Search
Search results
Darren (1599 KP) rated Alone with Her (2007) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: Alone with Her starts warning statistics about how every minute 3 people become victims of stalkers and how easy it is to become one. We start by following our stalker in question Doug (Hanks) who has rigged a bag to wonder around with a hidden camera. When Doug picks his victim Amy (Talancon) he enters her house to place hidden cameras around her apartment while she is on holiday.
With the cameras set up Doug learns all the ins and outs of Amy’s live while she has no idea but when Doug starts trying to get to know Amy in person he uses his own information about her to make a relationship happen, but when things don’t go to his plan things turn sour and we see just how dangerous Doug can be.
Alone with Her brings us a disturbing look at how far a stalker can go, it all comes off early that it is just going to be watching but then when Doug gets involved in Amy’ life we get to see how far it goes. To think this film was made in 2006 just think how this could reach new levels with all the new technology we have in the world now. This film could make you paranoid about everything in your life but by the end it ends up going in an easy ending.
Actor Review
Colin Hanks: Doug is our stalker he likes to follow people’s lives when he picks his newest victim Amy he sets up cameras all over her house while following her around her everyday life, when things don’t go to his plan he starts getting involved in her life showing how dangerous he is. Colin gives us a disturbing performance that will use his charming side before showing his darker side.doug
Ana Claudia Talancon: Amy is the single lady that becomes the object of Doug’s obsession. She is unaware of anything going on but tore between what she wants from a chance meeting from Doug leading her to putting her life in danger when she finds out Doug’s true motives. Ana gives us a brave performance where she has to go through a lot during the film.amy
Support Cast: Alone with Her only really has two supporting cast members with Amy’s best friend and a potential love interest, they do what they need to but get eclipse by the two stars of the film.
Director Review: Eric Nicholas – Eric gives us a terrifying look at how a stalker could operate, with it starting off with simple watching before turning darker as the film continues.
Crime: Alone with Her shows how a criminal stalker goes about his plans.
Horror: Alone with Her shows how things end up getting out of hand when someone is watching your every move without you knowing.
Thriller: Alone with Her keeps you guessing to what will happen next and how far Doug will go.
Settings: Alone with Her keeps most of the settings inside the house of Amy as we watch everything she does this all works because it brings the horror of terror inside his own house.
Suggestion: Alone with Her is one to try because it does have a good idea of horror but does start slow. (Try It)
Best Part: The fact it could be real.
Worst Part: Slow starting.
Believability: This could easily happen to someone.
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: Could have one
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Budget: $1 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 18 Minutes
Tagline: Anytime. Anywhere. He’s watching.
Overall: Disturbing Thriller that will shock you with ow easy it is to become a victim of stalking
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/06/10/movie-reviews-101-midnight-horror-alone-with-her-2006/
With the cameras set up Doug learns all the ins and outs of Amy’s live while she has no idea but when Doug starts trying to get to know Amy in person he uses his own information about her to make a relationship happen, but when things don’t go to his plan things turn sour and we see just how dangerous Doug can be.
Alone with Her brings us a disturbing look at how far a stalker can go, it all comes off early that it is just going to be watching but then when Doug gets involved in Amy’ life we get to see how far it goes. To think this film was made in 2006 just think how this could reach new levels with all the new technology we have in the world now. This film could make you paranoid about everything in your life but by the end it ends up going in an easy ending.
Actor Review
Colin Hanks: Doug is our stalker he likes to follow people’s lives when he picks his newest victim Amy he sets up cameras all over her house while following her around her everyday life, when things don’t go to his plan he starts getting involved in her life showing how dangerous he is. Colin gives us a disturbing performance that will use his charming side before showing his darker side.doug
Ana Claudia Talancon: Amy is the single lady that becomes the object of Doug’s obsession. She is unaware of anything going on but tore between what she wants from a chance meeting from Doug leading her to putting her life in danger when she finds out Doug’s true motives. Ana gives us a brave performance where she has to go through a lot during the film.amy
Support Cast: Alone with Her only really has two supporting cast members with Amy’s best friend and a potential love interest, they do what they need to but get eclipse by the two stars of the film.
Director Review: Eric Nicholas – Eric gives us a terrifying look at how a stalker could operate, with it starting off with simple watching before turning darker as the film continues.
Crime: Alone with Her shows how a criminal stalker goes about his plans.
Horror: Alone with Her shows how things end up getting out of hand when someone is watching your every move without you knowing.
Thriller: Alone with Her keeps you guessing to what will happen next and how far Doug will go.
Settings: Alone with Her keeps most of the settings inside the house of Amy as we watch everything she does this all works because it brings the horror of terror inside his own house.
Suggestion: Alone with Her is one to try because it does have a good idea of horror but does start slow. (Try It)
Best Part: The fact it could be real.
Worst Part: Slow starting.
Believability: This could easily happen to someone.
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: Could have one
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Budget: $1 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 18 Minutes
Tagline: Anytime. Anywhere. He’s watching.
Overall: Disturbing Thriller that will shock you with ow easy it is to become a victim of stalking
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/06/10/movie-reviews-101-midnight-horror-alone-with-her-2006/
Darren (1599 KP) rated American Assassin (2017) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: American Assassin starts as normal American Mitch Rapp (O’Brien) sees his fiancée gunned down by terrorists and himself left for dead, 18 months later he has trained himself to eliminate the men responsible but little does he know that CIA agent Irene Kennedy (Lathan) has been watching his action.
When Kennedy arranges to save Mitch from a certain death, she recruits him for a special section of the CIA working under Stan Hurley (Keaton) who trains agents to go undercover but if caught or killed no one will come for them.
The first mission is to locate nuclear weapon components before former agent Ghost (Kitsch) can use or sell them giving somebody in the world a nuclear bomb that can wipe out millions.
Thoughts on American Assassin
Characters – Mitch Rapp is an American that loses everything at the hands of terrorists, he learns combat and language skills to go undercover in the terrorist cell for revenge, he gets recruited by the CIA where he must learn discipline but this is where he struggles because he always wants to go after the criminal. This character does feel like a young Jack Bauer because of his rule breaking attitude for the right reasons. Stan Hurley is the off the grid trainer who takes Mitch as part of his unit, he gets tired of the Mitch’s lack of discipline but knows he needs him to capture his former student. Irene Kennedy is the deputy director of the CIA, she sees the potential in Mitch forcing Hurley to take him on, but also falls into the standard CIA director figure that will risk their reputation to prove others wrong. Ghost is the former trainee of Hurley that is using all the skills gained to stay one step ahead of him while collecting the nuclear components.
Performances – Dylan O’Brien is an actor that got into the young adult films but this role showed an adult character, showing he could go onto action films without looking like the complete actions star. Michael Keaton looks like he did enjoy the mentoring role while also getting the action role he isn’t known for. Sanaa Lathan is good in her role even if the character is very generic. Taylor Kitsch does seem to be on the recovering his career tour showing everyone just how talented he is in the villainous role.
Story – The story does play out like an origin story for Mitch Rapp in the CIA, we see what motivated him to accept the offer, we see what makes him different from other potential agents. We have the standard level of threat, potential nuclear weapon and a story of needing to learn discipline to become a top agent while keeping his unique traits. This is an easy to watch but could easily be an over the top pilot for a television show.
Action/Thriller – The action starts out brutal with the terrorist attack, we also fall into the car chases, fights and shoot outs which are fun to watch, the final action sequences is just popcorn wow.
Settings – The settings take us on a tour of Europe which is fine and is giving us an iconic location moment, which is easy to locate for us.
Special Effects – The effects in the opening sequence are brutal but then it just becomes by the book stuff.
Scene of the Movie – Speed Boat fight.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – While it started with violent level, it did turn into Jack Bauer origin feeling.
Chances of Sequel: Easily could have one.
Post Credits Scene: No
Final Thoughts – This is an action film that is fun but not one of the greatest of the year.
Overall: Fun action packed blast.
https://moviesreview101.com/2017/09/17/american-assassin-2017/
When Kennedy arranges to save Mitch from a certain death, she recruits him for a special section of the CIA working under Stan Hurley (Keaton) who trains agents to go undercover but if caught or killed no one will come for them.
The first mission is to locate nuclear weapon components before former agent Ghost (Kitsch) can use or sell them giving somebody in the world a nuclear bomb that can wipe out millions.
