Search
Search results
PF
Philosophical Foundations of Fiduciary Law
Paul B. Miller and Andrew S. Gold
Book
Fiduciary law is a critically important body of law. Fiduciary duties ensure the integrity of a...
How to be a Pirate: Book 2
8.6
Rate It
Book
Read the books that inspired the How to Train Your Dragon films! This book will be a hit with...
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Rare Exports: A Christmas Tale (2010) in Movies
Dec 18, 2020
Rare Exports is a proper gem of an alternative Christmas film.
It revolves around a British company drilling into the mountain Korvatunturi in Lapland, hoping to find a legendary gravesite. A local child Pietari spies on proceedings, and is convinced that this company have found the grave of the original Santa Claus, not the jolly red and white icon that everyone is familiar with, but the proper monstrous version spoken about in fairtytales in Piertari's books. This being a child centric horror, of course no one believes him, until all the other children in the village start to go missing, and shit starts going sideways.
Rare Exports strengths lies in its strong cast. Greta performances from Onni Tommila and Jorma Tommila (father and son in both the film, and real life, just for that extra layer of believability!) The pair, alongside the supporting cast keep everything pretty grounded, despite the absurdity going on around them.
The film's dialogue is largely in Finnish, and this coupled with it's sparse and snowy setting, lend the narrative a truly otherworldly but authentic feeling.
It's also effectively creepy, especially the skinny old man "Santa" that the group capture and cage up. The need to figure out what is really going on never lets up either, even as the plot flies towards it's increasingly WTF climax (there's a silly amount of dong by the way, just FYI).
Rare Exports is certainly worth a watch. It's delightfully barmy, and is a great tonic if you become weary of "traditional" Christmas movies. š
It revolves around a British company drilling into the mountain Korvatunturi in Lapland, hoping to find a legendary gravesite. A local child Pietari spies on proceedings, and is convinced that this company have found the grave of the original Santa Claus, not the jolly red and white icon that everyone is familiar with, but the proper monstrous version spoken about in fairtytales in Piertari's books. This being a child centric horror, of course no one believes him, until all the other children in the village start to go missing, and shit starts going sideways.
Rare Exports strengths lies in its strong cast. Greta performances from Onni Tommila and Jorma Tommila (father and son in both the film, and real life, just for that extra layer of believability!) The pair, alongside the supporting cast keep everything pretty grounded, despite the absurdity going on around them.
The film's dialogue is largely in Finnish, and this coupled with it's sparse and snowy setting, lend the narrative a truly otherworldly but authentic feeling.
It's also effectively creepy, especially the skinny old man "Santa" that the group capture and cage up. The need to figure out what is really going on never lets up either, even as the plot flies towards it's increasingly WTF climax (there's a silly amount of dong by the way, just FYI).
Rare Exports is certainly worth a watch. It's delightfully barmy, and is a great tonic if you become weary of "traditional" Christmas movies. š
Thinking Out Loud: Love, Grief and Being Mum and Dad
Book
'Rio's honesty is astonishing, and will change how men grieve and how men think about their...
Biography sport
Damaged: The Heartbreaking True Story of a Forgotten Child
9.5
Rate It
Book
The Sunday Times and New York Times Bestseller. Although Jodie is only eight years old, she is...
Fire And Blood
8.8
Rate It
Book
"This first volume covers all the Targaryen kings from Aegon I (the Conquerer) to the regency of...
Merissa (13194 KP) rated Overland in Books
Mar 31, 2021 (Updated Aug 2, 2023)
OVERLAND is a compelling story about a woman whose actions come back to bite her. Not that she did anything wrong, but it had far-reaching consequences that never occurred to her.
It is very well-written, with the scenes between Skyla and the children particularly heart-rending. The big bad is just that - bad, through and through. The same as Edmond, he just had no redeeming qualities at all. Although the reader was supposed to want Skyla and Troy to get together at the end, it was just a bit too easy. If Edmond had been a bit more involved, I believe it would have added a bit more to the story, rather than him being a two-bit cartoon character.
Saying that, the whole story takes you along at a fair pace, with suspense and horror/disgust in equal measure. Part of me is sad that Bjorn got off so easy, but then I also think it was the perfect ending.
Although this says it is romantic suspense, I don't feel that it is. The romance part of it is definitely secondary to the thriller side, just a mention before and after the main event.
A great read and definitely recommended by me.
