Search
Search results
BookInspector (124 KP) rated Beast (Six Stories, #4) in Books
Sep 24, 2020
I find it hard to determine, who was the protagonist of this story. Scott King is interviewing people, who knew Youtube Vlogger Elizabeth or her killers, and trying to find out why and who locked Elizabeth in the Vampire Tower, where she was found dead. The characters in this novel are absolutely brilliant. They are diverse, complex, incredibly absorbing and mysterious. I really liked the way Scott King was choosing the people he interviewed, it showed different opinions and views, that kept me immensely intrigued.
The narrative was told from multiple sources, I should say. We are able to read what Elizabeth was saying to her followers, while she is doing an online challenge, as well as to read what Scott King uncovers during his interviews. I loved everything about this narrative, the way vampires were incorporated, giving this book a dark and ghostly feeling, the kind of Q&A writing style, and all the twists and discoveries that unravel as we read along. The topics discussed in this book were very dark, troublesome but at the same time very modern and realistic. Such as need of validation, the power of manipulation, abuse and bullying, social exclusion, social degradation and many, many more.
I really loved the setting of this book as well. It is set in Ergarth, a miserable town, that feels forgotten by the world, where unemployment and homelessness thrive, where the trouble is always next to you, and it is haunted by the Vampire Tower. LOVED IT! The whole book is divided into six chapters, and they are quite long, but the story absorbed me so much, that the pages just flew by. (And that comes from a person who despises long chapters
The narrative was told from multiple sources, I should say. We are able to read what Elizabeth was saying to her followers, while she is doing an online challenge, as well as to read what Scott King uncovers during his interviews. I loved everything about this narrative, the way vampires were incorporated, giving this book a dark and ghostly feeling, the kind of Q&A writing style, and all the twists and discoveries that unravel as we read along. The topics discussed in this book were very dark, troublesome but at the same time very modern and realistic. Such as need of validation, the power of manipulation, abuse and bullying, social exclusion, social degradation and many, many more.
I really loved the setting of this book as well. It is set in Ergarth, a miserable town, that feels forgotten by the world, where unemployment and homelessness thrive, where the trouble is always next to you, and it is haunted by the Vampire Tower. LOVED IT! The whole book is divided into six chapters, and they are quite long, but the story absorbed me so much, that the pages just flew by. (And that comes from a person who despises long chapters
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Dark Blue (2003) in Movies
Feb 25, 2021
Intimidation and Corruption
Dark Blue- is a good crime thriller.
The plot: Set in the Los Angeles Police Department in 1992, "Dark Blue" is a thriller that takes place just days before the acquittal of four white officers in the beating of black motorist Rodney King and the subsequent L.A. riots. In this racially charged climate, the LAPD's elite Special Investigations Squad is assigned a quadruple homicide. As they work the case, detective Eldon (Kurt Russell), tutors SIS rookie Bobby (Scott Speedman) in the realities of police intimidation and corruption.
I would highly recordmed watching it.
The plot: Set in the Los Angeles Police Department in 1992, "Dark Blue" is a thriller that takes place just days before the acquittal of four white officers in the beating of black motorist Rodney King and the subsequent L.A. riots. In this racially charged climate, the LAPD's elite Special Investigations Squad is assigned a quadruple homicide. As they work the case, detective Eldon (Kurt Russell), tutors SIS rookie Bobby (Scott Speedman) in the realities of police intimidation and corruption.
I would highly recordmed watching it.
BookInspector (124 KP) rated Deity in Books
Jul 1, 2021
The host of this book is Scott King, an online journalist that loves raking up old graves. 😀 He chooses a case and interviews six people, that tell the reader different perspectives of the same case. This time he investigates a very controversial celebrity, that died in the fire and was accused of many things, such as abuse against young girls. I love Scott King’s style, he does not judge, he shares the stories, allowing the reader to decide what they want to believe in. All the characters are pretty unexpected and very intriguing, I just love to see the story unravelling.
The narrative of this book is extremely addictive. Every perspective brings something different and new to the overall view of the case, that is why I simply could not put down this book. There are plenty of twists and turns and the whole story is shrouded in mystery and ghosts. For me, the story had some similarities to real celebrities and some of the allegations I have read in the past. The whole story sounds so realistic, that I actually wanted to google Zach Crystal in case he was real. 😀 The topics discussed in this book are child abuse, mental illness, wish to control, mystical creatures, fanaticism, religion, the life of rich and famous, family relations, and many more.
I loved the atmosphere of this novel, it is creepy and very intriguing. The writing style is impeccable as always. The chapters are pretty long, but they are so absorbing, that the pages just fly by. The ending of this novel was phenomenal, but I still have unanswered questions about the whole story… Even though this book is fifth in the series, it can easily be read as a stand-alone. I can not wait for the next book, because this case was a really sensitive one, and I am very excited to see what Scott King will investigate next.