Thoughts on American Assassin
Characters – Mitch Rapp is an American that loses everything at the hands of terrorists, he learns combat and language skills to go undercover in the terrorist cell for revenge, he gets recruited by the CIA where he must learn discipline but this is where he struggles because he always wants to go after the criminal. This character does feel like a young Jack Bauer because of his rule breaking attitude for the right reasons. Stan Hurley is the off the grid trainer who takes Mitch as part of his unit, he gets tired of the Mitch’s lack of discipline but knows he needs him to capture his former student. Irene Kennedy is the deputy director of the CIA, she sees the potential in Mitch forcing Hurley to take him on, but also falls into the standard CIA director figure that will risk their reputation to prove others wrong. Ghost is the former trainee of Hurley that is using all the skills gained to stay one step ahead of him while collecting the nuclear components.
Performances – Dylan O’Brien is an actor that got into the young adult films but this role showed an adult character, showing he could go onto action films without looking like the complete actions star. Michael Keaton looks like he did enjoy the mentoring role while also getting the action role he isn’t known for. Sanaa Lathan is good in her role even if the character is very generic. Taylor Kitsch does seem to be on the recovering his career tour showing everyone just how talented he is in the villainous role.
Story – The story does play out like an origin story for Mitch Rapp in the CIA, we see what motivated him to accept the offer, we see what makes him different from other potential agents. We have the standard level of threat, potential nuclear weapon and a story of needing to learn discipline to become a top agent while keeping his unique traits. This is an easy to watch but could easily be an over the top pilot for a television show.
Action/Thriller – The action starts out brutal with the terrorist attack, we also fall into the car chases, fights and shoot outs which are fun to watch, the final action sequences is just popcorn wow.
Settings – The settings take us on a tour of Europe which is fine and is giving us an iconic location moment, which is easy to locate for us.
Special Effects – The effects in the opening sequence are brutal but then it just becomes by the book stuff.
Scene of the Movie – Speed Boat fight.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – While it started with violent level, it did turn into Jack Bauer origin feeling.
Chances of Sequel: Easily could have one.
Post Credits Scene: No
Final Thoughts – This is an action film that is fun but not one of the greatest of the year.
Overall: Fun action packed blast.
https://moviesreview101.com/2017/09/17/american-assassin-2017/
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated No Time To Die by Billie Eilish in Music
Mar 3, 2020 (Updated Aug 6, 2020)
Congratulations to The Wasteland’s favourite new artist for sweeping 5 awards at yesterday’s Grammy’s. I hate to say I told you so, but I kinda did, a long way out. It just makes sense to me, that if you have a musical ear, this is the best pop music that has been made for 20 years.
Best new artist, best song (Bad Guy), record of the year, best pop vocal album of the year, and the cherry, best album of the year, for the extraordinary When We All Fall Asleep Where Do We Go. Oh, and her brother won one for best producer… so, not a terrible night out!
Not only is she now the youngest person ever to win a Grammy, beating Taylor Swift to that, mostly meaningless, accolade, but more significantly she is the the first artist to sweep the big 4 awards since Christopher Cross in 1981. That is 39 years ago!
From the few acceptance clips I have seen, you can see how genuinely stunned and thrilled she is to win, which is refreshing after a generation of too cool for school egos that were more persona than person, often holding their emotions in check for the sake of image.
I think there is a long, long way to go before talking about Billie Eilish as a great artist – she has to keep it up! But, for sure the music industry wants to make a point that this is the real deal, and have paved the path for an unlimited potential. What these awards do, is create the stamp on her being a superstar. What she and Finneas do with that now is up to them. I have a feeling they are not going to blow it; it just doesn’t feel like this story ends badly.
Billie’s Bond Theme
In the interest of this blog not turning into the Billie Eilish appreciation society, I am adding on my thoughts about the new release of her theme tune for the new 007 movie, No Time To Die. We all have a favourite Bond song from the years past, so how does this one size up?
Working in conjunction with Oscar winning composer, Hans Zimmer can’t be all bad when you just turned 18, and it certainly helps with this sombre, slow building song, utilising full orchestra and a bundle of small motifs that make it seem 100% Bond. Make no mistake, it is a Billie Eilish song, her moody vibe is all over it, but I love how faithful to the brand she has been, avoiding the temptation to do something too weird with the gig.
The first time I heard it was enough for me to be able to say “cast-iron hit!” And I haven’t changed my mind 20 listens later. It is just mind-blowing how the ball of success keeps rolling for her and Finneas. Having the honour of singing the in memoriam song at the Academy awards, with an emotional rendition of the Beatles’ Yesterday would be enough attention for one week for any ordinary superstar, but no, here’s the best Bond theme for 20 years for you too! Astonishing.
It even has folk that were a bit cautious at first saying, actually that is a great tune. Just yesterday I was listening to a radio interview where Billie talked about how she gets fan mail from all demographics, including 80 year old grandfathers! I find that not only reassuring, but apt. This is an artist of universal appeal wrapped up in the media hype of a teenage pop-idol, but doing a great job of denying that narrow image and idea.
What can I say? Just carry on, Billie. It’s going quite well!
Best new artist, best song (Bad Guy), record of the year, best pop vocal album of the year, and the cherry, best album of the year, for the extraordinary When We All Fall Asleep Where Do We Go. Oh, and her brother won one for best producer… so, not a terrible night out!
Not only is she now the youngest person ever to win a Grammy, beating Taylor Swift to that, mostly meaningless, accolade, but more significantly she is the the first artist to sweep the big 4 awards since Christopher Cross in 1981. That is 39 years ago!
From the few acceptance clips I have seen, you can see how genuinely stunned and thrilled she is to win, which is refreshing after a generation of too cool for school egos that were more persona than person, often holding their emotions in check for the sake of image.
I think there is a long, long way to go before talking about Billie Eilish as a great artist – she has to keep it up! But, for sure the music industry wants to make a point that this is the real deal, and have paved the path for an unlimited potential. What these awards do, is create the stamp on her being a superstar. What she and Finneas do with that now is up to them. I have a feeling they are not going to blow it; it just doesn’t feel like this story ends badly.
Billie’s Bond Theme
In the interest of this blog not turning into the Billie Eilish appreciation society, I am adding on my thoughts about the new release of her theme tune for the new 007 movie, No Time To Die. We all have a favourite Bond song from the years past, so how does this one size up?
Working in conjunction with Oscar winning composer, Hans Zimmer can’t be all bad when you just turned 18, and it certainly helps with this sombre, slow building song, utilising full orchestra and a bundle of small motifs that make it seem 100% Bond. Make no mistake, it is a Billie Eilish song, her moody vibe is all over it, but I love how faithful to the brand she has been, avoiding the temptation to do something too weird with the gig.
The first time I heard it was enough for me to be able to say “cast-iron hit!” And I haven’t changed my mind 20 listens later. It is just mind-blowing how the ball of success keeps rolling for her and Finneas. Having the honour of singing the in memoriam song at the Academy awards, with an emotional rendition of the Beatles’ Yesterday would be enough attention for one week for any ordinary superstar, but no, here’s the best Bond theme for 20 years for you too! Astonishing.
It even has folk that were a bit cautious at first saying, actually that is a great tune. Just yesterday I was listening to a radio interview where Billie talked about how she gets fan mail from all demographics, including 80 year old grandfathers! I find that not only reassuring, but apt. This is an artist of universal appeal wrapped up in the media hype of a teenage pop-idol, but doing a great job of denying that narrow image and idea.
What can I say? Just carry on, Billie. It’s going quite well!
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Captain Clive's Dreamworld in Books
Dec 12, 2020
I love books that deal with a mysterious town that seems to be perfect yet strange things happen, so when I heard about Captain Clive's Dreamworld by Jon Bassoff, I knew this would be my kind of book. I can not tell you enough about how great of a book this was!
Deputy Sam Hardy is fed up with his life. Everything looks bleak for Hardy. When a prostitute is found dead in a seedy motel room and Hardy looks like he may be the culprit, he is banished to take over the role of deputy in the seemingly perfect town of Angels and Hope. Everyone seems to love this town, and everything is so cookie cutter, but the people never seem to sleep. Young girls are going missing yet the town says the girls never existed. When Hardy begins to pry into this town's history, he puts his own wellbeing in jeopardy.
