Search
Search results
Dark Age (Red Rising Saga #5)
8.0
Rate It
Book
For a decade Darrow led a revolution against the corrupt color-coded Society. Now, outlawed by the...
Too Many Reasons to Live
Book
Rob Burrow is one of the greatest rugby league players of all time. And the most inspirational. As a...
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated A Quiet Place (2018) in Movies
Apr 20, 2018
Terrifying
Cool with being terrified for ninety nonstop minutes? I have just the film for you. In A Quiet Place, a family of four tries to silently survive a terror that stalks by sound.
Acting: 10
The number of words said in this film probably equal the number of words it took me to write this review. The cast relies heavily on body language and facial expressions to convey their emotions and it's extremely effective. You feel their fear, their love for one another, their hatred. No way this emanates without an amazing cast.
Emily Blunt. Emily Blunt. Emily Blunt. Absolutely...freaking...phenomenal. It's hard for me to put into words how outstanding of a role she played in making this film work. She's powerful yet vulnerable in her role as mother Evelyn. Again, so challenging to do when your words are limited. Seeing her kill it made me excited to rewatch Edge of Tomorrow.
Beginning: 10
One does not simply get eased into watching A Quiet Place. It's a film that comes out of the gates swinging with one of the best intros I've seen since Baby Driver. Tensions run high as you're just waiting for something awful to happen. It's the perfect setup for a film that holds on to you and never lets go.
Characters: 10
While Blunt's Evelyn blew me away, I felt I related most to John Krasinski's character Lee, the father of the family. He is trying to keep everyone safe by having them abide by the rules that have kept them alive for so long. At the same time you can tell it frustrates him to have to shelter his kids from being kids and living their lives normally. He loves his family and is solely focused on the duty of keeping them safe and together.
Each character is layered with their own personal demons that have affected them in some form or fashion. The kids are intelligent as you would expect from children that have had to grow up in such an insane world. At the same time their sporadic and unpredictable feelings remind you that they are still just children.
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
Conflict: 10
Genre: 10
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
A nonstop thrill ride. Sure you will get a couple breathers, but there is ALWAYS tension. Whether it's silence or looming threats around the corner, A Quiet Place never gives you a chance to get comfortable. I heard all of this going into the film and I still wasn't prepared for such intensity. Get ready...
Plot: 6
My one gripe. There is definitely a slight plot hole here that caused me to dock points. I won't ruin things, but if you look closely enough it's pretty obvious. I will also say that this one plot hole does little to nothing to ruin the overall experience of the film.
Resolution: 8
Strong ending that nicely ties everything together. It's a resolution that doesn't linger or wear out its welcome. It reminds me of Edge of Tomorrow in that it's just enough.
Overall: 93
If you're looking for a a memorable film to watch, A Quiet Place is a wonderful solution. Very original spin on a genre that can be repetitive at times. This one will stand out in my head for years to come.
Acting: 10
The number of words said in this film probably equal the number of words it took me to write this review. The cast relies heavily on body language and facial expressions to convey their emotions and it's extremely effective. You feel their fear, their love for one another, their hatred. No way this emanates without an amazing cast.
Emily Blunt. Emily Blunt. Emily Blunt. Absolutely...freaking...phenomenal. It's hard for me to put into words how outstanding of a role she played in making this film work. She's powerful yet vulnerable in her role as mother Evelyn. Again, so challenging to do when your words are limited. Seeing her kill it made me excited to rewatch Edge of Tomorrow.
Beginning: 10
One does not simply get eased into watching A Quiet Place. It's a film that comes out of the gates swinging with one of the best intros I've seen since Baby Driver. Tensions run high as you're just waiting for something awful to happen. It's the perfect setup for a film that holds on to you and never lets go.
Characters: 10
While Blunt's Evelyn blew me away, I felt I related most to John Krasinski's character Lee, the father of the family. He is trying to keep everyone safe by having them abide by the rules that have kept them alive for so long. At the same time you can tell it frustrates him to have to shelter his kids from being kids and living their lives normally. He loves his family and is solely focused on the duty of keeping them safe and together.
Each character is layered with their own personal demons that have affected them in some form or fashion. The kids are intelligent as you would expect from children that have had to grow up in such an insane world. At the same time their sporadic and unpredictable feelings remind you that they are still just children.
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
Conflict: 10
Genre: 10
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
A nonstop thrill ride. Sure you will get a couple breathers, but there is ALWAYS tension. Whether it's silence or looming threats around the corner, A Quiet Place never gives you a chance to get comfortable. I heard all of this going into the film and I still wasn't prepared for such intensity. Get ready...
