Search
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated Bonfire in Books
May 16, 2018
This was first posted on <I><a href="http://theghastlygrimoire.com"; target="new">The Ghastly Grimoire</a></I>.
After completing this book, I think it’s safe to say that my reading slump has finally come to an end. I devoured Krysten Ritter’s debut novel, Bonfire, with a hunger I haven’t felt in months. If you take into account that I’m from a small town of a whopping fifteen hundred people, it’s easier to realize how much I am able to relate to the main character of this book, Abigail Williams. That, and Ritter hits on some nostalgia too, because in a way, Bonfire reads like Erin Brokovich meets Sweet Home Alabama, with distinctly darker notes.
Character development plays a vital role in how a book turns out. If your cast is too flat, it makes the book a total bore. On the other hand, if you’ve got characters that are dynamic and, in the case of several individuals in Bonfire, two-faced, the book is far more likely to entertain. In this area, Ritter has excelled at creating that small-town feel with many of the types of people those living in small towns meet. Let’s face it, even with Abigail moving to Chicago, there’s always those people who get out. Sometimes they come back, sometimes they’re gone for good. (In my case, I chose to come back.)
Plotwise, Ritter keeps the ball rolling. I didn’t feel like the story was dragging at any point. In fact, it’s the way that the story continues to unfold that kept me up until three this morning finishing it. Bonfire plays host to a story within a story, taking the corrupt corporations one step beyond contamination and into a far deeper, far worse crime. Just when things appear over, an entirely new turn keeps the story going. I won’t lie: I nearly bawled last night while I finished reading it.
There is only one aspect of this book that truly miffed me, and it sorta deals with the romance aspect. As many of my readers know, I abhor romance plots. Especially those that seem forced, rather than natural. That said, I really don’t want to divulge any spoilers, but I will say this: for being such a strong, independent character, there are some actions that Abigail Williams takes in this book that simply aren’t natural. They feel incredibly forced and out of character, and I can’t help but think it’s there more as a cop-out for the final twist in the story than going about it in some other clever manner.
That said, after finishing Bonfire, I feel it is safe to say that this debut novel is worth reading. Initially, I nearly forgot I had it until I saw it was one of the options for this month’s Book of the Month Club. Considering I’m very particular, I almost chose it before realizing I already had it technically. So if you’re wanting to pick it up cheap, there you go. (I’m actually still debating grabbing it through Book of the Month Club myself, because hey! I loved it.)
I would like to thank Penguin’s First to Read program for providing me with a copy of this book for the purpose of unbiased review.
After completing this book, I think it’s safe to say that my reading slump has finally come to an end. I devoured Krysten Ritter’s debut novel, Bonfire, with a hunger I haven’t felt in months. If you take into account that I’m from a small town of a whopping fifteen hundred people, it’s easier to realize how much I am able to relate to the main character of this book, Abigail Williams. That, and Ritter hits on some nostalgia too, because in a way, Bonfire reads like Erin Brokovich meets Sweet Home Alabama, with distinctly darker notes.
Character development plays a vital role in how a book turns out. If your cast is too flat, it makes the book a total bore. On the other hand, if you’ve got characters that are dynamic and, in the case of several individuals in Bonfire, two-faced, the book is far more likely to entertain. In this area, Ritter has excelled at creating that small-town feel with many of the types of people those living in small towns meet. Let’s face it, even with Abigail moving to Chicago, there’s always those people who get out. Sometimes they come back, sometimes they’re gone for good. (In my case, I chose to come back.)
Plotwise, Ritter keeps the ball rolling. I didn’t feel like the story was dragging at any point. In fact, it’s the way that the story continues to unfold that kept me up until three this morning finishing it. Bonfire plays host to a story within a story, taking the corrupt corporations one step beyond contamination and into a far deeper, far worse crime. Just when things appear over, an entirely new turn keeps the story going. I won’t lie: I nearly bawled last night while I finished reading it.
There is only one aspect of this book that truly miffed me, and it sorta deals with the romance aspect. As many of my readers know, I abhor romance plots. Especially those that seem forced, rather than natural. That said, I really don’t want to divulge any spoilers, but I will say this: for being such a strong, independent character, there are some actions that Abigail Williams takes in this book that simply aren’t natural. They feel incredibly forced and out of character, and I can’t help but think it’s there more as a cop-out for the final twist in the story than going about it in some other clever manner.
That said, after finishing Bonfire, I feel it is safe to say that this debut novel is worth reading. Initially, I nearly forgot I had it until I saw it was one of the options for this month’s Book of the Month Club. Considering I’m very particular, I almost chose it before realizing I already had it technically. So if you’re wanting to pick it up cheap, there you go. (I’m actually still debating grabbing it through Book of the Month Club myself, because hey! I loved it.)
I would like to thank Penguin’s First to Read program for providing me with a copy of this book for the purpose of unbiased review.
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Dracula (English) (1931) in Movies
Mar 7, 2019
Where it all began...
Contains spoilers, click to show
The year was 1931: Two years after the success of The Jazz Singer and the final introduction of sound movies into the mainstream, sound was still revolutionising the industry. But in 1931, a bit like 3D now, there was still much confusion over to how make films, with directors, producers and actors alike, were still moving over from the suddenly dated silent era, with varying success.
Tod Browning was a man who would unfortunately find little success in the sound era, but not necessarily because he couldn't move with the times, but because his career was derailed a couple of years later by his disturbing horror pic, Freaks.
Dracula was shot THREE times. One, this one, was the conventional sound version that we all know. An other was shot at night and in Spanish for the benefit of that audience, which the studio supposedly preferred. This was quite common at this time, but little known nowadays. And the third was a straight forward silent version for the many theatres still un-equipped to handle sound.
But the styles of the silent era are all over this film. From the long silent reactions shots and the over acting, especially by Bela Lagosi in the titular role. This was also the adaptation of the stage adaptation of Bram Stoker's chiller, and was faithfully adapted from that source, hence the lack of more complex special effects, with bats on strings and fog machines, over more cinematic effects.
