Search
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Widows (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Death Becomes Her.
The Plot
If you are considering “inheritence planning” there are probably a number of things you might be toying with: what happens to your house; how to best transfer your investments; who gets the dog; etc. But probably “a grudge” is not on the list. But that’s the problem faced by teacher’s union rep Veronica (Viola Davis). As you might presume from the film’s title Veronica, together with fellow widows Linda (Michelle Rodriquez), Alice (Elizabeth Debicki), Amanda (Carrie Coon), are left in a tight spot when a gang’s robbery of a local black hoodlum’s stack of cash goes badly wrong. The leader of the gang, and Veronica’s husband, is Harry Rawlings (Liam Neeson), and his certain set of skills are not enough to save him.
The victim of the robbery, Jamal Manning (Brian Tyree Henry), is running for local office in the upcoming elections against Jack Mulligan (Colin Farrell), trying to take over the role as part of a long dynasty from his grouchy father Tom (Robert Duvall). Where Jamal might be better with words, Jamal’s brother Jatemme (Daniel Kaluuya, “Get Out“) has a more physical approach to resolving issues.
What Harry has left behind for Veronica is a notebook containing the details of their next job, and Veronica gathers the female group together to carry out the raid to help save them from a “bullet in the head”.
The Review
I really enjoyed this film. It’s the ying to the yang of the disappointing “Ocean’s 8” from earlier in the year. Yes, it’s YET another film that focuses on female empowerment and with a strong black presence within the cast. But what for me made it stand out above the crowd was the quality of the writing and the assuredness of the directing.
Although based on the ancient UK TV series by Lynda La Plante, the script is written by “Gone Girl” screenwriter Gillian Flynn, and is excellent. It really doesn’t EXPLAIN what is going on, but shows you a series of interconnected scenes and lets you mentally fill in the blanks. While you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to understand the overall story arc, I must admit that even now I’m not 100% sure of some of the nuances of the story. Harry, for example, seems to be a hardened career criminal, and yet he seems to be revered by the political leaders on both sides, even though he seemed to have loyalty to noone. The script cleverly uses flashbacks and has enough twists and turns to keep you on your mental toes.
The characters also worked well for me, with each having a back story and motivations that were distinctly different from each other. Alice (helped by Debecki’s standout performance) is particularly intriguing coming out of an ‘interesting’ relationship. Is she just following the path of her unpleasant mother (Jacki Weaver)? Some of the actions might suggest so.
As for the direction, Steve McQueen (he of “12 Years a Slave“), delivers some scenes that could justly be described as “bold”. A highpoint for me was a short drive by Jack Mulligan and his PA Siobhan (an excellently underplayed Molly Kunz) from a housing project, in a neighbourhood you might worry about walking through at night, to the Mulligan mansion in a leafy and pleasant street. McQueen mounts the camera on the bonnet (hood) of the car, but you can’t see the interior other than occasional glimpses of the chauffeur. All you can hear is Mulligan’s rant to his Siobhan. I thought this worked just brilliantly well. The heist itself well done and suitably tense with an outcome that continues to surprise.
If there’s a criticism then the ending rather fizzles out, leaving a few loose ends flapping in the breeze.
Words of comfort from wannabe politician Jack Mulligan (Colin Farrell) to Veronica (Viola Davis).
The Turns
It’s only been a couple of weeks since my review of the excellent “Bad Times at the El Royale” and I named as my second film of the year for my (private) “Ensemble Cast” award. And here hot on its tail is the third. There are such strong performances across the cast that it’s difficult to pull out specifics: as you start looking at the list you pull out more and more and more names…
As referenced above, I loved Elizabeth Debecki‘s performance. Both vulnerable and strong all in one package.
Colin Farrell, for me, gives his best performance in years as the son caught within the shadow of his overpowering father. A confrontational scene between Farrell and Robert Duvall is particularly powerful.
Daniel Kaluuya is truly threatening (possibly slightly OTT) as the psycho fixer.
For the second time in a month Cynthia Erivo stands out as a major acting force, as the hairstylist cum gang member Belle.
Jon Michael Hill, excellent as a fire-breathing reverend with flexible political views.
It would not surprise me to see Best Supporting Actor nods for any combinations of Debecki, Farrell, Kaluuya and Erivo for this.
I must admit that I’m not the greatest fan of Viola Davis: I find her performances quite mannered. But there’s no doubting here the depth of her passion and with this lead performance she carries this film.
Final Thoughts
I loved this as an intelligent action movie that’s a cut above the rest. Which is a surprise, since from the trailer I thought it looked good but not THAT good! It comes with my recommendation for an exciting and gripping two hours at the cinema. I’m rather caught between two ratings on this one, and if I still had half stars to use I would use it. But as I found this one of the most engrossing films of the year I’ll give it full marks.
If you are considering “inheritence planning” there are probably a number of things you might be toying with: what happens to your house; how to best transfer your investments; who gets the dog; etc. But probably “a grudge” is not on the list. But that’s the problem faced by teacher’s union rep Veronica (Viola Davis). As you might presume from the film’s title Veronica, together with fellow widows Linda (Michelle Rodriquez), Alice (Elizabeth Debicki), Amanda (Carrie Coon), are left in a tight spot when a gang’s robbery of a local black hoodlum’s stack of cash goes badly wrong. The leader of the gang, and Veronica’s husband, is Harry Rawlings (Liam Neeson), and his certain set of skills are not enough to save him.
The victim of the robbery, Jamal Manning (Brian Tyree Henry), is running for local office in the upcoming elections against Jack Mulligan (Colin Farrell), trying to take over the role as part of a long dynasty from his grouchy father Tom (Robert Duvall). Where Jamal might be better with words, Jamal’s brother Jatemme (Daniel Kaluuya, “Get Out“) has a more physical approach to resolving issues.
What Harry has left behind for Veronica is a notebook containing the details of their next job, and Veronica gathers the female group together to carry out the raid to help save them from a “bullet in the head”.
The Review
I really enjoyed this film. It’s the ying to the yang of the disappointing “Ocean’s 8” from earlier in the year. Yes, it’s YET another film that focuses on female empowerment and with a strong black presence within the cast. But what for me made it stand out above the crowd was the quality of the writing and the assuredness of the directing.
