Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Stan & Ollie (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
I think that almost everyone has some knowledge of Laurel and Hardy. Certainly growing up with a love of black and white comedies meant that I saw a fair few myself. There's certainly a familiarity in what we see from Coogan and Reilly that brings a smile to your face. The main problem is that it's such a hard act to follow. I can't say that I'm left raving about what was presented. It's a charming film... I'm just not sure if that's a compliment or not.
Seeing the BBC Films logo come up at the beginning gave me some hope. Having never really enjoy either of the main actor's work this actually gave me some hope that this would be an amazing sort of production that I've come to love from the BBC. Sadly, again, I wasn't wowed by what I saw.
Coogan and Reilly do both manage to capture their part of the double act well, and seeing those trademark moves briefly gives you that spark of joy. Nostalgia is a very powerful thing and you get a great buzz but I'm not sure it's enough to make up for the overall feeling of the film.
Both Shirley Henderson and Nina Arianda make for a fiery support cast in the roles of Lucille Hardy and Ida Laurel, but I have to say that Ida was the character for me. Self promoting and yet fiercely loyal. Loving and yet tinged with a streak of harsh reality. It was pleasing to see how she evolved to show such heart and unite the pair at the end.
Capturing snippets of a lifetime is always difficult. There are so many things going on that you have to choose whether to feature or not and that inevitably leads to gaps and slight inconsistencies. Hardy's gambling made several appearances but at no point is it really shown as a severe problem , most of it was done in a very lighthearted manner which sort of defeated the point of it being mentioned at all.
The first half of the film is incredibly slow and dare I say dull. So much so that I did wonder whether it was anything like the film that the trailer had promised. While I did silently chuckle to myself it was by no means laugh out loud funny with it's comedy... although the woman across the aisle from me would probably disagree on that point.
Despite my rather bland feelings about the film it did have some excellent moments. The opening sequence of them walking through the studio lot is really well set up, but shots after that were all very traditional. My other stand out moment was right at the end where they're doing their last performance. In that moment I had a stream of tears running down my face. The fact that they managed to convey the end of Laurel and Hardy's career in such a relatively short sequence was amazing.
Ultimately I think some of the greats from history should probably be left in that iconic position. I'm really not sure that this added anything to their story.
What you should do
If you#re one for nostalgia then you should head on out to see this in January.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I'd have to have just a little piece of Stan Laurel's creativity and dedication.
Seeing the BBC Films logo come up at the beginning gave me some hope. Having never really enjoy either of the main actor's work this actually gave me some hope that this would be an amazing sort of production that I've come to love from the BBC. Sadly, again, I wasn't wowed by what I saw.
Coogan and Reilly do both manage to capture their part of the double act well, and seeing those trademark moves briefly gives you that spark of joy. Nostalgia is a very powerful thing and you get a great buzz but I'm not sure it's enough to make up for the overall feeling of the film.
Both Shirley Henderson and Nina Arianda make for a fiery support cast in the roles of Lucille Hardy and Ida Laurel, but I have to say that Ida was the character for me. Self promoting and yet fiercely loyal. Loving and yet tinged with a streak of harsh reality. It was pleasing to see how she evolved to show such heart and unite the pair at the end.
Capturing snippets of a lifetime is always difficult. There are so many things going on that you have to choose whether to feature or not and that inevitably leads to gaps and slight inconsistencies. Hardy's gambling made several appearances but at no point is it really shown as a severe problem , most of it was done in a very lighthearted manner which sort of defeated the point of it being mentioned at all.
The first half of the film is incredibly slow and dare I say dull. So much so that I did wonder whether it was anything like the film that the trailer had promised. While I did silently chuckle to myself it was by no means laugh out loud funny with it's comedy... although the woman across the aisle from me would probably disagree on that point.
Despite my rather bland feelings about the film it did have some excellent moments. The opening sequence of them walking through the studio lot is really well set up, but shots after that were all very traditional. My other stand out moment was right at the end where they're doing their last performance. In that moment I had a stream of tears running down my face. The fact that they managed to convey the end of Laurel and Hardy's career in such a relatively short sequence was amazing.
Ultimately I think some of the greats from history should probably be left in that iconic position. I'm really not sure that this added anything to their story.