The transformation scenes for example, where the Count morphs from a bat to the undead human occur off-screen, rather than some form of cross fade etc. Is this a choice driven by lack of money? Lack of cinematic ambition of a choice to stick to the stage material? To be honest, I have too little knowledge or experience of Tod Browning's work to suggest a reason, but when all's said and done, it did work.
Let's be honest, this is 80 years old and is not the least bit scary and it is hard not to laugh, but in context, I'm sure it worked well at the time and the story is well conveyed. Lagosi's undead performance is hammy by today's standards but he was somewhat likable. He was very deliberate, slow and the silent era has certainly left its scars, as the subtly of sound performing was yet to take hold.
But this is the sort of film were silent melodramatic acting still worked. This is of course a piece Gothic Horror, the home of melodrama if ever there was one. This is surly a product of its time, both as the industry went through one of it's most dramatic changes, which ended so many careers as well a created so many new ones, but it's also, let's not forget, the first direct adaptation of Bram Stoker's book, besides the 1922 German version, Nosferatu, which changes a fair few details to try to get around the copyright, failing to do so mind, resulting in failed bid to have every copy of the film destroyed.
This is the film that ingrained the image of the Dracula that we know today into popular culture. This was were the Universal horror franchise began. For whatever faults it has by today's standards, it did something right.
Tod Browning was a man who would unfortunately find little success in the sound era, but not necessarily because he couldn't move with the times, but because his career was derailed a couple of years later by his disturbing horror pic, Freaks.
Dracula was shot THREE times. One, this one, was the conventional sound version that we all know. An other was shot at night and in Spanish for the benefit of that audience, which the studio supposedly preferred. This was quite common at this time, but little known nowadays. And the third was a straight forward silent version for the many theatres still un-equipped to handle sound.
But the styles of the silent era are all over this film. From the long silent reactions shots and the over acting, especially by Bela Lagosi in the titular role. This was also the adaptation of the stage adaptation of Bram Stoker's chiller, and was faithfully adapted from that source, hence the lack of more complex special effects, with bats on strings and fog machines, over more cinematic effects.
The transformation scenes for example, where the Count morphs from a bat to the undead human occur off-screen, rather than some form of cross fade etc. Is this a choice driven by lack of money? Lack of cinematic ambition of a choice to stick to the stage material? To be honest, I have too little knowledge or experience of Tod Browning's work to suggest a reason, but when all's said and done, it did work.
Let's be honest, this is 80 years old and is not the least bit scary and it is hard not to laugh, but in context, I'm sure it worked well at the time and the story is well conveyed. Lagosi's undead performance is hammy by today's standards but he was somewhat likable. He was very deliberate, slow and the silent era has certainly left its scars, as the subtly of sound performing was yet to take hold.
But this is the sort of film were silent melodramatic acting still worked. This is of course a piece Gothic Horror, the home of melodrama if ever there was one. This is surly a product of its time, both as the industry went through one of it's most dramatic changes, which ended so many careers as well a created so many new ones, but it's also, let's not forget, the first direct adaptation of Bram Stoker's book, besides the 1922 German version, Nosferatu, which changes a fair few details to try to get around the copyright, failing to do so mind, resulting in failed bid to have every copy of the film destroyed.
This is the film that ingrained the image of the Dracula that we know today into popular culture. This was were the Universal horror franchise began. For whatever faults it has by today's standards, it did something right.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019) in Movies
Jun 5, 2019
Good Enough - Monsters Fighting Each Other
I grew up in the 1960's watching old monster movies on Saturday afternoons on an old black and white TV in the home I grew up in. A staple of these Saturday afternoon movies was the Godzilla monster movies from Japan, featuring such great monsters as Godzilla, Mothra, Rodan and Ghidorah. So, imagine my excitement when I realized that they all would be in the same film.
And...that film...GODZILLA - KING OF THE MONSTERS...delivers the goods just fine. Sometimes you go to the movie theater looking for laughs, sometimes you are looking to cry, sometimes you are looking to have your mind stimulated with interesting thoughts and ideas and sometimes you just want to watch giant monsters battling it out over the remnants of Fenway Park in Boston.
The 3rd in the "Monarch Series" of films from Warner Brothers (following the surprisingly good 2014 GODZILLA film and the fun KONG: SKULL ISLAND movie of 2017), GODZILLA - KING OF THE MONSTERS follows Monarch as they find (and in some instances, re-awaken) giant monsters - TITANS as they are called - the Titans attempt to take over the planet from the humans (there's a "save the planet" message that is being used as the excuse)...but here comes good ol' Godzilla to save the day.
Besides the monsters, there are quite a few humans along for the ride...Kyle Chandler and Vera Famiga as a dysfunctional couple (who also happen to be experts in Monsters) who are trying to keep in check their daughter, Millie Bobbie Brown (STRANGER THINGS). Ken Watanbe, Sally Hawkins and Jason Strahairn reprise their roles as members of MONARCH from the 2014 GODZILLA film, 2 veritable "that person" actors, Thomas Middleditch & Aisha Hinds as other members of Monarch along with Ziya Zhang and O'Shea Jackson, Jr. - all of these actors are "serviceable" to the plot and machinations, reacting appropriately to the green screen carnage and monsters that they are pretending to react to. Only Bradley Whitford (as a Monarch Scientist) rises above things with a goofy, "almost too over the top" performance that captures the spirit of the proceedings. Add into this good ol' Tywin Lannister himself (Charles Dance) as a shadowy, non-feeling bad guy that seems to have an inexhaustible supply of men and material - kind of like Tywinn Lannister - and the "human side" of this movie is fun...enough.
But, make no mistake about it, this film - and the reason I came to see it - is to watch giant monsters fighting each other and destroying everything in their wake and this film delivers the goods. Director Micheal Dougherty ( KRAMPUS) does a "serviceable" job keeping the action moving and coherent while avoiding (for the most part) the headache-inducing "quick-cut" editing sequence. There's nothing much new or innovative in his approach to showing us monsters fighting and creating massive destruction, but he doesn't take away from the spectacle of the action on the screen so that's a good thing..
There are 2 more Godzilla films currently "on the books" to be produced - including next year's KONG vs. GODZILLA - which will keep me coming back to the IMAX in the multiplex for years to come...and that's just fine with me.