Although based on the ancient UK TV series by Lynda La Plante, the script is written by “Gone Girl” screenwriter Gillian Flynn, and is excellent. It really doesn’t EXPLAIN what is going on, but shows you a series of interconnected scenes and lets you mentally fill in the blanks. While you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to understand the overall story arc, I must admit that even now I’m not 100% sure of some of the nuances of the story. Harry, for example, seems to be a hardened career criminal, and yet he seems to be revered by the political leaders on both sides, even though he seemed to have loyalty to noone. The script cleverly uses flashbacks and has enough twists and turns to keep you on your mental toes.
The characters also worked well for me, with each having a back story and motivations that were distinctly different from each other. Alice (helped by Debecki’s standout performance) is particularly intriguing coming out of an ‘interesting’ relationship. Is she just following the path of her unpleasant mother (Jacki Weaver)? Some of the actions might suggest so.
As for the direction, Steve McQueen (he of “12 Years a Slave“), delivers some scenes that could justly be described as “bold”. A highpoint for me was a short drive by Jack Mulligan and his PA Siobhan (an excellently underplayed Molly Kunz) from a housing project, in a neighbourhood you might worry about walking through at night, to the Mulligan mansion in a leafy and pleasant street. McQueen mounts the camera on the bonnet (hood) of the car, but you can’t see the interior other than occasional glimpses of the chauffeur. All you can hear is Mulligan’s rant to his Siobhan. I thought this worked just brilliantly well. The heist itself well done and suitably tense with an outcome that continues to surprise.
If there’s a criticism then the ending rather fizzles out, leaving a few loose ends flapping in the breeze.
Words of comfort from wannabe politician Jack Mulligan (Colin Farrell) to Veronica (Viola Davis).
The Turns
It’s only been a couple of weeks since my review of the excellent “Bad Times at the El Royale” and I named as my second film of the year for my (private) “Ensemble Cast” award. And here hot on its tail is the third. There are such strong performances across the cast that it’s difficult to pull out specifics: as you start looking at the list you pull out more and more and more names…
As referenced above, I loved Elizabeth Debecki‘s performance. Both vulnerable and strong all in one package.
Colin Farrell, for me, gives his best performance in years as the son caught within the shadow of his overpowering father. A confrontational scene between Farrell and Robert Duvall is particularly powerful.
Daniel Kaluuya is truly threatening (possibly slightly OTT) as the psycho fixer.
For the second time in a month Cynthia Erivo stands out as a major acting force, as the hairstylist cum gang member Belle.
Jon Michael Hill, excellent as a fire-breathing reverend with flexible political views.
It would not surprise me to see Best Supporting Actor nods for any combinations of Debecki, Farrell, Kaluuya and Erivo for this.
I must admit that I’m not the greatest fan of Viola Davis: I find her performances quite mannered. But there’s no doubting here the depth of her passion and with this lead performance she carries this film.
Final Thoughts
I loved this as an intelligent action movie that’s a cut above the rest. Which is a surprise, since from the trailer I thought it looked good but not THAT good! It comes with my recommendation for an exciting and gripping two hours at the cinema. I’m rather caught between two ratings on this one, and if I still had half stars to use I would use it. But as I found this one of the most engrossing films of the year I’ll give it full marks.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Whistle In The Dark in Books
Mar 10, 2019
Jen Maddox is on holiday with her fifteen-year-old daughter, Lana, when Lana disappears. But, somehow, Lana is found four days later: confused and bloody, but in one piece. Jen and her husband, Hugh, are beyond relieved, but Jen cannot shake the fear plaguing her. Lana has struggled with depression these past few years. What happened over those four days? Why can't her daughter remember anything? Jen knows she should welcome Lana back with welcome arms, but she cannot rest until she knows what happened to her daughter.
This was a complicated read, which made me feel and think all sorts of feelings. I have to definitely point out that there are triggers for self-harm and suicide in this one. The book hit home for me, as I lost a dear cousin-who was more like a sister to me-to suicide. She was a little older than Lana when she died, but I saw a lot of similarity between the two, and I could understand some of Jen's frustration and sadness with her daughter because of it. Because, honestly, a lot of this book is just sad and depressing.
It's written in short snippets, not long chapters, each with a title, and they are all told from Jen's perspective. I would have liked to have heard from Lana sometimes. Because this is Emma Healey, many of these little pieces and insights are brilliant, truly. But, also, I won't lie, some of this book is a slog. It mirrors living with someone with depression--it's slow, painful, and tough. I wouldn't call this a fun read, even though I could definitely enjoy some of the breakthroughs and beautiful moments Lana and Jen did share.
While the premise of this book is finding out what happened to Lana, much of it is just Jen and Lana's daily life--trying to find themselves after Lana's disappearance. You see the guilt Jen feels about her daughter's mental illness and the complications of motherhood--how hard it can be. Jen's older daughter Meg and her husband, Hugh, are more supporting characters to the Jen and Lana show. There definitely are some humorous pieces among the sad parts--Jen and her husband struggling to raise a teen, Jen's interactions with her mom stand out. And Lana, as she comes across through her mom's eyes, is an interesting and dynamic character. Her grim sense of humor is enjoyable, too.
I found this novel to be very driven by emotions and to be a deep look at a family who is torn apart not only by Lana's disappearance, but by mental illness. I think, too, overall it does a very good job portraying what mental illness can do to a family. Even Lana's descriptions of what her depression feels like are quite well-done. So much of the book actually made me feel tense on Jen's behalf, and you just can't help but feel so sad and scared for both Jen and Lana. The little snippets of the book really do a good job of capturing moments--that is life, after all. A series of moments that add up.
I wish that Jen had been less obsessed with figuring out what had happened to Lana, but I think I can understand where it came from (her fear). For a little bit, I wasn't sure I could push through the book, but I was also motivated to figure out where Lana had been for those four days, and I was attached to Lana (and even Jen), I won't lie. The end of the book also redeemed it for me. There was something about it that made it all work.
