Search
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Dredd (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
The mid 90’s was a strange time for movies. Sure, there were quite a few remembered fondly (just like with any era) but there were also many movies that are forgotten due to their ridiculousness. It was a time that gave us the style of adaptions on par with Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection, or the two Joel Schumacher Batman films. Likewise, there was a Judge Dredd film right in the middle of that time period.
It was a mess. It exemplified everything wrong with many adaptions in the 90’s. Big name actors, over-the-top designs, cheesy dialogue. It tried very hard to be akin to the original Total Recall but instead succeeded at only being a movie fun to laugh at. It featured Sylvester Stallone and Rob Schneider. That is all that needs to be said about that film. So, when Hollywood comes along and decides to make a new adaption, of course the original’s ridiculousness looms over the whole affair. Not helping is the fact that most of the cast and crew are relatively obscure, and its source material (the Judge Dredd comics) is not as well-known as most of Marvel’s or DC’s pantheon. Yet, this brand new adaption, Dredd 3D, soars much higher than the original and manages to be one of those well-hidden gems of Fall 2012. I don’t imagine this film breaking box office records, but it is a wholly worthwhile piece of screen entertainment, even if it has some notable flaws and is overshadowed by past outings in the franchise.
The future America is an irradiated waste land known as the Cursed Earth. On the east coast of North America lies Mega-City One, a vast, violent metropolis containing 800 million residents, where 17,000 crimes are reported daily and “Slo-Mo”, an addictive new drug that slows the user’s perception of time, has been introduced. The only force of order is the Judges, who act as police, judge, jury and executioner. Judge Dredd (Karl Urban) is tasked by the Chief Judge (Rakie Ayola) with evaluating rookie Judge Cassandra Anderson (Olivia Thirlby), a psychic who has failed the tests to become a full Judge. They become involved in a raid upon a crime and Slo-Mo ridden apartment complex known as Peach-Trees, which is ruled by a vicious crime boss Ma-Ma (Lena Heady).
You can guess from the title that the movie is meant to be watched in 3D. But that is where personal opinions of 3D come into play. For me personally, I cannot ding the film’s use of 3D because it uses it well enough that it becomes unnoticeable, which is to say it does not obnoxiously remind you at all times it is meant to be watched in 3D by throwing random things at the camera. But I will say that, although somewhat gimmicky, the “Slo-Mo” segments (which are shot from the perspective of those on the mind-altering drug ‘Slo-Mo’) do use 3D very well and manage to be some of the most visually striking and beautiful shots in the entire film.
The plot is simple to understand and straight forward. There are not huge twists and turns, and manages to be tightly written. It is not extremely memorable for plot standards, but it does not need to be. The story is held up by focusing on three major characters, which some good additional characterization of two more side characters. In that sense, the plot and characters do not pop off the screen into greatness, yet they are still tightly written enough that both elements (plot and characters) are not muddled or confusing. The simple plot, and the fact it all takes place in one apartment complex, makes it easier to focus on action and visuals.
While the visuals are all extremely well-done, the action could use some work. The setting of Mega-City One is extremely well established, as opposed to the original Judge Dredd adaption. It seems like it could be a real place not far off in the future, as it is set up with a realistic visual design – just with added grittiness and subtle science fictional elements. Also, there is not a huge amount of CG and the Judge uniforms especially look like iconic yet possibly realistic futuristic police suits. But the action could use some work, as stated. I could not help but constantly compare it to the recently released film, “The Raid: Redeption”, the Indonesian martial arts police film centering on a single police raid on an apartment complex. The similarities are there.
Both movies have very similar locations and plots, but the difference is that while Dredd has more interesting setting and science fiction elements (and arguably more interesting characters), The Raid: Redemption’s action is far more entertaining and engrossing. The real problem with Dredd is that there are never any real amazing feats of heroics on part of Judge Dredd. They set up the film in a sort of “’Die Hard’ in the future vibe” but that requires the hero to barely overcome overwhelming odds. As it stands, it never really feels like Judge Dredd is in a ton of danger. There are some cool shooting moments, and some even more interesting usage of Judge Anderson’s psychic powers. But at the end of the day, there simply are not many memorable action moments.
