Search
Merissa (11925 KP) rated Bad Business (Billionaire's Club #17) in Books
Sep 26, 2023
BAD BUSINESS is the seventeenth and final book in the Billionaire's Club series, featuring Ro (Rome) and Maddie, both of whom we have met before.
Maddie is a fixer, always happy to solve everyone else's problems whilst ignoring her own. And Ro certainly has problems - he's still fighting a custody battle for his son and getting nowhere fast. It doesn't help that Jack is acting out due to all the changes. Top that with a cherry on the top in the shape of his ex coming back from the dead (I kid you not!) and it's all going on. He's dealing with it all as best he can and still has time for his family. I thought he was a brilliant, no-nonsense character.
I liked Maddie and her get-go attitude. There was nothing that could faze her until she looked in the mirror and, I'm afraid, this is where it got to me a little. I was SO glad when Ro gave her the harsh truth, I really was!!! Life isn't a bed of roses for anyone all the time but it felt as though Maddie was wallowing in it, holding a 'Poor Me Pity Party' for one. I do understand her reaction though. It's easy to fall back on old habits because they're comfortable.
All in all, this was a great read that I enjoyed, and I am looking forward to Brooks' story.
** 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; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Sep 26, 2023
Maddie is a fixer, always happy to solve everyone else's problems whilst ignoring her own. And Ro certainly has problems - he's still fighting a custody battle for his son and getting nowhere fast. It doesn't help that Jack is acting out due to all the changes. Top that with a cherry on the top in the shape of his ex coming back from the dead (I kid you not!) and it's all going on. He's dealing with it all as best he can and still has time for his family. I thought he was a brilliant, no-nonsense character.
I liked Maddie and her get-go attitude. There was nothing that could faze her until she looked in the mirror and, I'm afraid, this is where it got to me a little. I was SO glad when Ro gave her the harsh truth, I really was!!! Life isn't a bed of roses for anyone all the time but it felt as though Maddie was wallowing in it, holding a 'Poor Me Pity Party' for one. I do understand her reaction though. It's easy to fall back on old habits because they're comfortable.
All in all, this was a great read that I enjoyed, and I am looking forward to Brooks' story.
** 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; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Sep 26, 2023
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated 7500 (2019) in Movies
Jun 28, 2020
A 'small film' that packs a big punch
I'm not sure if there is an "IQ" table of Hollywood stars, but I would reckon if there is then Joseph Gordon-Levitt would rate pretty highly. Whenever I see him interviewed he comes across as a highly articulate and intelligent bloke. And that intelligence filters through into his choices of movie role. If you look back at his filmography on IMDB the first thing you notice is that his output is pretty sparse and selective, and the next is that the projects he's done mostly deliver a pretty strong hit rate: "500 Days of Summer"; "Inception", "Looper", "The Dark Knight Rises"; "Don Jon".... the list is impressive.
Here he stars (and really stars) in a small German film. It only had a $5 million budget and in some ways it shows: the speaking cast totals about a dozen; the single location used is the cockpit (an Airbus A320 simulator somewhere? Or a set? The production design is so good, it's difficult to tell) ; and the "score" is so minimalistic (a solo piano piece over the end titles) that it doesn't even merit an IMDB music credit!
But in many ways this is a case of 'small is beautiful'. For this is an extremely tense and claustrophobic action picture.
The Plot: German Captain Michael Lutzmann (Carlo Kitzlinger) and American Co-pilot Tobias Ellis (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) are about to pilot an Airbus A320 on a routine flight from Berlin to Paris. By coincidence, also on the flight is Tobias's partner and mother of his son, stewardess Gökce (Aylin Tezel). Shortly into the flight, three terrorists - Kenan (Murathan Muslu), Daniel (Paul Wollin) and youngster Vedat (Omid Memar) - take over the aircraft. Tobias issues a "7500" (hijack in progress) code. All that is protecting the injured pilots and the security of the 80 people on the flight is the cockpit door.
The film starts slowly, building atmosphere through the pre-flight chit-chat between the pilots and a leisurely take-off. I loved this development of character by Oscar-nominated shorts director Patrick Vollrath. But when the action starts, it starts with a bang and continues in truly tense and visceral style. There's a sense of creeping dread when you realise the terrorist's use of hostages to get the door open, and of who the hostages might be.
I note that one of the "thanks" for the film was director Paul Greengrass, who of course made the outstanding 9/11-themed "United 93" back in 2006. It would be fascinating to understand whether this was a "thank-you" for the inspiration the classic film gave Vollrath, or if there was some practical consultancy undertaken there.
Star of the show here is Joseph Gordon-Levitt who delivers a peerless performance as the pilot under extreme stress. Veering cyclically through terror, emotional breakdown and calm 'training-kicking-in' modes, it's a performance that is almost Oscar nomination-worthy in my book. He's on screen for virtually every shot of the film, and really earned his fee here. He makes for a very believable pilot.
I've read other comment that says the terrorists are rather 2-dimensional in their attempts to "do a 9/11". And to a degree I agree. A nice angle though is the relationship that develops between Tobias and young Vedat in the second half of the movie. There's a 'Stockholm Syndrome' vibe going on here, but this never quite gets resolved satisfactorily.
As such, unfortunately this 'back 9' never really quite lived up to the promise of the first 45 minutes for me. And as a single-location story that had nowhere else to go, the abrupt ending will not be to the liking of some I'm sure.
