Search
Search results
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated The Queens Corgi (2019) in Movies
Jul 13, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
The Queens Corgi is an animated children's movie about Rex, the Queen's favourite who, after a disastrous visit from Donald Trump, is tricked into leaving the palace and winds up in the dog pound. This is a common formula in children’s movies both animated and live action and I'm sure most of us can guess what happens next, Rex tries to get back home and, on the way makes some friends and falls in love. So when my daughter wanted to see it I though I'd be in for a funny, possibly sad film. God I was wrong. There is so much wrong with this film and it all seems to go wrong from the scene where Donald Trump visits the Queen and I really wish I could say my problems were politically motivated but unfortunately the film was just that bad.
The character of Trump was reduced to a stereotypical American tourist with Melania passing comments about the size of Donald’s (big) hands being one of the things that attracted her to him.
The problems really start when Melania and the Queen decided it will be a good idea to breed their respective corgis. Melania's Corgi, Mitzi, who is made up in heave eye shadow and lipstick is instantly judged and disliked by all the Queens corgis (both Male and female). Melania's Corgi then passes judgment on all the corgis until she comes to Rex who she decided she wants. The two dogs are then left in a room together after being told by Trump to grab him by the pups.
Now I just want to make the following clear:
1) I've seen plenty of movies where the (normally timid/nerdy) male character is hit on by the strong scary bully female and this normally for comedy value. Although these scenes could be seen as problematic they are normally played for laughs.
2) I understand that dog breeders do choose dogs and put them together to mate. However, as the animals in this film are given human personality's the situation is different.
So when the two dogs are left in the room we are treated to long scene where Mitzi tries to get Rex to mate with her, because Rex wants none of it Mitzi chases him around the room, grabs him, stops him from leaving and generally won’t take no for an answer. This is not done playfully.
Later in the film, Rex is in a dog pound, one of his cell mates starts listing the rules of the pound, rule one, there is no fight club. Now, this may have been ok if it was a one time throw away line, kids films often have little jokes for adults. However, it's not a throw away line, it's used more than once, including the first time the dogs are at a fight club. Yes, the top dog, called Butch, keeps order by making any dog he doesn't like fight. We see a dog carried off on stretcher, Rex is almost thrown into a fire and is only saved when Butch is knock out in one punch which also knocks out half his teeth.
Of course Rex and his new friends make it back to the palace and beat the main villain who is sent off with Trump and Mitzi. Remember non of the palace dogs liked Mitzi and she has all already said she doesn't understand the word no so this has implications for Charlie’s futures. It's ok though because he's the bad guy (not).
So we have a children's film with dog fights, attempted rape, implied rape, judging on appearance and a dull story, that seem find the line between children’s jokes and the adult ones the only reason I'm giving this one star is because it avoids getting political with Trump.
The character of Trump was reduced to a stereotypical American tourist with Melania passing comments about the size of Donald’s (big) hands being one of the things that attracted her to him.
The problems really start when Melania and the Queen decided it will be a good idea to breed their respective corgis. Melania's Corgi, Mitzi, who is made up in heave eye shadow and lipstick is instantly judged and disliked by all the Queens corgis (both Male and female). Melania's Corgi then passes judgment on all the corgis until she comes to Rex who she decided she wants. The two dogs are then left in a room together after being told by Trump to grab him by the pups.
Now I just want to make the following clear:
1) I've seen plenty of movies where the (normally timid/nerdy) male character is hit on by the strong scary bully female and this normally for comedy value. Although these scenes could be seen as problematic they are normally played for laughs.
2) I understand that dog breeders do choose dogs and put them together to mate. However, as the animals in this film are given human personality's the situation is different.
So when the two dogs are left in the room we are treated to long scene where Mitzi tries to get Rex to mate with her, because Rex wants none of it Mitzi chases him around the room, grabs him, stops him from leaving and generally won’t take no for an answer. This is not done playfully.
Later in the film, Rex is in a dog pound, one of his cell mates starts listing the rules of the pound, rule one, there is no fight club. Now, this may have been ok if it was a one time throw away line, kids films often have little jokes for adults. However, it's not a throw away line, it's used more than once, including the first time the dogs are at a fight club. Yes, the top dog, called Butch, keeps order by making any dog he doesn't like fight. We see a dog carried off on stretcher, Rex is almost thrown into a fire and is only saved when Butch is knock out in one punch which also knocks out half his teeth.
Of course Rex and his new friends make it back to the palace and beat the main villain who is sent off with Trump and Mitzi. Remember non of the palace dogs liked Mitzi and she has all already said she doesn't understand the word no so this has implications for Charlie’s futures. It's ok though because he's the bad guy (not).
So we have a children's film with dog fights, attempted rape, implied rape, judging on appearance and a dull story, that seem find the line between children’s jokes and the adult ones the only reason I'm giving this one star is because it avoids getting political with Trump.
