Search
Search results
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Who’s That Girl? in Books
Feb 1, 2018
Edie's life is going along just fine, she supposes. Until the fateful day of Jack and Charlotte's wedding, when everything changes. Edie is caught in a particular transgression with the groom, Jack, and immediately everyone blames her, without knowing the full story. Since Jack, Charlotte, and Edie work together, Edie finds life at work unbearable and winds up taking an assignment from her boss in Nottingham, her hometown. There she meets famous actor (think "Game of Thrones" famous) Elliot Owen, for whom Edie must ghost write his autobiography. But things only seem to go from bad to worse, as Elliot seems a pompous, self-absorbed actor and Edie's sister and father don't exactly seem thrilled she's living back home again. Not to mention she can't show her face on social media (or in public) due to Charlotte's revengeful friends, who all hate her... will things ever go right for Edie again?
I admit that I really didn't really know (remember?) the genre of this novel when I picked it up. It's a bit confusing at first, though certainly has its charming moments, especially as a romance.
<i>"Do we ever choose who we fall for? Edie has many a long lonely evening in with only Netflix for company to contemplate that one."</I>
Edie's quest for love is just one of the book's central themes. In many ways, she's on a journey to find herself, and only in doing so, can find love. The novel switches between the present tense (starting with the wedding) and also gives us a little of the past in some places. My biggest beef was how the adults in this book acted like bullying schoolchildren. So, Edie's transgression is really so bad that she's completely ostracized and the subject of intense in-life and cyber shaming and scrutiny? It seems like high school gone really wrong. Her "friend" Louis is just awful; are people really like this?! It's a commentary on social media and cyber bullying, perhaps, but also just terrible and hard to believe at times. These are grown adults! I found myself a little too appalled and couldn't believe grown people would act this way. It's really sad if they do, honestly...
However, once you get further past the wedding day and more into Nottingham, the novel picks up. Edie isn't always the most enjoyable of characters, but I did like her, as I liked Elliot. Parts of the book are just downright funny; I actually found myself laughing out loud. Edie's friends from school are particularly hilarious and a good fit for her. Her boss, too, even if he falls a bit on the dramatic side.
Just when it all seemed normal, it did get a little preposterous again, but hey, that can come with a good romance at times. Overall, while I found some of the characters and plot points frustrating on this one, much of it was balanced out by the charm and humor of the novel. 3.5 stars.
I received an ARC of this novel from the publisher and Edelweiss (thank you!).
I admit that I really didn't really know (remember?) the genre of this novel when I picked it up. It's a bit confusing at first, though certainly has its charming moments, especially as a romance.
<i>"Do we ever choose who we fall for? Edie has many a long lonely evening in with only Netflix for company to contemplate that one."</I>
Edie's quest for love is just one of the book's central themes. In many ways, she's on a journey to find herself, and only in doing so, can find love. The novel switches between the present tense (starting with the wedding) and also gives us a little of the past in some places. My biggest beef was how the adults in this book acted like bullying schoolchildren. So, Edie's transgression is really so bad that she's completely ostracized and the subject of intense in-life and cyber shaming and scrutiny? It seems like high school gone really wrong. Her "friend" Louis is just awful; are people really like this?! It's a commentary on social media and cyber bullying, perhaps, but also just terrible and hard to believe at times. These are grown adults! I found myself a little too appalled and couldn't believe grown people would act this way. It's really sad if they do, honestly...
However, once you get further past the wedding day and more into Nottingham, the novel picks up. Edie isn't always the most enjoyable of characters, but I did like her, as I liked Elliot. Parts of the book are just downright funny; I actually found myself laughing out loud. Edie's friends from school are particularly hilarious and a good fit for her. Her boss, too, even if he falls a bit on the dramatic side.
Just when it all seemed normal, it did get a little preposterous again, but hey, that can come with a good romance at times. Overall, while I found some of the characters and plot points frustrating on this one, much of it was balanced out by the charm and humor of the novel. 3.5 stars.
I received an ARC of this novel from the publisher and Edelweiss (thank you!).
theVman (16 KP) rated Ready Player One (2018) in Movies
Apr 6, 2018
Visual effects (1 more)
action scenes
Script (2 more)
Exposition
Casting
Ready Player Bomb!
I understand certain decisions and changes have to be made when adapting a book for the screen but with this one i just didnt understand or agree with 90% of them. For the most part the changes underminds the actual story the book was telling.
However, trying to be objective the best i can and looking at it just as a movie - i still didnt like it. For me it felt like the structure of the whole move was fractured. Everyone was totally miscast for my liking, leaving all the characters un-charismatic and un-endearing, leaving the story without a heart or a soul. I felt like the exposition was clunky at best, leading to the relationships between characters to either feel forced or not given them enough time to grow naturally, especially the "love interest" story. Also I felt it glossed over some key elements of the plot at the beginning, mainly due to the aforementioned clunky exposition, but also with its eagerness to go straight for throat with high octane action, which although brilliantly staged and choreographed through the camera, left me feeling like it was pointless, due to lack of context or feeling of any real threat. I never really felt like it got any of this right until the final battle in the climax of the film, but by then id given up the films ability to win me back.