Not to be confused with the 2014 horror "Flight 7500", this is for once a B-movie that's real nail-biter. The movie doesn't pull its punches, and although there is little of the more graphic violence actually shown, the mind can fill in the gaps effectively which makes for some upsetting moments. Although it never quite lives up to its early promise at only 93 minutes it is strongly deserving of your attention. The movie is available for viewing via Amazon-Prime.
(For the full graphical review please check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/06/28/one-manns-movies-film-review-the-7500-2020/ .)
Here he stars (and really stars) in a small German film. It only had a $5 million budget and in some ways it shows: the speaking cast totals about a dozen; the single location used is the cockpit (an Airbus A320 simulator somewhere? Or a set? The production design is so good, it's difficult to tell) ; and the "score" is so minimalistic (a solo piano piece over the end titles) that it doesn't even merit an IMDB music credit!
But in many ways this is a case of 'small is beautiful'. For this is an extremely tense and claustrophobic action picture.
The Plot: German Captain Michael Lutzmann (Carlo Kitzlinger) and American Co-pilot Tobias Ellis (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) are about to pilot an Airbus A320 on a routine flight from Berlin to Paris. By coincidence, also on the flight is Tobias's partner and mother of his son, stewardess Gökce (Aylin Tezel). Shortly into the flight, three terrorists - Kenan (Murathan Muslu), Daniel (Paul Wollin) and youngster Vedat (Omid Memar) - take over the aircraft. Tobias issues a "7500" (hijack in progress) code. All that is protecting the injured pilots and the security of the 80 people on the flight is the cockpit door.
The film starts slowly, building atmosphere through the pre-flight chit-chat between the pilots and a leisurely take-off. I loved this development of character by Oscar-nominated shorts director Patrick Vollrath. But when the action starts, it starts with a bang and continues in truly tense and visceral style. There's a sense of creeping dread when you realise the terrorist's use of hostages to get the door open, and of who the hostages might be.
I note that one of the "thanks" for the film was director Paul Greengrass, who of course made the outstanding 9/11-themed "United 93" back in 2006. It would be fascinating to understand whether this was a "thank-you" for the inspiration the classic film gave Vollrath, or if there was some practical consultancy undertaken there.
Star of the show here is Joseph Gordon-Levitt who delivers a peerless performance as the pilot under extreme stress. Veering cyclically through terror, emotional breakdown and calm 'training-kicking-in' modes, it's a performance that is almost Oscar nomination-worthy in my book. He's on screen for virtually every shot of the film, and really earned his fee here. He makes for a very believable pilot.
I've read other comment that says the terrorists are rather 2-dimensional in their attempts to "do a 9/11". And to a degree I agree. A nice angle though is the relationship that develops between Tobias and young Vedat in the second half of the movie. There's a 'Stockholm Syndrome' vibe going on here, but this never quite gets resolved satisfactorily.
As such, unfortunately this 'back 9' never really quite lived up to the promise of the first 45 minutes for me. And as a single-location story that had nowhere else to go, the abrupt ending will not be to the liking of some I'm sure.
Not to be confused with the 2014 horror "Flight 7500", this is for once a B-movie that's real nail-biter. The movie doesn't pull its punches, and although there is little of the more graphic violence actually shown, the mind can fill in the gaps effectively which makes for some upsetting moments. Although it never quite lives up to its early promise at only 93 minutes it is strongly deserving of your attention. The movie is available for viewing via Amazon-Prime.
(For the full graphical review please check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/06/28/one-manns-movies-film-review-the-7500-2020/ .)
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Such Sweet Sorrow in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<b><i>I received this book for free from Publisher in exchange for an honest review. This does not affect my opinion of the book or the content of my review.</i></b><i>Such Sweet Sorrow</i> is quite literally an unwritten sequel to <i>Romeo and Juliet</i> coinciding with <i>Hamlet</i> with a dark twist, or in other words, a bridge between the end of one Shakespeare play and the beginning of another.
I personally liked Trouts version of Romeo as he journeys to Denmark in the quest to save Juliet from death - he's much more spunky, but he has his romantic elements as well that Shakespeare originally placed in him. Hamlet is just as cheeky as his original counterpart, if not more cheeky (<i>Hamlet</i> is my favorite Shakespeare play, and it's not actually because of the ending). Juliet, like Romeo, also has another side to her Trout creates - she's more badass. (<i>Romeo and Juliet</i> is my least favorite - interesting combo going on here honestly.)
But <i>Such Sweet Sorrow</i> can be overwhelming. Trout doesn't just have <i>Hamlet</i> mashed with <i>Romeo and Juliet</i> - she's got Norse mythology and Greek mythology and who knows what else (some reviewers on Goodreads say anything you can think of... Essentially). Regardless, there is definitely a mess of things going on throughout and I just decided to go with it rather than question the book in its entirety (like what other mythological aspects are involved).
For the first half of the book, Romeo and Hamlet are, for the most part, wandering around cluelessly through this place called the Afterjord - it can get boring pretty quickly, but there is so much going on with the creatures they come across, it's not actually boring (I'm too busy trying to keep track of what's going on so I'm not lost). <i>Such Sweet Sorrow </i>doesn't actually pick up until after Romeo and Hamlet finally rescue Juliet and try to make their way back to the mortal world.
But while there is so much going on throughout, I actually liked this strange little book in all its weird complexities. However...
