Search
Search results
Merissa (12351 KP) rated I Never Knew (Riverside Town #4) in Books
Jul 3, 2023
I NEVER KNEW is the fourth book in the Riverside Town series, but I haven't read any of the others, and had no difficulties following this story or the characters involved.
Ryan is an angry young man who hides his feelings behind insults and gruffness. Elijah is the owner of a cafe, taking over when his mum and dad died, putting his own dreams on hold. Together, they are grumpy/sunshine and a delight to read about. I loved the explanations given for Ryan, to help you understand his character - the reasons for his anger and also his lack of enjoyment of sex until he met Elijah. I thought these were done brilliantly, giving details without too much drama.
Elijah has his own issues to deal with, trying to run a cafe that is leaking money with workers who don't show up. He is too nice of a guy and I was glad when he toughened up a bit on them. I don't like it when people are taken advantage of - even in books! I liked him marshmallow soft in the other areas though.
This is a fast-paced story and it works! From beginning to end, their relationship is just how it should be. Why question something when it's so right?! Elijah and Ryan got the ending I was hoping for, and I'm so very happy about that. I am definitely returning to Riverside Town and catching up on some of the others now. Definitely recommended by me.
** same worded review will appear elsewhere **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Jun 29, 2023
Ryan is an angry young man who hides his feelings behind insults and gruffness. Elijah is the owner of a cafe, taking over when his mum and dad died, putting his own dreams on hold. Together, they are grumpy/sunshine and a delight to read about. I loved the explanations given for Ryan, to help you understand his character - the reasons for his anger and also his lack of enjoyment of sex until he met Elijah. I thought these were done brilliantly, giving details without too much drama.
Elijah has his own issues to deal with, trying to run a cafe that is leaking money with workers who don't show up. He is too nice of a guy and I was glad when he toughened up a bit on them. I don't like it when people are taken advantage of - even in books! I liked him marshmallow soft in the other areas though.
This is a fast-paced story and it works! From beginning to end, their relationship is just how it should be. Why question something when it's so right?! Elijah and Ryan got the ending I was hoping for, and I'm so very happy about that. I am definitely returning to Riverside Town and catching up on some of the others now. Definitely recommended by me.
** same worded review will appear elsewhere **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Jun 29, 2023
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated If Beale Street Could Talk (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Love and Rage against the machine.
The baby asked,
‘Is there not one righteous among them?”
― James Baldwin, If Beale Street Could Talk
Beale Street refers to the jumpin’ heart of Memphis where Louis Armstrong was born. As explained in text from Baldwin’s source book (requiring a speed read!) it’s used as a metaphor for the birthplace of every black person in America. (“Every black person in America was born on Beale Street“). But the story is set in Harlem, New York, and with this intellectual stretch, before I even get past the title, I am immediately reaching for the “P-word”, of which more later.
The Plot
Tish (KiKi Layne) is 19 and in love with her lifelong friend ‘Fonny’ (Stephan James). So much in love in fact (and so careless) that Tish is now pregnant with his child. Tish must break this news to both families herself, since Fonny is inside awaiting trial for a vicious rape that he claims he didn’t commit. Tish and their joint families are trying to help, but can Fonny be released in time to see the birth of his child? Or are the institutions so set against him that release is impossible and death row might await?
Interwoven with Love and Anger
At its heart, this film portrays a truly beautiful love story. Tish and Fonny (both adorably played by the young leads) are friends becoming more than friends. We see their emerging love through flashback scenes. Some of these, particularly one on a metro train, are exquisitely done; long gazes into eyes, starting as one thing and ending as another.
In another scene, Fonny takes Tish’s virginity, and it’s done with style, taste and finesse. For younger teens this should be compulsory viewing as an antidote to all the horrible porn they are seeing on the internet: THIS is what sex, based on a foundation of true love, is all about. (The film is UK15 rated for “infrequent very strong language, strong sex” – I actually agree with the rating for the language (and actually I think an act of marital violence should also have also been referenced)…. but not for the sex, which should be 12A).
It’s a love story then? Well, yes, but offset against that, it’s a very angry film, seething with rage about how the police force and the justice system is set ‘against the black man’. Director Barry Jenkins (of – eventual – Oscar winner “Moonlight” fame) has a message to impart and he is intent on imparting it.
A great ensemble performance
The film didn’t get a SAG nomination for the ensemble cast, but it almost feels that they missed out here. As well as the two young leads being spectacular, the whole of the rest of the cast really gel well together, particularly the respective parents: Colman Domingo (“Selma“) as Tish’s father Joseph; Regina King as Tish’s mother Sharon; Michael Beach (“Patriots Day“) as Fonny’s father Frank and Aunjanue Ellis as his bible-bashing mother. A dramatic scene where they all collectively hear the news about the pregnancy is both comical and shocking in equal measure.
Poor sound mixing
If this film gets an Oscar nomination for sound, I’ll frankly be cross! There is significant use of sonorous, bass-heavy music and effects (including a lovely cello theme by Nicholas Britell) – all very effective; there is a lot of earnest and quietly spoken dialogue between the characters – also moody and effective. Unfortunately the two are mixed together in some scenes and frankly I couldn’t make out what was being said. Most frustrating.
In addition, there is voiceover narration from Tish (if you follow my blog regularly you KNOW what I think about that!). Actually, this isn’t as overly intrusive as in films like “The Hate U Give“, but it sounds like it was recorded in a dustbin! It’s a bit like that effect you get with headphones where the plug isn’t quite in the socket, and everything sounds way off and tinny. When combined with Layne’s accent the effect, again, made the dialogue difficult to comprehend.
The c-word and the n-word
There’s a degree of bad language in the film, albeit mild in comparison to “The Favourite“! Tish’s sister (Teyonah Parris) uses the c-word in one very funny dissing of Fonny’s ‘up-themselves’ sisters (Ebony Obsidian and Dominique Thorne). But the n-word is used repeatedly during the film, and that I can never get used to. I ‘get it’ (in the sense that I understand the perception) that this is a word that ‘only black people can use between themselves’. But this just feels elitist and wrong to me. At a time when Viggo Mortensen gets crucified for using it once (while being descriptive and in-context) during a press junket for “Green Book“, I just feel that if a word is taboo it should be taboo, period.
