Search
Search results
Dana (24 KP) rated The Winner's Curse (The Winner's Trilogy, #1) in Books
Mar 23, 2018
This was a very interesting concept for a book series. The nations and the struggle between them was based on the Greco-Roman time period when Rome was conquering most of Europe and the Mediterranean. Many of the ties to both appearance and even some of the cultures of these two rival nations were scattered throughout the first book.
I have got to say, I really enjoyed this book. It was a very quick read, something I appreciate as I am attempting to read 27 books in about two and a half months. The characters were very compelling, especially when I hated them. I obviously loved the two main characters, Kestrel and Arin, Kestrel's best friend, Jess, and her brother, Ronan. Even though I hated Irex (even his name is grating) I was intrigued by him and his motivations behind everything he did.
I loved how Kestrel was such a schemer. A lot of the time in YA books with female protagonists, if she is even slightly good at battle plans, she is passed off as being arrogant or is completely ignored by her male counterparts forcing her to execute her plan behind the scenes and be scolded for the rash behavior afterwards. Not in this book. No, Kestrel is actually praised for her tactical mind, something I think anyone with this skill should get. It was refreshing to see other characters lifting a female character up in her strengths instead of downplaying them, forcing her to use them for their own gain, or taking credit for it themselves. Other males in YA books, take note of this!! (Also, I love how badass she is at Bite and Sting. I want that game to be real and learn how to be just as awesome at it!!)
The relationships between the characters were well developed, but I think they could still use improvement. I wanted to know the motivations behind each of the relationships, especially between Kestrel and Ronan. Yes, he likes her, but why and for how long? And we all know about Irex, but why is he like that? Plus, how did Jess and Kestrel become friends?
I enjoyed how everything played out in the plot and was setting up for the next books without being only about world building and plot set up. It had a life of its own.
Overall, I really liked the book and I can't wait to pick up the next two!
I have got to say, I really enjoyed this book. It was a very quick read, something I appreciate as I am attempting to read 27 books in about two and a half months. The characters were very compelling, especially when I hated them. I obviously loved the two main characters, Kestrel and Arin, Kestrel's best friend, Jess, and her brother, Ronan. Even though I hated Irex (even his name is grating) I was intrigued by him and his motivations behind everything he did.
I loved how Kestrel was such a schemer. A lot of the time in YA books with female protagonists, if she is even slightly good at battle plans, she is passed off as being arrogant or is completely ignored by her male counterparts forcing her to execute her plan behind the scenes and be scolded for the rash behavior afterwards. Not in this book. No, Kestrel is actually praised for her tactical mind, something I think anyone with this skill should get. It was refreshing to see other characters lifting a female character up in her strengths instead of downplaying them, forcing her to use them for their own gain, or taking credit for it themselves. Other males in YA books, take note of this!! (Also, I love how badass she is at Bite and Sting. I want that game to be real and learn how to be just as awesome at it!!)
The relationships between the characters were well developed, but I think they could still use improvement. I wanted to know the motivations behind each of the relationships, especially between Kestrel and Ronan. Yes, he likes her, but why and for how long? And we all know about Irex, but why is he like that? Plus, how did Jess and Kestrel become friends?
I enjoyed how everything played out in the plot and was setting up for the next books without being only about world building and plot set up. It had a life of its own.
Overall, I really liked the book and I can't wait to pick up the next two!
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Call of Duty: Black Ops III - Descent in Video Games
Jun 19, 2019
The third DLC pack for Call of Duty Black Ops 3: Descent has arrived for PC and Xbox One users and brings four news maps and a new zombie episode for fans.
Previously available earlier for the Playstation 4, the new map is the third of four planned DLC packs which will pave the way for the release of Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare in November which itself will spawn four packs of DLC content itself.
The four new maps are as follows….
Cryogen
Set in a remote cryogenic lab this tech laden map is a great place for gamers who love to run and gun and have close quarter battles. I had a really good round of Kill Confirmed in this locale but beware, there are numerous areas for enemy players to hide and strike when you least expect them to.
Berserk
A frozen Viking village is the setting for this map and it is an ideal setting for Domination and Hardpoint. The map is even filled with arrows in the woodwork and a nice jump that requires your attention to traverse. The action is intense but it does have more than a few camping spots which ruined it for me at times as Spawn Campers took advantage of this to shoot me before I could even move.
Rumble
A futuristic arena setting which has quickly become a favorite as players must battle behind the scenes and on the main floor to survive. I had a few nice escort and Team Deathmatch rounds on this impressive setting.
Empire
This is a reimagined version of Raid from Black Ops II where a classic Roman themed villa is the setting for intense action. There are long courtyards and elevated windows which also makes this ideal for camping snipers who can really take the fun out of a game. However when played with a nice balance of player styles this is an action lovers dream.
Fans of the Zombie mode will love Gorod Krovi which sets the four players in an alternate Stalingrad. As if the Zombies were not bad enough, there are also robotic enemies and a Dragon for players to contend with.
While the set is not offering any new weapons or any drastic changes, it does offer new maps for players to enjoy and a top-notch Zombie mode which will help tide players over until the fourth pack and Infinite Warfare arrives.
http://sknr.net/2016/08/13/call-duty-black-ops-3-descent-dlc/
Previously available earlier for the Playstation 4, the new map is the third of four planned DLC packs which will pave the way for the release of Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare in November which itself will spawn four packs of DLC content itself.