Plot: 6
My one gripe. There is definitely a slight plot hole here that caused me to dock points. I won't ruin things, but if you look closely enough it's pretty obvious. I will also say that this one plot hole does little to nothing to ruin the overall experience of the film.
Resolution: 8
Strong ending that nicely ties everything together. It's a resolution that doesn't linger or wear out its welcome. It reminds me of Edge of Tomorrow in that it's just enough.
Overall: 93
If you're looking for a a memorable film to watch, A Quiet Place is a wonderful solution. Very original spin on a genre that can be repetitive at times. This one will stand out in my head for years to come.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Wild Rose (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Three Chords and the Truth.
BAFTA named Jessie Buckley as one of their “Rising Stars” for 2019, and here she proves why.
Buckley plays Glaswegian Rose-Lynn Harlan, a decidedly wild child electronically tagged and released from the clink but straight down to some very public cowgirl sex with her erstwhile boyfriend. Only then does she have the afterthought of going round to the house of her Mum (Julie Walters) where two young children live. For Rose-Lynn is a single mum of two (#needs-to-be-more-careful-with-the-cowgirl-stuff), and the emotional damage metered out to the youngsters from her wayward life is fully evident.
Rose-Lynn is a frustrated ‘country-and-weste’… no, sorry… just ‘western’ singer, and she has a talent for bringing the house down in Glasgow during a show. The desire to ‘make it big’ in Nashville is bordering on obsession, and nothing – not her mum, not her children, nothing – will get in her way.
Rose-Lynn has no idea how to make her dream come true. (And no, she doesn’t bump into Bradley Cooper at this point). But things look up when she lies her way to a cleaning job for the middle class Susannah (Sophie Okonedo) who sees the talent in her and comes up with a couple of innovative ways to move her in the right direction.
Will she get out of her Glasgow poverty trap and rise to fame and fortune as a Nashville star?
Difficult to like.
Rose-Lynn is not an easy character to like. She is borderline sociopathic and has a self-centred selfish streak a mile wide. As she tramples all over her offspring’s young lives, breaking each and every promise like clockwork, then you just want to shout at her and give her a good shaking. It’s a difficult line for the film to walk (did the ghost of Johnny Cash make me write that?) and it only barely walks it unscathed.
Memories of Birdman.
A key shout-out needs to go to director Tom Harper (“Woman in Black 2“, and the TV epic “War and Peace”) and his cinematographer of choice George Steel. Some of the angles and framed shots are exquisitely done. A fantastic dance sequence through Susannah’s house (the best since Hugh Grant‘s No. 10 “Jump” in “Love Actually”) reveals the associated imaginary musicians in various alcoves reminiscent of the drummer in “Birdman“. And there are a couple of great drone shots: one (no spoilers) showing Rose-Lynn leaving a party is particularly effective.
The turns.
The camera simply loves Jessie Buckley. She delivers real energy in the good times and real pathos in the bad. She can – assuming it’s her performing – also sing! (No surprise since she was, you might remember, runner up to Jodie Prenger in the BBC search for a “Maria” for Lloyd Webber’s “Sound of Music”). She is certainly one to watch on the acting stage.
Supporting Buckley in prime roles are national treasure Julie Walters, effecting an impressive Glaswegian accent, and Sophie Okonedo, who is one of those well-known faces from TV that you can never quite place. BBC Radio 2’s Bob Harris also turns up as himself, being marvellously unconvincing as an actor!
But I don’t like country music?
Frankly neither do I. But it hardly matters. As long as you don’t ABSOLUTELY LOATHE it, I predict you’ll tolerate the tunes and enjoy the movie. Followers of this blog might remember that – against the general trend – I was highly unimpressed with “A Star is Born“. This movie I enjoyed far, far more.
Buckley plays Glaswegian Rose-Lynn Harlan, a decidedly wild child electronically tagged and released from the clink but straight down to some very public cowgirl sex with her erstwhile boyfriend. Only then does she have the afterthought of going round to the house of her Mum (Julie Walters) where two young children live. For Rose-Lynn is a single mum of two (#needs-to-be-more-careful-with-the-cowgirl-stuff), and the emotional damage metered out to the youngsters from her wayward life is fully evident.
Rose-Lynn is a frustrated ‘country-and-weste’… no, sorry… just ‘western’ singer, and she has a talent for bringing the house down in Glasgow during a show. The desire to ‘make it big’ in Nashville is bordering on obsession, and nothing – not her mum, not her children, nothing – will get in her way.