Add to that the changes/difference from the book that failed to make any sense to me, or understand why they choose that direction to take - my frustration only grows and grows. The only real big change that i liked was the car race at the beginning which does not feature at all in the book...because it would be visually more exciting than what was actually written in the book. Some of the changes i felt like they were taking the safe option and lacked the balls of the book, such as the film choosing to let some character(s) not die, and pretty much totally ignoring the social commentary the book was making about big corporations, media influences, economic status of the world etc..... all things that i felt made the book as popular as it is in the first place. Popular enough that Spielberg wanted to turn it into a major motion picture.
However, trying to be objective the best i can and looking at it just as a movie - i still didnt like it. For me it felt like the structure of the whole move was fractured. Everyone was totally miscast for my liking, leaving all the characters un-charismatic and un-endearing, leaving the story without a heart or a soul. I felt like the exposition was clunky at best, leading to the relationships between characters to either feel forced or not given them enough time to grow naturally, especially the "love interest" story. Also I felt it glossed over some key elements of the plot at the beginning, mainly due to the aforementioned clunky exposition, but also with its eagerness to go straight for throat with high octane action, which although brilliantly staged and choreographed through the camera, left me feeling like it was pointless, due to lack of context or feeling of any real threat. I never really felt like it got any of this right until the final battle in the climax of the film, but by then id given up the films ability to win me back.
Add to that the changes/difference from the book that failed to make any sense to me, or understand why they choose that direction to take - my frustration only grows and grows. The only real big change that i liked was the car race at the beginning which does not feature at all in the book...because it would be visually more exciting than what was actually written in the book. Some of the changes i felt like they were taking the safe option and lacked the balls of the book, such as the film choosing to let some character(s) not die, and pretty much totally ignoring the social commentary the book was making about big corporations, media influences, economic status of the world etc..... all things that i felt made the book as popular as it is in the first place. Popular enough that Spielberg wanted to turn it into a major motion picture.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Sorry to Bother You (2018) in Movies
Apr 1, 2019
Bananas
When a man gets a job at a call center, he finds that using his “white voice” not only gets him ahead faster, but it takes him down a road crazier than he ever could have imagined. “Crazier” is the operative word here as this movie pushes crazy to the absolute limit. Sorry to Bother You is not without its flaws, but it gets the job done in terms of quality.
Acting: 10
Beginning; 10
Characters: 10
Cassius’ (LaKeith Stanfield) character works on a number of levels. He’s your average guy trying to make it in the world having to rob Peter to pay Paul. He’s easily lovable and funny. More importantly, he’s relatable. There was a number of times watching the movie where I found myself thinking, “Definitely been there before.”
While his character shines, it pales in comparison to Detroit played by the phenomenal Tessa Thompson. She has such a smoothness about her that you can’t escape. In this role, she is a starving artist trying to pave her way and stay true to herself as she wants Cassius to do. She’s cool as shit, but also not the type of girl you ever want to doublecross. I can’t express enough how much Detroit impacted the movie as a whole.
Cinematography/Visuals: 7
The movie succeeds with a lot of jarring imagery, although I will admit that the shock value felt too strong at times. The visuals won’t change your life, but there were a few moments that raised an eyebrow or two. This is the lovechild of when artsy-fartsy meets comedy.
Conflict: 8
Genre: 10
Memorability: 10
Pace: 9
There were a couple of times where I found myself asking, “Ok, where is this going?” But it gets there eventually. It’s consistently funny and is meant to be one of those movies that you probably need to watch a couple of times to really grasp. Outside of one lull, expect to be consistently entertained throughout as this strange mystery unfolds.
Plot: 9
Resolution: 3
Overall: 86
Sorry to Bother You should be a classic, but a meh ending keeps that award just out of reach. I still really liked it and I think you will too. However, it fell just short of me loving it. If you’re looking for some strong social commentary, look no further.
Acting: 10
Beginning; 10
Characters: 10
Cassius’ (LaKeith Stanfield) character works on a number of levels. He’s your average guy trying to make it in the world having to rob Peter to pay Paul. He’s easily lovable and funny. More importantly, he’s relatable. There was a number of times watching the movie where I found myself thinking, “Definitely been there before.”
While his character shines, it pales in comparison to Detroit played by the phenomenal Tessa Thompson. She has such a smoothness about her that you can’t escape. In this role, she is a starving artist trying to pave her way and stay true to herself as she wants Cassius to do. She’s cool as shit, but also not the type of girl you ever want to doublecross. I can’t express enough how much Detroit impacted the movie as a whole.