This book isn't for everyone, and in some ways, I even have trouble recommending it for those who have struggled with mental illness, because it can be really triggering. Still, I think the author treated the topic very respectfully. I couldn't help but feel for Jen and I really found myself wanting to help Lana, to reach out to her. Healey really does know how to create nuanced characters. Still, if this is your first time reading her, I can't help but recommend the amazing Elizabeth Is Missing, which I just adore. Still, it has its lovely moments and is certainly well-written, if not a slow read.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Edelweiss in return for an unbiased review (thank you!).
This was a complicated read, which made me feel and think all sorts of feelings. I have to definitely point out that there are triggers for self-harm and suicide in this one. The book hit home for me, as I lost a dear cousin-who was more like a sister to me-to suicide. She was a little older than Lana when she died, but I saw a lot of similarity between the two, and I could understand some of Jen's frustration and sadness with her daughter because of it. Because, honestly, a lot of this book is just sad and depressing.
It's written in short snippets, not long chapters, each with a title, and they are all told from Jen's perspective. I would have liked to have heard from Lana sometimes. Because this is Emma Healey, many of these little pieces and insights are brilliant, truly. But, also, I won't lie, some of this book is a slog. It mirrors living with someone with depression--it's slow, painful, and tough. I wouldn't call this a fun read, even though I could definitely enjoy some of the breakthroughs and beautiful moments Lana and Jen did share.
While the premise of this book is finding out what happened to Lana, much of it is just Jen and Lana's daily life--trying to find themselves after Lana's disappearance. You see the guilt Jen feels about her daughter's mental illness and the complications of motherhood--how hard it can be. Jen's older daughter Meg and her husband, Hugh, are more supporting characters to the Jen and Lana show. There definitely are some humorous pieces among the sad parts--Jen and her husband struggling to raise a teen, Jen's interactions with her mom stand out. And Lana, as she comes across through her mom's eyes, is an interesting and dynamic character. Her grim sense of humor is enjoyable, too.
I found this novel to be very driven by emotions and to be a deep look at a family who is torn apart not only by Lana's disappearance, but by mental illness. I think, too, overall it does a very good job portraying what mental illness can do to a family. Even Lana's descriptions of what her depression feels like are quite well-done. So much of the book actually made me feel tense on Jen's behalf, and you just can't help but feel so sad and scared for both Jen and Lana. The little snippets of the book really do a good job of capturing moments--that is life, after all. A series of moments that add up.
I wish that Jen had been less obsessed with figuring out what had happened to Lana, but I think I can understand where it came from (her fear). For a little bit, I wasn't sure I could push through the book, but I was also motivated to figure out where Lana had been for those four days, and I was attached to Lana (and even Jen), I won't lie. The end of the book also redeemed it for me. There was something about it that made it all work.
This book isn't for everyone, and in some ways, I even have trouble recommending it for those who have struggled with mental illness, because it can be really triggering. Still, I think the author treated the topic very respectfully. I couldn't help but feel for Jen and I really found myself wanting to help Lana, to reach out to her. Healey really does know how to create nuanced characters. Still, if this is your first time reading her, I can't help but recommend the amazing Elizabeth Is Missing, which I just adore. Still, it has its lovely moments and is certainly well-written, if not a slow read.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Edelweiss in return for an unbiased review (thank you!).
Darren (1599 KP) rated Revenge of the Green Dragons (2014) in Movies
Jun 21, 2019
Story: Revenge of the Green Dragons starts as we follow the two young boys that immigrated from China to America and New York City, in a neighbourhood that is run by the Chinese gang known as the Green Dragons.
Recruited at a young age Sonny (Chon) and Steven (Wu) have grown up as part of the Green Dragons under the leadership of Paul (Shum Jr) a businessman that uses the gang to get what he wants. We get to see how the two rise through the ranks in the Green Dragons that even grabs the attention of the FBI.
Thoughts on Revenge of the Green Dragons
Characters – Sonny is the quieter of the two friends that gets taken in by the gang, he is the one that would like a life outside the gang which isn’t as easy as it seems, even when he falls in love. Steven was built for the gang, even after he gets seriously injured in the battle between the gangs, he becomes the one that won’t hesitant to pull the trigger. Paul is the leader of the Green Dragons, a businessman on the outside, that uses his intelligence to make sure he can stay ahead of the game in the gang battle.
Performances – The performances in this movie are fine, nothing is great or bad, we get to see the different ranges of emotions that the two friends must face during their decisions. We don’t have any of the performances that stand out though.
Story – The story follows the gangster storylines we have seen before, two young men or in this case boys get recruited to a rising gang to become big players in their gang in a war against another gang, until they step out of line. This time we follow Chinese immigrants in New York and it shows how they would never hold back on anybody of any age or gender. This does give us a brutality in the story, but in the end it is just more of the same.
Action/Crime – The action is just gun battles and brutality to the people who get in the way of the crimes being committed by the Green Dragons, as we see how they try to stay off the radar while conducting their business
Settings – New York will always be a great choice for settings for crime movies, this is unlike any other showing us how gangs had neighbourhoods and always want more.
Scene of the Movie – Put the gun down, it brings a clever kill.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It offered nothing new to the genre.
Final Thoughts – This is a by the book crime movie, it shows the rise of two in a gang and just where they would go onto be in the gang, but otherwise gives us nothing we haven’t seen before.
Overall: Been Here Seen This.
https://moviesreview101.com/2019/06/18/revenge-of-the-green-dragons-2014/
Recruited at a young age Sonny (Chon) and Steven (Wu) have grown up as part of the Green Dragons under the leadership of Paul (Shum Jr) a businessman that uses the gang to get what he wants. We get to see how the two rise through the ranks in the Green Dragons that even grabs the attention of the FBI.
Thoughts on Revenge of the Green Dragons
Characters – Sonny is the quieter of the two friends that gets taken in by the gang, he is the one that would like a life outside the gang which isn’t as easy as it seems, even when he falls in love. Steven was built for the gang, even after he gets seriously injured in the battle between the gangs, he becomes the one that won’t hesitant to pull the trigger. Paul is the leader of the Green Dragons, a businessman on the outside, that uses his intelligence to make sure he can stay ahead of the game in the gang battle.
