Search
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Beauty and the Beast (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Tail as old as Kline.
With the Disney marketing machine in full swing, its hard to separate the hype from the movie reality in this latest live-action remake of one of their classic animated features from 1991. If you are lucky enough to have children you will know that each child tends to have “their” Disney feature: for my second daughter (then 4) that film would be “Beauty and the Beast”. With a VHS video tape worn down to the substrate, this is a film I know every line of dialogue to (“I’m especially good at expectorating”). So seeing this movie was always going to be a wander down Nostalgia Avenue and a left turn into Emotion Crescent, regardless of how good a film it was. And so it proved.
Taking no chances with a beloved formula, most of the film is an almost exact frame-for-frame recreation of the original, with the odd diversion which, in the main, is to slot in new songs by original composer Alan Menken with Tim Rice lyrics. For, unlike “La La Land” this is a proper musical lover’s musical with songs dropping in regularly throughout the running time.
Which brings us to Emma Watson’s Belle. I’ve seen review comments that she ‘dials it in’ with a humourless and souless portrayal of the iconic bookworm. I can’t fathom what film those people were watching! I found Watson to be utterly mesmerising, confident and delightful with a fine (though possibly auto-tuned) singing voice. Her ‘Sound of Music’ moment (you’ll know the one) brought tears to my eyes. There are moments when her acting is highly reminiscent of Hermione Grainger, but this is about as crass a criticism as saying that Harrison Ford has done his “Knock it Off” snarl again.
I even felt that the somewhat dodgy bestiality/Stockholm-syndrome thing, inherent in the plot, was deftly handled by her. Curiously (and I feel guilty for even thinking this) the only part I felt slightly icky about was the age difference evident in the final kiss between Watson (now 27) and the transformed beast (sorry if this is a TERRIBLE spoiler for you!) played by Dan Stevens (“Downton Abbey”): even though with Stevens being only 35 this is only 8 years! I think the problem here is that it is still difficult for me to decouple the modern feminist woman that is Watson from the picture of the young Hermione as a schoolgirl in her first term at Hogwarts. (I know this is terrible typecasting, and definitely my bad, but that’s the way it is).
Stevens himself is fine as the cursed prince, albeit that most of his scenes are behind the CGI-created wet-rug that is the beast. Similarly, most of the supporting stars (Ewan McGregor as Lumière, Ian McKellen as Cogsworth, Emma Thompson as Mrs Potts and an almost unrecognisable Stanley Tucci as the maestro Cadenza) are similarly confined to voice parts for the majority of the film. Kevin Kline is great as the supremely huggable Maurice. But the performances that really shine though are those of Luke Evans (“The Girl on the Train“) as the odiously boorish Gaston and Josh Gad (Olaf in “Frozen”) as his hilariously adoring sidekick LeFou. Much has been made of the gay Disney angle to this element of the story, most of which is arrant homophobic nonsense since the scenes are pretty innocuous. In fact the most adventurous ‘non-heterosexual’ aspect of the film, and a scene that raises by far the biggest laugh, relates to a completely different character.
Most of the songs delivered in the film are OK without, in my view, surpassing the versions in the original. Only Dan Steven’s dramatic new song “Evermore”- as one of the few really new ‘full-length’ songs in the film – has ‘Oscar nomination’ written all over it. However, the film eschews the ‘live-filming’ approach to song production featured in recent musicals like “La La Land” and “Les Miserables”, with some degree of lip-sync evident. Whilst I understand that ‘imperfection’ is not a “Disney thing”, I found that lack of risk-taking a bit of a disappointment.
The makers of the original “Beauty and the Beast” would I’m sure have been bowled over by the quality of the special effects on show here. However, that was in 1991 and it is now 2017, when “The Jungle Book” has set the bar for CGI effects. By today’s standards, the special effects here are mediocre at best. I wondered at first if some of the dodgy green-screen work was delivered that way to make it seem more “cartoony”, but I doubt that – – why bother? More irritatingly, the animated chattels in the castle, especially the candlestick Lumière, are seriously unconvincing. Mrs Potts, the teapot, and her son Chip, the cup, are rendered as flat and two-dimensional. There should have been no shortage of money to thrown at the effects with a reported budget of $160 million. Where has the Disney magic gone?
The film also seems to be rendered primarily for a 3D showing (I saw it in 2D). I say this because some of the panning shots (notably one around the library) to me just ended up as an unimpressive blur of mediocrity. Most odd.
The director is Bill Condon responsible for the modestly well-respected but low-key “Dreamgirls” and “Mr Holmes” but also the much derided “Breaking Dawn” end to the “Twilight” series. As such this seems to have been quite a risk that Disney took with such a high profile property, and I would have been intrigued to see what a more innovative director like Chazelle or Iñárritu would have done with it.
However, despite my reservations it is bound to be a MONSTER hit in every sense of the word, and kids aged 5 to 10 will, I predict, absolutely adore it (be warned that kids under 5 may be seriously scared by some of the darker scenes, especially the two wolf-attacks). For a younger age group, I would rate it as an easy FFFFF. As an adult viewer, given that I have viewed it through the rosy tint of my nostalgia-glasses (unfortunately you cannot hire these at the cinema if you haven’t brought your own!), this was an enjoyable watch. Despite my (more than expected!) slew of criticisms above my rating is still….
Taking no chances with a beloved formula, most of the film is an almost exact frame-for-frame recreation of the original, with the odd diversion which, in the main, is to slot in new songs by original composer Alan Menken with Tim Rice lyrics. For, unlike “La La Land” this is a proper musical lover’s musical with songs dropping in regularly throughout the running time.
