Search
Search results
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
The Transformers of the superhero genre
It feels like eons ago that Batman v Superman was announced as a genuine movie. Way back in 2007 there was a poster that seemed to signify DC Comic’s plans in I am Legend, but fans just thought of it as a pipedream.
Now, in 2016, the moment has finally arrived. The marketing campaign has been relentless, the trailers have been criticised for showing far too much (which they have), and Ben Affleck’s casting as Batman was met with disdain rather than joy. So what is the finished product like?
Superman has now become a controversial figure after his climactic battle with General Zod, with Batman in particular being cautious of his true plans for Earth. After a new threat is created, Doomsday, they must put aside their differences to save the planet.
Following on directly from the events of Man of Steel, director Zak Snyder brings together DC Comics’ biggest superheroes in a film as loud as anything Michael Bay served up in the Transformers series.
Henry Cavill returns as the god from above with Ben Affleck taking over duties from Christian Bale as the Dark Knight. Both of them give great performances with Cavill in particular impressing. Affleck proves his doubters wrong and is more than a match for Bale, though his one facial expression wears thin over the course of the film.
Elsewhere, Jesse Eisenberg takes on the role of Lex Luthor in a portrayal reminiscent of Johnny Depp’s Willy Wonka – eerily creepy and well-acted but just trying that little bit too hard. Amy Adams makes a welcome return as Lois Lane and gets much more screen time here than she did in Man of Steel.
However, the most praise has to go to Gal Gadot. Her exceptional characterisation of Wonder Woman is one of the movie’s highlights and it’s such a shame she takes a backseat to the two titular characters. It’s clear the filmmakers thought highly of her too, as she gets her own thundering theme tune whenever she appears.
Unfortunately, the plot is just too nondescript and completely incomprehensible at times, with Lex Luthor’s motives remaining unclear throughout the 150 minute running time. This proves increasingly hard to swallow as the film progresses and makes his villain feel less menacing than he should be.
Nevertheless, Batman v Superman is visually spectacular. Snyder bombards the audience with breath-taking set pieces, dispersing them well enough to ensure the plot only drags in a few areas, namely at the beginning – though the film’s flabby length is a sticking point; it simply doesn’t need to be nearly three hours long.
It may all sound pretty negative, but the exciting and beautifully filmed final act almost makes up for these shortcomings. We also get to see an emotional side to the genre, something that has been sorely lacking more recently with the constant quipping of the Marvel Universe.
Overall, Batman v Superman was never going to live up to the hype and in some ways it does fall short. The battle between Bat of Gotham and Son of Krypton is disappointingly brief and the story lacks any real weight, until the final 30 minutes. But it’s filmed in such a unique fashion and with such confidence; it’s quite possible you may not see anything like it in the genre again.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/03/27/the-transformers-of-the-superhero-genre-batman-v-superman-review/
Now, in 2016, the moment has finally arrived. The marketing campaign has been relentless, the trailers have been criticised for showing far too much (which they have), and Ben Affleck’s casting as Batman was met with disdain rather than joy. So what is the finished product like?
Superman has now become a controversial figure after his climactic battle with General Zod, with Batman in particular being cautious of his true plans for Earth. After a new threat is created, Doomsday, they must put aside their differences to save the planet.
Following on directly from the events of Man of Steel, director Zak Snyder brings together DC Comics’ biggest superheroes in a film as loud as anything Michael Bay served up in the Transformers series.
Henry Cavill returns as the god from above with Ben Affleck taking over duties from Christian Bale as the Dark Knight. Both of them give great performances with Cavill in particular impressing. Affleck proves his doubters wrong and is more than a match for Bale, though his one facial expression wears thin over the course of the film.
Elsewhere, Jesse Eisenberg takes on the role of Lex Luthor in a portrayal reminiscent of Johnny Depp’s Willy Wonka – eerily creepy and well-acted but just trying that little bit too hard. Amy Adams makes a welcome return as Lois Lane and gets much more screen time here than she did in Man of Steel.
However, the most praise has to go to Gal Gadot. Her exceptional characterisation of Wonder Woman is one of the movie’s highlights and it’s such a shame she takes a backseat to the two titular characters. It’s clear the filmmakers thought highly of her too, as she gets her own thundering theme tune whenever she appears.
Unfortunately, the plot is just too nondescript and completely incomprehensible at times, with Lex Luthor’s motives remaining unclear throughout the 150 minute running time. This proves increasingly hard to swallow as the film progresses and makes his villain feel less menacing than he should be.
Nevertheless, Batman v Superman is visually spectacular. Snyder bombards the audience with breath-taking set pieces, dispersing them well enough to ensure the plot only drags in a few areas, namely at the beginning – though the film’s flabby length is a sticking point; it simply doesn’t need to be nearly three hours long.
It may all sound pretty negative, but the exciting and beautifully filmed final act almost makes up for these shortcomings. We also get to see an emotional side to the genre, something that has been sorely lacking more recently with the constant quipping of the Marvel Universe.
Overall, Batman v Superman was never going to live up to the hype and in some ways it does fall short. The battle between Bat of Gotham and Son of Krypton is disappointingly brief and the story lacks any real weight, until the final 30 minutes. But it’s filmed in such a unique fashion and with such confidence; it’s quite possible you may not see anything like it in the genre again.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/03/27/the-transformers-of-the-superhero-genre-batman-v-superman-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Snowman (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
No, not that one
Nordic noir is big business at the moment, but with the incredible scenery of the locations lending themselves perfectly to film, is there any wonder?
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and The Hypnotist are just a couple of movies that have fallen into this massively expanding genre.
Now, Jo Nesbø’s chilling The Snowman novel gets the silver screen treatment in a film of the same name. But can this continue the thrilling trend of whodunit novels being turned into fabulous crime dramas?For Detective Harry Hole (Michael Fassbender), the death of a young woman during the first snow of winter feels like anything but a routine homicide. His investigation leads him to “The Snowman Killer,” an elusive sociopath who continuously taunts Hole with ingeniously crafted cat-and-mouse games. As the brutal deaths show no sign of slowing, Harry teams up with a new recruit (Rebecca Ferguson) to try and lure the madman out of the shadows before it’s too late.
