Search
Search results
Ross (3282 KP) rated The Grinch (2018) in Movies
Nov 12, 2018
Festive fun but could have been better
I was hoping this version would go back to the book as its sole reference point, and ignore Jim Carrey's version (although I love it, I didn't just want to see an animated version of it). I think they must have started out like that but ended up creating something fairly similar to the previous film.
Everything is toned down a little here, the Grinch isn't some hideous monster to be feared (he has a decent bit of awkward banter with his neighbour and pops to the shops for example), and he doesn't hate Christmas anywhere near as much as the story has it.
Cindy-Lou is back, but is significantly less annoying than Taylor Momsen's portrayal, and rather than herself feeling anti-festive and Grinchy she just wants her mum to be happy.
I enjoyed the Wallace and Gromit-esque moments, where Max uses a number of contraptions to make The Grinch a coffee etc.
The film doesn't overdo the festive spirit so, while we were left feeling Christmassy (or at least Christmassy enough for early November!) it wasn't ad nauseum.
The soundtrack became quite grating - I think the same singer as in the Despicable Me films - and the re-mastered version of "You're a Mean One..." did not work.
Few lines of the book (which I know pretty much off by heart now) are used in the film, and when they are used they stand out as a little jarring or are changed and just don't seem to work. While I am no fan of Dr Seuss' poetry and lazy rhyming this seemed to be a step down even from there. I felt they should either have stuck with it or ditched it altogether.
All in all, a decent, funny festive film for all the family.
Everything is toned down a little here, the Grinch isn't some hideous monster to be feared (he has a decent bit of awkward banter with his neighbour and pops to the shops for example), and he doesn't hate Christmas anywhere near as much as the story has it.
Cindy-Lou is back, but is significantly less annoying than Taylor Momsen's portrayal, and rather than herself feeling anti-festive and Grinchy she just wants her mum to be happy.
I enjoyed the Wallace and Gromit-esque moments, where Max uses a number of contraptions to make The Grinch a coffee etc.
The film doesn't overdo the festive spirit so, while we were left feeling Christmassy (or at least Christmassy enough for early November!) it wasn't ad nauseum.
The soundtrack became quite grating - I think the same singer as in the Despicable Me films - and the re-mastered version of "You're a Mean One..." did not work.
Few lines of the book (which I know pretty much off by heart now) are used in the film, and when they are used they stand out as a little jarring or are changed and just don't seem to work. While I am no fan of Dr Seuss' poetry and lazy rhyming this seemed to be a step down even from there. I felt they should either have stuck with it or ditched it altogether.
All in all, a decent, funny festive film for all the family.
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2099 KP) rated Lark! The Herald Angels Sing in Books
Jan 1, 2019
It All Started with a Baby in a Manger
During rehearsal for the children's Christmas pageant at Trinity Episcopal, Meg is surprised to find a baby in the manger. Since it is just rehearsal, they weren't using an actual baby yet. Things get even more intriguing when Meg finds the note attached to the baby strongly implying that the Meg's brother Rob is the father. This couldn't have come at a worse time since Rob is about to propose to his girlfriend of two years. Who is the mother? Why did she leave the baby in the church? And can Meg figure out who the father really is?
I'm not going to say more than this since the plot spins out in several fun and surprising directions from here. I was intrigued the entire way through. And yes, there is a crime and even murder, but the plot isn't a strict murder and five suspects. Then again, that's often the case with this series, and I love that creativity in the plotting. The usual characters are all here, although some get more page time than others, which is again a staple of the series. I did find some editing glitches in a couple of random chapters, and I thought a couple of plot points early on came out of nowhere even though Meg didn't seem that surprised by them. Then again, I could have missed something with those plot points. Honestly, I didn't care, however, because I was laughing so hard at the antics in the book. Yes, I always find this series amusing, but this is the most I've laughed out loud at a book in the series in quite a while.
I'm not going to say more than this since the plot spins out in several fun and surprising directions from here. I was intrigued the entire way through. And yes, there is a crime and even murder, but the plot isn't a strict murder and five suspects. Then again, that's often the case with this series, and I love that creativity in the plotting. The usual characters are all here, although some get more page time than others, which is again a staple of the series. I did find some editing glitches in a couple of random chapters, and I thought a couple of plot points early on came out of nowhere even though Meg didn't seem that surprised by them. Then again, I could have missed something with those plot points. Honestly, I didn't care, however, because I was laughing so hard at the antics in the book. Yes, I always find this series amusing, but this is the most I've laughed out loud at a book in the series in quite a while.
TravelersWife4Life (31 KP) rated Big Wishes for Little Feat in Books
Feb 24, 2021
I love children’s picture books, but I loved them with substance, <i>Big Wishes for Little Feet </i> gives me that and so much more!
Cheryl Olsten brought to life a vivid story of finding happiness right where you are planted, of never giving up even when things do not go your way, and that there is joy in the midst of sadness. I LOVED Lafitte and his story of perseverance. The narration was done beautifully (emphasized by the fantastic illustrations) and I enjoyed getting to watch him grow up. I also liked Ella’s story and how they intertwined together. I think there are a lot of kids who can relate to Ella and her family situation. I especially liked how Cheryl Olsten explained the phonics to say Ella’s nickname from her father <i>Brilliant étoile</i>. It was a fun interactive part of the story; plus, it reinforces dual language learning.