Rose-Lynn has no idea how to make her dream come true. (And no, she doesn’t bump into Bradley Cooper at this point). But things look up when she lies her way to a cleaning job for the middle class Susannah (Sophie Okonedo) who sees the talent in her and comes up with a couple of innovative ways to move her in the right direction.
Will she get out of her Glasgow poverty trap and rise to fame and fortune as a Nashville star?
Difficult to like.
Rose-Lynn is not an easy character to like. She is borderline sociopathic and has a self-centred selfish streak a mile wide. As she tramples all over her offspring’s young lives, breaking each and every promise like clockwork, then you just want to shout at her and give her a good shaking. It’s a difficult line for the film to walk (did the ghost of Johnny Cash make me write that?) and it only barely walks it unscathed.
Memories of Birdman.
A key shout-out needs to go to director Tom Harper (“Woman in Black 2“, and the TV epic “War and Peace”) and his cinematographer of choice George Steel. Some of the angles and framed shots are exquisitely done. A fantastic dance sequence through Susannah’s house (the best since Hugh Grant‘s No. 10 “Jump” in “Love Actually”) reveals the associated imaginary musicians in various alcoves reminiscent of the drummer in “Birdman“. And there are a couple of great drone shots: one (no spoilers) showing Rose-Lynn leaving a party is particularly effective.
The turns.
The camera simply loves Jessie Buckley. She delivers real energy in the good times and real pathos in the bad. She can – assuming it’s her performing – also sing! (No surprise since she was, you might remember, runner up to Jodie Prenger in the BBC search for a “Maria” for Lloyd Webber’s “Sound of Music”). She is certainly one to watch on the acting stage.
Supporting Buckley in prime roles are national treasure Julie Walters, effecting an impressive Glaswegian accent, and Sophie Okonedo, who is one of those well-known faces from TV that you can never quite place. BBC Radio 2’s Bob Harris also turns up as himself, being marvellously unconvincing as an actor!
But I don’t like country music?
Frankly neither do I. But it hardly matters. As long as you don’t ABSOLUTELY LOATHE it, I predict you’ll tolerate the tunes and enjoy the movie. Followers of this blog might remember that – against the general trend – I was highly unimpressed with “A Star is Born“. This movie I enjoyed far, far more.
POOW The Food Hero
Health & Fitness and Medical
App
POOW The Food Hero is a tool for parents / healthcare to help and use to support and motivate...
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Nineteen Minutes in Books
May 25, 2017
Fantastic Author
Your son says the bullying was unbearable. But his revenge was murder. What would you do?
Nineteen Minutes is perhaps Jodi Picoult’s most controversial novel, as well as one of the longest. Lots of things can happen in nineteen minutes including a school shooting resulting in the deaths of ten people. This is what happens at the beginning of this book, leaving hundreds of teachers and students emotionally scarred for the remainder of their lives. Picoult explores the reactions of a community who’s ideas of safety have been shattered, the grief of the victims and their families and, perhaps most importantly, the heartache of the parents of the shooter.
Seventeen-year-old Peter Houghton has had enough of the bullying that he has endured throughout his entire school life. He has no friends, is constantly miserable, possibly suicidal, and so, on a typical morning in March 2007 he decides permanently fix the situation, unthinking of the consequences. But why did he go to such extremes? What circumstances in his life led to firing a gun as the only solution?
As the evidence is gathered in the lead up to the court trial, many key characters question their own involvement in Peter’s life. Firstly there is Josie Cormier, a straight-A student who swapped her childhood friendship with Peter for popularity and her boyfriend Matt, a particularly aggressive bully. Secondly there is Alex Cormier, Josie’s mother, who destroyed her friendship with Peter’s mother after finding their five-year-old children playing with guns in the Houghton’s basement.
If Peter’s father had never owned a selection of hunting rifles, would Peter ever have thought of guns as a way out of his predicament? On the other hand, Lacy Houghton blames herself for not noticing how badly her son was suffering, not just at school, but at home as well, where he had to live up to the memory of his saint-like older brother who died in a car crash the previous year.
Naturally a tragic event such as this changes people, however not always in a negative way. Relationships begin to blossom as characters realize how close they were to losing the ones they love. Alex takes a step back from her demanding job to comfort Josie in the aftermath, thus feeling closer to her than she ever has done before. Alex, a single mother, also opens herself up to a romantic relationship, something she has had no time to seriously consider up until now.
All the while, Defense Attorney Jordan McAfee, who some readers may remember from Salem Falls, fights a losing battle to get Peter acquitted, by arguing and prying into Peter’s emotions to discover his reason for committing murder.