The p-word
My p-word here is “pretentious”. Barry Jenkins clearly feels he has something to prove after the success of “Moonlight“, and there are certainly moments of directorial brilliance in the film. As previously mentioned, the sex scene is one of the best I’ve seen in a long while. Also beautifully done are a birthing scene and two confrontational scenes in Puerto Rico. But there are also moments that seem to be staged, artificial and too ‘arty’ for their own good. Any hidden meaning behind them completely passed me by. (Examples are Sharon’s wig scene and a pan around Fonny’s wood sculpture). It all seems to be “trying too hard”.
Hate for the police is also writ large on the film, with every discriminatory police officer in the whole of the US embodied in the wicked sneering face of the police office Bell (Ed Skrein).
A platform that should be used for more than ranting
This is a film written and directed by an American black man (Jenkins) and largely fully cast with American black people. And I’m a white Englishman commenting on it. I’m clearly unqualified to pass judgement on how black America really feels about things! But comment I will from this fug of ignorance.
It feels to me that the “Black Lives Movement” has given, at long last, black film-makers like Jenkins a platform in cinema to present from. This is a great thing. But I’m sensing that at the moment the tone of the output from that platform (such as this film) seems to me heavily tinged with anger: a scream of frustration about the system and racial injustice over the years. It’s the film-makers right to make films about subjects dear to them. And I’m sure this summer we’ll sadly again see atrocities as previously seen in the likes of Ferguson and Dallas, fuelling the fire of hate. But I would personally really like to see someone like Jenkins use his undoubted talents to make a more uplifting film: a film reflecting the more positive strives that are happening in society, allowing for people of all races and all sexual orientations to make their way in business (not drug-running or crime!) and/or life in general. Those good news stories – the positive side of race relations – are out there and my view is that someone like Barry Jenkins should be telling them.
Final thoughts
I wasn’t as much of a fan of “Moonlight” as the Academy, and this film also left me conflicted. The film is well-made and the cast is very engaging. It also has a love story at its heart that is moody but well-done. Overall though the movie felt over-engineered and a little pretentious, and that knocked it down a few pegs for me.
‘Is there not one righteous among them?”
― James Baldwin, If Beale Street Could Talk
Beale Street refers to the jumpin’ heart of Memphis where Louis Armstrong was born. As explained in text from Baldwin’s source book (requiring a speed read!) it’s used as a metaphor for the birthplace of every black person in America. (“Every black person in America was born on Beale Street“). But the story is set in Harlem, New York, and with this intellectual stretch, before I even get past the title, I am immediately reaching for the “P-word”, of which more later.
The Plot
Tish (KiKi Layne) is 19 and in love with her lifelong friend ‘Fonny’ (Stephan James). So much in love in fact (and so careless) that Tish is now pregnant with his child. Tish must break this news to both families herself, since Fonny is inside awaiting trial for a vicious rape that he claims he didn’t commit. Tish and their joint families are trying to help, but can Fonny be released in time to see the birth of his child? Or are the institutions so set against him that release is impossible and death row might await?
Interwoven with Love and Anger
At its heart, this film portrays a truly beautiful love story. Tish and Fonny (both adorably played by the young leads) are friends becoming more than friends. We see their emerging love through flashback scenes. Some of these, particularly one on a metro train, are exquisitely done; long gazes into eyes, starting as one thing and ending as another.
In another scene, Fonny takes Tish’s virginity, and it’s done with style, taste and finesse. For younger teens this should be compulsory viewing as an antidote to all the horrible porn they are seeing on the internet: THIS is what sex, based on a foundation of true love, is all about. (The film is UK15 rated for “infrequent very strong language, strong sex” – I actually agree with the rating for the language (and actually I think an act of marital violence should also have also been referenced)…. but not for the sex, which should be 12A).
It’s a love story then? Well, yes, but offset against that, it’s a very angry film, seething with rage about how the police force and the justice system is set ‘against the black man’. Director Barry Jenkins (of – eventual – Oscar winner “Moonlight” fame) has a message to impart and he is intent on imparting it.
A great ensemble performance
The film didn’t get a SAG nomination for the ensemble cast, but it almost feels that they missed out here. As well as the two young leads being spectacular, the whole of the rest of the cast really gel well together, particularly the respective parents: Colman Domingo (“Selma“) as Tish’s father Joseph; Regina King as Tish’s mother Sharon; Michael Beach (“Patriots Day“) as Fonny’s father Frank and Aunjanue Ellis as his bible-bashing mother. A dramatic scene where they all collectively hear the news about the pregnancy is both comical and shocking in equal measure.
Poor sound mixing
If this film gets an Oscar nomination for sound, I’ll frankly be cross! There is significant use of sonorous, bass-heavy music and effects (including a lovely cello theme by Nicholas Britell) – all very effective; there is a lot of earnest and quietly spoken dialogue between the characters – also moody and effective. Unfortunately the two are mixed together in some scenes and frankly I couldn’t make out what was being said. Most frustrating.
In addition, there is voiceover narration from Tish (if you follow my blog regularly you KNOW what I think about that!). Actually, this isn’t as overly intrusive as in films like “The Hate U Give“, but it sounds like it was recorded in a dustbin! It’s a bit like that effect you get with headphones where the plug isn’t quite in the socket, and everything sounds way off and tinny. When combined with Layne’s accent the effect, again, made the dialogue difficult to comprehend.
The c-word and the n-word
There’s a degree of bad language in the film, albeit mild in comparison to “The Favourite“! Tish’s sister (Teyonah Parris) uses the c-word in one very funny dissing of Fonny’s ‘up-themselves’ sisters (Ebony Obsidian and Dominique Thorne). But the n-word is used repeatedly during the film, and that I can never get used to. I ‘get it’ (in the sense that I understand the perception) that this is a word that ‘only black people can use between themselves’. But this just feels elitist and wrong to me. At a time when Viggo Mortensen gets crucified for using it once (while being descriptive and in-context) during a press junket for “Green Book“, I just feel that if a word is taboo it should be taboo, period.
The p-word
My p-word here is “pretentious”. Barry Jenkins clearly feels he has something to prove after the success of “Moonlight“, and there are certainly moments of directorial brilliance in the film. As previously mentioned, the sex scene is one of the best I’ve seen in a long while. Also beautifully done are a birthing scene and two confrontational scenes in Puerto Rico. But there are also moments that seem to be staged, artificial and too ‘arty’ for their own good. Any hidden meaning behind them completely passed me by. (Examples are Sharon’s wig scene and a pan around Fonny’s wood sculpture). It all seems to be “trying too hard”.
Hate for the police is also writ large on the film, with every discriminatory police officer in the whole of the US embodied in the wicked sneering face of the police office Bell (Ed Skrein).