Letter Grade: a solid B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
And...that film...GODZILLA - KING OF THE MONSTERS...delivers the goods just fine. Sometimes you go to the movie theater looking for laughs, sometimes you are looking to cry, sometimes you are looking to have your mind stimulated with interesting thoughts and ideas and sometimes you just want to watch giant monsters battling it out over the remnants of Fenway Park in Boston.
The 3rd in the "Monarch Series" of films from Warner Brothers (following the surprisingly good 2014 GODZILLA film and the fun KONG: SKULL ISLAND movie of 2017), GODZILLA - KING OF THE MONSTERS follows Monarch as they find (and in some instances, re-awaken) giant monsters - TITANS as they are called - the Titans attempt to take over the planet from the humans (there's a "save the planet" message that is being used as the excuse)...but here comes good ol' Godzilla to save the day.
Besides the monsters, there are quite a few humans along for the ride...Kyle Chandler and Vera Famiga as a dysfunctional couple (who also happen to be experts in Monsters) who are trying to keep in check their daughter, Millie Bobbie Brown (STRANGER THINGS). Ken Watanbe, Sally Hawkins and Jason Strahairn reprise their roles as members of MONARCH from the 2014 GODZILLA film, 2 veritable "that person" actors, Thomas Middleditch & Aisha Hinds as other members of Monarch along with Ziya Zhang and O'Shea Jackson, Jr. - all of these actors are "serviceable" to the plot and machinations, reacting appropriately to the green screen carnage and monsters that they are pretending to react to. Only Bradley Whitford (as a Monarch Scientist) rises above things with a goofy, "almost too over the top" performance that captures the spirit of the proceedings. Add into this good ol' Tywin Lannister himself (Charles Dance) as a shadowy, non-feeling bad guy that seems to have an inexhaustible supply of men and material - kind of like Tywinn Lannister - and the "human side" of this movie is fun...enough.
But, make no mistake about it, this film - and the reason I came to see it - is to watch giant monsters fighting each other and destroying everything in their wake and this film delivers the goods. Director Micheal Dougherty ( KRAMPUS) does a "serviceable" job keeping the action moving and coherent while avoiding (for the most part) the headache-inducing "quick-cut" editing sequence. There's nothing much new or innovative in his approach to showing us monsters fighting and creating massive destruction, but he doesn't take away from the spectacle of the action on the screen so that's a good thing..
There are 2 more Godzilla films currently "on the books" to be produced - including next year's KONG vs. GODZILLA - which will keep me coming back to the IMAX in the multiplex for years to come...and that's just fine with me.
Letter Grade: a solid B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
My rating 3.5
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</i>
Written by the English Pen Award winner Laia Jufresa (and excellently translated by Sophie Hughes) <i>Umami</i> is a story of the troubled lives of a small community in Mexico as they go through various stages of grief. What this story reveals is that everyone deals with heartache in his or her own personal way, however the things they do can affect everyone around them.
Set in Belldrop Mews, Mexico City, five characters give an account of their own experiences over a five-year period, which when combined together produce an overview of life within the mews. Firstly there is Ana (2004), a preteen determined to plant her own garden in the depressing back yard of her family home. Despite her steps to do something positive, she and her family are still mourning the death of her little sister Luz who drowned a few years ago. The second perspective comes from Marina Mendoza (2003), a young adult artist suffering from an eating disorder whilst dealing with memories of her childhood.
Alfonso, the aging owner of the mews, begins his story in 2002 a couple of years after the death of his wife. Previously he was an anthropologist obsessed with the concept of <i>umami</i>, a Japanese word meaning <i>“a savory taste; one of the five basic tastes.”</i> He is an old soul that has fallen into depression, feeling, like Ana, a misfit. The final two narrators are young girls: Pina (2001) who is Ana’s best friend, and Luz (2000), Ana’s five year old sister shortly before she died. Both speak of loneliness as they look at the world through childishly naïve eyes. Pina is suffering the effects of her parents’ constant fighting, whereas Luz is crying out for attention from her family who will not let her join in the “big girl” activities.
<i>Umami</i> may not be a happy book but it has a very powerful voice. None of the characters have yet completely recovered from their experiences however they are all (barring Luz) making positive progress. Without knowing it, each member of the Belldrop Mews community is encouraging the rest as they drag themselves out from the depths of their despair – some by aspiring to be like another, and others listening to what their neighbours are telling them.
The message of this story is about the benefits of a community. Whether big or small, being within a group of people can prevent you from wallowing in your dark feelings and begin to continue with your life instead. This is something that the world at large would profit from.
The unconventional style of <i>Umami</i> may not be agreeable with some readers due to its lack of a clear beginning, middle and end. In fact it does not have a conclusion at all, leaving nothing fully resolved. Yet Jufresa did not intend it to end “happily ever after,” real life is not like that; but what is true is that with time and exposure to positive relationships things can get better.
The aspect preventing a higher rating is the occasional allusion to sexual content, especially from the mouths of girls too young to fully understand the concept. This was uncomfortable to read, however thankfully the majority of the novel was free of unpleasant imagery. <i>Umami</i> is down to earth, relatable and moving; Laia Jufresa is definitely an author to watch.
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</i>
Written by the English Pen Award winner Laia Jufresa (and excellently translated by Sophie Hughes) <i>Umami</i> is a story of the troubled lives of a small community in Mexico as they go through various stages of grief. What this story reveals is that everyone deals with heartache in his or her own personal way, however the things they do can affect everyone around them.
Set in Belldrop Mews, Mexico City, five characters give an account of their own experiences over a five-year period, which when combined together produce an overview of life within the mews. Firstly there is Ana (2004), a preteen determined to plant her own garden in the depressing back yard of her family home. Despite her steps to do something positive, she and her family are still mourning the death of her little sister Luz who drowned a few years ago. The second perspective comes from Marina Mendoza (2003), a young adult artist suffering from an eating disorder whilst dealing with memories of her childhood.
