Search
Search results
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated Vesper (Deviants, #1) in Books
Feb 15, 2019
The start of VESPERS immediately caught my attention with the transcript of an interview with Emily Webb, the protagonist, and an agent of the mysterious Vesper Company. This led to the first chapter where no time is wasted getting straight to the story. Emily is every introverted, insecure, don't-make-a-scene-or-stand-out girl out there, which made her very relatable to me; as a teen, I was just like her. Her transformations into Nighttime Emily, as she called herself, were well-done but I felt the author could have stretched a little further than the "wild child" persona he gave Emily during those times. I got a bit bored when she was in that stage and liked when she went back to Daytime Emily, her normal self, much better. At first, I was a little disappointed in where the story actually went, mainly what Emily ended up being (and that's all I'm saying, no spoilers here), but I accepted and enjoyed it anyway. The middle of the book lagged and I was afraid it would end up an average read, with too much wild behavior and not as much development as I would have liked. However, toward the end the story picked up and kept me riveted; it's always a good thing for an author to end his or her book on a high note. This isn't a YA book with romance as its central focus, but it does have its place in the story and doesn't overwhelm the main plot. The book as a whole could have been deeper than it was, but it's still a good start to the Deviants series and opened up numerous possibilities, with many unanswered questions for future endeavors. The use of six or so transcripts interspersed throughout the book was a nice element and I quite enjoyed them; the entire book could have easily been written this way. This would probably appeal more to teenagers but some adults would enjoy it as well. I did. THE VESPERS is a breeze to read, briskly-paced, and has a few snicker-worthy moments; maybe it's not perfect, but it's far from bad and I had a good time reading it.
3.5 stars
Note: There is some graphic violence, only one scene really, but it's there.
3.5 stars
Note: There is some graphic violence, only one scene really, but it's there.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated White Boy Rick (2018) in Movies
Sep 17, 2018
Would have been better if at actually WAS a McConaughey flick
If you believe the advertisement for the latest Matthew McConaughey flick, WHITE BOY RICK, you would think that it is...well...a Mathew McConaughey flick.
And you would be wrong.
Set in the mid-1980's, WHITE BOY RICK tells the true tale of Richard Wershe, Jr. a youth who gets involved in drug trafficking and becomes an informant for the FBI and who...eventually...becomes the person who has been incarcerated for the longest time in Michigan for a non-violent crime.
Sounds intriguing enough you say. And the cast list says that McConaughey is starring as Richard Wershe, so that could be interesting.
But you would be wrong again.
McConaughey stars as Richard Wershe, SENIOR, the father of Richard Wershe, Jr. who is played by Richie Merritt, in his film debut - and that's the problem. The actor that might have made the slightness of the screen play and story interesting is sidelined as a minor, supporting character and the lead role - the role that is front and center for the ENTIRE film - is played by someone in his screen debut who brings nothing interesting to the role.
Director Yann Demage does a credible enough job moving the plot forward from event to event, but doesn't craft an over-arching storyline - or character transformation - that makes each of these individual scenes work with each other. It's a series of vignettes, but not a total movie - at least not a total, emotionally satisfying film.
McConaughey, of course, is the best thing in this film - he has the "low-life, struggling, white trash" persona perfected. But he is in the film not nearly enough and his "big" scenes aren't big enough to make his appearance in this film worthwhile.
Jennifer Jason Leigh, Bruce Dern and Piper Laurie are wasted in even smaller supporting roles and the other actors/characters are just forgettable faces in forgettable situations. Only Bel Powley as White Boy Rick's sister is interesting to watch and has a character worth remembering.
There is a good movie in here, I'm sure, this just isn't it. Disappointing would be the best word I would use for it.
Letter Grade C+ (for McConaughey and Powley's presence - and for the sure fun of seeing Dern and Laurie together on the screen).
5 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
And you would be wrong.