A platform that should be used for more than ranting
This is a film written and directed by an American black man (Jenkins) and largely fully cast with American black people. And I’m a white Englishman commenting on it. I’m clearly unqualified to pass judgement on how black America really feels about things! But comment I will from this fug of ignorance.
It feels to me that the “Black Lives Movement” has given, at long last, black film-makers like Jenkins a platform in cinema to present from. This is a great thing. But I’m sensing that at the moment the tone of the output from that platform (such as this film) seems to me heavily tinged with anger: a scream of frustration about the system and racial injustice over the years. It’s the film-makers right to make films about subjects dear to them. And I’m sure this summer we’ll sadly again see atrocities as previously seen in the likes of Ferguson and Dallas, fuelling the fire of hate. But I would personally really like to see someone like Jenkins use his undoubted talents to make a more uplifting film: a film reflecting the more positive strives that are happening in society, allowing for people of all races and all sexual orientations to make their way in business (not drug-running or crime!) and/or life in general. Those good news stories – the positive side of race relations – are out there and my view is that someone like Barry Jenkins should be telling them.
Final thoughts
I wasn’t as much of a fan of “Moonlight” as the Academy, and this film also left me conflicted. The film is well-made and the cast is very engaging. It also has a love story at its heart that is moody but well-done. Overall though the movie felt over-engineered and a little pretentious, and that knocked it down a few pegs for me.
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated Primary Victim in Books
Apr 27, 2018
Primary Victim by Christopher Cihlar
Genre: Crime Fiction, Crime thriller
Rating: 4.5/5
Summary (from back of book): A serial killer whose victims don’t die. An innocent man who believes he is guilty. A police officer who may solve the crime but in doing so gives the killer exactly what he wants. A legal defense that challenges the very core ideals of justice.
Primary Victim is a thriller that tests both the psychological breaking point of an individual and the strength of the legal system governing society.
Review:
I’ll admit up front that I have a weakness for crime fiction—but this book was amazing. Words escape my mind as I try to explain how blown away I am by this book. I gasped and grinned and nearly cried and laughed at the surprises thrown at me through this stunning debut novel.
The psychological aspect of PRIMARY VICTIM was mainly found in the “Victim,” Brice. I won’t say what happens to him, but it amazed me as his mind began to twist and change through the course of the story.
The plot: PRIMARY VICTIM was full of twists and turns that I never expected, and it had me sitting on the edge of my seat the entire time. I couldn’t put it down! The viewpoint alternates between the criminal, the police officer, and the (living) victim, and switches back and forth at the most inconvenient places, forcing you to read on.
Characters: All the characters in PRIMARY VICTIM were strongly developed with real personalities. I hate books where people are just to perfect to be real (what I call “happyland syndrome”)—this book had the good guys and the bad guys, the the ones you hoped it all worked out for them, and the ones that you wished would be the next to die because they were such jerks (cough Nick cough).
By the end of the book I wasn’t sure what Michael (the criminal) was going to pull out of his hat, and was, from the very first page to the very last, impressed with Michael’s genius and creativity. At times I actually found myself almost cheering for him, but had to remind myself that he was the bad guy. It was almost hard to see him as the bad guy at times, because of his “work—” Michael considered himself a God in a world that needed one and didn’t have one, victimizing the people that he thought needed to be victimized.
Brice and Sarah were such a perfect yet sad couple, and for the sake of keeping the review spoiler-free, I won’t say anything… but I thought I was going to cry at one point.
Writing: The writing was the weakest point of this book. The prose itself seemed written in an unfamiliar style, minimizing comas in the sentences, and it made for a harder read. I caught myself occasionally re-reading sentences and paragraphs to understand what had happened. Aside from the prose, the vocabulary was broad enough and the pacing was good.
As of now, PRIMARY VICTIM is unedited, but there is only an occasional grammatical error, formatting error, or typo scattered through the book. However, all in all, it didn’t take away from the story.
Content: There was brief mention of sex between husband and wife (example: “they made love,” no other details, and the fact that they’re married made it that much better), and an occasional foul word from an angry officer, but other than that this book was refreshingly clean. I applaud Christopher for writing a crime thriller with low content—especially compared to some of the other crime thrillers out there. Maybe he can start a revolution. It’s true, people—you can have a good book without excessive sex and language!
Recommendation: Ages 14+ to lovers of Crime fiction, thrillers, and psychological thrillers.
Genre: Crime Fiction, Crime thriller
Rating: 4.5/5
Summary (from back of book): A serial killer whose victims don’t die. An innocent man who believes he is guilty. A police officer who may solve the crime but in doing so gives the killer exactly what he wants. A legal defense that challenges the very core ideals of justice.
Primary Victim is a thriller that tests both the psychological breaking point of an individual and the strength of the legal system governing society.
Review:
I’ll admit up front that I have a weakness for crime fiction—but this book was amazing. Words escape my mind as I try to explain how blown away I am by this book. I gasped and grinned and nearly cried and laughed at the surprises thrown at me through this stunning debut novel.
The psychological aspect of PRIMARY VICTIM was mainly found in the “Victim,” Brice. I won’t say what happens to him, but it amazed me as his mind began to twist and change through the course of the story.
The plot: PRIMARY VICTIM was full of twists and turns that I never expected, and it had me sitting on the edge of my seat the entire time. I couldn’t put it down! The viewpoint alternates between the criminal, the police officer, and the (living) victim, and switches back and forth at the most inconvenient places, forcing you to read on.
Characters: All the characters in PRIMARY VICTIM were strongly developed with real personalities. I hate books where people are just to perfect to be real (what I call “happyland syndrome”)—this book had the good guys and the bad guys, the the ones you hoped it all worked out for them, and the ones that you wished would be the next to die because they were such jerks (cough Nick cough).
By the end of the book I wasn’t sure what Michael (the criminal) was going to pull out of his hat, and was, from the very first page to the very last, impressed with Michael’s genius and creativity. At times I actually found myself almost cheering for him, but had to remind myself that he was the bad guy. It was almost hard to see him as the bad guy at times, because of his “work—” Michael considered himself a God in a world that needed one and didn’t have one, victimizing the people that he thought needed to be victimized.
Brice and Sarah were such a perfect yet sad couple, and for the sake of keeping the review spoiler-free, I won’t say anything… but I thought I was going to cry at one point.
Writing: The writing was the weakest point of this book. The prose itself seemed written in an unfamiliar style, minimizing comas in the sentences, and it made for a harder read. I caught myself occasionally re-reading sentences and paragraphs to understand what had happened. Aside from the prose, the vocabulary was broad enough and the pacing was good.
