snow Spark Saga.
Set in a post-apocalyptic West, thirty years into the future after Yellowstone erupts, the United States is reformed. A cruel king named Hyperion has taken control of the entire region and has cut multiple of small settlements off from the trade routes due to those settlements not bowing to him. All because they believe in God and Hyperion wants everyone to worship him. The main settlement that takes place within The Bone Roses is Rondo. In order to survive, the settlements have to have outlaws that are known as rustlers. These outlaws risk their own lives to steal from the capital city, Adonis. If caught, the punishment is torture and death. The main character, Rags, is a rustler with an extremely large bounty on her head.
But Rags runs into a problem when on a raid, the Kingdom Corps (K.C. for short) start chasing her. She manages to slip away with her adopted father Tracker and what neither of them realizes, is that they are being followed. This leads to a whole bunch of other problems down the road.
This fast-paced, page-turner will leave you on your toes until the very end.
Characters:
Rags - the protagonist of the story. Rondo's rustler, she is feared and the best at her role. But she does have a realistic sense to her that allows the reader to really get a feel on her.
Tracker - Rags' mentor and "adopted" father. Very mysterious and seems to have a hidden past.
Matthew - Rags' best friend, the preacher's son. I thought he was going to be a love interest, but he was only seen as a brother/friend to Rags.
Jericho - the preacher. He's seen as Rondo's town leader.
Sadie - a mother figure to Rags and soon-to-be-mother. No major role in the story but does seem to be hiding a past.
Frank - husband of Sadie and soon-to-be-father. No major role in the story.
Hyperion - the wicked king that thinks he's the almighty God.
Henny - Hyperion's second in command, he's to seek out all the rustlers and take care of them. One thing I really love about his character is that you hate but like him. Like he's the antagonist that does things that make you question why you ever put him into the antagonist category and then turns around and does the things that make him a bad guy. (if that makes any sense at all lol)
Hunter Lawrence - the sheriff of Rondo and discriminates against Rags because she isn't a true citizen of Rondo.
Colton - a luresman (someone who's good at negotiating with settlements), but he's an overall mysterious guy that leaves you wondering the same thing as Henny. Is he really bad? Is he really good? Can you trust him? Possible love interest to Rags??
Reasons why I rated it 5 stars:
1. Very intriguing from the beginning - the plot was amazing!
2. No grammatical or spelling errors - the writing was phenomenal!
3. There was not only character development but also story development! The only character that lacked any background was Rags, but she doesn't remember much of anything from before her arrival into Rondo.
4. With the development and plot, the overall story came together rather nicely and it left me wanting more.
5. This is a series that I can't wait to read more of!
"Deny all knowledge - but leave no one behind. Never"
I received a copy to read and review for my honest opinion from The Parliament Press.
TRIGGER WARNINGS: Violence, Gore, Oppression, Discrimination
I don't generally like Western stories but this is also considered Young Adult/ Fantasy so I figured I would give it a try, especially after reading the very intriguing synopsis. But be warned, this story is geared more towards a mature audience as there are a lot of scenes that are more NA then YA. This is book one(1) of the Snow Spark Saga.
Set in a post-apocalyptic West, thirty years into the future after Yellowstone erupts, the United States is reformed. A cruel king named Hyperion has taken control of the entire region and has cut multiple of small settlements off from the trade routes due to those settlements not bowing to him. All because they believe in God and Hyperion wants everyone to worship him. The main settlement that takes place within The Bone Roses is Rondo. In order to survive, the settlements have to have outlaws that are known as rustlers. These outlaws risk their own lives to steal from the capital city, Adonis. If caught, the punishment is torture and death. The main character, Rags, is a rustler with an extremely large bounty on her head.
But Rags runs into a problem when on a raid, the Kingdom Corps (K.C. for short) start chasing her. She manages to slip away with her adopted father Tracker and what neither of them realizes, is that they are being followed. This leads to a whole bunch of other problems down the road.
This fast-paced, page-turner will leave you on your toes until the very end.