I'm disappointed that a cliffhanger is involved and nowhere on Goodreads does it say <i>Such Sweet Sorrow</i> has a sequel in the works.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/arc-review-such-sweet-sorrow-by-jenny-trou/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
I personally liked Trouts version of Romeo as he journeys to Denmark in the quest to save Juliet from death - he's much more spunky, but he has his romantic elements as well that Shakespeare originally placed in him. Hamlet is just as cheeky as his original counterpart, if not more cheeky (<i>Hamlet</i> is my favorite Shakespeare play, and it's not actually because of the ending). Juliet, like Romeo, also has another side to her Trout creates - she's more badass. (<i>Romeo and Juliet</i> is my least favorite - interesting combo going on here honestly.)
But <i>Such Sweet Sorrow</i> can be overwhelming. Trout doesn't just have <i>Hamlet</i> mashed with <i>Romeo and Juliet</i> - she's got Norse mythology and Greek mythology and who knows what else (some reviewers on Goodreads say anything you can think of... Essentially). Regardless, there is definitely a mess of things going on throughout and I just decided to go with it rather than question the book in its entirety (like what other mythological aspects are involved).
For the first half of the book, Romeo and Hamlet are, for the most part, wandering around cluelessly through this place called the Afterjord - it can get boring pretty quickly, but there is so much going on with the creatures they come across, it's not actually boring (I'm too busy trying to keep track of what's going on so I'm not lost). <i>Such Sweet Sorrow </i>doesn't actually pick up until after Romeo and Hamlet finally rescue Juliet and try to make their way back to the mortal world.
But while there is so much going on throughout, I actually liked this strange little book in all its weird complexities. However...
I'm disappointed that a cliffhanger is involved and nowhere on Goodreads does it say <i>Such Sweet Sorrow</i> has a sequel in the works.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/arc-review-such-sweet-sorrow-by-jenny-trou/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Playmobil: The Movie (2019) in Movies
Jun 20, 2020
What can I say about Playmobil The Movie? You know how in real life Playmobil is naff when you compare it to Lego? ... Yeah.
"It's obviously a rip off of the Lego movies!" - Direct quote from my friend's son, and he's not wrong. It's basically a reverse, here people go into the fictional world whereas in the Lego movies the fictional world experiences the real world. There are many things that are reversed. Lego remembers its characters limitations, Playmobil doesn't. Lego is entertaining, Playmobil... isn't. I like daft humour so this should have been a hit with me. "But Emma, it isn't made for you." Well yes, but even I laugh at children's films, and there's definitely an aspect of it directed at adults and they don't hit either.
The beginning of the film is an experience. It opens with a musical number that doesn't have any impact at all, it's also quickly forgotten as the fun is interrupted by police officers arriving at the house. I saw with my jaw slowly dropping, this is a U rated films, they weren't really going to start it by... oh, yep, they did.
This change of mood was quite shocking to watch. It's an emergency stop of plot points, and not something that just adults would notice. A child a few rows in front turned to his mum and said "what happened?!" I unfortunately couldn't hear how she responded.
When it comes to humour, apart from one chuckle that appears in the trailer there was only one thing that I laughed at. I really did laugh out loud. It wasn't a great joke, it was verging on dad joke territory but the delivery was incredible.
I was surprisingly annoyed by the fact that at the beginning (and in the trailer) Marla doesn't know how to walk with her new Playmobil legs, yet moments later she's crawling before going back to not knowing how to walk. I don't expect a masterpiece, but I do expect at least some consistency.
Playmobil leaves me at a loss, I can't really identify anything exciting about the film. The story isn't very inspiring and the characters don't give you anything to identify with despite having the opportunity. The film also suffers from excess, storyline that goes nowhere, characters that don't get used for any real purpose... I don't think this was a particularly good attempt at bringing this toy to life, it might have been more suited to short skits in a TV series or the cutting room floor.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/08/playmobil-movie-review.html
"It's obviously a rip off of the Lego movies!" - Direct quote from my friend's son, and he's not wrong. It's basically a reverse, here people go into the fictional world whereas in the Lego movies the fictional world experiences the real world. There are many things that are reversed. Lego remembers its characters limitations, Playmobil doesn't. Lego is entertaining, Playmobil... isn't. I like daft humour so this should have been a hit with me. "But Emma, it isn't made for you." Well yes, but even I laugh at children's films, and there's definitely an aspect of it directed at adults and they don't hit either.
The beginning of the film is an experience. It opens with a musical number that doesn't have any impact at all, it's also quickly forgotten as the fun is interrupted by police officers arriving at the house. I saw with my jaw slowly dropping, this is a U rated films, they weren't really going to start it by... oh, yep, they did.
This change of mood was quite shocking to watch. It's an emergency stop of plot points, and not something that just adults would notice. A child a few rows in front turned to his mum and said "what happened?!" I unfortunately couldn't hear how she responded.
When it comes to humour, apart from one chuckle that appears in the trailer there was only one thing that I laughed at. I really did laugh out loud. It wasn't a great joke, it was verging on dad joke territory but the delivery was incredible.
I was surprisingly annoyed by the fact that at the beginning (and in the trailer) Marla doesn't know how to walk with her new Playmobil legs, yet moments later she's crawling before going back to not knowing how to walk. I don't expect a masterpiece, but I do expect at least some consistency.