What I like about Picoult’s novels is that there is a lot more to it than a simple storyline. While the story plays out and plot twists happen, the reader is learning something new. In Nineteen Minutes Picoult provides insight into midwifery, psychology and economics – things that are not synonymous with the shootings.
Readers will constantly question whose side of the story they are on. Hundreds of people grow up being bullied and will understand how Peter was feeling; yet they would not pick up a gun. Likewise, by putting themselves in the shoes of the victims readers will think about how they would feel in the same situation. However would anyone be willing to admit that they made someone else’s life a living hell? There is no simple conclusion to Nineteen Minutes; someone will always lose. Nevertheless, Picoult’s fantastic writing skills provide an enthralling story of love and loss.
I cannot recommend this book to readers in general due to the nature of the themes found in the story. Gun crime and school shootings are sadly still an occurrence in the present time, particularly in America, therefore there are thousands of people who have been affected by such an event, whether directly or indirectly as part of a local community. Some readers may find Nineteen Minutes challenging and upsetting, which is why I am not going to encourage everyone to read this book. However, Picoult has excelled herself with this novel and it would be a shame for people not to read it. Fans will not be disappointed with her writing and will love all her characters, possibly even Peter!
Nineteen Minutes is perhaps Jodi Picoult’s most controversial novel, as well as one of the longest. Lots of things can happen in nineteen minutes including a school shooting resulting in the deaths of ten people. This is what happens at the beginning of this book, leaving hundreds of teachers and students emotionally scarred for the remainder of their lives. Picoult explores the reactions of a community who’s ideas of safety have been shattered, the grief of the victims and their families and, perhaps most importantly, the heartache of the parents of the shooter.
Seventeen-year-old Peter Houghton has had enough of the bullying that he has endured throughout his entire school life. He has no friends, is constantly miserable, possibly suicidal, and so, on a typical morning in March 2007 he decides permanently fix the situation, unthinking of the consequences. But why did he go to such extremes? What circumstances in his life led to firing a gun as the only solution?
As the evidence is gathered in the lead up to the court trial, many key characters question their own involvement in Peter’s life. Firstly there is Josie Cormier, a straight-A student who swapped her childhood friendship with Peter for popularity and her boyfriend Matt, a particularly aggressive bully. Secondly there is Alex Cormier, Josie’s mother, who destroyed her friendship with Peter’s mother after finding their five-year-old children playing with guns in the Houghton’s basement.
If Peter’s father had never owned a selection of hunting rifles, would Peter ever have thought of guns as a way out of his predicament? On the other hand, Lacy Houghton blames herself for not noticing how badly her son was suffering, not just at school, but at home as well, where he had to live up to the memory of his saint-like older brother who died in a car crash the previous year.
Naturally a tragic event such as this changes people, however not always in a negative way. Relationships begin to blossom as characters realize how close they were to losing the ones they love. Alex takes a step back from her demanding job to comfort Josie in the aftermath, thus feeling closer to her than she ever has done before. Alex, a single mother, also opens herself up to a romantic relationship, something she has had no time to seriously consider up until now.
All the while, Defense Attorney Jordan McAfee, who some readers may remember from Salem Falls, fights a losing battle to get Peter acquitted, by arguing and prying into Peter’s emotions to discover his reason for committing murder.
What I like about Picoult’s novels is that there is a lot more to it than a simple storyline. While the story plays out and plot twists happen, the reader is learning something new. In Nineteen Minutes Picoult provides insight into midwifery, psychology and economics – things that are not synonymous with the shootings.
Readers will constantly question whose side of the story they are on. Hundreds of people grow up being bullied and will understand how Peter was feeling; yet they would not pick up a gun. Likewise, by putting themselves in the shoes of the victims readers will think about how they would feel in the same situation. However would anyone be willing to admit that they made someone else’s life a living hell? There is no simple conclusion to Nineteen Minutes; someone will always lose. Nevertheless, Picoult’s fantastic writing skills provide an enthralling story of love and loss.
I cannot recommend this book to readers in general due to the nature of the themes found in the story. Gun crime and school shootings are sadly still an occurrence in the present time, particularly in America, therefore there are thousands of people who have been affected by such an event, whether directly or indirectly as part of a local community. Some readers may find Nineteen Minutes challenging and upsetting, which is why I am not going to encourage everyone to read this book. However, Picoult has excelled herself with this novel and it would be a shame for people not to read it. Fans will not be disappointed with her writing and will love all her characters, possibly even Peter!
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Network (1976) in Movies
Feb 9, 2018
All time classic
"I'M MAD AS HELL, AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!"
One of the most famous lines in film history is as impactful today as it was when it was first uttered by fictitious news anchor Howard Beale in Paddy Chayefsky's (seemingly) parody of where TV and TV news is heading, 1976's NETWORK.