Overall, it does not ruin the film at all. It still manages to be an entertaining and interesting movie regardless of memorable action sequences. It has a tightly plotted narrative with fairly well done characters, not muddled by overuse of complexity or plot twists. It manages to be visually excellent with interesting science fictional elements, but never does it soar with its action set-pieces. It would have benefitted with some better use of gunplay or more clever feats of heroics on Judge Dredd’s part. But at least it takes itself seriously enough to not have anything akin to Rob Schneider following Sylvester Stallone around in a cheesy script.
It was a mess. It exemplified everything wrong with many adaptions in the 90’s. Big name actors, over-the-top designs, cheesy dialogue. It tried very hard to be akin to the original Total Recall but instead succeeded at only being a movie fun to laugh at. It featured Sylvester Stallone and Rob Schneider. That is all that needs to be said about that film. So, when Hollywood comes along and decides to make a new adaption, of course the original’s ridiculousness looms over the whole affair. Not helping is the fact that most of the cast and crew are relatively obscure, and its source material (the Judge Dredd comics) is not as well-known as most of Marvel’s or DC’s pantheon. Yet, this brand new adaption, Dredd 3D, soars much higher than the original and manages to be one of those well-hidden gems of Fall 2012. I don’t imagine this film breaking box office records, but it is a wholly worthwhile piece of screen entertainment, even if it has some notable flaws and is overshadowed by past outings in the franchise.
The future America is an irradiated waste land known as the Cursed Earth. On the east coast of North America lies Mega-City One, a vast, violent metropolis containing 800 million residents, where 17,000 crimes are reported daily and “Slo-Mo”, an addictive new drug that slows the user’s perception of time, has been introduced. The only force of order is the Judges, who act as police, judge, jury and executioner. Judge Dredd (Karl Urban) is tasked by the Chief Judge (Rakie Ayola) with evaluating rookie Judge Cassandra Anderson (Olivia Thirlby), a psychic who has failed the tests to become a full Judge. They become involved in a raid upon a crime and Slo-Mo ridden apartment complex known as Peach-Trees, which is ruled by a vicious crime boss Ma-Ma (Lena Heady).
You can guess from the title that the movie is meant to be watched in 3D. But that is where personal opinions of 3D come into play. For me personally, I cannot ding the film’s use of 3D because it uses it well enough that it becomes unnoticeable, which is to say it does not obnoxiously remind you at all times it is meant to be watched in 3D by throwing random things at the camera. But I will say that, although somewhat gimmicky, the “Slo-Mo” segments (which are shot from the perspective of those on the mind-altering drug ‘Slo-Mo’) do use 3D very well and manage to be some of the most visually striking and beautiful shots in the entire film.
The plot is simple to understand and straight forward. There are not huge twists and turns, and manages to be tightly written. It is not extremely memorable for plot standards, but it does not need to be. The story is held up by focusing on three major characters, which some good additional characterization of two more side characters. In that sense, the plot and characters do not pop off the screen into greatness, yet they are still tightly written enough that both elements (plot and characters) are not muddled or confusing. The simple plot, and the fact it all takes place in one apartment complex, makes it easier to focus on action and visuals.
While the visuals are all extremely well-done, the action could use some work. The setting of Mega-City One is extremely well established, as opposed to the original Judge Dredd adaption. It seems like it could be a real place not far off in the future, as it is set up with a realistic visual design – just with added grittiness and subtle science fictional elements. Also, there is not a huge amount of CG and the Judge uniforms especially look like iconic yet possibly realistic futuristic police suits. But the action could use some work, as stated. I could not help but constantly compare it to the recently released film, “The Raid: Redeption”, the Indonesian martial arts police film centering on a single police raid on an apartment complex. The similarities are there.