I will say the plot of Captain Clive's Dreamworld drew me in right away. The pacing is done perfectly, and I kept on finding myself reading as fast as possible so I could learn what would happen next. I was instantly transported to the town of Angels and Hope with Deputy Sam Hardy. I never lost interest at all. In my head, I was trying to work out what was wrong with the town. Everything seemed to be perfect there, but we all know that nothing is ever perfect. While Angels and Hope was created to be a utopia, it was much more dystopian. There were many sinister goings on happening. While I was able to predict some of the plot, it was still interesting to read on to see if I was correct. There are a few plot twists too. Jon Bassoff did a fantastic job making this story come together brilliantly enough to keep it interesting. While the book didn't end the way I wanted, it was definitely an interesting ending for sure. All loose ends were tied up and the story came together very well.
I enjoyed each and every character in Captain Clive's Dreamworld. Each character felt realistic and fleshed out. Sam Hardy was quite the interesting character. I liked reading about his thought process. I felt like I was going through everything he was. Although I thought he would be uncaring, he was quite the opposite. His plight to get answers was quite the journey to read about. The three witches were fabulous antagonists. I could picture each of the three women easily in my mind. They were easy to hate. I loved trying to figure out Mayor Sampson's character. I kept on trying to guess how much he knew and what he'd be willing to do to keep secrets hidden. I enjoyed reading about all the townspeople of Angels and Hope and trying to guess what their guilty secrets were and what their end game was.
Trigger warnings for Captain Clive's Dreamworld include death, murder, suicide, violence, prostitution, sex, child rape, incest, blackmail, gaslighting, threats, drugs, alcohol, and swearing. This is not a book for the faint of heart as it deals with some very dark subjects.
All in all, Captain Clive's Dreamworld is a highly entertaining read with a great cast of characters as well as a great plot. It is definitely not for the faint of heart though as it is quite dark but enjoyable nonetheless. I would definitely recommend Captain Clive's Dreamworld by Jon Bassoff to those aged 18+ who love a dark horror novel with great depth.
-
(A special thank you to Pump Up Your Book for providing me with a paperback of Captain Clive's Dreamworld by Jon Bassoff in exchange for an honest and unbiased review.)
Deputy Sam Hardy is fed up with his life. Everything looks bleak for Hardy. When a prostitute is found dead in a seedy motel room and Hardy looks like he may be the culprit, he is banished to take over the role of deputy in the seemingly perfect town of Angels and Hope. Everyone seems to love this town, and everything is so cookie cutter, but the people never seem to sleep. Young girls are going missing yet the town says the girls never existed. When Hardy begins to pry into this town's history, he puts his own wellbeing in jeopardy.
I will say the plot of Captain Clive's Dreamworld drew me in right away. The pacing is done perfectly, and I kept on finding myself reading as fast as possible so I could learn what would happen next. I was instantly transported to the town of Angels and Hope with Deputy Sam Hardy. I never lost interest at all. In my head, I was trying to work out what was wrong with the town. Everything seemed to be perfect there, but we all know that nothing is ever perfect. While Angels and Hope was created to be a utopia, it was much more dystopian. There were many sinister goings on happening. While I was able to predict some of the plot, it was still interesting to read on to see if I was correct. There are a few plot twists too. Jon Bassoff did a fantastic job making this story come together brilliantly enough to keep it interesting. While the book didn't end the way I wanted, it was definitely an interesting ending for sure. All loose ends were tied up and the story came together very well.
I enjoyed each and every character in Captain Clive's Dreamworld. Each character felt realistic and fleshed out. Sam Hardy was quite the interesting character. I liked reading about his thought process. I felt like I was going through everything he was. Although I thought he would be uncaring, he was quite the opposite. His plight to get answers was quite the journey to read about. The three witches were fabulous antagonists. I could picture each of the three women easily in my mind. They were easy to hate. I loved trying to figure out Mayor Sampson's character. I kept on trying to guess how much he knew and what he'd be willing to do to keep secrets hidden. I enjoyed reading about all the townspeople of Angels and Hope and trying to guess what their guilty secrets were and what their end game was.
Trigger warnings for Captain Clive's Dreamworld include death, murder, suicide, violence, prostitution, sex, child rape, incest, blackmail, gaslighting, threats, drugs, alcohol, and swearing. This is not a book for the faint of heart as it deals with some very dark subjects.
All in all, Captain Clive's Dreamworld is a highly entertaining read with a great cast of characters as well as a great plot. It is definitely not for the faint of heart though as it is quite dark but enjoyable nonetheless. I would definitely recommend Captain Clive's Dreamworld by Jon Bassoff to those aged 18+ who love a dark horror novel with great depth.
-
(A special thank you to Pump Up Your Book for providing me with a paperback of Captain Clive's Dreamworld by Jon Bassoff in exchange for an honest and unbiased review.)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Lady Bird (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“What if this is the best version”.
When did you grow up? I am now 57, and I’m still “working towards”! I remember distinctly though at the age of 16 thinking “I’ve got there”. And then again at 18. And then again at 21. And then again at 25…. There is something sweet about the certainty of youth that only life’s ultimate experiences can roughen the edges of.
“Lady Bird”, the directorial debut of Greta Gerwig, features one such teen who thinks she knows it all. Looking and acting for all the world like a 15 year old (something that Margot Robbie really can’t pull off in “I, Tonya”) Saoirse Ronan plays Christine McPherson who has the given name (“I gave the name to myself”) of ‘Lady Bird’. She is struggling with a lot of issues: an unreasonable and overbearing (parents: read ‘perfectly reasonably but firm’) mother (Laurie Metcalf, “Roseanne”); the issues of puberty and young love; the constrictions of a Catholic school she despises; and her inability to perform to the grades she needs to get into a college of her choice. That choice being on the East coast as far away from the backwater of Sacremento (“the mid-west of California” – LoL) as she can get.
Love comes in the form of two serial male fixations: the gorgeous and artistic Danny (Lucas Hedges, “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri”, “Manchester By The Sea”) and the aloof and enigmatic Kyle (Timothée Chalamet, “Call Me By Your Name”).
This is a near perfect coming of age film. The plot, while fairly superficial and covering ground well-trodden before, fully engages you and makes the running time just fly by. And there is just so much talent on show. The script by Gerwig is chocker-block full of great and memorable lines; Ronan is pitch-perfect as the irascible and cock-sure teen; Tracy Letts (“The Post“) is magnificent in the less showy role as the “good cop” dad, struggling invisibly with his own demons; and Metcalf gives an Oscar-nominated performance that really should give Alison Janney a run for her money… a drive away from an airport conveys just perfectly every college-age parent’s emotional low-point.
Where perhaps the film overplays its hand a bit is in the “wrong side of the tracks” line. The household while struggling is by no means trailer-park poor (compare and contrast with “I, Tonya”): perhaps this is the depths of financial desperation found in Sacremento? But I doubt it… there still seems to be money available for fancy cowgirl outfits.
Which leads me to the rating, which seems to have been a common rant in the last few weeks. I would have thought that there was nothing like this film to turn the mirror of reasonableness on a young teen, perhaps helping them to treat their parents better, work harder for college or make better choices. Yet it has a UK 15 certificate. And for what? There is a full frontal male photo-spread in “Playgirl” (I want to say “it’s a penis, get over it”, but if forced I would have frankly just snipped the 50 milliseconds out to get the lower rating). And there are a few (only a few) F- and C- words. I have the same problem here as with “Phantom Thread” – here is a high-class film that a young teen audience would absolutely love to see. I think the BBFC have got it wrong again here.
I cannot recommend this film enough: a tale of teenage life love and resolution that is hard to beat. Possibly one of the best coming of age tales I’ve ever seen. On the basis that it looks like I will never get to see “Call Me By Your Name” – the only major one I’ve missed – before this Sunday’s Oscar ceremony, what a great way to round off my Oscar-viewing season.
“Lady Bird”, the directorial debut of Greta Gerwig, features one such teen who thinks she knows it all. Looking and acting for all the world like a 15 year old (something that Margot Robbie really can’t pull off in “I, Tonya”) Saoirse Ronan plays Christine McPherson who has the given name (“I gave the name to myself”) of ‘Lady Bird’. She is struggling with a lot of issues: an unreasonable and overbearing (parents: read ‘perfectly reasonably but firm’) mother (Laurie Metcalf, “Roseanne”); the issues of puberty and young love; the constrictions of a Catholic school she despises; and her inability to perform to the grades she needs to get into a college of her choice. That choice being on the East coast as far away from the backwater of Sacremento (“the mid-west of California” – LoL) as she can get.