What you should do
If you#re one for nostalgia then you should head on out to see this in January.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I'd have to have just a little piece of Stan Laurel's creativity and dedication.
Andy K (10823 KP) rated The People Vs. Larry Flynt (1996) in Movies
Sep 14, 2019
The tragedy. The comedy. The pornography.
Not many filmmakers can say they won two Oscars and for Best Director in two different decades and were nominated a third time in a different decade. The recently deceased movie maestro Milos Forman is one that could.
This time he decides to take on a subject he is passionate about through the lens of someone he doesn't particularly like. It is hard to believe the real Larry Flynt became a poster child for free speech and freedom of expression just so he could peddle Hustler magazine which showed every variety of "smut", "vile" and immoral behavior and imagery which makes most people disgusted. They even featured a cartoon depicting the characters from "The Wizard of Oz" getting it on with each other!
Larry Flynt started with his brother managing a strip club, but dreaming for something more. Larry decided he would publish a "newsletter" to increase awareness of the club. Upon publication, people became interested in viewing and subscribing to its controversial content, thus an empire was born.
From this club Larry also met his latest dancer soon to be wife, Althea.
The hits started coming almost immediately with different groups causing trouble for Larry and having him arrested. His legal battles soon began as well. His lawyer is not able to control his increasingly belligerent client who shows no respect for the court and openly mocked and disrespected it. Unfortunately, after one of his court appearances, he and his lawyer were shot by a sniper leaving Larry paralyzed from the waist down.
Larry didn't let up; however, deciding instead to take on Reverend Jerry Falwell in Hustler which would ultimately end up with his case being seen at the US Supreme Court.
No stranger to telling a keen biography (Amadeus ranks among the greatest biopics in movie history), director Forman manages to fashion a true tale with such fervor and passion, you get drawn in almost immediately. Even if you hate Larry's message and attitude, you must ultimately completely agree with his right to express it.
Woody Harrelson began getting noticed as a dramatic actor in 1994 with Natural Born Killers and continues to this day including blockbusters like Solo and The Hunger Games franchise as well as meaningful dramatic roles in recent films like Three Billboards and Game Change, Hard to believe the numskull from Cheers has blossomed into a full fledged movie star. His Academy Award nominated performance in this film is so well deserved. He is able to make Larry Flynt repulsive and sympathetic, rude and adorable as well as repugnant and charming all at the same time.
Courtney Love comes form nowhere and plays Larry's wife Althea with energy and really give it her all showing herself as the woman who would stand by her husband no matter what and up against the system. An early performance from Edward Norton is also welcome coming right on the heels of his breakout role in Primal Fear.
The courtroom scenes and not revolutionary, however, the drama and intensity are there broken up by Larry's quips and infant like behavior.
A very entertaining watch from a true master filmmaker highly recommended.
This time he decides to take on a subject he is passionate about through the lens of someone he doesn't particularly like. It is hard to believe the real Larry Flynt became a poster child for free speech and freedom of expression just so he could peddle Hustler magazine which showed every variety of "smut", "vile" and immoral behavior and imagery which makes most people disgusted. They even featured a cartoon depicting the characters from "The Wizard of Oz" getting it on with each other!
Larry Flynt started with his brother managing a strip club, but dreaming for something more. Larry decided he would publish a "newsletter" to increase awareness of the club. Upon publication, people became interested in viewing and subscribing to its controversial content, thus an empire was born.
From this club Larry also met his latest dancer soon to be wife, Althea.
The hits started coming almost immediately with different groups causing trouble for Larry and having him arrested. His legal battles soon began as well. His lawyer is not able to control his increasingly belligerent client who shows no respect for the court and openly mocked and disrespected it. Unfortunately, after one of his court appearances, he and his lawyer were shot by a sniper leaving Larry paralyzed from the waist down.
Larry didn't let up; however, deciding instead to take on Reverend Jerry Falwell in Hustler which would ultimately end up with his case being seen at the US Supreme Court.
No stranger to telling a keen biography (Amadeus ranks among the greatest biopics in movie history), director Forman manages to fashion a true tale with such fervor and passion, you get drawn in almost immediately. Even if you hate Larry's message and attitude, you must ultimately completely agree with his right to express it.