Cinematography/Visuals: 7
The movie succeeds with a lot of jarring imagery, although I will admit that the shock value felt too strong at times. The visuals won’t change your life, but there were a few moments that raised an eyebrow or two. This is the lovechild of when artsy-fartsy meets comedy.
Conflict: 8
Genre: 10
Memorability: 10
Pace: 9
There were a couple of times where I found myself asking, “Ok, where is this going?” But it gets there eventually. It’s consistently funny and is meant to be one of those movies that you probably need to watch a couple of times to really grasp. Outside of one lull, expect to be consistently entertained throughout as this strange mystery unfolds.
Plot: 9
Resolution: 3
Overall: 86
Sorry to Bother You should be a classic, but a meh ending keeps that award just out of reach. I still really liked it and I think you will too. However, it fell just short of me loving it. If you’re looking for some strong social commentary, look no further.
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated The First Purge (2018) in Movies
May 14, 2019
Purge the purge
#thefirstpurge starts off with so much promise but quickly descends into one big messy brainless #shootemup. When the credits started to roll at the end of this film I found myself feeling confused as to what I'd just watched. It was like I'd just sat through the new #diehard film not a horror movie & as I stood up to leave thats when I saw in big letters ''PRODUCED BY #MICHAELBAY'. For the first 20 minutes I was really digging this film, it was slow with very interesting set up & seemingly going in a really intelligent direction with its strong social commentary themes & its portrails of human behaviour. See you have the government glamourising & rewarding #violence to secretly encourage the poor to eliminate each other, killing not even being a choice for most people or people not taking the #purge seriously, hate groups using the purge as opportunity to commit racially motivated killings, people embracing religion or using it as a excuse to commit violence. Then theres the people who commit crime outside of the purge & get away with it on daily basis who are never punished making the over all question does the purge do more harm than good or vice'versa?. All these themes/subjects are so fascinating but other than at the start of the movie they are not explored or developed with any depth at all. Tone is a mixed bag here too, theres very very light horror elements mixed with humour thats just so out of place & the shoot out heavy third act just feels like they ran out of ideas or didnt know what direction to go. Theres also no real tension or scares here & the costumes/masks are sparse & unimaginative this time around too bringing no fear or haunting imagery to the film either. Acting is fine but no character has a clear drive or a fleshed out back story making them disposable. If your looking for a good horror film the first purge is to action packed, if your looking for action the film is to generic & if your looking for a good time its pacing & mixed tone is to all over place. Watch #electionyear instead its by far the best purge. #odeon #odeonlimitless #horror #scary #gore #fun #mask #jumpscare #halloween #silly #wednesdaywisdom #filmcritic #filmbuff
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Jay and Silent Bob Reboot (2019) in Movies
Mar 7, 2020
To put it simply, if you're not too keen on anything related to Jay & Silent Bob or Kevin Smith, then this entry is not going to change your mind!
The first film from way back in 2001 was already loveably dumb enough. It's collision of immature humour, social commentary, slapstick silliness and plentiful references to past Kevin Smith projects leant it an awkward charm, and things are no different this time around, with exception of everyone involved looking older.
The plot revolves around the titular duo traveling to Hollywood to stop the reboot of a comic book film featuring characters based on their likenesses (literally the same plot as the first). Cue plenty of remarks about the state of cinema and the unstoppable geyser of reboots/remakes/re-imaginings, followed by an absurd road trip, and everything feels familiar and homely.
Jason Mewes and Kevin Smith are just as likable as they every have been as Jay & SB, and the supporting characters, lead by Smith's daughter Harley Quinn, are much the same (although they took a bit longer to grow on me).
There is a veritable plethora of cameos and Clerks call backs peppered throughout, including the likes of Ben Affleck, Matt Damon, Chris Hemsworth, Joey Lauren Adams, Melissa Benoist, Val Kilmer, Jason Biggs, Robert Kirkman....the list goes on and on. None of these inclusions feel particularly forced, and everyone seems pretty willing to be a part of the silliness.
The script is a mixed bag of decent gags, meta lines (sometimes a bit too over the top, to the point of almost insulting the audience!), Kevin Smith talking a whole bunch of shit about himself and some genuinely touching moments. Seriously - towards the films climax, I genuinely fretted that i might let out a little sob...
The truth is, I grew up watching films like Clerks, Dogma, Mallrats etc, and whenever a new entry is put out, I remember just how much these niche comedies mean to me. Jay & Silent Bob Reboot fits right in there with the rest of them.
It's not perfect by any means, but this is a film that can pull off Chris Jericho playing a KKK leader, Redman and Method Man giving parenting, whilst still including a lip wobbling tribute to the late Stan Lee (a we'll know fan of Kevin Smith and his work). How can anyone not appreciate that!?