With Michael Fassbender at the helm, director Thomas Alfredson (Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy) manages to blend gorgeous imagery with an intriguing plot and excellent performances in a film that suffers from a couple of issues that stops it from becoming a must-see event.
These R-rated thrillers are ten-a-penny these days with the bar still being set incredibly high by Gone Girl. Last year’s Girl on the Train was a decent stab at dethroning David Fincher’s masterpiece, but it just fell a little short – well the same has happened here.
Michael Fassbender is uniformly excellent as troubled detective, Harry and the actor can do no wrong in his performances, but he’s suffered this year. After Assassin’s Creed failed to ignite the box-office, it looks to be a similar story this time. While The Snowman is technically competent and filmed beautifully, it lacks the sense of originality that breeds success.
It also doesn’t help that he’s surrounded by thinly padded supporting characters like former love interest Rakel (Charlotte Gainsbourg) and new police officer Katrine (Ferguson). Elsewhere, bizarre glorified cameos for Val Kilmer and Toby Jones leave you wondering if these actors expected a little more from their parts.
Perhaps I’m being a little harsh. After all, the cast is one of the film’s strongest suits. Add J.K. Simmons to the aforementioned roster and it really does have one of the best line-ups of the year. It’s just a shame the script doesn’t do more with them.
To look at, The Snowman is absolutely gorgeous. Helped obviously by magnificent Norwegian landscapes, Alfredson shoots using steady cam in scenes reminiscent of Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining, high praise indeed. In a year populated by CGI-heavy blockbusters, this comes as a real breath of fresh air.
Unfortunately, the constant use of flashbacks and a peculiar subplot involving a Winter sporting event ruin the pacing, though at 130 minutes, this isn’t too much of an issue. The ending however, is disappointing and lacks an emotional payoff after the film’s events.
Overall, The Snowman is a gritty adaptation of Jo Nesbø’s successful novel and while some of the plot choices leave a little to be desired, a great anchor performance by Michael Fassbender and stunning cinematography mean it’s definitely worth a watch; just don’t expect too much.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/10/14/the-snowman-review/
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and The Hypnotist are just a couple of movies that have fallen into this massively expanding genre.
Now, Jo Nesbø’s chilling The Snowman novel gets the silver screen treatment in a film of the same name. But can this continue the thrilling trend of whodunit novels being turned into fabulous crime dramas?For Detective Harry Hole (Michael Fassbender), the death of a young woman during the first snow of winter feels like anything but a routine homicide. His investigation leads him to “The Snowman Killer,” an elusive sociopath who continuously taunts Hole with ingeniously crafted cat-and-mouse games. As the brutal deaths show no sign of slowing, Harry teams up with a new recruit (Rebecca Ferguson) to try and lure the madman out of the shadows before it’s too late.
With Michael Fassbender at the helm, director Thomas Alfredson (Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy) manages to blend gorgeous imagery with an intriguing plot and excellent performances in a film that suffers from a couple of issues that stops it from becoming a must-see event.
These R-rated thrillers are ten-a-penny these days with the bar still being set incredibly high by Gone Girl. Last year’s Girl on the Train was a decent stab at dethroning David Fincher’s masterpiece, but it just fell a little short – well the same has happened here.
Michael Fassbender is uniformly excellent as troubled detective, Harry and the actor can do no wrong in his performances, but he’s suffered this year. After Assassin’s Creed failed to ignite the box-office, it looks to be a similar story this time. While The Snowman is technically competent and filmed beautifully, it lacks the sense of originality that breeds success.
It also doesn’t help that he’s surrounded by thinly padded supporting characters like former love interest Rakel (Charlotte Gainsbourg) and new police officer Katrine (Ferguson). Elsewhere, bizarre glorified cameos for Val Kilmer and Toby Jones leave you wondering if these actors expected a little more from their parts.
Perhaps I’m being a little harsh. After all, the cast is one of the film’s strongest suits. Add J.K. Simmons to the aforementioned roster and it really does have one of the best line-ups of the year. It’s just a shame the script doesn’t do more with them.
To look at, The Snowman is absolutely gorgeous. Helped obviously by magnificent Norwegian landscapes, Alfredson shoots using steady cam in scenes reminiscent of Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining, high praise indeed. In a year populated by CGI-heavy blockbusters, this comes as a real breath of fresh air.
Unfortunately, the constant use of flashbacks and a peculiar subplot involving a Winter sporting event ruin the pacing, though at 130 minutes, this isn’t too much of an issue. The ending however, is disappointing and lacks an emotional payoff after the film’s events.
Overall, The Snowman is a gritty adaptation of Jo Nesbø’s successful novel and while some of the plot choices leave a little to be desired, a great anchor performance by Michael Fassbender and stunning cinematography mean it’s definitely worth a watch; just don’t expect too much.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/10/14/the-snowman-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Bridget Jones's Baby (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
No Big Bloomers?
Bridget Jones’s Diary is a classic example of the perfect British rom-com. Upon its release in 2001, yes 15 years ago, it catapulted Renée Zellweger into the public eye and made household names of its other stars.
Its sequel, The Edge of Reason, on the other hand was a dramatic fall from grace, with a lowly 27% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Since then, the series has fallen into a dormant state with talks of another sequel doing the rounds since as early as 2004.
Fast-forward 12 years and the prayers of fans the world over have finally been answered. However, the comedy genre has moved on from the warm, fuzzy rom-coms of the past and in its place are the foul-mouthed female-led films of the present. But does Bridget Jones’s Baby get the balance right? Or is it a good decade too late?
Breaking up with Mark Darcy (Colin Firth) leaves Bridget Jones (Renée Zellweger) over 40 and single again. Feeling that she has everything under control, Jones decides to focus on her career as a top news producer. Suddenly, her love life comes back from the dead when she meets a handsome American named Jack (Patrick Dempsey). Things couldn’t be better, until Bridget discovers that she is pregnant. From then on, the befuddled mum-to-be must figure out if the proud dad is Mark or Jack.
The casting choices throughout the film are spot on and it’s a pleasure to see Colin Firth back on the big screen. His quintessentially British persona has been a highlight of both previous films and it’s no exception here. Patrick Dempsey’s turn as the dashing American stallion is sheer perfection and both he and Firth remain intensely likeable as the movie progresses, despite their obvious flaws.