So, to conclude, this book has brilliant characters and a plot that always kept me guessing. I think this book was amazing, and I would recommend it to anyone. I hope you will like it as well. 🙂
The narrative of this book is extremely addictive. Every perspective brings something different and new to the overall view of the case, that is why I simply could not put down this book. There are plenty of twists and turns and the whole story is shrouded in mystery and ghosts. For me, the story had some similarities to real celebrities and some of the allegations I have read in the past. The whole story sounds so realistic, that I actually wanted to google Zach Crystal in case he was real. 😀 The topics discussed in this book are child abuse, mental illness, wish to control, mystical creatures, fanaticism, religion, the life of rich and famous, family relations, and many more.
I loved the atmosphere of this novel, it is creepy and very intriguing. The writing style is impeccable as always. The chapters are pretty long, but they are so absorbing, that the pages just fly by. The ending of this novel was phenomenal, but I still have unanswered questions about the whole story… Even though this book is fifth in the series, it can easily be read as a stand-alone. I can not wait for the next book, because this case was a really sensitive one, and I am very excited to see what Scott King will investigate next.
So, to conclude, this book has brilliant characters and a plot that always kept me guessing. I think this book was amazing, and I would recommend it to anyone. I hope you will like it as well. 🙂
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated FIRESTARTER (2022) in Movies
May 21, 2022
Commits the Biggest Film Crime - It's Boring
Sometimes, I watch a movie, so you don’t have to.
I watched the remake of the Stephen King novel FIRESTARTER, so you don’t have to.
The current “leader in the clubhouse” for the worst film of 2022, FIRESTARTER is based on the very good Stephen King novel that was published in 1980 and was made into a pretty cheesy, pretty ‘80s flick in 1984 that made Drew Barrymore (fresh off her work in ET) a bonafide movie star.
No such luck in this one.
Produced by Blum House, Directed by Keith Thomas (THE VIGIL) and adapted from King’s novel by Scott Teems (HALLOWEEN KILLS), this version of FIRESTARTER was dead on arrival, with a weak script, mediocre directing and less than stellar visual effects, consequently making a film that is the worst sort of film…boring. It doesn’t even have the ambition to be “so bad, it’s good”, it is just plodding and mediocre throughout.
But, at 1 hour 34 minutes, it is mercifully short, so it does have that going for it.
What it also has going for it is a “game” Zach Efron as “Firestarter’s Father” and he elevates the scenes he is in to something that comes close to watchable. And when Sydney Lemmon is along as “Firestarter’s Mom” the screen comes the closest to interesting. But the rest…”meh”.
Ryan Kiera Armstrong plays “Firestarter”, Charlie McGee - the young lady who can start fires with her telepathic powers - and she is “just fine”, but she does not have the star power or “it” factor that Barrymore brought to the proceedings previously. She is just not a compelling enough presence on screen to save this turkey. I don’t blame her, I blame the weak Direction by Thomas and the limp script by Teems.
The only other character/performance that sparks some interest in this film is Michael Grayeyes (TOGO) who plays a Native American tracker with his own telekinetic powers who is put on the trail of Charlie by the mysterious Institute (a shadowy Gov’t agency that chases after various “special” people - mostly kids - in quite a few Stephen King novels). Inexplicably, this role was played by an aging, pony-tailed George C. Scott (obviously chasing a paycheck) in the 1984 film. Grayeyes succeeds more.
But these glimmers of competence only aggravates more when the film bogs back down in cardboard villains (what has happened to your career, Gloria Ruben) and exposition spouting scientists (what a waste of Kurtwood Smith) and less than spectacular action sequences that, mostly, consist of Armstrong screaming while a wind machine blows her hair back while sub-par CGI flames engulf the screen.
And…adding insult to injury…the "guy in the asbestos suit” (a mainstay of any film involving fire) does not even get a day of stunt pay! It’s like going to see a Tom Cruise Mission Impossible film and Cruise doesn’t do some sort of crazy stunt!
After the success of IT, PART ONE in 2017, there was a renaissance, of sorts, of adaptations of Stephen King works and even though PET SEMATARY (2019) was pretty decent and IT, CHAPTER TWO and DOCTOR SLEEP (2019) were okay, THE DARK TOWER, the TV remake of THE STAND, LISEY’S STORY and now FIRESTARTER were all terrible, so maybe we’ve seen the end of this phase of King adaptations (I doubt it, but one can hope).
Save yourself and hour and a half of your life and skip this Firestarter. Instead, revisit the 1984 version - it plays like an Oscar-winner compared to this turkey. Or, better yet, read the original Stephen King work - it is the best of all of these.