Both movies have very similar locations and plots, but the difference is that while Dredd has more interesting setting and science fiction elements (and arguably more interesting characters), The Raid: Redemption’s action is far more entertaining and engrossing. The real problem with Dredd is that there are never any real amazing feats of heroics on part of Judge Dredd. They set up the film in a sort of “’Die Hard’ in the future vibe” but that requires the hero to barely overcome overwhelming odds. As it stands, it never really feels like Judge Dredd is in a ton of danger. There are some cool shooting moments, and some even more interesting usage of Judge Anderson’s psychic powers. But at the end of the day, there simply are not many memorable action moments.
Overall, it does not ruin the film at all. It still manages to be an entertaining and interesting movie regardless of memorable action sequences. It has a tightly plotted narrative with fairly well done characters, not muddled by overuse of complexity or plot twists. It manages to be visually excellent with interesting science fictional elements, but never does it soar with its action set-pieces. It would have benefitted with some better use of gunplay or more clever feats of heroics on Judge Dredd’s part. But at least it takes itself seriously enough to not have anything akin to Rob Schneider following Sylvester Stallone around in a cheesy script.
Never meet your heroes is the succinct tag line of this Amazon original series, dealing with the notion that all superheroes are morally good… but what if they weren’t…?
Filmed in Canada, and starring New Zealand actors Karl Urban and American Gothic’s Antony Starr, this violent and very adult take on the costumed hero mythology is enough removed from standard American sensibilities to allow it to explore itself boldly and largely uncensored. It is definitely not a show for kids!
From the opening scenes it is evident that The Boys is not afraid to use gallons of blood and gore, nudity and colourful language to emphasise its point of a world corrupt, corporate and cruel, where the falacy of the powerful being there to protect you is shown up as pure money-spinning political and media manipulation.
We follow Jack Quaid’s naive victim Hughie Cambell, as he comes to realise the true nature of the self-centred and entirely flawed “heroes” that make up The Seven – an elite collection of super-powered “freaks”, led by Starr’s superbly vain and ego-maniachal Homelander; yet ultimately controlled by the Vought corporation and its unethical CEO Madelyn Stillwell, played with nervy relish by Elizabeth Shue.
There is Translucent, who can turn his skin invisible, but has to be naked to do so, and uses it largely to lurk in women’s bathrooms… The Deep, who can speak to sea creatures, but manifests a poisonous macho air, driven by massive insecurity… and A-Train, the world’s fastest man, who is a self-serving junkie with big issues.
Into the mix comes, the newest member of The Seven, Erin Moriaty, as Annie January, aka Starlight. Who may or may not have what it takes to join the ranks of well publicised fame, if she can turn a blind eye to the sinister workings of Vought and fit in.
Meanwhile, Hughie, looking for justice and perhaps revenge, meets Will Butcher (Urban), a man with a shady past, a terrible London accent (hilariously brought to attention whenever possible), and a reason to despise and hunt The Seven to extinction. The narrative progresses through this hunt, and the revelation of many secrets, into a cat and mouse game between the powerful “heroes” and the mere mortals determined to stop them.
Arch humour presides; nothing is handled with any sense of realism, favouring spectacle over believability. The tongue is firmly in cheek throughout, and the fun comes from the inventive ways the “Supes” use and misuse their powers, versus the resourcefulness of the essentially powerless methods employed by The Boys to chase them down and bring them to justice.
There are moments when the idea overshadows the actual script, for sure. Other times when the density of characters becomes confusing and unfocused. Without spoilers, it does all go in some very interesting directions, and by the end of episode 8 and the season finale it reaches a point suggesting a tactic many new shows seem to favour. Namely, to leaves things open enough, and on a cliff edge enough, to lead it anywhere it wants to go in a second series.
I have to admit, I wasn’t always comfortable with the tone of it… but, perhaps, that is the point. I did, however, find it very entertaining, fascinatingly post-modern and allegorical. As with many of the “Supes” it could have the ability to fly… but isn’t quite there yet!
Filmed in Canada, and starring New Zealand actors Karl Urban and American Gothic’s Antony Starr, this violent and very adult take on the costumed hero mythology is enough removed from standard American sensibilities to allow it to explore itself boldly and largely uncensored. It is definitely not a show for kids!