The first film from way back in 2001 was already loveably dumb enough. It's collision of immature humour, social commentary, slapstick silliness and plentiful references to past Kevin Smith projects leant it an awkward charm, and things are no different this time around, with exception of everyone involved looking older.
The plot revolves around the titular duo traveling to Hollywood to stop the reboot of a comic book film featuring characters based on their likenesses (literally the same plot as the first). Cue plenty of remarks about the state of cinema and the unstoppable geyser of reboots/remakes/re-imaginings, followed by an absurd road trip, and everything feels familiar and homely.
Jason Mewes and Kevin Smith are just as likable as they every have been as Jay & SB, and the supporting characters, lead by Smith's daughter Harley Quinn, are much the same (although they took a bit longer to grow on me).
There is a veritable plethora of cameos and Clerks call backs peppered throughout, including the likes of Ben Affleck, Matt Damon, Chris Hemsworth, Joey Lauren Adams, Melissa Benoist, Val Kilmer, Jason Biggs, Robert Kirkman....the list goes on and on. None of these inclusions feel particularly forced, and everyone seems pretty willing to be a part of the silliness.
The script is a mixed bag of decent gags, meta lines (sometimes a bit too over the top, to the point of almost insulting the audience!), Kevin Smith talking a whole bunch of shit about himself and some genuinely touching moments. Seriously - towards the films climax, I genuinely fretted that i might let out a little sob...
The truth is, I grew up watching films like Clerks, Dogma, Mallrats etc, and whenever a new entry is put out, I remember just how much these niche comedies mean to me. Jay & Silent Bob Reboot fits right in there with the rest of them.
It's not perfect by any means, but this is a film that can pull off Chris Jericho playing a KKK leader, Redman and Method Man giving parenting, whilst still including a lip wobbling tribute to the late Stan Lee (a we'll know fan of Kevin Smith and his work). How can anyone not appreciate that!?
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Team America: World Police (2004) in Movies
Feb 19, 2019
AMERICA! F**K YEAH!
The theme’s lyrics sum up this movie as well as any could have. Made in the midst of the War On Terror in 2004, a satire was needed and who better to provide one than the satirical genius’ Trey Parker and Matt Stone, best known for South Park. On the surface, this looks like a straight forward bawdy adult puppet parody, taking the mickey out of Bruckheimer’s blockbusters, Thunderbirds and the reputation being acquired by the U.S. over the past 30 years but reaching boiling point over the last decade, certainly in a post 9/11 world.But that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
This is looking into every major aspect of the above, such as chauvinism, the political interference and undue, and sometimes dangerous influence of celebrities, summed up here with the Film Actor’s Guild (or F.A.G.) with a host of major film stars ripped off, notably upsetting Sean Penn.
The infamous puppet sex scene, which is nothing more than a poke, pardon the pun, at the puppetry employed in the film.But there’s so much more such as the excellent selection of bespoke songs, such as “Only A Woman” for the sex scene, “End Of An Act” as our hero leaves the group to wallow in self-pity to the song with features verse after verse nothing more than slagging off Michael Bay’s, Pearl Harbor and Ben Afleck! But for a film with criticises these blockbusters, it understands them too well to be truly nasty about them.
The entire film IS a well made Bruckheimer film, even recruiting one of his regular composers, Harry Gregson-Williams, to be in at the last-minute, to compose a great score, but why do this if they hated it so much? They don’t; they love these films and the affection for the genre is clear, making their digs enjoyable and not hurtful… There’s even a contradiction with the political tract as one hand this would seem to be an anti-American tome where Team America blow up every city and landmark imaginable in order to protect the world from the destruction of the Terrorists… Get it?
On the other, the song entitled “Freedom Isn’t Free” would seem to suggest that we should all do our part, even though this number ends with the line, “Freedom cost a buck o’five…” But then after all the political and social satire, and the spoofing of Hollywood’s gung-ho films, it’s just a fun film.When the terrorist’s come from Derka Derkastan, the tone is clear. This is like a pair of boys playing “War On Terror” with a collection of action figures.
They’re clearly laughing hysterically as they write, produce and direct this film like two teenagers, as they create the highly insensitive language of the terrorists, use elements from films such as Star Wars and James Bond, certainly as for Kim Jong-il, is nobody safe, well not after offending the North Korean leader, but in all fairness, this is really just Eric Cartman from South Park.But in the end, this is the perfect satire, with a blend of real world political and social commentary, great spoofing but when all’s said and done, this has a great sense if humour, though at times, somewhat bawdy. This is brilliant and one of, if not the best comedy of the past decade, and one of the greatest satires of all time. And, no, I don’t believe that I’m over stating that…
This is looking into every major aspect of the above, such as chauvinism, the political interference and undue, and sometimes dangerous influence of celebrities, summed up here with the Film Actor’s Guild (or F.A.G.) with a host of major film stars ripped off, notably upsetting Sean Penn.