Letter Grade: C- (and I’m being generous)
3 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis).
I watched the remake of the Stephen King novel FIRESTARTER, so you don’t have to.
The current “leader in the clubhouse” for the worst film of 2022, FIRESTARTER is based on the very good Stephen King novel that was published in 1980 and was made into a pretty cheesy, pretty ‘80s flick in 1984 that made Drew Barrymore (fresh off her work in ET) a bonafide movie star.
No such luck in this one.
Produced by Blum House, Directed by Keith Thomas (THE VIGIL) and adapted from King’s novel by Scott Teems (HALLOWEEN KILLS), this version of FIRESTARTER was dead on arrival, with a weak script, mediocre directing and less than stellar visual effects, consequently making a film that is the worst sort of film…boring. It doesn’t even have the ambition to be “so bad, it’s good”, it is just plodding and mediocre throughout.
But, at 1 hour 34 minutes, it is mercifully short, so it does have that going for it.
What it also has going for it is a “game” Zach Efron as “Firestarter’s Father” and he elevates the scenes he is in to something that comes close to watchable. And when Sydney Lemmon is along as “Firestarter’s Mom” the screen comes the closest to interesting. But the rest…”meh”.
Ryan Kiera Armstrong plays “Firestarter”, Charlie McGee - the young lady who can start fires with her telepathic powers - and she is “just fine”, but she does not have the star power or “it” factor that Barrymore brought to the proceedings previously. She is just not a compelling enough presence on screen to save this turkey. I don’t blame her, I blame the weak Direction by Thomas and the limp script by Teems.
The only other character/performance that sparks some interest in this film is Michael Grayeyes (TOGO) who plays a Native American tracker with his own telekinetic powers who is put on the trail of Charlie by the mysterious Institute (a shadowy Gov’t agency that chases after various “special” people - mostly kids - in quite a few Stephen King novels). Inexplicably, this role was played by an aging, pony-tailed George C. Scott (obviously chasing a paycheck) in the 1984 film. Grayeyes succeeds more.
But these glimmers of competence only aggravates more when the film bogs back down in cardboard villains (what has happened to your career, Gloria Ruben) and exposition spouting scientists (what a waste of Kurtwood Smith) and less than spectacular action sequences that, mostly, consist of Armstrong screaming while a wind machine blows her hair back while sub-par CGI flames engulf the screen.
And…adding insult to injury…the "guy in the asbestos suit” (a mainstay of any film involving fire) does not even get a day of stunt pay! It’s like going to see a Tom Cruise Mission Impossible film and Cruise doesn’t do some sort of crazy stunt!
After the success of IT, PART ONE in 2017, there was a renaissance, of sorts, of adaptations of Stephen King works and even though PET SEMATARY (2019) was pretty decent and IT, CHAPTER TWO and DOCTOR SLEEP (2019) were okay, THE DARK TOWER, the TV remake of THE STAND, LISEY’S STORY and now FIRESTARTER were all terrible, so maybe we’ve seen the end of this phase of King adaptations (I doubt it, but one can hope).
Save yourself and hour and a half of your life and skip this Firestarter. Instead, revisit the 1984 version - it plays like an Oscar-winner compared to this turkey. Or, better yet, read the original Stephen King work - it is the best of all of these.
Letter Grade: C- (and I’m being generous)
3 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis).
Dean (6926 KP) rated Aladdin (2019) in Movies
May 22, 2019 (Updated May 22, 2019)
Very entertaining family film
Well I have to say I was a bit surprised when I saw Guy Ritchie come up as the director at the start, especially after the King Arthur film. Gladly none of his usual editing techniques are on show here. I can only just remember the cartoon version when I was younger. The humour of the genie voiced by Robin Williams made the film for me.
So a tough act to follow. The film is visually dazzling, in the costumes, sets, CGI and SFX in general. It all looks very realistic. I'm not a big fan of the songs, some are better than others. Overall it's a bit unfair to compare it to the original. It's a fun and light hearted film that goes by at a good pace and doesn't feel like a long film. Naomi Scott does look like a Disney princess. Maybe not as funny as the original but it's still a film all ages should enjoy.
