Search
Vanity Fair
8.3
Rate It
TV Show
A new adaptation of William Makepeace Thackeray’s, Vanity Fair, has been commissioned as a...
period drama
The Illustrated Child
9.5
Rate It
Book
A picture paints a thousand lies… ‘Evocative and enchanting – a future classic' Veronica...
Coming of Age Books about books
Hot Feminist
Book
Hot (adj.) : (Of a person) Attractive 'a hot chick' Fem-i-n-ist (n.) : A person who supports...
The Plus One
5.0
Rate It
Book
‘So funny. And the sex is amazing – makes me feel like a nun! JILLY COOPER The Plus One [n]...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Dolittle (2020) in Movies
Mar 5, 2020
More CGI animals in another adaptation of a franchise that has been around since the 1920s. I do so love Eddie Murphy's comedy portrayal, am I ready for a period appropriate version?
Tommy Stubbins isn't like his uncle, he doesn't want to hunt the animals in the wood. When he shoots wide in an attempt to miss his target he accidentally hits a squirrel, but his reaction makes his uncle and cousin leave him there with the injured animal. Clutching the squirrel and not knowing what to do Tommy finds himself being beckoned by a parrot. She leads him through a gap in a high stone wall to an expanse filled with (not so) wild animals.
Doctor Dolittle has been hidden behind closed doors ever since his wife disappeared. With just the animals for company he's forgotten some of his human manners, he must remember them quickly as he's summoned by the Queen who is gravely ill.
Welsh. That accent that you couldn't quite put your finger on, that was Welsh... yeah, it wouldn't have been my first guess either but let's just accept it and move on shall we?
Seeing the CGI on this in the trailer didn't annoy me, and looking back now I'm not sure how that was the case when Call Of The Wild basically the same thing and I was livid. Just like Call Of The Wild, Dolittle benefits from the comedy you can get from the CGI and it really needed that.
RDJ is a big ticket name, but I'm not entirely sure he was suited to the role of John Dolittle. Perhaps that's partly to do with the fact that so much of his recent history is dominated by him as Tony Stark, perhaps it's because the slightly crazy and vulnerable Dolittle in this film has little impact. The truth for me is probably somewhere in the middle.
Considering the live action section of the films features a lot of Tommy Stubbins (played by Harry Collett) his role seems of little consequence after he's taken us to the estate, after all, Lady Rose would still have gone there and I suspect Polly would have steered him right. Stubbins, in the books, narrates the stories after he first appears, but in this adaptation it's given to Polly, voiced by Emma Thompson. I can understand that decision, she's got a very soothing and yet commanding voice that's perfect for that role.
There seems to be a lot of pieces kept from the books, though they've been tweaked for the modern audience. Not only the change of narrator but Polly is no longer a grey African parrot, instead we're given a much brighter macaw which has a better visual payoff.
One day I'll remember to look at the cast list for animated films before I go in, trying to place voices is so difficult on the fly. All in all the animals are fine, the script doesn't feel great but the antics help it out somewhat.
Our villains are quite varied throughout but Michael Sheen takes a main role as Dr. Blair Müdfly, Dolittle's rival. The interactions between him and the animals did amuse me but his over the top nature that built steadily through the film felt much too cliche, sadly not always in an entertaining way.
There are many things to like hidden in the film. It opens with a great animation that gives us back story which allows us not to suffer through clumsy attempts at the same during the film. I also really enjoyed the way we're shown how Dolittle speaks to the animals, though that does raise other questions that make things unravel, so I'll move on. The squirrel's commentary is hilarious and probably makes him my favourite character, though the octopus isn't too far behind.
Dolittle has a lot of nice little touches but it relies heavily on predictable humour and at times doesn't know when to stop (I'm thinking specifically about a scene towards the end of the film here). Even with its many ups and downs the film was enjoyable to watch, just the once. I'm entirely convinced that with a different accent it would have been infinitely better.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/03/dolittle-movie-review.html
Tommy Stubbins isn't like his uncle, he doesn't want to hunt the animals in the wood. When he shoots wide in an attempt to miss his target he accidentally hits a squirrel, but his reaction makes his uncle and cousin leave him there with the injured animal. Clutching the squirrel and not knowing what to do Tommy finds himself being beckoned by a parrot. She leads him through a gap in a high stone wall to an expanse filled with (not so) wild animals.