The astonishing thing about this terrific motion picture is how prescient it is. News is now entertainment. Appeal to the disaffected masses. Drive our message to the viewers. Be provocative. The 6:00 news had "less than 1 minute of hard news, the rest was sex, scandal, brutal crime sports, children with incurable diseases and lost puppies."
Sound familiar? This isn't from today, it came from this movie that was made 42 years ago as a cautionary tale of what might happen.
Besides the social ramifications, how does this film hold up? Quite well, indeed. A rare 10 star BankofMarquis film. Starting with the great Paddy Chayefsky's Oscar winning Screenplay. This was the capper on a brilliant career from Chayefsky - who also won Oscar's for his screenplay for 1972's THE HOSPITAL (I'll have to check that one out) and 1956's MARTY.
What does a terrific screenplay do? It attracts top-level talent clamoring to be in this - and they all deliver. Start with Faye Dunaway who won the Lead Actress Oscar for her role as Entertainment Head Diane Christensen - a driven, work hard, play hard individual who has the idea to make news "entertainment". Lost in the fog of time (and MOMMIE DEAREST) is the fact that in the mid-1970's, Dunaway was, perhaps, the greatest leading actress of the day and her skills are in sharp display in this film.
Joining Dunaway in terrific supporting turns are Robert Duvall, following his turns as Tom Hagen in GODFATHER I and II, as network head, Frank Hackett, Ned Beatty as Ned Jennings, President of the company that owns the network - he has a speech towards the tail end of this film that is as good - both in performance and in the way that it is shot - as anything put upon the screen - it was masterful. Speaking of masterful, Beatrice Straight won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress in one of the shortest performances to ever win. She is in this film for about 6 minutes in total - but she won her Oscar for a 5 minute scene that is, most definately Oscar-worthy.
And then there are the leading men. William Holden gives one of the last great performances of his extraordinary career as the "voice of reason in this film". He is our everyman caught up in the bizarre, absurd circumstances that evolve around him. It is his effort to try to make sense of this insanity that jumps off the screen. Holden was, deservedly, nominated for a Best Actor in a Leading Role Oscar, but lost (rightfully so) to Peter Finch's turn as crazed newsman turned prophet, Howard Beale. His maniacal (but not over the top) turn is one for the ages. If you do nothing else, see this film for his performance (but there is so, so much more to love here). Unfortunately, Finch passed away from a heart attack in between his Oscar nomination and win, and was the first posthumous winner in an acting role (sadly, Heath Ledger would join this "club" years later).
Finally, enough cannot be said about Sidney Lumet's direction. A movie like this would not succeed without a sure, steady and seasoned hand at the helm - and this is how I would describe Lumet's direction. He lets the camera roll and lets the actors and the screenplay take center stage, not drawing attention away, but adding to the themes of the film throughout - especially in Beatty's speech at the end.
NETWORK was nominated for (but did not win) the Oscar for Best Film of 1976. Did it lose out to other nominees ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN or TAXI DRIVER? Nope, it lost to ROCKY.
Let that sink in.
If you get a chance to watch (or rewatch) this film, I highly recommend you do so. For me, it was GREAT to watch this on the big screen with an audience, one of the reasons I love - and will continue to attend - the SECRET CINEMA series of films.
Letter Grade: A+
10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
One of the most famous lines in film history is as impactful today as it was when it was first uttered by fictitious news anchor Howard Beale in Paddy Chayefsky's (seemingly) parody of where TV and TV news is heading, 1976's NETWORK.
The astonishing thing about this terrific motion picture is how prescient it is. News is now entertainment. Appeal to the disaffected masses. Drive our message to the viewers. Be provocative. The 6:00 news had "less than 1 minute of hard news, the rest was sex, scandal, brutal crime sports, children with incurable diseases and lost puppies."
Sound familiar? This isn't from today, it came from this movie that was made 42 years ago as a cautionary tale of what might happen.
Besides the social ramifications, how does this film hold up? Quite well, indeed. A rare 10 star BankofMarquis film. Starting with the great Paddy Chayefsky's Oscar winning Screenplay. This was the capper on a brilliant career from Chayefsky - who also won Oscar's for his screenplay for 1972's THE HOSPITAL (I'll have to check that one out) and 1956's MARTY.
What does a terrific screenplay do? It attracts top-level talent clamoring to be in this - and they all deliver. Start with Faye Dunaway who won the Lead Actress Oscar for her role as Entertainment Head Diane Christensen - a driven, work hard, play hard individual who has the idea to make news "entertainment". Lost in the fog of time (and MOMMIE DEAREST) is the fact that in the mid-1970's, Dunaway was, perhaps, the greatest leading actress of the day and her skills are in sharp display in this film.