Alfonso, the aging owner of the mews, begins his story in 2002 a couple of years after the death of his wife. Previously he was an anthropologist obsessed with the concept of <i>umami</i>, a Japanese word meaning <i>“a savory taste; one of the five basic tastes.”</i> He is an old soul that has fallen into depression, feeling, like Ana, a misfit. The final two narrators are young girls: Pina (2001) who is Ana’s best friend, and Luz (2000), Ana’s five year old sister shortly before she died. Both speak of loneliness as they look at the world through childishly naïve eyes. Pina is suffering the effects of her parents’ constant fighting, whereas Luz is crying out for attention from her family who will not let her join in the “big girl” activities.
<i>Umami</i> may not be a happy book but it has a very powerful voice. None of the characters have yet completely recovered from their experiences however they are all (barring Luz) making positive progress. Without knowing it, each member of the Belldrop Mews community is encouraging the rest as they drag themselves out from the depths of their despair – some by aspiring to be like another, and others listening to what their neighbours are telling them.
The message of this story is about the benefits of a community. Whether big or small, being within a group of people can prevent you from wallowing in your dark feelings and begin to continue with your life instead. This is something that the world at large would profit from.
The unconventional style of <i>Umami</i> may not be agreeable with some readers due to its lack of a clear beginning, middle and end. In fact it does not have a conclusion at all, leaving nothing fully resolved. Yet Jufresa did not intend it to end “happily ever after,” real life is not like that; but what is true is that with time and exposure to positive relationships things can get better.
The aspect preventing a higher rating is the occasional allusion to sexual content, especially from the mouths of girls too young to fully understand the concept. This was uncomfortable to read, however thankfully the majority of the novel was free of unpleasant imagery. <i>Umami</i> is down to earth, relatable and moving; Laia Jufresa is definitely an author to watch.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Skyscraper (2018) in Movies
Jul 13, 2018
Surprising Enjoyable Action Movie
As I headed into Skyscraper at my local cinema, I tweeted something about disengaging my brain for a couple of hours, fully open to the prospect of some completely ridiculous action, courtesy of Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson. That's exactly what I ended up with, and I actually really enjoyed it all too.
The movie opens 10 years ago, with FBI agent Will Sawyer (Johnson) and his team attending a domestic hostage situation which goes badly wrong. Back in the present, Will is now an amputee and married to the military nurse that cared for him during that incident (Neve Campbell). They've got 2 young kids and the whole family is in Hong Kong where Will has been hired as security consultant for The Pearl, a new state-of-the-art skyscraper and the tallest building in the world. A news reel montage fires off lots of impressive facts and figures about the building, hardly giving you time to digest or even question them. Let's just say, it cost billions of dollars, looks incredibly futuristic (and a bit silly) and is a scientific wonder of the world. Before The Pearl opens up its doors for people to live and work in though, Will needs to sign off on fire safety and security.
We're shown Will putting on his false leg, letting us know how that all works in preparation for later scenes in the movie. Will then fixes his wife's phone before he rushes out of the door and ushers a line so obviously important to the movie it's actually annoyingly distracting. So important is this piece of information, he actually uses two variations of it within minutes of each other too - "Remember, you can fix 90% of problems by just turning it off and on again...". Like I say, just disengage your brain, don't worry about it, and you'll be fine.
If you've seen the trailer, you'll have gathered that Wills family are the only residents in The Pearl, with the buildings owner and his team way up top in the penthouse. You'll have gathered that this is attempting to be a Die Hard / Towering Inferno crossover, and that there are bad guys involved. You'll no doubt have also seen the famous leap from a crane by Dwayne Johnsons character into the burning skyscraper. This is where the movie really kicks into action.
Now, I was watching this in 3D, so I'm not sure if it will have quite the same effect on a TV screen at home, but I was literally on the edge of my seat whenever Will was either dangling or jumping 96 floors in the air (which is a lot), while a Hong Kong crowd gasps and cheers on the streets below. The action and peril is relentless, repeatedly moving Will and his family from one dangerous set piece to another. While not quite as funny or charming as he is in his other movies, Skyscraper is still all about Dwayne Johnson though, and all other characters come out of this pretty short changed. Neve Campbell gets a couple of chances to kick some ass, but otherwise she's pretty underused. The bad guys aren't particularly effective, or memorable, neither are the police team down on the ground.
It's predictable and it's ridiculous. But I absolutely loved it.
The movie opens 10 years ago, with FBI agent Will Sawyer (Johnson) and his team attending a domestic hostage situation which goes badly wrong. Back in the present, Will is now an amputee and married to the military nurse that cared for him during that incident (Neve Campbell). They've got 2 young kids and the whole family is in Hong Kong where Will has been hired as security consultant for The Pearl, a new state-of-the-art skyscraper and the tallest building in the world. A news reel montage fires off lots of impressive facts and figures about the building, hardly giving you time to digest or even question them. Let's just say, it cost billions of dollars, looks incredibly futuristic (and a bit silly) and is a scientific wonder of the world. Before The Pearl opens up its doors for people to live and work in though, Will needs to sign off on fire safety and security.
We're shown Will putting on his false leg, letting us know how that all works in preparation for later scenes in the movie. Will then fixes his wife's phone before he rushes out of the door and ushers a line so obviously important to the movie it's actually annoyingly distracting. So important is this piece of information, he actually uses two variations of it within minutes of each other too - "Remember, you can fix 90% of problems by just turning it off and on again...". Like I say, just disengage your brain, don't worry about it, and you'll be fine.
If you've seen the trailer, you'll have gathered that Wills family are the only residents in The Pearl, with the buildings owner and his team way up top in the penthouse. You'll have gathered that this is attempting to be a Die Hard / Towering Inferno crossover, and that there are bad guys involved. You'll no doubt have also seen the famous leap from a crane by Dwayne Johnsons character into the burning skyscraper. This is where the movie really kicks into action.
Now, I was watching this in 3D, so I'm not sure if it will have quite the same effect on a TV screen at home, but I was literally on the edge of my seat whenever Will was either dangling or jumping 96 floors in the air (which is a lot), while a Hong Kong crowd gasps and cheers on the streets below. The action and peril is relentless, repeatedly moving Will and his family from one dangerous set piece to another. While not quite as funny or charming as he is in his other movies, Skyscraper is still all about Dwayne Johnson though, and all other characters come out of this pretty short changed. Neve Campbell gets a couple of chances to kick some ass, but otherwise she's pretty underused. The bad guys aren't particularly effective, or memorable, neither are the police team down on the ground.
