Search
Search results
The Echo Chamber
10.0
Rate It
Book
What a thing of wonder a mobile phone is. Six ounces of metal, glass and plastic, fashioned into a...
Satire
The Burning Room (Harry Bosch, #17; Harry Bosch Universe, #26)
8.8
Rate It
Book
In the LAPD’s Open-Unsolved Unit, not many murder victims die a decade after the crime. So when a...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated On the Rocks (2020) in Movies
Oct 23, 2020
Bill Murray being Bill Murray, but in sparkling form
Bill Murray is astonishing. Not just in "On the Rocks", but generally in life. Some actors - Johnny Depp, Mark Rylance, Gary Oldman, for instance - disappear completely into their characters so it takes a while to "see" who they are. Whereas with others - Bill Nighy, Tom Cruise, John Wayne, for instance - it's "Oh, there's the famous actor xxxx in a new movie". If we were grading on a scale, Bill Murray would be at the far right of the latter category. In every movie, he IS Bill Murray! In "Ghostbusters" he was the dry, laconic, wisecracking ghost hunter. In "Groundhog Day" he was the dry, laconic, wisecracking weatherman. In "The Monuments Men" he was the dry, laconic, wisecracking art historian. (In the "Zombieland" movies, he excelled himself by playing the dry, laconic, wisecracking Bill Murray!)
For many actors, that would be a problem. But Bill Murray gets away with it, because - - he's Bill freakin' Murray!! And being him is so awesome that however many times you've seen the character, you always want more.
Here's a case in point. In "On the Rocks", a chaffeured car with tinted windows rolls up. You brace yourself as the window winds slowly down. And there he is... the star. This happens quite a way into Sofia Coppola's new film. First up, we get a leisurely, but intelligent, set-up to the plot. The "Parks and Recreation" actress, Rashida Jones, plays Laura; a successful writer (currently with writer's block) married to successful businessman Dean (Marlon Wayans). The couple seem to have it all: high income; large New York apartment; two lovely young children. But Dean is always away, travelling on business - and always with his attractive co-worker "with the legs" Fiona (Jessica Henwick). Is Dean scratching the seven-year itch?
Laura's rich, art-dealing father Felix (Bill Murray) arrives, and won't take no for an answer in sniffing out the truth.
Love, love, love this movie! The pacing, the humour, the witty dialogue (it's Sofia Coppola's script) and - above all - Murray's triumphant performance all fire this well and truly into my Top 10 for the year.
Bill Murray's acting is astounding... is there an actor who spends more time in his "deep in thought" mode, with eyeballs looking at the ceiling? You could quite well believe that none of it is scripted, and he's pausing in deep thought because he really is trying to compose the next best line! A scene where, through appropriate name-dropping, he charms his way out of a traffic infringement with two New York cops is utterly absorbing.
Behind every embarrassing father is a grown-up daughter rolling her eyes. (I should know!) And Rashida Jones is perfect in the role. I'm not familiar with Jones's previous work, but she was just perfect as the foil for Murray's humour.
There's dry comedy to be had throughout "On the Rocks" which I found delightful. A running joke is Laura's drop-off and pick-ups from the local kindergarten, where she is repeatedly pinned against the wall by single-mum Vanessa (Jenny Slate) and bored to death with her moans about boyfriend-hunting on the New York scene! It's an insight that the project is led by a female writer/director, reminiscing about personal experiences!
Coppola's script also buzzes with politically incorrect views of the playboy Felix. (He reminds me strongly of an ex-work colleague: the life and soul of any party and with a charisma that is naturally attractive to women!)
For me, there was just one misstep in the movie. There's a sub-plot about the estranged relationship between Felix and Laura's mother, and the unspoken tension that lies there. This all comes to a head in a hotel bedroom, and for me personally it brought the mood of the movie down and wasn't necessary. It's a relatively minor thing. But the result was that it just took the edge off things for me in declaring it a classic.
This is one of those flicks produced for Apple, in cinemas only while en-route to their streaming service to make it eligible for Oscar consideration. And it's actually available now. This is Coppola's third outing with Murray, with the most famous being the Oscar winner "Lost in Translation". I'm actually not a mad fan of that film. But this one comes with a "Highly recommended".