As of now, PRIMARY VICTIM is unedited, but there is only an occasional grammatical error, formatting error, or typo scattered through the book. However, all in all, it didn’t take away from the story.
Content: There was brief mention of sex between husband and wife (example: “they made love,” no other details, and the fact that they’re married made it that much better), and an occasional foul word from an angry officer, but other than that this book was refreshingly clean. I applaud Christopher for writing a crime thriller with low content—especially compared to some of the other crime thrillers out there. Maybe he can start a revolution. It’s true, people—you can have a good book without excessive sex and language!
Recommendation: Ages 14+ to lovers of Crime fiction, thrillers, and psychological thrillers.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Pants Project in Books
Feb 13, 2018
Liv (Olivia) was born a girl, but knows in his heart that he's a boy. But this realization isn't easy for a kid entering middle school, which can be a heartless place for anyone. What complicates things for Liv is a move to a new school, which brings a stringent dress code: girls must wear skirts. No exceptions. Whatsoever. Liv knows in his heart that he's a boy, but the school system (and kids at school) don't see it that way. Liv is already dealing with enough, but now he feels uncomfortable everyday in his school clothes. It also doesn't help that his best friend is dropping him for a group of mean-spirited bullies who bully Liv on a daily basis. But Liv perseveres and comes up with an idea: Operation Pants Project. Liv is going to get this uniform dress code overturned, no matter what.
This is an excellent YA novel that draws you in immediately. I found the storyline to be interesting from the very beginning, and it never wavered. Liv is a wonderful, amazing, resilient young man, and I loved him from the moment I met him. Liv's story is heartbreaking at times, but also very poignant. I see this tale as a must-read for transgender kids, but also all middle school kids, as it offers a wonderful chance to teach empathy. But, seriously, just having this story, and the way Liv expresses his thoughts on being transgender is so key. Yes, a lot of the story is probably a tad simplified, but still. It's just so refreshing to see this in book form.
Liv also has same-sex parents (two mothers) for which he is teased at school, which breaks my heart (being part of a same-sex marriage and having two young daughters). So much of the story hurts your heart at times and makes you just despair how much young kids have to go through at school. Liv meets a new friend in middle school, Jacob, and in reading this book, I just hope that the world continues to be filled with more Liv and Jacobs: it will make it a better place for sure. (I also enjoyed that Clarke seemed to insert an inside joke about how awful and cliche lesbian films can be!)
Overall, I loved this book, and I wish it was on the shelves of every middle school (and high school) -heck all libraries and bookstores-- everywhere! Huge portions of it make you smile, and you will find yourself just rooting for plucky, wonderful Liv and his spirit. There's a great sappy message in this book that I wish everyone could read in these troubled times. Liv has a wonderful sense of humor, and Clarke's writing is perfect for the targeted age group. I do think a great deal is this book is probably a little simplified (not all parents may be as supportive of Liv, for instance), but the bullying aspects at school are spot-on. Just seeing a transgender "tween" in print is great. I would like to see a list of support resources at the end of the book (and I just read an ARC, so it's not the final version) for those who do not have the same support system as Liv. Yes, this book goes a long way toward showing acceptance, but it's not as easy for everyone. I certainly hope it inspires kids to treat everyone equally: it's an important message. I definitely recommend this wonderful novel for kids and adults alike.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you!); it is available everywhere as of 03/01/2017.
This is an excellent YA novel that draws you in immediately. I found the storyline to be interesting from the very beginning, and it never wavered. Liv is a wonderful, amazing, resilient young man, and I loved him from the moment I met him. Liv's story is heartbreaking at times, but also very poignant. I see this tale as a must-read for transgender kids, but also all middle school kids, as it offers a wonderful chance to teach empathy. But, seriously, just having this story, and the way Liv expresses his thoughts on being transgender is so key. Yes, a lot of the story is probably a tad simplified, but still. It's just so refreshing to see this in book form.
Liv also has same-sex parents (two mothers) for which he is teased at school, which breaks my heart (being part of a same-sex marriage and having two young daughters). So much of the story hurts your heart at times and makes you just despair how much young kids have to go through at school. Liv meets a new friend in middle school, Jacob, and in reading this book, I just hope that the world continues to be filled with more Liv and Jacobs: it will make it a better place for sure. (I also enjoyed that Clarke seemed to insert an inside joke about how awful and cliche lesbian films can be!)
Overall, I loved this book, and I wish it was on the shelves of every middle school (and high school) -heck all libraries and bookstores-- everywhere! Huge portions of it make you smile, and you will find yourself just rooting for plucky, wonderful Liv and his spirit. There's a great sappy message in this book that I wish everyone could read in these troubled times. Liv has a wonderful sense of humor, and Clarke's writing is perfect for the targeted age group. I do think a great deal is this book is probably a little simplified (not all parents may be as supportive of Liv, for instance), but the bullying aspects at school are spot-on. Just seeing a transgender "tween" in print is great. I would like to see a list of support resources at the end of the book (and I just read an ARC, so it's not the final version) for those who do not have the same support system as Liv. Yes, this book goes a long way toward showing acceptance, but it's not as easy for everyone. I certainly hope it inspires kids to treat everyone equally: it's an important message. I definitely recommend this wonderful novel for kids and adults alike.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you!); it is available everywhere as of 03/01/2017.
Louise (64 KP) rated The Moonlight Dreamers in Books
Jul 2, 2018
I won a copy of this book over at Maximumpopbooks in exchange for an honest review.
I really enjoyed this book all about friendship.It was a cute, fun and heart warming read and I enjoyed the twists and turns along the way.
Amber is sick and tired of being treated differently at school, she is not one to conform. All the girls at school are obsessed with beauty, fashion and boys! All she wants is to have a proper conversation with someone her own age about her interests and not to be judged on her views. Inspired by her favourite author Oscar Wilde she plans to start a group called the Moonlight Dreamers, where she can find like-minded people, others who have dreams,others that are different and can talk about anything in the group without being taunted. Four girls join the group but they couldn’t be more different.