It's predictable and it's ridiculous. But I absolutely loved it.
Louise (64 KP) rated Salt to the Sea in Books
Jul 2, 2018
This book! OMG you guys! It had the feels and was so so so so sad!
Guilt is a hunter.
Salt to the Sea is a story set in 1945 Germany told from four perspectives, Florian, Joana, Emilia and Alfred all from different homelands, fleeing Stalin's Red Army. Refugees are fleeing for freedom in form on the Wilhelm- Gustloff a ship that will make a 48 hour trip to Kiel. The Wilhelm-Gustaloff is evacuating injured soldiers and civilians - It's capacity is to hold 1500 passengers but with so many people they are forced to take over 10,000. A few hours into the trip the ship is hit by Russian torpedoes, does the foursome still have enough fight to survive?
Fate is a hunter.
Joana is Lithuanian and has been assisting a doctor with surgery, with her knowledge she is able to help some of the injured refugees and civilians she comes across. She is leading a current group of people to the Wilhelm Gustloff when she meets Florian a Prussian apprentice art restorer for Gauleiter Erich Koch who was a leader of the regional branch of Nazi party (Very high up). Along side Florian is Emilia a 15-year-old Polish girl on the run from a farm in which she was sent by her father. Then there is Alfred a German sailor, with his first Voyage being the Wilhelm-Gustloff.
Shame is a hunter
This book was heartbreaking and a real eye opener. The story is told in small chapters alternating from the four perspectives. Alfred's perspectives are sometimes told in letters to a love interest back home The characters are equally fleshed out and you get a real connection with them, they all have something they are running from and a background story. I really didn't like Alfred's character, in his letters he was making out that he was some highly responsible soldier which made a huge difference to the war when all he was doing was a low-level job on the ship, he was pretty much insane. Emilia's story grew stronger and stronger as the story went on and became more peturbed . Florian is a mysterious character who doesn't reveal much about himself but he is always calculating the best way to freedom. There is a slow burn romance within the novel but it is no way insta-lovey at all. With this romance we find out more about Florian.
Fear is a hunter.
This book reminded me a lot of 'All the light we cannot see' by Anthony Doerr minus the fantasy element. But for me it was much better, the fact that you don't really read stories about Lithuanians, Prussians etc in world war 2 stories. The Wilhelm Gustloff was an actual ship in world war 2 and 9,500 lives were lost however I had never heard about this before and I am really interested in reading more about this. I am going to be honest, I don't know too much about the war and the particulars to it, so I can't say how accurate Ruta's account is.
This book is compelling and harrowing at the same time, some of the descriptions of how the civilians and refugees were living and attempts for freedom were deeply upsetting. The most moving book I have read this year and would definitely recommend to anyone that is interested in historical fiction.
I loved Ruta Sepetys writing and really want to read between shades of gray and out of the easy.
I rated this 5 out of 5 stars.
Guilt is a hunter.
Salt to the Sea is a story set in 1945 Germany told from four perspectives, Florian, Joana, Emilia and Alfred all from different homelands, fleeing Stalin's Red Army. Refugees are fleeing for freedom in form on the Wilhelm- Gustloff a ship that will make a 48 hour trip to Kiel. The Wilhelm-Gustaloff is evacuating injured soldiers and civilians - It's capacity is to hold 1500 passengers but with so many people they are forced to take over 10,000. A few hours into the trip the ship is hit by Russian torpedoes, does the foursome still have enough fight to survive?
Fate is a hunter.
Joana is Lithuanian and has been assisting a doctor with surgery, with her knowledge she is able to help some of the injured refugees and civilians she comes across. She is leading a current group of people to the Wilhelm Gustloff when she meets Florian a Prussian apprentice art restorer for Gauleiter Erich Koch who was a leader of the regional branch of Nazi party (Very high up). Along side Florian is Emilia a 15-year-old Polish girl on the run from a farm in which she was sent by her father. Then there is Alfred a German sailor, with his first Voyage being the Wilhelm-Gustloff.
Shame is a hunter
This book was heartbreaking and a real eye opener. The story is told in small chapters alternating from the four perspectives. Alfred's perspectives are sometimes told in letters to a love interest back home The characters are equally fleshed out and you get a real connection with them, they all have something they are running from and a background story. I really didn't like Alfred's character, in his letters he was making out that he was some highly responsible soldier which made a huge difference to the war when all he was doing was a low-level job on the ship, he was pretty much insane. Emilia's story grew stronger and stronger as the story went on and became more peturbed . Florian is a mysterious character who doesn't reveal much about himself but he is always calculating the best way to freedom. There is a slow burn romance within the novel but it is no way insta-lovey at all. With this romance we find out more about Florian.
Fear is a hunter.
This book reminded me a lot of 'All the light we cannot see' by Anthony Doerr minus the fantasy element. But for me it was much better, the fact that you don't really read stories about Lithuanians, Prussians etc in world war 2 stories. The Wilhelm Gustloff was an actual ship in world war 2 and 9,500 lives were lost however I had never heard about this before and I am really interested in reading more about this. I am going to be honest, I don't know too much about the war and the particulars to it, so I can't say how accurate Ruta's account is.
This book is compelling and harrowing at the same time, some of the descriptions of how the civilians and refugees were living and attempts for freedom were deeply upsetting. The most moving book I have read this year and would definitely recommend to anyone that is interested in historical fiction.
I loved Ruta Sepetys writing and really want to read between shades of gray and out of the easy.
I rated this 5 out of 5 stars.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated 1968 Tunnel Rats (2009) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
It is no secret that many films have often tried to convey the true horrors of war. Films ranging from “Platoon”, “Saving Private Ryan”, and “Apocalypse Now”, have attempted to convey the carnage and brutality of war by showing it through the eyes of individuals who were not prepared for the reality of combat.