Set in the mid-1980's, WHITE BOY RICK tells the true tale of Richard Wershe, Jr. a youth who gets involved in drug trafficking and becomes an informant for the FBI and who...eventually...becomes the person who has been incarcerated for the longest time in Michigan for a non-violent crime.
Sounds intriguing enough you say. And the cast list says that McConaughey is starring as Richard Wershe, so that could be interesting.
But you would be wrong again.
McConaughey stars as Richard Wershe, SENIOR, the father of Richard Wershe, Jr. who is played by Richie Merritt, in his film debut - and that's the problem. The actor that might have made the slightness of the screen play and story interesting is sidelined as a minor, supporting character and the lead role - the role that is front and center for the ENTIRE film - is played by someone in his screen debut who brings nothing interesting to the role.
Director Yann Demage does a credible enough job moving the plot forward from event to event, but doesn't craft an over-arching storyline - or character transformation - that makes each of these individual scenes work with each other. It's a series of vignettes, but not a total movie - at least not a total, emotionally satisfying film.
McConaughey, of course, is the best thing in this film - he has the "low-life, struggling, white trash" persona perfected. But he is in the film not nearly enough and his "big" scenes aren't big enough to make his appearance in this film worthwhile.
Jennifer Jason Leigh, Bruce Dern and Piper Laurie are wasted in even smaller supporting roles and the other actors/characters are just forgettable faces in forgettable situations. Only Bel Powley as White Boy Rick's sister is interesting to watch and has a character worth remembering.
There is a good movie in here, I'm sure, this just isn't it. Disappointing would be the best word I would use for it.
Letter Grade C+ (for McConaughey and Powley's presence - and for the sure fun of seeing Dern and Laurie together on the screen).
5 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated John Wick: Chapter 3 - Parabellum (2019) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
“John Wick Chapter 3: Parabellum” literally hits the ground running as the film opens with the title star (Keanu Reeves) and his faithful dog running desperately through the rain soaked streets of New York. Wick is set to have every major player after him and 14 million dollar bounty in less than an hour and he is desperate to find a way out of his situation.
Picking up moments from the end of the last film, Wick is persona non grata due to his decision to conduct business on the grounds of the Continental which while providing services and sanctuary to those in his profession; is strictly forbidden.
As he gets closer to the appointed hour; the streets fill with assassins looking to take down the legend and this drives Wick to desperately call in a Marker with a figure from his past (Anjelica Houston) in order to get passage from the city.
Wick hopes that by meeting with the head of the Table he can get the bounty removed and stop running for his life. This of course requires him to deal with figures from his past such as Sofia (Halle Berry) who would sooner shoot him rather than help him due to the enormous risks associated with helping him in any way.
Of course the bodies pile up along the way as Wick dispatches countless foes in creative and brutal fashion showing his reputation is still very well earned.
The film also has a very clever secondary story that involves Winston (Ian McShane) being forced to atone for his willingness to give Wick a one hour head start at the end of the last film and this of course will bring things full circle as Wick must decide what is most important to him as he tries to find a way out of his deadly situation.
Toss in a master assassin (Mark Dacascos) and his army of rogues after Wick and the film never lets up once. It is an epic thrill ride and a symphony of bullets, blades, blood, and bodies and Reeves and the cast have never been better. While most series have run out of steam by the third film, this series has never been more enjoyable and I cannot wait to see what comes next.
http://sknr.net/2019/05/10/john-wick-chapter-3-parabellum/
Picking up moments from the end of the last film, Wick is persona non grata due to his decision to conduct business on the grounds of the Continental which while providing services and sanctuary to those in his profession; is strictly forbidden.
As he gets closer to the appointed hour; the streets fill with assassins looking to take down the legend and this drives Wick to desperately call in a Marker with a figure from his past (Anjelica Houston) in order to get passage from the city.
Wick hopes that by meeting with the head of the Table he can get the bounty removed and stop running for his life. This of course requires him to deal with figures from his past such as Sofia (Halle Berry) who would sooner shoot him rather than help him due to the enormous risks associated with helping him in any way.