Which brings us to Emma Watson’s Belle. I’ve seen review comments that she ‘dials it in’ with a humourless and souless portrayal of the iconic bookworm. I can’t fathom what film those people were watching! I found Watson to be utterly mesmerising, confident and delightful with a fine (though possibly auto-tuned) singing voice. Her ‘Sound of Music’ moment (you’ll know the one) brought tears to my eyes. There are moments when her acting is highly reminiscent of Hermione Grainger, but this is about as crass a criticism as saying that Harrison Ford has done his “Knock it Off” snarl again.
I even felt that the somewhat dodgy bestiality/Stockholm-syndrome thing, inherent in the plot, was deftly handled by her. Curiously (and I feel guilty for even thinking this) the only part I felt slightly icky about was the age difference evident in the final kiss between Watson (now 27) and the transformed beast (sorry if this is a TERRIBLE spoiler for you!) played by Dan Stevens (“Downton Abbey”): even though with Stevens being only 35 this is only 8 years! I think the problem here is that it is still difficult for me to decouple the modern feminist woman that is Watson from the picture of the young Hermione as a schoolgirl in her first term at Hogwarts. (I know this is terrible typecasting, and definitely my bad, but that’s the way it is).
Stevens himself is fine as the cursed prince, albeit that most of his scenes are behind the CGI-created wet-rug that is the beast. Similarly, most of the supporting stars (Ewan McGregor as Lumière, Ian McKellen as Cogsworth, Emma Thompson as Mrs Potts and an almost unrecognisable Stanley Tucci as the maestro Cadenza) are similarly confined to voice parts for the majority of the film. Kevin Kline is great as the supremely huggable Maurice. But the performances that really shine though are those of Luke Evans (“The Girl on the Train“) as the odiously boorish Gaston and Josh Gad (Olaf in “Frozen”) as his hilariously adoring sidekick LeFou. Much has been made of the gay Disney angle to this element of the story, most of which is arrant homophobic nonsense since the scenes are pretty innocuous. In fact the most adventurous ‘non-heterosexual’ aspect of the film, and a scene that raises by far the biggest laugh, relates to a completely different character.
Most of the songs delivered in the film are OK without, in my view, surpassing the versions in the original. Only Dan Steven’s dramatic new song “Evermore”- as one of the few really new ‘full-length’ songs in the film – has ‘Oscar nomination’ written all over it. However, the film eschews the ‘live-filming’ approach to song production featured in recent musicals like “La La Land” and “Les Miserables”, with some degree of lip-sync evident. Whilst I understand that ‘imperfection’ is not a “Disney thing”, I found that lack of risk-taking a bit of a disappointment.
The makers of the original “Beauty and the Beast” would I’m sure have been bowled over by the quality of the special effects on show here. However, that was in 1991 and it is now 2017, when “The Jungle Book” has set the bar for CGI effects. By today’s standards, the special effects here are mediocre at best. I wondered at first if some of the dodgy green-screen work was delivered that way to make it seem more “cartoony”, but I doubt that – – why bother? More irritatingly, the animated chattels in the castle, especially the candlestick Lumière, are seriously unconvincing. Mrs Potts, the teapot, and her son Chip, the cup, are rendered as flat and two-dimensional. There should have been no shortage of money to thrown at the effects with a reported budget of $160 million. Where has the Disney magic gone?
The film also seems to be rendered primarily for a 3D showing (I saw it in 2D). I say this because some of the panning shots (notably one around the library) to me just ended up as an unimpressive blur of mediocrity. Most odd.
The director is Bill Condon responsible for the modestly well-respected but low-key “Dreamgirls” and “Mr Holmes” but also the much derided “Breaking Dawn” end to the “Twilight” series. As such this seems to have been quite a risk that Disney took with such a high profile property, and I would have been intrigued to see what a more innovative director like Chazelle or Iñárritu would have done with it.
However, despite my reservations it is bound to be a MONSTER hit in every sense of the word, and kids aged 5 to 10 will, I predict, absolutely adore it (be warned that kids under 5 may be seriously scared by some of the darker scenes, especially the two wolf-attacks). For a younger age group, I would rate it as an easy FFFFF. As an adult viewer, given that I have viewed it through the rosy tint of my nostalgia-glasses (unfortunately you cannot hire these at the cinema if you haven’t brought your own!), this was an enjoyable watch. Despite my (more than expected!) slew of criticisms above my rating is still….
Piper (13 KP) rated Halloween (2018) in Movies
Nov 27, 2019
Strong Characters (3 more)
Clever Camerawork
Myers is Finally Threatening Again
Callbacks and Subversions
"You're The New Doctor Loomis" (3 more)
Plot Holes
Predictable
Too Much Off-Screen Action
Halloween: Predictably Unpredictable
Contains spoilers, click to show
After the nightmare of a film that was Rob Zombie’s 2007 remake, I refused to bother seeing the new Halloween on its release, choosing instead to pick up a DVD when the price got knocked down significantly enough - after all, we’ve had sixty-three Halloween films now and only half of them were worth watching (really, Season of the Witch?) and this looked, in all honesty, like just another slasher-film-reboot that wasn’t worth the time. Now don’t get me wrong, it absolutely was just another slasher film, but I wish I’d seen it in the cinema. And a year earlier than I did, too, because I missed out big-time with this one.