<b>“Little Feet, thought the horse. That is who I am—a horse of great courage, strength, and skill.”</b>
Paolo D’Altan’s work in this book is phenomenal. He truly conveyed the wonder and curiosity displayed by Ella and Lafitte and told their story in a colorful and eye-catching way. I want some of the pictures to hang in my home! As I look back over the story, I am again amazed by all the detailed work that went into this book and I am looking forward to showing my niece this book over Christmas to see which picture is her favorite. Well done Paolo D’Altan!
A definite 5 out of 5 stars for me! Some great themes combined with a good flowing storyline and some great imaginative art.
*I volunteered to read this book in return for my honest feedback. The thoughts and opinions expressed within are my own.
Cheryl Olsten brought to life a vivid story of finding happiness right where you are planted, of never giving up even when things do not go your way, and that there is joy in the midst of sadness. I LOVED Lafitte and his story of perseverance. The narration was done beautifully (emphasized by the fantastic illustrations) and I enjoyed getting to watch him grow up. I also liked Ella’s story and how they intertwined together. I think there are a lot of kids who can relate to Ella and her family situation. I especially liked how Cheryl Olsten explained the phonics to say Ella’s nickname from her father <i>Brilliant étoile</i>. It was a fun interactive part of the story; plus, it reinforces dual language learning.
<b>“Little Feet, thought the horse. That is who I am—a horse of great courage, strength, and skill.”</b>
Paolo D’Altan’s work in this book is phenomenal. He truly conveyed the wonder and curiosity displayed by Ella and Lafitte and told their story in a colorful and eye-catching way. I want some of the pictures to hang in my home! As I look back over the story, I am again amazed by all the detailed work that went into this book and I am looking forward to showing my niece this book over Christmas to see which picture is her favorite. Well done Paolo D’Altan!
A definite 5 out of 5 stars for me! Some great themes combined with a good flowing storyline and some great imaginative art.
*I volunteered to read this book in return for my honest feedback. The thoughts and opinions expressed within are my own.
Lee (2222 KP) rated The House (2017) in Movies
Jul 14, 2017
Worst movie I've seen in a very, very long time
Usually when I review comedies I start off by complaining about how disappointing they tend to be these days. Sometimes they manage to prove me wrong (Bad Moms), sometimes they’re not quite as bad as I was expecting (Baywatch). The last time I was seriously annoyed about how bad a comedy was it was Office Christmas Party, but even then that managed to raise a laugh or two. The House though, well that goes way beyond that, taking it to a whole other level by having absolutely no laughs in it at all!
Will Ferrell is Scott, Amy Poehler is his wife Kate. When their daughter Alex gets into the university she wanted, they’re over the moon. Especially as the town runs some kind of scholarship program, paying for one lucky students education each year. This years lucky recipient is due to be Alex but when sleazy city councilman Bob decides to cancel the program in favour of building a huge pool for the town, Scott and Kate need to come up with another way of raising the money. Recently divorced neighbour Frank has a big empty house and between them they hit upon the idea of building a casino in his home, somewhere for the locals to come and spend all their money. Things go well for a while, then things get way out of hand. Cue the opportunity for some riotous, hilarious humour…
Only there’s none of that. It’s riotous, but this is just such a lazily written movie that the humour is non-existent. Featuring a date rape ‘gag’ within the first five minutes(?!) it just gets progressively worse from there. Pointless, nonsensical playground style bickering, name calling and random violence feature heavily throughout in a scatter-gun attempt at trying to raise a laugh. All of this ends up coming across as either poorly written, badly improvised, or both. Even the editing is a total disaster – in one scene Amy Poehler has a guy standing right behind her, cut to another camera and he’s gone, cut back and he’s there again, cut back and he’s gone!
The biggest disappointment about this is the complete waste of talent. Admittedly, Will Ferrell is on a downward spiral anyway since his Anchorman days and the brilliant Step Brothers, but you’d still expect more from him than this. One of my favourite TV shows, Parks and Recreation, stars Amy Poehler as the hilarious Leslie Knope, so I’d expect way more from her too. Even her movie roles haven’t been too bad so far. I guess it just proves that if you’ve got a seriously dud script on your hands, there isn’t really much that anyone can do to fix it. This isn’t just a bad comedy, it’s a bad, bad movie.
Will Ferrell is Scott, Amy Poehler is his wife Kate. When their daughter Alex gets into the university she wanted, they’re over the moon. Especially as the town runs some kind of scholarship program, paying for one lucky students education each year. This years lucky recipient is due to be Alex but when sleazy city councilman Bob decides to cancel the program in favour of building a huge pool for the town, Scott and Kate need to come up with another way of raising the money. Recently divorced neighbour Frank has a big empty house and between them they hit upon the idea of building a casino in his home, somewhere for the locals to come and spend all their money. Things go well for a while, then things get way out of hand. Cue the opportunity for some riotous, hilarious humour…
Only there’s none of that. It’s riotous, but this is just such a lazily written movie that the humour is non-existent. Featuring a date rape ‘gag’ within the first five minutes(?!) it just gets progressively worse from there. Pointless, nonsensical playground style bickering, name calling and random violence feature heavily throughout in a scatter-gun attempt at trying to raise a laugh. All of this ends up coming across as either poorly written, badly improvised, or both. Even the editing is a total disaster – in one scene Amy Poehler has a guy standing right behind her, cut to another camera and he’s gone, cut back and he’s there again, cut back and he’s gone!