Of course the bodies pile up along the way as Wick dispatches countless foes in creative and brutal fashion showing his reputation is still very well earned.
The film also has a very clever secondary story that involves Winston (Ian McShane) being forced to atone for his willingness to give Wick a one hour head start at the end of the last film and this of course will bring things full circle as Wick must decide what is most important to him as he tries to find a way out of his deadly situation.
Toss in a master assassin (Mark Dacascos) and his army of rogues after Wick and the film never lets up once. It is an epic thrill ride and a symphony of bullets, blades, blood, and bodies and Reeves and the cast have never been better. While most series have run out of steam by the third film, this series has never been more enjoyable and I cannot wait to see what comes next.
http://sknr.net/2019/05/10/john-wick-chapter-3-parabellum/
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Conversations With A Killer: The Ted Bundy Tapes in TV
Mar 3, 2020
The third of these was the most powerful for me. It was Confessions of a killer: the Ted Bundy tapes. I mean… I had no idea. His name was in my imagination somewhere as a candidate for pure evil, but I had no notion of the level of media hype and drama behind and before this. Which is why I recommend this absolutely comprehensive 4 part series as the best in this dubious category I have yet to see.
With the benefit of at least some hindsight, we can see in this case the epitome of such terms as “serial killer” and “sociopath”. Looking at it in pure terms of an idea worthy of dramatic exploration, then this is it! And, interestingly, to this date, besides the Zac Efron misfire, it is a story beyond worthy of correct telling, the basis of which should be the real footage. Because nothing is more bizarre than the real man and what he not only attempted to do, but actually did.
Take the basic idea that one individual is capable of murdering 30 plus women and girls over a period of two decades… then accept that he systematically went back to the corpses and committed acts of necropholia and decapitation without ever skipping a beat in what he perceived as his true persona as a competent lawyer in his own right, and you have the stuff of true nightmare. Add to that the fact that he escaped custody twice, and defended himself in court to such a charming extent that the judge himself admitted an affinity with him, and you have the recipe for something that transcends fact and becomes myth. Don’t believe me? Watch for yourself.
Do I agree with these cases being shown as entertainment? No, I don’t. Essentially. Because they are rarely told from the victim’s point of view. We have a fascination with an unsolved mystery and grim death that is undeniably curious. The cult of personality pervades, and we should be wary of why we get involved with this stuff. As addictive TV it is undeniably going to continue. Please be careful of the line between understanding and entertainment. God forbid I would give these shows a rating, as if it were a thing worthy of encouragement. It is the most undeniable yet horrific side effect of our media growth imaginable. Watch at your peril. But watch discerningly with interest.
With the benefit of at least some hindsight, we can see in this case the epitome of such terms as “serial killer” and “sociopath”. Looking at it in pure terms of an idea worthy of dramatic exploration, then this is it! And, interestingly, to this date, besides the Zac Efron misfire, it is a story beyond worthy of correct telling, the basis of which should be the real footage. Because nothing is more bizarre than the real man and what he not only attempted to do, but actually did.
Take the basic idea that one individual is capable of murdering 30 plus women and girls over a period of two decades… then accept that he systematically went back to the corpses and committed acts of necropholia and decapitation without ever skipping a beat in what he perceived as his true persona as a competent lawyer in his own right, and you have the stuff of true nightmare. Add to that the fact that he escaped custody twice, and defended himself in court to such a charming extent that the judge himself admitted an affinity with him, and you have the recipe for something that transcends fact and becomes myth. Don’t believe me? Watch for yourself.
Do I agree with these cases being shown as entertainment? No, I don’t. Essentially. Because they are rarely told from the victim’s point of view. We have a fascination with an unsolved mystery and grim death that is undeniably curious. The cult of personality pervades, and we should be wary of why we get involved with this stuff. As addictive TV it is undeniably going to continue. Please be careful of the line between understanding and entertainment. God forbid I would give these shows a rating, as if it were a thing worthy of encouragement. It is the most undeniable yet horrific side effect of our media growth imaginable. Watch at your peril. But watch discerningly with interest.