Performances – The performances in this movie are fine, nothing is great or bad, we get to see the different ranges of emotions that the two friends must face during their decisions. We don’t have any of the performances that stand out though.
Story – The story follows the gangster storylines we have seen before, two young men or in this case boys get recruited to a rising gang to become big players in their gang in a war against another gang, until they step out of line. This time we follow Chinese immigrants in New York and it shows how they would never hold back on anybody of any age or gender. This does give us a brutality in the story, but in the end it is just more of the same.
Action/Crime – The action is just gun battles and brutality to the people who get in the way of the crimes being committed by the Green Dragons, as we see how they try to stay off the radar while conducting their business
Settings – New York will always be a great choice for settings for crime movies, this is unlike any other showing us how gangs had neighbourhoods and always want more.
Scene of the Movie – Put the gun down, it brings a clever kill.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It offered nothing new to the genre.
Final Thoughts – This is a by the book crime movie, it shows the rise of two in a gang and just where they would go onto be in the gang, but otherwise gives us nothing we haven’t seen before.
Overall: Been Here Seen This.
https://moviesreview101.com/2019/06/18/revenge-of-the-green-dragons-2014/
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Unhinged (Splintered #2) in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<i>Unhinged</i>, the second book in the <i>Splintered</i> trilogy, is <b>set an entire year after the events in <i><a title="Splintered by A.G. Howard" href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-splintered-by-ag-howard/"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">Splintered</a></i></b>. With the curse broken, Alyssa finally hopes to have as much of a normal life as possible, despite the fact nothing is actually the same.
I personally thought that <b><i>Splintered</i> was better off a stand-alone</b> when A.G. Howard first takes us to her dark version of Wonderland. <b>The ending definitely could have taken two turns</b> – the book could have expanded into multiple books, or it could have been left alone.
With <i>Unhinged</i>, <b>I just didn't feel as passionate as I was with the first book.</b> Though Alyssa believes she has left Wonderland behind, Morpheus and Wonderland eventually come back to haunt her through dreams and violent paintings – something bad is going on and Wonderland needs Alyssa back now that she's taken her place as the Red Queen. <b>The sequel isn't as adventurous or dark – it just felt like something I would normally see in a novel.</b>
I don't even know how to phrase it – <b><i>Unhinged</i> focuses a lot in the human world; Alyssa's conflicted feelings between Morpheus and Jeb, and where she actually belongs.</b> I hoped the book would bring us back to Wonderland, but <b>I don't even think we even entered Wonderland – it came to Alyssa and it just wasn't as exotic or enchanting or amazing as it was back in book one.</b> Am I sounding whiny now?
That's not including Morpheus and Jeb. <b>Much as I like Morpheus and his sassiness, I just don't like him for the life of me. I <em>still</em> don't like Jeb</b> [for the life of me]. If I really had to choose between the two, I would probably pick Morpheus simply because he just seems to have more personality than Jeb. (Have I mentioned Morpheus has sass?) <b>All Morpheus seems to really care about is Red and how to finally get her out of his wings.</b> Alyssa is just... convenient enough to be used and he ends up falling in love with her in the process of "using" her.
Now I don't know if that's true. I'm sure he actually cares about her greatly considering their history, and I'm sure Jeb cares about her as well, even though he is overprotective and it probably seems endearing. They don't fight as much as they did back in <i>Splintered</i>, but I just don't feel anything for the corners of the love triangle. I just don't. <b>I feel completely indifferent about <i>Unhinged</i> altogether and I'll read the last book simply for the feeling of closure.</b>
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-unhinged-by-ag-howard/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
I personally thought that <b><i>Splintered</i> was better off a stand-alone</b> when A.G. Howard first takes us to her dark version of Wonderland. <b>The ending definitely could have taken two turns</b> – the book could have expanded into multiple books, or it could have been left alone.
With <i>Unhinged</i>, <b>I just didn't feel as passionate as I was with the first book.</b> Though Alyssa believes she has left Wonderland behind, Morpheus and Wonderland eventually come back to haunt her through dreams and violent paintings – something bad is going on and Wonderland needs Alyssa back now that she's taken her place as the Red Queen. <b>The sequel isn't as adventurous or dark – it just felt like something I would normally see in a novel.</b>
I don't even know how to phrase it – <b><i>Unhinged</i> focuses a lot in the human world; Alyssa's conflicted feelings between Morpheus and Jeb, and where she actually belongs.</b> I hoped the book would bring us back to Wonderland, but <b>I don't even think we even entered Wonderland – it came to Alyssa and it just wasn't as exotic or enchanting or amazing as it was back in book one.</b> Am I sounding whiny now?
That's not including Morpheus and Jeb. <b>Much as I like Morpheus and his sassiness, I just don't like him for the life of me. I <em>still</em> don't like Jeb</b> [for the life of me]. If I really had to choose between the two, I would probably pick Morpheus simply because he just seems to have more personality than Jeb. (Have I mentioned Morpheus has sass?) <b>All Morpheus seems to really care about is Red and how to finally get her out of his wings.</b> Alyssa is just... convenient enough to be used and he ends up falling in love with her in the process of "using" her.
Now I don't know if that's true. I'm sure he actually cares about her greatly considering their history, and I'm sure Jeb cares about her as well, even though he is overprotective and it probably seems endearing. They don't fight as much as they did back in <i>Splintered</i>, but I just don't feel anything for the corners of the love triangle. I just don't. <b>I feel completely indifferent about <i>Unhinged</i> altogether and I'll read the last book simply for the feeling of closure.</b>
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-unhinged-by-ag-howard/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) created a post
Oct 22, 2022
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
The much anticipated second film in Peter Jackson’s Hobbit Trilogy has arrived in time to reap box office gold much the way the previous films based on Tolkien’s works have. The film continues the adventure started in the previous film and finds the band of adventurers chased by a pack of Orcs and faced with the deadly and dark Mirkwood Forest as they attempt to reach The Lonely Mountain in time.
The journey is long and filled with peril as everything from Orcs to giant spiders stand in the way and should the group be successful in reaching their destination, there is the little matter of a giant and very nasty dragon named Smaug to contend with.
