Search
Search results
London Underground by Design
Book
London Underground By Design is the beautifully illustrated new book from Mark Ovenden, the...
Ross (3284 KP) rated Stormblood in Books
Jul 14, 2020
Fairly mediocre sci-fi
I received an advance copy of this book from the publishers and Netgalley in exchange for an honest review.
Stormblood is set in a world where the human race has agreed terms with numerous alien races and Harmony governs the included races (the Common). Vakov Fukasawa (a character whose name is more fun to say than he is to read about) is a retired Reaper - that is, he was injected with alien DNA which gave him the rage and healing powers needed to become a super-soldier in the earlier Reaper Wars. He is hired to investigate reports of attacks on or attacks by his former colleagues, as reports of them "bluing-out" and dealing out devastation are mounting. This may well involve him being pitted against his younger brother who feels Vakov abandoned him to their cruel father.
Throughout the book, the story is told purely by telling the reader. Fukasawa finds himself in an extreme situation, having thrown himself in recklessly, and is almost always captured, told some crucial details, which dictate the next stage of the plot, and escapes or is rescued.
The world-building had so much promise, being a form of city built in an asteroid. However it wasn't very well described and I felt quite lost and really struggled to picture the setting. At times I had completely forgotten where the action was happening, and why.
The narrative is quite frustrating as well. What starts off as nice flowing narration with analogies, similes and metaphors, this quickly becomes at the expense of the pacing of the book. A number of times someone responded to a statement that was several paragraphs previous, with thick descriptions and side-tracked passages coming in between, making the reader go back and see what they were responding to.
As with most modern sci-fi, a number of cringeworthy technical terms have been made up and are not explained well enough to allow all but the most avid sci-fi tech-nerd to picture what they are supposed to refer to. See "slingshiv", "thin-gun", "micronades" etc etc. At times, these terms were used so frequently in long rambling passages listing tech and armoury that it may as well have been in a foreign language.
Speaking of which, the world the book takes place in is very reminiscent of Richard Morgan's Altered Carbon, even down to the part-Eastern European/part Japanese names. Fans of those books (which I suffered with similarly on the made-up technical terms) may enjoy this.
Overall, a great idea but needs some work on the pacing, how the plot is revealed (i.e. using different tricks and scenarios) and the narrative.
Stormblood is set in a world where the human race has agreed terms with numerous alien races and Harmony governs the included races (the Common). Vakov Fukasawa (a character whose name is more fun to say than he is to read about) is a retired Reaper - that is, he was injected with alien DNA which gave him the rage and healing powers needed to become a super-soldier in the earlier Reaper Wars. He is hired to investigate reports of attacks on or attacks by his former colleagues, as reports of them "bluing-out" and dealing out devastation are mounting. This may well involve him being pitted against his younger brother who feels Vakov abandoned him to their cruel father.
Throughout the book, the story is told purely by telling the reader. Fukasawa finds himself in an extreme situation, having thrown himself in recklessly, and is almost always captured, told some crucial details, which dictate the next stage of the plot, and escapes or is rescued.
The world-building had so much promise, being a form of city built in an asteroid. However it wasn't very well described and I felt quite lost and really struggled to picture the setting. At times I had completely forgotten where the action was happening, and why.
The narrative is quite frustrating as well. What starts off as nice flowing narration with analogies, similes and metaphors, this quickly becomes at the expense of the pacing of the book. A number of times someone responded to a statement that was several paragraphs previous, with thick descriptions and side-tracked passages coming in between, making the reader go back and see what they were responding to.
As with most modern sci-fi, a number of cringeworthy technical terms have been made up and are not explained well enough to allow all but the most avid sci-fi tech-nerd to picture what they are supposed to refer to. See "slingshiv", "thin-gun", "micronades" etc etc. At times, these terms were used so frequently in long rambling passages listing tech and armoury that it may as well have been in a foreign language.
Speaking of which, the world the book takes place in is very reminiscent of Richard Morgan's Altered Carbon, even down to the part-Eastern European/part Japanese names. Fans of those books (which I suffered with similarly on the made-up technical terms) may enjoy this.
Overall, a great idea but needs some work on the pacing, how the plot is revealed (i.e. using different tricks and scenarios) and the narrative.
Andy K (10823 KP) rated The Gate (1987) in Movies
Sep 29, 2019
Gremlins meets Explorers in some good 80's fun!