The plot is predictable, because of course it is. It’s Michael Myers, what’s he going to do except escape from a mental institution and murder some people? But it’s beautifully subverted; some of the characters you might expect to last till the end die before the halfway mark, and while there are a fair amount who are clearly written in just to be killed minutes later, they contribute to some fine, gory moments, so it’s kind of okay. There’s no real heartbreaker here - everyone you really rooted for just about makes it, and everyone that was kind of a dick is killed. And that’s fine, because in a way this isn’t the kind of slasher where it matters who lives or dies. This is a film about preserving a legacy, or perhaps just making one, and it works. We’re told fairly early on that this is a direct sequel to the original Halloween (Myers’ death toll at the start of this version, apparently, is five, which matches the amount of kills he made in the first movie - as far as I’m aware, Myers has actually killed over 100 people in all the films combined, so this is a nice subtle way of telling us what to remember and what to ignore completely). Having said that, references are made throughout to previous films, the best of which is of course a callback to the infamous scene where Myers tumbles out of a window only for his body to completely disappear - this time it’s Laurie Strode who does the tumbling, and she very much intends to do a little vanishing act of her own, Michael, so keep an eye on - oh, no, you looked away, I wonder what’s happening down there!
Focusing on Laurie for a moment, Jamie Lee Curtis does an absolutely excellent job here. Age has given her character wisdom, paranoia, and a whole lot of guns, and the acting carries a huge amount of weight and strength with it. Having said that, there are a couple of moments where all of Laurie’s fear-induced calculations don’t seem to have quite worked out - why bother going to such extreme measures to protect your house, if the front door you’re standing behind is half glass? But that’s the thing about this movie - whatever you plan for, whatever you think Michael Myers is capable of, he’s stronger than you think, he’s far more terrifying than you remember, and right until the end, he’s here to remind you that nothing you can plan for will ever be enough. Of course, we never actually see him die (again) so here’s looking forward to the next sequel…
The cinematography is something to at least wonder over - settings and locations are used well and established with some wonderful wide shots, and some of the best scenes are those where the camera just stays in one place, at a very carefully-selected window for example, and watches. Two scenes are worth a particular mention; the first, in which we follow our two podcast-host characters to a gas station, seems fairly dull until Myers catches up to them, but if you watch the background carefully enough you’ll see he’s there all along, beating people up and murdering quite happily (swapping his prison jumpsuit for those traditional blues in the process). The second seems a little superficial, in the grand scheme of the movie, but it’s well-shot nonetheless - we watch, from that aforementioned window, as a woman hears about all the nasty things Michael might do, and of course we can see him through another window, heading for her front door, and when he finally appears inside the house he’s all the way across the room, somehow, and he calmly wanders on over and stabs the woman quite coolly through the throat, in a scene which I think is most reminiscent of the original films.
However, there are moments when you don’t see Michael at all, just the aftermath, or where we watch him enter a room and are forced to linger in the corridor while he does the dirty work. A couple of times that’s just fine, but considering the nature of the film it would be nice to watch the magic happen a couple more times. And while we’re on the negatives, I might mention that the reveal that the Doctor Loomis-type character who looked, felt, and sounded like a rip-off of Doctor Loomis, and was even referred to as “The New Doctor Loomis” did EXACTLY the same thing that Doctor Loomis did, surprise, and we were somehow expected to not see that coming like it was all one big, obvious, heavy-handed bluff. A couple of the other characters, too, felt like they were purely rammed in there to be irritating - there were a couple of strong scenes with our podcast hosts, but ultimately they were rude, on-the-nose and annoyingly egotistical, and I was happy to see them go, just like Alison’s friend Foggy Nelson.
The score, incidentally, is worth mentioning, from a haunting retune of the original Myers theme to darker and more dramatic variations on it later on that really would have been quite something to hear in surround-sound. I’m never usually one to appreciate the music of a film quite fully enough, so it was nice to have this grab my attention in quite the way it did. Overall, it’s a genuinely good follow-on that takes the best of the films before and makes the best use of the worst of them. Some of the characters might be a little annoying, some of the action could have translated better on-screen than off, but it was an honest and straight-up slasher film and it just wasn’t that bad at all.
The plot is predictable, because of course it is. It’s Michael Myers, what’s he going to do except escape from a mental institution and murder some people? But it’s beautifully subverted; some of the characters you might expect to last till the end die before the halfway mark, and while there are a fair amount who are clearly written in just to be killed minutes later, they contribute to some fine, gory moments, so it’s kind of okay. There’s no real heartbreaker here - everyone you really rooted for just about makes it, and everyone that was kind of a dick is killed. And that’s fine, because in a way this isn’t the kind of slasher where it matters who lives or dies. This is a film about preserving a legacy, or perhaps just making one, and it works. We’re told fairly early on that this is a direct sequel to the original Halloween (Myers’ death toll at the start of this version, apparently, is five, which matches the amount of kills he made in the first movie - as far as I’m aware, Myers has actually killed over 100 people in all the films combined, so this is a nice subtle way of telling us what to remember and what to ignore completely). Having said that, references are made throughout to previous films, the best of which is of course a callback to the infamous scene where Myers tumbles out of a window only for his body to completely disappear - this time it’s Laurie Strode who does the tumbling, and she very much intends to do a little vanishing act of her own, Michael, so keep an eye on - oh, no, you looked away, I wonder what’s happening down there!
Focusing on Laurie for a moment, Jamie Lee Curtis does an absolutely excellent job here. Age has given her character wisdom, paranoia, and a whole lot of guns, and the acting carries a huge amount of weight and strength with it. Having said that, there are a couple of moments where all of Laurie’s fear-induced calculations don’t seem to have quite worked out - why bother going to such extreme measures to protect your house, if the front door you’re standing behind is half glass? But that’s the thing about this movie - whatever you plan for, whatever you think Michael Myers is capable of, he’s stronger than you think, he’s far more terrifying than you remember, and right until the end, he’s here to remind you that nothing you can plan for will ever be enough. Of course, we never actually see him die (again) so here’s looking forward to the next sequel…
The cinematography is something to at least wonder over - settings and locations are used well and established with some wonderful wide shots, and some of the best scenes are those where the camera just stays in one place, at a very carefully-selected window for example, and watches. Two scenes are worth a particular mention; the first, in which we follow our two podcast-host characters to a gas station, seems fairly dull until Myers catches up to them, but if you watch the background carefully enough you’ll see he’s there all along, beating people up and murdering quite happily (swapping his prison jumpsuit for those traditional blues in the process). The second seems a little superficial, in the grand scheme of the movie, but it’s well-shot nonetheless - we watch, from that aforementioned window, as a woman hears about all the nasty things Michael might do, and of course we can see him through another window, heading for her front door, and when he finally appears inside the house he’s all the way across the room, somehow, and he calmly wanders on over and stabs the woman quite coolly through the throat, in a scene which I think is most reminiscent of the original films.
