Search

Search only in certain items:

40x40

Claire (8 KP) rated I am missing in Books

Jan 28, 2018  
I am missing
I am missing
Tim Weaver | 2018 | Fiction & Poetry
7
7.5 (2 Ratings)
Book Rating
Suspense (2 more)
Page turner
Twists
Takes a few chapters to get going..but once you're in it's worth it!! (0 more)
Richard is missing..he doesn't know who he is, where he's from, anything..even if his name is Richard! He hires an investigator (Ryker) to 'find him' ..who tries all the usual googling etc but comes up with nothing until he goes to see a psychiatrist that's been 'helping' Richard ..then it all starts to twist and turn and people are turning up dead..and even Ryker is in danger as he keeps on uncovering more about who Richard is.
Definately worth a read..and as you get drawn further in you will want to speed read to find out the truth.
  
Surviving Execution
Surviving Execution
Ian Woods | 2018 | Crime, Law
6
6.0 (1 Ratings)
Book Rating
First off thank you to readers first for a copy of this book.

Surviving execution is the true story of Richard Glossip, a man who is on death row for a crime he never committed. Richard Glossip’s story is told by Ian Woods a UK Sky news reporter, Ian wanted to bring this to the UK’s attention of the miscarriage of justice and how capital punishment is not always as straight forward as it’s made out to be.

Richard Glossip was arrested for the murder of his boss and motel owner Barry Von Treese, however Richard was not the person that killed him but was implicated by Justin Sneed and the police who interviewed him. For this the man who actually murdered Barry Von Treese got life without parole whilst Richard gets the death penalty for being the supposed mastermind.

Richards Glossip didn’t start off well with a bad lawyer that was under qualified for this type of case and failure to bringing certain evidence to light was going to cost Richard his life. With multiple trials, appeals and stays you would hope this man would get some sort of break, however that’s not the case and shows how corrupt the police and the law can be.

Also this book tells us a bit about the history of Capital Punishment, the methods, the countries and also the abolitionists. Although this is non fiction it is really easy to digest and very much the page turner. It makes you question so many things and whether this should really still be carried out.

We also get an insight in to what Ian Woods is thinking as he is helping this mans case and whether he would or could witness the death of a man that he has come to know and call a friend. Ian tries to remain unbiased especially when asked if he thinks Richard is guilty which infuriates others helping with the case. This case got some high coverage as Richard Branson, Susan Sarandon, Sister Helen Prejean and even the Pope got involved.

I would really recommend reading this book if you are interested in true crime and capital punishment. Maybe just read this book so you can decide if the state of Oklahoma was correct in giving this man the death penalty.
  
40x40

Tom Jones recommended Greatest Songs by Little Richard in Music (curated)

 
Greatest Songs by Little Richard
Greatest Songs by Little Richard
1995 | Rock
(0 Ratings)
Album Favorite

"It's got all the classics on it: 'Good Golly Miss Molly', 'Rip It Up'. It's tremendous, when you put that thing on: from start to finish, it's boom all the way! First of all, I thought he was a girl, because I heard him do 'Rip It Up' and I'd heard Bill Haley & The Comets - they covered a lot of things where we didn't know what the originals were at first, but then you'd hear them - sometimes in movie houses funnily enough, like in Pontypridd, between films, they would play records. Sometimes they'd play the original American ones, but that's when I heard 'Rip It Up' by Little Richard. I thought, 'Some chick has covered Billy Haley & The Comets', but it was the original record. And then the same thing with 'Ain't That A Shame' - I heard the Pat Boon version before I heard Fats Domino. We never got to them that early - there was always somebody covering them first, getting the jump on it. It definitely made me appreciate the songs more when I first heard it, no doubt about it. Americans - they're paranoid about the lyrics that might be a little risque. With Big Joe Turner, on his version of 'Shake Rattle and Roll', there's some - 'you're wearing those dresses, the sun comes shining through / I can't believe my eyes, all that mess belongs to you' - [laughs] well, they cut that back out straightaway! Bill Haley & The Comets: 'Wearin' those dresses, your hair done up so nice / you look so warm, but your heart is cold as ice' - they changed it"

Source
  
40x40

Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Denial (2016) in Movies

Sep 29, 2021  
Denial (2016)
Denial (2016)
2016 | Drama
5
7.9 (8 Ratings)
Movie Rating
Jewry Trial.
It’s the mid-90’s and Deborah Lipstadt (Rachael Weisz, “The Lobster“), an American professor of Holocaust studies at a US university has written a book naming and shaming David Irving (Timothy Spall, “Mr Turner”) as a Nazi-apologist who denies that the Holocaust ever happened. Filing a law suit against Penguin Books and Lipstadt in the UK, Lipstadt chooses to fight rather than settle and takes the case to the High Courts in a much publicised trial.