It's a Myth by Sneaks
Album Watch
It's a Myth is Sneaks' 2nd album. With little more than a bass, drum machine, and deadpan vocals,...
Illeana Douglas recommended Wild Strawberries (1957) in Movies (curated)
Kathleen Hanna recommended Ballad Of The Insolent Pup by Thee Headcoatees in Music (curated)
BookInspector (124 KP) rated A Pearl for My Mistress in Books
Sep 24, 2020
I would like to begin this review by saying that I really loved the cover of this book, it looks pleasant and very sophisticated, another thing which intrigued me, was the lesbian relationship in 1930th England.
The characters in this novel are very interesting, sophisticated and at the same time very believable and down to earth. The whole book was mainly told from Lady Lucy’s, Hester’s (the maid) and Sophie’s (Hester’s sister) perspectives. I really liked that author chose multiple perspectives, it allowed me to have a better insight into characters personalities and made the whole story more indulging. My favourite persona in this book was Hester. I liked her simplicity, pureness and adventurous heart.
The narrative of the book is filled with historical knowledge and politics. It was very clearly visible that author has a passion for history and she has done a great research for this novel. For me it wasn't a very easy read, there are a lot of things happening in this novel and a lot of politics involved, because of that I had to keep my concentration going to understand what was going on. However, I really enjoyed all the details which author shared about aristocratic life, their struggles and wish of Independence. I also loved the insight into maids world in that period, as most of the books I read was mostly set in the 19th century, and it was nice to compare how it changed during the time.
The writing style of this book is very rich and elegant, it reflected that particular era very nicely, and I felt the spirit of 1930th through the pages. The chapter length was quite long to my liking, even though it was divided into smaller parts. (Well, what can I say, I love short chapters…) The ending of the book concluded the book really nicely but still left me guessing where life will take Hester. So to conclude, it is a very interesting book about aristocrats and their lifestyle between the wars in England, filled with secrets, manipulations, and fear or support of new regiment. I would strongly recommend this book to all historical fiction readers and people who like politics. Enjoy :)
Was given this book by publisher and NetGalley for an honest review.
The characters in this novel are very interesting, sophisticated and at the same time very believable and down to earth. The whole book was mainly told from Lady Lucy’s, Hester’s (the maid) and Sophie’s (Hester’s sister) perspectives. I really liked that author chose multiple perspectives, it allowed me to have a better insight into characters personalities and made the whole story more indulging. My favourite persona in this book was Hester. I liked her simplicity, pureness and adventurous heart.
The narrative of the book is filled with historical knowledge and politics. It was very clearly visible that author has a passion for history and she has done a great research for this novel. For me it wasn't a very easy read, there are a lot of things happening in this novel and a lot of politics involved, because of that I had to keep my concentration going to understand what was going on. However, I really enjoyed all the details which author shared about aristocratic life, their struggles and wish of Independence. I also loved the insight into maids world in that period, as most of the books I read was mostly set in the 19th century, and it was nice to compare how it changed during the time.
The writing style of this book is very rich and elegant, it reflected that particular era very nicely, and I felt the spirit of 1930th through the pages. The chapter length was quite long to my liking, even though it was divided into smaller parts. (Well, what can I say, I love short chapters…) The ending of the book concluded the book really nicely but still left me guessing where life will take Hester. So to conclude, it is a very interesting book about aristocrats and their lifestyle between the wars in England, filled with secrets, manipulations, and fear or support of new regiment. I would strongly recommend this book to all historical fiction readers and people who like politics. Enjoy :)
Was given this book by publisher and NetGalley for an honest review.
Studio Fotografico Pro
Photo & Video and Utilities
7.0
Rate It
App
###SCONTATA DEL 50%### Studio Fotografico è un l'editor di Foto per il vostro iPhone, iPod o iPad...