So a tough act to follow. The film is visually dazzling, in the costumes, sets, CGI and SFX in general. It all looks very realistic. I'm not a big fan of the songs, some are better than others. Overall it's a bit unfair to compare it to the original. It's a fun and light hearted film that goes by at a good pace and doesn't feel like a long film. Naomi Scott does look like a Disney princess. Maybe not as funny as the original but it's still a film all ages should enjoy.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated The King of Staten Island (2020) in Movies
Jan 25, 2021
Incredible
An amateur tattoo artist is forced to grow up when his mom (who he is living with) falls in love with a new boo.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 7
The very first few moments sees main character Scott Carlin (Pete Davidson) driving on the highway with his eyes closed, seemingly trying to off himself. It’s a powerful scene followed quickly by Scott and his friends tripping out with the typical hilarious banter you find in a Judd Apatow movie. While both great scenes, you still don’t get a full sense of where the story is going after the first ten minutes hence the score.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
Shot in a memorable style that brings out the best and worst of Staten Island at the same time. Director Apatow has a knack for capturing extremely impactful moments, especially the awkward ones. Every scene, no matter how short makes the most of its time and tells its own story. It’s such a hard thing to do yet Apatow finds a way to do it repeatedly.
Conflict: 10
It’s funny, I can’t look at Scott’s character without thinking about my 16-year-old son. He’s kind of drifting about in the same aimless way and, like Scott, doesn’t seem to understand how his now actions will affect his later. The beauty of having a character like this is the ability to be able to drive external conflict through Scott’s internal growth. He is struggling for selfish reasons. He wants his mom to be happy, but not at his expense. The dynamic of conflict is perfect.
Entertainment Value: 9
Memorability: 10
Pace: 8
The story flows along pretty smoothly, although I wasn’t happy with the 147-minute runtime. That’s a bit extensive for a comedy in my opinion. Again, I was impressed about how time was maximized for the most part, but there were a few spots where I felt things could have been trimmed.
Plot: 7
The movie does cheat to meet its end, but I was ultimately ok with it because the rest of the story was pretty incredible. The cheat is a blip on an otherwise quality story that really enhances the growth of the characters. Every scene really does come together well to tell a great story.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 90
From jump, The King of Staten Island hits you in the mouth and keeps you entertained. I enjoyed this movie for multiple reasons, but mostly because it checks all the boxes. Even the things it falls short on is just slightly missing the mark. Highly recommended.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 7
The very first few moments sees main character Scott Carlin (Pete Davidson) driving on the highway with his eyes closed, seemingly trying to off himself. It’s a powerful scene followed quickly by Scott and his friends tripping out with the typical hilarious banter you find in a Judd Apatow movie. While both great scenes, you still don’t get a full sense of where the story is going after the first ten minutes hence the score.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
Shot in a memorable style that brings out the best and worst of Staten Island at the same time. Director Apatow has a knack for capturing extremely impactful moments, especially the awkward ones. Every scene, no matter how short makes the most of its time and tells its own story. It’s such a hard thing to do yet Apatow finds a way to do it repeatedly.
Conflict: 10
It’s funny, I can’t look at Scott’s character without thinking about my 16-year-old son. He’s kind of drifting about in the same aimless way and, like Scott, doesn’t seem to understand how his now actions will affect his later. The beauty of having a character like this is the ability to be able to drive external conflict through Scott’s internal growth. He is struggling for selfish reasons. He wants his mom to be happy, but not at his expense. The dynamic of conflict is perfect.
Entertainment Value: 9
Memorability: 10
Pace: 8
The story flows along pretty smoothly, although I wasn’t happy with the 147-minute runtime. That’s a bit extensive for a comedy in my opinion. Again, I was impressed about how time was maximized for the most part, but there were a few spots where I felt things could have been trimmed.
Plot: 7
The movie does cheat to meet its end, but I was ultimately ok with it because the rest of the story was pretty incredible. The cheat is a blip on an otherwise quality story that really enhances the growth of the characters. Every scene really does come together well to tell a great story.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 90
From jump, The King of Staten Island hits you in the mouth and keeps you entertained. I enjoyed this movie for multiple reasons, but mostly because it checks all the boxes. Even the things it falls short on is just slightly missing the mark. Highly recommended.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Aladdin (2019) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Don't let us down Guy Ritchie
Along with Beauty & The Beast and The Lion King, Aladdin is one of Disney’s most-loved animated films. With Disney’s penchant for remaking their classic cartoons over the last few years, it was always going to be the case that Aladdin was going to be on the cards.
Director Bill Condon’s Beauty & The Beast was an enchanting ride that just fell short of living up to its predecessor and The Jungle Book director Jon Favreau has been tasked with bringing The Lion King back to life in live-action. We’ll find out how he gets on in July.
After Dumbo’s less than stellar performance with both critics and audiences in March, dark clouds were circling around the House of Mouse’s live-action arm. Hoping to inject a shot of hope to this ambitious release schedule was Guy Ritchie’s remake of Aladdin. Things didn’t look good from the marketing with poor CGI and seemingly wooden acting, so what does the finished film end up like?
Young Aladdin (Mena Massoud) embarks on a magical adventure after finding a lamp that releases a wisecracking genie (Will Smith). In his efforts to impress the wonderful Princess Jasmine (Naomi Scott), Aladdin embarks on a battle between good and evil against the wicked Jafar (Marwan Kenzari).