From the opening scenes it is evident that The Boys is not afraid to use gallons of blood and gore, nudity and colourful language to emphasise its point of a world corrupt, corporate and cruel, where the falacy of the powerful being there to protect you is shown up as pure money-spinning political and media manipulation.
We follow Jack Quaid’s naive victim Hughie Cambell, as he comes to realise the true nature of the self-centred and entirely flawed “heroes” that make up The Seven – an elite collection of super-powered “freaks”, led by Starr’s superbly vain and ego-maniachal Homelander; yet ultimately controlled by the Vought corporation and its unethical CEO Madelyn Stillwell, played with nervy relish by Elizabeth Shue.
There is Translucent, who can turn his skin invisible, but has to be naked to do so, and uses it largely to lurk in women’s bathrooms… The Deep, who can speak to sea creatures, but manifests a poisonous macho air, driven by massive insecurity… and A-Train, the world’s fastest man, who is a self-serving junkie with big issues.
Into the mix comes, the newest member of The Seven, Erin Moriaty, as Annie January, aka Starlight. Who may or may not have what it takes to join the ranks of well publicised fame, if she can turn a blind eye to the sinister workings of Vought and fit in.
Meanwhile, Hughie, looking for justice and perhaps revenge, meets Will Butcher (Urban), a man with a shady past, a terrible London accent (hilariously brought to attention whenever possible), and a reason to despise and hunt The Seven to extinction. The narrative progresses through this hunt, and the revelation of many secrets, into a cat and mouse game between the powerful “heroes” and the mere mortals determined to stop them.
Arch humour presides; nothing is handled with any sense of realism, favouring spectacle over believability. The tongue is firmly in cheek throughout, and the fun comes from the inventive ways the “Supes” use and misuse their powers, versus the resourcefulness of the essentially powerless methods employed by The Boys to chase them down and bring them to justice.
There are moments when the idea overshadows the actual script, for sure. Other times when the density of characters becomes confusing and unfocused. Without spoilers, it does all go in some very interesting directions, and by the end of episode 8 and the season finale it reaches a point suggesting a tactic many new shows seem to favour. Namely, to leaves things open enough, and on a cliff edge enough, to lead it anywhere it wants to go in a second series.
I have to admit, I wasn’t always comfortable with the tone of it… but, perhaps, that is the point. I did, however, find it very entertaining, fascinatingly post-modern and allegorical. As with many of the “Supes” it could have the ability to fly… but isn’t quite there yet!
The Little Witch at School
Book and Education
App
"The Little Witch at School" is an artful blend of stories, games and cartoons. !! Featured in the...
MDCalc Medical Calculators
Medical and Health & Fitness
App
Join the 1 million+ medical professionals who use MDCalc daily to support clinical decision making...
PressReader
News and Magazines & Newspapers
App
Connecting you with the stories you love, from thousands of sources you trust. All you can read news...
TravelersWife4Life (31 KP) rated Dust (Heirs of Neverland, #1) in Books
Feb 24, 2021
<a href="https://travelingwife4life.wordpress.com/2020/08/05/the-dust-celebrate-lit/">Travelers Wife 4 Life</a>
Wholly Guacamole was this a captivating book! Take it from someone who was pretty indifferent to the tale of Peter Pan and his adventures before this book, that you will be immersed in a world full of life, dreams, and the pursuit of finding a family. This is Kara Swanson’s first book in her Heirs of Neverland series, and I already can not wait to get my hands on the second book! Dust was AMAZING!
<b>“Play it safe, you mean. I’ve never wanted to be safe Lily. I want to stop hook and save Neverland- even if that means a bit of danger. A smirk tugs at my lips. “Especially if it means danger.”- Peter Pan</b>
The characters in this story were unlike any I have encountered before. They were very real and raw, talking about issues outside of the realm of make-believe and “Magic”, and dealing with them in very lifelike ways. The characters do not fit the mold for Peter Pan and his gang, which I thoroughly loved. Peter had such growth through the story that it was almost tangible. Claire was dreamlike and I enjoyed seeing her unique perspective of Peter and Tiger Lily. I believe Claire is a very relatable character and I am so excited to see where Kara Swanson leads her in the next book. Plus, I loved the hint of romance between Claire and Peter; I am a sucker for a sweet coming of age romance. Both main characters show tremendous growth by the end of the story, Peter maybe a new favorite of mine in terms of character growth and self-reflection.