(For the full graphical review, please check out the bob the movie man review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/10/23/love-on-the-rocks-aint-no-surprise/ . Thanks)
For many actors, that would be a problem. But Bill Murray gets away with it, because - - he's Bill freakin' Murray!! And being him is so awesome that however many times you've seen the character, you always want more.
Here's a case in point. In "On the Rocks", a chaffeured car with tinted windows rolls up. You brace yourself as the window winds slowly down. And there he is... the star. This happens quite a way into Sofia Coppola's new film. First up, we get a leisurely, but intelligent, set-up to the plot. The "Parks and Recreation" actress, Rashida Jones, plays Laura; a successful writer (currently with writer's block) married to successful businessman Dean (Marlon Wayans). The couple seem to have it all: high income; large New York apartment; two lovely young children. But Dean is always away, travelling on business - and always with his attractive co-worker "with the legs" Fiona (Jessica Henwick). Is Dean scratching the seven-year itch?
Laura's rich, art-dealing father Felix (Bill Murray) arrives, and won't take no for an answer in sniffing out the truth.
Love, love, love this movie! The pacing, the humour, the witty dialogue (it's Sofia Coppola's script) and - above all - Murray's triumphant performance all fire this well and truly into my Top 10 for the year.
Bill Murray's acting is astounding... is there an actor who spends more time in his "deep in thought" mode, with eyeballs looking at the ceiling? You could quite well believe that none of it is scripted, and he's pausing in deep thought because he really is trying to compose the next best line! A scene where, through appropriate name-dropping, he charms his way out of a traffic infringement with two New York cops is utterly absorbing.
Behind every embarrassing father is a grown-up daughter rolling her eyes. (I should know!) And Rashida Jones is perfect in the role. I'm not familiar with Jones's previous work, but she was just perfect as the foil for Murray's humour.
There's dry comedy to be had throughout "On the Rocks" which I found delightful. A running joke is Laura's drop-off and pick-ups from the local kindergarten, where she is repeatedly pinned against the wall by single-mum Vanessa (Jenny Slate) and bored to death with her moans about boyfriend-hunting on the New York scene! It's an insight that the project is led by a female writer/director, reminiscing about personal experiences!
Coppola's script also buzzes with politically incorrect views of the playboy Felix. (He reminds me strongly of an ex-work colleague: the life and soul of any party and with a charisma that is naturally attractive to women!)
For me, there was just one misstep in the movie. There's a sub-plot about the estranged relationship between Felix and Laura's mother, and the unspoken tension that lies there. This all comes to a head in a hotel bedroom, and for me personally it brought the mood of the movie down and wasn't necessary. It's a relatively minor thing. But the result was that it just took the edge off things for me in declaring it a classic.
This is one of those flicks produced for Apple, in cinemas only while en-route to their streaming service to make it eligible for Oscar consideration. And it's actually available now. This is Coppola's third outing with Murray, with the most famous being the Oscar winner "Lost in Translation". I'm actually not a mad fan of that film. But this one comes with a "Highly recommended".
(For the full graphical review, please check out the bob the movie man review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/10/23/love-on-the-rocks-aint-no-surprise/ . Thanks)
Louise (64 KP) rated He Said/She Said in Books
Jul 2, 2018
I was lucky enough to win an unfinished copy of this book on a Goodreads giveaway.
The year is 1999, Kit and Laura are down in Cornwall at a festival held for eclipse chasers, this will be their first one together and the start of many more to come. Kit has all the future eclipses planned out, he has been doing this his whole life and wants to share it with the woman he loves and future children. With it being cloudy the odds of a total eclipse is minimal, to try and get a better viewing angle the couple move out to the edges of the festival, but what they do witness changes their lives forever. Kit and Laura are embroiled in a rape case, Jamie Balcombe was witnessed attacking Beth Taylor – Will Laura’s testimony be enough for a conviction?
He Said/She Said is told from alternating point of views from Kit and Laura. They are also told from past and present, so will get a chapter from Kit in 2015 and 1999 and the same from Laura. This allows the stories to be interwoven and tells what happened and how it has affected them now. This is another slow paced book that feeds you small amounts of information at a time and when you think you know what has happened it takes an unexpected turn.