Undaunted the group press on despite finding danger a constant companion and once again give us a series staples of endless shots of them walking and walking in locales lifted from the Tourism New Zealand film room in between the amazing visual work that makes up the battle sequence and other-worldly visuals of the film.
Bilbo (Martin Freeman), is becoming more and more under the spell of the ring he obtained in the previous film and Gandalf (Sir Ian McKellen), suspects that darker forces are growing and sets off to confirm his suspicions. This divides the film into two quest centric storylines that are sure to cause some division amongst fans of the series.
The film does manage to hold your attention throughout its 2.5 hr plus run time and does have a very enjoyable finale act as the arrival of Smug (Benedict Cumberbatch), for me has been honestly the most enjoyable of any of the four prior films in the series to date. His interactions with Bilbo and the group flesh him out to be more than a creation of CGI, but rather infuse him with a evil and complexity that make him a very compelling and dynamic character.
Despite the strong cast and amazing visual FX in the film that is captured very well by the 3D filming Jackson used, the movie does have it’s share of frustrations.
Jackson has once again loaded the film with tons of characters, scenarios, and padding that easily make up more than half of the film. The idea seems to be to show a greater connection to the original LOTR films and the inclusion of Orlando Bloom as Legolas and Evangeline Lilly as Tauriel is bound to cause controversy. On one hand it was great to see the two characters and the great amounts of action they brought to the film, but the entire time I kept thinking that there was no need for most of this extra stuff as it was included simply to stretch out the film in order to justify a third movie and ensure another big box office.
When the film reaches it’s conclusion it was very clear to me that they could have completed the film in two films had the removed all of the padding and fluff and stuck to the source material. Segments are drawn out or included that really do not need to be there no matter how exciting and visually appealing they may be.
When the film was first announced it was planned to be two films but was later expanded to three when Jackson took over as Director following the departure of Guillermo del Toro. If one film was sufficient to capture each book in the original series than three films for this one book is simply overkill to me and it undermines the source material.
That being said, I did enjoy the film as it works best for me if I look at it as “inspired by’ rather than a cinematic translation of the book and in doing so I was able to get caught up in the action of the film and the character’s.
In the end the film is a true delight filled with plenty of action and adventure and will keep fans old and new entertained as despite the issues I had with it, it was one of the better action/fantasy films of the year and is a great technological achievement.
http://sknr.net/2013/12/13/the-hobbit-the-desolation-of-smaug/
The journey is long and filled with peril as everything from Orcs to giant spiders stand in the way and should the group be successful in reaching their destination, there is the little matter of a giant and very nasty dragon named Smaug to contend with.
Undaunted the group press on despite finding danger a constant companion and once again give us a series staples of endless shots of them walking and walking in locales lifted from the Tourism New Zealand film room in between the amazing visual work that makes up the battle sequence and other-worldly visuals of the film.
Bilbo (Martin Freeman), is becoming more and more under the spell of the ring he obtained in the previous film and Gandalf (Sir Ian McKellen), suspects that darker forces are growing and sets off to confirm his suspicions. This divides the film into two quest centric storylines that are sure to cause some division amongst fans of the series.
The film does manage to hold your attention throughout its 2.5 hr plus run time and does have a very enjoyable finale act as the arrival of Smug (Benedict Cumberbatch), for me has been honestly the most enjoyable of any of the four prior films in the series to date. His interactions with Bilbo and the group flesh him out to be more than a creation of CGI, but rather infuse him with a evil and complexity that make him a very compelling and dynamic character.
Despite the strong cast and amazing visual FX in the film that is captured very well by the 3D filming Jackson used, the movie does have it’s share of frustrations.
Jackson has once again loaded the film with tons of characters, scenarios, and padding that easily make up more than half of the film. The idea seems to be to show a greater connection to the original LOTR films and the inclusion of Orlando Bloom as Legolas and Evangeline Lilly as Tauriel is bound to cause controversy. On one hand it was great to see the two characters and the great amounts of action they brought to the film, but the entire time I kept thinking that there was no need for most of this extra stuff as it was included simply to stretch out the film in order to justify a third movie and ensure another big box office.
When the film reaches it’s conclusion it was very clear to me that they could have completed the film in two films had the removed all of the padding and fluff and stuck to the source material. Segments are drawn out or included that really do not need to be there no matter how exciting and visually appealing they may be.
When the film was first announced it was planned to be two films but was later expanded to three when Jackson took over as Director following the departure of Guillermo del Toro. If one film was sufficient to capture each book in the original series than three films for this one book is simply overkill to me and it undermines the source material.
That being said, I did enjoy the film as it works best for me if I look at it as “inspired by’ rather than a cinematic translation of the book and in doing so I was able to get caught up in the action of the film and the character’s.
In the end the film is a true delight filled with plenty of action and adventure and will keep fans old and new entertained as despite the issues I had with it, it was one of the better action/fantasy films of the year and is a great technological achievement.
http://sknr.net/2013/12/13/the-hobbit-the-desolation-of-smaug/
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated My One and Only in Books
Apr 27, 2018
I loved Kristin Higgins' last release, All I Ever Wanted. I loved that it was a good romance with good characters and no explicit sex scenes. I loved the dogs. I loved the quirks. I loved the family, I loved everything about it. I was psyched to get her new release.
Sadly, it was a huge disappointment.
There were a few things that stacked against her in the beginning and I figured they would be made up for later, but it didn't improve. First, the characters.
I didn't like the main character, Harper. She was pessimistic, nosey, had no filter from her brain to her mouth, and her view of marriage was slightly offensive to me (only because I'm a Christian and a romantic. Don't mess with me.). I figured by halfway through the story maybe she'd see things the way they were, or that at least someone would hit her over the head and tell her to get a grip, but nobody did. I didn't like her interior monologue either. She didn't swear, but she had a few expletives that were... raunchy. I don't mind the "d" word too much. But supplementing the word "Crotch" or other phrases of similar nature just doesn't sit well with me.
And her boyfriend had the mentality of a sixth grader. Not joking. We'll leave it at that. Moving on!