After a lightning storm, a major tree get uprooted in the suburban back yard of Glen and his sometimes nice big sister, Al. Glen and his best friend Terry proceed to investigate and discover some cool geode stones. At the same time, Glen and Al's parents are going away and leaving the teen and pre-teens home alone (doesn't this always happen in 80's movies).
All seems well enough until the boys split the geode and it spurts out some ancient writing that Glen reads aloud. Al decides to have a party while her parents are away (go figure) where Glen is levitated during a mini seance. Terry discovers during one of his headbanging sessions some of these events coincidentally are said to open a demonic gate where strange creatures can emerge, torment those they find and ravage the Earth.
The three protagonists decide to try and close the "gate" by reading ancient text and Bible verses. This proves successful and small, feisty demons begin to appear and creep into their house. After several run ins, more unusual things start happening within the home, possibly as a precursor for something even bigger on the horizon.
The teens must formulate a plan to dispose of their new house-guests before it is too late!
Funny that Glen is played by a very young Stephen Dorff in his very first role. He reminds me of a young Ethan Hawke in Explorers as his nerd friend Terry reminds me of River Phoenix in the same film.
The movie is cheesy with dated special and optical effects that modern audiences might get annoyed by or find lame and of poor quality. The small demons are more funny than they are scary, but I still enjoyed seeing them on screen. I actually thought it was stop motion animation similar to a Ray Harryhausen film like Clash of the Titans, but they were actually actors in demon costumes and then shot in forced perspective to make them seem smaller.
The movie is only 85 minutes and the plot does take a little while to get going. The first half of the movie is more like every 80's movie you have ever seen with dated hairstyles, clothing and dialogue, but once the demon stuff manifests it becomes more interesting.
Even though PG-13 with some semi scary moments, the movie does seem the style of Gremlins meaning maybe aiming more for a younger audience rather than being excessively disgusting or graphic.
Hopefully you can put aside the elements I mentioned that aren't up to today's standards and enjoy the cute, interesting story this film inhabits. I surely did.
All seems well enough until the boys split the geode and it spurts out some ancient writing that Glen reads aloud. Al decides to have a party while her parents are away (go figure) where Glen is levitated during a mini seance. Terry discovers during one of his headbanging sessions some of these events coincidentally are said to open a demonic gate where strange creatures can emerge, torment those they find and ravage the Earth.
The three protagonists decide to try and close the "gate" by reading ancient text and Bible verses. This proves successful and small, feisty demons begin to appear and creep into their house. After several run ins, more unusual things start happening within the home, possibly as a precursor for something even bigger on the horizon.
The teens must formulate a plan to dispose of their new house-guests before it is too late!
Funny that Glen is played by a very young Stephen Dorff in his very first role. He reminds me of a young Ethan Hawke in Explorers as his nerd friend Terry reminds me of River Phoenix in the same film.
The movie is cheesy with dated special and optical effects that modern audiences might get annoyed by or find lame and of poor quality. The small demons are more funny than they are scary, but I still enjoyed seeing them on screen. I actually thought it was stop motion animation similar to a Ray Harryhausen film like Clash of the Titans, but they were actually actors in demon costumes and then shot in forced perspective to make them seem smaller.
The movie is only 85 minutes and the plot does take a little while to get going. The first half of the movie is more like every 80's movie you have ever seen with dated hairstyles, clothing and dialogue, but once the demon stuff manifests it becomes more interesting.
Even though PG-13 with some semi scary moments, the movie does seem the style of Gremlins meaning maybe aiming more for a younger audience rather than being excessively disgusting or graphic.
Hopefully you can put aside the elements I mentioned that aren't up to today's standards and enjoy the cute, interesting story this film inhabits. I surely did.
Something She's Not Telling Us
7.0
Rate It
Book
Named most anticipated book of 2020 by Cosmopolitan, Women's Wear Daily, Woman's Day, She Reads, The...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Back to the Future (1985) in Movies
Mar 30, 2018
Almost a perfect film
I was flipping channels the other day and ran across BACK TO THE FUTURE, it was just about to start and since I hadn't seen it in quite awhile, I figured I'd catch the first part of it before venturing off to other surfing opportunities. As often happens in this sort of situation, I ended up transfixed by this film and watched the whole thing. After it was over, I asked myself why did I enjoy this film so much and my answer was fascinating (at least to me) -
BACK TO THE FUTURE is about as perfect of a film as there is.