The four new maps are as follows….
Cryogen
Set in a remote cryogenic lab this tech laden map is a great place for gamers who love to run and gun and have close quarter battles. I had a really good round of Kill Confirmed in this locale but beware, there are numerous areas for enemy players to hide and strike when you least expect them to.
Berserk
A frozen Viking village is the setting for this map and it is an ideal setting for Domination and Hardpoint. The map is even filled with arrows in the woodwork and a nice jump that requires your attention to traverse. The action is intense but it does have more than a few camping spots which ruined it for me at times as Spawn Campers took advantage of this to shoot me before I could even move.
Rumble
A futuristic arena setting which has quickly become a favorite as players must battle behind the scenes and on the main floor to survive. I had a few nice escort and Team Deathmatch rounds on this impressive setting.
Empire
This is a reimagined version of Raid from Black Ops II where a classic Roman themed villa is the setting for intense action. There are long courtyards and elevated windows which also makes this ideal for camping snipers who can really take the fun out of a game. However when played with a nice balance of player styles this is an action lovers dream.
Fans of the Zombie mode will love Gorod Krovi which sets the four players in an alternate Stalingrad. As if the Zombies were not bad enough, there are also robotic enemies and a Dragon for players to contend with.
While the set is not offering any new weapons or any drastic changes, it does offer new maps for players to enjoy and a top-notch Zombie mode which will help tide players over until the fourth pack and Infinite Warfare arrives.
http://sknr.net/2016/08/13/call-duty-black-ops-3-descent-dlc/
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Morrigan in Books
Jan 23, 2020
Original Review Posted on <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2013/02/blog-tour-morrigan-by-laura-deluca-review-and-guest-post.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>.
Note: Formatting has been lost due to copy and pasting.
<i><b>Disclaimer:</b> I received this book from YANR Blog Tours for free in exchange for an honest for the blog tour. This does not influence my review in any way.</i>
I think 3 words grabbed my attention: Tir na NOg. Only because the place was familiar from another series (I'll leave it for you guys to ponder on that). Okay, not just Tir na NOg. The blurb grabbed me as well. *o* So with that concept, I thought it might have something to do with faeries and would you be glad to know I was wrong.
I haven't read anything about Celtic mythology, or any books about it (I usually stick to Greek and Roman myths...), so Morrigan was made much more interesting to read knowing that fact. I love the fact that the author placed a glossary at the very beginning of the book - it was very helpful (hey, I'm pretty sure I'll be pronouncing everything foreign-like wrong in the end anyways, regardless of glossary there or not. But I'm sure it'll be helpful for the majority of us).
Here, we have a girl named Morrigan, who's an orphan and moving from home to home constantly. Until one day, she finds out her world isn't what it seems... AND she's different than what she thought she was. She can control fire, read the future (at least a glimpse), and move things... with her mind.
I find Morrigan an enchanting read. Like any fantasy book, we enter a different world that's "parallel" to our modern day world. I love the way Tiarn reacts to Morrigan's technological knowledge/use of modern items in Tir na NOg. However, I did find some things a bit confusing and didn't really make sense. I also loved the choice of words, especially in transitions.
I also loved the way the villains are formed. The author is descriptive and detailed with them (trust me... I had the shudders. No Nightmares though). Just when you think someone is a villain, it ends up being another... (which is a good thing, in my humble opinion). I'm also curious if there's going to be a sequel... due to the way the book ends. ;)
By the way, just because there's a werewolf, does not mean this story is going to be Twilight fashioned. It's not. ;)
Note: Formatting has been lost due to copy and pasting.
<i><b>Disclaimer:</b> I received this book from YANR Blog Tours for free in exchange for an honest for the blog tour. This does not influence my review in any way.</i>
I think 3 words grabbed my attention: Tir na NOg. Only because the place was familiar from another series (I'll leave it for you guys to ponder on that). Okay, not just Tir na NOg. The blurb grabbed me as well. *o* So with that concept, I thought it might have something to do with faeries and would you be glad to know I was wrong.
I haven't read anything about Celtic mythology, or any books about it (I usually stick to Greek and Roman myths...), so Morrigan was made much more interesting to read knowing that fact. I love the fact that the author placed a glossary at the very beginning of the book - it was very helpful (hey, I'm pretty sure I'll be pronouncing everything foreign-like wrong in the end anyways, regardless of glossary there or not. But I'm sure it'll be helpful for the majority of us).
Here, we have a girl named Morrigan, who's an orphan and moving from home to home constantly. Until one day, she finds out her world isn't what it seems... AND she's different than what she thought she was. She can control fire, read the future (at least a glimpse), and move things... with her mind.
I find Morrigan an enchanting read. Like any fantasy book, we enter a different world that's "parallel" to our modern day world. I love the way Tiarn reacts to Morrigan's technological knowledge/use of modern items in Tir na NOg. However, I did find some things a bit confusing and didn't really make sense. I also loved the choice of words, especially in transitions.