** same worded review will appear elsewhere **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Mar 31, 2021
It is very well-written, with the scenes between Skyla and the children particularly heart-rending. The big bad is just that - bad, through and through. The same as Edmond, he just had no redeeming qualities at all. Although the reader was supposed to want Skyla and Troy to get together at the end, it was just a bit too easy. If Edmond had been a bit more involved, I believe it would have added a bit more to the story, rather than him being a two-bit cartoon character.
Saying that, the whole story takes you along at a fair pace, with suspense and horror/disgust in equal measure. Part of me is sad that Bjorn got off so easy, but then I also think it was the perfect ending.
Although this says it is romantic suspense, I don't feel that it is. The romance part of it is definitely secondary to the thriller side, just a mention before and after the main event.
A great read and definitely recommended by me.
** same worded review will appear elsewhere **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Mar 31, 2021
One Wrong Word
5.0
Rate It
Book
A heart-racing new psychological thriller from USA Today bestselling and multiple award-winning...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated King of Thieves (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
No f-ing honour among f-ing thieves.
What a cast! Micheal Caine; Jim Broadbent; Tom Courtenay; Michael Gambon; Ray Winstone; Paul Whitehouseā¦. Just one look at the poster and you think yes, Yes, YES! But would this be a case where my expectations would be dashed?
Having seen the film at a preview showing last night, Iām pleased to say no, itās not. I was very much entertained.
The film tells the ridiculous true story of the āover the hill gangā ā the bunch of largely pensioner-age criminals who successfully extracted what was definitely Ā£14 million ā and could have been up to Ā£200 million ā of goodies from a vault in Londonās Hatton Gardens jewellery district over the Easter Bank Holiday weekend in 2015. The gang is led by the āking of thievesā ā Brian (Michael Caine) ā highly regarded as an āelder statesmanā among the London criminal scene.
Did you see Mark Kermodeās excellent āSecrets of Cinemaā series on the BBC? (If not, seek it out on a catch-up service!) The first of the series deconstructs the āHeistā movie, showing how such movies track the preparation, the execution and the progressive unravelling of the wicked scheme, typically through internal strife among the gang itself. (Pretty much as you would assume happens most of the time in real life!) Kermode points out that such movies play with our emotion in secretly wishing the bad āuns to succeed in doing something we would never have the bottle to āstep out of lineā to do. āKing of Thievesā nicely follows this well trodden story-arc, but ā for me ā does it with significantly greater style than the norm.
Yes, itās very much a āBrit-flickā, and Iām not sure how it will play outside of the UK. But the filmās script, penned by Joe Penhall (āThe Roadā, āEnduring Loveā), plays beautifully to the extreme age of its cast ā the average age of the actors playing the gang is over 67ā¦ and that includes the 35-year old Charlie āStardustā Cox (who is actually very good as the young foil for the older blades)! There is lots of laugh-out-loud dialogue relating to bodily deficiencies and ailments and the tendencies of old-folk to nod off at inconvenient times! However, its not very deep stuff, giving little background to the characters. And if you are of a sensitive disposition, the language used in the film is pretty extreme: F-bombs and C-bombs are dropped in every other sentence.
The film is delivered with visual style by āThe Theory of Everythingā director James Marsh. He cleverly reflects that all of the older leads have past records: the film nicely interweaving tiny snippets of past British crime movies to illustrate the career exploits of the now-creaky old folks. (If in the epilepsy-inducing opening titles you thought you caught a subliminal shot of the gold from āThe Italian Jobā ā the superior 1969 version ā then you were right!) As well as āThe Italian Jobā, the snippets also includes āThe Lavender Hill Mobā and (if Iām not mistaken) the late George Sewell in āRobberyā.
Itās all delivered to a deafeningly intrusive ā but in a good way ā jazz-style soundtrack by the continually up-and-coming Benjamin Wallfisch.
As in the recent āThe Children Actā, it is the acting of the senior leads that makes the film fly for me. Caine is just MAGNIFICENT, at the age of 85 with the same screen presence he had (as featured) stepping out of that prison in āThe Italian Jobā; Winstone is as good as ever in playing a menacing thug, and even gets to do a Michael Caine impression!; Gambon is hilarious as the weak-bladdered āBilly the Fishā. But it is Broadbent that really impresses: he generally appears in films as a genial but slightly ditzy old gent in films like the āPotterā series; āPaddingtonā and āBridget Jonesā. While he has played borderline darker roles (āThe Lady in the Vanā for example), he rarely goes full āSexy Beastā evilā¦. but here he is borderline psycho and displays blistering form. A head-to-head unblinking confrontation between Broadbent and Caine is a high-point in the whole filmā¦ just electrifying. Iād love to see BAFTA nominations for them both in Acting/Supporting Acting categories.