Playmobil leaves me at a loss, I can't really identify anything exciting about the film. The story isn't very inspiring and the characters don't give you anything to identify with despite having the opportunity. The film also suffers from excess, storyline that goes nowhere, characters that don't get used for any real purpose... I don't think this was a particularly good attempt at bringing this toy to life, it might have been more suited to short skits in a TV series or the cutting room floor.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/08/playmobil-movie-review.html
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Fifty Shades of Grey (2015) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
A tiresome affair
The Fifty Shades phenomenon is something very hard to calculate. Yes, we know its sold millions of copies worldwide, but its readership is likely to be much higher. I’m sure someone somewhere will know another person who didn’t go out and buy the book, but just borrowed it.
Creating a film from E.L. James’ novel was never going to be an easy task for numerous reasons. The harsh reality is that Brits have mixed views with regards to seeing sex on the big screen – nonetheless, Sam Taylor-Johnson, director of the critically acclaimed Nowhere Boy, was chosen to helm an adaptation. But is it a success?
Partially is the short answer. The film is nicely shot and well-acted, but in trying to craft a ‘classy’ movie, Taylor-Johnson has stripped it of what people read the novel for – escapism and of course sex.
For the uninitiated, Fifty Shades follows the story of young Ana Steele, a shy, timid virgin as she begins a rather, shall we say, unusual relationship with the wealthy, intimidating Christian Grey.
The lead roles are cast well with Dakota Johnson playing Ana as she appears in the novel – minus her irritating thought processes – and Jamie Dornan as Mr Grey. Other roles are scarce on the ground with glorified cameos for Rita Ora and Marcia Gay Harden.
It’s been well publicised that with only 20 minutes of sex in a 2 hour film, pleasing hardcore fans of the books was going to be a difficult task. The sex that is there is reasonably tastefully edited and nicely choreographed, though this also creates Fifty Shades’ biggest problem.
There simply is no story to speak of, with each raunchy scene being scattered alongside numerous plot fillers like helicopter rides which act as a catalyst to the next sequence of passion and when the majority of them are removed, watching is a tiresome affair.
Moreover, whilst the leads perform well on their own, the chemistry between them is sorely lacking. At no point in the film is there a whisper of sexual tension – with Dornan’s Grey coming across overly creepy and Johnson’s Ana reeking of desperation.
Despite its 18 certification here in the UK, Fifty Shades never feels like it is fully deserving of it. With a highly controversial and no doubt too lenient 12 rating being awarded to it in France, it almost feels like producers here tried as hard as they could to slip it into the 18 category – therefore maximising controversy before its release.
Unfortunately, digging beneath the surface reveals a good film trying desperately to break out of its shackles. Exploring the characters more than in James’ admittedly lacklustre novel ultimately does more harm than good.
Overall, Sam Taylor-Johnson should be commended for trying to bring a controversial novel to the big screen and the soundtrack is very good indeed. However, the lack of chemistry between the two leads and a lack of sex and story mean you’re more likely to be checking your watch than checking your heart rate.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/02/14/a-tiresome-affair-fifty-shades-of-grey-review/
Creating a film from E.L. James’ novel was never going to be an easy task for numerous reasons. The harsh reality is that Brits have mixed views with regards to seeing sex on the big screen – nonetheless, Sam Taylor-Johnson, director of the critically acclaimed Nowhere Boy, was chosen to helm an adaptation. But is it a success?
Partially is the short answer. The film is nicely shot and well-acted, but in trying to craft a ‘classy’ movie, Taylor-Johnson has stripped it of what people read the novel for – escapism and of course sex.
For the uninitiated, Fifty Shades follows the story of young Ana Steele, a shy, timid virgin as she begins a rather, shall we say, unusual relationship with the wealthy, intimidating Christian Grey.
The lead roles are cast well with Dakota Johnson playing Ana as she appears in the novel – minus her irritating thought processes – and Jamie Dornan as Mr Grey. Other roles are scarce on the ground with glorified cameos for Rita Ora and Marcia Gay Harden.
It’s been well publicised that with only 20 minutes of sex in a 2 hour film, pleasing hardcore fans of the books was going to be a difficult task. The sex that is there is reasonably tastefully edited and nicely choreographed, though this also creates Fifty Shades’ biggest problem.
There simply is no story to speak of, with each raunchy scene being scattered alongside numerous plot fillers like helicopter rides which act as a catalyst to the next sequence of passion and when the majority of them are removed, watching is a tiresome affair.
Moreover, whilst the leads perform well on their own, the chemistry between them is sorely lacking. At no point in the film is there a whisper of sexual tension – with Dornan’s Grey coming across overly creepy and Johnson’s Ana reeking of desperation.
Despite its 18 certification here in the UK, Fifty Shades never feels like it is fully deserving of it. With a highly controversial and no doubt too lenient 12 rating being awarded to it in France, it almost feels like producers here tried as hard as they could to slip it into the 18 category – therefore maximising controversy before its release.
Unfortunately, digging beneath the surface reveals a good film trying desperately to break out of its shackles. Exploring the characters more than in James’ admittedly lacklustre novel ultimately does more harm than good.
