Search
Search results
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated A Beautiful Mind (2001) in Movies
Jul 4, 2020
Russell Crowe's performance (1 more)
The legendary scene with the cup of tea and the pens
What a masterpiece!
Recently, a photo was circling Facebook, with a room full of movie items, where you had to guess all movies. Me and my boyfriend played it, and found almost all of the movies. On this picture, there was a table with a cup of tea and multiple pens, and we had no idea what movie this was about. I knew it had to mean something, so we searched for "cup of tea and pens movie scene" and came across the legendary scene on YouTube.
Knowing the name of the movie now, we had to watch it. And it was legendary!
The story is about a young mathematician John Nash, who studies at Princeton University. While all his colleagues attend classes and write papers, he is trying to solve an original problem and won't stop until he proves a theory wrong.
During this journey, he is approached by a man and is recruited to work for the government, to break secret codes Russians might leave hanging about for their next steps. He also meets a woman and falls in love.
At one point, it becomes difficult for John to keep up with everything happening in his life, and the pressure is too much to handle. A couple of people start chasing him, and put him into a mental health facility.
And this is where I will stop, as I don't want to reveal any spoilers.
But this is the moment where John will have to face the truth, and finally try and battle what is real in his life and what has been an illusion all along. And we follow him on this revelation and on his journey. I have never felt this was about any movie when I have had a revelation.
The acting is impeccable. When I think of Russell Crowe, I think of Gladiator. But John Nash is the opposite - the socially awkward intelligent guy. And Russell Crowe made me believe this performance and I never doubted it.
Also, Ed Harris is a phenomenal actor as well!
The movie kept you in the dark with what was real and what not for a very long time, and this was the favorite part for me.
Recently, a photo was circling Facebook, with a room full of movie items, where you had to guess all movies. Me and my boyfriend played it, and found almost all of the movies. On this picture, there was a table with a cup of tea and multiple pens, and we had no idea what movie this was about. I knew it had to mean something, so we searched for "cup of tea and pens movie scene" and came across the legendary scene on YouTube.
Knowing the name of the movie now, we had to watch it. And it was legendary!
The story is about a young mathematician John Nash, who studies at Princeton University. While all his colleagues attend classes and write papers, he is trying to solve an original problem and won't stop until he proves a theory wrong.
During this journey, he is approached by a man and is recruited to work for the government, to break secret codes Russians might leave hanging about for their next steps. He also meets a woman and falls in love.
At one point, it becomes difficult for John to keep up with everything happening in his life, and the pressure is too much to handle. A couple of people start chasing him, and put him into a mental health facility.
And this is where I will stop, as I don't want to reveal any spoilers.
But this is the moment where John will have to face the truth, and finally try and battle what is real in his life and what has been an illusion all along. And we follow him on this revelation and on his journey. I have never felt this was about any movie when I have had a revelation.
The acting is impeccable. When I think of Russell Crowe, I think of Gladiator. But John Nash is the opposite - the socially awkward intelligent guy. And Russell Crowe made me believe this performance and I never doubted it.
Also, Ed Harris is a phenomenal actor as well!
The movie kept you in the dark with what was real and what not for a very long time, and this was the favorite part for me.
GE
Gluten Exposed: The Science Behind the Hype and How to Navigate to a Healthy, Symptom-Free Life
Peter H.R. Green and Rory Jones
Book
In this essential book on gluten, Dr. Peter H. R. Green, internationally renowned expert on celiac...
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Honey Girl in Books
Mar 4, 2021
I loved this book so much I could cry. (I did cry.) Oh Grace, my sweet, emotional girl, and oh this book. This beautiful book. Do not go into HONEY GIRL thinking it is a gimmicky read because of the Vegas marriage premise. It's a real, heart-wrenching book that will rip and tear at your soul. But don't worry, this is a good thing. Because this is a ridiculously romantic and adorable story, as well as a nuanced coming-of-age/finding yourself (hey, it can happen at twenty-eight) story.
"Have you ever gone to bed thinking of someone you only knew for a night? Have you ever stared up at the sky and wondered where it was you saw yourself, all those years ago? Which star it was you followed here?"
Rogers writes with a lyrical beauty. She gives us Grace and Yuki, two sweet, lovely, flawed, real characters whom I adored. As for Grace, I wanted nothing but good for her. I identified so much with an anxious workaholic crippled by the expectations of her parents. ("Being angry at his unattainable expectations is so much easier than accepting that the only ones I have to meet are my own." -- I think I may need to have this bronzed, as it sums up my life.) Grace struggles with the pressures placed on her by her ex-military father, by intense racism that makes it difficult to succeed in a field where she's extremely qualified, and with mental health/anxiety issues. Rogers handles all of these excellently, covering them so well in her story, along with Grace and Yuri's burgeoning relationship. It seems like it should be too much for one book, but everything fits perfectly together.