However, there are moments when you don’t see Michael at all, just the aftermath, or where we watch him enter a room and are forced to linger in the corridor while he does the dirty work. A couple of times that’s just fine, but considering the nature of the film it would be nice to watch the magic happen a couple more times. And while we’re on the negatives, I might mention that the reveal that the Doctor Loomis-type character who looked, felt, and sounded like a rip-off of Doctor Loomis, and was even referred to as “The New Doctor Loomis” did EXACTLY the same thing that Doctor Loomis did, surprise, and we were somehow expected to not see that coming like it was all one big, obvious, heavy-handed bluff. A couple of the other characters, too, felt like they were purely rammed in there to be irritating - there were a couple of strong scenes with our podcast hosts, but ultimately they were rude, on-the-nose and annoyingly egotistical, and I was happy to see them go, just like Alison’s friend Foggy Nelson.
The score, incidentally, is worth mentioning, from a haunting retune of the original Myers theme to darker and more dramatic variations on it later on that really would have been quite something to hear in surround-sound. I’m never usually one to appreciate the music of a film quite fully enough, so it was nice to have this grab my attention in quite the way it did. Overall, it’s a genuinely good follow-on that takes the best of the films before and makes the best use of the worst of them. Some of the characters might be a little annoying, some of the action could have translated better on-screen than off, but it was an honest and straight-up slasher film and it just wasn’t that bad at all.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Elysium in Tabletop Games
Aug 3, 2021
Greek Mythology has ALWAYS been a fascination of mine. I remember rewinding and replaying the original “Clash of the Titans” movie over and over on VHS. It’s super warped today but I still enjoy it now digitally. When I saw Elysium was coming out several years ago I knew I had to take a look at it, and I’m glad I did because it shot up my Top 100 Games of All Time and even spent a while in my Top 10. Not so much anymore, but I still love it. Why, you ask?
Elysium is a set collection card drafting game for two to four players. Each player will be attempting to complete the greatest collection of Legends written and subsequently transferred to their Elysium (Ancient Grecian version of heaven) for Victory Points. Whomever weaves the greatest Legendary tapestry will emerge victorious and really have a story to tell.
To setup, follow the instructions in the rulebook, but a three player game should look similar to what is pictured above. Players will receive their own player board, starting VP tokens and gold, and a set of columns. Cards from five different Grecian families will be shuffled and displayed in The Agora (middle of the board and the place to draft the cards). Once setup the game may begin.
Elysium is played over five Epochs (rounds) and each Epoch is divided into four phases. Phase I is Awakening, which is simply setting up The Agora for the new Epoch by removing all existing cards there and revealing more. Phase II is Actions, where players will be using their columns to draft cards from The Agora (as long as the color of column matches one of the icons on the card) and taking at least one Quest tile (also denotes player order for the next Epoch). Phase III is Writing the Legends, where players will redistribute the player order discs, receive gold and VP per their Quest tile, and transfer any cards from their Domain – active holding area – to their Elysium for VP at game end. Phase IV is End of Epoch, where players will perform basic cleanup tasks to prepare for the next Epoch of play. Play will continue in this fashion until the end of the fifth Epoch and players tally their final VP to determine the greatest Legend-crafter in all the land!
I know this is a VERY brief summary of what is done during the game, but Elysium has many card effects and combos to consider that I just cannot detail here for fear of readers falling asleep or my fingers falling off.
Components. Elysium has simply an incredible aesthetic. The non-card components certainly radiate ancient times and the art on the cards is breathtaking. Every piece is very high quality, which is something I have grown to expect from Space Cowboys games. The columns are fun to hold and move, and as a whole is just visually stunning. I love playing this game and seeing it all out on the table.
Obviously we place our ratings on the very first graphic you see so it is no surprise by the time you read down here, but I love Elysium. Like I mentioned in my open it was in my Top 10 for quite a while, and for very good reasons. First, I love games that simply LOOK good. Is that shallow? Maybe, but it’s what I like. Second, I love the card interplay and combo potential in Elysium. Chaining together cards to build small engines is always fun and provides so much replayability by never really being able to experience every card combo in the box. Finally, it has great components and a theme that speaks to me and my personal interests. It feels like a game that was meant to be played by me specifically. When you find a game like that you have to give it high ratings.
So if you are at all like me and enjoy games with a great theme, excellent art and components, and intriguing replayability, then certainly grab a copy of Elysium. Purple Phoenix Games gives it an Olympus-sized 11 / 12. So many Ancient Greece themed games exist and Elysium is simply one of the best.
Elysium is a set collection card drafting game for two to four players. Each player will be attempting to complete the greatest collection of Legends written and subsequently transferred to their Elysium (Ancient Grecian version of heaven) for Victory Points. Whomever weaves the greatest Legendary tapestry will emerge victorious and really have a story to tell.
To setup, follow the instructions in the rulebook, but a three player game should look similar to what is pictured above. Players will receive their own player board, starting VP tokens and gold, and a set of columns. Cards from five different Grecian families will be shuffled and displayed in The Agora (middle of the board and the place to draft the cards). Once setup the game may begin.