In summary, itās a sweary but stylishly-executed heist movie that has enough humour to thoroughly entertain this cinema-goer. The film is on general release in the UK from September 14th and comes with my recommendation.
Having seen the film at a preview showing last night, Iām pleased to say no, itās not. I was very much entertained.
The film tells the ridiculous true story of the āover the hill gangā ā the bunch of largely pensioner-age criminals who successfully extracted what was definitely Ā£14 million ā and could have been up to Ā£200 million ā of goodies from a vault in Londonās Hatton Gardens jewellery district over the Easter Bank Holiday weekend in 2015. The gang is led by the āking of thievesā ā Brian (Michael Caine) ā highly regarded as an āelder statesmanā among the London criminal scene.
Did you see Mark Kermodeās excellent āSecrets of Cinemaā series on the BBC? (If not, seek it out on a catch-up service!) The first of the series deconstructs the āHeistā movie, showing how such movies track the preparation, the execution and the progressive unravelling of the wicked scheme, typically through internal strife among the gang itself. (Pretty much as you would assume happens most of the time in real life!) Kermode points out that such movies play with our emotion in secretly wishing the bad āuns to succeed in doing something we would never have the bottle to āstep out of lineā to do. āKing of Thievesā nicely follows this well trodden story-arc, but ā for me ā does it with significantly greater style than the norm.
Yes, itās very much a āBrit-flickā, and Iām not sure how it will play outside of the UK. But the filmās script, penned by Joe Penhall (āThe Roadā, āEnduring Loveā), plays beautifully to the extreme age of its cast ā the average age of the actors playing the gang is over 67ā¦ and that includes the 35-year old Charlie āStardustā Cox (who is actually very good as the young foil for the older blades)! There is lots of laugh-out-loud dialogue relating to bodily deficiencies and ailments and the tendencies of old-folk to nod off at inconvenient times! However, its not very deep stuff, giving little background to the characters. And if you are of a sensitive disposition, the language used in the film is pretty extreme: F-bombs and C-bombs are dropped in every other sentence.
The film is delivered with visual style by āThe Theory of Everythingā director James Marsh. He cleverly reflects that all of the older leads have past records: the film nicely interweaving tiny snippets of past British crime movies to illustrate the career exploits of the now-creaky old folks. (If in the epilepsy-inducing opening titles you thought you caught a subliminal shot of the gold from āThe Italian Jobā ā the superior 1969 version ā then you were right!) As well as āThe Italian Jobā, the snippets also includes āThe Lavender Hill Mobā and (if Iām not mistaken) the late George Sewell in āRobberyā.
Itās all delivered to a deafeningly intrusive ā but in a good way ā jazz-style soundtrack by the continually up-and-coming Benjamin Wallfisch.
As in the recent āThe Children Actā, it is the acting of the senior leads that makes the film fly for me. Caine is just MAGNIFICENT, at the age of 85 with the same screen presence he had (as featured) stepping out of that prison in āThe Italian Jobā; Winstone is as good as ever in playing a menacing thug, and even gets to do a Michael Caine impression!; Gambon is hilarious as the weak-bladdered āBilly the Fishā. But it is Broadbent that really impresses: he generally appears in films as a genial but slightly ditzy old gent in films like the āPotterā series; āPaddingtonā and āBridget Jonesā. While he has played borderline darker roles (āThe Lady in the Vanā for example), he rarely goes full āSexy Beastā evilā¦. but here he is borderline psycho and displays blistering form. A head-to-head unblinking confrontation between Broadbent and Caine is a high-point in the whole filmā¦ just electrifying. Iād love to see BAFTA nominations for them both in Acting/Supporting Acting categories.
In summary, itās a sweary but stylishly-executed heist movie that has enough humour to thoroughly entertain this cinema-goer. The film is on general release in the UK from September 14th and comes with my recommendation.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Dolittle (2020) in Movies
Feb 23, 2020
A complete mess, but kids will probably love it.
With the words of Mark Kermode's review ringing in my ears ("It's shockingly poor... and that's the same in any language") I was bracing myself when I went to see this latest incarnation of Hugh Lofting's famous animal-chatting character. And I have to agree that it is a shocking mess of a film, given $175 million was poured into this thing. But, and I say this cautiously without first-hand empirical evidence, I *think* this is a movie that kids in the 6 to 10 age range might fall in love with.