Woody Harrelson began getting noticed as a dramatic actor in 1994 with Natural Born Killers and continues to this day including blockbusters like Solo and The Hunger Games franchise as well as meaningful dramatic roles in recent films like Three Billboards and Game Change, Hard to believe the numskull from Cheers has blossomed into a full fledged movie star. His Academy Award nominated performance in this film is so well deserved. He is able to make Larry Flynt repulsive and sympathetic, rude and adorable as well as repugnant and charming all at the same time.
Courtney Love comes form nowhere and plays Larry's wife Althea with energy and really give it her all showing herself as the woman who would stand by her husband no matter what and up against the system. An early performance from Edward Norton is also welcome coming right on the heels of his breakout role in Primal Fear.
The courtroom scenes and not revolutionary, however, the drama and intensity are there broken up by Larry's quips and infant like behavior.
A very entertaining watch from a true master filmmaker highly recommended.
Zombies Everywhere! Augmented Reality Apocalypse (Halloween Edition)
Games and Entertainment
App
Fight zombies in the REAL WORLD with your iPhone! You wont believe your eyes! How long can you...
Anya Dress Up & Pet Puppies
Games and Entertainment
App
The cutest little doll, Anya is a little girl who loves to play and care for her puppies. --...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Stuber (2019) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
An action comedy that takes you for a ride.
Kumail Nanjiani hits my funny bone… again.
Like no other genre, comedy is highly personal and one person’s comedy gold is another person’s comedy nightmare (“Mrs Brown’s Boys” anyone?). Similarly there are some comedians that I really engage with and others that really irritate. For me, stand-up comedian Kumail Nanjiani falls into the former category. Although having had bit-part roles in many films over the last ten years, it was his starring role playing… well… basically, himself in “The Big Sick” that first caught my attention. Here he repeats that starring role and delivers a deft performance as the shy and ‘scaredy-cat’ driver making a pick-up he won’t forget in a hurry.
He’s paired here, in an unusual ‘buddy cop’/’not buddy cop’ manner, with “Spectre” bad-guy Dave Bautista, a giant of a man who displays a knack for comic delivery (albeit as the straight man) that I was not expecting.
The seeing-eye Uber man.
Bautista plays cop Vic Manning who is in an obsessive pursuit of bad-guy Oka Tedjo (Iko Uwais). Suffering from increasingly bad eyesight, Manning undergoes laser eye surgery on the very day that the “big tip-off” comes through. Being almost blind, Manning hires (read kidnaps) Stu to be his unwilling partner in a battle that puts Stu as well as Manning’s attractive artist daughter (Natalie Morales) in harm’s way.
There’s comedy to be mined in the blind cop set-up…. it’s similar in some ways to the Gene Wilder/Richard Pryor comedy “See No Evil, Hear No Evil”.
Surprisingly visceral action.
We all know that Bautista can do a good fight scene. That fight onboard a train in “Spectre“, with Daniel Craig‘s Bond, was almost on a par with the famous Connery/Shaw fight in “From Russia With Love”. Here, Bautista gets to brawl with gusto in a few scenes.
In general, the “action” in this “action-comedy” is pretty full-on and entertaining. The opening scenes in particular, with Manning and officer Sara Morris (the ever-watchable Karen Gillan) taking on Tedjo in an upper floor of a high-rise building are exciting and dramatic. This is due in no small part to the acrobatic capabilities of Iko Uwais. (Uwais is an Indonesian champion at the martial art Silat… and it shows).
Slick writing that delivers some great lines.
The script is by Tripper Clancy, with this being his first US film after penning two previous German films. And it really made me laugh a lot, both in terms of some of the set up scenes (one in an animal hospital is particularly funny) and in some of the dialogue. As an example, when pushed to the limit of his stress, Stu wails “So I’m gonna have to get cheap student therapists who quote white guys with Indian names and tell me that I should meditate. I…DO…MEDITATE!!!!”.
Also top-notch is the use of music in the film. A use of the Hollies classic “Air that I breathe” during the above mentioned Animal Hospital scene was brilliant.
Summary
Comedies need to make me laugh. This one did. Repeatedly. It even made the illustrious Mrs Movie Man laugh too. Repeatedly. As such “Stuber” comes with a “recommended” from me.