The infamous puppet sex scene, which is nothing more than a poke, pardon the pun, at the puppetry employed in the film.But there’s so much more such as the excellent selection of bespoke songs, such as “Only A Woman” for the sex scene, “End Of An Act” as our hero leaves the group to wallow in self-pity to the song with features verse after verse nothing more than slagging off Michael Bay’s, Pearl Harbor and Ben Afleck! But for a film with criticises these blockbusters, it understands them too well to be truly nasty about them.
The entire film IS a well made Bruckheimer film, even recruiting one of his regular composers, Harry Gregson-Williams, to be in at the last-minute, to compose a great score, but why do this if they hated it so much? They don’t; they love these films and the affection for the genre is clear, making their digs enjoyable and not hurtful… There’s even a contradiction with the political tract as one hand this would seem to be an anti-American tome where Team America blow up every city and landmark imaginable in order to protect the world from the destruction of the Terrorists… Get it?
On the other, the song entitled “Freedom Isn’t Free” would seem to suggest that we should all do our part, even though this number ends with the line, “Freedom cost a buck o’five…” But then after all the political and social satire, and the spoofing of Hollywood’s gung-ho films, it’s just a fun film.When the terrorist’s come from Derka Derkastan, the tone is clear. This is like a pair of boys playing “War On Terror” with a collection of action figures.
They’re clearly laughing hysterically as they write, produce and direct this film like two teenagers, as they create the highly insensitive language of the terrorists, use elements from films such as Star Wars and James Bond, certainly as for Kim Jong-il, is nobody safe, well not after offending the North Korean leader, but in all fairness, this is really just Eric Cartman from South Park.But in the end, this is the perfect satire, with a blend of real world political and social commentary, great spoofing but when all’s said and done, this has a great sense if humour, though at times, somewhat bawdy. This is brilliant and one of, if not the best comedy of the past decade, and one of the greatest satires of all time. And, no, I don’t believe that I’m over stating that…
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The First Purge (2018) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Usually when a film reaches the fourth in a series there is the danger of becoming stale and repeating things form the prior film. With the release of “The First Purge”, the creator of the series, James DeMonaco; has stepped away from directing duties this time around and has turned his script over to Director Gerald McMurray to tell the tale of how the Purge began.
With crime, unemployment, and other social issues at all all-time high, a new political group; known as the “New Founding Fathers of America” rises to power and plan to implement a bold new experiment to get the country back on track.
Dr. Updale (Marisa Tomei) has a plan to legalize all crime including murder for a 12-hour span. The idea is that by allowing people to vent their frustrations, it will allow them to be happier in the situations and better able to face the challenges they have.
The decision is made to set it in a poor community in Staten Island and naturally protests arise over this especially from community leaders who see the cash incentives being offered to stay in the area and take part in the event as exploiting the poor.
Despite worldwide condemnation and protests, the event goes on as planned and for the most part does not result in the mass carnage that many expected.
Local criminal Kingpin Dmitri (Y’Lan Noel) plans to ride out the event in his compound surrounded by his crew as he believes that his fortified and well-armed locale will be more than enough to ensure his safety. Others in the community stay at home, gather at a church, or take to the streets for parties and mayhem as nobody really knows what to expect.
Under the watchful gaze of the government, it soon becomes clear that the events of the evening are being manipulated and that there is a much bigger and more sinister agenda behind the event.
When squads of well-armed mercenaries enter the community and start killing everyone they encounter, Dmitri and others must work with one another to survive the night.
The film takes a bit to get started as it spends a good amount of time introducing us to the various characters we will meet over the evening and it helps to show the community and how the events of the evening motivate the various characters.
The series has always been heavy on social commentary and the inclusion of characters and costumes that are clearly inspired by various hate groups throughout history is impossible to miss and the film seems to be pushing home the message that society needs to be careful as we are close to heading down the dystopian path that the series depicts.
If you have seen any of the film in the series, you know what to expect as it shows what happens when humanity is not bound by the laws of society and the threat of punishment. The cast works well as they are not simply fodder to be endangered and disposed of when the Purge begins.
There is a 10-episode television series coming soon and it will be interesting to see where the franchise goes following it. For now, “The First Purge” should be an entertaining enough film for fans of the series
http://sknr.net/2018/07/03/the-first-purge/
With crime, unemployment, and other social issues at all all-time high, a new political group; known as the “New Founding Fathers of America” rises to power and plan to implement a bold new experiment to get the country back on track.
Dr. Updale (Marisa Tomei) has a plan to legalize all crime including murder for a 12-hour span. The idea is that by allowing people to vent their frustrations, it will allow them to be happier in the situations and better able to face the challenges they have.