Honestly, no review of mine can do this book justice. I love the characters of Grace and Yuri and the supporting cast is excellent (and the book is diverse). It's hilarious and funny yet deftly and kindly covers mental health issues. It also takes an insightful look at racism--especially in academia--and how difficult it makes life for Grace. There's romance, friendship, family, and so much more. I loved it all, and I highly highly recommend HONEY GIRL. I cannot wait to read what Morgan Rogers writes next. 4.5+ stars.
"Have you ever gone to bed thinking of someone you only knew for a night? Have you ever stared up at the sky and wondered where it was you saw yourself, all those years ago? Which star it was you followed here?"
Rogers writes with a lyrical beauty. She gives us Grace and Yuki, two sweet, lovely, flawed, real characters whom I adored. As for Grace, I wanted nothing but good for her. I identified so much with an anxious workaholic crippled by the expectations of her parents. ("Being angry at his unattainable expectations is so much easier than accepting that the only ones I have to meet are my own." -- I think I may need to have this bronzed, as it sums up my life.) Grace struggles with the pressures placed on her by her ex-military father, by intense racism that makes it difficult to succeed in a field where she's extremely qualified, and with mental health/anxiety issues. Rogers handles all of these excellently, covering them so well in her story, along with Grace and Yuri's burgeoning relationship. It seems like it should be too much for one book, but everything fits perfectly together.
Honestly, no review of mine can do this book justice. I love the characters of Grace and Yuri and the supporting cast is excellent (and the book is diverse). It's hilarious and funny yet deftly and kindly covers mental health issues. It also takes an insightful look at racism--especially in academia--and how difficult it makes life for Grace. There's romance, friendship, family, and so much more. I loved it all, and I highly highly recommend HONEY GIRL. I cannot wait to read what Morgan Rogers writes next. 4.5+ stars.
Cougar Sim: Mountain Puma 3D
Games
App
Free Cougar simulator game. The cougar versus mountain forest animals. Become the brown puma or...
Toddler Counting 123
Education and Games
App
"simple and well executed with straightforward menus and good graphics." -- The New York Times ...
Hazel (2934 KP) rated The 13th Girl in Books
Jul 10, 2022
Lucy thought she had escaped her past but little did she know that it was just waiting for her all along ready to come back and bite her with venom.
Lucy escaped a cult when she was just seven years old. Many years later and having made a new life for herself, the skeletons start to emerge and Lucy's life is turned upside down. Having escaped one kind of controlling environment, Lucy swaps it for another - her husband and his parents are, in my opinion, vile creatures who continue to brow beat Lucy and blame her for what happened to her as a child and what her mother and cult did ... what the heck!!! Who blames a 7 year old??? Like I said, vile creatures.
Anyway, what follows is the story of Lucy trying to remember her time in the cult through flashbacks, memories and dreams/nightmares but what is real and how reliable is she? And who is doing this to her? Lucy returns to the place of her nightmares to try and remember just what happened but she is soon in an even more terrifying nightmare which is all to real and how is she going to get out of it.
This is a book that pulls on all your emotions at once and I admit that I wanted to physically get inside it and give Lucy's husband and parents-in-law a slap and Lucy a shake; oh my word, I was so annoyed at times that I nearly didn't finish the book it irritated me that much however, I persevered and, actually, am glad I did as the reasons she was like she was, became clear and, in the end, I was rooting for her and desperate for there to be a happy ending. I won't give it away but I will say that it was quite satisfying albeit a little unbelievable in parts.
Overall, a good read with an interesting plot and some unexpected twists but with characters I struggled with and with a pace that started well, got a bit slow in the middle and ramped up again towards the end.
Thank you to Avon Books UK and NetGalley for enabling me to read The 13th Girl and share my thoughts.
Lucy escaped a cult when she was just seven years old. Many years later and having made a new life for herself, the skeletons start to emerge and Lucy's life is turned upside down. Having escaped one kind of controlling environment, Lucy swaps it for another - her husband and his parents are, in my opinion, vile creatures who continue to brow beat Lucy and blame her for what happened to her as a child and what her mother and cult did ... what the heck!!! Who blames a 7 year old??? Like I said, vile creatures.