Overall, Sam Taylor-Johnson should be commended for trying to bring a controversial novel to the big screen and the soundtrack is very good indeed. However, the lack of chemistry between the two leads and a lack of sex and story mean you’re more likely to be checking your watch than checking your heart rate.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/02/14/a-tiresome-affair-fifty-shades-of-grey-review/
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Dumplin' (2018) in Movies
Jan 16, 2019
Good On So Many Levels
High school student Willowdean (Danielle MacDonald) decides to enter a beauty pageant to spite her mom Rosie (Jennifer Aniston), a former pageant queen.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
The characters in this story are not just unique and enjoyable. They also represent the melting pot of what this world should be. Willowdean feels out of place because she is heavyset so she tries to attack herself before others do. Her Aunt Lucy (Hilliary Begley) tried to teach her to do the opposite before she passed away, but Willowdean didn’t grasp her aunt’s confidence unfortunately. Through her journey of pageant life, she makes two good friends: Hannah (Bex Taylor-Klaus) who is anti-establishment (or anti-everything, rather) and Millie (Maddie Baillio) a ball of happiness with an overprotective mom. They are at the core of a slew of good characters that brighten the story. And did I mention the drag queens? Phe-no-men-al.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
The conflict here is less about outward confrontation and more about inner discovery. Willowdean’s greatest enemy is herself, something most of us can probably relate to. It is refreshing to watching her battle old demons while coming to terms with who she is and who she can be. Destroying yourself is toxic and Dumplin’ shows how a negative view of one’s self can damage and destroy the relationships around us.
Genre: 10
Memorability: 8
The story as a whole has a magical feeling to it that’s centered in realism, almost like a trailer park Cinderella. I thought of all the 201 movies I watched in 2018. Few touched me quite like this one. A really memorable movie can make you laugh, maybe cry a little, and reflect. Dumplin’ gets the job done. It teaches you never to underestimate yourself and to go all out even when you don’t think you have a shot.
Pace: 10
I love when storytelling is consistent and blends seamlessly from one scene to the next. You get that here. There’s not a whole lot of pointless dialogue that takes you nowhere or random scenes that forces relationship-building. It moves consistently like a batch of waves. Before you know it, it’s over and you’ve had a great ride.
Plot: 10
The story isn’t just original but heartfelt. Something we can all get behind. I can honestly say that I’ve never seen anything like it. You can see the ending coming a mile away, but you’re having so much of a good time you don’t care!
Resolution: 10
Just as with the plot, you definitely see the ending coming a mile away. Doesn’t make it any less awesome or touching. Mum’s the word, but it ties on a nice little bow on the movie as a whole.
Overall: 98
I’m always wary of Netflix originals. Not because they can’t be good, I’ve seen plenty of amazing things on Netflix. Rather I understand that there’s a pressure for them to keep putting out original content at a fast pace because the market is catching up. This could mean more swings-and-misses. Dumplin’ is not a casualty of that in the least. Quality movie.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
The characters in this story are not just unique and enjoyable. They also represent the melting pot of what this world should be. Willowdean feels out of place because she is heavyset so she tries to attack herself before others do. Her Aunt Lucy (Hilliary Begley) tried to teach her to do the opposite before she passed away, but Willowdean didn’t grasp her aunt’s confidence unfortunately. Through her journey of pageant life, she makes two good friends: Hannah (Bex Taylor-Klaus) who is anti-establishment (or anti-everything, rather) and Millie (Maddie Baillio) a ball of happiness with an overprotective mom. They are at the core of a slew of good characters that brighten the story. And did I mention the drag queens? Phe-no-men-al.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
The conflict here is less about outward confrontation and more about inner discovery. Willowdean’s greatest enemy is herself, something most of us can probably relate to. It is refreshing to watching her battle old demons while coming to terms with who she is and who she can be. Destroying yourself is toxic and Dumplin’ shows how a negative view of one’s self can damage and destroy the relationships around us.
Genre: 10
Memorability: 8
The story as a whole has a magical feeling to it that’s centered in realism, almost like a trailer park Cinderella. I thought of all the 201 movies I watched in 2018. Few touched me quite like this one. A really memorable movie can make you laugh, maybe cry a little, and reflect. Dumplin’ gets the job done. It teaches you never to underestimate yourself and to go all out even when you don’t think you have a shot.
Pace: 10
I love when storytelling is consistent and blends seamlessly from one scene to the next. You get that here. There’s not a whole lot of pointless dialogue that takes you nowhere or random scenes that forces relationship-building. It moves consistently like a batch of waves. Before you know it, it’s over and you’ve had a great ride.
Plot: 10
The story isn’t just original but heartfelt. Something we can all get behind. I can honestly say that I’ve never seen anything like it. You can see the ending coming a mile away, but you’re having so much of a good time you don’t care!
Resolution: 10
Just as with the plot, you definitely see the ending coming a mile away. Doesn’t make it any less awesome or touching. Mum’s the word, but it ties on a nice little bow on the movie as a whole.
Overall: 98
I’m always wary of Netflix originals. Not because they can’t be good, I’ve seen plenty of amazing things on Netflix. Rather I understand that there’s a pressure for them to keep putting out original content at a fast pace because the market is catching up. This could mean more swings-and-misses. Dumplin’ is not a casualty of that in the least. Quality movie.
Darren (1599 KP) rated The Mountain Between Us (2017) in Movies
Oct 14, 2019
Characters – Ben Bass is a surgeon, he needs to get back to New York to perform an operation, when the crash happens, he focuses on aiming to stay at the crash site believing he will get rescued, reluctant to follow Alex’s idea to find their own way out. His skills as a doctor are key to survive this one. Alex is a photographer heading home for her wedding, she does get hurt in the crash and wants to go in search of help rather than wait. These two are professionals that make decisions based on logic over panic which is why even if they are opposite, their discussions make sense.
Performances – Idris Elba and Kate Winslet are the only ones that get any major screen time, they are both great in this film as we see them both playing to their strengths.