Then there was her Ex. He was hot stuff, and I could see how the two of them could make it work (their personalities played off each other) but I just didn't like him. He was totally ignorant of the mistakes he'd made, at the halfway through point where we finally learn the back-story of her and him I seriously wanted to beat him over the head with a baseball bat--or a Bible--and give him a lecture about what marriage meant because the guy didn't get it. I didn't want the two to get back together, because it would be a recipe for disaster all over again. By the looks of it, neither of them had learned from their mistakes!
Second, I knew what was going to happen. She broke up with her boyfriend, she was going to fall for Nick again, and they were going to get married. Again. And because I didn't give a rat's poo about the characters, I didn't really care what happened to them.
Third, there were editorial mistakes. Now I know it's rude to point those out because when you read something dozens of times, you miss stuff like that. I understand that. I'm a writer. But I'm also a Professional Writing major and an editor, and I proofread stuff and I write promotional material and I edit things. It's what I do. It's my job. When I read a published book and I find things like "/= in the middle of the paragraph, or a grammatical error that is definitely not dialect or part of the character's personality, it makes me angry.
Fourth: I don't remember Kristin Higgins being a poor writer, but this book was poorly written and full of fragments. Sentences go like this: Subject, Verb, Direct Object. Or, Actor, Action, Description. Rearranging this causes passive voice, which is never fun to read, even though it does raise the word count. Ellipses should be used sparingly. Two or three per book: not per page or per paragraph.
And, no offense, but the dog was retarded. I know I shouldn't complain about the dog because now I'm just being whiney. But really? Maybe I'm biased about dogs, but I can't stand anything that bounces when it barks, even when it is in a book.
So those are five reasons why I stopped halfway through the book. This one is going to PBS. Don't get me wrong, I will continue to read Kristin's books. I've got a few more of hers that I hope will be as great as All I Ever Wanted, but this book was not her best work.
Recommended: Ages 18+ (Please note I don't know what sort of content was in the second half of the book.)
Sadly, it was a huge disappointment.
There were a few things that stacked against her in the beginning and I figured they would be made up for later, but it didn't improve. First, the characters.
I didn't like the main character, Harper. She was pessimistic, nosey, had no filter from her brain to her mouth, and her view of marriage was slightly offensive to me (only because I'm a Christian and a romantic. Don't mess with me.). I figured by halfway through the story maybe she'd see things the way they were, or that at least someone would hit her over the head and tell her to get a grip, but nobody did. I didn't like her interior monologue either. She didn't swear, but she had a few expletives that were... raunchy. I don't mind the "d" word too much. But supplementing the word "Crotch" or other phrases of similar nature just doesn't sit well with me.
And her boyfriend had the mentality of a sixth grader. Not joking. We'll leave it at that. Moving on!
Then there was her Ex. He was hot stuff, and I could see how the two of them could make it work (their personalities played off each other) but I just didn't like him. He was totally ignorant of the mistakes he'd made, at the halfway through point where we finally learn the back-story of her and him I seriously wanted to beat him over the head with a baseball bat--or a Bible--and give him a lecture about what marriage meant because the guy didn't get it. I didn't want the two to get back together, because it would be a recipe for disaster all over again. By the looks of it, neither of them had learned from their mistakes!
Second, I knew what was going to happen. She broke up with her boyfriend, she was going to fall for Nick again, and they were going to get married. Again. And because I didn't give a rat's poo about the characters, I didn't really care what happened to them.
Third, there were editorial mistakes. Now I know it's rude to point those out because when you read something dozens of times, you miss stuff like that. I understand that. I'm a writer. But I'm also a Professional Writing major and an editor, and I proofread stuff and I write promotional material and I edit things. It's what I do. It's my job. When I read a published book and I find things like "/= in the middle of the paragraph, or a grammatical error that is definitely not dialect or part of the character's personality, it makes me angry.
Fourth: I don't remember Kristin Higgins being a poor writer, but this book was poorly written and full of fragments. Sentences go like this: Subject, Verb, Direct Object. Or, Actor, Action, Description. Rearranging this causes passive voice, which is never fun to read, even though it does raise the word count. Ellipses should be used sparingly. Two or three per book: not per page or per paragraph.
And, no offense, but the dog was retarded. I know I shouldn't complain about the dog because now I'm just being whiney. But really? Maybe I'm biased about dogs, but I can't stand anything that bounces when it barks, even when it is in a book.
So those are five reasons why I stopped halfway through the book. This one is going to PBS. Don't get me wrong, I will continue to read Kristin's books. I've got a few more of hers that I hope will be as great as All I Ever Wanted, but this book was not her best work.
Recommended: Ages 18+ (Please note I don't know what sort of content was in the second half of the book.)
Inky Books (3 KP) rated The Queen of the Tearling in Books
Jun 21, 2018
Here’s the book I’ve been looking for! I’ve been waiting and searching and looking for a book that would hold my interest long enough to get through it. While I listened to the book instead of reading it because of the little time I have because of school and work (six classes plus 20 hours a week, why do I do this to myself?) plus trying to train my new puppy, I just haven’t had enough time to sleep, let alone read a book. So listening to books on my 1 hour + commute to and from school and work six days a week was the only option.
I’m so glad I found this book because I could borrow it right away from the library. I had seen it, decided a few times not to buy the book because of the books I still haven’t read, so I just jumped at the chance.
So, let us start at the beginning. It was slow to start. I wasn’t connected to any of the characters, I didn’t have much of an interest other than just entertainment. There were a lot of people introduced at once and I had a hard time keeping them straight at first. Over time the characters got sorted out and each had their own personality.
This book was told from a few different perspectives, but for the most part it added important details to the story. It was interesting to see the thoughts of some people other than Kelsea, and it rounded out the story better than if it would have been just her perspective.
However, with the change in perspectives I found that I had a few issues with one character in particular. Javel is a complicated character, and not in the way most people like. His inner monologue has him come off as a strong character, one that doesn’t take crap. His actions and words tell a completely different story. Javel is a weak man. I was very unimpressed with his character and his story until the very, very end. He only had that one redeeming quality, but it paled against everything else about him.