Doctor Doolittle (Robert Downey Jnr) - famed animal doctor, with the unique ability to communicate with any animal - is now holed up in his animal sanctuary, a recluse. His beloved wife - adventurer Lily - was lost at sea (in a cartoon sequence that could have just used the same clip from "Frozen"). He's lost the will to practice; and almost lost the will to live.
Impinging on his morose life come two humans: Tommy Stubbings (Harry Collett), a reluctant hunter with a wounded squirrel, and Lady Rose (Carmel Laniado), daughter of the Queen of England. (We'll quietly ignore the coincidence that, after what looks like several years of mourning, these two independently pitch up at Chez Doolittle within ten minutes of each other!).
For the Queen (the omnipresent Jessie Buckley) is dying, and noone (other than us viewers, let in on the deal) suspect foul play might be at work in the form of Lord Thomas Badgley (the ever-reliable Jim Broadbent) and the Queen's old leech-loving doctor Blair MĆ¼dfly (a moustache-twiddling Michael Sheen).
Doolittle must engage in a perilous journey to find the only cure that will save both the Queen and his animal sanctuary - the fruit of the tree on a missing island that his long lost love was searching for.
Let's start with the most obvious point first up. Robert Downey Jnr's Welsh accent is quite the most terrible, most preposterous, most unintelligible, most offensive (to the Welsh) attempt at an accent in a mainstream film in movie history. And that's really saying something when you have Laurence Olivier's Jewish father from "The Jazz Singer" and Russell Crowe's English cum Irish cum Scottish cum Yugoslavian "Robin Hood" in the list. Why? Just why? Was it to distance this version from Rex Harrison's? (Since most younger movie goers will be going "Rex who?" at this point, this seems unlikely). It's a wholly curious decision.
It turns RDj's presence in the movie from being an asset to a liability.
The movie has had a tortuous history. Filmed in 2018 at enormous expense, the film completely bombed at test screenings so they brought in more script writers to make it funnier and did extensive additional filming.
I actually disagree with the general view that the film is unfunny. For there are a few points in the movie where I laughed out loud. A fly's miraculous, if temporary, escape was one such moment. The duck laying an egg in fright, another.
However, these seem to stand out starkly in isolation as 'the funny bits they inserted'. Much of the rest of the movie's comedy falls painfully flat.
In terms of the acting, there are the obvious visual talents on show of Michael Sheen (doing a great English accent for a Welshman.... #irony), Jim Broadbent, Jessie Buckley, Joanna Page (blink and you'll miss her) and Antonio Banderas, as the swashbuckling pirate king cum father-in-law.
But the end titles are an amazing array of "Ah!" moments as the vocal performances are revealed: Emma Thompson as the parrot; Rami Malek as the gorilla; John Cena as the polar bear; Kumail Nanjiani at the ostrich; Octavia Spencer at the duck; Tom Holland as the dog; Selena Gomez as the giraffe; Marion Cotillade as the fox, Frances de la Tour as a flatulent dragon and Ralph Fiennes as an evil tiger with mummy issues. It's a gift for future contestants on "Pointless"!
There are a lot of poe-faced critics throwing brick-bats at this movie, and to a degree it's deserved. They lavished $175 million on it, and it looked like it was going to be a thumping loss. (However, against all the odds, at the time of writing it has grossed north of $184 million. And it only opened yesterday in China. So although not stellar in the world of blockbuster movies it's not going to be a studio-killer like "Heaven's Gate").
And I suspect there's a good reason for that latent salvation. I think kids are loving this movie, driving repeat viewings and unexpected word of mouth. It is certainly a family friendly experience. There are no truly terrifying scenes that will haunt young children. A dragon-induced death, not seen on screen, is - notwithstanding the intro Frozen-esque cartoon sequence - the only obvious one in the movie and is (as above) played for laughs. There are fantastical sets and landscapes. Performing whales. A happy-ending (albeit not the one I was cynically expecting). And an extended dragon-farting scene, and what kids are not going to love that!!
Directed by Stephen Gaghan ("Syriana", but better known as a writer than a director) it's a jumbled messy bear of a movie but is in no way an unpleasant watch. I would take a grandkid along to watch this again. It even has some nuggets of gold hidden within its matted coat.
As this is primarily one for the kids, I'm giving the movie two ratings: 4/10 for adults and 8/10 for kids... the Smashbomb rating is the mean of these.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the review on One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/02/22/doolittle-2019/ . Thanks).