Joining Dunaway in terrific supporting turns are Robert Duvall, following his turns as Tom Hagen in GODFATHER I and II, as network head, Frank Hackett, Ned Beatty as Ned Jennings, President of the company that owns the network - he has a speech towards the tail end of this film that is as good - both in performance and in the way that it is shot - as anything put upon the screen - it was masterful. Speaking of masterful, Beatrice Straight won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress in one of the shortest performances to ever win. She is in this film for about 6 minutes in total - but she won her Oscar for a 5 minute scene that is, most definately Oscar-worthy.
And then there are the leading men. William Holden gives one of the last great performances of his extraordinary career as the "voice of reason in this film". He is our everyman caught up in the bizarre, absurd circumstances that evolve around him. It is his effort to try to make sense of this insanity that jumps off the screen. Holden was, deservedly, nominated for a Best Actor in a Leading Role Oscar, but lost (rightfully so) to Peter Finch's turn as crazed newsman turned prophet, Howard Beale. His maniacal (but not over the top) turn is one for the ages. If you do nothing else, see this film for his performance (but there is so, so much more to love here). Unfortunately, Finch passed away from a heart attack in between his Oscar nomination and win, and was the first posthumous winner in an acting role (sadly, Heath Ledger would join this "club" years later).
Finally, enough cannot be said about Sidney Lumet's direction. A movie like this would not succeed without a sure, steady and seasoned hand at the helm - and this is how I would describe Lumet's direction. He lets the camera roll and lets the actors and the screenplay take center stage, not drawing attention away, but adding to the themes of the film throughout - especially in Beatty's speech at the end.
NETWORK was nominated for (but did not win) the Oscar for Best Film of 1976. Did it lose out to other nominees ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN or TAXI DRIVER? Nope, it lost to ROCKY.
Let that sink in.
If you get a chance to watch (or rewatch) this film, I highly recommend you do so. For me, it was GREAT to watch this on the big screen with an audience, one of the reasons I love - and will continue to attend - the SECRET CINEMA series of films.
Letter Grade: A+
10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
Lee (2222 KP) rated Bird Box (2018) in Movies
Dec 26, 2018
It's easy to draw comparisons between Bird Box and one of this years biggest hits, A Quiet Place. As Malorie (Sandra Bullock), guides two young children towards a boat, all three of them blindfolded and terrified of the consequences should they remove them, the similarities with the post apocalyptic themes of A Quiet Place are clear. In that movie, you couldn't make a sound for fear of drawing the attentions of the ominous killers, while in this one you're unable to use your eyes to look at the world around you.
But Bird Box does what AQP didn't, by going back in time 5 years to see how the apocalypse all came about. A pregnant Malorie is visiting the hospital for a scan, along with sister Jessica (Sarah Paulson), while news reports detail events unfolding throughout the world. Something is causing thousands of people to suddenly commit suicide, and it has found its way to American shores. As Malorie and Jessica leave the hospital, everything around them descends into panic, chaos and destruction. Cars crash, people throw themselves in front of oncoming cars and thousands of others are running to escape from who knows what. As her sister meets an untimely death, the heavily pregnant Malorie is helped into a nearby house where a large number of people have already found refuge.
We manage to catch our breath for a short while, while the survivors piece together what has happened, offering their theories. As one of them explains - "Humanity has been judged and we've been found wanting. They go by different names. You got world religion and mythology that's full of mentions of demons or spirit creatures. People who’ve seen these creatures almost always describe their encounter as with an entity who takes on the form of your worst fears, your deepest sadness or your greatest loss. It’s not bullshit. It’s real talk, it’s facts."
Life continues in the house for a while, with all the windows covered to prevent anyone from seeing something that might lead to their death. There's a tense trip to the supermarket for supplies, driving a car with blacked out windows and only a satnav to guide them, along with various dramas between the group. Every so often, we rejoin the future timeline, as Malorie and the children (referred to only as boy and girl) make their way along the river.
Bird Box is more of a slow burn than A Quiet Place, and we never actually see what is responsible for causing the suicides either, but I still found much to enjoy with it. And as we become fully immersed in the present timeline, following the blindfolded journey, things build to a tense and satisfying climax.