Kelsea is a character I can defiantly stand behind, though there are two things that irked me. This is more about the writing of the book than it is about Kelsea herself, but that fact that she’s plain, not beautiful, was mentioned so often that I got very annoyed. She’s not as beautiful as her mother was, so what? She looked plain standing next to this woman. Yeah, so what’s your point? I get that she is plain but it doesn’t need to be mentioned multiple times in the first chapter and at least once in all the other chapters. The second was that she sees beauty as vanity. Just because a women is beautiful doesn’t mean she’s automatically a rival or that she’s worthless. It annoyed me that every woman was more beautiful than Kelsea could have imagined. Yeah, well get used to it. You’re the queen now, you’re going to be surrounded by beautiful people.
The one other issue I had was with the timing of everything. I can’t get a sense of how long it was from the begging of the book to the end, and it jumps forward weeks ahead with little explanation.
Despite those problems that I have with the book I really enjoyed it. Very rarely do I get to read about queens taking their keep by storm and upturning everything in her wake. Usually Princesses or other random girls are the main character, and this made me happy. It gave me an insight to what her life was like as queen without boring me.
The plot twist was rather predictable, I had it figured out from halfway through the book, but the way it was handled in the end was interesting.
This author isn’t afraid of killing her characters or going into details most would just briefly skim over. It was refreshing. I can’t wait to listen to or read the next book to see what happens from here!
I’m so glad I found this book because I could borrow it right away from the library. I had seen it, decided a few times not to buy the book because of the books I still haven’t read, so I just jumped at the chance.
So, let us start at the beginning. It was slow to start. I wasn’t connected to any of the characters, I didn’t have much of an interest other than just entertainment. There were a lot of people introduced at once and I had a hard time keeping them straight at first. Over time the characters got sorted out and each had their own personality.
This book was told from a few different perspectives, but for the most part it added important details to the story. It was interesting to see the thoughts of some people other than Kelsea, and it rounded out the story better than if it would have been just her perspective.
However, with the change in perspectives I found that I had a few issues with one character in particular. Javel is a complicated character, and not in the way most people like. His inner monologue has him come off as a strong character, one that doesn’t take crap. His actions and words tell a completely different story. Javel is a weak man. I was very unimpressed with his character and his story until the very, very end. He only had that one redeeming quality, but it paled against everything else about him.
Kelsea is a character I can defiantly stand behind, though there are two things that irked me. This is more about the writing of the book than it is about Kelsea herself, but that fact that she’s plain, not beautiful, was mentioned so often that I got very annoyed. She’s not as beautiful as her mother was, so what? She looked plain standing next to this woman. Yeah, so what’s your point? I get that she is plain but it doesn’t need to be mentioned multiple times in the first chapter and at least once in all the other chapters. The second was that she sees beauty as vanity. Just because a women is beautiful doesn’t mean she’s automatically a rival or that she’s worthless. It annoyed me that every woman was more beautiful than Kelsea could have imagined. Yeah, well get used to it. You’re the queen now, you’re going to be surrounded by beautiful people.
The one other issue I had was with the timing of everything. I can’t get a sense of how long it was from the begging of the book to the end, and it jumps forward weeks ahead with little explanation.
Despite those problems that I have with the book I really enjoyed it. Very rarely do I get to read about queens taking their keep by storm and upturning everything in her wake. Usually Princesses or other random girls are the main character, and this made me happy. It gave me an insight to what her life was like as queen without boring me.
The plot twist was rather predictable, I had it figured out from halfway through the book, but the way it was handled in the end was interesting.
This author isn’t afraid of killing her characters or going into details most would just briefly skim over. It was refreshing. I can’t wait to listen to or read the next book to see what happens from here!
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated BlacKkKlansman (2018) in Movies
Oct 1, 2018 (Updated Oct 2, 2018)
Brilliant performances by the entire cast (1 more)
Funny, while still being relevant and sending a serious message
Spike Lee's Best In Years
BlackkKlansman released while I was on holiday, so after playing a bit of catchup at my local cinema, I eventually got around to seeing this film that I was looking forward to ever since seeing the first trailer for it. It lived up to my expectations and I really enjoyed it. Also, just a heads up; I usually don't like to get political in movie reviews, but I feel that with a film as politically charged as this one, it makes it inevitable to get around, so there may be some stuff in here that you disagree with.
The movie worked in several different ways, it definitely worked as a comedy and had me laughing raucously at certain points and then it would drop an important and relevant point on you and suddenly things wouldn't seem so funny any more. All of a sudden, these laughably ignorant racists suddenly became a very real threat, which I don't think was an accident in paralleling how Lee feels about a good amount of modern day Americans like Donald Trump. Remember when he first announced that he was running for office and everybody, (including the current president at that time,) laughed at him? Now he is the most powerful man in the world and poses a very real threat to minorities in the US. I thought that this was a very clever, subtle way to take a shot without being too blatant.
Then there was a slightly more obvious shot at him when characters are discussing a man filled with hate potentially working his way into power and getting the majority of the American public on his side and how awful that would be. Although this particular dig is way more obvious, it still didn't bother me too much and I accepted it as a filmmaker using his platform to send a message to someone that he morally disagrees with.
The final dig was a step too far for me. During a phone conversation between David Duke and Ron Stallworth, Duke says something about getting rid of non-whites to "make America great again." It was so heavy handed that the characters onscreen might as well have turned around and winked at the camera. Please don't get me wrong, I think that Donald Trump is a scumbag and am totally fine with Lee taking a couple of shots at him, but I much preferred the more subtle undertones that he sent his way earlier in the film to this blatantly obvious, slightly cringey callout.
I did enjoy Lee's references to Blaxploitation films of the 70's and I liked the whole aesthetic that this movie had. The score was brilliant and the cast did a great job, the performance that stayed with me the most after the film, was Corey Hawkins monologue as Kwame Ture. He only appears in one scene in the film, but his speech, (in which I felt he strongly channelled Denzel,) was mesmerising and electrifying to watch.