The biggest disappointment about this is the complete waste of talent. Admittedly, Will Ferrell is on a downward spiral anyway since his Anchorman days and the brilliant Step Brothers, but you’d still expect more from him than this. One of my favourite TV shows, Parks and Recreation, stars Amy Poehler as the hilarious Leslie Knope, so I’d expect way more from her too. Even her movie roles haven’t been too bad so far. I guess it just proves that if you’ve got a seriously dud script on your hands, there isn’t really much that anyone can do to fix it. This isn’t just a bad comedy, it’s a bad, bad movie.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Mary Poppins (1964) in Movies
Apr 20, 2019
Practically Perfect In Every Way
After watching MARY POPPINS RETURNS, the BankofMarquis was itching to check out the original 1964 Julie Andrews/Dick Van Dyke/Walt Disney production of MARY POPPINS to see if it holds up as well as my memory has held it up. I was a little nervous when I put the DVD in the player and hit go.
And I shouldn't have worried, for MARY POPPINS is...pardon the expression..."Practically Perfect in Every Way".
Based on the series of books by P.L. Travers and set right around 1900, the film tells the tale of the London Banks' Family - Mr., Mrs., Jane and Michael - who need a new nanny. Both parents are too busy to spend time with their children - he with his job at the Bank (get it - Mr. Banks works at a Bank) and her involvement in the Women's Suffragette movement. Into their lives flies (quite literally) Mary Poppins - a nanny with magical qualities who, along with her friend and cohort Bert, casts a spell on the children - and the Banks' family.
Julie Andrews earned the Oscar for Best Actress for her feature film debut - and it is richly deserved. Her Poppins is stern, smart, brassy and loving - oh...and a marvelous singer and dancer. Just as strong as Andrews is Dick Van Dyke as Bert (though some will quibble with his Cockney accent). I say...don't worry about his accent and watch the wonderful comedic timing, dancing and joi de vivre that Van Dyke brings to this film. He is the "secret sauce" that makes this work. Julie would not be as good - nor would this film be as interesting - without Bert by her side.
EVERY major player shines in this film from David Tomlinson's befuddled, straight-laced British Gentleman Mr. Banks to Glynnis Johns as the enthusiastic supporter of Votes for Women, Mrs. Banks, to the children - Karen Dotrice and Matthew Garber. Special notice should be made to Ed Wynn who's one scene/song/cameo as Uncle Albert - the "I Love To Laugh" scene - is pure gold.
Even the smaller, supporting roles are stellar. Reta Shaw and Hermione Baddely as the "domestics", Arthur Treacher (yes - he, of FISH AND CHIPS fame) as the Constable and Reginald Owen (Scrooge in the 1930's version of A CHRISTMAS CAROL) as Admiral Boom are all fun to watch and match the energy and timing of the leads in their limited screen time.
And...the music...Oh, the Music! Written by Richard M and Robert B Sherman - these songs are classic. Starting with the Oscar Winner for Best Song - Chim Chim Cheree and continuing through Feed The Birds, I Love To Laugh, Jolly Holiday and Let's Go Fly A Kite - ALL the songs are magical and lend a hand to the story - they serve a purpose and are not just a distraction. This film is worth watching just for the rooftop Step-In-Time song and dance number alone.
But the thing that makes this film go is the story - the characters, settings, costumes, songs and dances - are all in service to a touching, sentimental (but not cloying) simple story of a family coming together. It is charming in it's simplicity and leaves everyone with a heart full of joy.
Surprisingly to a modern audience, the special effects (especially the "Live Action and Animation" sequence) holds up really, really well. It is amazing to me how strong these effects are - even over 50 years later.
This is a wonderful, heartfelt family film that deserves a re-watch if you haven't seen it in awhile.
Letter Grade A+
10 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (OfMarquis)
And I shouldn't have worried, for MARY POPPINS is...pardon the expression..."Practically Perfect in Every Way".
Based on the series of books by P.L. Travers and set right around 1900, the film tells the tale of the London Banks' Family - Mr., Mrs., Jane and Michael - who need a new nanny. Both parents are too busy to spend time with their children - he with his job at the Bank (get it - Mr. Banks works at a Bank) and her involvement in the Women's Suffragette movement. Into their lives flies (quite literally) Mary Poppins - a nanny with magical qualities who, along with her friend and cohort Bert, casts a spell on the children - and the Banks' family.
Julie Andrews earned the Oscar for Best Actress for her feature film debut - and it is richly deserved. Her Poppins is stern, smart, brassy and loving - oh...and a marvelous singer and dancer. Just as strong as Andrews is Dick Van Dyke as Bert (though some will quibble with his Cockney accent). I say...don't worry about his accent and watch the wonderful comedic timing, dancing and joi de vivre that Van Dyke brings to this film. He is the "secret sauce" that makes this work. Julie would not be as good - nor would this film be as interesting - without Bert by her side.