David McK (3547 KP) rated The Batman (2022) in Movies
Apr 3, 2022 (Updated Oct 23, 2022)
"I am vengeance!"
Batman.
First debuting in DC Comics, 1939, and now one of the most popular superheroes of all, amongst the 'holy trinity' of Superman, Wonder Woman and Batman
It's often forgotten and/or overlooked in his numerous movies to date that those initials (DC) actually stand for Detective Comics, with Batman - on the pages - sometimes also known as The Worlds Greatest Detective.
This is the first of his movies that I can think of where that aspect of his character is portrayed - sure, there hints of it in 1989s Batman, but only hints. Here it's full force, front and centre, with Batman - only his second year as a Vigilante - working alongside Jim Gordon and a proto-Catwoman to track down and apprehend the serial killer known only as The Riddler, who is leaving clues behind at all his kills.
A very different portrayal of that character than Jim Carrey's version in 'Batman Forever'.
This is also a very long film - nearly 3 hours - that, I felt, is in danger of outstaying it's welcome, with very little in the way of superheroics. More of a police whodunnit with costumed characters, maybe. There's also a perfect 'cutting-off' point at just after the third act, with - I guess? - a studio mandate for the fourth act tacked on, which is probably more along the lines of what to expect from a Batman movie.
As for Robert Pattinson as The Caped Crusader? I kept expecting him to sparkle. Unfair, I know (to type cast him as the vampire from Twilight), but I do think he may have swung too far in the other direction when portraying Bruce Wayne; here very much an emo goth kid rather than the swaggering heir to the fortune he is oft shown as. In fact, there's very little of Bruce on display: he spends most of his time, in costume, as Batman. This was a conscious decision, or so I have heard, to show how Bruce is in danger of losing himself to that persona. I'm also struggling to think of a single key 'stand-out' moment in line with 'Batman Begins' rescuing Rachel or 'The Dark Knight' "he's the Hero we need ..." bit: the Penguin car chase, perhaps?
So, yeah, a very different cinematic take on The Dark Knight, indeed.
First debuting in DC Comics, 1939, and now one of the most popular superheroes of all, amongst the 'holy trinity' of Superman, Wonder Woman and Batman
It's often forgotten and/or overlooked in his numerous movies to date that those initials (DC) actually stand for Detective Comics, with Batman - on the pages - sometimes also known as The Worlds Greatest Detective.
This is the first of his movies that I can think of where that aspect of his character is portrayed - sure, there hints of it in 1989s Batman, but only hints. Here it's full force, front and centre, with Batman - only his second year as a Vigilante - working alongside Jim Gordon and a proto-Catwoman to track down and apprehend the serial killer known only as The Riddler, who is leaving clues behind at all his kills.
A very different portrayal of that character than Jim Carrey's version in 'Batman Forever'.
This is also a very long film - nearly 3 hours - that, I felt, is in danger of outstaying it's welcome, with very little in the way of superheroics. More of a police whodunnit with costumed characters, maybe. There's also a perfect 'cutting-off' point at just after the third act, with - I guess? - a studio mandate for the fourth act tacked on, which is probably more along the lines of what to expect from a Batman movie.
As for Robert Pattinson as The Caped Crusader? I kept expecting him to sparkle. Unfair, I know (to type cast him as the vampire from Twilight), but I do think he may have swung too far in the other direction when portraying Bruce Wayne; here very much an emo goth kid rather than the swaggering heir to the fortune he is oft shown as. In fact, there's very little of Bruce on display: he spends most of his time, in costume, as Batman. This was a conscious decision, or so I have heard, to show how Bruce is in danger of losing himself to that persona. I'm also struggling to think of a single key 'stand-out' moment in line with 'Batman Begins' rescuing Rachel or 'The Dark Knight' "he's the Hero we need ..." bit: the Penguin car chase, perhaps?
So, yeah, a very different cinematic take on The Dark Knight, indeed.