Elysium is played over five Epochs (rounds) and each Epoch is divided into four phases. Phase I is Awakening, which is simply setting up The Agora for the new Epoch by removing all existing cards there and revealing more. Phase II is Actions, where players will be using their columns to draft cards from The Agora (as long as the color of column matches one of the icons on the card) and taking at least one Quest tile (also denotes player order for the next Epoch). Phase III is Writing the Legends, where players will redistribute the player order discs, receive gold and VP per their Quest tile, and transfer any cards from their Domain – active holding area – to their Elysium for VP at game end. Phase IV is End of Epoch, where players will perform basic cleanup tasks to prepare for the next Epoch of play. Play will continue in this fashion until the end of the fifth Epoch and players tally their final VP to determine the greatest Legend-crafter in all the land!
I know this is a VERY brief summary of what is done during the game, but Elysium has many card effects and combos to consider that I just cannot detail here for fear of readers falling asleep or my fingers falling off.
Components. Elysium has simply an incredible aesthetic. The non-card components certainly radiate ancient times and the art on the cards is breathtaking. Every piece is very high quality, which is something I have grown to expect from Space Cowboys games. The columns are fun to hold and move, and as a whole is just visually stunning. I love playing this game and seeing it all out on the table.
Obviously we place our ratings on the very first graphic you see so it is no surprise by the time you read down here, but I love Elysium. Like I mentioned in my open it was in my Top 10 for quite a while, and for very good reasons. First, I love games that simply LOOK good. Is that shallow? Maybe, but it’s what I like. Second, I love the card interplay and combo potential in Elysium. Chaining together cards to build small engines is always fun and provides so much replayability by never really being able to experience every card combo in the box. Finally, it has great components and a theme that speaks to me and my personal interests. It feels like a game that was meant to be played by me specifically. When you find a game like that you have to give it high ratings.
So if you are at all like me and enjoy games with a great theme, excellent art and components, and intriguing replayability, then certainly grab a copy of Elysium. Purple Phoenix Games gives it an Olympus-sized 11 / 12. So many Ancient Greece themed games exist and Elysium is simply one of the best.
Prêt-à-Template
Productivity and Lifestyle
App
Ideas come up all the time. Registering them instantly in our inseparable mobile devices has become...
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Exposure (Twisted Lit #2) in Books
Jun 7, 2018
(This review will be available on my blog <a href="http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.com/">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a> at the end of September).
First off, I just want to say that although this is the second book in the series, this book can be read as a standalone since it involves a whole new cast of characters, plot, and setting. Saying that, this book is a retelling of Shakespeare's Macbeth. To be honest, it's been about 11 or 12 years (maybe longer) since I read Macbeth, so I won't be comparing this to the original. Now that that's all said, I really enjoyed this book!
Skye's been in love with Craig forever. However, he's part of the popular crowd and Skye is not. There's also the problem of Craig's super mean girlfriend, Beth. When one of the popular boys die in what appears to be an accident, things start spiraling out of control.
I didn't really know what to expect with the title. However, after reading this book, it makes sense in more ways then just Skye being a photographer.
The cover is rather plain, but I actually like its plainness. I think anything else would've made this cover look too cluttered. I also think the cover is rather cute!
I enjoyed the world building, and I felt that it was written rather well. The only thing that bothered me was the outcome when it came to the ending. I can't really say to much, but it just didn't feel like it followed procedure. That's your only hint. I did enjoy the setting of Alaska though especially since I don't really read any books set in Alaska.
I loved the pacing! The prologue definitely caught my attention and kept it until the very end. If I would've had more time, I would've finished this book in one setting. It was paced that good!
I enjoyed the plot! I don't remember Macbeth all that well as I said before, so I can't comment on how much the plot of this book was like that of Macbeth. There's not really any mystery I enjoyed the whole playing on conscience thing and what was done about it. I even enjoyed Skye's endless pursuit of Craig!
I enjoyed the characters more than anything! I loved how mature Skye was especially when it came to how mean Beth was to her at some points during the story. I loved how friendly she was and how vulnerable she could be. Even though Craig was a bit of a tool when it came to Beth, I still enjoyed how much of a friend he could be to Skye when he really wanted to be. However, at times he could be a little bit insensitive and selfish, but perhaps that's just a teenage thing (and even some adults)! My most favorite characters were Kaya, Cat, and Tess. I loved their sarcasm, wit, and humor they brought to the story. In fact, I wanted to be friends with those girls.
I enjoyed the dialogue very much, and I felt like it was set in high school, which it was. It was also very easy to understand, but it wasn't dumbed down or anything. My favorite dialogue was when it involved Kaya, Cat, and Tess. There are only a few swear words in this book.
Overall, Exposure is a book that is fun to read as well as having fantastic characters and great dialogue!
I'd recommend this book to those aged 15+ who would like some fun literature to read!
First off, I just want to say that although this is the second book in the series, this book can be read as a standalone since it involves a whole new cast of characters, plot, and setting. Saying that, this book is a retelling of Shakespeare's Macbeth. To be honest, it's been about 11 or 12 years (maybe longer) since I read Macbeth, so I won't be comparing this to the original. Now that that's all said, I really enjoyed this book!
Skye's been in love with Craig forever. However, he's part of the popular crowd and Skye is not. There's also the problem of Craig's super mean girlfriend, Beth. When one of the popular boys die in what appears to be an accident, things start spiraling out of control.
I didn't really know what to expect with the title. However, after reading this book, it makes sense in more ways then just Skye being a photographer.
The cover is rather plain, but I actually like its plainness. I think anything else would've made this cover look too cluttered. I also think the cover is rather cute!