Laura in present day is an unreliable narrator, she suffers with anxiety and is extremely paranoid. We don’t find out for a long time how she has become this way all we do know that it’s related to ‘Beth’. In 1999, Laura has her whole life ahead of her, she has just met Kit and has this outgoing nature to her. As the story progresses you begin understand why she is so paranoid and why she is so anxious.
Kit seemed like a super relaxed guy that takes everything in his stride, Laura is his soulmate and have been together for 15 years and will protect her to no end. At points he could be very meticulous and other points very sloppy regarding their change of identity. I must admit that Laura is the stronger character of the two and her POV was much more enjoyable.
I felt this book especially the first half was very slow even when there were parts that really appealed to me. The story line was good not something I have read about before and I didn’t think it was predictable but when the twist happened it wasn’t anything majorly startling for me.My actual reaction was ‘oh’! but the second half was much better than the first and had more action to it.
There is a trigger warning of Rape, so if this is something you are uncomfortable reading about then this might not be the book for you.
I rated this book 3.5 out of 5 stars
The year is 1999, Kit and Laura are down in Cornwall at a festival held for eclipse chasers, this will be their first one together and the start of many more to come. Kit has all the future eclipses planned out, he has been doing this his whole life and wants to share it with the woman he loves and future children. With it being cloudy the odds of a total eclipse is minimal, to try and get a better viewing angle the couple move out to the edges of the festival, but what they do witness changes their lives forever. Kit and Laura are embroiled in a rape case, Jamie Balcombe was witnessed attacking Beth Taylor – Will Laura’s testimony be enough for a conviction?
He Said/She Said is told from alternating point of views from Kit and Laura. They are also told from past and present, so will get a chapter from Kit in 2015 and 1999 and the same from Laura. This allows the stories to be interwoven and tells what happened and how it has affected them now. This is another slow paced book that feeds you small amounts of information at a time and when you think you know what has happened it takes an unexpected turn.
Laura in present day is an unreliable narrator, she suffers with anxiety and is extremely paranoid. We don’t find out for a long time how she has become this way all we do know that it’s related to ‘Beth’. In 1999, Laura has her whole life ahead of her, she has just met Kit and has this outgoing nature to her. As the story progresses you begin understand why she is so paranoid and why she is so anxious.
Kit seemed like a super relaxed guy that takes everything in his stride, Laura is his soulmate and have been together for 15 years and will protect her to no end. At points he could be very meticulous and other points very sloppy regarding their change of identity. I must admit that Laura is the stronger character of the two and her POV was much more enjoyable.
I felt this book especially the first half was very slow even when there were parts that really appealed to me. The story line was good not something I have read about before and I didn’t think it was predictable but when the twist happened it wasn’t anything majorly startling for me.My actual reaction was ‘oh’! but the second half was much better than the first and had more action to it.
There is a trigger warning of Rape, so if this is something you are uncomfortable reading about then this might not be the book for you.
I rated this book 3.5 out of 5 stars
The Last Suppers: A Novel
Book
-A gorgeous novel that finds beauty in the most unlikely of places.- --Susan Wiggs, #1 New York...
fiction
iTalk Arabic: Conversation guide - Learn to speak a language with audio phrasebook, vocabulary expressions, grammar exercises and tests for english speakers
Education and Travel
App
▶ Speak Arabic with perfect native accent, in no time! ▶ Record your voice and hear what an...
Lee (2222 KP) rated Dumbo (2019) in Movies
Mar 31, 2019
It's set to be a busy year for live action Disney remakes, with Aladdin and The Lion King already lined up for release this year. Kicking things off though, is this reimagining of the 1941 classic Dumbo, with Tim Burton directing.
It's 1919 and Holt Farrier (Colin Farrell) has returned from World War I, arriving by train to join the Medici Brothers Circus, where he worked before the war as a performer. But Holt has a number of issues to contend with on his return, the least of which being the loss one of his arms while in service. He's greeted at the station by his two young children, Milly and Joe, who lost their mother, Holt's wife, to influenza while he was away. On top of that, he learns that while he was away, the cash strapped circus owner, Max Medici (Danny DeVito) decided to sell the horses that were part of Holt's star act. Holt is put in charge of pregnant elephant Jumbo, with Max hoping that the arrival of a cute baby elephant will bring in the much needed crowds. It's a lot for Holt to come to terms with and adjust to.