Anyway, what follows is the story of Lucy trying to remember her time in the cult through flashbacks, memories and dreams/nightmares but what is real and how reliable is she? And who is doing this to her? Lucy returns to the place of her nightmares to try and remember just what happened but she is soon in an even more terrifying nightmare which is all to real and how is she going to get out of it.
This is a book that pulls on all your emotions at once and I admit that I wanted to physically get inside it and give Lucy's husband and parents-in-law a slap and Lucy a shake; oh my word, I was so annoyed at times that I nearly didn't finish the book it irritated me that much however, I persevered and, actually, am glad I did as the reasons she was like she was, became clear and, in the end, I was rooting for her and desperate for there to be a happy ending. I won't give it away but I will say that it was quite satisfying albeit a little unbelievable in parts.
Overall, a good read with an interesting plot and some unexpected twists but with characters I struggled with and with a pace that started well, got a bit slow in the middle and ramped up again towards the end.
Thank you to Avon Books UK and NetGalley for enabling me to read The 13th Girl and share my thoughts.
Kim Pook (101 KP) rated Love you to death (2019) in Movies
Jun 2, 2022
Police arrive at a house in 2013, The door is unlocked so they enter to find a dead body on the bed. We are shown a montage of pictures of a sick teen girl called Esme and her mum, it seems they had been raising a lot of money because of her illness.
Rewind to a few months before the death, it's Esmes 16th birthday and then her routine appointment, but sadly she is showing no signs of improving. During a shopping trip they bump into Esmes estranged dad, and it's clear there is hostility between him and Esmes mum. We soon discover that Esme has had the illness since she was 4 years old and also has a learning disability which just adds to the sadness of her illness.
It soon becomes evident how controlling her mother is though, she refuses to let anyone take Esme anywhere, controls what she eats as well as which doctors are allowed to treat her. After Esme is attacked at a gaming convention, the mother purchases a gun for protection and it isn't long before she's using it against an intruder.
About half an hour into the movie, we are thrown back to 2005, and we see Esmes side of the story. Esmes mum has a conversation with a nurse who confirms that Esme was misdiagnosed and she was fine, I won't go into that too much incase you want to watch it, but basically Esmes mum continues to fake Esmes illness. You will have to watch the movie to see how she achieves this, by tricking everyone including medical staff.
I enjoyed the movie but I was so shocked to find out it was based on a true story, I immediately went on to watch the documentary to compare and I felt they did do the true story justice, they included Esmes mum always holding her hand and hitting her if she didn't do as she was expected to do. The way Esme (gypsy rose) meets her boyfriend was different in real life, I felt the movie made him out to be this sweet guy trying to save Esme but in real life he was very disturbed, but then again it was told through Esmes eyes, so it was probably to show what she saw at the time.
Rewind to a few months before the death, it's Esmes 16th birthday and then her routine appointment, but sadly she is showing no signs of improving. During a shopping trip they bump into Esmes estranged dad, and it's clear there is hostility between him and Esmes mum. We soon discover that Esme has had the illness since she was 4 years old and also has a learning disability which just adds to the sadness of her illness.
It soon becomes evident how controlling her mother is though, she refuses to let anyone take Esme anywhere, controls what she eats as well as which doctors are allowed to treat her. After Esme is attacked at a gaming convention, the mother purchases a gun for protection and it isn't long before she's using it against an intruder.
About half an hour into the movie, we are thrown back to 2005, and we see Esmes side of the story. Esmes mum has a conversation with a nurse who confirms that Esme was misdiagnosed and she was fine, I won't go into that too much incase you want to watch it, but basically Esmes mum continues to fake Esmes illness. You will have to watch the movie to see how she achieves this, by tricking everyone including medical staff.
I enjoyed the movie but I was so shocked to find out it was based on a true story, I immediately went on to watch the documentary to compare and I felt they did do the true story justice, they included Esmes mum always holding her hand and hitting her if she didn't do as she was expected to do. The way Esme (gypsy rose) meets her boyfriend was different in real life, I felt the movie made him out to be this sweet guy trying to save Esme but in real life he was very disturbed, but then again it was told through Esmes eyes, so it was probably to show what she saw at the time.
Sloane Jacobsen is the most famous and sought after trends forecaster in the world. Companies across the globe seek Sloane's knowledge about the "next big thing." Sloane may be confident in her work life, but her personal life is a mess. She's not happy with her boyfriend, Roman, and she's basically estranged from her family--all since she fled to Paris shortly after her father's death. But now Sloane is working for six months in New York: she's back near her family, and Roman is accompanying her on the trip.