Love comes in the form of two serial male fixations: the gorgeous and artistic Danny (Lucas Hedges, “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri”, “Manchester By The Sea”) and the aloof and enigmatic Kyle (Timothée Chalamet, “Call Me By Your Name”).
This is a near perfect coming of age film. The plot, while fairly superficial and covering ground well-trodden before, fully engages you and makes the running time just fly by. And there is just so much talent on show. The script by Gerwig is chocker-block full of great and memorable lines; Ronan is pitch-perfect as the irascible and cock-sure teen; Tracy Letts (“The Post“) is magnificent in the less showy role as the “good cop” dad, struggling invisibly with his own demons; and Metcalf gives an Oscar-nominated performance that really should give Alison Janney a run for her money… a drive away from an airport conveys just perfectly every college-age parent’s emotional low-point.
Where perhaps the film overplays its hand a bit is in the “wrong side of the tracks” line. The household while struggling is by no means trailer-park poor (compare and contrast with “I, Tonya”): perhaps this is the depths of financial desperation found in Sacremento? But I doubt it… there still seems to be money available for fancy cowgirl outfits.
Which leads me to the rating, which seems to have been a common rant in the last few weeks. I would have thought that there was nothing like this film to turn the mirror of reasonableness on a young teen, perhaps helping them to treat their parents better, work harder for college or make better choices. Yet it has a UK 15 certificate. And for what? There is a full frontal male photo-spread in “Playgirl” (I want to say “it’s a penis, get over it”, but if forced I would have frankly just snipped the 50 milliseconds out to get the lower rating). And there are a few (only a few) F- and C- words. I have the same problem here as with “Phantom Thread” – here is a high-class film that a young teen audience would absolutely love to see. I think the BBFC have got it wrong again here.
I cannot recommend this film enough: a tale of teenage life love and resolution that is hard to beat. Possibly one of the best coming of age tales I’ve ever seen. On the basis that it looks like I will never get to see “Call Me By Your Name” – the only major one I’ve missed – before this Sunday’s Oscar ceremony, what a great way to round off my Oscar-viewing season.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Groot Expectations.
James Gunn is back writing and directing the sequel to his surprise 2014 summer hit. And it might be a fresh mix tape slammed into the Walkman, but it’s much of the same again. Not that that’s necessarily a bad thing.
In terms of the story, it’s almost a remake of the worst Star Trek film ever made! However, this time its all done for ‘laffs’ and so works much, much better. We join Quill (Chris Pratt, “Jurassic World“), Gamora (Zoe Saldana, “Star Trek Beyond“), Drax (Dave Bautista, “Spectre“) and Rocket (the voice of Bradley Cooper) ‘ever ready’ (LOL) to save the priceless Anulax batteries of their current employees, the Sovereigns, from the ravages of some multi-dimensional being. ‘Helping’ them is Baby Groot, a twig off the old branch from the first film, again voiced (in what must be the easiest money in Hollywood) by Vin Diesel (“Fast and Furious 8“).
The Sovereign’s High Priestess (Elizabeth Debicki, “The Man From U.N.C.L.E.“) provides payment to Gamora in the form of her chained-up evil sister Nebula (a deliciously sulky Karen Gillen, “Dr Who”, “Oculus”) but is then less than impressed when the mercenary Rocket pockets a knapsack full of the batteries. So starts a chase across the galaxy leading Quill to meet Ego (Kurt Russell, “The Hateful 8“) on the planet Ego (LOL) at the very base of his family tree.
The great thing about these films is that they don’t even TRY to be realistic. Characters get towed behind crashing spaceships and – literally- dragged through a wood backwards; others fall hundreds of feet to certain death… no, sorry, a “superhero landing”; and planets and characters are painted with a garishness never ever to be found in nature. You’ll even believe Kurt Russell is 18 again – oh that these effects were available on the NHS!
But the other saving grace for this film is the soundtrack, put together by Tyler Bates as an ode to the 80’s, with wonderful tracks by ELO, Fleetwood Mac, Cat Stevens and a host of others. The film matches the music with the action superbly.
I won’t bother commenting on the acting… who cares with this sort of film! But everyone seems to have fun with Michael Rooker (“Cliffhanger”) being particularly good in reprising his role of Yondu. There are also a wealth of memorable cameos, some of them being laugh out loud moments. While some of the pop culture references might go over a younger audience’s heads, there are still enough great one-liners and comic moments to provide general appeal. Bad guys silhouetted against the moon, ET style, was particularly memorable.
One criticism I would have though is that it’s just too darn long for an “action comedy”. The original film just about scraped into my good books by coming in under the two hour curfew. The sequel however adds another 15 minutes, which should have found its way either onto the cutting room floor or onto the “Blu Ray collector’s edition”. In particular, the final never-ending showdown of CGI manicness went on too long for my liking.
Looking back at the original 2014 review, I gave it a rather stingy FFF rating, which in retrospect I think was a bit mean given its novelty. This time the novelty has worn off, but if anything this is an even more enjoyable romp that the first outing.
James Gunn be warned though: I am unlikely to be so generous with “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 3” (as threatened) which in my view might be a trip too far for this franchise. My advice would be to take a leaf out of Peter Kay’s “Car Share” book and quit while you’re ahead.
By the way, for those who are interested, the film had a reported budget of $200 million (an impressive “BvS quotient” of 80%!) and the end titles have four “monkeys“, with a humorous reprise of Stan Lee’s astronaut.
In terms of the story, it’s almost a remake of the worst Star Trek film ever made! However, this time its all done for ‘laffs’ and so works much, much better. We join Quill (Chris Pratt, “Jurassic World“), Gamora (Zoe Saldana, “Star Trek Beyond“), Drax (Dave Bautista, “Spectre“) and Rocket (the voice of Bradley Cooper) ‘ever ready’ (LOL) to save the priceless Anulax batteries of their current employees, the Sovereigns, from the ravages of some multi-dimensional being. ‘Helping’ them is Baby Groot, a twig off the old branch from the first film, again voiced (in what must be the easiest money in Hollywood) by Vin Diesel (“Fast and Furious 8“).
The Sovereign’s High Priestess (Elizabeth Debicki, “The Man From U.N.C.L.E.“) provides payment to Gamora in the form of her chained-up evil sister Nebula (a deliciously sulky Karen Gillen, “Dr Who”, “Oculus”) but is then less than impressed when the mercenary Rocket pockets a knapsack full of the batteries. So starts a chase across the galaxy leading Quill to meet Ego (Kurt Russell, “The Hateful 8“) on the planet Ego (LOL) at the very base of his family tree.
The great thing about these films is that they don’t even TRY to be realistic. Characters get towed behind crashing spaceships and – literally- dragged through a wood backwards; others fall hundreds of feet to certain death… no, sorry, a “superhero landing”; and planets and characters are painted with a garishness never ever to be found in nature. You’ll even believe Kurt Russell is 18 again – oh that these effects were available on the NHS!
But the other saving grace for this film is the soundtrack, put together by Tyler Bates as an ode to the 80’s, with wonderful tracks by ELO, Fleetwood Mac, Cat Stevens and a host of others. The film matches the music with the action superbly.
I won’t bother commenting on the acting… who cares with this sort of film! But everyone seems to have fun with Michael Rooker (“Cliffhanger”) being particularly good in reprising his role of Yondu. There are also a wealth of memorable cameos, some of them being laugh out loud moments. While some of the pop culture references might go over a younger audience’s heads, there are still enough great one-liners and comic moments to provide general appeal. Bad guys silhouetted against the moon, ET style, was particularly memorable.
One criticism I would have though is that it’s just too darn long for an “action comedy”. The original film just about scraped into my good books by coming in under the two hour curfew. The sequel however adds another 15 minutes, which should have found its way either onto the cutting room floor or onto the “Blu Ray collector’s edition”. In particular, the final never-ending showdown of CGI manicness went on too long for my liking.
Looking back at the original 2014 review, I gave it a rather stingy FFF rating, which in retrospect I think was a bit mean given its novelty. This time the novelty has worn off, but if anything this is an even more enjoyable romp that the first outing.
James Gunn be warned though: I am unlikely to be so generous with “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 3” (as threatened) which in my view might be a trip too far for this franchise. My advice would be to take a leaf out of Peter Kay’s “Car Share” book and quit while you’re ahead.