In the film “1968 Tunnel Rats” controversial director Uwe Boll has crafted a solid and moving depiction of war, brutality, and how fragile the human psyche can be.
Set in 1968 Vietnam, the film tells the story of a group of soldiers who operate from a jungle camp under the command of LT. Hollowborn (Michael Pare).
The new arrivals are welcomed by their fellow soldiers and the early moments of the film focuses on the life in the camp, ranging from bad food and showers, gambling, smoking, their homes, and bibles. All of this of course is secondary to what the new arrivals really want to know, and that is how to survive. As the men bond we get to see the dreary nature of their lives, as they are surrounded by danger, and use faith and dreams of what life will be like when they return home to keep them going. One individual dreams of opening a hamburger franchise and sees this as the wave of the future.
The camp is not without issues as the execution of an enemy sniper draws the ire of some of the men, who see it as murder. Nonetheless, a squad sets off in the morning to patrol the jungle and investigate a newly discovered tunnel.
The Vietcong have hundreds of miles of tunnels in the countryside, and when discovered soldiers enter the tunnel and explore. Since the tunnels are trapped and rife with danger, the unit usually asks for volunteers to go first, and the newly discovered tunnel is no exception as the squad soon finds themselves under attack.
As events unfold, the survivors find themselves forced to seek refuge in the dark and claustrophobic tunnels and survive the constant dangers that face them both below and above ground in a desperate battle for survival.
Boll wrote, directed, and produced the film, and has crafted a solid war film that is easily his best work. While the characters are not all fleshed out, you see them as real people and their flaws make them all the more real.
The action scenes are solid if at times hampered by some jerky camera work, but the violence of the film is a stark contrast to the beauty of the African locale which substituted for Vietnam.
The story of the tunnels is a dimension of the war that has not been fully explored in many previous films, and Boll uses them in many ways as the main character of the film as the actions and outcomes of all the characters in the film are in some way related to the tunnels.
While more character development might would have been nice, the film is a solid effort that shows that Boll should focus his efforts on more original work than his customary video game adaptations, as “1968 Tunnel Rats”, is a not only his best film, but an effective war film.
In the film “1968 Tunnel Rats” controversial director Uwe Boll has crafted a solid and moving depiction of war, brutality, and how fragile the human psyche can be.
Set in 1968 Vietnam, the film tells the story of a group of soldiers who operate from a jungle camp under the command of LT. Hollowborn (Michael Pare).
The new arrivals are welcomed by their fellow soldiers and the early moments of the film focuses on the life in the camp, ranging from bad food and showers, gambling, smoking, their homes, and bibles. All of this of course is secondary to what the new arrivals really want to know, and that is how to survive. As the men bond we get to see the dreary nature of their lives, as they are surrounded by danger, and use faith and dreams of what life will be like when they return home to keep them going. One individual dreams of opening a hamburger franchise and sees this as the wave of the future.
The camp is not without issues as the execution of an enemy sniper draws the ire of some of the men, who see it as murder. Nonetheless, a squad sets off in the morning to patrol the jungle and investigate a newly discovered tunnel.
The Vietcong have hundreds of miles of tunnels in the countryside, and when discovered soldiers enter the tunnel and explore. Since the tunnels are trapped and rife with danger, the unit usually asks for volunteers to go first, and the newly discovered tunnel is no exception as the squad soon finds themselves under attack.
As events unfold, the survivors find themselves forced to seek refuge in the dark and claustrophobic tunnels and survive the constant dangers that face them both below and above ground in a desperate battle for survival.
Boll wrote, directed, and produced the film, and has crafted a solid war film that is easily his best work. While the characters are not all fleshed out, you see them as real people and their flaws make them all the more real.
The action scenes are solid if at times hampered by some jerky camera work, but the violence of the film is a stark contrast to the beauty of the African locale which substituted for Vietnam.
The story of the tunnels is a dimension of the war that has not been fully explored in many previous films, and Boll uses them in many ways as the main character of the film as the actions and outcomes of all the characters in the film are in some way related to the tunnels.
While more character development might would have been nice, the film is a solid effort that shows that Boll should focus his efforts on more original work than his customary video game adaptations, as “1968 Tunnel Rats”, is a not only his best film, but an effective war film.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Knowing (2009) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
John Koestler (Nicolas Cage) is a man who lives in a world of facts. As a professor at M.I.T. he is more concerned about things that can be proven through hard science than with things that cannot be proven. With the recent loss of his wife leaving him a single father, John is not willing to accept the notion of a grand plan or the notion of heaven easily.
John’s son Caleb (Chandler Cantebury), morns the loss of his mother and looks to pick up his life with his father unaware of the dramatic turn that fate has in store for them both in the new film “Knowing” by Director Alex Proyas.
When a 50 year old time capsule is unearthed at Caleb’s school he and his fellow classmates eagerly await the envelopes contained within as each student is eager to see what the students from the past have placed in the envelopes as their predictions of the future. Caleb’s envelope contains not a picture but a series of numbers which he quickly dismisses.
One evening at home, John accidently notices the series of numbers and notices the date of 9/11/01 is included followed by a number. Intrigued, John looks up the 9/11 terror attacks online and is surprised that the numbers on the paper that follow the date are the exact death count from the attack. An all night study of the paper indicates to John that the exact date and death count of tragedies from the last fifty years are contained on the paper with some other numbers John cannot account for. What John does know is that there are three dates left on the paper, all of which are in the near future.
Further complicating matters is that the paper contains the data for the accident the killed John’s wife which leads him to believe that he can alter the outcome of the tragedies that are yet to happen and that he has been chosen to save those destined for a tragic death.
When mysterious individuals start to appear near Caleb, John finds himself in a race against time to get to the bottom of the mystery. His efforts lead him to Diana Wayland (Rose Byrne), the daughter of the girl who wrote the numbers on the sheet. While at first reluctant to become involved Diana and her daughter join John and Caleb in a frantic race against time with the very fate of the world hanging in the balance.