This book immediately got off on the wrong foot with me as the main character ranted against how society has changed--using peanut allergies and the horror of having to avoid her favorite peanut-filled treats on a plane as proof. As someone with a kid with a peanut allergy (who has met these lovely people on planes in real life), I was already turned off by Sloane. <i>It never really got any better. </i>
Sloane is supposedly a trend forecaster. Her entire life she's been able to "see" things and predict where society is going with certain trends. She is credited with foreseeing the famous "swipe" action. The problem Sloane faces now is that she thinks society is going to turn against the technology it has come to hold so dear: something that doesn't sit well with the technology-focused firm, Mammoth, who has hired her. After all, Mammoth uses a driverless car to transport Sloane while she works for them. They want her to present at a convention that aims to showcase technology for the childless set.
On the surface, this doesn't sound so bad. Consider parts of it satire and a critique on our tech-obsessed society, and it has real promise. Unfortunately, for me, <i>the premise fell flat.</i> My favorite character wound up being Anastasia, the driverless car. Sloane's boyfriend, Roman, wears a Zentai suit (imagine a full-length wet-suit that covers his entire body) and preaches an anti-touch, pro-cybersex agenda. He's strange. That whole part of the plot is weird, albeit one that offers the occasional comic moment. Maybe my sense of humor is not finely developed enough?
The book nails a lot of the corporate world (you can certainly picture Dax, the head of Mammoth, and many of his worker bees). Other parts of the plot are harder to swallow. Sloane waffles. Roman irritates. The dialogue is oddly written at times. Large pieces of the plot didn't really seem necessary. Other pieces were interesting, but felt like reading a research paper (and I found myself skimming).
So while there were certainly funny moments (and it picked up a bit as it neared the end), overall I just found myself cringing. I didn't like the plot, I never warmed up to Sloane, and I wanted to hit Roman and Dax. Maybe I missed a higher meaning to this novel, as it seems to be getting a lot of better reviews, so take mine with a grain of salt. For me, I just didn't enjoy reading it, and that's why (and I debated this a while), I'm going with 2.5 stars.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you!) in return for an unbiased review. It is available everywhere as of 05/30/2017.
<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>;
This book immediately got off on the wrong foot with me as the main character ranted against how society has changed--using peanut allergies and the horror of having to avoid her favorite peanut-filled treats on a plane as proof. As someone with a kid with a peanut allergy (who has met these lovely people on planes in real life), I was already turned off by Sloane. <i>It never really got any better. </i>
Sloane is supposedly a trend forecaster. Her entire life she's been able to "see" things and predict where society is going with certain trends. She is credited with foreseeing the famous "swipe" action. The problem Sloane faces now is that she thinks society is going to turn against the technology it has come to hold so dear: something that doesn't sit well with the technology-focused firm, Mammoth, who has hired her. After all, Mammoth uses a driverless car to transport Sloane while she works for them. They want her to present at a convention that aims to showcase technology for the childless set.
On the surface, this doesn't sound so bad. Consider parts of it satire and a critique on our tech-obsessed society, and it has real promise. Unfortunately, for me, <i>the premise fell flat.</i> My favorite character wound up being Anastasia, the driverless car. Sloane's boyfriend, Roman, wears a Zentai suit (imagine a full-length wet-suit that covers his entire body) and preaches an anti-touch, pro-cybersex agenda. He's strange. That whole part of the plot is weird, albeit one that offers the occasional comic moment. Maybe my sense of humor is not finely developed enough?
The book nails a lot of the corporate world (you can certainly picture Dax, the head of Mammoth, and many of his worker bees). Other parts of the plot are harder to swallow. Sloane waffles. Roman irritates. The dialogue is oddly written at times. Large pieces of the plot didn't really seem necessary. Other pieces were interesting, but felt like reading a research paper (and I found myself skimming).
So while there were certainly funny moments (and it picked up a bit as it neared the end), overall I just found myself cringing. I didn't like the plot, I never warmed up to Sloane, and I wanted to hit Roman and Dax. Maybe I missed a higher meaning to this novel, as it seems to be getting a lot of better reviews, so take mine with a grain of salt. For me, I just didn't enjoy reading it, and that's why (and I debated this a while), I'm going with 2.5 stars.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you!) in return for an unbiased review. It is available everywhere as of 05/30/2017.
<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>;
Anyone who knows me knows that I am a hardcore Shakespeare fan. One of my bosses at work knows this and let me borrow her copy of this book thinking that it would interest me. Unfortunately, it fell a little flat.