The decision is made to set it in a poor community in Staten Island and naturally protests arise over this especially from community leaders who see the cash incentives being offered to stay in the area and take part in the event as exploiting the poor.
Despite worldwide condemnation and protests, the event goes on as planned and for the most part does not result in the mass carnage that many expected.
Local criminal Kingpin Dmitri (Y’Lan Noel) plans to ride out the event in his compound surrounded by his crew as he believes that his fortified and well-armed locale will be more than enough to ensure his safety. Others in the community stay at home, gather at a church, or take to the streets for parties and mayhem as nobody really knows what to expect.
Under the watchful gaze of the government, it soon becomes clear that the events of the evening are being manipulated and that there is a much bigger and more sinister agenda behind the event.
When squads of well-armed mercenaries enter the community and start killing everyone they encounter, Dmitri and others must work with one another to survive the night.
The film takes a bit to get started as it spends a good amount of time introducing us to the various characters we will meet over the evening and it helps to show the community and how the events of the evening motivate the various characters.
The series has always been heavy on social commentary and the inclusion of characters and costumes that are clearly inspired by various hate groups throughout history is impossible to miss and the film seems to be pushing home the message that society needs to be careful as we are close to heading down the dystopian path that the series depicts.
If you have seen any of the film in the series, you know what to expect as it shows what happens when humanity is not bound by the laws of society and the threat of punishment. The cast works well as they are not simply fodder to be endangered and disposed of when the Purge begins.
There is a 10-episode television series coming soon and it will be interesting to see where the franchise goes following it. For now, “The First Purge” should be an entertaining enough film for fans of the series
http://sknr.net/2018/07/03/the-first-purge/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Favourite (2018) in Movies
Jan 24, 2019
Quirky and original with strong performances and direction
Greek Director Yorgos Lanthimos is the director of such quirky, bizarre comedy/dramas as DOGTOOTH, THE LOBSTER and KILLING OF A SACRED DEER and his latest, THE FAVOURITE is no different, so when it was nominated for 10 Oscars, I thought I'd better go see what all the fuss was all about.
And I'm glad I did for THE FAVOURITE is a biting, funny, sarcastic, bizarre, intense and interesting Royal Court drama about the inner workings, back channel dealings and backstabbing social climbing in Queen Anne's court in England in the early 18th Century as seen through Lanthimos' camera lens - a lens that is different indeed.
Starring Oscar winners Rachel Weisz (THE CONSTANT GARDNER) and Emma Stone (LA LA LAND) in their Oscar nominated turns as cousins who vie for the attentions of Queen Anne (Olivia Colman, also Oscar nominated), it is the rare film that features 3 strong women who play off each other well and where each one is a full character in and of themselves - all 3 with strengths and weaknesses that make them real and compelling and performed by 3 strong actresses. Needless to say that each Oscar nod is well deserved.
But the real star of this film is the sensibilities and camera work of Lanthimos. He uses unusual camera angles, unusual angles and bizarre imagery to show the unreality of the court in relation to the real world around them and is a commentary on these people as much as it shows the action on the screen. This film is an artist with a true, unique vision and is one that, while not for everyone, is one that worked for me.
Lanthimos layers on a rich tapestry of story (by Oscar nominated Screenplay writers Deborah Davis and Tony McNamara) locations (by Oscar nominated Production Designers Fijona Crombie and Alice Felton), Costumes (by Oscar nominated costumer Sandy Powell) , editing (by Oscar nominated Yorgos Mavropsaridis), Cinematography (by Oscar nominated Robbie Ryan) and performances, direction and film.
I think you get the point - this film has become (rightfully so) a darling of the Awards season and is well worth checking out - while this film is not entirely successful in what it attempts to do, it is fun to watch the attempt and the strong performances, characters, direction, costumes, cinematography, etc...which more than makes up for any shortcomings in the story (especially the final act of the film).
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
And I'm glad I did for THE FAVOURITE is a biting, funny, sarcastic, bizarre, intense and interesting Royal Court drama about the inner workings, back channel dealings and backstabbing social climbing in Queen Anne's court in England in the early 18th Century as seen through Lanthimos' camera lens - a lens that is different indeed.
Starring Oscar winners Rachel Weisz (THE CONSTANT GARDNER) and Emma Stone (LA LA LAND) in their Oscar nominated turns as cousins who vie for the attentions of Queen Anne (Olivia Colman, also Oscar nominated), it is the rare film that features 3 strong women who play off each other well and where each one is a full character in and of themselves - all 3 with strengths and weaknesses that make them real and compelling and performed by 3 strong actresses. Needless to say that each Oscar nod is well deserved.
But the real star of this film is the sensibilities and camera work of Lanthimos. He uses unusual camera angles, unusual angles and bizarre imagery to show the unreality of the court in relation to the real world around them and is a commentary on these people as much as it shows the action on the screen. This film is an artist with a true, unique vision and is one that, while not for everyone, is one that worked for me.