To look at, this live-action remake is absolutely packed full of colour and excitement, helped in part by Guy Ritchie’s frenetic filming style. Like Tim Burton before him, I was concerned about Ritchie’s appointment as director of this universally adored film, but unlike Burton, Ritchie gets it absolutely spot on. There are some absolutely stunning shot choices dotted throughout and the action is filmed with typical aplomb by a film-maker who has proven himself to be adept in this area.
The music, with original songs and updates of old classics is superb. Will Smith’s take on Friend Like Me is lip-smackingly good and will have you wanting to dance around the aisles, while A Whole New World really takes flight in this new, CGI-enhanced environment. Brand-new song, Speechless, written by Benj Pasek and Justin Paul and sang by Naomi Scott is Let It Go levels of awesome with Scott singing it exquisitely.
Will Smith’s take on Friend Like Me is lip-smackingly good
The special effects are on the whole very good and not as jarring as those in Dumbo. It’s unfortunate then that there are instances in which the green-screen is all too obvious and the CGI all too artificial. This is a shame, as the rest of the picture is extraordinarily well-filmed and feels, for want of a better word, incredibly opulent, dripping in gold hues. Again, Disney tests the limits of CGI and these limits are becoming more and more obvious as film-makers pursue more extravagant sequences.
Elsewhere, the cast is both a highlight and a hindrance. Mena Massoud plays the titular character with a cocky charm that makes this Aladdin very likeable indeed, while Naomi Scott is so much better than the trailers made her look. The film however belongs to Will Smith. He’s a brave man taking on a role that has become synonymous with Robin Williams but he brings depth, charisma and some of that old-fashioned Will Smith charm to the role – it’s the best we’ve seen him in years, even if he is doused in blue CGI for the majority of the film’s runtime.
Unfortunately, this modern reimagining hasn’t got everything right. Marwan Kenzari is severely miscast as Jafar. Bringing absolutely no menace to the role whatsoever, he proves to be a disappointing antagonist and the film’s only major black mark. The clunky CGI can be forgiven but this unfortunate characterisation can’t. Jafar is one of Disney’s best villains and for him to fall flat here is unacceptable.
Nevertheless, poor marketing aside, Aladdin is an absolute blast from start to finish. Well-paced, nicely acted (for the most part) and packed full of stunning music, this live-action remake has proven that Dumbo may have just been a disappointing sidestep in Disney’s ambitious live-action schedule.
That’s two out of the three. Don’t let us down Jon Favreau!
https://moviemetropolis.net/2019/05/22/aladdin-review-dont-let-us-down-guy-ritchie/
Director Bill Condon’s Beauty & The Beast was an enchanting ride that just fell short of living up to its predecessor and The Jungle Book director Jon Favreau has been tasked with bringing The Lion King back to life in live-action. We’ll find out how he gets on in July.
After Dumbo’s less than stellar performance with both critics and audiences in March, dark clouds were circling around the House of Mouse’s live-action arm. Hoping to inject a shot of hope to this ambitious release schedule was Guy Ritchie’s remake of Aladdin. Things didn’t look good from the marketing with poor CGI and seemingly wooden acting, so what does the finished film end up like?
Young Aladdin (Mena Massoud) embarks on a magical adventure after finding a lamp that releases a wisecracking genie (Will Smith). In his efforts to impress the wonderful Princess Jasmine (Naomi Scott), Aladdin embarks on a battle between good and evil against the wicked Jafar (Marwan Kenzari).
To look at, this live-action remake is absolutely packed full of colour and excitement, helped in part by Guy Ritchie’s frenetic filming style. Like Tim Burton before him, I was concerned about Ritchie’s appointment as director of this universally adored film, but unlike Burton, Ritchie gets it absolutely spot on. There are some absolutely stunning shot choices dotted throughout and the action is filmed with typical aplomb by a film-maker who has proven himself to be adept in this area.
The music, with original songs and updates of old classics is superb. Will Smith’s take on Friend Like Me is lip-smackingly good and will have you wanting to dance around the aisles, while A Whole New World really takes flight in this new, CGI-enhanced environment. Brand-new song, Speechless, written by Benj Pasek and Justin Paul and sang by Naomi Scott is Let It Go levels of awesome with Scott singing it exquisitely.
Will Smith’s take on Friend Like Me is lip-smackingly good
The special effects are on the whole very good and not as jarring as those in Dumbo. It’s unfortunate then that there are instances in which the green-screen is all too obvious and the CGI all too artificial. This is a shame, as the rest of the picture is extraordinarily well-filmed and feels, for want of a better word, incredibly opulent, dripping in gold hues. Again, Disney tests the limits of CGI and these limits are becoming more and more obvious as film-makers pursue more extravagant sequences.