Help is required and Lipstadt is assigned a hot-shot solicitor (if that’s not an oxymoron) in the form of Anthony Julius (Andrew Scott, “Sherlock”) and top barrister Richard Rampton (Tom Wilkinson, “Selma“). The stage is set for an epic legal battle that will establish not just legal precedent but also historical precedent affecting the entire Jewish people.
This film’s trailer really appealed to me, and I was looking forward to this film. And that view clearly also got through to people of my age bracket (and older) since the cinema was pretty full. But ultimately I was disappointed by the film.

But first the good points.
The cinematography by Haris Zambarloukos (“Thor”, “Mamma Mia”) is memorable, particularly for the Auschwitz tour which is done in an impressively bleak way on an astoundingly bleak winter’s day.
Andrew Scott, so woefully miscast as “C” in “Spectre“, here is a nice shoo-in for the cocksure but aloof expert. And Tom Wilkinson, who can seldom put a movie foot wrong, is also perfectly cast as the claret-swigging defence-lead: passionless and analytical even when facing the horrors of a trip to Auschwitz.

Timothy Spall’s Irving is well portrayed as the intelligent and articulate – albeit deluded – eccentric he no doubt is.
There are also some nice cameo performances, including John Sessions (“Florence Foster Jenkins“) as an Oxbridge history boffin and Mark Gatiss (“Sherlock”) as an Auschwitz expert.
However, these positives don’t outweigh the big negative that the broader ensemble cast never really gels together well. The first time this is evident is in an office meeting of the defence team where the interactions have a sheen of falseness about them that is barely hidden behind some weak script and forced nervous laughter. Tea can’t help.
In particular, attractive Kiwi actress Caren Pistorius (“The Light Between Oceans“) seems to have been given a poor hand to play with as the junior member of the team. A late night interaction with her boyfriend, who whinges at her for having to work late, seems to be taken from a more sexist age: “the 70’s called and they want their script back”.


None of this is helped by Rachel Weisz, who I’m normally a fan of, but here she is hindered by some rather dodgy lines by David Hare (“The Reader”) and an unconvincing (well, to me at least) New York accent. For me I’m afraid she just doesn’t seem to adequately convey her passion for the cause.
While the execution of the court scenes are well done, the film is hampered by its opening five words: “Based on a True Story”. This is something of a disease at the moment in the movies, and whilst in many films (the recent “Lion” for example) the story is in the journey rather than the result, with “Denial” the story is designed to build to a tense result that unfortunately lacks any sort of tension – since the result is pre-ordained.

This is all a great shame, since director Mick Jackson (“LA Story”, in his first feature for nearly 15 years) has the potential here for a great movie. Perhaps a more fictionalised version (“vaguely based on a true story”) might have provided more of a foundation for a better film?
  
Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore (2022)
Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore (2022)
2022 | Adventure, Family, Fantasy
7
7.0 (11 Ratings)
Movie Rating
The Magic is Fading
Alas, the magic is fading in the Wizarding World

The 3rd installment of the Fantastic Beasts saga, THE SECRETS OF DUMBLEDORE is satisfying enough for fans of the ongoing Wizarding World of Harry Potter universe and will be time well spent for those of you that have watched all 8 Harry Potter films and the first 2 FANTASTIC BEASTS films, but it is nothing…magical.

Picking up where the 2nd film (THE CRIMES OF GRINDEWALD) left off, the arch-nemesis of Dumbledore (a game Jude Law) is in power and looking to start a war with the Muggles (non-magic folk). A ragtag group of heroes (are there any other kind) led by Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) are humanity’s only hope.

And…while this worked well in the first series of film…this setup falls rather flat as it has a “been there done that” feel to it that is not really elevated above the ordinary.

The reason are numerous:

First, Newt Scamander is no Harry Potter. While Eddie Redymayne plays an interesting, quirky, central character - a character who’s unique skills were needed to defeat the bad guy in the first film - he is, really, a secondary character, yet he is the one we follow throughout the film. Kind of like watching the Harry Potter films through the eyes of Neville Longbottom.

Secondly, Grindewald (this time played by Mads Mikkelsen, replacing Johnny Depp) is no Voldemort. Grindewald was an interesting character set up in the first film, but by this film, he is pretty bland (and pretty blandly played by Mikkeslen who is, frankly, miscast).

Thirdly, Dumbledore (Jude Law in a very good performance, one that needed to be larger and more central) is sidelined for most of this film - a film about the battle between Grindewald and Dumbledore, a stumble (plotwise) to be sure in an awkward attempt to keeping the Newt Scamander character front and center.

Fortunately, the supporting cast is strong from Dan Fogler’s muggle, Jacob Kowalski to his love, Queenie (Alison Sudol) to Newt’s brother, Theseus (Callum Turner) to Newt’s assistant Bunty (Victoria Yeates) to Dumbledore’s brother, Aberforth (Richard Coyle) - all have their moments and are interesting (enough) to watch.