I enjoyed the world building, and I felt that it was written rather well. The only thing that bothered me was the outcome when it came to the ending. I can't really say to much, but it just didn't feel like it followed procedure. That's your only hint. I did enjoy the setting of Alaska though especially since I don't really read any books set in Alaska.
I loved the pacing! The prologue definitely caught my attention and kept it until the very end. If I would've had more time, I would've finished this book in one setting. It was paced that good!
I enjoyed the plot! I don't remember Macbeth all that well as I said before, so I can't comment on how much the plot of this book was like that of Macbeth. There's not really any mystery I enjoyed the whole playing on conscience thing and what was done about it. I even enjoyed Skye's endless pursuit of Craig!
I enjoyed the characters more than anything! I loved how mature Skye was especially when it came to how mean Beth was to her at some points during the story. I loved how friendly she was and how vulnerable she could be. Even though Craig was a bit of a tool when it came to Beth, I still enjoyed how much of a friend he could be to Skye when he really wanted to be. However, at times he could be a little bit insensitive and selfish, but perhaps that's just a teenage thing (and even some adults)! My most favorite characters were Kaya, Cat, and Tess. I loved their sarcasm, wit, and humor they brought to the story. In fact, I wanted to be friends with those girls.
I enjoyed the dialogue very much, and I felt like it was set in high school, which it was. It was also very easy to understand, but it wasn't dumbed down or anything. My favorite dialogue was when it involved Kaya, Cat, and Tess. There are only a few swear words in this book.
Overall, Exposure is a book that is fun to read as well as having fantastic characters and great dialogue!
I'd recommend this book to those aged 15+ who would like some fun literature to read!
Gareth von Kallenbach (977 KP) rated Hancock (2008) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
Throughout the annals of cinema, the big screen has been home to some of the most larger-than-life heroes ever to spring from the pages of comic books. Recent adaptations of Spider-Man, Batman, and Superman, all went on to box office gold and with several more character adaptations in the works, there seems to be no end to the public’s desire to see tales based on costumed heroes with amazing powers.
In one of the more original twists on the hero genre, Will Smith stars as Hancock, a surly lush, who is more concerned about his next drink than he is about saving the day. Despite being blessed with amazing strength, invulnerability, and the ability to fly, Hancock is looked upon with disdain by most of the people of Los Angeles because his attitude is second only to the amazing amount of damage he causes in bringing local hoodlums to justice.
Shortly after causing nine million dollars in damage after his latest crime fighting effort, the mayor of L.A. places a warrant out for Hancock, having decided it was time for Hancock to be held accountable for the mayhem he has caused. At the same time, publicist Ray Embrey (Jason Bateman) is returning home after failing in his pitch to get a major pharmaceutical company to donate their new wonder drug in an effort to make the world better.
When danger arises during a traffic jam, Ray is saved by Hancock in the nick of time and is grateful for the efforts of the hero. Unfortunately a group of bystanders are convinced that Hancock could have saved Ray without making wreaking such havoc. In the midst of some heated verbal exchanges, Ray steps up for Hancock and expresses his gratitude to the hero and invites him home for dinner with his son and wife Mary (Charlize Theron). Undaunted by the gruff mannerisms of Hancock, Ray eventually convinces Hancock to let Ray represent him and sets out on a plan to remake Hancock’s image more positive and civic-friendly.
While this scenario presents several comedic moments, the film eventually changes tact, and becomes much darker in tone, and mired in a subplot of fate and mysticism that honestly seems greatly out-of-place with the tone established in the first three quarters of the film.
While it is notable that the filmmakers decided to try something different, the final result is a muddled effort that greatly undermines the laughs and momentum that were established earlier in the film. Smith does a great job but when he is not unleashing his sardonic quips, he seems to be disinterested and going through the motion for much of the last half of the film. Bateman does the best he can with a stock part and Theron seems woefully underused in a role that, while promising, really is not worthy of an actress of her skills.
Director Peter Berg does a solid job with the action and FX of the film, and clearly shows he has a knack for humor. Unfortunately the script by “X-Files” alum Vince Gilligan and Vince Ngo fails to live up to the potential of the premise and in the end leaves “Hancock” grounded.
In one of the more original twists on the hero genre, Will Smith stars as Hancock, a surly lush, who is more concerned about his next drink than he is about saving the day. Despite being blessed with amazing strength, invulnerability, and the ability to fly, Hancock is looked upon with disdain by most of the people of Los Angeles because his attitude is second only to the amazing amount of damage he causes in bringing local hoodlums to justice.
Shortly after causing nine million dollars in damage after his latest crime fighting effort, the mayor of L.A. places a warrant out for Hancock, having decided it was time for Hancock to be held accountable for the mayhem he has caused. At the same time, publicist Ray Embrey (Jason Bateman) is returning home after failing in his pitch to get a major pharmaceutical company to donate their new wonder drug in an effort to make the world better.
When danger arises during a traffic jam, Ray is saved by Hancock in the nick of time and is grateful for the efforts of the hero. Unfortunately a group of bystanders are convinced that Hancock could have saved Ray without making wreaking such havoc. In the midst of some heated verbal exchanges, Ray steps up for Hancock and expresses his gratitude to the hero and invites him home for dinner with his son and wife Mary (Charlize Theron). Undaunted by the gruff mannerisms of Hancock, Ray eventually convinces Hancock to let Ray represent him and sets out on a plan to remake Hancock’s image more positive and civic-friendly.
While this scenario presents several comedic moments, the film eventually changes tact, and becomes much darker in tone, and mired in a subplot of fate and mysticism that honestly seems greatly out-of-place with the tone established in the first three quarters of the film.