Characters:
Rags - the protagonist of the story. Rondo's rustler, she is feared and the best at her role. But she does have a realistic sense to her that allows the reader to really get a feel on her.
Tracker - Rags' mentor and "adopted" father. Very mysterious and seems to have a hidden past.
Matthew - Rags' best friend, the preacher's son. I thought he was going to be a love interest, but he was only seen as a brother/friend to Rags.
Jericho - the preacher. He's seen as Rondo's town leader.
Sadie - a mother figure to Rags and soon-to-be-mother. No major role in the story but does seem to be hiding a past.
Frank - husband of Sadie and soon-to-be-father. No major role in the story.
Hyperion - the wicked king that thinks he's the almighty God.
Henny - Hyperion's second in command, he's to seek out all the rustlers and take care of them. One thing I really love about his character is that you hate but like him. Like he's the antagonist that does things that make you question why you ever put him into the antagonist category and then turns around and does the things that make him a bad guy. (if that makes any sense at all lol)
Hunter Lawrence - the sheriff of Rondo and discriminates against Rags because she isn't a true citizen of Rondo.
Colton - a luresman (someone who's good at negotiating with settlements), but he's an overall mysterious guy that leaves you wondering the same thing as Henny. Is he really bad? Is he really good? Can you trust him? Possible love interest to Rags??
Reasons why I rated it 5 stars:
1. Very intriguing from the beginning - the plot was amazing!
2. No grammatical or spelling errors - the writing was phenomenal!
3. There was not only character development but also story development! The only character that lacked any background was Rags, but she doesn't remember much of anything from before her arrival into Rondo.
4. With the development and plot, the overall story came together rather nicely and it left me wanting more.
5. This is a series that I can't wait to read more of!
"Deny all knowledge - but leave no one behind. Never"
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated I Am Not Okay With This in TV
Mar 3, 2020
Proof that Netflix can rule your life, in an OK way, I guess. Every time I have dropped in for the last two weeks, this is the show they went out of their way to push on me. I watched the trailer and thought hmm, I don’t get it… but after relentless publicity I ended up watching the entire first series within 36 hours of its release on February 26th. Which is easy enough to do, as the entire first series only lasts 2 1/2 hours, in 7 x 23 minute easy to swallow episodes. Another nice tactic for the attention deficient generation.
Based on the graphic novels of Charles Forsman, who also gave us The End of the F***ing World – an equally dark edged teen angst story, that has had 2 full seasons of similarly short episodes. It also continues the partnership of that series’ main director, British born Jonathon Entwistle, who seems happily stuck with this genre on his, as yet, limited CV. It stars the quirky charm of Sophia Lillis, best known from the It reboot movies, and Wyatt Oleff, also plucked from that franchise. And, oh yeah, it shares production credits with a small show called Stranger Things; so it has a pop culture pedigree 100% guaranteed to attract a young audience.
In terms of tone and direction, it does wobble at the beginning, but also shows a lot of promise, thanks largely to the watchability of Lillis, who is perfectly cast as a nervy, nerdy teen with a lot of smarts, but not too many friends. The humour is black, the satire subtle, and the delivery is disarmingly adult; on the surface this is a high school comedy, but underneath it is a fucked up, biting exploration of grief, paranoia and anger (mis)management – it pushes boundaries on content, visually and in use of language that only Netflix can endorse and get away with. Which of course is what audiences want!
The premise is that after the suicide of her father, 17 year old Sydney Novak is having some emotional issues beyond the normal teenage stuff of zits on your thighs. As she keeps a secret journal to document her worries and thoughts (heard in voice-over consistently, giving it a definite graphic novel thought bubble vibe) we are in from the start on the possibility she may have a dubious superpower linked to being pissed off.
It takes a while for that aspect to kick in, however, so don’t expect big, showy, superhero set pieces; this is a comedy drama that borrows from every teenage trope available, and is focussed more on the troubles of high school, a single mom and general growing pains. It is funny – I laughed, and found it a charming mix of something really modern feeling, but with retro vibes; it is clearly 2020, but could be 1985, a trick Stranger Things has taught them well.