But Bird Box does what AQP didn't, by going back in time 5 years to see how the apocalypse all came about. A pregnant Malorie is visiting the hospital for a scan, along with sister Jessica (Sarah Paulson), while news reports detail events unfolding throughout the world. Something is causing thousands of people to suddenly commit suicide, and it has found its way to American shores. As Malorie and Jessica leave the hospital, everything around them descends into panic, chaos and destruction. Cars crash, people throw themselves in front of oncoming cars and thousands of others are running to escape from who knows what. As her sister meets an untimely death, the heavily pregnant Malorie is helped into a nearby house where a large number of people have already found refuge.
We manage to catch our breath for a short while, while the survivors piece together what has happened, offering their theories. As one of them explains - "Humanity has been judged and we've been found wanting. They go by different names. You got world religion and mythology that's full of mentions of demons or spirit creatures. People who’ve seen these creatures almost always describe their encounter as with an entity who takes on the form of your worst fears, your deepest sadness or your greatest loss. It’s not bullshit. It’s real talk, it’s facts."
Life continues in the house for a while, with all the windows covered to prevent anyone from seeing something that might lead to their death. There's a tense trip to the supermarket for supplies, driving a car with blacked out windows and only a satnav to guide them, along with various dramas between the group. Every so often, we rejoin the future timeline, as Malorie and the children (referred to only as boy and girl) make their way along the river.
Bird Box is more of a slow burn than A Quiet Place, and we never actually see what is responsible for causing the suicides either, but I still found much to enjoy with it. And as we become fully immersed in the present timeline, following the blindfolded journey, things build to a tense and satisfying climax.
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children in Books
Jun 7, 2018
This review can also be found on my blog <a href="themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.co.uk">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a>.
I feel the synopsis of what the book is about makes it sound a lot better than what it is. I wanted to like this book, I really did. I had high hopes for it. Unfortunately, it didn't do much for me. I was expecting more of a ghost story. Instead I got more of a sci-fi story, and one that wasn't very good.
Jacob's grandfather tells him of a magical island of which he spent his childhood. He shows him photos and tells him stories about the peculiar children he grew up with. As Jacob becomes a teenager, he stops believing in his grandfather's ridiculous stories until something awful happens. Jacob travels to the mysterious island to find out about his grandfather. Little does he know that by going to that island he's put himself and many others in danger.
First off, I thought the word building/setting were fantastic. The author made me feel as if I was on the island. I'll give him props there. The description of the world was beautifully described.
I couldn't relate very much to the characters. I can't really place why that is. I just couldn't connect. I found myself not caring what happened to any of them. Perhaps the author should've spent a bit more time character building to make me relate to at least one the characters. The characters just felt a bit one dimensional. There wasn't even one that I could remotely say that I favourited. Okay, that's a lie. I liked Fiona, the Irish girl, but I only liked her because she was Irish, and I love all things Irish. That's it.
I found the pacing to be a bit slow. I'd read a chapter, then I'd get bored with it and go off to do something else. I really struggled with this book. There are a couple of chapters that the pacing is great in, but it's not until the last two chapters that the pacing definitely picks up.
The dialogue was easy to understand although some Americans may not get all the slang British terms. There was one scene where a character says "I was taking a piss" where he meant that he was joking around. The phrase he meant was "taking the piss" which is a British slang phrase for joking. "Taking a piss" isn't a typo either as it's mentioned a few more times. This annoyed me because taking a piss, is just that, it means urinating. "Taking the piss" means to be joking around. Other than that, the dialogue was good.
The best part of the book was the photographs found within the book. I loved that little touch! I found myself studying the photos and enjoying them a million times better than the actual book.
The cover is also something I loved about the book. How freaky does that little girl look??? The German cover looks even better. It's the same photo, just with a green hue. If I was marking the book based on the cover alone, it'd get 5 out of 5 for me.
The title of the book doesn't really leave anything to make you wonder what the books about. It says exactly what the book is about - a home for peculiar children.
All in all, this book left me feeling empty. I didn't really feel much of anything reading it until I got to the last two chapters where it got exciting. However, I will not put myself through the torture of reading the second book in the series especially as I don't care about the characters or what happens to them. I'm just glad I won this book in a competition and didn't buy it.
I was going to give this book a 2 - 2.5 star rating but the ending saved it a bit.
I feel the synopsis of what the book is about makes it sound a lot better than what it is. I wanted to like this book, I really did. I had high hopes for it. Unfortunately, it didn't do much for me. I was expecting more of a ghost story. Instead I got more of a sci-fi story, and one that wasn't very good.
Jacob's grandfather tells him of a magical island of which he spent his childhood. He shows him photos and tells him stories about the peculiar children he grew up with. As Jacob becomes a teenager, he stops believing in his grandfather's ridiculous stories until something awful happens. Jacob travels to the mysterious island to find out about his grandfather. Little does he know that by going to that island he's put himself and many others in danger.
