Search
Search results
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Identity (2003) in Movies
Sep 22, 2020 (Updated Nov 26, 2020)
"๐ ๐๐ข๐ฏ๐ฒ๐ถ๐ฆ๐ต ๐ฑ๐ฐ๐ต ๐ฑ๐ช๐ฆ?! ๐ ๐๐ข๐ฏ๐ฒ๐ถ๐ฆ๐ต ๐ฑ๐ฐ๐ต ๐ฑ๐ช๐ฆ!"
*or*
"๐๐ช๐ด๐ต๐ฆ๐ฏ ๐ต๐ฐ ๐ฎ๐ฆ, ๐ฅ๐ถ๐ฅ๐ฆ, ๐'๐ฎ ๐ฉ๐ข๐ท๐ช๐ฏ๐จ ๐ข ๐ณ๐ฆ๐ข๐ญ๐ญ๐บ ๐ง๐ถ๐ค๐ฌ๐ฆ๐ฅ-๐ถ๐ฑ, ๐ธ๐ฆ๐ต, ๐ฃ๐ข๐ฅ ๐ง๐ถ๐ค๐ฌ๐ช๐ฏ๐จ ๐ฅ๐ข๐บ."
True "What the fuck is going on? Huh? What..? Who?? ... wait what the fuck is that I- um, did they just? What the hell, but...where? Why? Uh, how?" cinema. This sort of exasperatingly looney, balls-planted-firmly-to-the-wall thriller with like 60 twists is sort of played these days - but I'd imagine that in its day it was quite revelatory. This was honestly a hoot and a holler but sadly its greatness is sunk by James Mangold - for the most part - being a hack who has no clue how to dramatize, have any definable mark as a director, or make inherently compelling things at all very compelling unless the studio has a firm grip on the project. His films mostly look like flat TV movies and play like no one behind the camera has much of a clue on what they're doing beyond maybe an introductory film guide on the back of a cereal box. This one isn't all that different either, but material with *this* low of a regard for any sense of subtlety or earthly realism and with a gleeful eagerness to throw all of its cards violently onto the table any chance it gets has a pass from me - especially when it's acted by a banging troupe of crackerjack character actors and reliable leads like this one. Really, really fun and sincerely manic - Agatha Christie meets a line of coke at a gas station bathroom. Plus the uninterrupted, heaping downpour is a helluva gimmick and it works where Mangold doesn't.
*or*
"๐๐ช๐ด๐ต๐ฆ๐ฏ ๐ต๐ฐ ๐ฎ๐ฆ, ๐ฅ๐ถ๐ฅ๐ฆ, ๐'๐ฎ ๐ฉ๐ข๐ท๐ช๐ฏ๐จ ๐ข ๐ณ๐ฆ๐ข๐ญ๐ญ๐บ ๐ง๐ถ๐ค๐ฌ๐ฆ๐ฅ-๐ถ๐ฑ, ๐ธ๐ฆ๐ต, ๐ฃ๐ข๐ฅ ๐ง๐ถ๐ค๐ฌ๐ช๐ฏ๐จ ๐ฅ๐ข๐บ."
True "What the fuck is going on? Huh? What..? Who?? ... wait what the fuck is that I- um, did they just? What the hell, but...where? Why? Uh, how?" cinema. This sort of exasperatingly looney, balls-planted-firmly-to-the-wall thriller with like 60 twists is sort of played these days - but I'd imagine that in its day it was quite revelatory. This was honestly a hoot and a holler but sadly its greatness is sunk by James Mangold - for the most part - being a hack who has no clue how to dramatize, have any definable mark as a director, or make inherently compelling things at all very compelling unless the studio has a firm grip on the project. His films mostly look like flat TV movies and play like no one behind the camera has much of a clue on what they're doing beyond maybe an introductory film guide on the back of a cereal box. This one isn't all that different either, but material with *this* low of a regard for any sense of subtlety or earthly realism and with a gleeful eagerness to throw all of its cards violently onto the table any chance it gets has a pass from me - especially when it's acted by a banging troupe of crackerjack character actors and reliable leads like this one. Really, really fun and sincerely manic - Agatha Christie meets a line of coke at a gas station bathroom. Plus the uninterrupted, heaping downpour is a helluva gimmick and it works where Mangold doesn't.