<b>“His whole face lights up with delight, like a child inviting a grown-up to see a new creation they’ve made. He’s inviting me into his world.” – Claire</b>
The setting for this book is partially the US and then moves to London, which is to be expected; I mean how can you tell the story of Peter Pan without Big Ben? It flows beautifully with Kara Swanson’s edgier tale of Peter and the Lost Boys. From dancing fairies to the feeling of gliding through the air Kara Swanson describes the actions and emotions of the characters in vivid detail making me feel like I was gliding alongside Peter ready for any adventure to come our way. I truly enjoyed this tale and cannot express my anticipation for the next book in the series to release!
I give this book 5 out of 5 stars for the amazing characters, the great twist on a classic tale, and for making me like the story of Peter Pan and the adventures of Lost Boys. I will definitely be reading my kids this story someday, much better than even the original!
<b>“You were created for more than to bear the weight of your shadows- but you have to choose to no longer let them define you. You have to choose to let the light shine through the shattered pieces.” – Tiger Lilly</b>
I could go on forever quoting this book…so you can check out my <a href="https://www.instagram.com/travelerswife4life/">IG</a>; or <a href="https://twitter.com/TravelersWife4L">Twittert</a>; for some more amazing quotes!
*I volunteered to read this book in return for my honest feedback. The thoughts and opinions expressed within are my own.
Wholly Guacamole was this a captivating book! Take it from someone who was pretty indifferent to the tale of Peter Pan and his adventures before this book, that you will be immersed in a world full of life, dreams, and the pursuit of finding a family. This is Kara Swanson’s first book in her Heirs of Neverland series, and I already can not wait to get my hands on the second book! Dust was AMAZING!
<b>“Play it safe, you mean. I’ve never wanted to be safe Lily. I want to stop hook and save Neverland- even if that means a bit of danger. A smirk tugs at my lips. “Especially if it means danger.”- Peter Pan</b>
The characters in this story were unlike any I have encountered before. They were very real and raw, talking about issues outside of the realm of make-believe and “Magic”, and dealing with them in very lifelike ways. The characters do not fit the mold for Peter Pan and his gang, which I thoroughly loved. Peter had such growth through the story that it was almost tangible. Claire was dreamlike and I enjoyed seeing her unique perspective of Peter and Tiger Lily. I believe Claire is a very relatable character and I am so excited to see where Kara Swanson leads her in the next book. Plus, I loved the hint of romance between Claire and Peter; I am a sucker for a sweet coming of age romance. Both main characters show tremendous growth by the end of the story, Peter maybe a new favorite of mine in terms of character growth and self-reflection.
<b>“His whole face lights up with delight, like a child inviting a grown-up to see a new creation they’ve made. He’s inviting me into his world.” – Claire</b>
The setting for this book is partially the US and then moves to London, which is to be expected; I mean how can you tell the story of Peter Pan without Big Ben? It flows beautifully with Kara Swanson’s edgier tale of Peter and the Lost Boys. From dancing fairies to the feeling of gliding through the air Kara Swanson describes the actions and emotions of the characters in vivid detail making me feel like I was gliding alongside Peter ready for any adventure to come our way. I truly enjoyed this tale and cannot express my anticipation for the next book in the series to release!
I give this book 5 out of 5 stars for the amazing characters, the great twist on a classic tale, and for making me like the story of Peter Pan and the adventures of Lost Boys. I will definitely be reading my kids this story someday, much better than even the original!
<b>“You were created for more than to bear the weight of your shadows- but you have to choose to no longer let them define you. You have to choose to let the light shine through the shattered pieces.” – Tiger Lilly</b>
I could go on forever quoting this book…so you can check out my <a href="https://www.instagram.com/travelerswife4life/">IG</a>; or <a href="https://twitter.com/TravelersWife4L">Twittert</a>; for some more amazing quotes!
*I volunteered to read this book in return for my honest feedback. The thoughts and opinions expressed within are my own.