Amber,Sky, Maali and Rose couldn’t be more different. Amber is being bullied at school, the main reason being that she has two dads, also she is not getting on with one of them and is leaving her quite stressed. She tries to de-stress with writing on her blog and starting the Moonlight Dreamers. Sky is still grieving for her mother, trying to become a poet and perform in front of others whilst her dad is canoodling with a celebrity. Maali is trying to get the courage to speak to boys so one day she will find her soul mate and Rose is sick and tired of being told what to do by her mother and feeling pressurised by her boyfriend. These girls were so different from one another,we had different religions, race and backgrounds. There was also so much creativity from poetry, writing, art and baking.The diversity in this book was amazing. As soon as I had read that Amber had two dads I knew that I was going to enjoy this book, I have never read anything where there have been same-sex parents and loved that Siobhan Curham added it into the book. There were parts in the book where I was so worried for some of the characters that I was reading as fast as possible to make sure they were alright.
" Yes: I am a dreamer. For a dreamer is one who can only find his way by moonlight, and his punishment is that he sees the dawn before the rest of the world.”
The book is mostly about developing friendships, families and identity. I liked that this book had no romance in it and it wasn’t needed as there was so much going in on with the girls lives that you were focused on their individual issues. The book was fast paced with a short paragraph or two from each of their point of views. There were also different formats used such as texts, emails and notes from blogs which made the book read quicker.
This book was so honest and relatable,the problems that Teenagers go through at school such as not fitting in, bullying,boyfriends,sex etc etcera. Parents are being……well… Parents!,you know what it’s like when your young, your parents are insufferable, embarrassing and doing everything in their power to make your life hell. I think this book will be great for teenagers and very influential, I personally would have loved a secret society when I was at school.
The ending was really heart warming and wrapped up nicely. My favourite characters from the book are Rose and Maali, I would say this book is for younger YA readers from 13+
I rated this 4.25 out of 5 stars
I really enjoyed this book all about friendship.It was a cute, fun and heart warming read and I enjoyed the twists and turns along the way.
Amber is sick and tired of being treated differently at school, she is not one to conform. All the girls at school are obsessed with beauty, fashion and boys! All she wants is to have a proper conversation with someone her own age about her interests and not to be judged on her views. Inspired by her favourite author Oscar Wilde she plans to start a group called the Moonlight Dreamers, where she can find like-minded people, others who have dreams,others that are different and can talk about anything in the group without being taunted. Four girls join the group but they couldn’t be more different.
Amber,Sky, Maali and Rose couldn’t be more different. Amber is being bullied at school, the main reason being that she has two dads, also she is not getting on with one of them and is leaving her quite stressed. She tries to de-stress with writing on her blog and starting the Moonlight Dreamers. Sky is still grieving for her mother, trying to become a poet and perform in front of others whilst her dad is canoodling with a celebrity. Maali is trying to get the courage to speak to boys so one day she will find her soul mate and Rose is sick and tired of being told what to do by her mother and feeling pressurised by her boyfriend. These girls were so different from one another,we had different religions, race and backgrounds. There was also so much creativity from poetry, writing, art and baking.The diversity in this book was amazing. As soon as I had read that Amber had two dads I knew that I was going to enjoy this book, I have never read anything where there have been same-sex parents and loved that Siobhan Curham added it into the book. There were parts in the book where I was so worried for some of the characters that I was reading as fast as possible to make sure they were alright.
" Yes: I am a dreamer. For a dreamer is one who can only find his way by moonlight, and his punishment is that he sees the dawn before the rest of the world.”
The book is mostly about developing friendships, families and identity. I liked that this book had no romance in it and it wasn’t needed as there was so much going in on with the girls lives that you were focused on their individual issues. The book was fast paced with a short paragraph or two from each of their point of views. There were also different formats used such as texts, emails and notes from blogs which made the book read quicker.
This book was so honest and relatable,the problems that Teenagers go through at school such as not fitting in, bullying,boyfriends,sex etc etcera. Parents are being……well… Parents!,you know what it’s like when your young, your parents are insufferable, embarrassing and doing everything in their power to make your life hell. I think this book will be great for teenagers and very influential, I personally would have loved a secret society when I was at school.
The ending was really heart warming and wrapped up nicely. My favourite characters from the book are Rose and Maali, I would say this book is for younger YA readers from 13+
I rated this 4.25 out of 5 stars
MyFLO Period Tracker by FLO Living LLC
Health & Fitness and Lifestyle
App
MyFLO is the first-ever period tracker and fertility app that tells you what to do to be...
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated Falling Short in Books
Oct 2, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
When I first found out about Falling Short, written by Lex Coulton, the blurb promised to be ''fresh, funny and life-affirming''. I am sorry, but no. That is not correct. This book was none of those things. It wasn’t bad at all, but I would prefer describing it as a slow-paced, and confusingly complex in an unsatisfying way.
About the book:
Frances Pilgrim’s father went missing when she was five, and ever since all sorts of things have been going astray: car keys, promotions, a series of underwhelming and unsuitable boyfriends . . . Now here she is, thirty-bloody-nine, teaching Shakespeare to rowdy sixth formers and still losing things.
But she has a much more pressing problem. Her mother, whose odd behaviour Frances has long put down to eccentricity, is slowly yielding to Alzheimer’s, leaving Frances with some disturbing questions about her father’s disappearance, and the family history she’s always believed in. Frances could really do with someone to talk to. Ideally Jackson: fellow teacher, dedicated hedonist, erstwhile best friend. Only they haven’t spoken since that night last summer when things got complicated . . .
As the new school year begins, and her mother’s behavior becomes more and more erratic, Frances realizes that she might just have a chance to find something for once. But will it be what she’s looking for?
My thoughts:
I am usually good at explaining why I don’t like a certain book, or why I feel the way I feel, and believe me, with this one, I have spent two days and 6 sittings in front of this draft (now published post) to try and write about it. So I am doing my best now…
First of all, there has to be something about a certain book to make me want to read it. With this one – there were two things:
I love romance and intrigue, and the blurb promised two people not really talking to each other, but sparks flying around… so yes, that got me.
The Alzheimer’s disease – as a person that has worked with people suffering from Dementia and Alzheimer’s, this subject is very close to my heart. I couldn’t miss this book for this reason.
Now – the romance part disappointed me, as there was no romance. No romance at all. Unless, of course, you count as a romance a person in their mid-forties sleeping around with drunk teens, and is then too complicated of a character to even realise who he loves, and why, and the moment he does, he still has no idea what to do with that information.
The other disappointment I had was that I expected to read about the Alzheimer’s, and not only that they weren’t there, but also some of the symptoms mentioned were not correct at all. There were only sex relationships and sex scenes, and that was supposed to define their relationship in the end. Not realistic at all.
Even though it seems that we follow Frances’s story throughout, we actually follow Jackson’s story as well. Their characters were too complicated and confusing for me, and it let me to now feel nor care about them at all. I honestly cared about Frances’s dog the most in this book.
