Search
Search results
stephen (6 KP) rated Vindolanda in Books
Jul 24, 2017
Eilidh G Clark (177 KP) rated Sunsett Song in Books
May 14, 2017
there are better things than your books or studies or loving or bedding, there’s the countryside your own […] in the days when you’re neither bairn nor woman.’ I
Sunset Song by Lewis Grassic Gibbon, published in 1932 became the ‘cream of the crop’ in a poll organised by The Scottish Book Trust last year. Not only was it voted as Scotland’s favourite novel, First Minister Nicola Sturgeon described it as ‘timeless’ in an interview with the BBC, ‘ it said something about the history of the country I grew up in and it resonated with me very strongly as a young Scottish woman.’ I have to say that I am in agreement with the First Minister. Sunset Song is a beautifully written aesthetic novel that follows the life and internal conflict of the protagonist Chris Guthrie. By presenting Chris as a kind of cultural double, Gibbon is showing the reader the problems that result in Chris’s separation from the community and her parents conflicting interests regarding her upbringing. Chris’ father, hoping to enhance his daughter’s natural intelligence, is aware of the negative impact that the community might have on her progression, ‘Stick to your lessons and let’s see you make a name for yourself, you’ve no time for friends.’ John Guthrie, a progressive man, regards Chris’s peers as ‘servant queans.’ Whilst this may read as a cultural attack on the lower classes, John Guthrie, is simply reacting to his own working class conditions as a farmer. His motivation is to raise Chris out of the environment that he himself has struggled in and to give her better opportunities. Chris refers to her intelligent self as ‘English’ and identifies a cultural otherness between herself and those of her community. Chris’ mother Jean, on the other hand, has a view of the world that is from a much older time. Before marriage she was a free spirit, ‘there are better things than your books or studies or loving or bedding, there’s the countryside your own […] in the days when you’re neither bairn nor woman.’ It was Gibbon’s intention to create a heteroglossic view of education between Chris’ parents in order to create a protagonist whose future is a conflict between progression and an older unstructured way of life. It is through Chris’s thoughts, however, that her true self can be found. Her English self forms an escape, a place that is simpler, refined and an improvement on how she perceives Scottish culture as a result of her class, ‘the furrows went criss and cross, you wanted this and you wanted that, books and the fineness of them no more than empty gabble sometimes, and then sharn and the snapping that sickened you and drove you back to books.’ It is clear that Gibbon wanted to show the reader that Scottish culture does evaporate with progression. Culture lives in all of us, in the people, the land and in the struggles that we have faced and will face in the future. Chris Guthrie is the perfect example of hope, for a future which is rich in learning while still embracing her Scottish roots, I guess a future we can all identify with.
Kelly (279 KP) rated Outlaw King (2018) in Movies
Dec 16, 2018
Clear passion to retell the story (1 more)
Excellent battle scene
Watchable
After seeing an advert for the Outlaw King, I was excited to watch the movie. Despite this I found that the film missed my expectations, and I found that it became almost boring in places.
The writers of the outlaw king had a clear passion to retell the story of Robert Bruce and his fight to regain the Scottish crown from the English in the early Plantagenet period. To the best of my knowledge, the story was told as accurately as possible, however this did mean that there were a lot of scenes centred around the politics of Roberts plight. The slower scenes were unbalanced with the battle scenes which meant that the pace of the story dipped many times during the film - I have to confess it took me three attempts to watch it in full as a result of this.
As the writers tried to cram too much into such a short film, I found that the movie had a bit of an identity crisis - was this an action, romance or political film? Had the writers focused on just one area, I believe the movie would have been a lot more watchable, instead the movie felt overloaded.
The acting in general was okay, and reasonably well cast, except for the relationship between Robert Bruce and his wife. I struggled to believe the romance between the two actors. Although this is ultimately my opinion, I struggled to believe that what was ultimately an arranged marriage between the two, could rest in the two characters falling for each other as quickly as the film portrayed.
In general, the film is watchable, although it is not one I would go to as a first choice. There are some good parts of the film, for example the relationship between Robert and his men, and the final battle scene. The film also teaches us about part of Scottish history that tends to be overlooked by many schools during history lessons.
The writers of the outlaw king had a clear passion to retell the story of Robert Bruce and his fight to regain the Scottish crown from the English in the early Plantagenet period. To the best of my knowledge, the story was told as accurately as possible, however this did mean that there were a lot of scenes centred around the politics of Roberts plight. The slower scenes were unbalanced with the battle scenes which meant that the pace of the story dipped many times during the film - I have to confess it took me three attempts to watch it in full as a result of this.