Like no other genre, comedy is highly personal and one person’s comedy gold is another person’s comedy nightmare (“Mrs Brown’s Boys” anyone?). Similarly there are some comedians that I really engage with and others that really irritate. For me, stand-up comedian Kumail Nanjiani falls into the former category. Although having had bit-part roles in many films over the last ten years, it was his starring role playing… well… basically, himself in “The Big Sick” that first caught my attention. Here he repeats that starring role and delivers a deft performance as the shy and ‘scaredy-cat’ driver making a pick-up he won’t forget in a hurry.
He’s paired here, in an unusual ‘buddy cop’/’not buddy cop’ manner, with “Spectre” bad-guy Dave Bautista, a giant of a man who displays a knack for comic delivery (albeit as the straight man) that I was not expecting.
The seeing-eye Uber man.
Bautista plays cop Vic Manning who is in an obsessive pursuit of bad-guy Oka Tedjo (Iko Uwais). Suffering from increasingly bad eyesight, Manning undergoes laser eye surgery on the very day that the “big tip-off” comes through. Being almost blind, Manning hires (read kidnaps) Stu to be his unwilling partner in a battle that puts Stu as well as Manning’s attractive artist daughter (Natalie Morales) in harm’s way.
There’s comedy to be mined in the blind cop set-up…. it’s similar in some ways to the Gene Wilder/Richard Pryor comedy “See No Evil, Hear No Evil”.
Surprisingly visceral action.
We all know that Bautista can do a good fight scene. That fight onboard a train in “Spectre“, with Daniel Craig‘s Bond, was almost on a par with the famous Connery/Shaw fight in “From Russia With Love”. Here, Bautista gets to brawl with gusto in a few scenes.
In general, the “action” in this “action-comedy” is pretty full-on and entertaining. The opening scenes in particular, with Manning and officer Sara Morris (the ever-watchable Karen Gillan) taking on Tedjo in an upper floor of a high-rise building are exciting and dramatic. This is due in no small part to the acrobatic capabilities of Iko Uwais. (Uwais is an Indonesian champion at the martial art Silat… and it shows).
Slick writing that delivers some great lines.
The script is by Tripper Clancy, with this being his first US film after penning two previous German films. And it really made me laugh a lot, both in terms of some of the set up scenes (one in an animal hospital is particularly funny) and in some of the dialogue. As an example, when pushed to the limit of his stress, Stu wails “So I’m gonna have to get cheap student therapists who quote white guys with Indian names and tell me that I should meditate. I…DO…MEDITATE!!!!”.
Also top-notch is the use of music in the film. A use of the Hollies classic “Air that I breathe” during the above mentioned Animal Hospital scene was brilliant.
Summary
Comedies need to make me laugh. This one did. Repeatedly. It even made the illustrious Mrs Movie Man laugh too. Repeatedly. As such “Stuber” comes with a “recommended” from me.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Seinfeld - Season 1 in TV
Jan 22, 2021
I always assumed I wouldn’t like Seinfeld in the 90s. In fact I was opposed to the very idea of it on principle. And that principle was: I’ve never heard of this guy as a comedian, and American stand-up usually isn’t funny. I never saw a single episode until six months ago – in my head it was some dumb, canned laughter show with very forced scripts and little charm. I just didn’t get why it was always quoted amongst the best sitcoms of all time, and I wasn’t willing to find out. This is called “being ignorant”. Guilty.
One random day with nothing else inspiring me I finally took the plunge and put an episode on. Guess what happened? I laughed, I found it completely charming and witty and easy to watch, with some great lines and likeable characters. 3 hours later I had done 6 episodes and was as hooked as anyone can be with anything. It was just so nostalgically and completely 90s! And I loved that!
A show doesn’t run for 9 years and over 170 episodes without being some kind of special, especially taking into account the depreciation due to being dated, as all sitcoms eventually are, and it really is quite remarkable – deserving of a place in the conversation of the greatest ever American half hour shows. Sure, there is an element early on in the preoccupation with everyone’s sex life and dating habits that is a little creepy in 2020, but I am totally willing to forgive it.
Shows that are hyper aware of themselves and the audience are odd creatures the minute they take themselves too seriously, and Seinfeld never does that. It knows it is trivial, essentially about nothing and going nowhere, and style-wise it is always winking at us for being in on the joke and a part of it, even to the point of applauding new characters on their entrance, which is a uniquely American thing to do.