While it is notable that the filmmakers decided to try something different, the final result is a muddled effort that greatly undermines the laughs and momentum that were established earlier in the film. Smith does a great job but when he is not unleashing his sardonic quips, he seems to be disinterested and going through the motion for much of the last half of the film. Bateman does the best he can with a stock part and Theron seems woefully underused in a role that, while promising, really is not worthy of an actress of her skills.
Director Peter Berg does a solid job with the action and FX of the film, and clearly shows he has a knack for humor. Unfortunately the script by “X-Files” alum Vince Gilligan and Vince Ngo fails to live up to the potential of the premise and in the end leaves “Hancock” grounded.
Lyndsey Gollogly (2893 KP) rated Some Will Not Sleep: Selected Horrors in Books
Jun 22, 2021
90 of 250
Kindle
Some Will Not Sleep: selected horrors
By Adam Nevill
Once read a review will be written via Smashbomb and link posted in comments
A bestial face appears at windows in the night.
In the big white house on the hill angels are said to appear.
A forgotten tenant in an isolated building becomes addicted to milk.
A strange goddess is worshipped by a home-invading disciple.
The least remembered gods still haunt the oldest forests.
Cannibalism occurs in high society at the end of the world.
The sainted undead follow their prophet to the Great Dead Sea.
A confused and vengeful presence occupies the home of a first-time buyer.
In ghastly harmony with the nightmarish visions of the award-winning writer's novels, these stories blend a lifelong appreciation of horror culture with the grotesque fascinations and childlike terrors that are the author's own.
So I wrote a few notes on each story that I enjoyed!
They are just little rambling I’m far from a in depth critic!
1. Where Angels come in
I’ve read this before and it it’s stuck with me for some reason. We all had that one house as kids that spooked us, only luckily mine was never full of creepy things.
2. The Original Occupant
A man determined to spend time in a Swedish forest finds himself disturbing a sacred ritual only to disappear after writing a frantic letter to his friends. After a search of the house and forest he’s never seen again! Really good and quite creepy never mess with someone’s sacred alter!
3. Mother’s Milk
Well that’s just made my stomach turn! A man thinks he’s found lodgings and a job finds himself turned into a milk fiend the source of the milk is definitely an interesting one.
4. Yellow Teeth
An old friend comes to visit and never leaves. This was creepy I’d just hate having someone around me that filthy and smelly.
5. Pig Thing
A strange little piggy tale after a family move to New Zealand
6. What God have Wrought
This follows a soldier searching across desert for the creature that holds his sister! For some reason this didn’t grab me.
7. Doll Hands
This is what will happen when the world comes to an end the over privileged using the poor souls as meat! Quite chilling!
8. To Forget and be Forgotten
I loved this! It reminded me of his Apartment 16 which is a book I fell totally in love with and the first book I read of Adams and this was in that style. A lot of the paragraphs struck home with me especially at the start! Solitude is something we all seek at some point and being around people can be taxing.
9. The Ancestors
This is the second time I’ve read this and it still creeps me out! A little girl makes friends with a ghost and some toys that have dark intentions and definitely dislike parents!
10.!The Age of Entitlement
11. Florrie
Another brilliant short! I think a good cleansing of all newly brought houses is in order to prevent this!
Overall I absolutely love his writing style each story even ones I didn’t quite click with transports you to that scene you’re reading. I’m building a steady collection of Adams books I highly recommend anyone of them!
Kindle
Some Will Not Sleep: selected horrors
By Adam Nevill
Once read a review will be written via Smashbomb and link posted in comments
A bestial face appears at windows in the night.
In the big white house on the hill angels are said to appear.
A forgotten tenant in an isolated building becomes addicted to milk.
A strange goddess is worshipped by a home-invading disciple.
The least remembered gods still haunt the oldest forests.
Cannibalism occurs in high society at the end of the world.
The sainted undead follow their prophet to the Great Dead Sea.
A confused and vengeful presence occupies the home of a first-time buyer.
In ghastly harmony with the nightmarish visions of the award-winning writer's novels, these stories blend a lifelong appreciation of horror culture with the grotesque fascinations and childlike terrors that are the author's own.
So I wrote a few notes on each story that I enjoyed!
They are just little rambling I’m far from a in depth critic!
1. Where Angels come in
I’ve read this before and it it’s stuck with me for some reason. We all had that one house as kids that spooked us, only luckily mine was never full of creepy things.
2. The Original Occupant
A man determined to spend time in a Swedish forest finds himself disturbing a sacred ritual only to disappear after writing a frantic letter to his friends. After a search of the house and forest he’s never seen again! Really good and quite creepy never mess with someone’s sacred alter!
3. Mother’s Milk
Well that’s just made my stomach turn! A man thinks he’s found lodgings and a job finds himself turned into a milk fiend the source of the milk is definitely an interesting one.
4. Yellow Teeth
An old friend comes to visit and never leaves. This was creepy I’d just hate having someone around me that filthy and smelly.
5. Pig Thing
A strange little piggy tale after a family move to New Zealand
6. What God have Wrought
This follows a soldier searching across desert for the creature that holds his sister! For some reason this didn’t grab me.
7. Doll Hands
This is what will happen when the world comes to an end the over privileged using the poor souls as meat! Quite chilling!
8. To Forget and be Forgotten
I loved this! It reminded me of his Apartment 16 which is a book I fell totally in love with and the first book I read of Adams and this was in that style. A lot of the paragraphs struck home with me especially at the start! Solitude is something we all seek at some point and being around people can be taxing.
9. The Ancestors
This is the second time I’ve read this and it still creeps me out! A little girl makes friends with a ghost and some toys that have dark intentions and definitely dislike parents!
10.!The Age of Entitlement
11. Florrie
Another brilliant short! I think a good cleansing of all newly brought houses is in order to prevent this!