I also loved the way the villains are formed. The author is descriptive and detailed with them (trust me... I had the shudders. No Nightmares though). Just when you think someone is a villain, it ends up being another... (which is a good thing, in my humble opinion). I'm also curious if there's going to be a sequel... due to the way the book ends. ;)
By the way, just because there's a werewolf, does not mean this story is going to be Twilight fashioned. It's not. ;)
Life is not going well for Harley Quinn (Margot Robbie). She has recently
split from the Joker and is wallowing in self-pity and trying to find a
new focus in her life. As a further complication; the protection she
enjoyed under the Joker has vanished and now everyone with a grudge is
gunning for her.
Fate has Harley cross paths with a young Pickpocket named Cassandra (Ella
Jay Basco), who comes into possession of a diamond that happens to hold a
very valuable secret. Before Harley knows what has hit her; she is on the
run not only from all manner of thugs but the very dangerous Roman Siona
(Ewan Mc Gregor) has upped the stakes for their heads and will stop at nothing to get it.
Throw in a disgruntled Detective (Rose Perez) a jaded singer (Jurnee
Smollett-Bell), and a mysterious assassin (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) and
you have a very interesting and dangerous mix.
Sadly the film becomes jumbled at the start as the film will go down certain paths only to abruptly stop, rewind, go down another path, and resume.
This comes off as a disjointed mess at times and while I took it to help symbolize the mental state of Harley; it made connecting with the character and stories difficult.
This combined with the over the top
characters and routine story underminded the potential of the film.
While it entertained in parts, I do have to wonder if Director Cathy Yan
was in over her head. Yan had previously done four shorts and an Art Film
and seemed to be unsure of the pacing, action, and visual effects at times
as it certainally showed.
It is rumored that the head of the John Wick
stunt team was brought in to oversee reshoots for the film but Yan has
claimed this was simply for Second Unit work.
The film does have a strong theme of empowerment and I liked how it
emphasized that a woman does not need anyone to be strong and that they
have limitless potential. This is a very strong message that worked
wiell. Sadly the story offered no real variation from what we have seen
many times before in action and comic films and underscores how DC and
Warner Bros constantly come up lacking in this genrre where Marvel soars
time and again.
There isome entertainment in the film and Robbie is the perfect embodiyment of the character, sadly this Bird never really takes
flight.
2.5 out of 5
split from the Joker and is wallowing in self-pity and trying to find a
new focus in her life. As a further complication; the protection she
enjoyed under the Joker has vanished and now everyone with a grudge is
gunning for her.
Fate has Harley cross paths with a young Pickpocket named Cassandra (Ella
Jay Basco), who comes into possession of a diamond that happens to hold a
very valuable secret. Before Harley knows what has hit her; she is on the
run not only from all manner of thugs but the very dangerous Roman Siona
(Ewan Mc Gregor) has upped the stakes for their heads and will stop at nothing to get it.
Throw in a disgruntled Detective (Rose Perez) a jaded singer (Jurnee
Smollett-Bell), and a mysterious assassin (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) and
you have a very interesting and dangerous mix.
Sadly the film becomes jumbled at the start as the film will go down certain paths only to abruptly stop, rewind, go down another path, and resume.
This comes off as a disjointed mess at times and while I took it to help symbolize the mental state of Harley; it made connecting with the character and stories difficult.
This combined with the over the top
characters and routine story underminded the potential of the film.
While it entertained in parts, I do have to wonder if Director Cathy Yan
was in over her head. Yan had previously done four shorts and an Art Film
and seemed to be unsure of the pacing, action, and visual effects at times
as it certainally showed.
It is rumored that the head of the John Wick
stunt team was brought in to oversee reshoots for the film but Yan has
claimed this was simply for Second Unit work.
The film does have a strong theme of empowerment and I liked how it
emphasized that a woman does not need anyone to be strong and that they
have limitless potential. This is a very strong message that worked
wiell. Sadly the story offered no real variation from what we have seen
many times before in action and comic films and underscores how DC and
Warner Bros constantly come up lacking in this genrre where Marvel soars
time and again.
There isome entertainment in the film and Robbie is the perfect embodiyment of the character, sadly this Bird never really takes
flight.
2.5 out of 5
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Birds of Prey (And the Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn) (2020) in Movies
Oct 2, 2020 (Updated Oct 6, 2020)
Margot Robbie and her return to Harley Quinn (2 more)
Badass fight choreography
Some really cool action sequences
I wasn't a fan of the self narration the entire film. (2 more)
I also didn't like the Tarantino-ish way of chopping up the story and going back and forth the way they did.
I feel like every character in this movie was underutilized and could have been done better or had better character development.
Birds of a Feather Can't Stick Their Landing On This One
Contains spoilers, click to show
Birds of Prey (and the Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn) is a 2020 action super hero film. Distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures, it is a follow-up to Suicide Squad (2016). The movie was directed by Cathy Yan and written by Christina Hodson, and it stars Margot Robbie, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Jurnee Smollett-Bell, Rosie Perez, Chris Messina and Ewan McGregor.
Four years after the defeat of the Enchantress, the Joker throws Harley Quinn out on the Gotham City streets when they break up. The already extremely volatile and unhinged, Harley (Margot Robbie) finds herself all alone with a huge target on her back. Without the Joker in the picture, the city is turned upside down as criminals that have a beef with Harley hunt her down. Gotham's most narcissistic villain, Roman Sionis (Ewan McGregor), and his right-hand man, Victor Zsasz (Chris Messina), have Harley and a precious diamond in their sights. Now Harley, Huntress (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), Black Canary (Jurnee Smollett-Bell) and Detective Renee Montoya's (Rosie Perez) paths collide, and the unlikely foursome have no choice but to team up to take Roman down.