Elsewhere, the cast is both a highlight and a hindrance. Mena Massoud plays the titular character with a cocky charm that makes this Aladdin very likeable indeed, while Naomi Scott is so much better than the trailers made her look. The film however belongs to Will Smith. He’s a brave man taking on a role that has become synonymous with Robin Williams but he brings depth, charisma and some of that old-fashioned Will Smith charm to the role – it’s the best we’ve seen him in years, even if he is doused in blue CGI for the majority of the film’s runtime.
Unfortunately, this modern reimagining hasn’t got everything right. Marwan Kenzari is severely miscast as Jafar. Bringing absolutely no menace to the role whatsoever, he proves to be a disappointing antagonist and the film’s only major black mark. The clunky CGI can be forgiven but this unfortunate characterisation can’t. Jafar is one of Disney’s best villains and for him to fall flat here is unacceptable.
Nevertheless, poor marketing aside, Aladdin is an absolute blast from start to finish. Well-paced, nicely acted (for the most part) and packed full of stunning music, this live-action remake has proven that Dumbo may have just been a disappointing sidestep in Disney’s ambitious live-action schedule.
That’s two out of the three. Don’t let us down Jon Favreau!
https://moviemetropolis.net/2019/05/22/aladdin-review-dont-let-us-down-guy-ritchie/
Joe Goodhart (27 KP) rated Batman: Detective Comics, Volume 7: Batmen Eternal in Books
Nov 30, 2020
Well, boys and girls (and all non-gender folks as well), I have made to the last entry in James Tynion IV's run on DETECTIVE COMICS! Wowwowwoweeewow! What an amazing run it was!!
Following the beginnings of "Rebirth", I was excited, as it was doing away with much of the New52 stuff that was just crap, helping to restructure the DCU. Unfortunately, my initial excitement was partially crushed by Tom King, as he left me, for want of a better word, <i><b>hating</i></b> the Dark Knight!
That was the general feeling until I read Scott Snyder's BATMAN run (OMG! The Court of Owls is such a cool concept! I could totally see Faction Paradox involving themselves with the Court!) and then Tynion's run on DETECTIVE! Both writers have helped me to remember why I always liked the character of Batman, and what goes into making him cool and interesting!
This final volume, BATMAN ETERNAL, brings all of the plotlines together: the stuff with Tim Drake, angst-y Steph Brown/Spoiler (who, actually, was less angst-y, so that was great) and all her issues, Batman "vs." Batwoman, the Belfry, Cassandra Cain/Orphan and her role in the world going forward, as well as what became of [Spoiler!]. The answers given were well-thought out and fitting to the whole arc overall. Everything Tynion presented made sense, and really helped to restore Batman to being a great character, with depth and emotion. Definitely a better Batman than in the Tom King-helmed BATMAN book!
All the artists, even Eddy Barrows (who, normally, I kinda like, but the last two volumes he felt off), were top notch! Perfectly suited to the mood, environment running through this final Tynion 'TEC arc! So, let me just give a hearty applause for all their effort to Javier Fernandez, Eddy Barrows, Alvaro Martinez, Philippe Briones, Scot Eaton, Raul Fernandez, Eber Ferreira, and Wayne Faucher! Brilliant work, lads, absolutely brilliant!
Yes, I recommend this book, but more than that, I recommend you read all seven of the volumes of DETECTIVE COMICS! Some of the best, most Batman-like Batman stuff you will read!
Following the beginnings of "Rebirth", I was excited, as it was doing away with much of the New52 stuff that was just crap, helping to restructure the DCU. Unfortunately, my initial excitement was partially crushed by Tom King, as he left me, for want of a better word, <i><b>hating</i></b> the Dark Knight!
That was the general feeling until I read Scott Snyder's BATMAN run (OMG! The Court of Owls is such a cool concept! I could totally see Faction Paradox involving themselves with the Court!) and then Tynion's run on DETECTIVE! Both writers have helped me to remember why I always liked the character of Batman, and what goes into making him cool and interesting!
This final volume, BATMAN ETERNAL, brings all of the plotlines together: the stuff with Tim Drake, angst-y Steph Brown/Spoiler (who, actually, was less angst-y, so that was great) and all her issues, Batman "vs." Batwoman, the Belfry, Cassandra Cain/Orphan and her role in the world going forward, as well as what became of [Spoiler!]. The answers given were well-thought out and fitting to the whole arc overall. Everything Tynion presented made sense, and really helped to restore Batman to being a great character, with depth and emotion. Definitely a better Batman than in the Tom King-helmed BATMAN book!