Of course, praise must go to Renée Zellweger who, despite 12 years in between filming, manages to channel that iconic character like it was yesterday. She may look different to how we all remember her, but as soon as she speaks, it’s impossible not to feel at home.
Elsewhere, Emma Thompson, Jim Broadbent and Celia Imrie all pop up from time to time with the former providing Bridget Jones’s Baby with some of its best comedic moments. Her character is sharp and very well written indeed.
It would be very easy to go picking around the plot; criticising its blatant lack of originality, but that’s not what director Sharon Maguire was aiming for. Instead, she cleverly crafts a film that remains faithful to its predecessors, all the while introducing a new generation of comedy fans to the titular character.
What does this mean? Well, it toes the line quite well between the heart-warming qualities of the original and the over-the-top hilarity of films like Bridesmaids and Spy. This may not sit well with some die-hard fans of the series, but it’s sure to be a winner for the more modern movie-goer.
Overall, Bridget Jones’s Baby is better than it ever had the right to be. It’s nostalgic, beautifully sweet, ridiculous, over-the-top and quite frankly, absolutely hilarious. I haven’t laughed that much in years, it’s a must see for fans and newcomers alike.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/09/17/no-big-bloomers-bridget-joness-baby-review/
Its sequel, The Edge of Reason, on the other hand was a dramatic fall from grace, with a lowly 27% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Since then, the series has fallen into a dormant state with talks of another sequel doing the rounds since as early as 2004.
Fast-forward 12 years and the prayers of fans the world over have finally been answered. However, the comedy genre has moved on from the warm, fuzzy rom-coms of the past and in its place are the foul-mouthed female-led films of the present. But does Bridget Jones’s Baby get the balance right? Or is it a good decade too late?
Breaking up with Mark Darcy (Colin Firth) leaves Bridget Jones (Renée Zellweger) over 40 and single again. Feeling that she has everything under control, Jones decides to focus on her career as a top news producer. Suddenly, her love life comes back from the dead when she meets a handsome American named Jack (Patrick Dempsey). Things couldn’t be better, until Bridget discovers that she is pregnant. From then on, the befuddled mum-to-be must figure out if the proud dad is Mark or Jack.
The casting choices throughout the film are spot on and it’s a pleasure to see Colin Firth back on the big screen. His quintessentially British persona has been a highlight of both previous films and it’s no exception here. Patrick Dempsey’s turn as the dashing American stallion is sheer perfection and both he and Firth remain intensely likeable as the movie progresses, despite their obvious flaws.
Of course, praise must go to Renée Zellweger who, despite 12 years in between filming, manages to channel that iconic character like it was yesterday. She may look different to how we all remember her, but as soon as she speaks, it’s impossible not to feel at home.
Elsewhere, Emma Thompson, Jim Broadbent and Celia Imrie all pop up from time to time with the former providing Bridget Jones’s Baby with some of its best comedic moments. Her character is sharp and very well written indeed.
It would be very easy to go picking around the plot; criticising its blatant lack of originality, but that’s not what director Sharon Maguire was aiming for. Instead, she cleverly crafts a film that remains faithful to its predecessors, all the while introducing a new generation of comedy fans to the titular character.
What does this mean? Well, it toes the line quite well between the heart-warming qualities of the original and the over-the-top hilarity of films like Bridesmaids and Spy. This may not sit well with some die-hard fans of the series, but it’s sure to be a winner for the more modern movie-goer.
Overall, Bridget Jones’s Baby is better than it ever had the right to be. It’s nostalgic, beautifully sweet, ridiculous, over-the-top and quite frankly, absolutely hilarious. I haven’t laughed that much in years, it’s a must see for fans and newcomers alike.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/09/17/no-big-bloomers-bridget-joness-baby-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Chappie (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
A little rough around the edges
District 9 was a tough act to follow for first-time director Neill Blomkamp. His follow up to 2009’s sci-fi sleeper hit was the mediocre Elysium that whilst having a gargantuan budget and the likes of Jodie Foster and Matt Damon, failed on the most basic of levels – storytelling.
Here, Blomkamp returns a little wiser and much richer with Chappie. But does it hark back to the brilliance of District 9?
Chappie follows the story of the titular robot, created by Deon Wilson (Dev Patel), as he grows up in the violent city of Johannesburg. Due to the increasing crime rates, Wilson has created a force of robotic police officers, known as Scouts.
Despite the gritty nature of the film, the cityscapes are stunning with the sweeping shots of the South African metropolis perfectly blended with claustrophobic ruins and towering skyscrapers.
Hugh Jackman stars as ex-soldier Vincent Moore, a man hell bent on proving the capabilities of his own robot, The Moose, even if that means going against the protocols of his employers Tetravaal. Sigourney Weaver also stars as the CEO of the aforementioned corporation.
Unfortunately, side-lining Jackman and to a greater extent Weaver hurts the film. We see Chappie grow from a young child-like robot through to a young adult but Jackman and Weaver only show their faces for very brief moments at a time, though they manage to show their prowess in each scene.
Instead, we are lumbered with real-life pop group Die Antwoord in two roles as Chappie’s ‘mommy’ and ‘daddy’, and despite their decent acting skills and intriguing screen presence, they fail to make as much of an impression as the big names.
Chappie hits home hard and often on just how violent a species we are and the fact that the titular robot doesn’t understand why we can be so cruel only deepens the emotional connection forged for him.
Sharlto Copley, a Blomkamp staple, must be given high praise for crafting such a brilliant cast-member in the motion-captured Chappie. The robot rivals Caesar from Dawn of the Planet of the Apes for sheer realism, and credit must be given to the entire crew for making us feel for a character that has very few human characteristics.
Nevertheless, there is a real issue with the film’s narrative. There are moments of comedic brilliance that are hastily juxtaposed with ones of
sadness and gore, and despite Blomkamp’s best efforts to merge them together, it fails and this becomes increasingly evident in the film’s admittedly exciting finale.
Pacing, a blight that plagued Elysium, is again a problem here. The first 40 minutes of the film drag to such an extent that it feels much longer than its 2 hour running time. This is a huge shame as once it gets going, Chappie rarely lets up until the end credits roll.