The secret of the show is undoubtedly the chemistry of the four leads, so mismatched that it someone works a spell and creates magic, much in the same way Friends managed to do, times six. Jerry Seinfeld himself is a very likeable everyman, and the schtick of each show beginning and ending with 30 seconds of stand up is a gimmick that grows on you, as does everything about it: the more you watch, the more you love it for what it is.
Jason Alexander as the balding, quirky, self-conscious, opinionated best friend is perhaps my least favourite of the regular quartet, but he has some amazing moments over the course of things, and plays great dead-pan. But the other two are on a plane of equal genius. The verbal timing of the super cute, super smart Julia Louis-Dreyfus as Elaine (who I have fallen in love with a little bit in 1993) and the physical slapstick timing of Michael Richards as Cosmo Kramer (surely one of the most memorable characters in sitcom history) have both left me aching with laughter time after time after time. Just a glance or an expression is often enough.
And the great thing is, it never seems to get old. They are always finding new ways and new situations that keep it fresh. Some trick! Even in the final season of the 9, when there is a small melancholia creeping in because they all know it is coming to an end, it still manages to create moments that aren’t just repeats of previous gags. Which means, as future background watching it is 100% perfect. Leave it on whilst doing something else, look up once in a while, and like the best of all long running US comedy shows each episode is indistinguishable from any other in the best way – it is like having a friend in the room.
I can’t imagine ever saying it is amongst my very favourites, maybe because I missed out on it first time around – which I put down to an inherent middle aged appeal, rather than a youth appeal – but I wouldn’t also ever argue with anyone that did say that it was one of their favourites. Because I get it now. And I’m so glad I got to do it, no matter how late to the party!
One random day with nothing else inspiring me I finally took the plunge and put an episode on. Guess what happened? I laughed, I found it completely charming and witty and easy to watch, with some great lines and likeable characters. 3 hours later I had done 6 episodes and was as hooked as anyone can be with anything. It was just so nostalgically and completely 90s! And I loved that!
A show doesn’t run for 9 years and over 170 episodes without being some kind of special, especially taking into account the depreciation due to being dated, as all sitcoms eventually are, and it really is quite remarkable – deserving of a place in the conversation of the greatest ever American half hour shows. Sure, there is an element early on in the preoccupation with everyone’s sex life and dating habits that is a little creepy in 2020, but I am totally willing to forgive it.
Shows that are hyper aware of themselves and the audience are odd creatures the minute they take themselves too seriously, and Seinfeld never does that. It knows it is trivial, essentially about nothing and going nowhere, and style-wise it is always winking at us for being in on the joke and a part of it, even to the point of applauding new characters on their entrance, which is a uniquely American thing to do.
The secret of the show is undoubtedly the chemistry of the four leads, so mismatched that it someone works a spell and creates magic, much in the same way Friends managed to do, times six. Jerry Seinfeld himself is a very likeable everyman, and the schtick of each show beginning and ending with 30 seconds of stand up is a gimmick that grows on you, as does everything about it: the more you watch, the more you love it for what it is.
Jason Alexander as the balding, quirky, self-conscious, opinionated best friend is perhaps my least favourite of the regular quartet, but he has some amazing moments over the course of things, and plays great dead-pan. But the other two are on a plane of equal genius. The verbal timing of the super cute, super smart Julia Louis-Dreyfus as Elaine (who I have fallen in love with a little bit in 1993) and the physical slapstick timing of Michael Richards as Cosmo Kramer (surely one of the most memorable characters in sitcom history) have both left me aching with laughter time after time after time. Just a glance or an expression is often enough.
And the great thing is, it never seems to get old. They are always finding new ways and new situations that keep it fresh. Some trick! Even in the final season of the 9, when there is a small melancholia creeping in because they all know it is coming to an end, it still manages to create moments that aren’t just repeats of previous gags. Which means, as future background watching it is 100% perfect. Leave it on whilst doing something else, look up once in a while, and like the best of all long running US comedy shows each episode is indistinguishable from any other in the best way – it is like having a friend in the room.
I can’t imagine ever saying it is amongst my very favourites, maybe because I missed out on it first time around – which I put down to an inherent middle aged appeal, rather than a youth appeal – but I wouldn’t also ever argue with anyone that did say that it was one of their favourites. Because I get it now. And I’m so glad I got to do it, no matter how late to the party!