All the artists, even Eddy Barrows (who, normally, I kinda like, but the last two volumes he felt off), were top notch! Perfectly suited to the mood, environment running through this final Tynion 'TEC arc! So, let me just give a hearty applause for all their effort to Javier Fernandez, Eddy Barrows, Alvaro Martinez, Philippe Briones, Scot Eaton, Raul Fernandez, Eber Ferreira, and Wayne Faucher! Brilliant work, lads, absolutely brilliant!
Yes, I recommend this book, but more than that, I recommend you read all seven of the volumes of DETECTIVE COMICS! Some of the best, most Batman-like Batman stuff you will read!
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Darkest Hour (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
As the Nazi’s sweep through Europe at the beginning of World War II the British face the difficult issue of replacing their Prime Minister. The people and members of Parliament have become disenchanted with Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain (Ronald Pickup). They feel his lack of action lead to the rise of Hitler and the Nazis. He agrees to step down and has to name a replacement. While he would prefer to have his protégé, Foreign Secretary Viscount Halifax (Stephen Dillane), there is only one member of his party that all of Parliament will accept, Winston Churchill (Gary Oldman). King George VI (Ben Mendelsohn) is also opposed to the brash and opinionated Churchill. Bowing to the will of the opposition Churchill the King agrees to appoint him the next Prime Minister. Although he is thrilled at finally achieving his lifelong dream he has no delusions that he is facing extremely difficult times ahead. The Nazis are tearing through Europe. They have already taken Belgium and Holland they now are invading France. The Nazis have also managed to surround nearly the entire British ground force on the French beaches with no way home. Not only does he have to worry about foreign foes but also his numerous political enemies in his own party. Many oppose his brash and unpredictable nature, while others think of him as heavy drinker that is no more than an exceptional orator with little capacity to make hard decisions. He must overcome all of this to protect the English people and prepare them for the tough days ahead.
Winston Churchill is a very well know historically figure. He was known for his powerful speeches and bigger than life personality. This film takes a look at the early days of him being Prime Minister, during some of the most volatile days in the history of Europe. Not only does the story delve into the politics and struggles of Churchill to put forth his agenda in a hostile climate but also shows him at his most vulnerable. One example is after delivering his first radio address to the nation he walks home alone and to talk with and be reassured by his wife, Clementine Churchill (Kristin Scott Thomas), that his speech was good and people could hear him.
Gary Oldman is spectacular in his role as Chruchill. From the iconic speeches to the light moments with his family and personal secretary, Elizabeth Layton (Lily James), he puts forth a great performance. The supporting cast is great as well, highlighted by Mendelsohn, Scott Thomas and James. The flow of the film really worked, under direction of Joe Wright (Atonement, The Soloist, and Pan). The two hour and five minute run time felt shorter and the movie really moved along. There were some points that they showed some battle scenes, after all it is a World War II era film, which did feel like afterthoughts and didn’t really add anything to the movie. The tension of the moment was well done even without these scenes. Besides those scenes the movie was shot well and added to the overall feel of the movie.
This film will appeal to those who are fans of history, the World War II era specifically, and historical figures. It also is powerful and heartfelt. Really the performances of the cast are what really stuck with me and will be the reason that I watch it again.
Winston Churchill is a very well know historically figure. He was known for his powerful speeches and bigger than life personality. This film takes a look at the early days of him being Prime Minister, during some of the most volatile days in the history of Europe. Not only does the story delve into the politics and struggles of Churchill to put forth his agenda in a hostile climate but also shows him at his most vulnerable. One example is after delivering his first radio address to the nation he walks home alone and to talk with and be reassured by his wife, Clementine Churchill (Kristin Scott Thomas), that his speech was good and people could hear him.
Gary Oldman is spectacular in his role as Chruchill. From the iconic speeches to the light moments with his family and personal secretary, Elizabeth Layton (Lily James), he puts forth a great performance. The supporting cast is great as well, highlighted by Mendelsohn, Scott Thomas and James. The flow of the film really worked, under direction of Joe Wright (Atonement, The Soloist, and Pan). The two hour and five minute run time felt shorter and the movie really moved along. There were some points that they showed some battle scenes, after all it is a World War II era film, which did feel like afterthoughts and didn’t really add anything to the movie. The tension of the moment was well done even without these scenes. Besides those scenes the movie was shot well and added to the overall feel of the movie.
This film will appeal to those who are fans of history, the World War II era specifically, and historical figures. It also is powerful and heartfelt. Really the performances of the cast are what really stuck with me and will be the reason that I watch it again.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Ant-Man and The Wasp: Quantumania (2023) in Movies
Feb 16, 2023
Life for Scott Lang (Paul Rudd) is good. He is basking in the recognition
and fame that has come with his work with the Avengers and saving half the
universe from Thanos and has even become a best-selling author.