First off let me say that I love Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn. I've always been a big Harley fan since before she was mainstream cool and a big part of that would have to be the Batman Animated Series and how it portrayed her. I liked Margot Robbie's performance in Suicide Squad and thought she did an excellent job of bringing that character to "life". I didn't have high expectations for this movie going in and sometimes that can be a good thing because it leaves you more open to the film being better than you thought it was going to be. Right away I didn't like the whole, Harley narrating the movie in the beginning and kind of throughout the movie. I don't know if they were trying to go for a "funny" Deadpool breaking the "4th" wall type thing but for me it just kind of made the movie less fun. I also have to say that I wasn't a big fan of the pacing and the whole going back and forth through time in the events of the movie. I think it might have been better on paper than how it actually came out in the movie. Kind of Tarantino-ish but just kind of overdone because of the info-dumping narration. There were some awesome fight sequences and there was plenty of over the top violence and action but a lot could have been done better. For me the plot was what felt like it made the movie feel a little lackluster. I really felt like they failed to flesh out Black Canary's character and Huntress felt extremely unpolished as well. A lot of the character's were underutilized except in gratuitous fight scenes and the audience is not shown their motivations a lot of the time but instead told them. I have to say some parts did make me laugh and the music wasn't terrible. The acting was extremely bad sometimes though. I don't know what they were going for with Huntress/Mary Elizabeth Winstead but she comes off as a badass but then really awkward or nerdy and then for a little bit she was a raging psychopath killer. I don't think they knew what direction to take the character and her performance definitely suffered. Black Canary/Jurnee Smollett-Bell was a character that was really cool but without knowing her motivations it really took alot out by never uncovering more about her character until later. A lot of things didn't make sense too. I can't believe that anyone would want to mess with Harley even if she wasn't with Joker. I however could have seen anyone and I mean anyone go after her for a big reward like they placed on the kid. Also a big reward like that on a no name kid who is just a low level pick pocket wouldn't have brought in that much results. Plus the diamond that she has is something you wouldn't want anybody else finding out about so why bring so much attention to it. Harley Quinn and all the other female actors in this movie have "plot armor" and never get hurt even when being blown up or shot at. All-in-all, it was an enjoyable movie but I wouldn't say it was anything special. This was a big-budget superhero film that comes off more run of the mill and fails to bring anything "wow" except some pretty kick ass action sequences and Margot Robbie and her return to Harley Quinn. I give it a 5/10.
Four years after the defeat of the Enchantress, the Joker throws Harley Quinn out on the Gotham City streets when they break up. The already extremely volatile and unhinged, Harley (Margot Robbie) finds herself all alone with a huge target on her back. Without the Joker in the picture, the city is turned upside down as criminals that have a beef with Harley hunt her down. Gotham's most narcissistic villain, Roman Sionis (Ewan McGregor), and his right-hand man, Victor Zsasz (Chris Messina), have Harley and a precious diamond in their sights. Now Harley, Huntress (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), Black Canary (Jurnee Smollett-Bell) and Detective Renee Montoya's (Rosie Perez) paths collide, and the unlikely foursome have no choice but to team up to take Roman down.
First off let me say that I love Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn. I've always been a big Harley fan since before she was mainstream cool and a big part of that would have to be the Batman Animated Series and how it portrayed her. I liked Margot Robbie's performance in Suicide Squad and thought she did an excellent job of bringing that character to "life". I didn't have high expectations for this movie going in and sometimes that can be a good thing because it leaves you more open to the film being better than you thought it was going to be. Right away I didn't like the whole, Harley narrating the movie in the beginning and kind of throughout the movie. I don't know if they were trying to go for a "funny" Deadpool breaking the "4th" wall type thing but for me it just kind of made the movie less fun. I also have to say that I wasn't a big fan of the pacing and the whole going back and forth through time in the events of the movie. I think it might have been better on paper than how it actually came out in the movie. Kind of Tarantino-ish but just kind of overdone because of the info-dumping narration. There were some awesome fight sequences and there was plenty of over the top violence and action but a lot could have been done better. For me the plot was what felt like it made the movie feel a little lackluster. I really felt like they failed to flesh out Black Canary's character and Huntress felt extremely unpolished as well. A lot of the character's were underutilized except in gratuitous fight scenes and the audience is not shown their motivations a lot of the time but instead told them. I have to say some parts did make me laugh and the music wasn't terrible. The acting was extremely bad sometimes though. I don't know what they were going for with Huntress/Mary Elizabeth Winstead but she comes off as a badass but then really awkward or nerdy and then for a little bit she was a raging psychopath killer. I don't think they knew what direction to take the character and her performance definitely suffered. Black Canary/Jurnee Smollett-Bell was a character that was really cool but without knowing her motivations it really took alot out by never uncovering more about her character until later. A lot of things didn't make sense too. I can't believe that anyone would want to mess with Harley even if she wasn't with Joker. I however could have seen anyone and I mean anyone go after her for a big reward like they placed on the kid. Also a big reward like that on a no name kid who is just a low level pick pocket wouldn't have brought in that much results. Plus the diamond that she has is something you wouldn't want anybody else finding out about so why bring so much attention to it. Harley Quinn and all the other female actors in this movie have "plot armor" and never get hurt even when being blown up or shot at. All-in-all, it was an enjoyable movie but I wouldn't say it was anything special. This was a big-budget superhero film that comes off more run of the mill and fails to bring anything "wow" except some pretty kick ass action sequences and Margot Robbie and her return to Harley Quinn. I give it a 5/10.