Unfortunately, Ezra Miller’s conflicted villain, Credence is poorly written with a crescendo to his character that lands with a thud. And, the inexplicable reason that Katherine Waterston’s main character of Tina is sidelined (rumors are she conflicted with J.K. Rowling) just doesn’t land, so, consequently, 2 major pieces from the first 2 films just don’t work.

What does work in this film is the magical sequences, as handled by Harry Potter veteran David Yates (who has now helmed 6 films in the Wizarding World franchise), the magical scenes are truly…magical. They are fun to watch and the real reason to watch this film, but the story is weak with a misguided viewpoint character that diminishes the fantasy for all.

Rumors are that this was supposed to be a 5 film franchise, but with box office diminishing for each successive Fantastic Beasts films, the filmmakers wisely decided to wrap up most storylines in this film.

It’s time to say goodbye to FANTASTIC BEASTS, but it should be time for the Wizarding World to go the way of Star Wars, Marvel and Star Trek - streaming TV series that breathes new life - and new, interesting characters - to a sagging franchise.

In the meantime, FANTASTIC BEASTS: THE SECRETS OF DUMBLEDORE is “good enough” and since it is all we have at the moment, it will have to do.

Letter Grade: B

7 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
  
Finding your feet (2018)
Finding your feet (2018)
2018 | Comedy, Drama, Romance
6
6.6 (5 Ratings)
Movie Rating
Foot tapping and Tear Jerking.
There are some films whose trailers really don’t properly represent their contents. The trailer for the new ‘grey-pound’ film “Finding Your Feet” promised a light hearted and witty foray into an elderly dance-club. And, yes, you get some laughs. But it’s very much a bitter sweet comedy, and the bitterness is ladled on by the bucketload leading to more tears than smiles through the majority of the running time.

Sandra (Imelda Staunton, “Pride“) – now Lady Sandra, after her husband’s latest knighthood – is in a predictable, sex-free but reasonably happy marriage to legal beagle Mike (John Sessions, “Denial“, “Florence Foster Jenkins“) when her world is shaken to its core on discovering that Mike has been having a five-year affair with her best friend Pamela (Josie Lawrence). Moving in with her Bohemian sister Bif (Celia Imrie, “Bridget Jones Baby“), she struggles to integrate into her decidedly lower class lifestyle and find common ground with Bif’s dance club friends Charlie (Timothy Spall, “Denial“, “Mr Turner”), Ted (David Hayman) and Jackie (Joanna Lumley, “The Wolf of Wall Street“).

Can Sandra turn her downward spiral around and find love and happiness again? Well, the posters scream “The Feel Good Film of the Year” so you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to know the answer to that! But it’s a bumpy journey for sure.

Getting all the acting honours is Timothy Spall, who is far too good to be buried away in this small British rom com. To watch him do “ordinary bloke doing ordinary things” is an absolute delight. He adds class and distinction to every scene he’s in, especially for those concerned with his truly tragic and upsetting back-story. Running a close second is Celia Imrie who has a wicked smile off to perfection and adds a lot of emotional depth to her performance: and she needs the range, since she too is on a pretty emotional journey through the second half of the film.

John Sessions and Josie Lawrence – old compatriots of course from the original version of TV’s “Whose Line Is It Anyway” – also deliver marvellous cameo performances, as does Phoebe Nicholls (“The Elephant Man”, “Downton Abbey”) as the tennis playing friend Janet.

Less convincing for me was Imelda Staunton, particularly in the first half of the film: for me she never quite pulls off the icy cold emotional wreck of Sandra, but is much better once the thaw has set in.

The film is written by Meg Leonard (in a debut script) and Nick Moorcroft (who did the “St Trinians” scripts). And there are some funny lines in there, although it has to be said that there are not enough of them. The majority of the best ones in fact are in the trailer, never bettered by Joanna Lumley’s zinger…. “My last marriage ended for religious reasons…. he thought he was God and I didn’t”! There’s not much more room for comic lines, since the rest of the script is stuffed with the dramatic outcomes from various flavours of old-age malady. Fortunately I was one of the younger members of the generally grey-haired audience, but for those further up the scale it must have been like staring into the void!

The film will win no awards for choreography, since the dance scenes are gloriously inept and out of sync. But this all rather adds to the charm of the piece.

Directed by Richard Loncraine, director of the equally forgettable Brit-flick “Wimbledon” and the rather more memorable “Brimstone and Treacle”, this is as Douglas Adams would have said “Mostly Harmless”: a film that most over-50’s will find a pleasant way to spend two hours. But go in expecting a drama with comic moments, rather than the hilarious comedy predicted by the trailer, and you will be better prepared.

(I should comment that the rating below is my view: my illustrious wife declared it a triumphant chick-flick and gave it FFFFf).