First off, I thought the word building/setting were fantastic. The author made me feel as if I was on the island. I'll give him props there. The description of the world was beautifully described.
I couldn't relate very much to the characters. I can't really place why that is. I just couldn't connect. I found myself not caring what happened to any of them. Perhaps the author should've spent a bit more time character building to make me relate to at least one the characters. The characters just felt a bit one dimensional. There wasn't even one that I could remotely say that I favourited. Okay, that's a lie. I liked Fiona, the Irish girl, but I only liked her because she was Irish, and I love all things Irish. That's it.
I found the pacing to be a bit slow. I'd read a chapter, then I'd get bored with it and go off to do something else. I really struggled with this book. There are a couple of chapters that the pacing is great in, but it's not until the last two chapters that the pacing definitely picks up.
The dialogue was easy to understand although some Americans may not get all the slang British terms. There was one scene where a character says "I was taking a piss" where he meant that he was joking around. The phrase he meant was "taking the piss" which is a British slang phrase for joking. "Taking a piss" isn't a typo either as it's mentioned a few more times. This annoyed me because taking a piss, is just that, it means urinating. "Taking the piss" means to be joking around. Other than that, the dialogue was good.
The best part of the book was the photographs found within the book. I loved that little touch! I found myself studying the photos and enjoying them a million times better than the actual book.
The cover is also something I loved about the book. How freaky does that little girl look??? The German cover looks even better. It's the same photo, just with a green hue. If I was marking the book based on the cover alone, it'd get 5 out of 5 for me.
The title of the book doesn't really leave anything to make you wonder what the books about. It says exactly what the book is about - a home for peculiar children.
All in all, this book left me feeling empty. I didn't really feel much of anything reading it until I got to the last two chapters where it got exciting. However, I will not put myself through the torture of reading the second book in the series especially as I don't care about the characters or what happens to them. I'm just glad I won this book in a competition and didn't buy it.
I was going to give this book a 2 - 2.5 star rating but the ending saved it a bit.
Katie (868 KP) rated Mad Monster Party? (1967) in Movies
Jun 16, 2018
Excellent character design (3 more)
Overall look of the film
Francesca is a style icon
Little Tibia and the Fibias!!
Slow paced (1 more)
Very little substance
Tons of style, very little substance
I went into this one really expecting to love it and I did love aspects of it. The character design, sets, and cinematography were great and Rankin/Bass fans will not be disappointed by those things. The music was fine, especially the opening sequence, but also left much to be desired. There weren't really any catchy, unforgettable songs that one usually finds on a Rankin/Bass production.
While there were some funny moments and some parts of the story were interesting, it seems that the film was mostly a series of kooky gags. Don't get me wrong, I love that kind of humor, but it needed to be supported by more plot than was provided. Often it was easy to forget that there even was one. I think Mad Monster Party would have benefited from cutting some scenes to make it a 45 minute special rather than feature length.
I went into this movie wondering why I hadn't heard of it until recently and why it wasn't a Halloween staple of my youth like "Santa Clause is Coming to Town" or "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer" were for Christmas. After finishing it I had my answer. It was a little too grown up for children (and maybe a bit too boring) and didn't have enough substance for adults.
While it's hard to recommend this one to anyone I probably will be watching it again. The good parts are good enough to bring me back and the bad isn't bad enough to scare me away (and now I know which scenes to avoid).
I also realize that this has a lot of jokes directed at the readers of Mad Magazine, which I am not. So feel free to prove me wrong about this movie. I really want to love it!
While there were some funny moments and some parts of the story were interesting, it seems that the film was mostly a series of kooky gags. Don't get me wrong, I love that kind of humor, but it needed to be supported by more plot than was provided. Often it was easy to forget that there even was one. I think Mad Monster Party would have benefited from cutting some scenes to make it a 45 minute special rather than feature length.
I went into this movie wondering why I hadn't heard of it until recently and why it wasn't a Halloween staple of my youth like "Santa Clause is Coming to Town" or "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer" were for Christmas. After finishing it I had my answer. It was a little too grown up for children (and maybe a bit too boring) and didn't have enough substance for adults.
While it's hard to recommend this one to anyone I probably will be watching it again. The good parts are good enough to bring me back and the bad isn't bad enough to scare me away (and now I know which scenes to avoid).
I also realize that this has a lot of jokes directed at the readers of Mad Magazine, which I am not. So feel free to prove me wrong about this movie. I really want to love it!
Stormi (105 KP) Apr 20, 2018