Overall, despite not reaching the dizzying heights of the brilliant District 9, director Neill Blomkamp is back on the right track and has crafted a beautifully shot, richly detailed and hugely emotional film – despite his insistence on pushing the most intriguing human characters into the background.
Like the titular character himself, Chappie is charming, if a little rough around the edges and has a lack of story definition, but if you’re a fan of Blomkamp’s work, there’s no reason why you’d be disappointed with what’s on offer.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/03/08/a-little-rough-around-the-edges-chappie-review/
Here, Blomkamp returns a little wiser and much richer with Chappie. But does it hark back to the brilliance of District 9?
Chappie follows the story of the titular robot, created by Deon Wilson (Dev Patel), as he grows up in the violent city of Johannesburg. Due to the increasing crime rates, Wilson has created a force of robotic police officers, known as Scouts.
Despite the gritty nature of the film, the cityscapes are stunning with the sweeping shots of the South African metropolis perfectly blended with claustrophobic ruins and towering skyscrapers.
Hugh Jackman stars as ex-soldier Vincent Moore, a man hell bent on proving the capabilities of his own robot, The Moose, even if that means going against the protocols of his employers Tetravaal. Sigourney Weaver also stars as the CEO of the aforementioned corporation.
Unfortunately, side-lining Jackman and to a greater extent Weaver hurts the film. We see Chappie grow from a young child-like robot through to a young adult but Jackman and Weaver only show their faces for very brief moments at a time, though they manage to show their prowess in each scene.
Instead, we are lumbered with real-life pop group Die Antwoord in two roles as Chappie’s ‘mommy’ and ‘daddy’, and despite their decent acting skills and intriguing screen presence, they fail to make as much of an impression as the big names.
Chappie hits home hard and often on just how violent a species we are and the fact that the titular robot doesn’t understand why we can be so cruel only deepens the emotional connection forged for him.
Sharlto Copley, a Blomkamp staple, must be given high praise for crafting such a brilliant cast-member in the motion-captured Chappie. The robot rivals Caesar from Dawn of the Planet of the Apes for sheer realism, and credit must be given to the entire crew for making us feel for a character that has very few human characteristics.
Nevertheless, there is a real issue with the film’s narrative. There are moments of comedic brilliance that are hastily juxtaposed with ones of
sadness and gore, and despite Blomkamp’s best efforts to merge them together, it fails and this becomes increasingly evident in the film’s admittedly exciting finale.
Pacing, a blight that plagued Elysium, is again a problem here. The first 40 minutes of the film drag to such an extent that it feels much longer than its 2 hour running time. This is a huge shame as once it gets going, Chappie rarely lets up until the end credits roll.
Overall, despite not reaching the dizzying heights of the brilliant District 9, director Neill Blomkamp is back on the right track and has crafted a beautifully shot, richly detailed and hugely emotional film – despite his insistence on pushing the most intriguing human characters into the background.
Like the titular character himself, Chappie is charming, if a little rough around the edges and has a lack of story definition, but if you’re a fan of Blomkamp’s work, there’s no reason why you’d be disappointed with what’s on offer.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/03/08/a-little-rough-around-the-edges-chappie-review/
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Most Dangerous Place on Earth in Books
Feb 13, 2018
Mill Valley is the perfect little town, and Molly Nicoll is excited to start a teaching career in English at the local high school. However, when she starts up mid-year, she has no idea about a tragedy that occurred in her students' eighth grade year. To Miss Nicoll, these kids are in deep need of understanding and guidance, even if they are sometimes a bit rude and unfocused. There's Abby, the perfect student prepping for her Ivy League future, but also hiding a secret; Nick, an intelligent kid with a trick for every situation; Cally, a prominent player in the early tragedy, who now floats through school with the other hippie kids; Emma, a talented dancer who loves to let go and party on the weekends; Damon, who just wants to have fun; Ryan, a popular kid who hangs with Nick and Damon; Elizabeth, the most beautiful girl in school - and the one without any friends; and Dave, who is struggling with the weight of his parents' expectations. These kids have known each other for years, and their lives are shared in every way possible - in their small town, at school, and across all forms of social media.
I'd heard a lot of advance praise for this novel, and had put it on hold at my local library ages ago. I was excited to finally get a chance to read it, but upon finishing it, was left feeling conflicted. This is going to be yet another one of those lauded novels that everyone loves where I feel a bit "eh." Don't get me wrong: this is a well-written book--even a beautiful one at times--and it often tells a compelling and sometimes frightening story of kids growing up in suburbia. The novel starts with the gang in eighth grade and goes through their senior year. It's told in snippets from various students, as well as Miss Nicoll.
The problem, for me, is that it read more like a series of interconnected short stories than a novel. We get brief insights into a variety of students, but no real depth or insight into anyone. You're able to infer a lot about each and how their home life and past has affected them, but every student's piece leaves you wanting more, feeling unfinished. Even Miss Nicoll's role sort of trails off. It's a shame, because most of the teens are so clearly written that you can visualize them so well - they each stand out on the page, and each one could have commanded the book on their own. Instead, they come and go, and at times, the plot veers off into strange side stories that seem unnecessary or unbelievable.
This is one of those novels that terrifies me to have my children grow up, because it presents high school as one never-ending saga of bullying and partying. The rich, disaffected teens are abandoned by their similarly rich and disaffected parents and no one really seems to care about anything. Still, you find yourself getting into one kids' story, only to have the point of view turn and you're thrust into another student's life instead. By the end, I found myself frustrated, wanting to know more, and wishing for more finality to, well, everything. 3.5 stars
<center><a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">Blog</a>; ~ <a href="https://twitter.com/mwcmoto">Twitter</a>; ~ <a href="https://www.facebook.com/justacatandabook/">Facebook</a>; ~ <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/+KristyHamiltonbooks">Google+</a></center>;
I'd heard a lot of advance praise for this novel, and had put it on hold at my local library ages ago. I was excited to finally get a chance to read it, but upon finishing it, was left feeling conflicted. This is going to be yet another one of those lauded novels that everyone loves where I feel a bit "eh." Don't get me wrong: this is a well-written book--even a beautiful one at times--and it often tells a compelling and sometimes frightening story of kids growing up in suburbia. The novel starts with the gang in eighth grade and goes through their senior year. It's told in snippets from various students, as well as Miss Nicoll.