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated Musical Chairs in Books
Apr 27, 2018
This is probably one of the best books I’ve read in a while. It brought reality down to earth, and reminded me how blessed and safe and sheltered I am.
Jen’s story is not something that can really be summed up in a quick explanation, it is something that needs to be seen in the whole. Her story was absolutely addicting in a sad, scary, painful way, and it gave me a whole new respect for recovered alcoholics, ex-smokers, and those who have been through other awful situations like Jen has, such as rape, strip dancers, the homeless, and those shuffling from one job to another.
I rate it high for writing and prose (it’s always nice to read a novel by someone who knows how to write!), Jen told her story clearly and well. Obviously as it is a memoir I'm not going to say anything about the plot ;) however the pacing of the book was very good—i didn’t feel any dragging at all, at the same time it wasn’t too fast either. I would have given it five stars but it was a bit depressing at times, and sometimes I had to stop and take a break and read something sappy and lighthearted. (but that’s probably just me.)
The end of the story, where Jen’s life is turned around and she starts really living, is beautiful. I felt proud of her. I grew very connected to the people in her story, to the point that it almost felt that I knew them personally.
this book is not for people who want a light quick read—it’s the opposite. Musical Chairs is not a book to read if you’re trying to lift your spirits, but it’s not extremely depressing either. It makes you think, it makes you grateful, and it gives you hope.
Recommendation: Ages 16+ (for language and some sexual content.)
**Thank you to Jen for providing my review copy**
More reviews at <a href="http://haleymathiot.blogspot.com">; my blog </a>
Jen’s story is not something that can really be summed up in a quick explanation, it is something that needs to be seen in the whole. Her story was absolutely addicting in a sad, scary, painful way, and it gave me a whole new respect for recovered alcoholics, ex-smokers, and those who have been through other awful situations like Jen has, such as rape, strip dancers, the homeless, and those shuffling from one job to another.
I rate it high for writing and prose (it’s always nice to read a novel by someone who knows how to write!), Jen told her story clearly and well. Obviously as it is a memoir I'm not going to say anything about the plot ;) however the pacing of the book was very good—i didn’t feel any dragging at all, at the same time it wasn’t too fast either. I would have given it five stars but it was a bit depressing at times, and sometimes I had to stop and take a break and read something sappy and lighthearted. (but that’s probably just me.)
The end of the story, where Jen’s life is turned around and she starts really living, is beautiful. I felt proud of her. I grew very connected to the people in her story, to the point that it almost felt that I knew them personally.
this book is not for people who want a light quick read—it’s the opposite. Musical Chairs is not a book to read if you’re trying to lift your spirits, but it’s not extremely depressing either. It makes you think, it makes you grateful, and it gives you hope.
Recommendation: Ages 16+ (for language and some sexual content.)
**Thank you to Jen for providing my review copy**
More reviews at <a href="http://haleymathiot.blogspot.com">; my blog </a>
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated Heather, the Totality in Books
Mar 15, 2018
<b>2.5 stars</b>
I can understand the negatives reviews for this book because it was underwhelming.
People are complaining about the writing style but it didnt bother me that much. I guess this just felt like a slightly bulked out storyboard for a TV show, which would make sense as the author wrote Mad Men.
Some people think there is no character development in this novella, but I cant say I agree. Mark and Karen are well described throughout the book and though you dont get much history into each character, you learn enough about them as they grow older together and have a child. Same goes for Bobby. Heather, on the other hand, is more difficult to get to know. We didnt really get the chance to learn much about her.
I honestly feel like this book was a little above my level of understanding and maybe I didnt get the bigger picture, but to me this just felt like a slow story of overbearing, selfish parents, their confused golden child, and the obsession of a disturbed man. I know Im probably getting this all wrong but hey, what can you do.
I enjoyed Bobbys monologue, even though it was filled with sick and depraved rape imaginings. I guess because he was the only character that had any character, it made his part of the story worth reading. Other than that, it was pretty boring.
I agree with reviewers who said this felt cut off all of a sudden, because it does just seem to end out of nowhere, and in a pretty dull manner.
This novel reminded me of Hubert Selby Jrs work. Depressing, bleak, dark and slow. (But with worse characters and a less captivating plot).
<i>Thanks to Netgalley and Little, Brown and Company for giving me the opportunity to read this in exchange for an honest review.</i>
I can understand the negatives reviews for this book because it was underwhelming.
People are complaining about the writing style but it didnt bother me that much. I guess this just felt like a slightly bulked out storyboard for a TV show, which would make sense as the author wrote Mad Men.