“Knowing” is a very compelling drama that mixes action and suspense with expert pacing to produce a first rate and entertaining thriller. Proyas keeps the film moving at a brisk pace but is not afraid to let the film slow down to allow the tension to build. The FX in the film are first rate and while spectacular are not the main attraction to this character driven drama. Though a bit monotone and restrained for my taste, Cage does solid work as the Skeptical John who realizes that there are forces in the universe that cannot be explained and who comes across as a likeable everyman in an extraordinary situation.
The strong script and direction is well balanced by the supporting cast. The ending of the film might be a bit to Hollywood for some, and for me, did detract slightly from the first ¾ of the film.
That being said, “Knowing” was a very enjoyable film and reminded me of the type of films that M. Night Shyamalan used to make, and probably wishes he had done.
John’s son Caleb (Chandler Cantebury), morns the loss of his mother and looks to pick up his life with his father unaware of the dramatic turn that fate has in store for them both in the new film “Knowing” by Director Alex Proyas.
When a 50 year old time capsule is unearthed at Caleb’s school he and his fellow classmates eagerly await the envelopes contained within as each student is eager to see what the students from the past have placed in the envelopes as their predictions of the future. Caleb’s envelope contains not a picture but a series of numbers which he quickly dismisses.
One evening at home, John accidently notices the series of numbers and notices the date of 9/11/01 is included followed by a number. Intrigued, John looks up the 9/11 terror attacks online and is surprised that the numbers on the paper that follow the date are the exact death count from the attack. An all night study of the paper indicates to John that the exact date and death count of tragedies from the last fifty years are contained on the paper with some other numbers John cannot account for. What John does know is that there are three dates left on the paper, all of which are in the near future.
Further complicating matters is that the paper contains the data for the accident the killed John’s wife which leads him to believe that he can alter the outcome of the tragedies that are yet to happen and that he has been chosen to save those destined for a tragic death.
When mysterious individuals start to appear near Caleb, John finds himself in a race against time to get to the bottom of the mystery. His efforts lead him to Diana Wayland (Rose Byrne), the daughter of the girl who wrote the numbers on the sheet. While at first reluctant to become involved Diana and her daughter join John and Caleb in a frantic race against time with the very fate of the world hanging in the balance.
“Knowing” is a very compelling drama that mixes action and suspense with expert pacing to produce a first rate and entertaining thriller. Proyas keeps the film moving at a brisk pace but is not afraid to let the film slow down to allow the tension to build. The FX in the film are first rate and while spectacular are not the main attraction to this character driven drama. Though a bit monotone and restrained for my taste, Cage does solid work as the Skeptical John who realizes that there are forces in the universe that cannot be explained and who comes across as a likeable everyman in an extraordinary situation.
The strong script and direction is well balanced by the supporting cast. The ending of the film might be a bit to Hollywood for some, and for me, did detract slightly from the first ¾ of the film.
That being said, “Knowing” was a very enjoyable film and reminded me of the type of films that M. Night Shyamalan used to make, and probably wishes he had done.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Isle of Dogs (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
When an outbreak of “dog-flu” and other dog diseases ravish Japan. Mayor Kobayashi (Kunichi Nomura voice) signs an order to banish all dogs to Trash Island, aka the Isle of Dogs. The island is now home to thousands of dogs who are all scavenging for food. Groups of dogs’ band together to fight for scraps of trash and survive. Then all one day a plane crashes on the island. A boy, Atari (Koyu Rankin voice), has come to the island to find his dog best friend Spots (Liev Schreiber voice). Five dogs find Atari injured buy the crash. The lone stray in the group, Chief (Bryan Cranston voice), has no use for masters and wants to leave the boy. But the rest of the group, Rex (Edward Norton voice), King (Bob Balaban voice), Duke (Jeff Goldblum voice) and Boss (Bill Murray voice) all want help the boy find his best friend. Out voted by the domesticated dogs in the group Chief agrees and they set out on a journey to find Atari’s lost dog on an island full of dogs.
This stop-motion animated film is the latest written and directed film by Wes Anderson (Fantastic Mr. Fox, Moonrise Kingdom, and The Royal Tenenbaums). Anderson’s unique film style and dialog are very present in this Japanese based tale. The stop motion animation is very well done and highlighted throughout the film. From the dogs’ hair moving with the animals to flower petals floating through the air the small details are not missed and expertly done. The dialog was also very much staying with Andersons unique style. It is fast paced and full of subtle comedy. The story is original and fun but also full of meaning and heart. The star studded cast does well in providing their voices to the animated film. The sound track really fits the film well.
The film was not without its struggles. At the beginning of the film it was pointed out that the humans would speak their native language, in most cases Japanese, and the dogs barks had been translated to English. This provides some fun moments throughout the film as there are translators to press conferences and the dog interpreting what the humans say to other dogs. But at times it seemed to me that the humans could understand what the dogs were saying, barking. So it was a little inconsistent. Also one character put into the movie presumably to aid in translation in the film as an American exchange student, Tracy Walker (Greta Gerwig voice). Other than translating parts of the film I don’t know why this character had to be American and could not have been Japanese. It definitely helped the overall theme of the movie to have her there to describe what was happening, given the fact there were no subtitles, but did seem a little forced.
I am definitely a fan of Wes Anderson’s film making and one of a kind style. That comes with certain expectations, which in this case were met. But I also understand that as someone reviewing the film it may make me a little bias. As noted above there a few minor issues I had with the film in general but overall I enjoyed the film and thing fans of Anderson will not be disappointed and neither will those who are just looking for a fun movie. I think overall this is a beautifully made and fun film.
This stop-motion animated film is the latest written and directed film by Wes Anderson (Fantastic Mr. Fox, Moonrise Kingdom, and The Royal Tenenbaums). Anderson’s unique film style and dialog are very present in this Japanese based tale. The stop motion animation is very well done and highlighted throughout the film. From the dogs’ hair moving with the animals to flower petals floating through the air the small details are not missed and expertly done. The dialog was also very much staying with Andersons unique style. It is fast paced and full of subtle comedy. The story is original and fun but also full of meaning and heart. The star studded cast does well in providing their voices to the animated film. The sound track really fits the film well.