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Game Of Thrones - Season 7 in TV
Sep 5, 2017
Inconsistent characters (2 more)
Lazy writing
Huge plot holes
Who Wrote This?
Contains spoilers, click to show
Full disclosure, I wasn't a huge GoT fan to begin with, but this season takes the cake for the amount of nonsense it expected the viewer to accept without question. The show is ahead of the books at this point, so its no longer based on George RR Martin's books and it shows.
From this point on, I will be spoiling the events of the season, so if you haven't seen it and you care about spoilers, look away now.
If you are looking for a drinking game to play this season, drink every time Danyres is an entitled brat, drink every time Bran says something pretentious, drink every time John mentions the white walkers and drink when Tyrion screws up and I guarantee you that you won't be able to stand up by the end of the season.
There were two things in particular that got under my skin this season. First of all Littlefinger, (the supposed 'smartest character in the show,') got outsmarted by Arya and Sansa? Are you kidding? His death was so unsatisfying and ridiculous and in past seasons that character would have never have been stupid enough to get himself into that situation without working out a way to get himself away with his life.
The second thing is Bran. You can't have an all knowing character that doesn't know things. How is it that Sam has to be the one to tell Bran about John's parents being married when he was born? I've heard the excuse made that Bran has to choose to go to a period in history in order to see what happened at that time, but we have seen that he was back there last season when John was born in that tower! Also, why didn't he inform his brother that the Night King had a dragon, as soon as it happened? I realise that Bran is in Winterfell and John is with Danyres, but in the last episode, John sends Bran a note via carrier pigeon, so why couldn't he have sent one to John? Why didn't Bran see that Cersei was going to betray John and Danyres? If in the next season John and Dany are surprised when Cersei doesn't back them, then the writing for this show has well and truly fell off a cliff.
From this point on, I will be spoiling the events of the season, so if you haven't seen it and you care about spoilers, look away now.
If you are looking for a drinking game to play this season, drink every time Danyres is an entitled brat, drink every time Bran says something pretentious, drink every time John mentions the white walkers and drink when Tyrion screws up and I guarantee you that you won't be able to stand up by the end of the season.
There were two things in particular that got under my skin this season. First of all Littlefinger, (the supposed 'smartest character in the show,') got outsmarted by Arya and Sansa? Are you kidding? His death was so unsatisfying and ridiculous and in past seasons that character would have never have been stupid enough to get himself into that situation without working out a way to get himself away with his life.
The second thing is Bran. You can't have an all knowing character that doesn't know things. How is it that Sam has to be the one to tell Bran about John's parents being married when he was born? I've heard the excuse made that Bran has to choose to go to a period in history in order to see what happened at that time, but we have seen that he was back there last season when John was born in that tower! Also, why didn't he inform his brother that the Night King had a dragon, as soon as it happened? I realise that Bran is in Winterfell and John is with Danyres, but in the last episode, John sends Bran a note via carrier pigeon, so why couldn't he have sent one to John? Why didn't Bran see that Cersei was going to betray John and Danyres? If in the next season John and Dany are surprised when Cersei doesn't back them, then the writing for this show has well and truly fell off a cliff.
Ross (3284 KP) rated Smoke and Summons in Books
Mar 18, 2019 (Updated Mar 18, 2019)
Flintlock Tangled
It took me a while to realise, but this book is basically a re-telling of Tangled, the Rapunzel Disney film.
We have the young girl with magical powers who is held prisoner (though she has been trained to appreciate her captor's benevolence) by someone wanting to benefit from her powers. She meets a ne'er-do-well thief looking for that one last score before he can move and settle down. They travel together trying to find somewhere safe for her to go but are tracked down at all stops, until finally the male protagonist is persuaded to hand her in and reap the rewards, before the inevitable emotional rescue.
Rather than magical healing hair, however, Sandis has the ability to act as a vessel to demons, and is linked to a specific one (a fire horse). Her captor, Kazen, uses her abilities to bolster his gangster crew and lead the city's underworld. Upon sensing Kazen's desire to summon a more powerful demon (which is likely to kill her) she escapes and becomes embroiled with Rone, a young thief.
Together they try to track down a family member Sandis has become aware of, who may be able to help save her.