I do not agree with the main argument of this biography: that William Shakespeare was, in fact, only a pen name for Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford. No. I do not agree with this claim, like so many other Shakespeare scholars and lovers because the "facts" put forth are just very thinly stretched ideas and concepts that cannot be proven.
This book, instead of pushing me to think about how this fact could even possibly be true, is more about the life of Edward de Vere and how some of the circumstances in his life would be able to loosely connect to the plays Shakespeare had written. In tying in the plays, Anderson thinks he is making a stronger claim for his argument, but is honestly just trying to connect things that are unalike to "prove" what he is thinking. As an English major, I don't really like that way of thinking much.
Most of what he was trying to argue could have been left out and, instead, just have the appendices left in there. In the approximately sixty pages of the four appendices, he stated what over three hundred pages could not. No, I do not agree with the argument he is making, but it seems like it is stronger and more coherent in the appendix.
I want to point out a specific quotation from the Appendix A on page 381 to make a point about this book. It states: The thesis of this book, the "Oxfordian" proposition that Edward de Vere was Shake-speare, is a theory built on circumstantial evidence. There is no single "smoking gun" document that leads one inexorably to the conclusion that de Vere wrote Hamlet, King Lear, the Sonnets, etc." I understand that it is difficult to try to prove a theory that many argue against (myself included), but basing your argument solely on circumstantial evidence is not the way to go. It makes the argument, at least to me, seem less realistic and, in all honesty, difficult to agree with. If you cannot prove someone is guilty solely based on circumstantial evidence, you should not try to prove a complex argument that a famous playwright was not a real person, but, in fact, a pseudonym for another historical figure around the same time.
The "facts" that de Vere's life has similar qualities to the plays written by Shakespeare leading to the thought that de Vere, himself, is Shakespeare is a stretch, and not a convincing one at that.
Overall, I did not enjoy this book and I did not find it convincing at all. It felt more like a history lesson about the background of Edward de Vere rather than any kind of argument towards the idea that he could have been Shakespeare.
In my heart of hearts, I will always believe that William Shakespeare was, in fact, a real man by the name of William Shakespeare, not some made up name for a man who wanted to keep his private life separate from the public.
I do not agree with the main argument of this biography: that William Shakespeare was, in fact, only a pen name for Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford. No. I do not agree with this claim, like so many other Shakespeare scholars and lovers because the "facts" put forth are just very thinly stretched ideas and concepts that cannot be proven.
This book, instead of pushing me to think about how this fact could even possibly be true, is more about the life of Edward de Vere and how some of the circumstances in his life would be able to loosely connect to the plays Shakespeare had written. In tying in the plays, Anderson thinks he is making a stronger claim for his argument, but is honestly just trying to connect things that are unalike to "prove" what he is thinking. As an English major, I don't really like that way of thinking much.
Most of what he was trying to argue could have been left out and, instead, just have the appendices left in there. In the approximately sixty pages of the four appendices, he stated what over three hundred pages could not. No, I do not agree with the argument he is making, but it seems like it is stronger and more coherent in the appendix.
I want to point out a specific quotation from the Appendix A on page 381 to make a point about this book. It states: The thesis of this book, the "Oxfordian" proposition that Edward de Vere was Shake-speare, is a theory built on circumstantial evidence. There is no single "smoking gun" document that leads one inexorably to the conclusion that de Vere wrote Hamlet, King Lear, the Sonnets, etc." I understand that it is difficult to try to prove a theory that many argue against (myself included), but basing your argument solely on circumstantial evidence is not the way to go. It makes the argument, at least to me, seem less realistic and, in all honesty, difficult to agree with. If you cannot prove someone is guilty solely based on circumstantial evidence, you should not try to prove a complex argument that a famous playwright was not a real person, but, in fact, a pseudonym for another historical figure around the same time.
The "facts" that de Vere's life has similar qualities to the plays written by Shakespeare leading to the thought that de Vere, himself, is Shakespeare is a stretch, and not a convincing one at that.
Overall, I did not enjoy this book and I did not find it convincing at all. It felt more like a history lesson about the background of Edward de Vere rather than any kind of argument towards the idea that he could have been Shakespeare.
In my heart of hearts, I will always believe that William Shakespeare was, in fact, a real man by the name of William Shakespeare, not some made up name for a man who wanted to keep his private life separate from the public.
24me Smart Personal Assistant
Productivity and Business
App
"Best of App Store to manage your calendar, to-do list, notes and personal accounts" - Apple. 24me...