Story – The story here follows two strangers who are involved in a plane crash in a mountain range and must put their differences a side to survive while searching and hoping for rescue. This is a survival movie at heart with a weak romance movie on the side, we go through the normal can they survive situations, each one becoming deadlier as they go along and leaving us guessing how rather than if they will get rescued, it seems to clear to say that they won’t make it because of it only being a two person. The fact that the dog is the most interesting character doesn’t help us out here and the timing we go through just seems weak when it comes to telling us how long they have been there, we get the odd scene, but learn nothing about moments inbetween.
Action/Adventure/Romance – The action comes from the scene in which the plane crashed, it is shot well but is the only one we see. The adventure side of the film shows us just what the two must go through to survive their ordeal. The romance between them seems to just get tagged in for no particular reasons.
Settings – The film puts us in the middle of nowhere in a mountain range, it looks stunning with views from the top, the biggest problem with the setting is we just don’t get the full scale of the situation.
Scene of the Movie – The crash scene.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Not explaining the time period there are lost for.
Final Thoughts – This is a standard movie with a simple story that gets everything it needs to in the film without being anything overly memorable.
Overall: Standard and safe.
Performances – Idris Elba and Kate Winslet are the only ones that get any major screen time, they are both great in this film as we see them both playing to their strengths.
Story – The story here follows two strangers who are involved in a plane crash in a mountain range and must put their differences a side to survive while searching and hoping for rescue. This is a survival movie at heart with a weak romance movie on the side, we go through the normal can they survive situations, each one becoming deadlier as they go along and leaving us guessing how rather than if they will get rescued, it seems to clear to say that they won’t make it because of it only being a two person. The fact that the dog is the most interesting character doesn’t help us out here and the timing we go through just seems weak when it comes to telling us how long they have been there, we get the odd scene, but learn nothing about moments inbetween.
Action/Adventure/Romance – The action comes from the scene in which the plane crashed, it is shot well but is the only one we see. The adventure side of the film shows us just what the two must go through to survive their ordeal. The romance between them seems to just get tagged in for no particular reasons.
Settings – The film puts us in the middle of nowhere in a mountain range, it looks stunning with views from the top, the biggest problem with the setting is we just don’t get the full scale of the situation.
Scene of the Movie – The crash scene.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Not explaining the time period there are lost for.
Final Thoughts – This is a standard movie with a simple story that gets everything it needs to in the film without being anything overly memorable.
Overall: Standard and safe.
LilyLovesIndie (123 KP) rated Indivisible Line in Books
Nov 5, 2018
Two people, thrown together by coincidence develop a bond that goes much deeper than blood. Sarah and Greg experience loss, injury and much more as they come to realise that, when all is said and done, love is really all they needed from the start.
I thoroughly enjoyed this new offering from Font and found it to be a delightful little romance that was easy to read, yet full of twists and turns as Greg and Sarah tried to work out their feelings for each other. The plot itself does, at first glance, seem somewhat familiar - girl meets boy, two different worlds, and all that usual jazz - but this is Font we're talking about, and you can feel from the first few chapters that there is going to be something more in this story. In true style, Font throws in adversity and drama from the off, never overdoing the 'woe is me' that Sarah could play on, but keeping a perfect balance between angst and romance.
Characterisation is something that I am always on the look out for, and Font, as usual, delivers a super cast who you engage with and find quite easy to relate to. Sarah is as stubborn as a mule, but it works more as an endearing feature than a character flaw. You root for her, you want her life to come good, you want her to find that happiness you know she deserves. Greg is an enigma at first, and he never really sheds that persona until much later in the story, but again, it is an endearing part of his character, rather than a flaw. The supporting ensemble of Lily, Trimble, Matilda and Simon are equally enjoyable to read, helping at key points to be a stable feature for Sarah and Greg during times of need.
If there was one thing I could quibble over it would be, and I'm being super nit-picky here, the pace. Personally, I found the pace to be a little slow in places, but note the 'in places' - at other times, it was splendid and pulled you right into the story so that you had to keep reading. Once you reach 50%, the book is near impossible to put down, but I guess I just wanted that momentum there from a little earlier on rather than taking that extra bit of time. Like I said, nit-picky, but that's me!
Something I felt was done exceedingly well in this book was the emotion, be it Sarah's sadness, confusion, love or Greg's anger, worry or determination - it was all there and it was all believable from start to finish. I got exasperated when both Sarah and Greg were being daft and not noticing the signs, I cried for most of the last 10% (no spoilers in my reviews, but seriously, get yourself some tissues at 89%!) and I gasped in shock as plot twists hit me out of nowhere (you'd think I'd be used to this after reading Font's other works, but she totally got me again). It was written with excellent skill and balance, and I have to give praise where it's due, because Font did a fantastic job of making the emotions pour out of the page and straight into your heart.
And so, the end of another review. To conclude, it was a very enjoyable read and one I'll be recommending to friends and family ahead of that poolside reading time we call summer holidays. Characters, emotion, plot - all the key elements were there and it was, as always, a very well written story from start to finish. Well done Lorenz Font, you've written another super story that will no doubt be one I shall return to read one day in the future.