Accessible (2 more)
Simplified
Incredible insight into how much the modern world has taken from Greek and Roman culture
A lot of pretty complex names to remember (1 more)
Constant footnotes (usually at least one per page) to explain certain aspects, or highlight an interesting fact.
Mythos - The Greek legends retold
Ah, what a great read. Stephen Fry writes exactly how you would expect him to, if you've ever heard him speak. He understands the subject matter, and more importantly, realises how easily a reader will be overwhelmed by the sheer amount of players in these myths and answers that problem without condescension.
The book reads as a quasi-novel, from the birth of the universe to the third and fourth generations of immortals (this includes the creators, the titans, the gods, and mythical creatures/characters, spawns of titans and gods, gods and creatures, gods and men and all sorts.) and their adventures, each following on from the other.
I have always had an interest in the Greek myths and gods, and as I suggested above the really interesting part of these stories, beyond the very human nature of the immortals (jealousy, unreasonableness, duplicity, rage, deceit and pride) which makes for so much more of a believable creation theory, is the myriad ways they have influenced English language (any many others I'm sure). To give an example (I'm showing my own ignorance flagrantly here) a simple thing, the alphabet. It never occurred to me, in my own self centered existence, this simply come from the first and second letters of the Greek alphabet. Alpha and Beta. So simple, so obvious, yet I never made this connection.
The stories themselves are wonderful, and the best thing about them is they all tie in with a creation theory. Something, whatever it is, is learned, or created. Some paradigm is set, some moral conundrum is answered, or something in the world is explained by the end of every story told (the tides, the moon, wine, love, soul, war, sex, the seasons, humanity itself just to name a few). It's such an entertaining read, and I find myself telling anyone who will listen some of the revelations I find in this book page on page on page.
As an end note, don't be overwhelmed by the prospect of reading about these stories, this installment ONLY covers from creation, to the establishment of the twelve Greek gods, and their children. It stops before the even greater amount of legends stemming from human demigods (Hercules, Perseus etc) and these are picked up in Fry's most recent offering, Heroes (which I am yet to read).
If you have any interest in the Greek mythology, or etymology, or even history as a whole, this is absolutely one for you.
- Rob
The book reads as a quasi-novel, from the birth of the universe to the third and fourth generations of immortals (this includes the creators, the titans, the gods, and mythical creatures/characters, spawns of titans and gods, gods and creatures, gods and men and all sorts.) and their adventures, each following on from the other.
I have always had an interest in the Greek myths and gods, and as I suggested above the really interesting part of these stories, beyond the very human nature of the immortals (jealousy, unreasonableness, duplicity, rage, deceit and pride) which makes for so much more of a believable creation theory, is the myriad ways they have influenced English language (any many others I'm sure). To give an example (I'm showing my own ignorance flagrantly here) a simple thing, the alphabet. It never occurred to me, in my own self centered existence, this simply come from the first and second letters of the Greek alphabet. Alpha and Beta. So simple, so obvious, yet I never made this connection.
The stories themselves are wonderful, and the best thing about them is they all tie in with a creation theory. Something, whatever it is, is learned, or created. Some paradigm is set, some moral conundrum is answered, or something in the world is explained by the end of every story told (the tides, the moon, wine, love, soul, war, sex, the seasons, humanity itself just to name a few). It's such an entertaining read, and I find myself telling anyone who will listen some of the revelations I find in this book page on page on page.
As an end note, don't be overwhelmed by the prospect of reading about these stories, this installment ONLY covers from creation, to the establishment of the twelve Greek gods, and their children. It stops before the even greater amount of legends stemming from human demigods (Hercules, Perseus etc) and these are picked up in Fry's most recent offering, Heroes (which I am yet to read).
If you have any interest in the Greek mythology, or etymology, or even history as a whole, this is absolutely one for you.
- Rob
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Birds of Prey (And the Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn) (2020) in Movies
Feb 8, 2020 (Updated Feb 12, 2020)
Birds of Prey is a mixed bag, but there's just about enough good there to make it an enjoyable time.
I absolutely hated Suicide Squad, so naturally, didn't have high hopes for this. The film is aesthetically in the same vein, and carries a similar tone, but this time around, it mostly works.
One of the only things I liked in SS was Margot Robbie, so making her front and centre here is a smart move. She is undeniably the star, and even a cynical bastard like me has to admit, that she is a solid embodiment of Harley Quinn
The surrounding cast are unfortunately, under developed and have little impact. It's great to see characters like Black Canary, Huntress and Zsasz finally bought to the big screen, and Mary Elizabeth Winstead and Jurnee Smollett-Bell so a good job with what they're given, but the plots focus on Harley, and the films relatively brief runtime, leave little room for development past a flashback here and there, which is a shame.