The problem, for me, is that it read more like a series of interconnected short stories than a novel. We get brief insights into a variety of students, but no real depth or insight into anyone. You're able to infer a lot about each and how their home life and past has affected them, but every student's piece leaves you wanting more, feeling unfinished. Even Miss Nicoll's role sort of trails off. It's a shame, because most of the teens are so clearly written that you can visualize them so well - they each stand out on the page, and each one could have commanded the book on their own. Instead, they come and go, and at times, the plot veers off into strange side stories that seem unnecessary or unbelievable.
This is one of those novels that terrifies me to have my children grow up, because it presents high school as one never-ending saga of bullying and partying. The rich, disaffected teens are abandoned by their similarly rich and disaffected parents and no one really seems to care about anything. Still, you find yourself getting into one kids' story, only to have the point of view turn and you're thrust into another student's life instead. By the end, I found myself frustrated, wanting to know more, and wishing for more finality to, well, everything. 3.5 stars
<center><a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">Blog</a>; ~ <a href="https://twitter.com/mwcmoto">Twitter</a>; ~ <a href="https://www.facebook.com/justacatandabook/">Facebook</a>; ~ <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/+KristyHamiltonbooks">Google+</a></center>;
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated The Witchfinder's Sister in Books
Mar 15, 2018
<i><b>I think now that to be close to someone can be to underestimate them. Grow too close, and you do not see what they are capable of; or you do not see it in time.</b></i>
<i>The Witchfinder’s Sister</i> is based on true life witch hunter Matthew Hopkins that grew to fame during the English Civil War around East Anglia, hunting and killing “witches”. This book isn’t non-fiction, it’s fiction based around non-fiction! I love these sorts of books that create their own stories from something that was very much real. Not only does it make for good reading, they also bring in some true history facts, so you’re being educated on the subject as you read.
High praise goes to Underdown for this novel. I feel like historical fiction can be hard genre to get right, and considering this is a <i>debut</i> novel, I’m amazed at how well put together and beautiful this has turned out to be! I love reading historical fiction, every once in awhile, and this is the sort of book that keeps my love for the genre burning.
The writing in this novel was haunting and beautiful. Nine times out of ten, it was exactly as you would have imagined the 17th Century to be, but I felt there were a few slips that made the book feel modern. For example, would a lady in 1645 say the phrase <i><b>“shitting herself”</b></i>? Correct me if I’m wrong, but that feels like a reasonably modern phrase to me.
I loved our main character, Alice. Me and my mum were talking about historical fiction novels and how we find it hard to understand why women make the decisions they make in these books, because we’re so used to having some equality and independence. But I noted that in this book, even though Alice is inferior to her brother and his counterparts, she is still a risk taker; going against her brother's wishes & sneaking around. I liked that she was strong and a little rebellious, it was so much easier to connect with her because of this.
On the other hand. I <i>hated</i> Matthew. He was a despicable character. I can rarely hate a character in a book, even if I’m supposed to. I tend to find the good in them at some point, or have some sort of sympathy for them, but I absolutely despised Matthew. Well done to Underdown for creating such a hate-inducing character. It’s quite a hard feat, but she managed it perfectly. The same goes for Mary Phillips.
The tension was built so well in this novel, you could feel the mystery growing and growing with every page and I loved it! Though the story moved reasonably slowly, the book was still absolutely riveting and I found it extremely hard to put down when I knew it was time to get some rest.
I am so, so excited to read more from Underdown. This was an amazingly well put together and researched.
<i>Thanks to Netgalley and Penguin Books UK for giving me the opportunity to read this in exchange for an honest review.</i>
<i>The Witchfinder’s Sister</i> is based on true life witch hunter Matthew Hopkins that grew to fame during the English Civil War around East Anglia, hunting and killing “witches”. This book isn’t non-fiction, it’s fiction based around non-fiction! I love these sorts of books that create their own stories from something that was very much real. Not only does it make for good reading, they also bring in some true history facts, so you’re being educated on the subject as you read.
High praise goes to Underdown for this novel. I feel like historical fiction can be hard genre to get right, and considering this is a <i>debut</i> novel, I’m amazed at how well put together and beautiful this has turned out to be! I love reading historical fiction, every once in awhile, and this is the sort of book that keeps my love for the genre burning.
The writing in this novel was haunting and beautiful. Nine times out of ten, it was exactly as you would have imagined the 17th Century to be, but I felt there were a few slips that made the book feel modern. For example, would a lady in 1645 say the phrase <i><b>“shitting herself”</b></i>? Correct me if I’m wrong, but that feels like a reasonably modern phrase to me.
I loved our main character, Alice. Me and my mum were talking about historical fiction novels and how we find it hard to understand why women make the decisions they make in these books, because we’re so used to having some equality and independence. But I noted that in this book, even though Alice is inferior to her brother and his counterparts, she is still a risk taker; going against her brother's wishes & sneaking around. I liked that she was strong and a little rebellious, it was so much easier to connect with her because of this.
On the other hand. I <i>hated</i> Matthew. He was a despicable character. I can rarely hate a character in a book, even if I’m supposed to. I tend to find the good in them at some point, or have some sort of sympathy for them, but I absolutely despised Matthew. Well done to Underdown for creating such a hate-inducing character. It’s quite a hard feat, but she managed it perfectly. The same goes for Mary Phillips.
The tension was built so well in this novel, you could feel the mystery growing and growing with every page and I loved it! Though the story moved reasonably slowly, the book was still absolutely riveting and I found it extremely hard to put down when I knew it was time to get some rest.
I am so, so excited to read more from Underdown. This was an amazingly well put together and researched.
<i>Thanks to Netgalley and Penguin Books UK for giving me the opportunity to read this in exchange for an honest review.</i>
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Anchor & Hope (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
A heart-wrenching portrait of parenthood & sexuality
Deciding to have a baby is a big step in many couples’ lives, but sometimes, things don’t always go according to plan. Carlos Marques-Marcet’s Anchor and Hope follows two lesbian women who, one drunken night, decide to use their friend’s sperm in order to have a child of their own. It’s not a decision that should be taken lightly, but makes for an interesting story nonetheless. Insemination is a viable option that is often considered by those in same-sex relationships, or by those who struggle to conceive. This is the first film I’ve seen that deals with the subject so explicitly.