By the way, for those who are interested, the film had a reported budget of $200 million (an impressive “BvS quotient” of 80%!) and the end titles have four “monkeys“, with a humorous reprise of Stan Lee’s astronaut.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) in Movies
Jun 20, 2020
Tarantino makes good movies, I like them, but I don't love them. When everyone was raving about the OUATIH trailer I was sitting back going "that looks okay, but..." I wasn't sure I could see how they were going to mix the two strands of the story together, or why. After seeing it I'm still not sure.
I'm not going to do an extended synopsis for this, partly because I'm not sure what the point was to a lot of it. 2 hours and 41 minutes is a lot of time to fill with such random stuff. There are essentially to films here, and I definitely would have wanted to watch one of them. It doesn't matter how many times I think about this film, I can't make sense of why these stories were put together.
There's a lot of acting talent in this, obviously. I'm not a particular fan of DiCaprio, I can't give you a real reason behind that. I don't mind some of his older films but recently nothing has really caught my eye. He has some excellent moments in this though. I particularly liked the scene where he's on set explaining the story of his novel to his young co-star. The audience and Rick are able to reach the realisation at the same time, it's a moving moment that was annoyingly ruined for me by Trudi's lines afterwards. I guess it does reflect the way Hollywood is though so in that respect it was spot on.
Brad Pitt swooped in and stole the show though. There's a very laid back and sometimes cheeky sense to Cliff, and most of his scenes had me engaged with what was going on. The only thing I would say though is that occasionally you just see Brad Pitt and other characters he's portrayed in this performance. He really does have a strong presence though and apart from those small blips he was by far the best performance of the film and my favourite scenes were his fight with Bruce Lee and the last ten minutes. Both of these were done so well and Pitt's reactions were perfect.
The cast has a lot of bit parters in it, I'm never quite sure what gets something classed as a cameo over a "proper" role. As we're in Hollywood there are obviously a lot of Hollywood stars making appearances and they've all got really strong casting behind them, but they barely get any screen time. We get some Sharon Tate background from Steve McQueen (Damien Lewis) at a party, later on we have Bruce Lee appear for the onset fight scene, there are a lot of faces popping up everywhere.
I briefly want to mention Bruce Lee in this film, since seeing the film I read a couple of pieces about his portrayal in this... I know nothing about him as a person beyond his martial arts skills and while I did find the Lee/Booth fight scene amusing I thought it was a little... off? Lee comes across as a bit of an arse, there's no denying that. Like I said, I know nothing about him, this could be a true depiction but I feel like I would have heard that before if he was. Regardless of the truth, the character didn't come across well, he could easily have been given a slightly cocky demeanour to allow for the challenge to happen without giving him that persona.
I haven't got enough time to talk about every actor in the film but there wasn't anyone who stuck out as being bad, every role was handled reasonably well. Whether they all needed to be there though is another matter.
Earlier I mentioned that the film has two story threads, those being Rick Dalton/Cliff Booth and Sharon Tate. We get the odd crossover moment with the two but ultimately there's no proper link until the end. One of the problems going into the film is that if you don't know anything about Sharon Tate and Charles Manson then one of these storylines isn't going to make a great deal of sense. I'd be interested to see how people going in without that knowledge found the story overall, there have to be some out there right?
OUATIH almost seems like an introduction to Manson being in Mindhunter season 2, you've even got potential crossover as he's played by the same guy. I found the Manson inclusion to be very misleading in the advertising. His appearance is beyond brief in the final cut and it felt like we were due a lot more after watching the trailer. I think I would have preferred the movie if it was weighted the other way with the Tate/Manson side as the focus and the Dalton/Booth side at the add on.
Despite Pitt's performance, the great setting and some other small highlight this film just didn't hit the right notes for me. It was so long, I could have forgiven that had there been a more complex link between the two bits of story. I went in with low expectations and when I came out those were only just met.
If you're considering leaving partway through this there are three reasons that you should stick it out.
- Brad Pitt as Cliff Booth
- Booth's dog
- The last ten minutes (give or take)
The 18 certificate is there for "strong bloody violence", somehow the large amount of drug use doesn't warrant inclusion on the card. Up until around the 2 hour 30 minutes mark this film is a 15. You've had drugs, language and some fights, but nothing that matches up to those last few minutes. They earn that 18 certificate... and it's hilarious. Cliff and his dog are epic and it was worth the rest of the film just to see that, there's some terrible (ridiculous) acting in it that potentially it could have done without but at least I came out slightly less annoyed.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/08/once-upon-time-in-hollywood-movie-review.html
I'm not going to do an extended synopsis for this, partly because I'm not sure what the point was to a lot of it. 2 hours and 41 minutes is a lot of time to fill with such random stuff. There are essentially to films here, and I definitely would have wanted to watch one of them. It doesn't matter how many times I think about this film, I can't make sense of why these stories were put together.
There's a lot of acting talent in this, obviously. I'm not a particular fan of DiCaprio, I can't give you a real reason behind that. I don't mind some of his older films but recently nothing has really caught my eye. He has some excellent moments in this though. I particularly liked the scene where he's on set explaining the story of his novel to his young co-star. The audience and Rick are able to reach the realisation at the same time, it's a moving moment that was annoyingly ruined for me by Trudi's lines afterwards. I guess it does reflect the way Hollywood is though so in that respect it was spot on.
Brad Pitt swooped in and stole the show though. There's a very laid back and sometimes cheeky sense to Cliff, and most of his scenes had me engaged with what was going on. The only thing I would say though is that occasionally you just see Brad Pitt and other characters he's portrayed in this performance. He really does have a strong presence though and apart from those small blips he was by far the best performance of the film and my favourite scenes were his fight with Bruce Lee and the last ten minutes. Both of these were done so well and Pitt's reactions were perfect.
The cast has a lot of bit parters in it, I'm never quite sure what gets something classed as a cameo over a "proper" role. As we're in Hollywood there are obviously a lot of Hollywood stars making appearances and they've all got really strong casting behind them, but they barely get any screen time. We get some Sharon Tate background from Steve McQueen (Damien Lewis) at a party, later on we have Bruce Lee appear for the onset fight scene, there are a lot of faces popping up everywhere.
I briefly want to mention Bruce Lee in this film, since seeing the film I read a couple of pieces about his portrayal in this... I know nothing about him as a person beyond his martial arts skills and while I did find the Lee/Booth fight scene amusing I thought it was a little... off? Lee comes across as a bit of an arse, there's no denying that. Like I said, I know nothing about him, this could be a true depiction but I feel like I would have heard that before if he was. Regardless of the truth, the character didn't come across well, he could easily have been given a slightly cocky demeanour to allow for the challenge to happen without giving him that persona.
I haven't got enough time to talk about every actor in the film but there wasn't anyone who stuck out as being bad, every role was handled reasonably well. Whether they all needed to be there though is another matter.
Earlier I mentioned that the film has two story threads, those being Rick Dalton/Cliff Booth and Sharon Tate. We get the odd crossover moment with the two but ultimately there's no proper link until the end. One of the problems going into the film is that if you don't know anything about Sharon Tate and Charles Manson then one of these storylines isn't going to make a great deal of sense. I'd be interested to see how people going in without that knowledge found the story overall, there have to be some out there right?
OUATIH almost seems like an introduction to Manson being in Mindhunter season 2, you've even got potential crossover as he's played by the same guy. I found the Manson inclusion to be very misleading in the advertising. His appearance is beyond brief in the final cut and it felt like we were due a lot more after watching the trailer. I think I would have preferred the movie if it was weighted the other way with the Tate/Manson side as the focus and the Dalton/Booth side at the add on.
Despite Pitt's performance, the great setting and some other small highlight this film just didn't hit the right notes for me. It was so long, I could have forgiven that had there been a more complex link between the two bits of story. I went in with low expectations and when I came out those were only just met.
If you're considering leaving partway through this there are three reasons that you should stick it out.
- Brad Pitt as Cliff Booth
- Booth's dog
- The last ten minutes (give or take)
The 18 certificate is there for "strong bloody violence", somehow the large amount of drug use doesn't warrant inclusion on the card. Up until around the 2 hour 30 minutes mark this film is a 15. You've had drugs, language and some fights, but nothing that matches up to those last few minutes. They earn that 18 certificate... and it's hilarious. Cliff and his dog are epic and it was worth the rest of the film just to see that, there's some terrible (ridiculous) acting in it that potentially it could have done without but at least I came out slightly less annoyed.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/08/once-upon-time-in-hollywood-movie-review.html
Hadley (567 KP) rated Frankenstein in Books
Apr 30, 2019
Great main character (1 more)
Beautiful writing
Over usage of some words (1 more)
Secondary characters have hardly a back story
In the horror genre, I have very few favorite female writers, but Mary Shelley is one of them. The way she weaves environments with character defining scenes is beautifully done in 'Frankenstein.' At the tender age of 18, Shelley was able to convey grief and loss through a single story. She created a relatable 'creature' that many readers will have pity for, but also an obsessive young man that can hardly be hated. Some people may be intimidated by the more diverse English language from the early 1800's, but, in my opinion, the story would not have had the same impact if it had been written today.