*This book was first reviewed on Lily Loves Indie as part of a blog tour, for which an ARC was received in return for an honest review*
I thoroughly enjoyed this new offering from Font and found it to be a delightful little romance that was easy to read, yet full of twists and turns as Greg and Sarah tried to work out their feelings for each other. The plot itself does, at first glance, seem somewhat familiar - girl meets boy, two different worlds, and all that usual jazz - but this is Font we're talking about, and you can feel from the first few chapters that there is going to be something more in this story. In true style, Font throws in adversity and drama from the off, never overdoing the 'woe is me' that Sarah could play on, but keeping a perfect balance between angst and romance.
Characterisation is something that I am always on the look out for, and Font, as usual, delivers a super cast who you engage with and find quite easy to relate to. Sarah is as stubborn as a mule, but it works more as an endearing feature than a character flaw. You root for her, you want her life to come good, you want her to find that happiness you know she deserves. Greg is an enigma at first, and he never really sheds that persona until much later in the story, but again, it is an endearing part of his character, rather than a flaw. The supporting ensemble of Lily, Trimble, Matilda and Simon are equally enjoyable to read, helping at key points to be a stable feature for Sarah and Greg during times of need.
If there was one thing I could quibble over it would be, and I'm being super nit-picky here, the pace. Personally, I found the pace to be a little slow in places, but note the 'in places' - at other times, it was splendid and pulled you right into the story so that you had to keep reading. Once you reach 50%, the book is near impossible to put down, but I guess I just wanted that momentum there from a little earlier on rather than taking that extra bit of time. Like I said, nit-picky, but that's me!
Something I felt was done exceedingly well in this book was the emotion, be it Sarah's sadness, confusion, love or Greg's anger, worry or determination - it was all there and it was all believable from start to finish. I got exasperated when both Sarah and Greg were being daft and not noticing the signs, I cried for most of the last 10% (no spoilers in my reviews, but seriously, get yourself some tissues at 89%!) and I gasped in shock as plot twists hit me out of nowhere (you'd think I'd be used to this after reading Font's other works, but she totally got me again). It was written with excellent skill and balance, and I have to give praise where it's due, because Font did a fantastic job of making the emotions pour out of the page and straight into your heart.
And so, the end of another review. To conclude, it was a very enjoyable read and one I'll be recommending to friends and family ahead of that poolside reading time we call summer holidays. Characters, emotion, plot - all the key elements were there and it was, as always, a very well written story from start to finish. Well done Lorenz Font, you've written another super story that will no doubt be one I shall return to read one day in the future.
*This book was first reviewed on Lily Loves Indie as part of a blog tour, for which an ARC was received in return for an honest review*
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy in Books
Nov 14, 2019
What can be said about Douglas Adams' freewheeling science fiction comedy that hasn't been said before? Probably nothing but that doesn't mean it doesn't deserve a review.
I first came to the Hitchhiker's Guide series through this book. It was about 1981 I suppose and it was recommended by a school friend. I hadn't been aware of the radio series (although as luck would have it it was repeated on BBC Radio 4 within a few weeks) and it was a little while before the television adaptation appeared (which for all its faults - mainly a lack of budget - stayed true to the spirit of the books and the radio series rather more successfully than the film).
From the point I opened this and started reading I couldn't get enough Hitchhiker's Guide. Adams' style is so much like a swan on a lake - it all seems effortless on the surface but underneath there's a lot going on. As Adams' friend John Lloyd has commented, he had the ability to write backwards, so he would start with several pages of (what to other people would be) excellent material and after a couple of days' furious writing it would be down to 2 pages, but each sentence a carefully crafted gem. The result is like the difference between beer and vodka. You will enjoy drinking the beer but the distilled and concentrated vodka will knock you out.
There is real genius in the wit, ideas seemingly being pulled from nowhere and taking on a whole new aspect (towels for example). Delightful non-sequitors (especially from aliens who turn out to be pretty ordinary - or frequently less than ordinary), brilliant and inventive word play and sheer imagination and brio run through every page, all joined together by delightful asides from 'the book'.
The story itself is based on the radio series of the same name which was pretty much made up as it went along, Adams following whatever idea seemed to give him the best scope for a quick gag at the time. But somehow this all works and the story is remarkably coherent (although the book does veer away from the thread of the radio series at the very end). It has been said before that it resembles Gulliver's Travels as each new world reveals new wonders (or new banalities shining a light on our own humdrum existences here on Earth).
Oh the story? The book essentially follows one Arthur Dent, a completely unremarkable and normal human being apart from two things. Firstly his house is about to be demolished to make way for a bypass, a fact he was previously unaware of. Secondly his friend Ford Prefect (the book explains the name) is not from Guildford after all but from a small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse. When aliens show up to demolish the whole Earth to make way for an interstellar bypass, Ford saves Arthur from certain death and reveals he is a reporter for a book called The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy and he got stuck on Earth for rather a long time.
Arthur proceeds to have a rather horrible time being shot at, thrown out of spaceships, patronised and generally baffled by everything that is going on around him. But The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy is always on hand to try to explain things.
Incredibly amusing, brilliantly written and ultimately quoteable this not just a good book, it is something that really everyone should read.
I first came to the Hitchhiker's Guide series through this book. It was about 1981 I suppose and it was recommended by a school friend. I hadn't been aware of the radio series (although as luck would have it it was repeated on BBC Radio 4 within a few weeks) and it was a little while before the television adaptation appeared (which for all its faults - mainly a lack of budget - stayed true to the spirit of the books and the radio series rather more successfully than the film).