The plot wasn’t perfect – there were times when the information given didn’t match.
[SPOILER ALERT]
The scene how Frances searches on Google to find the address of her dad. We are then told that she found out his address through Jean. Which one is it, then?
I am actually quite sad that I didn’t enjoy this book, but I will still be curious about new works from Lex Coulton, because, somehow, I really liked her writing style, despite all the flaws.
About the book:
Frances Pilgrim’s father went missing when she was five, and ever since all sorts of things have been going astray: car keys, promotions, a series of underwhelming and unsuitable boyfriends . . . Now here she is, thirty-bloody-nine, teaching Shakespeare to rowdy sixth formers and still losing things.
But she has a much more pressing problem. Her mother, whose odd behaviour Frances has long put down to eccentricity, is slowly yielding to Alzheimer’s, leaving Frances with some disturbing questions about her father’s disappearance, and the family history she’s always believed in. Frances could really do with someone to talk to. Ideally Jackson: fellow teacher, dedicated hedonist, erstwhile best friend. Only they haven’t spoken since that night last summer when things got complicated . . .
As the new school year begins, and her mother’s behavior becomes more and more erratic, Frances realizes that she might just have a chance to find something for once. But will it be what she’s looking for?
My thoughts:
I am usually good at explaining why I don’t like a certain book, or why I feel the way I feel, and believe me, with this one, I have spent two days and 6 sittings in front of this draft (now published post) to try and write about it. So I am doing my best now…
First of all, there has to be something about a certain book to make me want to read it. With this one – there were two things:
I love romance and intrigue, and the blurb promised two people not really talking to each other, but sparks flying around… so yes, that got me.
The Alzheimer’s disease – as a person that has worked with people suffering from Dementia and Alzheimer’s, this subject is very close to my heart. I couldn’t miss this book for this reason.
Now – the romance part disappointed me, as there was no romance. No romance at all. Unless, of course, you count as a romance a person in their mid-forties sleeping around with drunk teens, and is then too complicated of a character to even realise who he loves, and why, and the moment he does, he still has no idea what to do with that information.
The other disappointment I had was that I expected to read about the Alzheimer’s, and not only that they weren’t there, but also some of the symptoms mentioned were not correct at all. There were only sex relationships and sex scenes, and that was supposed to define their relationship in the end. Not realistic at all.
Even though it seems that we follow Frances’s story throughout, we actually follow Jackson’s story as well. Their characters were too complicated and confusing for me, and it let me to now feel nor care about them at all. I honestly cared about Frances’s dog the most in this book.
The plot wasn’t perfect – there were times when the information given didn’t match.
[SPOILER ALERT]
The scene how Frances searches on Google to find the address of her dad. We are then told that she found out his address through Jean. Which one is it, then?
I am actually quite sad that I didn’t enjoy this book, but I will still be curious about new works from Lex Coulton, because, somehow, I really liked her writing style, despite all the flaws.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Phantom Thread (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“There’s an air of quiet death in this house”.
The alleged acting swan-song of Daniel Day-Lewis (“Lincoln“) sees him deliver a brilliantly intense portrayal of a maestro in his craft with all the quirks and egotistical faults that come with that position.
Reynolds Woodcock is the craftsman behind a world-renowned 1950’s fashion house, in demand from the elite classes and even royalty. He has a magnetic personality, is overtly self-confident, obsessive, a cruel bully and treats his girlfriends as chattels that he can tire of and dismiss from his life without a backward glance. Trying to keep the business and Reynolds on track, with ruthless efficiency, is his sister Cyril (Leslie Manville, “Maleficent“).
Looking for his next conquest during a trip to his seaside residence, he reels in blushing young waitress Alma (Vicky Krieps, “The Colony”). But he gets more than he bargains for.
This is a really exquisite and gentle film. Aside from some dubious fungi-related practices, there is no violence, no sex and – aside from about half a dozen well-chosen F-words – limited swearing (of which more below). This is a study of the developing relationship between the two protagonists, with little in the way of plot. Sounds dull? Far from it. This is two hours that flew by.
What it also features is (yet) another example of extremely strong women asserting their power. A scene (well trailed in Manville’s award snippets) where Cyril firmly puts Reynolds back in his box is brilliant: a real turning of tables with Woodcock meekly falling into line. And Alma makes for an incredibly rich and complicated character, one of the most interesting female roles I’ve seen this year so far.
It’s a stellar acting performance from Day-Lewis, and while Oldman fully deserves all of his award kudos for “Darkest Hour”, Day-Lewis delivers the goods without any of the make-up. It feels like Day-Lewis is a long way down the betting odds this year because “he always gets one”. He certainly gets my vote ahead of all of the other three nominees.
Kreips – not an actress I know – also brilliantly holds her own, and if it wasn’t such a strong female field this year she could well have been nominated.
Also worthy of note is the pervasive piano score by (suprisingly) Radiohead’s Jonny Greenwood. It’s really lovely and counterpoints the rest of the classical score nicely. Its BAFTA and Oscar nominations are both well deserved (though I would expect the Oscar to follow the BAFTA steer with “The Shape of Water“).
All in all, this is a real tour de force by writer/director Paul Thomas Anderson (“Inherent Vice”, “There Will Be Blood”). How much I enjoyed this film was a surprise to me, since I have no interest in the “fashion industry” (as my family will no doubt be quick to point out!) and I went to see this more out of ‘duty’ based on its Oscar buzz than because I really wanted to see it.
The big curiosity is why exactly the BBFC decided that this film was worthy of a 15 certificate rather than a 12A. Their comments on the film say “There is strong language (‘f**k’), as well as milder terms including ‘bloody’ and ‘hell’. Other issues include mild sex references and scenes of emotional upset. In one scene, a woman’s nipples are visible through her slip while she is measured for a dress.” For a 12A, the board say “The use of strong language (for example, ‘f***’) must be infrequent”. I didn’t count the f-words… but as I said I don’t think it amounts to more than a half-dozen. Is that “frequent”? And – SHOCK, HORROR… visible covered nipples you say?! Lock up your teenagers! When you look at the gentleness of this film versus the violence within “Black Panther”, you have to question this disparity.
Reynolds Woodcock is the craftsman behind a world-renowned 1950’s fashion house, in demand from the elite classes and even royalty. He has a magnetic personality, is overtly self-confident, obsessive, a cruel bully and treats his girlfriends as chattels that he can tire of and dismiss from his life without a backward glance. Trying to keep the business and Reynolds on track, with ruthless efficiency, is his sister Cyril (Leslie Manville, “Maleficent“).