As the writers tried to cram too much into such a short film, I found that the movie had a bit of an identity crisis - was this an action, romance or political film? Had the writers focused on just one area, I believe the movie would have been a lot more watchable, instead the movie felt overloaded.
The acting in general was okay, and reasonably well cast, except for the relationship between Robert Bruce and his wife. I struggled to believe the romance between the two actors. Although this is ultimately my opinion, I struggled to believe that what was ultimately an arranged marriage between the two, could rest in the two characters falling for each other as quickly as the film portrayed.
In general, the film is watchable, although it is not one I would go to as a first choice. There are some good parts of the film, for example the relationship between Robert and his men, and the final battle scene. The film also teaches us about part of Scottish history that tends to be overlooked by many schools during history lessons.
James Morrison (7 KP) rated The Isle (2018) in Movies
May 12, 2019
Should have left it on the isle
So i went to see this one at everyman cinema stratford upon avon where they also had a Q+A session with the two directors, alex and the woman who plays the part or the murdered victim was all their.
Now for me and the wife we feel that the film dragged on to long to the point I was falling asleep as it became that boring, i would say that if you liked the VVITCH then you may like this one but if not then its one to avoid as its the same kinda film.
As for fizz and ginger themself well lets just say they had a question possed at them during the Q+A "why did the people leave the island? Was it bacause of the highland clearances, fammine or the weather conditions?" Trying to get themself out of it they said "it was a combination of every thing" well at the end of the Q+A with me and the wife being scottish we had to give them a history lesson, the highland clearances happened in the 1600s after the battle of culloden, now if you know scotland this is the top end of the country and their "island" is not far from glasgow the bottom end of Scotland, added to this the clue highland clearances the island is in the lowlands, and adding even further after the battle of culloden the english pushed north slaughtering anyone wearing a kilt and banded the bagpipes and bonny prince charlie escaped the the closed island before going to france which was the isle of sky where people still live they would have seen that this does not match up.
On top of this the people left the island in the late 1800s, the highland clearances was 1600 so they were 200 years out of date the reason we know this is because the wifes great grand mother lived on the island.
For a film was written over a 2 year period and made on a small budget and film with in 4 weeks with trained actors this film would have been better being dumped in the loch never to be seen by the public but i guess we all need to start some where even if we open our gobs to make ourself look intelligent rather than be honest with the public and say we really dont know why they left
Now for me and the wife we feel that the film dragged on to long to the point I was falling asleep as it became that boring, i would say that if you liked the VVITCH then you may like this one but if not then its one to avoid as its the same kinda film.
As for fizz and ginger themself well lets just say they had a question possed at them during the Q+A "why did the people leave the island? Was it bacause of the highland clearances, fammine or the weather conditions?" Trying to get themself out of it they said "it was a combination of every thing" well at the end of the Q+A with me and the wife being scottish we had to give them a history lesson, the highland clearances happened in the 1600s after the battle of culloden, now if you know scotland this is the top end of the country and their "island" is not far from glasgow the bottom end of Scotland, added to this the clue highland clearances the island is in the lowlands, and adding even further after the battle of culloden the english pushed north slaughtering anyone wearing a kilt and banded the bagpipes and bonny prince charlie escaped the the closed island before going to france which was the isle of sky where people still live they would have seen that this does not match up.
On top of this the people left the island in the late 1800s, the highland clearances was 1600 so they were 200 years out of date the reason we know this is because the wifes great grand mother lived on the island.
For a film was written over a 2 year period and made on a small budget and film with in 4 weeks with trained actors this film would have been better being dumped in the loch never to be seen by the public but i guess we all need to start some where even if we open our gobs to make ourself look intelligent rather than be honest with the public and say we really dont know why they left
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Dolittle (2020) in Movies
Feb 23, 2020
A complete mess, but kids will probably love it.
With the words of Mark Kermode's review ringing in my ears ("It's shockingly poor... and that's the same in any language") I was bracing myself when I went to see this latest incarnation of Hugh Lofting's famous animal-chatting character. And I have to agree that it is a shocking mess of a film, given $175 million was poured into this thing. But, and I say this cautiously without first-hand empirical evidence, I *think* this is a movie that kids in the 6 to 10 age range might fall in love with.