From the point I opened this and started reading I couldn't get enough Hitchhiker's Guide. Adams' style is so much like a swan on a lake - it all seems effortless on the surface but underneath there's a lot going on. As Adams' friend John Lloyd has commented, he had the ability to write backwards, so he would start with several pages of (what to other people would be) excellent material and after a couple of days' furious writing it would be down to 2 pages, but each sentence a carefully crafted gem. The result is like the difference between beer and vodka. You will enjoy drinking the beer but the distilled and concentrated vodka will knock you out.
There is real genius in the wit, ideas seemingly being pulled from nowhere and taking on a whole new aspect (towels for example). Delightful non-sequitors (especially from aliens who turn out to be pretty ordinary - or frequently less than ordinary), brilliant and inventive word play and sheer imagination and brio run through every page, all joined together by delightful asides from 'the book'.
The story itself is based on the radio series of the same name which was pretty much made up as it went along, Adams following whatever idea seemed to give him the best scope for a quick gag at the time. But somehow this all works and the story is remarkably coherent (although the book does veer away from the thread of the radio series at the very end). It has been said before that it resembles Gulliver's Travels as each new world reveals new wonders (or new banalities shining a light on our own humdrum existences here on Earth).
Oh the story? The book essentially follows one Arthur Dent, a completely unremarkable and normal human being apart from two things. Firstly his house is about to be demolished to make way for a bypass, a fact he was previously unaware of. Secondly his friend Ford Prefect (the book explains the name) is not from Guildford after all but from a small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse. When aliens show up to demolish the whole Earth to make way for an interstellar bypass, Ford saves Arthur from certain death and reveals he is a reporter for a book called The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy and he got stuck on Earth for rather a long time.
Arthur proceeds to have a rather horrible time being shot at, thrown out of spaceships, patronised and generally baffled by everything that is going on around him. But The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy is always on hand to try to explain things.
Incredibly amusing, brilliantly written and ultimately quoteable this not just a good book, it is something that really everyone should read.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Willy's Wonderland (2021) in Movies
Jul 18, 2021
Oh come on... you know I'm watching Nic Cage go full rage at some killer robots!
A stranger runs into bad luck as he nears a small town in the middle of nowhere. Luckily a local mechanic comes across him stranded and offers him assistance. But the bad luck isn't over. With no way to pay for his new tyres, he has to agree to some light cleaning work in the abandoned town attraction. What could possibly go wrong when you're locked in a family restaurant overnight with some large, menacing looking, animatronics?
What's not to love about this particular breed of film? Horror that is so over the top with daftness and unintentional/intentional humour really does hit the spot.
Is this storyline sensible? Absolutely not. If you pick at any thread this will very quickly fall apart... but we're here for the nonsense. You don't come to a Nic Cage film these days for anything else. And much like shark films, I have an independent scoring system to deem the quality of his offerings.
The dynamics between all of the characters is hilarious. Cage with... everyone... is stranger (as expected), and the others all have stereotypical elements to them that bounce back and forth well. Though none of them are quite as obvious as you'd see in spoof horrors though. Beth Grant is always fun to have in things, and she's got the sinister thing down quite well, definitely a great pick for this role.
Our animatronic actors have the perfect creepy movements, combine this with the oversized costumes and the somewhat magical elements to their activities, and you get some fantastic nightmare fuel.
Though I have to query who designed such a terrible layout for a family restaurant, I can't help but marvel at all the different rooms scattered around the building. A fantastic maze of terror waiting for anyone who enters, and each one with its retro-ramshackle look is a delight to see. Throw in the oversized entertainment and the look is great.
At just 88 minutes in length it's a nice easy watch, and you'll definitely have enough to keep you... intrigued? I found myself shouting at the screen with "why", "how" and "what" type questions, and that just added to my enjoyment. A masterpiece.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/07/willys-wonderland-movie-review.html
A stranger runs into bad luck as he nears a small town in the middle of nowhere. Luckily a local mechanic comes across him stranded and offers him assistance. But the bad luck isn't over. With no way to pay for his new tyres, he has to agree to some light cleaning work in the abandoned town attraction. What could possibly go wrong when you're locked in a family restaurant overnight with some large, menacing looking, animatronics?
What's not to love about this particular breed of film? Horror that is so over the top with daftness and unintentional/intentional humour really does hit the spot.
Is this storyline sensible? Absolutely not. If you pick at any thread this will very quickly fall apart... but we're here for the nonsense. You don't come to a Nic Cage film these days for anything else. And much like shark films, I have an independent scoring system to deem the quality of his offerings.
The dynamics between all of the characters is hilarious. Cage with... everyone... is stranger (as expected), and the others all have stereotypical elements to them that bounce back and forth well. Though none of them are quite as obvious as you'd see in spoof horrors though. Beth Grant is always fun to have in things, and she's got the sinister thing down quite well, definitely a great pick for this role.
Our animatronic actors have the perfect creepy movements, combine this with the oversized costumes and the somewhat magical elements to their activities, and you get some fantastic nightmare fuel.
Though I have to query who designed such a terrible layout for a family restaurant, I can't help but marvel at all the different rooms scattered around the building. A fantastic maze of terror waiting for anyone who enters, and each one with its retro-ramshackle look is a delight to see. Throw in the oversized entertainment and the look is great.
At just 88 minutes in length it's a nice easy watch, and you'll definitely have enough to keep you... intrigued? I found myself shouting at the screen with "why", "how" and "what" type questions, and that just added to my enjoyment. A masterpiece.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/07/willys-wonderland-movie-review.html