EVERY major player shines in this film from David Tomlinson's befuddled, straight-laced British Gentleman Mr. Banks to Glynnis Johns as the enthusiastic supporter of Votes for Women, Mrs. Banks, to the children - Karen Dotrice and Matthew Garber. Special notice should be made to Ed Wynn who's one scene/song/cameo as Uncle Albert - the "I Love To Laugh" scene - is pure gold.
Even the smaller, supporting roles are stellar. Reta Shaw and Hermione Baddely as the "domestics", Arthur Treacher (yes - he, of FISH AND CHIPS fame) as the Constable and Reginald Owen (Scrooge in the 1930's version of A CHRISTMAS CAROL) as Admiral Boom are all fun to watch and match the energy and timing of the leads in their limited screen time.
And...the music...Oh, the Music! Written by Richard M and Robert B Sherman - these songs are classic. Starting with the Oscar Winner for Best Song - Chim Chim Cheree and continuing through Feed The Birds, I Love To Laugh, Jolly Holiday and Let's Go Fly A Kite - ALL the songs are magical and lend a hand to the story - they serve a purpose and are not just a distraction. This film is worth watching just for the rooftop Step-In-Time song and dance number alone.
But the thing that makes this film go is the story - the characters, settings, costumes, songs and dances - are all in service to a touching, sentimental (but not cloying) simple story of a family coming together. It is charming in it's simplicity and leaves everyone with a heart full of joy.
Surprisingly to a modern audience, the special effects (especially the "Live Action and Animation" sequence) holds up really, really well. It is amazing to me how strong these effects are - even over 50 years later.
This is a wonderful, heartfelt family film that deserves a re-watch if you haven't seen it in awhile.
Letter Grade A+
10 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (OfMarquis)
Ronyell (38 KP) rated Tim Burton's Corpse Bride (2005) in Movies
Jul 24, 2020
Boy Meets Dead Girl
When a young man named Victor Van Dort is engaged to a young woman named Victoria Everglot (Victor, Victoria, get it?) due to Victor's family, the Van Dorts wanting to get Victor to marry Victoria because they want to be in high society; while Victoria's parents, the Everglots, want Victoria to marry Victor in order to get more money from the Van Dorts, Victor ends up messing up his wedding rehearsals to Victoria and ends up going into the woods to practice his wedding vows. Unfortunately, Victor accidentally places his wedding ring on a bony finger that was embedded in the ground and he ends up being engaged to Emily, the Corpse Bride. Meanwhile, in the living world, a sly and diabolical gentlemen named Lord Barkis Bittern wants to take Victoria's hand in marriage in case Victor does not come back to the living world.
Can Victor get back to the world of the living and who will he choose: Victoria or Emily?
I have been watching many of Tim Burton's animated films and "Corpse Bride" happens to be one of his most ingenious works yet! I loved the fact that this movie was based off an ancient folktale about a man accidentally marrying a corpse as I love reading about folktales in general and this movie definitely has the ancient folktale feel to it. I also enjoyed seeing the two different worlds between the living world and the world of the dead as they contrast each other in a very unique way. In this case, the world of the living is seen as a dreary black and white world while the world of the dead is shown in a loud and colorful manner, which is surprising since you would expect to see the world of the dead as a dreary place while the world of the living is a colorful place. I also enjoyed the relationship shared between Victor and Emily, even though Victor at first didn't want to be in the world of the dead. Even though the idea of even communicating with a talking corpse is horrifying at best, this film managed to make the interactions between Emily and Victor be as charming as can be and I was able to really enjoy their innocent bantering with each other! I really loved the way that each voice actor portrayed the characters as they made them come to life, especially with the performance of Johnny Depp as Victor as he made Victor sound timid yet friendly at the same time. I really loved Helena Bonham Carter's performance as Emily the Corpse Bride as she was probably the most interesting character in the entire movie and I loved the way that Emily is so innocent and yet can be pretty frightening when she wants to be!
The only issue I had with this film was that I felt that the songs in this movie were not as memorable as "The Nightmare Before Christmas" and they didn't really get me to feel so much for the characters' situations since they weren't catchy or emotional enough. I also wished that the movie actually explored the characters a bit more like explain how Victoria's family got into financial troubles in the first place and what was Lord Barkis Bittern like as a character before he is introduced into this film.
Overall, "Corpse Bride" is a great film for anyone who is a huge fan of Tim Burton's dark comedy films and who loves watching films starring dead characters in general!
Originally posted on: http://surrealmoviesandtvblog.blogspot.com/2014/10/movie-review-corpse-bride-2005.html
Can Victor get back to the world of the living and who will he choose: Victoria or Emily?