Throughout the course of the film, we focus heavily on the lives of Eva, Kat and Roger. The quality of acting was very good and believable, meaning it was easy for me to stay invested in their lives as events transpired. They all have very different personality traits that inevitably clash, and it’s not long before jealousy starts to rear its ugly head and tensions rise. Kat and Roger are close and both fluent in Spanish, meaning they’re able to communicate and Eva hasn’t got a clue what they’re saying. She starts feeling left out, which may or may not have driven her to think about the insemination. It’s left up to the audience to figure that one out. It’s clear Eva wants the baby more than Kat does, which is already a huge red flag.
The baby becomes a central part of the narrative, and the character’s lives. Anchor and Hope presents us with different viewpoints, all centred around this new life. It’s incredibly emotional to watch as we witness how three very different characters respond to it. I respected the fact the film doesn’t position itself as for or against any argument, it simply presents them to the audience as valid responses to what’s happening. Had the film gotten too preachy one way or the other, I think I may have found that frustrating. This is a film that leaves a lot up to the audience, and one that can spark interesting discussions.
Despite my interest in the topic and praise for the acting, I didn’t particularly like any of the characters. They’re all frustrating in their own ways and sometimes it felt a little too far-fetched and melodramatic. This weakened the film for me as I didn’t find myself rooting for anyone, and just wished they’d never made that decision in the first place. There’s no warmth for any of the characters, which was a let down. I also felt the story could have been shorter and snappier, as it felt too drawn out in places.
However, it is a very interesting look into insemination and sperm donors, and the script is strong and considered. It would be easy to cause controversy if not dealt with respectfully, but I felt like appropriate research had been done and they remained impartial throughout. The visuals are clean, well shot, and I liked the use of small, intimate locations to tell the story. Eva and Kat live on a houseboat, so that sense of minimalism is present throughout.
I was mostly entertained and enjoyed watching it, so I would recommend this film if it’s a topic that interests you. Overall, it’s an emotionally charged and well-written LGBT+ film and we definitely need more of those.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/11/08/anchor-and-hope-a-heart-wrenching-portrait-of-parenthood-sexuality/
Throughout the course of the film, we focus heavily on the lives of Eva, Kat and Roger. The quality of acting was very good and believable, meaning it was easy for me to stay invested in their lives as events transpired. They all have very different personality traits that inevitably clash, and it’s not long before jealousy starts to rear its ugly head and tensions rise. Kat and Roger are close and both fluent in Spanish, meaning they’re able to communicate and Eva hasn’t got a clue what they’re saying. She starts feeling left out, which may or may not have driven her to think about the insemination. It’s left up to the audience to figure that one out. It’s clear Eva wants the baby more than Kat does, which is already a huge red flag.
The baby becomes a central part of the narrative, and the character’s lives. Anchor and Hope presents us with different viewpoints, all centred around this new life. It’s incredibly emotional to watch as we witness how three very different characters respond to it. I respected the fact the film doesn’t position itself as for or against any argument, it simply presents them to the audience as valid responses to what’s happening. Had the film gotten too preachy one way or the other, I think I may have found that frustrating. This is a film that leaves a lot up to the audience, and one that can spark interesting discussions.
Despite my interest in the topic and praise for the acting, I didn’t particularly like any of the characters. They’re all frustrating in their own ways and sometimes it felt a little too far-fetched and melodramatic. This weakened the film for me as I didn’t find myself rooting for anyone, and just wished they’d never made that decision in the first place. There’s no warmth for any of the characters, which was a let down. I also felt the story could have been shorter and snappier, as it felt too drawn out in places.
However, it is a very interesting look into insemination and sperm donors, and the script is strong and considered. It would be easy to cause controversy if not dealt with respectfully, but I felt like appropriate research had been done and they remained impartial throughout. The visuals are clean, well shot, and I liked the use of small, intimate locations to tell the story. Eva and Kat live on a houseboat, so that sense of minimalism is present throughout.
I was mostly entertained and enjoyed watching it, so I would recommend this film if it’s a topic that interests you. Overall, it’s an emotionally charged and well-written LGBT+ film and we definitely need more of those.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/11/08/anchor-and-hope-a-heart-wrenching-portrait-of-parenthood-sexuality/
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Black Mirror: Bandersnatch (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
It comes as no surprise that Black Mirror was Netflix’s guinea pig for their first ever interactive film. Charlie Brooker’s anthology series about the dark side of technology has captivated fans ever since it first aired on Channel 4 in the UK. With Netflix being a leading entertainment service, the time had come for them to try something brand new. The film dropped over the Christmas break, and I for one was very excited to sit down and try it.
Black Mirror: Bandersnatch is set in the ’80s and follows teenager Stefan Butler as he works to create a choice/consequence video game called ‘Bandersnatch’. He’s basing it off one of his mother’s ‘choose your own adventure’ books, where you could flick back and forth between chapters to change the course of your story. He’s been invited to speak with video games company Tuckersoft, comprised of video game creator Colin Ritman and savvy businessman Mohan Thaku, in the hopes he can make the game for their company.
As Stefan works on ‘Bandersnatch’, he also visits a therapist to help with his depression following the loss of his mother. He takes an unnamed medication in an attempt to ease his symptoms. Soon, the lines between reality and the video game world start to blur for Stefan, and he becomes more and more unhinged before our eyes.
That’s about all I’m going to tell you about the plot itself, because I don’t want to give away any spoilers. My advice when approaching this for the first time is to go in completely blind and just make your own decisions. You can find numerous pathway guides online, but try to avoid these until your later playthroughs if you can. Black Mirror: Bandersnatch is an experience that requires multiple watches and a lot of patience, but I promise you it’s worth it.
Personally I adore this episode, and I think they did such a fantastic job of bringing it to life. It’s so fluid and engaging; the scenes continue to play even when the options pop up on screen. The acting is absolutely stunning, with Fionn Whitehead (Stefan) and Will Poulter (Colin) impressing me the most, but every character is so well acted and believable. For the very first time, you feel part of the Black Mirror universe, and everything starts to feel so meta. There are also a lot of references to previous episodes which will delight long term fans, but aren’t too jarring for those new to the series.