The story flows quite well, with enough strength in the main characters to engage the reader. Their travails, and Kazen's crew's neverending chase, are enjoyable and thrilling.
The narrative is good, swapping between Sandis' and Rone's perspectives and telling of their increasing tiredness and running out of options. At times, the author's American tone slips in (words like "Mom", "they were a ways from their lodgings" etc), which would normally be fine, I'm not that big of a snob, but it really comes at odds with the majority of the narrative and does stand out.
The setting is more early industrial revolution than more medieval, so there is the use of firearms to spice up the action.
A few times, events become a little hard to accept - quite how quickly and persistently Kazen's goons catch up with them, and how easily Rone manages to accomplish his rescue seem quite hard to believe.
Overall, the story is good and while the format of "lets go here, oh they've somehow found us again" becomes a little tiring, the book is short enough for this not to be too much of an issue.
We have the young girl with magical powers who is held prisoner (though she has been trained to appreciate her captor's benevolence) by someone wanting to benefit from her powers. She meets a ne'er-do-well thief looking for that one last score before he can move and settle down. They travel together trying to find somewhere safe for her to go but are tracked down at all stops, until finally the male protagonist is persuaded to hand her in and reap the rewards, before the inevitable emotional rescue.
Rather than magical healing hair, however, Sandis has the ability to act as a vessel to demons, and is linked to a specific one (a fire horse). Her captor, Kazen, uses her abilities to bolster his gangster crew and lead the city's underworld. Upon sensing Kazen's desire to summon a more powerful demon (which is likely to kill her) she escapes and becomes embroiled with Rone, a young thief.
Together they try to track down a family member Sandis has become aware of, who may be able to help save her.
The story flows quite well, with enough strength in the main characters to engage the reader. Their travails, and Kazen's crew's neverending chase, are enjoyable and thrilling.
The narrative is good, swapping between Sandis' and Rone's perspectives and telling of their increasing tiredness and running out of options. At times, the author's American tone slips in (words like "Mom", "they were a ways from their lodgings" etc), which would normally be fine, I'm not that big of a snob, but it really comes at odds with the majority of the narrative and does stand out.
The setting is more early industrial revolution than more medieval, so there is the use of firearms to spice up the action.
A few times, events become a little hard to accept - quite how quickly and persistently Kazen's goons catch up with them, and how easily Rone manages to accomplish his rescue seem quite hard to believe.
Overall, the story is good and while the format of "lets go here, oh they've somehow found us again" becomes a little tiring, the book is short enough for this not to be too much of an issue.
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Line of Duty - Season 5 in TV
May 18, 2019
Gripping and thrilling
What can I say, Line of Duty have done it again with another hugely gripping series with twists, turns and a stellar cast. Again I won’t say too much at the risk of giving away any spoilers, but this series continues the investigation into the mysterious ‘H’ and they really do pack a lot of intrigue and twists and turns. It’s good to see the wonderful Stephen Graham in this, I couldn’t imagine anyone else more fitting for the role of Clayton and it’s also good to see a bit more of Adrian Dunbar who has been slightly sidelined in past series in favour of the characters of Arnott and Fleming. The plot itself is action packed with a lot of twists you just wouldn’t see coming. Of course unsurprisingly the series ends with a bit of a bang but also doesn’t quite wrap everything up neatly, leaving me screaming for another that I’ll now have to wait for. Damn you BBC.
My only criticism about this show, other than the fact that some plot lines have been left hanging until the ends series, is a bit of a back handed compliment. From working in a police environment I cannot stress to you how realistic a lot of aspects of this show are. Yes they’ve obviously made the storylines thrilling and action packed and made up, but the little nuances and parts of daily ordinary police life are very realistic. Whilst I really love they’ve made it this realistic, there’s one part I find very irritating and that’s mainly because it annoys me on a daily basis at work. I can’t stand the dated way police officers refer to those of a higher rank as ‘Sir’ or ‘Ma’am’, it seems very outdated in a world where we’re all meant to be equal, except when you’re a higher police rank then you can’t be called by your first name by a lower rank... Doesn’t seem right to me, and you certainly wouldn’t catch me doing that at work - calling someone by name doesn’t mean you don’t respect their position any less. So I do get a little irritated with this hierarchical nonsense sometimes on the show, especially with Kate and Steve. But very realistic to say the least! Rant over ?