Lanthimos layers on a rich tapestry of story (by Oscar nominated Screenplay writers Deborah Davis and Tony McNamara) locations (by Oscar nominated Production Designers Fijona Crombie and Alice Felton), Costumes (by Oscar nominated costumer Sandy Powell) , editing (by Oscar nominated Yorgos Mavropsaridis), Cinematography (by Oscar nominated Robbie Ryan) and performances, direction and film.
I think you get the point - this film has become (rightfully so) a darling of the Awards season and is well worth checking out - while this film is not entirely successful in what it attempts to do, it is fun to watch the attempt and the strong performances, characters, direction, costumes, cinematography, etc...which more than makes up for any shortcomings in the story (especially the final act of the film).
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2082 KP) rated I'll Be There for You: The One about Friends in Books
Oct 16, 2019
The One Where We Look at the Friends Phenomenon
Over the course of the book, we get a well-researched look at the sitcom Friends and the impact it has had on the US and the world in the 25 years since it premiered. We learn about how the creators met and came up with the show, the path the actors took before they landed on the show, and some of the bumps and growing pains that everyone experienced during the 10 years the show was on the air. There is also talk about the impact the show has had on fashion, trends, and overall pop culture the world over.
Author Kelsey Miller starts out by talking about her own connection to the show, and at various times in the book she talks about how she gained insight into the show (and vice versa) while talking to her real-life friends about it. As I said, the book is well-researched, but that is part of the problem – it has too much research, rehashing stories we can find elsewhere with little new insights from the cast and crew. I did find her commentary on a few episodes and arcs to be interesting. I had already thought of some of her comments myself, and the rest make perfect sense to me. My biggest issue with the book is the way she works modern social issues into a look at a comedy from 25 years ago. Now, I’m not saying that the issues on the show aren’t worth talking about. This is the only part of the book where she did her any original research, reaching out to people to get reactions to the show’s handing of diversity, etc. However, her experts all seem to be of the opinion that it would be nice if the show had done a better job, but that was TV in the day, and it is a funny comedy that wasn’t trying to push an agenda. It is clear she wasn’t happy these people didn’t agree with her more since she obvious thinks these are major issues in the show. She even spends much of the last chapter talking about the lawsuit a writer’s assistant brought for a hostile work environment and speculating how it would have been handled in the current environment. These complaints aside, I found the book very readable, and when I picked it up, I was hooked. I was even choking up as I read about the taping of the final episodes. This would probably appeal most to die hard Friends fans, but most of the material here they probably already know.
Author Kelsey Miller starts out by talking about her own connection to the show, and at various times in the book she talks about how she gained insight into the show (and vice versa) while talking to her real-life friends about it. As I said, the book is well-researched, but that is part of the problem – it has too much research, rehashing stories we can find elsewhere with little new insights from the cast and crew. I did find her commentary on a few episodes and arcs to be interesting. I had already thought of some of her comments myself, and the rest make perfect sense to me. My biggest issue with the book is the way she works modern social issues into a look at a comedy from 25 years ago. Now, I’m not saying that the issues on the show aren’t worth talking about. This is the only part of the book where she did her any original research, reaching out to people to get reactions to the show’s handing of diversity, etc. However, her experts all seem to be of the opinion that it would be nice if the show had done a better job, but that was TV in the day, and it is a funny comedy that wasn’t trying to push an agenda. It is clear she wasn’t happy these people didn’t agree with her more since she obvious thinks these are major issues in the show. She even spends much of the last chapter talking about the lawsuit a writer’s assistant brought for a hostile work environment and speculating how it would have been handled in the current environment. These complaints aside, I found the book very readable, and when I picked it up, I was hooked. I was even choking up as I read about the taping of the final episodes. This would probably appeal most to die hard Friends fans, but most of the material here they probably already know.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Mid90s (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
It doesn’t take much to remember that Jonah Hill (writer and director) had already acted in one of the greatest coming-of-age movies at the age of 24. A cursory glance at Superbad shows it to be a hilarious and quotable movie. But a deeper look at the film reveals the true story. Two high school friends (Hill and Michael Cera) who realize they are drifting apart because of incoming adulthood and that they are powerless to stop it. Keeping that in mind, Hill was quoted during the production of Mid 90s as saying that coming-of-age films are cliché and what he really wanted was to make a skateboarding movie that avoided the 80s “cowabunga” tropes. The result of that focus is Mid 90s.