The only character that comes close to matching the leading lady is Ewan McGregor's Roman Sionis aka Black Mask. McGregor obviously relishes in making Sionis seedy, nasty, misogynistic, and flamboyant, and results in one of those villains that you can't wait to get stomped down. The two of them carry the film, no doubt.
The pacing and narrative structure is comparable to Deadpool, with a good chunk of the film being told through various flashbacks. It honestly feels messy for much of the first half, and the truth is, this structure is hiding a fairly thread bare plot.
When the movie catches up with itself, if you will, and moves forward with a more traditional story path, is where there movie started to shine a bit more. The mid section lost me a little bit, with the exception of the odd set piece (the scene in the police station looks incredible), but when Birds of Prey hits it's third act, it's a lot of dumb, beautifully shot fun. The whole final sequence is great, and instead of the overloaded CGI orgies that I've come to expect from the DCEU, we get given fantastically choreographed, practical fight scenes, full of colour, swearing, a surprisingly hard hitting violence.
I left the cinema talking about all the bits that I liked, a stark contrast to the vitriol I felt after seeing Suicide Squad. It's not perfect, it's messy, it's a little cheesy, and is maybe guilty of thinking it's better than it is, but all in all, I can't find too much to complain about.
Also, that car chase scene was ridiculous (in a good way 👍)
I absolutely hated Suicide Squad, so naturally, didn't have high hopes for this. The film is aesthetically in the same vein, and carries a similar tone, but this time around, it mostly works.
One of the only things I liked in SS was Margot Robbie, so making her front and centre here is a smart move. She is undeniably the star, and even a cynical bastard like me has to admit, that she is a solid embodiment of Harley Quinn
The surrounding cast are unfortunately, under developed and have little impact. It's great to see characters like Black Canary, Huntress and Zsasz finally bought to the big screen, and Mary Elizabeth Winstead and Jurnee Smollett-Bell so a good job with what they're given, but the plots focus on Harley, and the films relatively brief runtime, leave little room for development past a flashback here and there, which is a shame.
The only character that comes close to matching the leading lady is Ewan McGregor's Roman Sionis aka Black Mask. McGregor obviously relishes in making Sionis seedy, nasty, misogynistic, and flamboyant, and results in one of those villains that you can't wait to get stomped down. The two of them carry the film, no doubt.
The pacing and narrative structure is comparable to Deadpool, with a good chunk of the film being told through various flashbacks. It honestly feels messy for much of the first half, and the truth is, this structure is hiding a fairly thread bare plot.
When the movie catches up with itself, if you will, and moves forward with a more traditional story path, is where there movie started to shine a bit more. The mid section lost me a little bit, with the exception of the odd set piece (the scene in the police station looks incredible), but when Birds of Prey hits it's third act, it's a lot of dumb, beautifully shot fun. The whole final sequence is great, and instead of the overloaded CGI orgies that I've come to expect from the DCEU, we get given fantastically choreographed, practical fight scenes, full of colour, swearing, a surprisingly hard hitting violence.
I left the cinema talking about all the bits that I liked, a stark contrast to the vitriol I felt after seeing Suicide Squad. It's not perfect, it's messy, it's a little cheesy, and is maybe guilty of thinking it's better than it is, but all in all, I can't find too much to complain about.
Also, that car chase scene was ridiculous (in a good way 👍)
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
A Fairly Tale In Hollywood But Lacks Finesse And Excitement
Once Upon A Time In Hollywood is a 2019 dramedy (drama/comedy) movie written and directed by Quentin Tarantino and producers David Heyman and Shannon Mcintosh. It was produced by Columbia Pictures, Bona Film Group, Heyday Films, and Visiona Romantica and distributed by Sony Pictures Releasing. The movie stars Leonardo DiCaprio, Brad, Margot Robbie, Emile Hirsch and Al Pacino.
In 1969 Los Angeles, actor Rick Dalton (Leonardo DiCaprio) and his best friend and stunt double Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt) navigate their way through an ever changing industry they hardly recognize anymore. Rick laments to Cliff that his career is over, having been the star of Bounty Law a 1950s Western television series and having trouble landing acting jobs as the lead in films. Dalton dreams of befriending actress Sharon Tate (Margot Robbie) and her husband, director Roman Polanski (Rafal Zawierucha), who are now his neighbors, in order to resurrect his career. Booth, who lives in a trailer with his pitbull, Brandy, relies on Dalton for work because of rumors he killed his wife, and drives Dalton around town and does other odd jobs for him.
This movie was definitely not what I expected from Quentin Tarantino. It was very slow building, and honestly boring in a lot of ways. I kept waiting for something to happen, but half way through the movie, still nothing really did. The acting however was outstanding. Leonardo DiCaprio was excellent as Rick Dalton and Brad Pitt was a charmer, I think this movie was awesome in its portrayal of Hollywood from that time and was almost like a fairy tale about Hollywood in a way. The ending of the movie really didn't fit with the rest of the film and was controversial, but to me it didn't fit because it hyper violent like most of Tarantino's other films. To me the ending kind of saved the movie but I see how to others it didn't go with it. I usually really like Tarantino's films but I didn't particularly like this one altogether. It kind of was a collection of good scenes and acting but didn't deliver on an actual story that was good or compelling enough for me personally. But then again I didn't like Inglorious Bastards that much, and thought The Hateful 8 could have been better too. But I loved Django Unchained, and the Kill Bill films and pretty much all his other films. So I would give this movie a 6/10, it's above average in a lot of ways but just fell through for me equally in a lot of ways that can't justify a higher rating from me. Maybe it was overrated or over-hyped, or maybe I just had too high of expectations.