Both Black Mirror and Netflix have proven they can work with interactivity without making it too gimmicky or tedious. It’s a fascinating format that I’m excited to see more of, and I’m sure we haven’t seen the last of this. I have equal amounts of praise for both the series and Netflix themselves, because they’re constantly upping the entertainment game which makes me fall in love even more. This is the kind of stuff that really excites me!
In classic Black Mirror style, there are some disturbing pathways but they’re arguably my favourite. They’re chilling, harrowing and bloody brilliant. At this point I think I’ve explored every possible ending or pathway, but I’m reluctant to spoil any of them on here because that would ruin the experience. However, if you do want to discuss anything, please do message me on @LGTHBlog so we can fangirl together!
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2019/01/06/netflixs-first-interactive-film-my-thoughts-on-black-mirror-bandersnatch/
Black Mirror: Bandersnatch is set in the ’80s and follows teenager Stefan Butler as he works to create a choice/consequence video game called ‘Bandersnatch’. He’s basing it off one of his mother’s ‘choose your own adventure’ books, where you could flick back and forth between chapters to change the course of your story. He’s been invited to speak with video games company Tuckersoft, comprised of video game creator Colin Ritman and savvy businessman Mohan Thaku, in the hopes he can make the game for their company.
As Stefan works on ‘Bandersnatch’, he also visits a therapist to help with his depression following the loss of his mother. He takes an unnamed medication in an attempt to ease his symptoms. Soon, the lines between reality and the video game world start to blur for Stefan, and he becomes more and more unhinged before our eyes.
That’s about all I’m going to tell you about the plot itself, because I don’t want to give away any spoilers. My advice when approaching this for the first time is to go in completely blind and just make your own decisions. You can find numerous pathway guides online, but try to avoid these until your later playthroughs if you can. Black Mirror: Bandersnatch is an experience that requires multiple watches and a lot of patience, but I promise you it’s worth it.
Personally I adore this episode, and I think they did such a fantastic job of bringing it to life. It’s so fluid and engaging; the scenes continue to play even when the options pop up on screen. The acting is absolutely stunning, with Fionn Whitehead (Stefan) and Will Poulter (Colin) impressing me the most, but every character is so well acted and believable. For the very first time, you feel part of the Black Mirror universe, and everything starts to feel so meta. There are also a lot of references to previous episodes which will delight long term fans, but aren’t too jarring for those new to the series.
Both Black Mirror and Netflix have proven they can work with interactivity without making it too gimmicky or tedious. It’s a fascinating format that I’m excited to see more of, and I’m sure we haven’t seen the last of this. I have equal amounts of praise for both the series and Netflix themselves, because they’re constantly upping the entertainment game which makes me fall in love even more. This is the kind of stuff that really excites me!
In classic Black Mirror style, there are some disturbing pathways but they’re arguably my favourite. They’re chilling, harrowing and bloody brilliant. At this point I think I’ve explored every possible ending or pathway, but I’m reluctant to spoil any of them on here because that would ruin the experience. However, if you do want to discuss anything, please do message me on @LGTHBlog so we can fangirl together!
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2019/01/06/netflixs-first-interactive-film-my-thoughts-on-black-mirror-bandersnatch/
Darren (1599 KP) rated 12 Strong (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: 12 Strong starts on the day of 9/11, Captain Mitch Nelson (Hemsworth) witnesses the horrors of the terrorist attack on the Twin Towers, returning to his military base, he wants to lead her unit into battle against the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Once receiving permission and earning the right, Mitch is joined by Hal Spencer (Shannon) and his 10 other trusted soldiers that head into Afghanistan to work with the Afghan Warlord General Dostum (Negahban) as they unleashes the first attack in retaliation after the 9/11 attack.
Thoughts on 12 Strong
Characters – These soldiers are real people, Mitch Nelson is the unexperienced combat Captain that takes his driven man into battle, he must use his own smarts to be given the opportunity to be the first in the retaliation, he uses his knowledge to work with General Dostum as the two different cultures and ideas must come together for the battle. Hal Spencer is the second in command of the unit, he is older and offers the advice he soldier needs to get himself to the right answers. The rest of the unit all have their moments through the story and by the end you will believe you are watching a real unit.
Performances – Chris Hemsworth in the leading role is fantastic, he keeps himself looking like the star even though he needs to work with a unit to get the right answers, showing he can handle the serious roles once again. Michael Shannon in the supporting role shines even though it is strange seeing him in a good guy role after his recent run as a villain. The rest of the cast are great, they all have wonderful chemistry which the unit needs to pull this off.
Story – The day of 9/11 shocked the world, America the most and this shows the plan to retaliate after the attacks, the first men to go into combat against the Taliban as they risked everything to get a strike back and prevent what was believed to be another big attack. This is a true story, this could easily have been a fictional story because after the mission starts, you are pulled into seeing just what the men will do to get the job done and of course it is an against the odd style mission.
Action/History/War – The action sequences are shot in a brutal style that doesn’t hold back with what happens, we are left shocked by certain moments and on the edge of our seats the next because of the war time battle sequences.
Settings – The settings look the part, we are mostly just in and around caves and canyons which is where the Taliban would be hiding and preparing.
Special Effects – The effects for the battle sequences are flawless, looking brutal and the stunt team need praise for the work they have put into this movie.
Scene of the Movie – The final surge, wonderfully shot moment.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It is ‘we are America, we are great’
Final Thoughts – This is one of the best war movies or recent years, it shows the brutally of the war, the thin line between good and evil between the Afghan units and just how bringing together two cultures can unit for a same enemy.
Overall: Must watch action movie.
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/01/27/12-strong-2018/
Once receiving permission and earning the right, Mitch is joined by Hal Spencer (Shannon) and his 10 other trusted soldiers that head into Afghanistan to work with the Afghan Warlord General Dostum (Negahban) as they unleashes the first attack in retaliation after the 9/11 attack.