My only criticism about this show, other than the fact that some plot lines have been left hanging until the ends series, is a bit of a back handed compliment. From working in a police environment I cannot stress to you how realistic a lot of aspects of this show are. Yes they’ve obviously made the storylines thrilling and action packed and made up, but the little nuances and parts of daily ordinary police life are very realistic. Whilst I really love they’ve made it this realistic, there’s one part I find very irritating and that’s mainly because it annoys me on a daily basis at work. I can’t stand the dated way police officers refer to those of a higher rank as ‘Sir’ or ‘Ma’am’, it seems very outdated in a world where we’re all meant to be equal, except when you’re a higher police rank then you can’t be called by your first name by a lower rank... Doesn’t seem right to me, and you certainly wouldn’t catch me doing that at work - calling someone by name doesn’t mean you don’t respect their position any less. So I do get a little irritated with this hierarchical nonsense sometimes on the show, especially with Kate and Steve. But very realistic to say the least! Rant over ?
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated You're Next (2013) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Finding a good horror film has been a little like a prompt train over the last few years, they are few and far between. However, 2013 has produced more than its fair share of movies within the genre, with the excellent The Purge, released earlier this year; Insidious 2, which is in cinemas this autumn and of course, the subject of this review; You’re Next. But can this modern horror film deliver the thrills and spills of those of yesteryear?
Relative newcomer Adam Wingard directs this rather formulaic home invasion film with some nice creative touches and a rousing score, borrowing heavily from other similar films like the dire When a Stranger Calls, the excellent The Strangers and the downright ridiculous Black Christmas.
However, what sets You’re Next apart from the pack is in its comic timing. Rather than going for full shock value, the film delivers a comedic edge which is welcome in breaking up the bludgeoning and stabbing, which there is a huge amount of.
The plot is simple, a family gathers at their parents’ large manor house to celebrate an anniversary, only to be taunted and butchered by a group of masked killers intent on ruining the party. There are the usual horror clichés of people being watched from outside, people being crept up on from behind and the gem that is thinking there is someone there and realising it’s just a member of the family, but Wingard keeps it feeling fresh and new throughout.
The acting is generally terrible, as is the case with many horror films, but because the movie never takes itself too seriously, the performances add to the overall effect rather than become an annoyance. One stand-out characterisation is Sharni Vinson as Erin, a larger than life Australian who really comes into her own in the battle between the ever decreasing family and the constant onslaught of the masked murderers.
Whilst not scaling the heights of last year’s Cabin in the Woods, You’re Next really helps show that there is life in a genre which has been inundated with cheap knock-offs, countless sequels and pointless remakes.
It is daft, unoriginal and full of lifeless characters, but as a slice of truly terrifying horror and a piece of laugh out loud dark comedy, it succeeds and is highly recommended.
Relative newcomer Adam Wingard directs this rather formulaic home invasion film with some nice creative touches and a rousing score, borrowing heavily from other similar films like the dire When a Stranger Calls, the excellent The Strangers and the downright ridiculous Black Christmas.
However, what sets You’re Next apart from the pack is in its comic timing. Rather than going for full shock value, the film delivers a comedic edge which is welcome in breaking up the bludgeoning and stabbing, which there is a huge amount of.
The plot is simple, a family gathers at their parents’ large manor house to celebrate an anniversary, only to be taunted and butchered by a group of masked killers intent on ruining the party. There are the usual horror clichés of people being watched from outside, people being crept up on from behind and the gem that is thinking there is someone there and realising it’s just a member of the family, but Wingard keeps it feeling fresh and new throughout.
The acting is generally terrible, as is the case with many horror films, but because the movie never takes itself too seriously, the performances add to the overall effect rather than become an annoyance. One stand-out characterisation is Sharni Vinson as Erin, a larger than life Australian who really comes into her own in the battle between the ever decreasing family and the constant onslaught of the masked murderers.
Whilst not scaling the heights of last year’s Cabin in the Woods, You’re Next really helps show that there is life in a genre which has been inundated with cheap knock-offs, countless sequels and pointless remakes.
It is daft, unoriginal and full of lifeless characters, but as a slice of truly terrifying horror and a piece of laugh out loud dark comedy, it succeeds and is highly recommended.