Doctor Doolittle (Robert Downey Jnr) - famed animal doctor, with the unique ability to communicate with any animal - is now holed up in his animal sanctuary, a recluse. His beloved wife - adventurer Lily - was lost at sea (in a cartoon sequence that could have just used the same clip from "Frozen"). He's lost the will to practice; and almost lost the will to live.
Impinging on his morose life come two humans: Tommy Stubbings (Harry Collett), a reluctant hunter with a wounded squirrel, and Lady Rose (Carmel Laniado), daughter of the Queen of England. (We'll quietly ignore the coincidence that, after what looks like several years of mourning, these two independently pitch up at Chez Doolittle within ten minutes of each other!).
For the Queen (the omnipresent Jessie Buckley) is dying, and noone (other than us viewers, let in on the deal) suspect foul play might be at work in the form of Lord Thomas Badgley (the ever-reliable Jim Broadbent) and the Queen's old leech-loving doctor Blair MĆ¼dfly (a moustache-twiddling Michael Sheen).
Doolittle must engage in a perilous journey to find the only cure that will save both the Queen and his animal sanctuary - the fruit of the tree on a missing island that his long lost love was searching for.
Let's start with the most obvious point first up. Robert Downey Jnr's Welsh accent is quite the most terrible, most preposterous, most unintelligible, most offensive (to the Welsh) attempt at an accent in a mainstream film in movie history. And that's really saying something when you have Laurence Olivier's Jewish father from "The Jazz Singer" and Russell Crowe's English cum Irish cum Scottish cum Yugoslavian "Robin Hood" in the list. Why? Just why? Was it to distance this version from Rex Harrison's? (Since most younger movie goers will be going "Rex who?" at this point, this seems unlikely). It's a wholly curious decision.
It turns RDj's presence in the movie from being an asset to a liability.
The movie has had a tortuous history. Filmed in 2018 at enormous expense, the film completely bombed at test screenings so they brought in more script writers to make it funnier and did extensive additional filming.
I actually disagree with the general view that the film is unfunny. For there are a few points in the movie where I laughed out loud. A fly's miraculous, if temporary, escape was one such moment. The duck laying an egg in fright, another.
However, these seem to stand out starkly in isolation as 'the funny bits they inserted'. Much of the rest of the movie's comedy falls painfully flat.
In terms of the acting, there are the obvious visual talents on show of Michael Sheen (doing a great English accent for a Welshman.... #irony), Jim Broadbent, Jessie Buckley, Joanna Page (blink and you'll miss her) and Antonio Banderas, as the swashbuckling pirate king cum father-in-law.
But the end titles are an amazing array of "Ah!" moments as the vocal performances are revealed: Emma Thompson as the parrot; Rami Malek as the gorilla; John Cena as the polar bear; Kumail Nanjiani at the ostrich; Octavia Spencer at the duck; Tom Holland as the dog; Selena Gomez as the giraffe; Marion Cotillade as the fox, Frances de la Tour as a flatulent dragon and Ralph Fiennes as an evil tiger with mummy issues. It's a gift for future contestants on "Pointless"!
There are a lot of poe-faced critics throwing brick-bats at this movie, and to a degree it's deserved. They lavished $175 million on it, and it looked like it was going to be a thumping loss. (However, against all the odds, at the time of writing it has grossed north of $184 million. And it only opened yesterday in China. So although not stellar in the world of blockbuster movies it's not going to be a studio-killer like "Heaven's Gate").
And I suspect there's a good reason for that latent salvation. I think kids are loving this movie, driving repeat viewings and unexpected word of mouth. It is certainly a family friendly experience. There are no truly terrifying scenes that will haunt young children. A dragon-induced death, not seen on screen, is - notwithstanding the intro Frozen-esque cartoon sequence - the only obvious one in the movie and is (as above) played for laughs. There are fantastical sets and landscapes. Performing whales. A happy-ending (albeit not the one I was cynically expecting). And an extended dragon-farting scene, and what kids are not going to love that!!
Directed by Stephen Gaghan ("Syriana", but better known as a writer than a director) it's a jumbled messy bear of a movie but is in no way an unpleasant watch. I would take a grandkid along to watch this again. It even has some nuggets of gold hidden within its matted coat.
As this is primarily one for the kids, I'm giving the movie two ratings: 4/10 for adults and 8/10 for kids... the Smashbomb rating is the mean of these.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the review on One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/02/22/doolittle-2019/ . Thanks).