Black Shark - Combat Gunship Flight Simulator
Games and Entertainment
App
Ultra realistic flight simulator of the Ka-50 attack helicopter. Black Shark offers an extreme level...
OW
Of Wilderness and Wolves
Paul Lester Errington and Matthew Wynn Sivils
Book
"I was a predator, myself, and lived close to the land." With these words, Paul L. Errington begins...
Infinite Tanks
Games
App
Infinite Tanks features exactly what the name suggests โ huge content - never ending lines of...
Can Knockdown 3
Games and Entertainment
App
Be accurate! Be smart! Be quick! Challenge your aim, hone your precision, and push your...
This Idea Is Brilliant: Lost, Overlooked, and Underappreciated Scientific Concepts Everyone Should Know
Book
The latest volume in the bestselling series from Edge.orgโdubbed โthe worldโs smartest...
life sciences
The Island of Missing Trees
10.0
Rate It
Book
It is 1974 on the island of Cyprus. Two teenagers, from opposite sides of a divided land, meet at a...
Historical Fiction Magical Realism Literary Fiction Cyprus Turkey London
Eilidh G Clark (177 KP) rated The Portrait of Mr W.H. in Books
May 14, 2017
. As a paradox to the realism and ethics of the period, decadent writers, artists, and poets challenged a society that strove for a standard in public discourse.
First published in 1889, Oscar Wildeโs The Portrait of Mr W.H., is a short story about the efforts of three characters trying to discover the identity of Shakespeareโs Mr W.H. ; the dedicatee of his many sonnets. Wildeโs novel is a prime example of decadent literature and aestheticism, which, as a result, challenges the Victorian ideals of moral decency and public rectitude. The author uses paradox in the novel to present a theory that contradicts the conservative critics of Shakespeareโs sonnets.
Wilde presents a subjective interpretation of Shakespeareโs sonnets that portrays homoerotic sexual desire as the force for creative inspiration. Foremost, through the character Cyril Graham, the author demonstrates that art is โan attempt to realise oneโs own personality on some imaginative plane out of reach of the trammelling accidents and limitations of real lifeโ, (Wilde, p.111).
Taking from a hypothesis in the previous century by Edmund Malone and Thomas Tyrwhitt, the character of Cyril forms a theory in which Mr W.H. is a young actor named Willie Hughes, employed by Shakespeare and who is the muse to which the sonnets are devoted. Cyril investigates each poem and pieces together a theory he believes to be true.
On the surface, Cyrilโs theory derives from feeling and beauty rather than logic and instruction.
The withholding of facts in Shakespeareโs sonnets energises Cyril. He scours the poems to find a clue that harmonise with his own feelings. Cyril believes that Shakespeare influences his readers by guiding them to Willie Hughes.
Cyril, spurned by the moralistic interpretations of previous critics, becomes enthralled by Shakespeareโs muse.
Wilde presents a subjective interpretation of Shakespeareโs sonnets that portrays homoerotic sexual desire as the force for creative inspiration. Foremost, through the character Cyril Graham, the author demonstrates that art is โan attempt to realise oneโs own personality on some imaginative plane out of reach of the trammelling accidents and limitations of real lifeโ, (Wilde, p.111).
Taking from a hypothesis in the previous century by Edmund Malone and Thomas Tyrwhitt, the character of Cyril forms a theory in which Mr W.H. is a young actor named Willie Hughes, employed by Shakespeare and who is the muse to which the sonnets are devoted. Cyril investigates each poem and pieces together a theory he believes to be true.
On the surface, Cyrilโs theory derives from feeling and beauty rather than logic and instruction.