Some people think there is no character development in this novella, but I cant say I agree. Mark and Karen are well described throughout the book and though you dont get much history into each character, you learn enough about them as they grow older together and have a child. Same goes for Bobby. Heather, on the other hand, is more difficult to get to know. We didnt really get the chance to learn much about her.
I honestly feel like this book was a little above my level of understanding and maybe I didnt get the bigger picture, but to me this just felt like a slow story of overbearing, selfish parents, their confused golden child, and the obsession of a disturbed man. I know Im probably getting this all wrong but hey, what can you do.
I enjoyed Bobbys monologue, even though it was filled with sick and depraved rape imaginings. I guess because he was the only character that had any character, it made his part of the story worth reading. Other than that, it was pretty boring.
I agree with reviewers who said this felt cut off all of a sudden, because it does just seem to end out of nowhere, and in a pretty dull manner.
This novel reminded me of Hubert Selby Jrs work. Depressing, bleak, dark and slow. (But with worse characters and a less captivating plot).
<i>Thanks to Netgalley and Little, Brown and Company for giving me the opportunity to read this in exchange for an honest review.</i>
Cody Cook (8 KP) rated The Satanic Bible in Books
Jun 29, 2018
LaVey echoes a view of man's value and of non-materialist religion which can be easily found in the writings of Friedrich Nietzsche (especially Antichrist) and Ayn Rand. He is incredibly inconsistent on the subject of morality and shows only a cursory understanding of Christian history, doctrines, and the Bible.
LaVey does not view Satan as a person (nor does he view God that way), but as a representation of what man really is in his primal nature-- a violent and lustful nature which LaVey calls good, though he simultaneously argues that certain parts of it (that which would harm children or rape, for instance) are not good-- a dichotomy that he calls hypocritical in righthand path religions such as Christianity. Beyond this tension, he elsewhere seems to argue for moral relativism, creating a vicious circle of nonsense. Because good and evil are falsehoods and God and Satan are non-persons, the spells and rituals he creates are only symbols meant to harness our primal energies, sending them out to accomplish our goals (much like in the Hicks' Law of Attraction books or in The Secret).
A mix of equal parts tongue-in-cheek symbolism and outright charlatanism.
I suspect that this book's teachings would appeal primarily to two types of people: narcissists who want to seem edgy and angry people who have been harmed by institutional religion. In regard to the former, there are more thoughtful ways to be counter-cultural. In regard to the latter, an assessment of the intellectual weaknesses of this philosophy won't remove the hurt or pain they've been through, but hopefully an understanding that the kind of Christianity spoken of by LaVey is not genuine Christianity can remove some of the hatred they feel toward it due to the immoral actions performed by its claimed representatives.
Totally off-topic, but Lavey looks like a bald version of Evil Spock.
LaVey does not view Satan as a person (nor does he view God that way), but as a representation of what man really is in his primal nature-- a violent and lustful nature which LaVey calls good, though he simultaneously argues that certain parts of it (that which would harm children or rape, for instance) are not good-- a dichotomy that he calls hypocritical in righthand path religions such as Christianity. Beyond this tension, he elsewhere seems to argue for moral relativism, creating a vicious circle of nonsense. Because good and evil are falsehoods and God and Satan are non-persons, the spells and rituals he creates are only symbols meant to harness our primal energies, sending them out to accomplish our goals (much like in the Hicks' Law of Attraction books or in The Secret).
A mix of equal parts tongue-in-cheek symbolism and outright charlatanism.
I suspect that this book's teachings would appeal primarily to two types of people: narcissists who want to seem edgy and angry people who have been harmed by institutional religion. In regard to the former, there are more thoughtful ways to be counter-cultural. In regard to the latter, an assessment of the intellectual weaknesses of this philosophy won't remove the hurt or pain they've been through, but hopefully an understanding that the kind of Christianity spoken of by LaVey is not genuine Christianity can remove some of the hatred they feel toward it due to the immoral actions performed by its claimed representatives.
Totally off-topic, but Lavey looks like a bald version of Evil Spock.
Bodies of Desire and Bodies in Distress: The Golden Age of Italian Cult Cinema, 1970-1985
Book
In recent years, there has been an explosion of critical interest in the icons, genres and...
Viking Britain: An Exploration
Book
A new narrative history of the Viking Age, interwoven with exploration of the physical remains and...
history
A False Report
T. Christian Miller and Ken Armstrong
6.0
Rate It
Book
Two Pulitzer Prize-winning journalists uncover the true story of Marie. She said she was raped;...
biography crime true crime
Yamashita's Ghost: War Crimes, Macarthur's Justice, and Command Accountability
Book
"I don't blame my executioners. I will pray God bless them. " So said General Tomoyuki Yamashita,...
Ta-ra-ra-boom-de-ay: The Dodgy Business of Popular Music
Book
Simon Napier-Bell is a legend in the music business. Not only was he the manager of The Yardbirds, T...