Soon after, the baby elephant is born. But with clumsy, oversized ears, he's not quite the cute crowd pleaser they had all hoped for. Attempts to hide his ears only end in disaster, and ridicule from the circus crowds. Milly and Joe fall in love with the new arrival, and when they discover that he has the ability to use those big ears for flying, interest in him is quickly renewed.
The flying elephant not only draws in the crowds, but also the attentions of V.A. Vandevere (Michael Keaton), who offers Max a deal for him and his circus troupe to join his huge fancy theme park. It's at this point that the movie should really begin to soar, having introduced the circus family and their new arrival. Unfortunately, the arrival of Vandevere signals a sharp downward spiral in terms of story telling. The circus cast are all but forgotten, with the story focusing instead on the tired, familiar tale of sleazy, greedy businessman who is only interested in money and success, at the expense of the poor, trusting people who believed him.
The computerised Dumbo is simply oozing cuteness and technical wizardry. The eyes and the facial expressions are wonderful and he manages to steal every scene he is in. Every time he takes flight, it is a joy to watch. Unfortunately though, this version of Dumbo is trying to add a lot more to the original story and ends up becoming bit of a drag at times. The human characters are poorly written and mostly forgettable, and the movie really only soars when Dumbo himself does. While trying to steer clear of being a straight up remake, opting instead for the addition of plot and characters, it ultimately loses a lot of the charm. As with the recent remake of Beauty and the Beast, it's another case of style over substance.
It's 1919 and Holt Farrier (Colin Farrell) has returned from World War I, arriving by train to join the Medici Brothers Circus, where he worked before the war as a performer. But Holt has a number of issues to contend with on his return, the least of which being the loss one of his arms while in service. He's greeted at the station by his two young children, Milly and Joe, who lost their mother, Holt's wife, to influenza while he was away. On top of that, he learns that while he was away, the cash strapped circus owner, Max Medici (Danny DeVito) decided to sell the horses that were part of Holt's star act. Holt is put in charge of pregnant elephant Jumbo, with Max hoping that the arrival of a cute baby elephant will bring in the much needed crowds. It's a lot for Holt to come to terms with and adjust to.
Soon after, the baby elephant is born. But with clumsy, oversized ears, he's not quite the cute crowd pleaser they had all hoped for. Attempts to hide his ears only end in disaster, and ridicule from the circus crowds. Milly and Joe fall in love with the new arrival, and when they discover that he has the ability to use those big ears for flying, interest in him is quickly renewed.
The flying elephant not only draws in the crowds, but also the attentions of V.A. Vandevere (Michael Keaton), who offers Max a deal for him and his circus troupe to join his huge fancy theme park. It's at this point that the movie should really begin to soar, having introduced the circus family and their new arrival. Unfortunately, the arrival of Vandevere signals a sharp downward spiral in terms of story telling. The circus cast are all but forgotten, with the story focusing instead on the tired, familiar tale of sleazy, greedy businessman who is only interested in money and success, at the expense of the poor, trusting people who believed him.
The computerised Dumbo is simply oozing cuteness and technical wizardry. The eyes and the facial expressions are wonderful and he manages to steal every scene he is in. Every time he takes flight, it is a joy to watch. Unfortunately though, this version of Dumbo is trying to add a lot more to the original story and ends up becoming bit of a drag at times. The human characters are poorly written and mostly forgettable, and the movie really only soars when Dumbo himself does. While trying to steer clear of being a straight up remake, opting instead for the addition of plot and characters, it ultimately loses a lot of the charm. As with the recent remake of Beauty and the Beast, it's another case of style over substance.
Mattia Gagliardi (14 KP) rated Love, Death & Robots in TV
Jun 4, 2019
Outstanding animation (2 more)
Some of the shorts are amazing
I wish there would be more products like this
Other shorts where very dull and boring (3 more)
Sometimes it's style over substance
Too edgy in some parts
Some of the shorts look like commercial for videogame
Uff this is gonna be though to review
"Love Death & Robot" is an anthology of adult animated shorts. It features 18 shorts of different lenght with the common theme being the sci-fi.