The withholding of facts in Shakespeareโs sonnets energises Cyril. He scours the poems to find a clue that harmonise with his own feelings. Cyril believes that Shakespeare influences his readers by guiding them to Willie Hughes.
Cyril, spurned by the moralistic interpretations of previous critics, becomes enthralled by Shakespeareโs muse.
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated The Reapers are the Angels (Reapers, #1) in Books
Feb 15, 2019
If you're going into this book thinking you'll find an action-packed, zombie-mauling good-time, you're in for a surprise. THE REAPERS ARE THE ANGELS is literary zombie fiction (yes, you read that right), although it's not too literary it feels pretentious and stuffy, but it's not a totally light read either. There's violence chock full of blood and gore, a semi-solitary road trip, and God. Does it work? Yeah, in a way. The book was serious but there wasn't much depth and it didn't impact me as much as it probably should have. The plot is basically an odyssey, in which many diverse characters appear and we see how the main character, Temple, relates with them. One of these struck me as odd and took me out of the story. Before, the book showed realism and grit, then it came to giant mutants and turned into a sci-fi horror show. Frankly, it was just weird and didn't correlate with the rest of the story. Temple was an interesting character who told the tale well but was a contradiction; she's illiterate but knows words that few people do. Since she's always lived with "meatskins" and has never known the world before, her background doesn't support this and I found it didn't fit with her character at all. I got her but didn't care about her.
Honestly, I don't have much feeling for this book, I liked it but that's all, and while it's a good read, it's not great. If you like a thinking zombie story with philosophy and a stream of Christianity running through it, although it's not too deep, than you just might enjoy this book.
Honestly, I don't have much feeling for this book, I liked it but that's all, and while it's a good read, it's not great. If you like a thinking zombie story with philosophy and a stream of Christianity running through it, although it's not too deep, than you just might enjoy this book.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated The Highwaymen (2019) in Movies
Apr 5, 2019 (Updated Apr 5, 2019)
Costner & Harrelson (1 more)
Well made
HighwayMeh
The Highwaymen is a recent Netflix movie about two ex Texas Rangers that were brought out of retirement to hunt and kill Bonnie & Clyde. With that premise and Kevin Costner & Woody Harrelson in the lead roles, this could have been incredible. Although the movie is very well made and the entire cast are all pretty great in it, it is just so damn slow.
Not only that but it is 2+ hours long and, my God do you feel it. Like me, you will most likely spend the whole time waiting for the film to pick up until it just sort of fizzles out. I get that they were going for realism over action here, but it is seriously slow. At what I thought was almost the end of the movie, I hit paused to go for a bathroom break, only to discover that I was just shy of halfway into the movie's runtime.
Don't get me wrong, Costner and Harrelson do a great job of carrying this movie and it really does rely on their performance. Also, the movie is technically proficient. The camera work, the lighting, the set design etc is all solid, this is by no means a poorly made movie.
Overall, if you are a huge fan of the Bonnie & Clyde story, or of either of the lead actors, then you should probably check this one out. If not, you can most certainly give it a skip. As I keep reiterating, this is a technically sound movie, it is just so slow and drawn out that it is detrimental to me recommending the film to anyone other than diehard fans of this story.
Not only that but it is 2+ hours long and, my God do you feel it. Like me, you will most likely spend the whole time waiting for the film to pick up until it just sort of fizzles out. I get that they were going for realism over action here, but it is seriously slow. At what I thought was almost the end of the movie, I hit paused to go for a bathroom break, only to discover that I was just shy of halfway into the movie's runtime.
Don't get me wrong, Costner and Harrelson do a great job of carrying this movie and it really does rely on their performance. Also, the movie is technically proficient. The camera work, the lighting, the set design etc is all solid, this is by no means a poorly made movie.
Overall, if you are a huge fan of the Bonnie & Clyde story, or of either of the lead actors, then you should probably check this one out. If not, you can most certainly give it a skip. As I keep reiterating, this is a technically sound movie, it is just so slow and drawn out that it is detrimental to me recommending the film to anyone other than diehard fans of this story.