Sunny Suljic plays 13-year-old Stevie, a quiet and often confused boy looking to escape his bleak and abusive home life by connecting with a group of local skater kids. While Suljic absolutely steals the show with his superb acting, his (mostly no name) costars deserve massive kudos for this endeavor as well. Lucas Hedges (Manchester by the Sea, Three Billboards outside of Ebbing Missouri) plays Stevie’s abusive older brother Ian. Though he is quickly established in the opening shot as the antagonist, his character arc throughout the film is one of the greatest and you find yourself soon empathetic to his plight nearly as much as Stevie’s. The skater gang is comprised of Ray (Na-kel Smith), Fuckshit (Olan Prenatt), 4th Grade (Ryder McLaughlin) and Ruben (Gio Galicia). These four seem apathetically content to take Stevie under their wing after he begins hanging out at their skate shop. During this time they expose Stevie to a world of drinking, smoking, drugs and sex as well as a complex set of personalities that Stevie struggles to understand but tries desperately to emulate. This reverence begins to lead him down a path that worry not only his mother and brother, but also occasionally members of his new social group. The actors playing his newfound friends all bring a beautiful authenticity to their roles. They certainly aren’t playing “themselves”, but their personalities don’t feel concocted or forced.
The original score for the film was done by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross as well as a selection of 1990s Hip Hop. And while the original music by Reznor and Ross accents the film perfectly, the 90s throwback songs struggle to do more than remind the viewer of the period and provide the sporadic nostalgia kick. In fact, most of the 90s nostalgia does little to add to the film. Thus, while the opportunity was there to give us a solid examination and social commentary on 1990s culture, Hill seems to fall short of that concept and instead uses the references as a gimmick to tie in smaller plot points.
In addition to the music, there are a few other elements that add to the hipster vintage nature of the film. It was shot entirely on 16mm and is presented in square 1:1 ratio. While this is certainly an unusual choice as more movies are shifted to wide screen formats and square televisions are no longer produced, it pushes the film closer towards the verité genre that is necessary to keep it within the indie style guide.
Mid 90s, along with Eighth Grade have positioned A24 studios in a fantastic place. They’ve demonstrated their willingness to get behind first time writer/directors and the results have been impressive to say the least. If they can remain on this type of pace I could see how the Academy would take notice come awards season.
So despite his view that they are cliché, Jonah Hill has once again created a poignant and powerful coming-of-age movie and he’s managed to wrap it into just enough skateboarding reality to give us the love letter he was hoping to produce. The film is not without its faults, but it’s not one you should miss.
Sunny Suljic plays 13-year-old Stevie, a quiet and often confused boy looking to escape his bleak and abusive home life by connecting with a group of local skater kids. While Suljic absolutely steals the show with his superb acting, his (mostly no name) costars deserve massive kudos for this endeavor as well. Lucas Hedges (Manchester by the Sea, Three Billboards outside of Ebbing Missouri) plays Stevie’s abusive older brother Ian. Though he is quickly established in the opening shot as the antagonist, his character arc throughout the film is one of the greatest and you find yourself soon empathetic to his plight nearly as much as Stevie’s. The skater gang is comprised of Ray (Na-kel Smith), Fuckshit (Olan Prenatt), 4th Grade (Ryder McLaughlin) and Ruben (Gio Galicia). These four seem apathetically content to take Stevie under their wing after he begins hanging out at their skate shop. During this time they expose Stevie to a world of drinking, smoking, drugs and sex as well as a complex set of personalities that Stevie struggles to understand but tries desperately to emulate. This reverence begins to lead him down a path that worry not only his mother and brother, but also occasionally members of his new social group. The actors playing his newfound friends all bring a beautiful authenticity to their roles. They certainly aren’t playing “themselves”, but their personalities don’t feel concocted or forced.
The original score for the film was done by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross as well as a selection of 1990s Hip Hop. And while the original music by Reznor and Ross accents the film perfectly, the 90s throwback songs struggle to do more than remind the viewer of the period and provide the sporadic nostalgia kick. In fact, most of the 90s nostalgia does little to add to the film. Thus, while the opportunity was there to give us a solid examination and social commentary on 1990s culture, Hill seems to fall short of that concept and instead uses the references as a gimmick to tie in smaller plot points.
In addition to the music, there are a few other elements that add to the hipster vintage nature of the film. It was shot entirely on 16mm and is presented in square 1:1 ratio. While this is certainly an unusual choice as more movies are shifted to wide screen formats and square televisions are no longer produced, it pushes the film closer towards the verité genre that is necessary to keep it within the indie style guide.
Mid 90s, along with Eighth Grade have positioned A24 studios in a fantastic place. They’ve demonstrated their willingness to get behind first time writer/directors and the results have been impressive to say the least. If they can remain on this type of pace I could see how the Academy would take notice come awards season.
So despite his view that they are cliché, Jonah Hill has once again created a poignant and powerful coming-of-age movie and he’s managed to wrap it into just enough skateboarding reality to give us the love letter he was hoping to produce. The film is not without its faults, but it’s not one you should miss.