James Bagshaw recommended track Telstar by The Tornados in Ridin' the Wind: The Anthology by The Tornados in Music (curated)
Considering the fact all of the nominees for the 2015-2016 Gateway Award aren't exactly very appealing and I've had quite the bad luck with them... I pretty much decided to take a stab with Ashley Elston's <i>The Rules for Disappearing</i> as my next victim.
In elaboration of that bad luck, <a title="In the Shadow of Blackbirds" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-in-the-shadow-of-blackbirds-by-cat-winters/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">my first one was insanity</a>. I'm scared of reading another book by Cat Winters. <a href="http://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/dnf-review-the-5th-wave-by-rick-yancey"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">My second one had a highly annoying character named after a constellation</a>.
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><img src="http://bookwyrmingthoughts.bookblog.io/wp-content/uploads/sites/317/2015/05/dean-what-have-i-done.gif"; border="0" /></div>
And now, my third book has a very materialistic character (completely opposite spectrum from me) whose family is in Witness Protection for the last year and has quite literally changed their names far more times than Zach/Jack in <i>Zach's Lie</i> and <i>Jack's Run</i>. With their eighth move, "Meg," is extremely tired of constantly having to move places, leaving her life behind, and changing her identities – the moves were beginning to tear apart their family. Meg vows to find what landed her and her family in Witness Protection in the first place throughout the book.
I personally liked how the book was formatted. The beginning of each chapter has a "rule for disappearing," possibly concocted by Meg over the year her family has been in Witness Protection, and what happens in the chapter is sort of a reason "why" Meg established the rule in the first place.
For almost half the book there isn't really too much that happens – Meg makes a plan to not settle down with her new life like she did in her past placements, her "diary" gets stolen, and she tries to avoid a boy named Ethan Landry who's a lot smarter than he seems. After accidentally hearing a few conversations her dad has over the phone in the middle of the night, things start to pick up – Meg starts to remember more of what happened in her original life and becomes more determined to get her family out of Witness protection.
Meg is like a clamshell at the very beginning – she's very closed off and she wants to isolate herself from her peers because who cares about making friends when you might be plucked from your current life any moment? It's not until she meets Ethan that she "gives up" on trying to isolate herself and becomes more open with other people. In all honesty, if Ethan didn't make a constant attempt to open up her shell, Meg probably wouldn't have told her story – how her old life was like, why she's really in Witness Protection, and what each of her moves were like compared to her original life.
Elston does drop a hint or two of a sequel near the end of the book, which I'm not exactly too excited for. <i>The Rules for Disappearing</i> felt like a stand-alone rather than a duology, but maybe the sequel will be equally or more interesting.
<blockquote>We force you to sit through the chick flicks so maybe you'll get some idea of how you're supposed to act.</blockquote>
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-the-rules-for-disappearing-by-ashley-elston/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
In elaboration of that bad luck, <a title="In the Shadow of Blackbirds" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-in-the-shadow-of-blackbirds-by-cat-winters/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">my first one was insanity</a>. I'm scared of reading another book by Cat Winters. <a href="http://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/dnf-review-the-5th-wave-by-rick-yancey"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">My second one had a highly annoying character named after a constellation</a>.
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><img src="http://bookwyrmingthoughts.bookblog.io/wp-content/uploads/sites/317/2015/05/dean-what-have-i-done.gif"; border="0" /></div>
And now, my third book has a very materialistic character (completely opposite spectrum from me) whose family is in Witness Protection for the last year and has quite literally changed their names far more times than Zach/Jack in <i>Zach's Lie</i> and <i>Jack's Run</i>. With their eighth move, "Meg," is extremely tired of constantly having to move places, leaving her life behind, and changing her identities – the moves were beginning to tear apart their family. Meg vows to find what landed her and her family in Witness Protection in the first place throughout the book.
I personally liked how the book was formatted. The beginning of each chapter has a "rule for disappearing," possibly concocted by Meg over the year her family has been in Witness Protection, and what happens in the chapter is sort of a reason "why" Meg established the rule in the first place.