Doctor Dolittle has been hidden behind closed doors ever since his wife disappeared. With just the animals for company he's forgotten some of his human manners, he must remember them quickly as he's summoned by the Queen who is gravely ill.
Welsh. That accent that you couldn't quite put your finger on, that was Welsh... yeah, it wouldn't have been my first guess either but let's just accept it and move on shall we?
Seeing the CGI on this in the trailer didn't annoy me, and looking back now I'm not sure how that was the case when Call Of The Wild basically the same thing and I was livid. Just like Call Of The Wild, Dolittle benefits from the comedy you can get from the CGI and it really needed that.
RDJ is a big ticket name, but I'm not entirely sure he was suited to the role of John Dolittle. Perhaps that's partly to do with the fact that so much of his recent history is dominated by him as Tony Stark, perhaps it's because the slightly crazy and vulnerable Dolittle in this film has little impact. The truth for me is probably somewhere in the middle.
Considering the live action section of the films features a lot of Tommy Stubbins (played by Harry Collett) his role seems of little consequence after he's taken us to the estate, after all, Lady Rose would still have gone there and I suspect Polly would have steered him right. Stubbins, in the books, narrates the stories after he first appears, but in this adaptation it's given to Polly, voiced by Emma Thompson. I can understand that decision, she's got a very soothing and yet commanding voice that's perfect for that role.
There seems to be a lot of pieces kept from the books, though they've been tweaked for the modern audience. Not only the change of narrator but Polly is no longer a grey African parrot, instead we're given a much brighter macaw which has a better visual payoff.
One day I'll remember to look at the cast list for animated films before I go in, trying to place voices is so difficult on the fly. All in all the animals are fine, the script doesn't feel great but the antics help it out somewhat.
Our villains are quite varied throughout but Michael Sheen takes a main role as Dr. Blair Müdfly, Dolittle's rival. The interactions between him and the animals did amuse me but his over the top nature that built steadily through the film felt much too cliche, sadly not always in an entertaining way.
There are many things to like hidden in the film. It opens with a great animation that gives us back story which allows us not to suffer through clumsy attempts at the same during the film. I also really enjoyed the way we're shown how Dolittle speaks to the animals, though that does raise other questions that make things unravel, so I'll move on. The squirrel's commentary is hilarious and probably makes him my favourite character, though the octopus isn't too far behind.
Dolittle has a lot of nice little touches but it relies heavily on predictable humour and at times doesn't know when to stop (I'm thinking specifically about a scene towards the end of the film here). Even with its many ups and downs the film was enjoyable to watch, just the once. I'm entirely convinced that with a different accent it would have been infinitely better.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/03/dolittle-movie-review.html
David McK (3233 KP) rated The Magician's Nephew (Chronicles of Narnia, #6) in Books
Jan 28, 2019
Chronologically the first Narnia book, this was actually the last book written in the series, and goes back to how the magical land of Narnia (going by publication date, first visited in [b: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe|100915|The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe (Chronicles of Narnia, #1)|C.S. Lewis|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1353029077s/100915.jpg|4790821]) came to be.
As such, who says that the concept of prequels is a new invention??
Personally, I think I approached this from the wrong perspective: when I hear the word 'magician' mentioned (as in the title of the book) I tend to think either of the likes of Paul Daniels, or (going by literature) of Gandalf the Grey/White.
That, however, is not how the magician is portrayed here: rather than a benevolent, kindly old character, we instead have a selfish, greedy older man, who is responsible for sending the two children protagonists (Digory and Polly) into the magical woods between the worlds, and eventually into the land that will become Narnia.
If I'm honest, it's also not a story that I was overly familiar with: sure, I'd read (as a kid) that more famous previously mentioned entry and (more recently) have even watched a few of the movies, but this one? Not so much.
As such, who says that the concept of prequels is a new invention??
Personally, I think I approached this from the wrong perspective: when I hear the word 'magician' mentioned (as in the title of the book) I tend to think either of the likes of Paul Daniels, or (going by literature) of Gandalf the Grey/White.
That, however, is not how the magician is portrayed here: rather than a benevolent, kindly old character, we instead have a selfish, greedy older man, who is responsible for sending the two children protagonists (Digory and Polly) into the magical woods between the worlds, and eventually into the land that will become Narnia.
If I'm honest, it's also not a story that I was overly familiar with: sure, I'd read (as a kid) that more famous previously mentioned entry and (more recently) have even watched a few of the movies, but this one? Not so much.