Really, it is almost all over before it gets started, with these brief episode times – which is smart; no time to waste, so it moves along, and is always endearingly entertaining. In essence, what we have here is a 2 1/2 hour pilot show, chopped into bite sized chunks and released as a tease for the main show, which will be series 2. Think of it as an origin story, if you will. Undoubtedly, that 2nd series is already on the way. Early critical response is solid, and in about another month you will be hearing everyone and their cat talking about it, for sure.
The lack of originality didn’t massively bother me, as you could see what they were trying to do with it, and the large appeal is to recreate a teen world that feels familiar and comfortable, and then play with those preconceptions, choosing the right moments to flip it upside down. Which eventually it does. The final episode of seven is an absolute doozy! Talk about teasing cliff-hangers! They really know how to keep us hooked!
The best thing about it, by a country mile, is the obvious star quality of Sophia Lillis, who must surely use this as a stepping-stone to a fine career, if she can master the emotional scenes as well as the charming quirky ones, at which she already excels. She reminds me a lot of Ellen Page, without the unlikely gravitas… yet. There is time to mature. I will be there for season 2 for sure, so it will be exciting to find out where it all goes next – this is a big opportunity for a BIG little show. I am only half sure they won’t fuck it up…
Based on the graphic novels of Charles Forsman, who also gave us The End of the F***ing World – an equally dark edged teen angst story, that has had 2 full seasons of similarly short episodes. It also continues the partnership of that series’ main director, British born Jonathon Entwistle, who seems happily stuck with this genre on his, as yet, limited CV. It stars the quirky charm of Sophia Lillis, best known from the It reboot movies, and Wyatt Oleff, also plucked from that franchise. And, oh yeah, it shares production credits with a small show called Stranger Things; so it has a pop culture pedigree 100% guaranteed to attract a young audience.
In terms of tone and direction, it does wobble at the beginning, but also shows a lot of promise, thanks largely to the watchability of Lillis, who is perfectly cast as a nervy, nerdy teen with a lot of smarts, but not too many friends. The humour is black, the satire subtle, and the delivery is disarmingly adult; on the surface this is a high school comedy, but underneath it is a fucked up, biting exploration of grief, paranoia and anger (mis)management – it pushes boundaries on content, visually and in use of language that only Netflix can endorse and get away with. Which of course is what audiences want!
The premise is that after the suicide of her father, 17 year old Sydney Novak is having some emotional issues beyond the normal teenage stuff of zits on your thighs. As she keeps a secret journal to document her worries and thoughts (heard in voice-over consistently, giving it a definite graphic novel thought bubble vibe) we are in from the start on the possibility she may have a dubious superpower linked to being pissed off.
It takes a while for that aspect to kick in, however, so don’t expect big, showy, superhero set pieces; this is a comedy drama that borrows from every teenage trope available, and is focussed more on the troubles of high school, a single mom and general growing pains. It is funny – I laughed, and found it a charming mix of something really modern feeling, but with retro vibes; it is clearly 2020, but could be 1985, a trick Stranger Things has taught them well.
Really, it is almost all over before it gets started, with these brief episode times – which is smart; no time to waste, so it moves along, and is always endearingly entertaining. In essence, what we have here is a 2 1/2 hour pilot show, chopped into bite sized chunks and released as a tease for the main show, which will be series 2. Think of it as an origin story, if you will. Undoubtedly, that 2nd series is already on the way. Early critical response is solid, and in about another month you will be hearing everyone and their cat talking about it, for sure.
The lack of originality didn’t massively bother me, as you could see what they were trying to do with it, and the large appeal is to recreate a teen world that feels familiar and comfortable, and then play with those preconceptions, choosing the right moments to flip it upside down. Which eventually it does. The final episode of seven is an absolute doozy! Talk about teasing cliff-hangers! They really know how to keep us hooked!