For almost half the book there isn't really too much that happens – Meg makes a plan to not settle down with her new life like she did in her past placements, her "diary" gets stolen, and she tries to avoid a boy named Ethan Landry who's a lot smarter than he seems. After accidentally hearing a few conversations her dad has over the phone in the middle of the night, things start to pick up – Meg starts to remember more of what happened in her original life and becomes more determined to get her family out of Witness protection.
Meg is like a clamshell at the very beginning – she's very closed off and she wants to isolate herself from her peers because who cares about making friends when you might be plucked from your current life any moment? It's not until she meets Ethan that she "gives up" on trying to isolate herself and becomes more open with other people. In all honesty, if Ethan didn't make a constant attempt to open up her shell, Meg probably wouldn't have told her story – how her old life was like, why she's really in Witness Protection, and what each of her moves were like compared to her original life.
Elston does drop a hint or two of a sequel near the end of the book, which I'm not exactly too excited for. <i>The Rules for Disappearing</i> felt like a stand-alone rather than a duology, but maybe the sequel will be equally or more interesting.
<blockquote>We force you to sit through the chick flicks so maybe you'll get some idea of how you're supposed to act.</blockquote>
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-the-rules-for-disappearing-by-ashley-elston/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Expositor's Bible & Strong's
Book and Reference
App
"Where the word of a king is, there is power" (Ecclesiastes 8:4). You have just found the best tool...
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Ben-Hur (2016) in Movies
Feb 20, 2019
Who thought it was a good idea to remake Ben-Hur? Well, on paper, it would seem to be a possibility. Ben-Hur has been hitting our cinema screens since 1907, with three other theatrical versions before this one; a short silent effort in 1907, the 1925 silent epic and the blockbusting MGM epic from 1959.
But this follows stage plays, TV movies and even animated movies, all based on General Lee Wallace's 1880 novel of the same name. But if a comparison is to be made, let us focus on the 1959 Charlton Heston movie. That, which ran for over three and half hours, takes its time to establish characters and situations, then takes us on a journey across the Roman Empire as we follow the turmoil of Judah Ben-Hur, betrayed by his best friend, a Roman who he considered to be a brother.
This journey takes place and parallels the life and ultimate execution of Jesus Christ and with this parallel, Judah is gradually inspired to temper his vengeance against his friend turned enemy and after the famous chariot race and the hollow victory therein, he will witness the crucifixion and through several machinations, find solace in the fledgling Christian movement.
So, how does this version hold up? To the 1959 version; not very well. This two-hour action movie is centred around the chariot race from start to finish, something which happens in the second act of the 1959 version but this is NOT the conclusion, but a catalyst for the finale.
Here, even though the events play out in a similar fashion, they are rushed and none of the character moments are earned. It is as if the film was pitched soley on the concept of showing an action packed chariot race in the 21st century.
If you want to see a modern interpretation of this race, possibly cinema's greatest such sequence, then look at Star Wars: Episode I's Podrace which captures the spirit perfectly. The positioning of this race and its significance to the plot was the same in the 1925 version as well, yet the fifteen minute 1907 short pretty much cherry picked the same plot elements as this 2016 version, which is quite telling really.
There was little interest in the story, just a cynical desire to bring this iconic movie back to the big screen and milk it as they would any franchise. But Ben-Hur is a poisoned chalice, so iconic that it would have to have offered something new without losing the original feel to succeed, as this classic simply did not warrant a remake.
But if you are going to remake it, give it a mega budget, which they did not, an all star cast, again, not the case and bring on board a top director to lead this project.
Instead we have a cast of relative unknowns, with Morgan Freeman being the most notable cast member, the director of such movies as Wanted (2007) and a small budget of just $100,000,000, when a blockbuster these days is usually pushing $200,000,000.
The main selling point for the previous two Ben-Hurs was the scale. These were epics and pushed the technology, filmmaking styles and never shied away from the strong religious overtones. Here it looks like it is given little more than lip service hoping to pander to the religious right.
It failed. Darren Aronofsky's Noah (2013) made more of an impact and it divided audiences, but at least it was faithful to itself, pushed boundaries and left its mark on cinema.