The way that Spike Lee chose to end this movie has stirred some controversy, but I found it to be incredibly powerful and moving. It really sent home the message that this kind of intense, despicable hatred isn't just something that was around in the 70's and 80's, it is something that is still sadly prevalent and happening in today's society and we have people in power, like Trump, who is willing to defend and stand by these people and their violent, hateful behaviour. It was also a fitting tribute to Heather Heyer who was killed when a car crashed into a crowd of people who had been peacefully protesting the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia one-year prior to this film's release.
Overall, this is a funny, entertaining, uncomfortable and anger-inducing film and all of these emotion are equally relevant. I also feel that this movie does exactly what it intends to on a moral level, whether you agree with the ideals portrayed or not, Lee does a terrific job in turning a period piece movie into a painfully relevant message for modern audiences.
The movie worked in several different ways, it definitely worked as a comedy and had me laughing raucously at certain points and then it would drop an important and relevant point on you and suddenly things wouldn't seem so funny any more. All of a sudden, these laughably ignorant racists suddenly became a very real threat, which I don't think was an accident in paralleling how Lee feels about a good amount of modern day Americans like Donald Trump. Remember when he first announced that he was running for office and everybody, (including the current president at that time,) laughed at him? Now he is the most powerful man in the world and poses a very real threat to minorities in the US. I thought that this was a very clever, subtle way to take a shot without being too blatant.
Then there was a slightly more obvious shot at him when characters are discussing a man filled with hate potentially working his way into power and getting the majority of the American public on his side and how awful that would be. Although this particular dig is way more obvious, it still didn't bother me too much and I accepted it as a filmmaker using his platform to send a message to someone that he morally disagrees with.
The final dig was a step too far for me. During a phone conversation between David Duke and Ron Stallworth, Duke says something about getting rid of non-whites to "make America great again." It was so heavy handed that the characters onscreen might as well have turned around and winked at the camera. Please don't get me wrong, I think that Donald Trump is a scumbag and am totally fine with Lee taking a couple of shots at him, but I much preferred the more subtle undertones that he sent his way earlier in the film to this blatantly obvious, slightly cringey callout.
I did enjoy Lee's references to Blaxploitation films of the 70's and I liked the whole aesthetic that this movie had. The score was brilliant and the cast did a great job, the performance that stayed with me the most after the film, was Corey Hawkins monologue as Kwame Ture. He only appears in one scene in the film, but his speech, (in which I felt he strongly channelled Denzel,) was mesmerising and electrifying to watch.
The way that Spike Lee chose to end this movie has stirred some controversy, but I found it to be incredibly powerful and moving. It really sent home the message that this kind of intense, despicable hatred isn't just something that was around in the 70's and 80's, it is something that is still sadly prevalent and happening in today's society and we have people in power, like Trump, who is willing to defend and stand by these people and their violent, hateful behaviour. It was also a fitting tribute to Heather Heyer who was killed when a car crashed into a crowd of people who had been peacefully protesting the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia one-year prior to this film's release.
Overall, this is a funny, entertaining, uncomfortable and anger-inducing film and all of these emotion are equally relevant. I also feel that this movie does exactly what it intends to on a moral level, whether you agree with the ideals portrayed or not, Lee does a terrific job in turning a period piece movie into a painfully relevant message for modern audiences.
Rachel King (13 KP) rated Saving Max in Books
Feb 11, 2019
Though I was not familiar with this author when I recieved this book, upon reading it I could easily tell that Heugten was well-educated, especially since I actually came across a few words I did not know the meaning of - and I consider myself fairly well-read. Words like eidolon and glistered (both from the same sentence) made me a little intimidated by the book, but I stuck with it anyways. The prose of the text is written excellently and I thoroughly appreciated the book for this alone.
I was originally drawn to the book because it focuses on a mother's fight for the life and freedom of her son - which I can relate to in some ways. The sub-plots quickly intersect when the mother, Danielle, has to rely on her career as a lawyer to fight for her son while working with another lawyer, who happens to be the man she has a one-night stand with after turning to what she terms as "liquid courage." Some scenes in the plot were quite horrific, especially at the end of the book, but they were necessary to the plot. The psychiatric facility of Maitland where the plot centers at is intended to be the foremost facility of its kind in the country, but I found many of its practices either abysmal or downright terrifying. I found it very satisfying when Max began to take a more active role in his own court case, showing to me that he is indeed in charge of his own faculties (mostly) and not responsible for what he is being accused of. The big revelation that Danielle discovers is incredibly shocking and grotesque and reveals a psychosis I never knew even existed, much less the depths of depravity that it takes a person to. I have no doubt that such individuals exist in real life, though I believe that such people are beyond what psychologists or psychiatrists can fix. These kinds of people either need God or corporal punishment, but that is another soap box for another day.
I found the progression of the plot unpredictable, which is a good thing, but the ending not completely fulfilling, since the author obviously opted to leave one loose thread for a possible sequel. While I normally like book series, in this case I would have much preferred a more rewarding ending.
I was originally drawn to the book because it focuses on a mother's fight for the life and freedom of her son - which I can relate to in some ways. The sub-plots quickly intersect when the mother, Danielle, has to rely on her career as a lawyer to fight for her son while working with another lawyer, who happens to be the man she has a one-night stand with after turning to what she terms as "liquid courage." Some scenes in the plot were quite horrific, especially at the end of the book, but they were necessary to the plot. The psychiatric facility of Maitland where the plot centers at is intended to be the foremost facility of its kind in the country, but I found many of its practices either abysmal or downright terrifying. I found it very satisfying when Max began to take a more active role in his own court case, showing to me that he is indeed in charge of his own faculties (mostly) and not responsible for what he is being accused of. The big revelation that Danielle discovers is incredibly shocking and grotesque and reveals a psychosis I never knew even existed, much less the depths of depravity that it takes a person to. I have no doubt that such individuals exist in real life, though I believe that such people are beyond what psychologists or psychiatrists can fix. These kinds of people either need God or corporal punishment, but that is another soap box for another day.
I found the progression of the plot unpredictable, which is a good thing, but the ending not completely fulfilling, since the author obviously opted to leave one loose thread for a possible sequel. While I normally like book series, in this case I would have much preferred a more rewarding ending.