The best thing about it, by a country mile, is the obvious star quality of Sophia Lillis, who must surely use this as a stepping-stone to a fine career, if she can master the emotional scenes as well as the charming quirky ones, at which she already excels. She reminds me a lot of Ellen Page, without the unlikely gravitas… yet. There is time to mature. I will be there for season 2 for sure, so it will be exciting to find out where it all goes next – this is a big opportunity for a BIG little show. I am only half sure they won’t fuck it up…
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Coco (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Has pixar got it's mojo back?
Pixar has been on something of a downward trend of late, and that’s something I never thought I’d say. As much as it hurts, films like Cars 3, Finding Dory and The Good Dinosaur just don’t cut the mustard when compared to some of the studio’s greats.
Movies like Up, Inside Out and Wall.E as well as The Incredibles, which we’re finally getting a sequel to this year, are up there with the best animations ever produced, never mind just from Pixar. Hoping to get back on the right track this year, Pixar has released Coco. But are we back up to scratch?
Before we begin. Did you know you can now vote in the third annual Movie Metropolis Alternative Oscars? Vote for your favourite films from last year!
Despite his family’s generations-old ban on music, young Miguel (Anthony Gonzalez) dreams of becoming an accomplished musician like his idol Ernesto de la Cruz (Benjamin Bratt). Desperate to prove his talent, Miguel finds himself in the stunning and colourful Land of the Dead. After meeting a charming trickster named Héctor (Gael García Bernal), the two new friends embark on an extraordinary journey to unlock the real story behind Miguel’s family history.
The first thing of note is just how stunning Coco is to look at. Director Lee Unkrich (Toy Story 3) creates what could be Pixar’s finest looking film to date, it really is that staggering to watch. The colourful world of the Land of the Dead is astounding and it’s pleasing that he chooses to spend the majority of the film’s runtime here. Populated by vibrant animals and the living dead, it grabs attention from scene to scene and isn’t afraid to hold on.
The animation itself is spot on, but come on, this is Pixar we’re talking about, we expect nothing less. They really are getting very good at this photo-realistic scenery business and aside from the naturally carnival-esque Land of the Dead, it reeks of realism. The characters too are rendered in ridiculously detailed CGI with the work done on Coco herself being absolutely exquisite. Every well-deserved wrinkle and the remaining twinkle in her eyes – it’s all there.
Aside from all the spectacle though, at its heart, Coco is a film about family, and the importance of family no matter how annoying or frustrating they can be. This may sound a little straightforward in comparison to some of Pixar’s more mature themes, but it’s worth noting that the plot has more twists and turns in it than some of the best thrillers – it’s a brilliant story full of laughs and emotion.
The voice work done by the entire cast is absolutely sublime, but Anthony Gonzalez’s portrayal of Miguel is beautiful. His performance is perfectly integrated into the film as Miguel slowly unravels who he truly is – it’s a testament to the actors and actresses who lent their voices that it speaks to absolutely everyone in the audience.
Pixar films have never really been about moving from one set piece to another and what keeps Coco interesting is the constant shifts in tone, colour and story
Naturally, Pixar’s trademark wit and heart are here in spades. There are some genuinely funny moments that are beautifully juxtaposed with some more sombre scenes that make you realise just how important family is. Correctly awarded a PG certification by the BBFC means that smaller children may find some of the more adult themes a little hard to watch. In fact, there were a few children in floods of tears as I left the cinema.
Pacing wise, Coco is just about right for a family friendly film. At a shade under 110 minutes, it zips along smoothly, very rarely letting up pace. But Pixar films have never really been about moving from one set piece to another and what keeps Coco interesting is the constant shifts in tone, colour and story. In this respect, it’s up there with the very best the studio has to offer us.
It is unfortunate however that there is no Pixar Short attached to Coco. Films like Inside Out and Toy Story 3 had brilliant pre-movie films to get the kids interested in what they were about to see on screen. It’s not clear why Pixar chose to snub Coco like this, but that’s one of the only negative points in a film filled to the brim with memorable moments.