Not just horror readers will enjoy 'Frankenstein,' but also those who like to read philosophy. Shelley brings up life discerning questions that even society meddles with today. It's amazing to think that a two century old book discusses problems we still deal with.
The book begins with a sea captain that picks up a stranger that was stranded on a raft of ice, and this man has a fascinating story to tell. The entire book is a letter written by the sea captain to his sister, which he details every bit of Victor Frankenstein's several year tale. Readers get to follow Frankenstein's life from the moment his 'creature' is made to the end of his days, which traverses the globe. When Shelley begins to lull over her love of environments, she quickly picks up with character or story development that keeps our attention from wandering.
'Frankenstein' focuses on the need to be loved and accepted to live a happy existence,as well as reaching our dreams, but Shelley shows how achieving such things can cause a crushing defeat in the latter pursuit: "Night was far advanced when I came to the halfway resting-place, and seated myself beside the fountain. The stars shone at intervals, as the clouds passed from over them; the dark pines rose before me, and every here and there a broken tree lay on the ground: it was a scene of wonderful solemnity, and stirred strange thoughts within me. I wept bitterly; and clasping my hands in agony, I exclaimed, 'Oh! stars, and clouds, and winds, ye are all about to mock me: if ye really pity me, crush sensation and memory; let me become as nought; but if not, depart, depart, and leave me in darkness.' "
There are other characters we read of, including Frankenstein's best friend, Henry, and his long time love interest, Elizabeth (both of who grew up with Frankenstein). Henry comes from a well-to-do merchant family, while Elizabeth was orphaned from a wealthy family, then adopted by the Frankensteins as a future wife for Victor. Unfortunately, we learn little about them or Victor's family, that when any of them do die, it's not felt personally by the reader. There are other characters that had major events in the story, but as with the friends, they weren't developed enough to bring up any emotion at their passing.
After Frankenstein sets out after his creation,we meet the 'creature' at the top of a mountain. He is devastated that his creator hates him, and that the other humans he has met also hated him. "I expected this reception,' said the demon. 'All men hate the wretched; how, then, must I be hated, who am miserable beyond all living things! Yet you, my creator, detest and spurn me, thy creature, to whom thou art bound by ties only dissoluble by the annihilation of one of us. You purpose to kill me. How dare you sport thus with life? Do your duty towards me, and I will do mine towards you and the rest of mankind. If you will comply with my conditions, I will leave them and you at peace; but if you refuse, I will glut the maw of death, until it be satiated with the blood of your remaining friends.' "
The 'creature' gives Frankenstein an ultimatum: he either makes him a female companion or he will kill everyone Frankenstein loves and adores." 'What I ask of you is reasonable and moderate; I demand a creature of another sex, but as hideous as myself; the gratification is small, but it is all that I can receive,and it shall content me.' " Although, by this time, the 'creature' has already murdered Frankenstein's youngest brother, Victor agrees to make him a companion, but with serious regret soon after.
The majority of the story concerns Frankenstein trying fool-hardly to protect all those he loves while the 'creature' murders them one by one. The most surprising of the murders is Henry's. After Frankenstein changes his mind on making another creation, the 'creature' quickly finds Henry and kills him, but Frankenstein is accused of the murder and spends quite some time in prison for it. "But I was doomed to live; and, in two months, found myself as awaking from a dream, in a prison, stretched on a wretched bed, surrounded by gaolers, turnkeys, bolts, and all the miserable apparatus of a dungeon. "
Frankenstein is eventually released from prison when the evidence doesn't add up, and witnesses come forward, claiming to have seen Victor elsewhere at the time of the murder. Frankenstein is, at this time, in a drowning melancholy and madness, but this doesn't stop him from marrying Elizabeth. The 'creature' foretold Frankenstein that he would be with him on his wedding night, and Victor uses this to his advantage - arming himself with pistols and knives on the honeymoon. Yet, to no avail, Frankenstein is unable to outlive or outsmart the 'creature' at any turn.
'Frankenstein' is a must-read for all readers. Although many horror stories today pertain to a creature killing it's master, none of them can reach the grief stricken peaks as Shelley has. Every passage in this book reads like poetry. Every interaction between Frankenstein and his 'creature' is fascinating to the reader. And, before Frankenstein dies, he leaves the sea captain with words of wisdom that even readers could benefit from: "Seek happiness in tranquillity and avoid ambition, even if it be only the apparently innocent one of distinguishing yourself in science and discoveries."
Highly recommend!
Not just horror readers will enjoy 'Frankenstein,' but also those who like to read philosophy. Shelley brings up life discerning questions that even society meddles with today. It's amazing to think that a two century old book discusses problems we still deal with.
The book begins with a sea captain that picks up a stranger that was stranded on a raft of ice, and this man has a fascinating story to tell. The entire book is a letter written by the sea captain to his sister, which he details every bit of Victor Frankenstein's several year tale. Readers get to follow Frankenstein's life from the moment his 'creature' is made to the end of his days, which traverses the globe. When Shelley begins to lull over her love of environments, she quickly picks up with character or story development that keeps our attention from wandering.
'Frankenstein' focuses on the need to be loved and accepted to live a happy existence,as well as reaching our dreams, but Shelley shows how achieving such things can cause a crushing defeat in the latter pursuit: "Night was far advanced when I came to the halfway resting-place, and seated myself beside the fountain. The stars shone at intervals, as the clouds passed from over them; the dark pines rose before me, and every here and there a broken tree lay on the ground: it was a scene of wonderful solemnity, and stirred strange thoughts within me. I wept bitterly; and clasping my hands in agony, I exclaimed, 'Oh! stars, and clouds, and winds, ye are all about to mock me: if ye really pity me, crush sensation and memory; let me become as nought; but if not, depart, depart, and leave me in darkness.' "
There are other characters we read of, including Frankenstein's best friend, Henry, and his long time love interest, Elizabeth (both of who grew up with Frankenstein). Henry comes from a well-to-do merchant family, while Elizabeth was orphaned from a wealthy family, then adopted by the Frankensteins as a future wife for Victor. Unfortunately, we learn little about them or Victor's family, that when any of them do die, it's not felt personally by the reader. There are other characters that had major events in the story, but as with the friends, they weren't developed enough to bring up any emotion at their passing.
After Frankenstein sets out after his creation,we meet the 'creature' at the top of a mountain. He is devastated that his creator hates him, and that the other humans he has met also hated him. "I expected this reception,' said the demon. 'All men hate the wretched; how, then, must I be hated, who am miserable beyond all living things! Yet you, my creator, detest and spurn me, thy creature, to whom thou art bound by ties only dissoluble by the annihilation of one of us. You purpose to kill me. How dare you sport thus with life? Do your duty towards me, and I will do mine towards you and the rest of mankind. If you will comply with my conditions, I will leave them and you at peace; but if you refuse, I will glut the maw of death, until it be satiated with the blood of your remaining friends.' "
The 'creature' gives Frankenstein an ultimatum: he either makes him a female companion or he will kill everyone Frankenstein loves and adores." 'What I ask of you is reasonable and moderate; I demand a creature of another sex, but as hideous as myself; the gratification is small, but it is all that I can receive,and it shall content me.' " Although, by this time, the 'creature' has already murdered Frankenstein's youngest brother, Victor agrees to make him a companion, but with serious regret soon after.
The majority of the story concerns Frankenstein trying fool-hardly to protect all those he loves while the 'creature' murders them one by one. The most surprising of the murders is Henry's. After Frankenstein changes his mind on making another creation, the 'creature' quickly finds Henry and kills him, but Frankenstein is accused of the murder and spends quite some time in prison for it. "But I was doomed to live; and, in two months, found myself as awaking from a dream, in a prison, stretched on a wretched bed, surrounded by gaolers, turnkeys, bolts, and all the miserable apparatus of a dungeon. "
Frankenstein is eventually released from prison when the evidence doesn't add up, and witnesses come forward, claiming to have seen Victor elsewhere at the time of the murder. Frankenstein is, at this time, in a drowning melancholy and madness, but this doesn't stop him from marrying Elizabeth. The 'creature' foretold Frankenstein that he would be with him on his wedding night, and Victor uses this to his advantage - arming himself with pistols and knives on the honeymoon. Yet, to no avail, Frankenstein is unable to outlive or outsmart the 'creature' at any turn.