But by the end, my jaw was literally on the floor as the maimed Massalia reconciled with Judah and the pair ride off into the sunset together, all forgiven....
WHAT!!!
And more importantly, what was the point? Jesus sacrified himself, (in the story) so that people like Judah would put down their swords and learn to forgive, yet in the end, Judah and Massalia sacrifice nothing as they both regain their friendship and live happily ever after. In the previous versions, Ben-Hur beat Massalia but he has the last laugh as his mother and sister have been left with leprosy, that is until Jesus' death sparks a miracle which cures them. This was his reward for seeing the error of his ways, not getting his family and his friend back.
In the end, this is not a bad action romp, very watchable and is an entertaining spectacle but ultimately forgettable. It will entertain for two hours but leaves you with nothing to think about, unlike the books, plays and films which have preceded this.
A real shame...
But this follows stage plays, TV movies and even animated movies, all based on General Lee Wallace's 1880 novel of the same name. But if a comparison is to be made, let us focus on the 1959 Charlton Heston movie. That, which ran for over three and half hours, takes its time to establish characters and situations, then takes us on a journey across the Roman Empire as we follow the turmoil of Judah Ben-Hur, betrayed by his best friend, a Roman who he considered to be a brother.
This journey takes place and parallels the life and ultimate execution of Jesus Christ and with this parallel, Judah is gradually inspired to temper his vengeance against his friend turned enemy and after the famous chariot race and the hollow victory therein, he will witness the crucifixion and through several machinations, find solace in the fledgling Christian movement.
So, how does this version hold up? To the 1959 version; not very well. This two-hour action movie is centred around the chariot race from start to finish, something which happens in the second act of the 1959 version but this is NOT the conclusion, but a catalyst for the finale.
Here, even though the events play out in a similar fashion, they are rushed and none of the character moments are earned. It is as if the film was pitched soley on the concept of showing an action packed chariot race in the 21st century.
If you want to see a modern interpretation of this race, possibly cinema's greatest such sequence, then look at Star Wars: Episode I's Podrace which captures the spirit perfectly. The positioning of this race and its significance to the plot was the same in the 1925 version as well, yet the fifteen minute 1907 short pretty much cherry picked the same plot elements as this 2016 version, which is quite telling really.
There was little interest in the story, just a cynical desire to bring this iconic movie back to the big screen and milk it as they would any franchise. But Ben-Hur is a poisoned chalice, so iconic that it would have to have offered something new without losing the original feel to succeed, as this classic simply did not warrant a remake.
But if you are going to remake it, give it a mega budget, which they did not, an all star cast, again, not the case and bring on board a top director to lead this project.
Instead we have a cast of relative unknowns, with Morgan Freeman being the most notable cast member, the director of such movies as Wanted (2007) and a small budget of just $100,000,000, when a blockbuster these days is usually pushing $200,000,000.
The main selling point for the previous two Ben-Hurs was the scale. These were epics and pushed the technology, filmmaking styles and never shied away from the strong religious overtones. Here it looks like it is given little more than lip service hoping to pander to the religious right.
It failed. Darren Aronofsky's Noah (2013) made more of an impact and it divided audiences, but at least it was faithful to itself, pushed boundaries and left its mark on cinema.
But by the end, my jaw was literally on the floor as the maimed Massalia reconciled with Judah and the pair ride off into the sunset together, all forgiven....
WHAT!!!
And more importantly, what was the point? Jesus sacrified himself, (in the story) so that people like Judah would put down their swords and learn to forgive, yet in the end, Judah and Massalia sacrifice nothing as they both regain their friendship and live happily ever after. In the previous versions, Ben-Hur beat Massalia but he has the last laugh as his mother and sister have been left with leprosy, that is until Jesus' death sparks a miracle which cures them. This was his reward for seeing the error of his ways, not getting his family and his friend back.
In the end, this is not a bad action romp, very watchable and is an entertaining spectacle but ultimately forgettable. It will entertain for two hours but leaves you with nothing to think about, unlike the books, plays and films which have preceded this.
A real shame...