Overall, Pixar is well and truly back on track with Coco. They’ve managed to create a film that not only creates some new classic characters for the studio to bring back in a sequel, but they discuss life and death in a way that adults and children alike will enjoy. Couple this with a beautiful soundtrack with some gorgeous original songs, stunning animation and a heartfelt story and they’ve definitely recovered the animation crown. What a way to start 2018.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/01/13/coco-review-has-pixar-got-its-mojo-back/
Movies like Up, Inside Out and Wall.E as well as The Incredibles, which we’re finally getting a sequel to this year, are up there with the best animations ever produced, never mind just from Pixar. Hoping to get back on the right track this year, Pixar has released Coco. But are we back up to scratch?
Before we begin. Did you know you can now vote in the third annual Movie Metropolis Alternative Oscars? Vote for your favourite films from last year!
Despite his family’s generations-old ban on music, young Miguel (Anthony Gonzalez) dreams of becoming an accomplished musician like his idol Ernesto de la Cruz (Benjamin Bratt). Desperate to prove his talent, Miguel finds himself in the stunning and colourful Land of the Dead. After meeting a charming trickster named Héctor (Gael García Bernal), the two new friends embark on an extraordinary journey to unlock the real story behind Miguel’s family history.
The first thing of note is just how stunning Coco is to look at. Director Lee Unkrich (Toy Story 3) creates what could be Pixar’s finest looking film to date, it really is that staggering to watch. The colourful world of the Land of the Dead is astounding and it’s pleasing that he chooses to spend the majority of the film’s runtime here. Populated by vibrant animals and the living dead, it grabs attention from scene to scene and isn’t afraid to hold on.
The animation itself is spot on, but come on, this is Pixar we’re talking about, we expect nothing less. They really are getting very good at this photo-realistic scenery business and aside from the naturally carnival-esque Land of the Dead, it reeks of realism. The characters too are rendered in ridiculously detailed CGI with the work done on Coco herself being absolutely exquisite. Every well-deserved wrinkle and the remaining twinkle in her eyes – it’s all there.
Aside from all the spectacle though, at its heart, Coco is a film about family, and the importance of family no matter how annoying or frustrating they can be. This may sound a little straightforward in comparison to some of Pixar’s more mature themes, but it’s worth noting that the plot has more twists and turns in it than some of the best thrillers – it’s a brilliant story full of laughs and emotion.
The voice work done by the entire cast is absolutely sublime, but Anthony Gonzalez’s portrayal of Miguel is beautiful. His performance is perfectly integrated into the film as Miguel slowly unravels who he truly is – it’s a testament to the actors and actresses who lent their voices that it speaks to absolutely everyone in the audience.
Pixar films have never really been about moving from one set piece to another and what keeps Coco interesting is the constant shifts in tone, colour and story
Naturally, Pixar’s trademark wit and heart are here in spades. There are some genuinely funny moments that are beautifully juxtaposed with some more sombre scenes that make you realise just how important family is. Correctly awarded a PG certification by the BBFC means that smaller children may find some of the more adult themes a little hard to watch. In fact, there were a few children in floods of tears as I left the cinema.
Pacing wise, Coco is just about right for a family friendly film. At a shade under 110 minutes, it zips along smoothly, very rarely letting up pace. But Pixar films have never really been about moving from one set piece to another and what keeps Coco interesting is the constant shifts in tone, colour and story. In this respect, it’s up there with the very best the studio has to offer us.
It is unfortunate however that there is no Pixar Short attached to Coco. Films like Inside Out and Toy Story 3 had brilliant pre-movie films to get the kids interested in what they were about to see on screen. It’s not clear why Pixar chose to snub Coco like this, but that’s one of the only negative points in a film filled to the brim with memorable moments.
Overall, Pixar is well and truly back on track with Coco. They’ve managed to create a film that not only creates some new classic characters for the studio to bring back in a sequel, but they discuss life and death in a way that adults and children alike will enjoy. Couple this with a beautiful soundtrack with some gorgeous original songs, stunning animation and a heartfelt story and they’ve definitely recovered the animation crown. What a way to start 2018.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/01/13/coco-review-has-pixar-got-its-mojo-back/