Looking for his next conquest during a trip to his seaside residence, he reels in blushing young waitress Alma (Vicky Krieps, “The Colony”). But he gets more than he bargains for.
This is a really exquisite and gentle film. Aside from some dubious fungi-related practices, there is no violence, no sex and – aside from about half a dozen well-chosen F-words – limited swearing (of which more below). This is a study of the developing relationship between the two protagonists, with little in the way of plot. Sounds dull? Far from it. This is two hours that flew by.
What it also features is (yet) another example of extremely strong women asserting their power. A scene (well trailed in Manville’s award snippets) where Cyril firmly puts Reynolds back in his box is brilliant: a real turning of tables with Woodcock meekly falling into line. And Alma makes for an incredibly rich and complicated character, one of the most interesting female roles I’ve seen this year so far.
It’s a stellar acting performance from Day-Lewis, and while Oldman fully deserves all of his award kudos for “Darkest Hour”, Day-Lewis delivers the goods without any of the make-up. It feels like Day-Lewis is a long way down the betting odds this year because “he always gets one”. He certainly gets my vote ahead of all of the other three nominees.
Kreips – not an actress I know – also brilliantly holds her own, and if it wasn’t such a strong female field this year she could well have been nominated.
Also worthy of note is the pervasive piano score by (suprisingly) Radiohead’s Jonny Greenwood. It’s really lovely and counterpoints the rest of the classical score nicely. Its BAFTA and Oscar nominations are both well deserved (though I would expect the Oscar to follow the BAFTA steer with “The Shape of Water“).
All in all, this is a real tour de force by writer/director Paul Thomas Anderson (“Inherent Vice”, “There Will Be Blood”). How much I enjoyed this film was a surprise to me, since I have no interest in the “fashion industry” (as my family will no doubt be quick to point out!) and I went to see this more out of ‘duty’ based on its Oscar buzz than because I really wanted to see it.
The big curiosity is why exactly the BBFC decided that this film was worthy of a 15 certificate rather than a 12A. Their comments on the film say “There is strong language (‘f**k’), as well as milder terms including ‘bloody’ and ‘hell’. Other issues include mild sex references and scenes of emotional upset. In one scene, a woman’s nipples are visible through her slip while she is measured for a dress.” For a 12A, the board say “The use of strong language (for example, ‘f***’) must be infrequent”. I didn’t count the f-words… but as I said I don’t think it amounts to more than a half-dozen. Is that “frequent”? And – SHOCK, HORROR… visible covered nipples you say?! Lock up your teenagers! When you look at the gentleness of this film versus the violence within “Black Panther”, you have to question this disparity.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Shape of Water (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
A mystical tale of fish and fingers.
With perfect timing after scooping 13 Oscar nominations, “The Shape of Water” arrives for preview screenings in the UK. Is it worth all the hype?
Well, in a word, yes.
Not since Spielberg entranced the world in 1982 with a love story between an isolated and lonely child and an alien, stranded a million light-years from home, have we seen a magical fairy-tale so well told.
Cleaning up at the (box) office. Sally Hawkins and Doug Jones as the creature.
Here Lewisham’s own Sally Hawkins (“Paddington”, “Godzilla“) plays Elisa Esposito, an attractive but mousy mute living above a cinema and next door to her best friend: a struggling artist called Giles (Richard Jenkins). Sexually-frustrated, Elisa works out those tensions in the bath every morning before heading off to work as a cleaner at a government research institute. Together with partner Zelda Fuller (Octavia Spencer, “Hidden Figures“) she is asked to clean a highly secured room where a mysterious aquatic creature is being studied by the cruel and militaristic Strickland (Michael Shannon, “Midnight Special“, “Nocturnal Animals“) and the more compassionate scientist Hoffstetler. (The latter is played by Michael Stuhlbarg (“Miss Sloane“, “Steve Jobs“) in a performance that wasn’t recognised by the Academy, but for me really held the film’s story together). Elisa forms a relationship with the creature, and as the scientific investigations turn darker, she becomes determined to help him.
When you think about it, the similarities in the screenplay with E.T. are quite striking. But this is most definitely not a kid’s film, containing full frontal nudity, sex and some considerable violence, some of it “hands-over-the-eyes” worthy. Most of this violence comes courtesy of Shannon’s character, who is truly monstrous. He is uncontrollably vicious, single-minded and amoral: a hand over the mouth to silence his wife during vigourous sex cleverly belies where his true lust currently lies. (Shannon is just so convincing in all of his roles that, after “Nocturnal Animals“, it is a bit of a surprise to see that he is still alive and well!)
It’s worth pointing out for balance at this point that my wife thought this portrayal was over-egged for its villany, and she rated the film less highly than I did because of it.
Michael Shannon as evil incarnate.
So its no Oscar nomination this time for Shannon as a supporting actor. But that honour goes to Richard Jenkins, who is spectacularly good as the movie-musical-loving and pie-munching neighbour who is drawn unwillingly into Elisa’s plans. Giles is a richly fashioned character – also the film’s narrator – who struggles to fit in with the cruel and rascist 1962 world that he finds himself in. “Sometimes I think I was born too early or too late for my life” he bemoans to the creature whose loneliness he relates to. A scene in a cafe where he fastidiously wipes all traces of pie-filling from his tongue is masterfully done.
Richard Hawkins and Sally Hawkins, hatching a plan.
Octavia Spencer is also Oscar nominated for Best Supporting Actress, and it’s a magical partnership she shares with Hawkins, with each bouncing off each other wonderfully.
This leads to a ‘no brainer’ Oscar nomination for Sally Hawkins who delivers a star turn. She has to go through such a huge range of emotions in this film, and she genuinely makes you really care about the outcome like few films this year. It’s a little tricky since I haven’t seen “I Tonya” or “Ladybird” yet, but I would have thought that Ms Hawkins is going to possibly give Frances McDormand the closest run for her money on March 4th. My money would still be on McDormand for “3 Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri“, but the Oscar voters are bound to love “The Shape of Water”. For like “La La Land” last year, the film is (rather surprisingly for me) another love letter to Hollywood’s golden years, with Elisa and Giles living out their lives with classic movie music and dance numbers: a medium that Elisa only ever truly finds here “voice” through.
Eliza and Zelda about to give two fingers to the establishment.