Doctor Doolittle (Robert Downey Jnr) - famed animal doctor, with the unique ability to communicate with any animal - is now holed up in his animal sanctuary, a recluse. His beloved wife - adventurer Lily - was lost at sea (in a cartoon sequence that could have just used the same clip from "Frozen"). He's lost the will to practice; and almost lost the will to live.
Impinging on his morose life come two humans: Tommy Stubbings (Harry Collett), a reluctant hunter with a wounded squirrel, and Lady Rose (Carmel Laniado), daughter of the Queen of England. (We'll quietly ignore the coincidence that, after what looks like several years of mourning, these two independently pitch up at Chez Doolittle within ten minutes of each other!).
For the Queen (the omnipresent Jessie Buckley) is dying, and noone (other than us viewers, let in on the deal) suspect foul play might be at work in the form of Lord Thomas Badgley (the ever-reliable Jim Broadbent) and the Queen's old leech-loving doctor Blair Müdfly (a moustache-twiddling Michael Sheen).
Doolittle must engage in a perilous journey to find the only cure that will save both the Queen and his animal sanctuary - the fruit of the tree on a missing island that his long lost love was searching for.
Let's start with the most obvious point first up. Robert Downey Jnr's Welsh accent is quite the most terrible, most preposterous, most unintelligible, most offensive (to the Welsh) attempt at an accent in a mainstream film in movie history. And that's really saying something when you have Laurence Olivier's Jewish father from "The Jazz Singer" and Russell Crowe's English cum Irish cum Scottish cum Yugoslavian "Robin Hood" in the list. Why? Just why? Was it to distance this version from Rex Harrison's? (Since most younger movie goers will be going "Rex who?" at this point, this seems unlikely). It's a wholly curious decision.
It turns RDj's presence in the movie from being an asset to a liability.
The movie has had a tortuous history. Filmed in 2018 at enormous expense, the film completely bombed at test screenings so they brought in more script writers to make it funnier and did extensive additional filming.
I actually disagree with the general view that the film is unfunny. For there are a few points in the movie where I laughed out loud. A fly's miraculous, if temporary, escape was one such moment. The duck laying an egg in fright, another.
However, these seem to stand out starkly in isolation as 'the funny bits they inserted'. Much of the rest of the movie's comedy falls painfully flat.
In terms of the acting, there are the obvious visual talents on show of Michael Sheen (doing a great English accent for a Welshman.... #irony), Jim Broadbent, Jessie Buckley, Joanna Page (blink and you'll miss her) and Antonio Banderas, as the swashbuckling pirate king cum father-in-law.
But the end titles are an amazing array of "Ah!" moments as the vocal performances are revealed: Emma Thompson as the parrot; Rami Malek as the gorilla; John Cena as the polar bear; Kumail Nanjiani at the ostrich; Octavia Spencer at the duck; Tom Holland as the dog; Selena Gomez as the giraffe; Marion Cotillade as the fox, Frances de la Tour as a flatulent dragon and Ralph Fiennes as an evil tiger with mummy issues. It's a gift for future contestants on "Pointless"!
There are a lot of poe-faced critics throwing brick-bats at this movie, and to a degree it's deserved. They lavished $175 million on it, and it looked like it was going to be a thumping loss. (However, against all the odds, at the time of writing it has grossed north of $184 million. And it only opened yesterday in China. So although not stellar in the world of blockbuster movies it's not going to be a studio-killer like "Heaven's Gate").
And I suspect there's a good reason for that latent salvation. I think kids are loving this movie, driving repeat viewings and unexpected word of mouth. It is certainly a family friendly experience. There are no truly terrifying scenes that will haunt young children. A dragon-induced death, not seen on screen, is - notwithstanding the intro Frozen-esque cartoon sequence - the only obvious one in the movie and is (as above) played for laughs. There are fantastical sets and landscapes. Performing whales. A happy-ending (albeit not the one I was cynically expecting). And an extended dragon-farting scene, and what kids are not going to love that!!
Directed by Stephen Gaghan ("Syriana", but better known as a writer than a director) it's a jumbled messy bear of a movie but is in no way an unpleasant watch. I would take a grandkid along to watch this again. It even has some nuggets of gold hidden within its matted coat.
As this is primarily one for the kids, I'm giving the movie two ratings: 4/10 for adults and 8/10 for kids... the Smashbomb rating is the mean of these.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the review on One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/02/22/doolittle-2019/ . Thanks).