The Selected Works of H.G. Wells
Book
H. G. Wells is often referred to as 'the father of science fiction' and this compendium of his...
Cyn Armistead (14 KP) rated All Clear (All Clear, #2) in Books
Mar 1, 2018
Well, this volume moved much more quickly than [b:Blackout|6506307|Blackout|Connie Willis|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1402428101s/6506307.jpg|6697901] did! Having read a brief piece written by Ms. Willis thanking those who stood by her as one book spread into two, I think I have a slightly better understanding now of what happened that led to my unhappiness with the way the first book ended. They really shouldn't be two books, but they couldn't physically fit into one volume. Or, for many e-readers, one ebook.
It is still a large book! And, as in [b:Blackout|6506307|Blackout|Connie Willis|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1402428101s/6506307.jpg|6697901], it isn't always clear just who a character is. I'm reading along happily and all of a sudden, there's a new main character! Wait, who is this? Has Colin gotten through somehow? Or is it another historian? Or another trip by one of the people we already know? Or--but--…Ms. Willis does a marvelous job of keeping us guessing. And the historians' habit of using different names on different assignments meant that I didn't always know which person I was reading about even when I thought I did know who he or she was! The reader has to catch the tiniest details to know that something isn't quite right, or be left completely surprised at the reveal! The many references to [a:Agatha Christie|123715|Agatha Christie|https://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1321738793p2/123715.jpg] are definitely meaningful, and I've come to believe that I haven't read nearly enough of her work!
I've always considered Ms. Willis a cerebral author, but my emotions were heavily engaged here. The analogy of Polly, Sir Godfrey, and <i>The Admirable Crichton</i> was so apt, and that dreadful business in the Phoenix had me bawling. By the time a hero we'd grown to know and love dearly fell, and fell so, so close to home, I was a basket case.
After finishing this massive duology (which really should count as one enormous book spread across two volumes), you would think that I would be sick and tired of all things Willis and not want to read another word by her for the next year or so. Instead, I want to know, right now, what comes next. I want to read about Eileen and the Vicar, and watch Alf and Binnie grow up. I want to see Polly and Colin's relationship grow.
I imagine Ms. Willis is rather tired of all of them, though, and happy to rest for a while and remember what it is to live back in this century again. The Oxford Time Travel universe offers so many rich and fascinating possibilities for fiction, and I hope she chooses to write many more novels set in it. I'll definitely be willing to read them!
It is still a large book! And, as in [b:Blackout|6506307|Blackout|Connie Willis|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1402428101s/6506307.jpg|6697901], it isn't always clear just who a character is. I'm reading along happily and all of a sudden, there's a new main character! Wait, who is this? Has Colin gotten through somehow? Or is it another historian? Or another trip by one of the people we already know? Or--but--…Ms. Willis does a marvelous job of keeping us guessing. And the historians' habit of using different names on different assignments meant that I didn't always know which person I was reading about even when I thought I did know who he or she was! The reader has to catch the tiniest details to know that something isn't quite right, or be left completely surprised at the reveal! The many references to [a:Agatha Christie|123715|Agatha Christie|https://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1321738793p2/123715.jpg] are definitely meaningful, and I've come to believe that I haven't read nearly enough of her work!
I've always considered Ms. Willis a cerebral author, but my emotions were heavily engaged here. The analogy of Polly, Sir Godfrey, and <i>The Admirable Crichton</i> was so apt, and that dreadful business in the Phoenix had me bawling. By the time a hero we'd grown to know and love dearly fell, and fell so, so close to home, I was a basket case.
After finishing this massive duology (which really should count as one enormous book spread across two volumes), you would think that I would be sick and tired of all things Willis and not want to read another word by her for the next year or so. Instead, I want to know, right now, what comes next. I want to read about Eileen and the Vicar, and watch Alf and Binnie grow up. I want to see Polly and Colin's relationship grow.
I imagine Ms. Willis is rather tired of all of them, though, and happy to rest for a while and remember what it is to live back in this century again. The Oxford Time Travel universe offers so many rich and fascinating possibilities for fiction, and I hope she chooses to write many more novels set in it. I'll definitely be willing to read them!
Northern Lights
Book
An updated third edition of Bradt's practical guide to the best places to view the Northern Lights,...
1915 Diary of S. An-Sky: A Russian Jewish Writer at the Eastern Front
S.A. An-sky and Polly Zavadivker
Book
S. An-sky was by the time of the First World War a well-known writer, a longtime revolutionary, and...