In the technical categories the Oscar nominations were for Cinematography (Dan Laustsen); Film Editing (Sidney Wolinsky); Sound Editing (Nathan Robitaille and Nelson Ferreira); Sound Mixing (Glen Gauthier, Christian Cooke and Brad Zoern); Production Design (Paul D. Austerberry, Jeffrey A. Melvin and Shane Vieau); Original Score (Alexandre Desplat) and Costume Design (Luis Sequeira). And you really wouldn’t want to bet against any of these not to win, for the film is a technical delight. Right from the dreamlike opening titles (arguably, they missed a deserved nomination here for Visual Effects), the film is gorgeous to look at, with such brilliant detail in the production design that there is interesting stuff to look at in every frame. And the film editing is extraordinary: Elisa wobbles on the bucket she’s standing on, but it’s Strickland’s butt, perched on a table, that slips off. This is a film that deserves multiple repeat viewings.
The monster feeding the monster. Nick Searcy as General Hoyt with Strickland (Michael Shannon).
An the helm is the multi-talented Guillermo del Toro (“Pacific Rim”, “Crimson Peak”) who both directed and co-wrote the exceptionally smart screenplay (with Vanessa Taylor, “Divergent”) and is nominated for both. I actually found the story to be rather predictable, as regards Elisa’s story arc, but that in no way reduced my enjoyment of the film. For the “original screenplay” is nothing if not “original”…. it’s witty, intelligent and shocking at different turns.
The violence and sex won’t be for everyone… but this is a deep and rich movie experience that everyone who loves the movies should at least appreciate… hopefully in a dry cinema!
Well, in a word, yes.
Not since Spielberg entranced the world in 1982 with a love story between an isolated and lonely child and an alien, stranded a million light-years from home, have we seen a magical fairy-tale so well told.
Cleaning up at the (box) office. Sally Hawkins and Doug Jones as the creature.
Here Lewisham’s own Sally Hawkins (“Paddington”, “Godzilla“) plays Elisa Esposito, an attractive but mousy mute living above a cinema and next door to her best friend: a struggling artist called Giles (Richard Jenkins). Sexually-frustrated, Elisa works out those tensions in the bath every morning before heading off to work as a cleaner at a government research institute. Together with partner Zelda Fuller (Octavia Spencer, “Hidden Figures“) she is asked to clean a highly secured room where a mysterious aquatic creature is being studied by the cruel and militaristic Strickland (Michael Shannon, “Midnight Special“, “Nocturnal Animals“) and the more compassionate scientist Hoffstetler. (The latter is played by Michael Stuhlbarg (“Miss Sloane“, “Steve Jobs“) in a performance that wasn’t recognised by the Academy, but for me really held the film’s story together). Elisa forms a relationship with the creature, and as the scientific investigations turn darker, she becomes determined to help him.
When you think about it, the similarities in the screenplay with E.T. are quite striking. But this is most definitely not a kid’s film, containing full frontal nudity, sex and some considerable violence, some of it “hands-over-the-eyes” worthy. Most of this violence comes courtesy of Shannon’s character, who is truly monstrous. He is uncontrollably vicious, single-minded and amoral: a hand over the mouth to silence his wife during vigourous sex cleverly belies where his true lust currently lies. (Shannon is just so convincing in all of his roles that, after “Nocturnal Animals“, it is a bit of a surprise to see that he is still alive and well!)
It’s worth pointing out for balance at this point that my wife thought this portrayal was over-egged for its villany, and she rated the film less highly than I did because of it.
Michael Shannon as evil incarnate.
So its no Oscar nomination this time for Shannon as a supporting actor. But that honour goes to Richard Jenkins, who is spectacularly good as the movie-musical-loving and pie-munching neighbour who is drawn unwillingly into Elisa’s plans. Giles is a richly fashioned character – also the film’s narrator – who struggles to fit in with the cruel and rascist 1962 world that he finds himself in. “Sometimes I think I was born too early or too late for my life” he bemoans to the creature whose loneliness he relates to. A scene in a cafe where he fastidiously wipes all traces of pie-filling from his tongue is masterfully done.
Richard Hawkins and Sally Hawkins, hatching a plan.
Octavia Spencer is also Oscar nominated for Best Supporting Actress, and it’s a magical partnership she shares with Hawkins, with each bouncing off each other wonderfully.
This leads to a ‘no brainer’ Oscar nomination for Sally Hawkins who delivers a star turn. She has to go through such a huge range of emotions in this film, and she genuinely makes you really care about the outcome like few films this year. It’s a little tricky since I haven’t seen “I Tonya” or “Ladybird” yet, but I would have thought that Ms Hawkins is going to possibly give Frances McDormand the closest run for her money on March 4th. My money would still be on McDormand for “3 Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri“, but the Oscar voters are bound to love “The Shape of Water”. For like “La La Land” last year, the film is (rather surprisingly for me) another love letter to Hollywood’s golden years, with Elisa and Giles living out their lives with classic movie music and dance numbers: a medium that Elisa only ever truly finds here “voice” through.
Eliza and Zelda about to give two fingers to the establishment.
In the technical categories the Oscar nominations were for Cinematography (Dan Laustsen); Film Editing (Sidney Wolinsky); Sound Editing (Nathan Robitaille and Nelson Ferreira); Sound Mixing (Glen Gauthier, Christian Cooke and Brad Zoern); Production Design (Paul D. Austerberry, Jeffrey A. Melvin and Shane Vieau); Original Score (Alexandre Desplat) and Costume Design (Luis Sequeira). And you really wouldn’t want to bet against any of these not to win, for the film is a technical delight. Right from the dreamlike opening titles (arguably, they missed a deserved nomination here for Visual Effects), the film is gorgeous to look at, with such brilliant detail in the production design that there is interesting stuff to look at in every frame. And the film editing is extraordinary: Elisa wobbles on the bucket she’s standing on, but it’s Strickland’s butt, perched on a table, that slips off. This is a film that deserves multiple repeat viewings.
The monster feeding the monster. Nick Searcy as General Hoyt with Strickland (Michael Shannon).
An the helm is the multi-talented Guillermo del Toro (“Pacific Rim”, “Crimson Peak”) who both directed and co-wrote the exceptionally smart screenplay (with Vanessa Taylor, “Divergent”) and is nominated for both. I actually found the story to be rather predictable, as regards Elisa’s story arc, but that in no way reduced my enjoyment of the film. For the “original screenplay” is nothing if not “original”…. it’s witty, intelligent and shocking at different turns.
The violence and sex won’t be for everyone… but this is a deep and rich movie experience that everyone who loves the movies should at least appreciate… hopefully in a dry cinema!