The film was not without its struggles. At the beginning of the film it was pointed out that the humans would speak their native language, in most cases Japanese, and the dogs barks had been translated to English. This provides some fun moments throughout the film as there are translators to press conferences and the dog interpreting what the humans say to other dogs. But at times it seemed to me that the humans could understand what the dogs were saying, barking. So it was a little inconsistent. Also one character put into the movie presumably to aid in translation in the film as an American exchange student, Tracy Walker (Greta Gerwig voice). Other than translating parts of the film I don’t know why this character had to be American and could not have been Japanese. It definitely helped the overall theme of the movie to have her there to describe what was happening, given the fact there were no subtitles, but did seem a little forced.
I am definitely a fan of Wes Anderson’s film making and one of a kind style. That comes with certain expectations, which in this case were met. But I also understand that as someone reviewing the film it may make me a little bias. As noted above there a few minor issues I had with the film in general but overall I enjoyed the film and thing fans of Anderson will not be disappointed and neither will those who are just looking for a fun movie. I think overall this is a beautifully made and fun film.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The Addams Family (2019) in Movies
Dec 8, 2019
Can anyone ever say the name of this film without finger snapping?
When their home life is dislodged by pitchfork-wielding townsfolk the Addams pack up their car and hit the road for a new beginning. They come across a mansion on a hill, it's creepy and it's kooky, mysterious and spooky... it's perfect for the Addams family.
Years of idyllic isolation fly by but the outside world is closer than ever. Wednesday is intrigued by the perils that lay beyond their gates and the family can no longer ignore their neighbours in the valley, their very perky neighbours who live in their little cookie cuttered dream houses below.
What's not to love about the madness of the Addams family? You can pretty much guarantee entertainment, and that's what you get from this film.
There's a gripe... there's always a gripe... so let me get it out of the way first. It annoys me more because it's accurate to the source material so I should love that, but modern adaptations have ruined me! Gomez Addams, he's not what you see when you think Gomez. I have been brainwashed by films and it annoys me. He is a perfect representation of the original cartoons by Charles Addams, he's still suave, sophisticated and playful like we know him to be, but he's no Raul Julia or John Astin.
On a similar note, when I heard Oscar Isaac and Charlize Theron were playing Gomez and Morticia I was elated, imagine my disappointment to discover they were to be animated and not live action. You couldn't get better casting for a live action couple if you tried! Anyway, moving on.
The voice cast is littered with famous faces including Elsie Fisher of Eighth Grade fame and Bette Midler... BETTE MIDLER!! We've also got Allison Janney as out saccharine sweet villain, Janney has a knack for the villain roles and I wouldn't mind seeing more of them.
There's just one role I object to, and I found it to be an incredibly lazy decision on someone's part. Nick Kroll as Uncle Fester. While I understand the nice-but-dim style voice is perfect for Fester it has basically been recycled from Big Mouth's Coach Steve. There will be no real issues with this for the intended audience as Big Mouth comes in at a 15 compared to The Addams Family's more subtle PG, but as someone who's old enough to watch both, I was annoyed.
The artwork on this really does play a great homage to the cartoons and despite their age it works really well for a modern audience. The story also brings it nicely up to date with its reality TV slant and the perfect American dream town. There are lots of great touches throughout that amuse.
I understand that each new adaptation has to do its own thing, and I like how it brought an original story (of sorts) to us but I didn't feel like it took previous iterations of the characters into consideration... this is a daft thing to complain about too, I know that, but the Addams family are iconic. Wednesday has always been my spirit animal, but to see a rather lacklustre version here made me a little sad.
But, ultimately I still enjoyed my time watching it, I just don't think I'll be placing it higher up the ranking than any of the previous ghoulish outings.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/11/the-addams-family-movie-review.html
When their home life is dislodged by pitchfork-wielding townsfolk the Addams pack up their car and hit the road for a new beginning. They come across a mansion on a hill, it's creepy and it's kooky, mysterious and spooky... it's perfect for the Addams family.
Years of idyllic isolation fly by but the outside world is closer than ever. Wednesday is intrigued by the perils that lay beyond their gates and the family can no longer ignore their neighbours in the valley, their very perky neighbours who live in their little cookie cuttered dream houses below.
What's not to love about the madness of the Addams family? You can pretty much guarantee entertainment, and that's what you get from this film.
There's a gripe... there's always a gripe... so let me get it out of the way first. It annoys me more because it's accurate to the source material so I should love that, but modern adaptations have ruined me! Gomez Addams, he's not what you see when you think Gomez. I have been brainwashed by films and it annoys me. He is a perfect representation of the original cartoons by Charles Addams, he's still suave, sophisticated and playful like we know him to be, but he's no Raul Julia or John Astin.
On a similar note, when I heard Oscar Isaac and Charlize Theron were playing Gomez and Morticia I was elated, imagine my disappointment to discover they were to be animated and not live action. You couldn't get better casting for a live action couple if you tried! Anyway, moving on.
The voice cast is littered with famous faces including Elsie Fisher of Eighth Grade fame and Bette Midler... BETTE MIDLER!! We've also got Allison Janney as out saccharine sweet villain, Janney has a knack for the villain roles and I wouldn't mind seeing more of them.
There's just one role I object to, and I found it to be an incredibly lazy decision on someone's part. Nick Kroll as Uncle Fester. While I understand the nice-but-dim style voice is perfect for Fester it has basically been recycled from Big Mouth's Coach Steve. There will be no real issues with this for the intended audience as Big Mouth comes in at a 15 compared to The Addams Family's more subtle PG, but as someone who's old enough to watch both, I was annoyed.
The artwork on this really does play a great homage to the cartoons and despite their age it works really well for a modern audience. The story also brings it nicely up to date with its reality TV slant and the perfect American dream town. There are lots of great touches throughout that amuse.
I understand that each new adaptation has to do its own thing, and I like how it brought an original story (of sorts) to us but I didn't feel like it took previous iterations of the characters into consideration... this is a daft thing to complain about too, I know that, but the Addams family are iconic. Wednesday has always been my spirit animal, but to see a rather lacklustre version here made me a little sad.
But, ultimately I still enjoyed my time watching it, I just don't think I'll be placing it higher up the ranking than any of the previous ghoulish outings.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/11/the-addams-family-movie-review.html