In 1969 Los Angeles, actor Rick Dalton (Leonardo DiCaprio) and his best friend and stunt double Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt) navigate their way through an ever changing industry they hardly recognize anymore. Rick laments to Cliff that his career is over, having been the star of Bounty Law a 1950s Western television series and having trouble landing acting jobs as the lead in films. Dalton dreams of befriending actress Sharon Tate (Margot Robbie) and her husband, director Roman Polanski (Rafal Zawierucha), who are now his neighbors, in order to resurrect his career. Booth, who lives in a trailer with his pitbull, Brandy, relies on Dalton for work because of rumors he killed his wife, and drives Dalton around town and does other odd jobs for him.
This movie was definitely not what I expected from Quentin Tarantino. It was very slow building, and honestly boring in a lot of ways. I kept waiting for something to happen, but half way through the movie, still nothing really did. The acting however was outstanding. Leonardo DiCaprio was excellent as Rick Dalton and Brad Pitt was a charmer, I think this movie was awesome in its portrayal of Hollywood from that time and was almost like a fairy tale about Hollywood in a way. The ending of the movie really didn't fit with the rest of the film and was controversial, but to me it didn't fit because it hyper violent like most of Tarantino's other films. To me the ending kind of saved the movie but I see how to others it didn't go with it. I usually really like Tarantino's films but I didn't particularly like this one altogether. It kind of was a collection of good scenes and acting but didn't deliver on an actual story that was good or compelling enough for me personally. But then again I didn't like Inglorious Bastards that much, and thought The Hateful 8 could have been better too. But I loved Django Unchained, and the Kill Bill films and pretty much all his other films. So I would give this movie a 6/10, it's above average in a lot of ways but just fell through for me equally in a lot of ways that can't justify a higher rating from me. Maybe it was overrated or over-hyped, or maybe I just had too high of expectations.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Rosemary's Baby (1968) in Movies
Jan 13, 2019
Good...Not Great
Rosemary’s Baby takes you down a rabbit hole and you have no idea what’s waiting for you at the other end. It drove me mad at times as I tried to figure out just what exactly was going on. The story follows a couple and the strange happenings that ensure when they move into a new apartment complex.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 8
I’m watching this movie as I write this as I typically try and do when I write reviews. The beginning is intriguing because it’s chocked full of foreshadowing. Hints are dropped here and there and you recognize almost instantly that something is off. Great job here of being subtle without being overbearing.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
The film succeeds with a visual jarring aspect where you never really gain your footing. You spend most of the film trying to figure out up from down and that’s in large part due to the fact that nothing really seems out of sorts…except for a few things here and there. Director Roman Polanski is like a cat owner with a laser pointer directing your attention in the right place for a bit then redirecting. Everything is under the surface waiting to boil over.
Conflict: 8
As the film progresses and Rosemary (Mia Farrow) descends into madness, you are hoping she can unravel the mystery of what exactly is happening. The conflict comes in the tension of the movements, the things moving under the surface that you know are there. Every new occurrence brings you closer to the truth and makes things more tense.
Genre: 4
This was probably a solid pass for the 1960’s, but it’s honestly pretty tame for today’s standards. I might catch some heat for not respecting the time period it was filmed in, but if we are identifying this as a horror film, then it pales in comparison to some of the horror that has kept me up at night. Also, when I compare it to a film like The Birds from the same period, it comes up short for me.
Memorability: 5
Pace: 7
Things move quickly enough, especially after the famous “dream sequence” that occurs. The pace is driven by the mystery of all the craziness unfolding. You are looking for answers along with Rosemary. A handful of scenes could have been shortened, but things never really drag on for the most part.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 4
Probably my biggest issue with the film. I won’t ruin it, but after everything that transpired, I was looking for a bit more hope for Rosemary. A few tweaks here and there may have altered my opinion of the entire film as a whole.
Overall: 74
Great cinematic storytelling isn’t quite enough to elevate Rosemary’s Baby to a classic in my opinion. Intriguing but not earth-shattering. Worth a one-time watch.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 8
I’m watching this movie as I write this as I typically try and do when I write reviews. The beginning is intriguing because it’s chocked full of foreshadowing. Hints are dropped here and there and you recognize almost instantly that something is off. Great job here of being subtle without being overbearing.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
The film succeeds with a visual jarring aspect where you never really gain your footing. You spend most of the film trying to figure out up from down and that’s in large part due to the fact that nothing really seems out of sorts…except for a few things here and there. Director Roman Polanski is like a cat owner with a laser pointer directing your attention in the right place for a bit then redirecting. Everything is under the surface waiting to boil over.
Conflict: 8
As the film progresses and Rosemary (Mia Farrow) descends into madness, you are hoping she can unravel the mystery of what exactly is happening. The conflict comes in the tension of the movements, the things moving under the surface that you know are there. Every new occurrence brings you closer to the truth and makes things more tense.