Thoughts on 12 Strong
Characters – These soldiers are real people, Mitch Nelson is the unexperienced combat Captain that takes his driven man into battle, he must use his own smarts to be given the opportunity to be the first in the retaliation, he uses his knowledge to work with General Dostum as the two different cultures and ideas must come together for the battle. Hal Spencer is the second in command of the unit, he is older and offers the advice he soldier needs to get himself to the right answers. The rest of the unit all have their moments through the story and by the end you will believe you are watching a real unit.
Performances – Chris Hemsworth in the leading role is fantastic, he keeps himself looking like the star even though he needs to work with a unit to get the right answers, showing he can handle the serious roles once again. Michael Shannon in the supporting role shines even though it is strange seeing him in a good guy role after his recent run as a villain. The rest of the cast are great, they all have wonderful chemistry which the unit needs to pull this off.
Story – The day of 9/11 shocked the world, America the most and this shows the plan to retaliate after the attacks, the first men to go into combat against the Taliban as they risked everything to get a strike back and prevent what was believed to be another big attack. This is a true story, this could easily have been a fictional story because after the mission starts, you are pulled into seeing just what the men will do to get the job done and of course it is an against the odd style mission.
Action/History/War – The action sequences are shot in a brutal style that doesn’t hold back with what happens, we are left shocked by certain moments and on the edge of our seats the next because of the war time battle sequences.
Settings – The settings look the part, we are mostly just in and around caves and canyons which is where the Taliban would be hiding and preparing.
Special Effects – The effects for the battle sequences are flawless, looking brutal and the stunt team need praise for the work they have put into this movie.
Scene of the Movie – The final surge, wonderfully shot moment.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It is ‘we are America, we are great’
Final Thoughts – This is one of the best war movies or recent years, it shows the brutally of the war, the thin line between good and evil between the Afghan units and just how bringing together two cultures can unit for a same enemy.
Overall: Must watch action movie.
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/01/27/12-strong-2018/
Darren (1599 KP) rated All Is Lost (2013) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: All is Lost starts 1700 Nautical Miles from The Sumatra Straits on the 13th July as Our Man (Redford) believes that all is lost. The film starts out with a bang when sleeping lone sailor is awoken be cargo shipping container floating in the ocean smashing into the side of his ship leaving a massive hole in the side. The breach in the ship leaves our man with no connections for help even if his boat isn’t going down yet. Staying calm our man fixes the hole before fixing the radio knowing he can survive for a time but just how long is the question, mother nature decides to test our man by throwing storms at him but his years of experience are keeping him a float.
All is Lost is such a very simple story of one man trying survive against mother nature. We have to say this is a courage story that shows our hero never panic and use all the tricks he can to make sure he survives as long as he can always hoping for help. We are left guessing whether he will survive or not as we learn tricks that could help us one day, but in the end I do think this is an incredible story but is very slow, I can easily see the casual film fan giving up on this one. There is pretty much no dialogue in the film because our character has no one to talk to or need to explain who he is. I can honestly I would rather watch the fantasy Life of Pi over this because of the extra elements involved. (8/10)
Actor Review
Robert Redford: Our Man is our lone character in the whole film, we learn little about him over than he likes to boat, we know he keeps calm during the panic and knows how to survive and we also get to see his determination to survive. Robert gives a great performance without having to say too much that his action bring us in. (9/10)man
Director Review: J.C. Chandor – J.C gives us a very good drama about surviving that will get the praise from the critics but might not get enough attention from the casual fans. (8/10)
Action: All is Lost has the action scenes when our hero has t take on mother nature, each scene is heart stopping and realistic. (9/10)
Drama: All is Lost brings us a brilliant story about surviving against the odds. (9/10)
Settings: All is Lost can’t be faulted one bit for the settings because the whole film is set in the middle of the ocean giving our hero little to no chance of surviving. (10/10)
Suggestion: All is Lost is one to watch even if it does come off slow in places. (Watch)
Best Part: Redford is brilliant.
Worst Part: Slow in places.
Action Scene Of The Film: Storm turning the boat upside and back up again.
Believability: Events like this happen a lot and while this story is fictional it takes ideas from other stories. (8/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Similar Too: Life of Pi
Oscar Chances: Nominated for Best Achievement in Sound Editing.
Box Office: $6.25 Million
Budget: $9 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 46 Minutes
Tagline: Never Give Up
Overall: All is Lost is a very good story about survival that keeps everything looking very realistic.
https://moviesreview101.com/2015/06/30/all-is-lost-2013/
All is Lost is such a very simple story of one man trying survive against mother nature. We have to say this is a courage story that shows our hero never panic and use all the tricks he can to make sure he survives as long as he can always hoping for help. We are left guessing whether he will survive or not as we learn tricks that could help us one day, but in the end I do think this is an incredible story but is very slow, I can easily see the casual film fan giving up on this one. There is pretty much no dialogue in the film because our character has no one to talk to or need to explain who he is. I can honestly I would rather watch the fantasy Life of Pi over this because of the extra elements involved. (8/10)
Actor Review
Robert Redford: Our Man is our lone character in the whole film, we learn little about him over than he likes to boat, we know he keeps calm during the panic and knows how to survive and we also get to see his determination to survive. Robert gives a great performance without having to say too much that his action bring us in. (9/10)man
Director Review: J.C. Chandor – J.C gives us a very good drama about surviving that will get the praise from the critics but might not get enough attention from the casual fans. (8/10)
Action: All is Lost has the action scenes when our hero has t take on mother nature, each scene is heart stopping and realistic. (9/10)
Drama: All is Lost brings us a brilliant story about surviving against the odds. (9/10)
Settings: All is Lost can’t be faulted one bit for the settings because the whole film is set in the middle of the ocean giving our hero little to no chance of surviving. (10/10)
Suggestion: All is Lost is one to watch even if it does come off slow in places. (Watch)
Best Part: Redford is brilliant.
Worst Part: Slow in places.
Action Scene Of The Film: Storm turning the boat upside and back up again.
Believability: Events like this happen a lot and while this story is fictional it takes ideas from other stories. (8/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Similar Too: Life of Pi
Oscar Chances: Nominated for Best Achievement in Sound Editing.
Box Office: $6.25 Million
Budget: $9 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 46 Minutes
Tagline: Never Give Up
Overall: All is Lost is a very good story about survival that keeps everything looking very realistic.
https://moviesreview101.com/2015/06/30/all-is-lost-2013/