'Frankenstein' is a must-read for all readers. Although many horror stories today pertain to a creature killing it's master, none of them can reach the grief stricken peaks as Shelley has. Every passage in this book reads like poetry. Every interaction between Frankenstein and his 'creature' is fascinating to the reader. And, before Frankenstein dies, he leaves the sea captain with words of wisdom that even readers could benefit from: "Seek happiness in tranquillity and avoid ambition, even if it be only the apparently innocent one of distinguishing yourself in science and discoveries."
Highly recommend!
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Among the Stars in Tabletop Games
Dec 3, 2021
If there is a mechanic that we at Purple Phoenix Games seem to really love, it is card drafting. One such game that has been a big hit for us (well, at least for 3 of us….) is 7 Wonders. Draft a card, pass the rest to your neighbor, draft another card from those received from your other neighbor, and repeat. Set in the Ancient World, you are working to build the most wondrous city. But Laura, why all the 7 Wonders talk in this review? Well, because Among the Stars gives me major 7 Wonders vibes, but IN SPACE. Keep reading to see what I mean.
Disclaimer: Among the Stars can be played in two different modes – Aggressive and Non-Aggressive. This review covers the core game Non-Aggressive mode of play. -L
Among the Stars is a game of card drafting and tile placement in which players take on the roles of different alien races attempting to build the most efficient space station over the span of 4 years (rounds). After the 4th and final round, players calculate their final scores, and the player with the highest score is the winner! To setup for a game, assemble the Location deck as described in the rules. Each player takes a Main Reactor card and score marker in their chosen color. Score markers are placed at zero on the score board, and players put their Main Reactor card face-up in front of them, along with 2 Energy Cubes. Players choose, or are randomly given, a Race Tile with a special Racial Ability to be used throughout the game. Randomly draw the requisite number of Objective cards and put them face-up near the score board. The game is now ready to begin!
Over the course of 4 rounds, players will be drafting cards and playing them into their Space Station. At the start of each round, every player collects 10 Credits (game currency), and draws a hand of 6 Location cards. Every turn, players will select one card from their hand, place it face-down in front of them, and will pass the remaining cards in their hand to the next player (in either clockwise or counter-clockwise direction, depending on the round). Players will then simultaneously reveal their chosen card and perform one of three actions: Build a Location, Build Power Reactor, or Discard and gain 3 Credits. To Build a Location, you pay its listed cost in Credits and/or Energy and add it to your Space Station. Locations must be placed orthogonally adjacent to an existing Location. When you build a Location, you immediately gain the listed number of VP (tracked on the score board), and may use its ability. Some abilities are immediate and earn you extra VP now, while some are delayed and will be counted at the end of the game. To Build a Power Reactor, you will first discard your selected card for the turn. Pay the 1 Credit cost of a Power Reactor and place it into your Space Station, along with 2 Energy Cubes. Every round, you get 10 Credits, but Energy Cubes do not replenish unless you build more Power Reactors, so keep an eye on your resources! The last possible action is to Discard and gain 3 Credits, and is pretty self-explanatory.
Players continue taking turns (drafting cards, passing cards, and playing cards) until they are left with no cards in hand. The round is now over. Move the round marker to the next space, and begin a new round by drawing another hand of 6 cards. After the 4th round of play, the game ends and final VP are scored. Victory Points have been earned throughout the game, but now any delayed abilities are triggered and scored, Objective points are added, and players gain points for Power Reactors and remaining Credits. The player with the highest score is the winner!
See what I mean about being 7 Wonders in space? The overall gameplay is pretty much the same thing – draft a card, pass cards, play the card – even though thematically they’re on opposite ends of time. That familiarity and simplicity of the gameplay definitely added to my enjoyment of the game. And when I say ‘simplicity’ of gameplay, I do not mean that it is an easy game necessarily. It still requires a decent amount of strategy! Not only do you have to decide what card to draft for maximum benefit, but you also need to figure out exactly where to put it in your Space Station too. Some Locations may give you extra VP for being adjacent to certain other Locations, or they may even earn more VP for distance between two Locations. You’ve got to be thinking in advance, but also able to adapt on the fly. Do you draft a card that you don’t necessarily want because you can see your opponent needs it? Or do you keep your head down and try to fly under the radar? The strategy and mechanics work very well together in creating an engaging and entertaining game.
Components. This game basically just consists of cards, a score board, and some tokens. So even though it’s nothing too fancy or anything, they’re still pretty decent quality! The artwork is thematic and fun to look at, and the layout of the cards is easy to understand. The cards are square, so that makes for some interesting shuffling, but the square shape really lends itself well to the tile-laying aspect of the gameplay. So all in all, good production quality. Just be warned – as the game progresses, it turns into quite a table hog, since you are constantly adding cards to your Space Station. Not a knock on the game, just a heads up so you give yourself plenty of room!
Will Among the Stars replace 7 Wonders for me? Ultimately, no. Don’t get me wrong, it’s still a great game, but 7 Wonders just offers a little more strategy that bumps it to a higher level than Among the Stars. To introduce players to these mechanics and gameplay style, I would use Among the Stars because it is a little ‘lighter’ than 7 Wonders, if you ask me. If you are a fan of 7 Wonders and are interested in a more futuristic theme, I would definitely recommend checking out Among the Stars. It’s a neat game that has been hiding on my game shelf without the playtime it deserves. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a stellar 15 / 18.
Disclaimer: Among the Stars can be played in two different modes – Aggressive and Non-Aggressive. This review covers the core game Non-Aggressive mode of play. -L
Among the Stars is a game of card drafting and tile placement in which players take on the roles of different alien races attempting to build the most efficient space station over the span of 4 years (rounds). After the 4th and final round, players calculate their final scores, and the player with the highest score is the winner! To setup for a game, assemble the Location deck as described in the rules. Each player takes a Main Reactor card and score marker in their chosen color. Score markers are placed at zero on the score board, and players put their Main Reactor card face-up in front of them, along with 2 Energy Cubes. Players choose, or are randomly given, a Race Tile with a special Racial Ability to be used throughout the game. Randomly draw the requisite number of Objective cards and put them face-up near the score board. The game is now ready to begin!
Over the course of 4 rounds, players will be drafting cards and playing them into their Space Station. At the start of each round, every player collects 10 Credits (game currency), and draws a hand of 6 Location cards. Every turn, players will select one card from their hand, place it face-down in front of them, and will pass the remaining cards in their hand to the next player (in either clockwise or counter-clockwise direction, depending on the round). Players will then simultaneously reveal their chosen card and perform one of three actions: Build a Location, Build Power Reactor, or Discard and gain 3 Credits. To Build a Location, you pay its listed cost in Credits and/or Energy and add it to your Space Station. Locations must be placed orthogonally adjacent to an existing Location. When you build a Location, you immediately gain the listed number of VP (tracked on the score board), and may use its ability. Some abilities are immediate and earn you extra VP now, while some are delayed and will be counted at the end of the game. To Build a Power Reactor, you will first discard your selected card for the turn. Pay the 1 Credit cost of a Power Reactor and place it into your Space Station, along with 2 Energy Cubes. Every round, you get 10 Credits, but Energy Cubes do not replenish unless you build more Power Reactors, so keep an eye on your resources! The last possible action is to Discard and gain 3 Credits, and is pretty self-explanatory.
Players continue taking turns (drafting cards, passing cards, and playing cards) until they are left with no cards in hand. The round is now over. Move the round marker to the next space, and begin a new round by drawing another hand of 6 cards. After the 4th round of play, the game ends and final VP are scored. Victory Points have been earned throughout the game, but now any delayed abilities are triggered and scored, Objective points are added, and players gain points for Power Reactors and remaining Credits. The player with the highest score is the winner!