The problem of reviewing a product like this is that the episodes are all so different to each other and the quality is too vary.
On a technical point of view, every shorts are amazing. The animation feels great in every style it is portrayed, either 2D or 3D. The quality of the shots, the models and basically every visual elements are simply gorgeous.
However that doesn't mean that the short themselves are by default good. The ones that are super realistic, like "Beyond the Aquila Rift" and "Lucky 13", just make you wonder why they didn't used real actors instead. This two in particular doesn't really benefit for being animated. For comparison, "Ice Age" uses real actors and the CG is contained in the special effects and it works perfectly. Oh and "Lucky 13" is just plain bad on top of that.
Then there are the shorts with amazing visual styles but with quite dull story. "The Witness" is the one that comes to mind using clever use of compositing (the implementation of CG elements in a realistic environment) and having a nice character design with excellent animation. However it feels pretentious because it doesn't say anything really interesting and it focus more on sexual visual rather than a story, with a nonsensical twist nevertheless. Style over substance.
Other shorts instead feels like watching a cinematic for a videogame, pilot for different series or University students showreel. This doesn't mean they are bad but it just feels a bit underwhelming.
However when a short is good, it's really good! The one that are always left me with a smile on my face and with an overall excitement, eager to see what was coming next or more works from these studios. "Three Robots" is definitely one of my favourite short thanks to the amazing visuals, clever dialogues and an interesting lore.
My main criticism that involves mostly all the shorts is the supposed maturity, especially in the use of sex and violence.. I am not against the use of them by any means. However using them just for the sake of it doesn't make your product automatically mature. It just felt edgy, the equivalent of a goth teenagers that watch gory movies just because "uuhhh so taboo".
I know that animation is still perceived as a product for children and I am always happy to see new ones that wants to focus on a more mature audience. I don't think though that you can do it with just the use of swear words, sex and violence without any substance in it.
I want to see more actually mature animations, with compelling stories and amazing styles, using animation as a media and not as a genre.
The problem of reviewing a product like this is that the episodes are all so different to each other and the quality is too vary.
On a technical point of view, every shorts are amazing. The animation feels great in every style it is portrayed, either 2D or 3D. The quality of the shots, the models and basically every visual elements are simply gorgeous.
However that doesn't mean that the short themselves are by default good. The ones that are super realistic, like "Beyond the Aquila Rift" and "Lucky 13", just make you wonder why they didn't used real actors instead. This two in particular doesn't really benefit for being animated. For comparison, "Ice Age" uses real actors and the CG is contained in the special effects and it works perfectly. Oh and "Lucky 13" is just plain bad on top of that.
Then there are the shorts with amazing visual styles but with quite dull story. "The Witness" is the one that comes to mind using clever use of compositing (the implementation of CG elements in a realistic environment) and having a nice character design with excellent animation. However it feels pretentious because it doesn't say anything really interesting and it focus more on sexual visual rather than a story, with a nonsensical twist nevertheless. Style over substance.
Other shorts instead feels like watching a cinematic for a videogame, pilot for different series or University students showreel. This doesn't mean they are bad but it just feels a bit underwhelming.
However when a short is good, it's really good! The one that are always left me with a smile on my face and with an overall excitement, eager to see what was coming next or more works from these studios. "Three Robots" is definitely one of my favourite short thanks to the amazing visuals, clever dialogues and an interesting lore.
My main criticism that involves mostly all the shorts is the supposed maturity, especially in the use of sex and violence.. I am not against the use of them by any means. However using them just for the sake of it doesn't make your product automatically mature. It just felt edgy, the equivalent of a goth teenagers that watch gory movies just because "uuhhh so taboo".
I know that animation is still perceived as a product for children and I am always happy to see new ones that wants to focus on a more mature audience. I don't think though that you can do it with just the use of swear words, sex and violence without any substance in it.
I want to see more actually mature animations, with compelling stories and amazing styles, using animation as a media and not as a genre.
B
Betalingsservice
Finance and Business
App
Pay and register your new bills for Betalingsservice. Manage your personal finances and avoid...