Why? Let's start with the structure of this film. It follows the classic 3 Act structure. ACT 1: set up the premise, the gimmick (if any) and the stakes. ACT 2: escalate the stakes and throw in complications and obstacles. ACT 3: Resolve everything.
Seems like a pretty simple formula, right? So why do so many get it wrong? Quite simply, they don't keep it simple and then execute (almost to perfection) the simplicity of the structure. Let's break down the 3 Acts of BACK TO THE FUTURE.
ACT 1 - set up the premise, the gimmick and the stakes. The premise & gimmick is simple, time travel is possible and our hero travels back in time and is stranded there. The stakes are even simpler - our hero must find a way to get Back to the Future.
ACT 2 - escalate the stakes and throw in complicaitons and obstacles. The stakes are escalated by the fact that our hero interrupts the timeline of when his mother met his father, thus there is the very real possibility that he will cease to exist for his parents never met. Our hero must find a way to bring his mother and father together. The complications are that his parents are not the boring old fuddy-duddy's that our hero thought they were, his father is a peeping-Tom nerd and his mother is a randy high-schooler who falls in love (lust?) with our hero, her son. Further complicating things is that the time machine must find enough power to make the time travel device (the flux-capacitor!) work, power that is not readily available in this timeline. Adding one more complication to the mix is the school bully who is constantly after our hero.
ACT 3 - resolve everything. This is where this film excels. EVERY loose end is tied up. Our hero find a way to reunite his mother and father, the bully is put in his place, a source of energy is found and our hero's journey comes to a succesful conclusion.
There is much, much more to this film than those plot points, but I just wanted to show how deceptively simple and efficient this plot is. Kudo's must go out to screenwriter's Robert Zemeckis (more on him later) and Bob Gale for coming up with this idea and executing it so well. Gale (1941, KOLCHAK: THE NIGHT STALKER) said he came up with this idea when he saw his father's high school yearbook and dreamed about going back to meet him. He stated that he doubted that he and his father would have been friends.
An interesting side fact: The University of Southern California Film school's writing classes use the screenplay for Back to the Future as the model of "The Perfect Screenplay". So, I rest my case.
But a "perfect" screenplay would be worthless without near perfect execution of putting the words and actions up on the screen - and this film achieves that as well. Director (and co-screenwriter) Robert Zemeckis (WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT, FORREST GUMP) cleary had a vision of how to make this film and did not waiver from it. The action is strong, the fluidness of the film is solid and the performances are all top-notch. The only thing that might knock this film down a peg or two is some of the 32 "special effects" shots that - to look at it these days - seem somewhat archaic (see the flames between Doc Brown's and Marty's feet when the DeLorean first goes forward in time). But for the time, these special effects are state-of-the-art.
Speaking of performances, Michael J. Fox became a movie star with this film, and rightfully so. His Marty McFly is charming, quirky, intelligent, dorky - all at the same time. His uncomfortableness with his teen age mother is palatable. Credit must go with Director Zemeckis, who - after he couldn't get Fox released from his contract on the TV show FAMILY TIES - went (famously) with his 2nd choice, Eric Stoltz. When Stolt's seriousness and "method" acting was not meshing with the type of film he wanted to make, Zemeckis made the bold decision to fire Stoltz and worked out a deal where he can use Fox at night while Fox shot Family ties during the day.
Playing against Fox, brilliantly, is Christopher Lloyd as "Doc" Emmit Brown. A two-time Emmy winner (at the time) for playing crazy Jim Ignatowski on the TV show TAXI, Lloyd played Doc Brown as "part Einstein, part composer Leopold Stokowski", creating what would be the benchmark for "brilliant, scatter-brained scientist". Leah Thompson does the finest performance of her career as Marty's mother and Crispin Glover was beyond quirky as Marty's nerd/loser Dad. Finally Thomas F. Wilson is the embodiment of bully as "Biff" Tannen.
After the success of this film, two other BACK TO THE FUTURE films were made - films that I feel were good, but somewhat diluted the perfection of this film. No matter. Sit down, relax and enjoy one of the most "perfect" films ever made.
Letter Grade: A+
A rare 10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BACK TO THE FUTURE is about as perfect of a film as there is.