He has a successful relationship with Hope (Evangeline Lilly) who has
taken her father’s company to new heights and they have managed to blend
their personal and professional lives and enjoy a very happy life.
Scott does worry about his daughter Cassie (Kathryn Newton) as he lost
several years with her during the Blip and she is an activist who has been
arrested for her efforts including a hysterical prank on the police with
Pym technology.
Cassie is constantly on her father for not doing more as she feels that he
is more focused on the past battles with the Avengers and not the day to
day struggles people are facing. Over dinner, she tells Hope and her dad as
well as Hank (Michael Douglas), and Janet (Michelle Pfeiffer), whom she
studied Hank’s journals while they were in the Blip and has developed a
Quantum beacon which can map the Quantum Realm without having to venture
to the sub-atomic relay where until recently nobody had been able to
return from.
This news sends Janet into a panic during a demonstration and the four are
soon sucked into the realm and discover a diverse and thriving ecosystem
as well as an abundance of strange and dangerous creatures.
Janet is clearly hiding something and is frantic that they must leave but
their party has been scattered and they soon learn that she fears and
individual known as Kang (Jonathan Majors).
While she was trapped in the realm for thirty years, Janet encountered
King and helped him regain his power source but in doing so, learned he
was a banished conquerer who can manipulate time, space, and the
multiverse.
Her actions to trap Kang and lead a resistance to the vast empire he
created has set the stage as Janet has now returned to see what has
developed and Kang will stop at nothing to regain his power source to
escape and wreck his wrath on trillions.
Naturally, it is up to Scott, Hope, and the team to find a way to fight the
evil and powerful Kang to save the day.
The film is a darker tale than people might expect from an Ant-man movie
but in kicking off Phase 5 of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, the movie is
a visual splendor filled with amazing visuals, landscapes, and characters.
The film takes a bit of time to get to the action but when it arrives it
delivers and the performance of Majors as Kang is captivating it will
be interesting to see where the storyline evolves over the next series of
films leading up to “The Avengers: The Kang Dynasty” and beyond.
“Ant-man and the Wasp: Quantumania may not break loads of new ground in
terms of a Marvel film but Director Peyton Reed knows the characters well
and delivers a story that should resonate with the fans and the strong
cast and addition of Majors along with the great visuals make this
another winner for Marvel.
4 stars out of 5
and fame that has come with his work with the Avengers and saving half the
universe from Thanos and has even become a best-selling author.
He has a successful relationship with Hope (Evangeline Lilly) who has
taken her father’s company to new heights and they have managed to blend
their personal and professional lives and enjoy a very happy life.
Scott does worry about his daughter Cassie (Kathryn Newton) as he lost
several years with her during the Blip and she is an activist who has been
arrested for her efforts including a hysterical prank on the police with
Pym technology.
Cassie is constantly on her father for not doing more as she feels that he
is more focused on the past battles with the Avengers and not the day to
day struggles people are facing. Over dinner, she tells Hope and her dad as
well as Hank (Michael Douglas), and Janet (Michelle Pfeiffer), whom she
studied Hank’s journals while they were in the Blip and has developed a
Quantum beacon which can map the Quantum Realm without having to venture
to the sub-atomic relay where until recently nobody had been able to
return from.
This news sends Janet into a panic during a demonstration and the four are
soon sucked into the realm and discover a diverse and thriving ecosystem
as well as an abundance of strange and dangerous creatures.
Janet is clearly hiding something and is frantic that they must leave but
their party has been scattered and they soon learn that she fears and
individual known as Kang (Jonathan Majors).
While she was trapped in the realm for thirty years, Janet encountered
King and helped him regain his power source but in doing so, learned he
was a banished conquerer who can manipulate time, space, and the
multiverse.
Her actions to trap Kang and lead a resistance to the vast empire he
created has set the stage as Janet has now returned to see what has
developed and Kang will stop at nothing to regain his power source to
escape and wreck his wrath on trillions.
Naturally, it is up to Scott, Hope, and the team to find a way to fight the
evil and powerful Kang to save the day.
The film is a darker tale than people might expect from an Ant-man movie
but in kicking off Phase 5 of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, the movie is
a visual splendor filled with amazing visuals, landscapes, and characters.
The film takes a bit of time to get to the action but when it arrives it
delivers and the performance of Majors as Kang is captivating it will
be interesting to see where the storyline evolves over the next series of
films leading up to “The Avengers: The Kang Dynasty” and beyond.
“Ant-man and the Wasp: Quantumania may not break loads of new ground in
terms of a Marvel film but Director Peyton Reed knows the characters well
and delivers a story that should resonate with the fans and the strong
cast and addition of Majors along with the great visuals make this
another winner for Marvel.
4 stars out of 5