Genre: 4
This was probably a solid pass for the 1960’s, but it’s honestly pretty tame for today’s standards. I might catch some heat for not respecting the time period it was filmed in, but if we are identifying this as a horror film, then it pales in comparison to some of the horror that has kept me up at night. Also, when I compare it to a film like The Birds from the same period, it comes up short for me.
Memorability: 5
Pace: 7
Things move quickly enough, especially after the famous “dream sequence” that occurs. The pace is driven by the mystery of all the craziness unfolding. You are looking for answers along with Rosemary. A handful of scenes could have been shortened, but things never really drag on for the most part.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 4
Probably my biggest issue with the film. I won’t ruin it, but after everything that transpired, I was looking for a bit more hope for Rosemary. A few tweaks here and there may have altered my opinion of the entire film as a whole.
Overall: 74
Great cinematic storytelling isn’t quite enough to elevate Rosemary’s Baby to a classic in my opinion. Intriguing but not earth-shattering. Worth a one-time watch.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Ben-Hur (2016) in Movies
Jul 15, 2019
Published in 1880, Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ is considered one of the most influential Christian books of the nineteenth century. The success of the novel led to film adaptations, most notably the 1955 academy award winning version of the film string Charlton Heston. Fast forward to 2016 and MGM and Paramount Pictures hope to see continue the success of this proven story with their newest film adaptation Ben-Hur.
The story follows a fictional Jewish Prince, Juda Ben-Hur (Jack Huston) as he is betrayed by his adopted brother and roman officer Messala (Toby Kebbell). Juda’s family is falsely accused of treason and Juda becomes enslaved by the Romans. Fueled by hate, Juda returns to Jerusalem seeking vengeance, until he unexpectedly finds compassion, forgiveness and redemption.
Walking into Ben-Hur, I did not know what to expect. I watched the 1955 version of Ben-Hur in 7th grade and did not remember anything accept the amazing chariot scene. That being said, this 2016 version of Ben-Hur stands on its own as a good film. Set in the time of Jesus, the story of Ben-Hur can be universally understood by people in all walks of life, religious or otherwise. That was something that I really appreciated about this film. Often stories set in a Christian setting can turn out to be distractingly preachy. However, Ben-Hur was the perfect blend of religion being hinted at throughout the story but never actually becoming the focal point of the story as a whole until redemption is found. Sure, it is there throughout for those who want it to be, but it also plays as a quiet catalyst for Juda through the compassion he sees in his wife Esther (Nazanin Boniadi) and Jesus (Rodrigo Santoro).
The film is acted well and the use of relatively unknown actors to play these major roles in an epic like this only works to strengthen the story as a whole. In fact, the most popular actor by far is Morgan Freeman (Ilderim) who has maybe 15-20 minutes of total screen time.
From a technical standpoint, Ben-Hur works not only visually with fantastic epic action scenes, but also in its pacing. The film’s pacing finds balance between intense action moments and the quieter exposition scenes that helps develop these characters, most notably Juda. We witness Juda’s transformation from naive prince, to a slave fighting for survival, to a man on a mission for revenge and the forgiveness he gains along the way.
Ben-Hur stands out to me this summer because at its core, it is a good coherent story told between impressive action pieces. Unlike so many recent summer blockbusters that are intent on showing off huge set pieces and not much more, Ben-Hur doesn’t forget that those action scenes are there to further the plot and tell a human story.
The story follows a fictional Jewish Prince, Juda Ben-Hur (Jack Huston) as he is betrayed by his adopted brother and roman officer Messala (Toby Kebbell). Juda’s family is falsely accused of treason and Juda becomes enslaved by the Romans. Fueled by hate, Juda returns to Jerusalem seeking vengeance, until he unexpectedly finds compassion, forgiveness and redemption.
Walking into Ben-Hur, I did not know what to expect. I watched the 1955 version of Ben-Hur in 7th grade and did not remember anything accept the amazing chariot scene. That being said, this 2016 version of Ben-Hur stands on its own as a good film. Set in the time of Jesus, the story of Ben-Hur can be universally understood by people in all walks of life, religious or otherwise. That was something that I really appreciated about this film. Often stories set in a Christian setting can turn out to be distractingly preachy. However, Ben-Hur was the perfect blend of religion being hinted at throughout the story but never actually becoming the focal point of the story as a whole until redemption is found. Sure, it is there throughout for those who want it to be, but it also plays as a quiet catalyst for Juda through the compassion he sees in his wife Esther (Nazanin Boniadi) and Jesus (Rodrigo Santoro).
The film is acted well and the use of relatively unknown actors to play these major roles in an epic like this only works to strengthen the story as a whole. In fact, the most popular actor by far is Morgan Freeman (Ilderim) who has maybe 15-20 minutes of total screen time.
From a technical standpoint, Ben-Hur works not only visually with fantastic epic action scenes, but also in its pacing. The film’s pacing finds balance between intense action moments and the quieter exposition scenes that helps develop these characters, most notably Juda. We witness Juda’s transformation from naive prince, to a slave fighting for survival, to a man on a mission for revenge and the forgiveness he gains along the way.
Ben-Hur stands out to me this summer because at its core, it is a good coherent story told between impressive action pieces. Unlike so many recent summer blockbusters that are intent on showing off huge set pieces and not much more, Ben-Hur doesn’t forget that those action scenes are there to further the plot and tell a human story.