I have been watching many of Tim Burton's animated films and "Corpse Bride" happens to be one of his most ingenious works yet! I loved the fact that this movie was based off an ancient folktale about a man accidentally marrying a corpse as I love reading about folktales in general and this movie definitely has the ancient folktale feel to it. I also enjoyed seeing the two different worlds between the living world and the world of the dead as they contrast each other in a very unique way. In this case, the world of the living is seen as a dreary black and white world while the world of the dead is shown in a loud and colorful manner, which is surprising since you would expect to see the world of the dead as a dreary place while the world of the living is a colorful place. I also enjoyed the relationship shared between Victor and Emily, even though Victor at first didn't want to be in the world of the dead. Even though the idea of even communicating with a talking corpse is horrifying at best, this film managed to make the interactions between Emily and Victor be as charming as can be and I was able to really enjoy their innocent bantering with each other! I really loved the way that each voice actor portrayed the characters as they made them come to life, especially with the performance of Johnny Depp as Victor as he made Victor sound timid yet friendly at the same time. I really loved Helena Bonham Carter's performance as Emily the Corpse Bride as she was probably the most interesting character in the entire movie and I loved the way that Emily is so innocent and yet can be pretty frightening when she wants to be!
The only issue I had with this film was that I felt that the songs in this movie were not as memorable as "The Nightmare Before Christmas" and they didn't really get me to feel so much for the characters' situations since they weren't catchy or emotional enough. I also wished that the movie actually explored the characters a bit more like explain how Victoria's family got into financial troubles in the first place and what was Lord Barkis Bittern like as a character before he is introduced into this film.
Overall, "Corpse Bride" is a great film for anyone who is a huge fan of Tim Burton's dark comedy films and who loves watching films starring dead characters in general!
Originally posted on: http://surrealmoviesandtvblog.blogspot.com/2014/10/movie-review-corpse-bride-2005.html
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated The Visitor in Books
Oct 5, 2020
An interesting and complex piece of work that covers memory loss and family love tightly together. A short read, but also a missed opportunity of what could be a lovely novel, if developed in a better way.
It is Christmas Eve, but the furnace has gone out, the breaker needs to be reset and the cupboards are empty. In her cold house, Mrs. Langstrum is waiting for her husband to arrive from his quick trip to the store. As a snowstorm is approaching, Mrs. Langstrum gets worried. But just as she decides to get help, someone knocks on her door. A visitor. A stranger. But before she can tell him to go, he says he has news about her husband.
The blurb was the main reason I picked up this book. You sort of get the idea of what this book might be about. A mystery person arrives, and he has a story. The woman has a story, and the setting makes you curious about how this will continue to unravel.
The plot is complex, and even though it’s a very short book, the story went incredibly slow. The plot twist happened at the begging, and knowing this, I expected another one, as the beginning was obvious. In the end, when no other plot twists happen, and the book ends exactly how you thought it would end at the beginning, you are felt disappointed and unsatisfied.
I really loved the idea of the woman who has a memory loss, and a person that reveals information bit by bit. Going from other perspectives and back in time, it was a nice concept. I also really enjoyed the family relationships captured, and all the challenges openly discussed. We have some big taboo subjects here, and not many people are brave enough to openly talk about this.
However, this whole concept, and idea, was not delivered as it should’ve been, as it had the capacity to. There was room for more development, more work, and more plot twists.
Some parts are confusing, and it was nice that the story was so short and you could go back to it and re-read it, but is that really a good thing? Would we go back and re-read a 300-page book if it was confusing? I wouldn’t.
It is Christmas Eve, but the furnace has gone out, the breaker needs to be reset and the cupboards are empty. In her cold house, Mrs. Langstrum is waiting for her husband to arrive from his quick trip to the store. As a snowstorm is approaching, Mrs. Langstrum gets worried. But just as she decides to get help, someone knocks on her door. A visitor. A stranger. But before she can tell him to go, he says he has news about her husband.
The blurb was the main reason I picked up this book. You sort of get the idea of what this book might be about. A mystery person arrives, and he has a story. The woman has a story, and the setting makes you curious about how this will continue to unravel.
The plot is complex, and even though it’s a very short book, the story went incredibly slow. The plot twist happened at the begging, and knowing this, I expected another one, as the beginning was obvious. In the end, when no other plot twists happen, and the book ends exactly how you thought it would end at the beginning, you are felt disappointed and unsatisfied.
I really loved the idea of the woman who has a memory loss, and a person that reveals information bit by bit. Going from other perspectives and back in time, it was a nice concept. I also really enjoyed the family relationships captured, and all the challenges openly discussed. We have some big taboo subjects here, and not many people are brave enough to openly talk about this.
However, this whole concept, and idea, was not delivered as it should’ve been, as it had the capacity to. There was room for more development, more work, and more plot twists.
Some parts are confusing, and it was nice that the story was so short and you could go back to it and re-read it, but is that really a good thing? Would we go back and re-read a 300-page book if it was confusing? I wouldn’t.
ClareR (5603 KP) rated The Mercies in Books
Feb 25, 2020 (Updated Feb 25, 2020)
The Mercies is a slow burn of a novel, set in the Arctic town of Vardø in 1617 (Norway, the part that was called Finnmark). On Christmas Eve, whilst all of the men are out fishing, a storm blows in and kills them all. The women are left without their husbands, brothers and fathers, and must learn to fend for themselves. Maren Magnusdatter is one of these women. She watches as her father, brothers and future husband are drowned.