Overall I absolutely love his writing style each story even ones I didn’t quite click with transports you to that scene you’re reading. I’m building a steady collection of Adams books I highly recommend anyone of them!
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Memento (2000) in Movies
Nov 29, 2020
One of my favourite films
Film #5 on the 100 Movies Bucket List: Memento
I have to admit, I may be a little biased when it comes to Memento. Christopher Nolan is my favourite director and Memento is both one of my favourite films of his and one of my favourite films of all time. For me, this undoubtedly deserves its place on this bucket list.
Memento is a 2000 psychological thriller starring Guy Pearce as Leonard Shelby, a man suffering from anterograde amnesia searching for the person responsible for the death of his wife, using notes and tattoos to organise his thoughts.
One of the most noticeable features of Memento is the fact that half of the narrative is told backwards. The movie begins at the end, focusing on a rather gruesome Polaroid photograph that fades rather than develops and a victim of a shooting coming back to life. The rest of the film jumps backwards a few minutes at a time, each scene ending where the last one started. For a film about memory loss and amnesia, this mechanism of telling the story really helps put us in Leonard’s shoes. It makes you feel as confused as he is. On the original dvd release, there was a hidden feature that allowed you to play the film in chronological order and this just didn’t have the same impact. These reverse scenes are interspersed with black and white flashbacks of Leonard earlier in his wife’s murder investigation and his life as an insurance investigator, which really help with the exposition. These paired together alongside a haunting score make for an intriguing and not your run of the mill murder mystery.
There are some great performances in this that also help increase the intrigue. Carrie-Anne Moss as the apparently helpful Natalie and Joe Pantoliano as the questionable sidekick appear new to Leonard every time they meet yet their loyalties and motives waver for us as the viewers throughout the film. And Guy Pearce manages to portray the frustrated and not as innocent as he first appears Leonard incredibly well, and holds this film on his own for most of the run time. They’re helped by a clever and smart script that flawlessly blends the sinister and rather dark criminal aspects of this with some surprisingly funny lines.
This story starts at the end so you don’t have to worry about how it turns out, but despite this Memento still comes up with a rather cracking twist and denouement. This entire film is about time and memory and how unreliable it is, and the lies we tell ourselves about our own identities. Even during this, what we thought we knew about Leonard as the black and white flashback meets the backwards story, is revealed to be completely unreliable and quite shocking. Without revealing too much, the outcome of this film is both surprising, sinister and rather emotional, and features some of the best dialogue of the entire movie. Leonard’s actions and motives revealed here and the final voiceover as he drives off makes for a hugely satisfying ending.
I first watched Memento in a psychology class at college around 17 years ago. I loved it then and in the years since, it hasn’t lost its appeal. Watching it back now still evokes the same emotion and feelings when the credits roll as it did all those years ago and will always be one of my favourite films, even possibly my all time favourite.
I have to admit, I may be a little biased when it comes to Memento. Christopher Nolan is my favourite director and Memento is both one of my favourite films of his and one of my favourite films of all time. For me, this undoubtedly deserves its place on this bucket list.
Memento is a 2000 psychological thriller starring Guy Pearce as Leonard Shelby, a man suffering from anterograde amnesia searching for the person responsible for the death of his wife, using notes and tattoos to organise his thoughts.
One of the most noticeable features of Memento is the fact that half of the narrative is told backwards. The movie begins at the end, focusing on a rather gruesome Polaroid photograph that fades rather than develops and a victim of a shooting coming back to life. The rest of the film jumps backwards a few minutes at a time, each scene ending where the last one started. For a film about memory loss and amnesia, this mechanism of telling the story really helps put us in Leonard’s shoes. It makes you feel as confused as he is. On the original dvd release, there was a hidden feature that allowed you to play the film in chronological order and this just didn’t have the same impact. These reverse scenes are interspersed with black and white flashbacks of Leonard earlier in his wife’s murder investigation and his life as an insurance investigator, which really help with the exposition. These paired together alongside a haunting score make for an intriguing and not your run of the mill murder mystery.
There are some great performances in this that also help increase the intrigue. Carrie-Anne Moss as the apparently helpful Natalie and Joe Pantoliano as the questionable sidekick appear new to Leonard every time they meet yet their loyalties and motives waver for us as the viewers throughout the film. And Guy Pearce manages to portray the frustrated and not as innocent as he first appears Leonard incredibly well, and holds this film on his own for most of the run time. They’re helped by a clever and smart script that flawlessly blends the sinister and rather dark criminal aspects of this with some surprisingly funny lines.
This story starts at the end so you don’t have to worry about how it turns out, but despite this Memento still comes up with a rather cracking twist and denouement. This entire film is about time and memory and how unreliable it is, and the lies we tell ourselves about our own identities. Even during this, what we thought we knew about Leonard as the black and white flashback meets the backwards story, is revealed to be completely unreliable and quite shocking. Without revealing too much, the outcome of this film is both surprising, sinister and rather emotional, and features some of the best dialogue of the entire movie. Leonard’s actions and motives revealed here and the final voiceover as he drives off makes for a hugely satisfying ending.
I first watched Memento in a psychology class at college around 17 years ago. I loved it then and in the years since, it hasn’t lost its appeal. Watching it back now still evokes the same emotion and feelings when the credits roll as it did all those years ago and will always be one of my favourite films, even possibly my all time favourite.
Business Card Scanner & Reader
Business and Productivity
App
ABBYY Business Card Reader –The World’s Fastest Business Card Scanner & Contact Management App! ...
Strawberry Shortcake Ice Cream
Entertainment and Education
App
Create and serve tasty treats in your own ice cream truck on an island paradise! Budge Studios™...