Why? Let's start with the structure of this film. It follows the classic 3 Act structure. ACT 1: set up the premise, the gimmick (if any) and the stakes. ACT 2: escalate the stakes and throw in complications and obstacles. ACT 3: Resolve everything.
Seems like a pretty simple formula, right? So why do so many get it wrong? Quite simply, they don't keep it simple and then execute (almost to perfection) the simplicity of the structure. Let's break down the 3 Acts of BACK TO THE FUTURE.
ACT 1 - set up the premise, the gimmick and the stakes. The premise & gimmick is simple, time travel is possible and our hero travels back in time and is stranded there. The stakes are even simpler - our hero must find a way to get Back to the Future.
ACT 2 - escalate the stakes and throw in complicaitons and obstacles. The stakes are escalated by the fact that our hero interrupts the timeline of when his mother met his father, thus there is the very real possibility that he will cease to exist for his parents never met. Our hero must find a way to bring his mother and father together. The complications are that his parents are not the boring old fuddy-duddy's that our hero thought they were, his father is a peeping-Tom nerd and his mother is a randy high-schooler who falls in love (lust?) with our hero, her son. Further complicating things is that the time machine must find enough power to make the time travel device (the flux-capacitor!) work, power that is not readily available in this timeline. Adding one more complication to the mix is the school bully who is constantly after our hero.
ACT 3 - resolve everything. This is where this film excels. EVERY loose end is tied up. Our hero find a way to reunite his mother and father, the bully is put in his place, a source of energy is found and our hero's journey comes to a succesful conclusion.
There is much, much more to this film than those plot points, but I just wanted to show how deceptively simple and efficient this plot is. Kudo's must go out to screenwriter's Robert Zemeckis (more on him later) and Bob Gale for coming up with this idea and executing it so well. Gale (1941, KOLCHAK: THE NIGHT STALKER) said he came up with this idea when he saw his father's high school yearbook and dreamed about going back to meet him. He stated that he doubted that he and his father would have been friends.
An interesting side fact: The University of Southern California Film school's writing classes use the screenplay for Back to the Future as the model of "The Perfect Screenplay". So, I rest my case.
But a "perfect" screenplay would be worthless without near perfect execution of putting the words and actions up on the screen - and this film achieves that as well. Director (and co-screenwriter) Robert Zemeckis (WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT, FORREST GUMP) cleary had a vision of how to make this film and did not waiver from it. The action is strong, the fluidness of the film is solid and the performances are all top-notch. The only thing that might knock this film down a peg or two is some of the 32 "special effects" shots that - to look at it these days - seem somewhat archaic (see the flames between Doc Brown's and Marty's feet when the DeLorean first goes forward in time). But for the time, these special effects are state-of-the-art.
Speaking of performances, Michael J. Fox became a movie star with this film, and rightfully so. His Marty McFly is charming, quirky, intelligent, dorky - all at the same time. His uncomfortableness with his teen age mother is palatable. Credit must go with Director Zemeckis, who - after he couldn't get Fox released from his contract on the TV show FAMILY TIES - went (famously) with his 2nd choice, Eric Stoltz. When Stolt's seriousness and "method" acting was not meshing with the type of film he wanted to make, Zemeckis made the bold decision to fire Stoltz and worked out a deal where he can use Fox at night while Fox shot Family ties during the day.
Playing against Fox, brilliantly, is Christopher Lloyd as "Doc" Emmit Brown. A two-time Emmy winner (at the time) for playing crazy Jim Ignatowski on the TV show TAXI, Lloyd played Doc Brown as "part Einstein, part composer Leopold Stokowski", creating what would be the benchmark for "brilliant, scatter-brained scientist". Leah Thompson does the finest performance of her career as Marty's mother and Crispin Glover was beyond quirky as Marty's nerd/loser Dad. Finally Thomas F. Wilson is the embodiment of bully as "Biff" Tannen.
After the success of this film, two other BACK TO THE FUTURE films were made - films that I feel were good, but somewhat diluted the perfection of this film. No matter. Sit down, relax and enjoy one of the most "perfect" films ever made.
Letter Grade: A+
A rare 10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Nelly Cootalot: The Fowl Fleet
Games, Entertainment and Stickers
App
Best of Mac App Store 2016 game now on iOS! "The funniest mobile game of 2017 if not all time." -...