Three years later, a Scot, Absalom Cornet and his young Norwegian wife, Ursa, arrive. Absalom has been appointed Commissioner of Vardø, and is adamant that witchcraft was the cause of the storm three years ago. The fact that the women are surviving and taking on the roles of their dead menfolk doesn’t help their case. Absalom only sees evil, and women who have forgotten their place as servants of God. He is a witch finder, and has been responsible for the prosecution and death of women at home in Scotland. Unsurprisingly, he’s not a very nice character, and I liked NOT liking him, although I couldn’t help but feel sorry for Ursa. She is shy and inexperienced in the ways of the world. She has been shut away, caring for her sick younger sister. She knows nothing of what is expected of her as a wife - in every sphere. She doesn’t know how to keep a house at all. This is where Maren steps in as an advisor. They become good friends, and there is the beginnings of something more than just a simple friendship. I loved the interactions between these two women. Maren, strongly independent, competent and lonely, and Ursa, inexperienced, unhappy and lonely. In other circumstances, theirs could have been a good friendship - but unlikely because of social status, I should think.
The writing in this is gorgeous. The descriptions of the landscape and the sea made me feel as though I was standing there with them (warmer though!), and I loved getting to know the women, even the ultra-religious women who were only too keen to give up their fellow towns-women as witches. This part doesn’t happen for quite a while, so we’re given the chance to become emotionally invested in these characters. So when we read of their treatment at the hands of Absalom and his fellow witch hunters, it makes it all the more appalling. If it wasn’t bad enough already.
I love historical fiction, and I really liked how this was written in such a way that these didn’t really seem to be women separated from us by 400 years. They were normal women, working hard to survive and make lives for the,selves. Which made it all the more sad. There’s no way I could detach myself and NOT read this with a modern woman’s eye. These women were punished for something that we take for granted: independence.
Despite the terrible things that happen, it’s a beautifully written, very enjoyable book that I would easily recommend to anyone, even though it’s just like I would imagine the landscape around Finnmark is: bleak, yet beautiful.
Many thanks to NetGalley and the publisher for my copy of this book to read and review.
Three years later, a Scot, Absalom Cornet and his young Norwegian wife, Ursa, arrive. Absalom has been appointed Commissioner of Vardø, and is adamant that witchcraft was the cause of the storm three years ago. The fact that the women are surviving and taking on the roles of their dead menfolk doesn’t help their case. Absalom only sees evil, and women who have forgotten their place as servants of God. He is a witch finder, and has been responsible for the prosecution and death of women at home in Scotland. Unsurprisingly, he’s not a very nice character, and I liked NOT liking him, although I couldn’t help but feel sorry for Ursa. She is shy and inexperienced in the ways of the world. She has been shut away, caring for her sick younger sister. She knows nothing of what is expected of her as a wife - in every sphere. She doesn’t know how to keep a house at all. This is where Maren steps in as an advisor. They become good friends, and there is the beginnings of something more than just a simple friendship. I loved the interactions between these two women. Maren, strongly independent, competent and lonely, and Ursa, inexperienced, unhappy and lonely. In other circumstances, theirs could have been a good friendship - but unlikely because of social status, I should think.
The writing in this is gorgeous. The descriptions of the landscape and the sea made me feel as though I was standing there with them (warmer though!), and I loved getting to know the women, even the ultra-religious women who were only too keen to give up their fellow towns-women as witches. This part doesn’t happen for quite a while, so we’re given the chance to become emotionally invested in these characters. So when we read of their treatment at the hands of Absalom and his fellow witch hunters, it makes it all the more appalling. If it wasn’t bad enough already.
I love historical fiction, and I really liked how this was written in such a way that these didn’t really seem to be women separated from us by 400 years. They were normal women, working hard to survive and make lives for the,selves. Which made it all the more sad. There’s no way I could detach myself and NOT read this with a modern woman’s eye. These women were punished for something that we take for granted: independence.
Despite the terrible things that happen, it’s a beautifully written, very enjoyable book that I would easily recommend to anyone, even though it’s just like I would imagine the landscape around Finnmark is: bleak, yet beautiful.
Many thanks to NetGalley and the publisher for my copy of this book to read and review.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Greatest Showman (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
This IS the Greatest Show!
I sometimes wonder how “proper” UK film critics view films early for review. Is there a ‘special screening’ which all the film critics attend in London? The point I’m getting at is whether the collective critical opinion of a movie can be swayed by a critic leaping to their feet and wildly applauding a film like “Star Wars: The Last Jedi” or, alternatively, snorting in derision at a film like “The Greatest Showman”. For sometimes the critics seem to get it massively wrong across the board, panning a film that the general public will adore. Unfortunately, this has the effect of putting the general public off seeing it, especially in the lethargic post-Christmas period. I think here is a case in point. It’s not the best little film in the world, but as a musical crowd-pleaser it delivers in spades.
Will you like “The Greatest Showman”? This will be dictated almost entirely by whether you are a “musicals” person or not! For “The Greatest Showman” is a frothy, very loud, cheesy and high-energy musical, much more aligned, in fact, to the mainstream genre from the 40’s and 50’s than “La La Land” was.
Roll up, roll up. The circus cast entertain.