See what I mean about being 7 Wonders in space? The overall gameplay is pretty much the same thing – draft a card, pass cards, play the card – even though thematically they’re on opposite ends of time. That familiarity and simplicity of the gameplay definitely added to my enjoyment of the game. And when I say ‘simplicity’ of gameplay, I do not mean that it is an easy game necessarily. It still requires a decent amount of strategy! Not only do you have to decide what card to draft for maximum benefit, but you also need to figure out exactly where to put it in your Space Station too. Some Locations may give you extra VP for being adjacent to certain other Locations, or they may even earn more VP for distance between two Locations. You’ve got to be thinking in advance, but also able to adapt on the fly. Do you draft a card that you don’t necessarily want because you can see your opponent needs it? Or do you keep your head down and try to fly under the radar? The strategy and mechanics work very well together in creating an engaging and entertaining game.
Components. This game basically just consists of cards, a score board, and some tokens. So even though it’s nothing too fancy or anything, they’re still pretty decent quality! The artwork is thematic and fun to look at, and the layout of the cards is easy to understand. The cards are square, so that makes for some interesting shuffling, but the square shape really lends itself well to the tile-laying aspect of the gameplay. So all in all, good production quality. Just be warned – as the game progresses, it turns into quite a table hog, since you are constantly adding cards to your Space Station. Not a knock on the game, just a heads up so you give yourself plenty of room!
Will Among the Stars replace 7 Wonders for me? Ultimately, no. Don’t get me wrong, it’s still a great game, but 7 Wonders just offers a little more strategy that bumps it to a higher level than Among the Stars. To introduce players to these mechanics and gameplay style, I would use Among the Stars because it is a little ‘lighter’ than 7 Wonders, if you ask me. If you are a fan of 7 Wonders and are interested in a more futuristic theme, I would definitely recommend checking out Among the Stars. It’s a neat game that has been hiding on my game shelf without the playtime it deserves. Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a stellar 15 / 18.
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated The Box (2009) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019
Norma (Cameron Diaz) and Arthur Lewis (James Marsden) don't seem to be any different than any other hardworking family in the late 1970s on the surface, but things aren't always what they seem. After a freak accident at the doctor's office when she was 18, Norma suffers from a disfigurement on her foot and has a noticeable limp. A student humiliates her in front of her class while she's teaching and Norma is under the impression that would be the worst part of her day until she's informed that the discount faculty had been getting on tuition would be cut next semester. Meanwhile, Arthur works for NASA and had been counting on being recruited as an astronaut since he aced every test, but is rejected for failing the psychological exam. Already living paycheck to paycheck, Norma and Lewis wonder how they'll support their son Walter and themselves until an opportunity presents itself in the form of a box. Arlington Steward (Frank Langella), a man who's missing half of his face, shows up at the Lewis' home and makes them an offer that could solve all of their financial situations at the expense of somebody else with the simple push of a button. But the consequences that unfold for Norma and Arthur ar far greater than what they bargained for.
Richard Kelly is capable of making pretty fantastic films. Donnie Darko is still his crowning achievement. People seem to either love the film or think it's highly overrated, but with repeat viewings over the years it's become a favorite and has a cult like status. Southland Tales showed promise, but just felt like the second half of an already established franchise. That turned out to be true when the three graphic novels were published and were recommended to be read before seeing the film. I admire the fact that they took a different approach to the filmwatching experience, but since I didn't hear about the reading material until after I saw the film it seemed like a lost cause. Possibly too much to be bothered with. So Kelly offers his take on a Twilight Zone episode with The Box and the result leaves the viewer with mixed reactions.
The film seems to drag a bit in the first half hour as it introduces us to the Lewis family. The Box is dropped off on their doorstep, but then we're offered a glimpse into the daily lives of Norma and Arthur Lewis; mostly what their careers and daily struggles are like. Once Mr. Steward shows up and explains what The Box does is when the film begins to gain momentum. From that point until around the time Arthur gets knee deep into his investigation is when The Box is at its peak. There's at least one twist in there that's actually pretty satisfying, but it's unfortunate that the film can't keep that up for its entire duration. From then on, it just seems like the film adds more and more weird plot twists and ridiculous explanations. You'll want the film to have ended 20 minutes prior by the time Mr. Steward makes his second offer to the Lewis family.
The dialogue seemed to fluctuate between sounding natural and sounding forced throughout the film. The film takes place in 1976 and it's established rather well, for the most part. At times, it felt like some of the dialect from today slipped through the cracks and made it into a film that took place over 30 years ago. The acting wasn't entirely satisfying either. Was Cameron Diaz's accent noticeable in the trailer for the film? It didn't really click until around the five minute mark of the actual film and seemed to kind of come and go depending on how much dialogue Diaz actually had in a particular scene. Frank Langella was the most enjoyable, but if he wasn't missing half of his face or being so mysterious then his character would probably be kind of dull since he doesn't actually show any range of emotion in the film. The CG also seemed to look a bit low budget during the three gateways scene, which is odd since the pool scene was pulled off incredibly well. With all of these superbly CG animated films coming out as of late like Disney Pixar's Up, Disney's A Christmas Carol, and even next year's Toy Story 3, if CG of a lower quality is contained in a film after that it becomes extremely evident in comparison.
Richard Kelly's The Box puts a modern day spin on a classic story and while it isn't entirely satisfying, it does have its high points. As the puzzle the film is wrapped in unravels, its first few reveals are interesting, but it was like they tried to cram in as many twists and turns as possible as the film went on. While Kelly has at least one great film under his belt, it seems like he still hasn't found a specific stride to being a great director. That doesn't mean he's not capable of doing so and he certainly has his trademarks that seem to bleed through in his films (usually something relating to another gateway or dimension), but that he hasn't been able to channel a similar formula to what made Donnie Darko his standout film. That, in itself, is disappointing.
Richard Kelly is capable of making pretty fantastic films. Donnie Darko is still his crowning achievement. People seem to either love the film or think it's highly overrated, but with repeat viewings over the years it's become a favorite and has a cult like status. Southland Tales showed promise, but just felt like the second half of an already established franchise. That turned out to be true when the three graphic novels were published and were recommended to be read before seeing the film. I admire the fact that they took a different approach to the filmwatching experience, but since I didn't hear about the reading material until after I saw the film it seemed like a lost cause. Possibly too much to be bothered with. So Kelly offers his take on a Twilight Zone episode with The Box and the result leaves the viewer with mixed reactions.
The film seems to drag a bit in the first half hour as it introduces us to the Lewis family. The Box is dropped off on their doorstep, but then we're offered a glimpse into the daily lives of Norma and Arthur Lewis; mostly what their careers and daily struggles are like. Once Mr. Steward shows up and explains what The Box does is when the film begins to gain momentum. From that point until around the time Arthur gets knee deep into his investigation is when The Box is at its peak. There's at least one twist in there that's actually pretty satisfying, but it's unfortunate that the film can't keep that up for its entire duration. From then on, it just seems like the film adds more and more weird plot twists and ridiculous explanations. You'll want the film to have ended 20 minutes prior by the time Mr. Steward makes his second offer to the Lewis family.
The dialogue seemed to fluctuate between sounding natural and sounding forced throughout the film. The film takes place in 1976 and it's established rather well, for the most part. At times, it felt like some of the dialect from today slipped through the cracks and made it into a film that took place over 30 years ago. The acting wasn't entirely satisfying either. Was Cameron Diaz's accent noticeable in the trailer for the film? It didn't really click until around the five minute mark of the actual film and seemed to kind of come and go depending on how much dialogue Diaz actually had in a particular scene. Frank Langella was the most enjoyable, but if he wasn't missing half of his face or being so mysterious then his character would probably be kind of dull since he doesn't actually show any range of emotion in the film. The CG also seemed to look a bit low budget during the three gateways scene, which is odd since the pool scene was pulled off incredibly well. With all of these superbly CG animated films coming out as of late like Disney Pixar's Up, Disney's A Christmas Carol, and even next year's Toy Story 3, if CG of a lower quality is contained in a film after that it becomes extremely evident in comparison.
Richard Kelly's The Box puts a modern day spin on a classic story and while it isn't entirely satisfying, it does have its high points. As the puzzle the film is wrapped in unravels, its first few reveals are interesting, but it was like they tried to cram in as many twists and turns as possible as the film went on. While Kelly has at least one great film under his belt, it seems like he still hasn't found a specific stride to being a great director. That doesn't mean he's not capable of doing so and he certainly has his trademarks that seem to bleed through in his films (usually something relating to another gateway or dimension), but that he hasn't been able to channel a similar formula to what made Donnie Darko his standout film. That, in itself, is disappointing.