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017) in Movies
Jan 25, 2021
New Vibes, New Dopeness
When I first saw that Sony was playing nice with Disney/Marvel, I almost lost it when I saw that Spider-Man would make an appearance in Captain America: Civil War. Nerd Moment: I’ve always thought that all of the Marvel properties belonged together and this was a step in the right direction. It’s been amazing what’s happened since. In this third reboot since the new century, Spider-Man: Homecoming is the story of a young Peter Parker handling his role as a teenager and a webslinging superhero.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 7
Characters: 7
Peter (Tom Holland) is a lovable kid surrounded by a fun cast of friends and foes. They took a different and, in my opinion, smarter route by making Aunt May (Marisa Tomei) younger and more relatable. Not only did it pay off but it helped contribute to side jokes in the story involving Happy (Jon Favreau) and Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.). Yes, there are so many characters to love here, both familiar and new…that is until we get to the villain played by one of my favorite actors Michael Keaton. Don’t get me wrong, he wasn’t horrible, I just couldn’t buy his motivation which made it hard at times to connect to the overall story and conflict.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Watching some of these scenes play out seriously made me wish I was Spider-Man. The aerial combat and clever use of webs is such a treat to watch and experience, both at home. and in the theater. Marvel hit another home run here with cinematic perfection that stretches all over the great city of New York.
Conflict: 10
The conflict isn’t just about Spider-Man fighting bad guys. Rather it’s about having to do all of this and be a kid at the same time…and impress Tony Stark…and get used to his new suit…and keep all of this a secret from his caretaker. So many things wrapped into one makes this such a fun ride. Yes, there is plenty of spider fights to enjoy, but there is so much more to love about the movie as a whole.
Entertainment Value: 9
Memorability: 8
Pace: 10
Plot: 9
Really enjoyed the story and how it plays into the Marvel universe as a whole. A few twists here and there keep things interesting. Again there is so much driving conflict here and character growth that it’s easy to miss the complexities of everything involved in the story. Again, not in love with Vulture’s motivation, but it doesn’t diminish things too badly.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 90
The difficulty of Peter trying to get used to his new suit alone was enough to keep me beaming watching this movie. Marvel movies are known for packing a mega punch and Spider-Man: Homecoming definitely stands up there as one of the stronger ones. Great movie.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 7
Characters: 7
Peter (Tom Holland) is a lovable kid surrounded by a fun cast of friends and foes. They took a different and, in my opinion, smarter route by making Aunt May (Marisa Tomei) younger and more relatable. Not only did it pay off but it helped contribute to side jokes in the story involving Happy (Jon Favreau) and Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.). Yes, there are so many characters to love here, both familiar and new…that is until we get to the villain played by one of my favorite actors Michael Keaton. Don’t get me wrong, he wasn’t horrible, I just couldn’t buy his motivation which made it hard at times to connect to the overall story and conflict.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Watching some of these scenes play out seriously made me wish I was Spider-Man. The aerial combat and clever use of webs is such a treat to watch and experience, both at home. and in the theater. Marvel hit another home run here with cinematic perfection that stretches all over the great city of New York.
Conflict: 10
The conflict isn’t just about Spider-Man fighting bad guys. Rather it’s about having to do all of this and be a kid at the same time…and impress Tony Stark…and get used to his new suit…and keep all of this a secret from his caretaker. So many things wrapped into one makes this such a fun ride. Yes, there is plenty of spider fights to enjoy, but there is so much more to love about the movie as a whole.
Entertainment Value: 9
Memorability: 8
Pace: 10
Plot: 9
Really enjoyed the story and how it plays into the Marvel universe as a whole. A few twists here and there keep things interesting. Again there is so much driving conflict here and character growth that it’s easy to miss the complexities of everything involved in the story. Again, not in love with Vulture’s motivation, but it doesn’t diminish things too badly.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 90
The difficulty of Peter trying to get used to his new suit alone was enough to keep me beaming watching this movie. Marvel movies are known for packing a mega punch and Spider-Man: Homecoming definitely stands up there as one of the stronger ones. Great movie.
Blueprint Entrepreneur Magazine - Actionable content for entrepreneurs on marketing, sales, lean startup, pricing, blogging, community building and more. Your action packed guide to business success principles all in one inspiring mag.
Business and Magazines & Newspapers
5.5
Rate It
App
Want the real actionable strategies of entrepreneurship? Get the real stories of struggle and...