In a VERY loose interpretation of the early life of Phineas Taylor Barnum, the American huckster and impressario, we start the story with a pre-pubescent Barnum (Ellis Rubin, sung by Ziv Zaifman) as a young tailor’s assistant punching above his weight with young socialite Charity (Skylar Dunn), firmly against the wishes of her father. Spin forward (via song) and the hitched Barnum’s – now Hugh Jackman (“Logan“) and Michelle Williams (“Manchester By The Sea“) – are barely scraping a living. But Barnum has “A Million Dreams” and hits on the novel idea of opening an entertainment (coined “a circus” by journalist James Gordon Bennett (Paul Sparks)) where he offers both respect and a family to those of the city who are deformed, rejected and socially shunned. Barnum’s show is shockingly entertaining – as in both filling seats and shocking the morally-self-righteous upper classes. But never one to rest on his laurels, Barnum’s endless ambition drives him to break his social ceiling by importing the “Swedish songbird”, opera singer Jenny Lind (Rebecca Ferguson, “Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation“, “The Snowman“) ), for an ambitious and extravegant tour of the States. All does not exactly go to plan.
Washing day tunes. Hugh Jackman and Michelle Williams take to the rooftops.
As I’ve said, most critics have been making sniffy noises about this film. But I am not one of them…. I LOVED IT, have already bought the glorious soundtrack album and will be looking forwards to the DVD release. For this is joy in a box. Sure, the story is a bit weak, the characterisations of everyone (other than Barnum) pretty lightweight, but it’s a musical extravaganza! Live with it!
Hugh Jackman, who of course started his career in stage musicals, is marvellously charismatic as Barnum although his singing does tend to the “shouty” end of the scale in many of the numbers. He’s joined here by fellow musicals star Zac Efron (let’s forget “Dirty Grandpa“) as the fictitious Phillip Carlyle: a socialite playwright and partner.
But the acting and singing revelation for me was Zendaya (“Spider-Man: Homecoming“) as Efron’s (scandalous) inter-racial love interest, who has a fantastically athletic body, sings and dances wonderfully and has a magnetic stare. A marvellous trapeze routine between Efron and Zendaya (“Rewrite The Stars”) is one of the high-spots of the film for me.
An energetic dance. Zendaya and Efron take to the skies.
Elsewhere Williams proves she has a singing voice as well as being a top flight actress and the bearded lady (Broadway star Keala Settle) belts out one of the show-stopping numbers “This is Me” (although she is a little ‘shrill’ for my musical tastes).
It would be nice to extend that compliment to the wonderful Rebecca Ferguson as the “greatest singer in the world” – but she is (wisely I think) dubbed here by Loren Allred (a finalist on the US version of “The Voice”). It is a bit of a shock when “the great opera singer” opens her mouth and a modern love song comes out, but once you get over that then the combination of Ferguson’s acting and Allred’s singing makes “Never Enough” one of the standout songs in the movie. (It’s been described as “a bit Eurovision” by Kevin Maher, “The Times” critic, which I can see but I don’t care! I find it marvellously moving).
A dangerous songbird’s nest for the married Barnum. Rebecca Ferguson and Hugh Jackman.
If you haven’t guessed it, there are some fantastic songs in this movie, written by “La La Land” song composers Benj Pasek and Justin Paul and at least one of these surely must be Oscar nominated (I’m not sure what the cut-off would be for the 2018 Oscars?).
There’s also a lot of talent in the backroom with production design and memorable costumes. Where I’d single out particular praise though is in the choreography and the editing on show.
Firstly, the choreography of “beats” in the song to the action on screen is brilliantly done, done, probably at its most impressive in a shot-glass bar-room scene between Jackman and Efron. And never (hats off to the special effects guys and cinematographer Seamus McGarvey) have you seen washing on a washing line so cleverly in time with the music.
Secondly in terms of the film editing, I am a sucker for clever “transition” shots, and there are some in this movie that just took my breath away: a transition to a pregnant Charity; a transition from ballet practice to ballet performance; there are numerous others!
Inverted magnetism. Zendaya as the trapeze artist Anne Wheeler.
I have decided to park some of my minor criticisms within the greater joy of the whole: some of the dialogue (by Jenny Bicks and Bill Condon) is as cheesy as hell, but probably no more so than in some of the Judy Garland/Mickey Rooney musicals. Where I had my biggest problem is in some of the lip synching to the songs. This is an age where the live recording of songs in films like “Les Miserables” and “La La Land” has set the bar high, and returning to the norm (I had the same problem with “Beauty and the Beast“) becomes noticeable and irritating to me. (Perhaps this is just me!).
It’s certainly not a perfect film, but its energy and drive carry it through as a memorable movie musical that may well take on a life of its own as word-of-mouth gets it more widely viewed (outside of the rather difficult Christmas holiday season). It would also be a good film for youngsters, with a bit of judicious editing (there is one moment of violence in the first 10 minutes that I would choose to edit out). From my perspective it is certainly a truly impressive debut for advert director Michael Gracey. Recommended for musical fans.
Will you like “The Greatest Showman”? This will be dictated almost entirely by whether you are a “musicals” person or not! For “The Greatest Showman” is a frothy, very loud, cheesy and high-energy musical, much more aligned, in fact, to the mainstream genre from the 40’s and 50’s than “La La Land” was.