Doctor Doolittle (Robert Downey Jnr) - famed animal doctor, with the unique ability to communicate with any animal - is now holed up in his animal sanctuary, a recluse. His beloved wife - adventurer Lily - was lost at sea (in a cartoon sequence that could have just used the same clip from "Frozen"). He's lost the will to practice; and almost lost the will to live.
Impinging on his morose life come two humans: Tommy Stubbings (Harry Collett), a reluctant hunter with a wounded squirrel, and Lady Rose (Carmel Laniado), daughter of the Queen of England. (We'll quietly ignore the coincidence that, after what looks like several years of mourning, these two independently pitch up at Chez Doolittle within ten minutes of each other!).
For the Queen (the omnipresent Jessie Buckley) is dying, and noone (other than us viewers, let in on the deal) suspect foul play might be at work in the form of Lord Thomas Badgley (the ever-reliable Jim Broadbent) and the Queen's old leech-loving doctor Blair Müdfly (a moustache-twiddling Michael Sheen).
Doolittle must engage in a perilous journey to find the only cure that will save both the Queen and his animal sanctuary - the fruit of the tree on a missing island that his long lost love was searching for.
Let's start with the most obvious point first up. Robert Downey Jnr's Welsh accent is quite the most terrible, most preposterous, most unintelligible, most offensive (to the Welsh) attempt at an accent in a mainstream film in movie history. And that's really saying something when you have Laurence Olivier's Jewish father from "The Jazz Singer" and Russell Crowe's English cum Irish cum Scottish cum Yugoslavian "Robin Hood" in the list. Why? Just why? Was it to distance this version from Rex Harrison's? (Since most younger movie goers will be going "Rex who?" at this point, this seems unlikely). It's a wholly curious decision.
It turns RDj's presence in the movie from being an asset to a liability.
The movie has had a tortuous history. Filmed in 2018 at enormous expense, the film completely bombed at test screenings so they brought in more script writers to make it funnier and did extensive additional filming.
I actually disagree with the general view that the film is unfunny. For there are a few points in the movie where I laughed out loud. A fly's miraculous, if temporary, escape was one such moment. The duck laying an egg in fright, another.
However, these seem to stand out starkly in isolation as 'the funny bits they inserted'. Much of the rest of the movie's comedy falls painfully flat.
In terms of the acting, there are the obvious visual talents on show of Michael Sheen (doing a great English accent for a Welshman.... #irony), Jim Broadbent, Jessie Buckley, Joanna Page (blink and you'll miss her) and Antonio Banderas, as the swashbuckling pirate king cum father-in-law.
But the end titles are an amazing array of "Ah!" moments as the vocal performances are revealed: Emma Thompson as the parrot; Rami Malek as the gorilla; John Cena as the polar bear; Kumail Nanjiani at the ostrich; Octavia Spencer at the duck; Tom Holland as the dog; Selena Gomez as the giraffe; Marion Cotillade as the fox, Frances de la Tour as a flatulent dragon and Ralph Fiennes as an evil tiger with mummy issues. It's a gift for future contestants on "Pointless"!
There are a lot of poe-faced critics throwing brick-bats at this movie, and to a degree it's deserved. They lavished $175 million on it, and it looked like it was going to be a thumping loss. (However, against all the odds, at the time of writing it has grossed north of $184 million. And it only opened yesterday in China. So although not stellar in the world of blockbuster movies it's not going to be a studio-killer like "Heaven's Gate").
And I suspect there's a good reason for that latent salvation. I think kids are loving this movie, driving repeat viewings and unexpected word of mouth. It is certainly a family friendly experience. There are no truly terrifying scenes that will haunt young children. A dragon-induced death, not seen on screen, is - notwithstanding the intro Frozen-esque cartoon sequence - the only obvious one in the movie and is (as above) played for laughs. There are fantastical sets and landscapes. Performing whales. A happy-ending (albeit not the one I was cynically expecting). And an extended dragon-farting scene, and what kids are not going to love that!!
Directed by Stephen Gaghan ("Syriana", but better known as a writer than a director) it's a jumbled messy bear of a movie but is in no way an unpleasant watch. I would take a grandkid along to watch this again. It even has some nuggets of gold hidden within its matted coat.
As this is primarily one for the kids, I'm giving the movie two ratings: 4/10 for adults and 8/10 for kids... the Smashbomb rating is the mean of these.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the review on One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/02/22/doolittle-2019/ . Thanks).