Roll up, roll up. The circus cast entertain.
In a VERY loose interpretation of the early life of Phineas Taylor Barnum, the American huckster and impressario, we start the story with a pre-pubescent Barnum (Ellis Rubin, sung by Ziv Zaifman) as a young tailor’s assistant punching above his weight with young socialite Charity (Skylar Dunn), firmly against the wishes of her father. Spin forward (via song) and the hitched Barnum’s – now Hugh Jackman (“Logan“) and Michelle Williams (“Manchester By The Sea“) – are barely scraping a living. But Barnum has “A Million Dreams” and hits on the novel idea of opening an entertainment (coined “a circus” by journalist James Gordon Bennett (Paul Sparks)) where he offers both respect and a family to those of the city who are deformed, rejected and socially shunned. Barnum’s show is shockingly entertaining – as in both filling seats and shocking the morally-self-righteous upper classes. But never one to rest on his laurels, Barnum’s endless ambition drives him to break his social ceiling by importing the “Swedish songbird”, opera singer Jenny Lind (Rebecca Ferguson, “Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation“, “The Snowman“) ), for an ambitious and extravegant tour of the States. All does not exactly go to plan.
Washing day tunes. Hugh Jackman and Michelle Williams take to the rooftops.
As I’ve said, most critics have been making sniffy noises about this film. But I am not one of them…. I LOVED IT, have already bought the glorious soundtrack album and will be looking forwards to the DVD release. For this is joy in a box. Sure, the story is a bit weak, the characterisations of everyone (other than Barnum) pretty lightweight, but it’s a musical extravaganza! Live with it!
Hugh Jackman, who of course started his career in stage musicals, is marvellously charismatic as Barnum although his singing does tend to the “shouty” end of the scale in many of the numbers. He’s joined here by fellow musicals star Zac Efron (let’s forget “Dirty Grandpa“) as the fictitious Phillip Carlyle: a socialite playwright and partner.
But the acting and singing revelation for me was Zendaya (“Spider-Man: Homecoming“) as Efron’s (scandalous) inter-racial love interest, who has a fantastically athletic body, sings and dances wonderfully and has a magnetic stare. A marvellous trapeze routine between Efron and Zendaya (“Rewrite The Stars”) is one of the high-spots of the film for me.
An energetic dance. Zendaya and Efron take to the skies.
Elsewhere Williams proves she has a singing voice as well as being a top flight actress and the bearded lady (Broadway star Keala Settle) belts out one of the show-stopping numbers “This is Me” (although she is a little ‘shrill’ for my musical tastes).
It would be nice to extend that compliment to the wonderful Rebecca Ferguson as the “greatest singer in the world” – but she is (wisely I think) dubbed here by Loren Allred (a finalist on the US version of “The Voice”). It is a bit of a shock when “the great opera singer” opens her mouth and a modern love song comes out, but once you get over that then the combination of Ferguson’s acting and Allred’s singing makes “Never Enough” one of the standout songs in the movie. (It’s been described as “a bit Eurovision” by Kevin Maher, “The Times” critic, which I can see but I don’t care! I find it marvellously moving).
A dangerous songbird’s nest for the married Barnum. Rebecca Ferguson and Hugh Jackman.
If you haven’t guessed it, there are some fantastic songs in this movie, written by “La La Land” song composers Benj Pasek and Justin Paul and at least one of these surely must be Oscar nominated (I’m not sure what the cut-off would be for the 2018 Oscars?).
There’s also a lot of talent in the backroom with production design and memorable costumes. Where I’d single out particular praise though is in the choreography and the editing on show.
Firstly, the choreography of “beats” in the song to the action on screen is brilliantly done, done, probably at its most impressive in a shot-glass bar-room scene between Jackman and Efron. And never (hats off to the special effects guys and cinematographer Seamus McGarvey) have you seen washing on a washing line so cleverly in time with the music.
Secondly in terms of the film editing, I am a sucker for clever “transition” shots, and there are some in this movie that just took my breath away: a transition to a pregnant Charity; a transition from ballet practice to ballet performance; there are numerous others!
Inverted magnetism. Zendaya as the trapeze artist Anne Wheeler.
I have decided to park some of my minor criticisms within the greater joy of the whole: some of the dialogue (by Jenny Bicks and Bill Condon) is as cheesy as hell, but probably no more so than in some of the Judy Garland/Mickey Rooney musicals. Where I had my biggest problem is in some of the lip synching to the songs. This is an age where the live recording of songs in films like “Les Miserables” and “La La Land” has set the bar high, and returning to the norm (I had the same problem with “Beauty and the Beast“) becomes noticeable and irritating to me. (Perhaps this is just me!).
It’s certainly not a perfect film, but its energy and drive carry it through as a memorable movie musical that may well take on a life of its own as word-of-mouth gets it more widely viewed (outside of the rather difficult Christmas holiday season). It would also be a good film for youngsters, with a bit of judicious editing (there is one moment of violence in the first 10 minutes that I would choose to edit out). From my perspective it is certainly a truly impressive debut for advert director Michael Gracey. Recommended for musical fans.
