Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Kim Possible (2019) in Movies
Nov 7, 2019
My name is Emma, and I still love Kim Possible. It's great fun and I will fight anyone who says it isn't. That is if we're talking about the animated series... that is gold, the live action film is not even tin foil.
I love Disney TV movies but I really wish they'd stick to originals or property that was already live action... stop remaking things that really don't need it.
Let's address the casting first.
Sean Giambrone as Ron was a solid bit of casting, the right amount of awkward and bumbling, the only thing is that for anyone who watches The Goldbergs he might just be a little too recognisable, but then I doubt many people will watch both of these things. Michael P. Northey as Mr Barkin, he was good, I was generally impressed... but in a world where we have Patrick Warburton why would we not cast Patrick Warburton? Patton Oswalt does evil genius voice fantastically and as Professor Demeantor he was a great pick. Getting a narrow pass, and it's the very finest of passess, Todd Stashwick. I enjoy him when he pops up in shows but he's no Drakken. He was also done wrong by the make-up department.
Everyone else? That's a no. Possibly the worst casting was on the Possible family themselves. I adore Alyson Hannigan but her Mrs. Dr. P. was no bueno. Same goes for Mr. Dr. P. After seeing them on screen I kind of assumed the story was going to revolve around them having been kidnapped and replaced by Bebes with extra nice programming. Jim and Tim were devoid of any of the character their cartoon counterparts had. And then there's Kim, I'm not sure there would have been anyone I'd have been happy with in this role but they've managed to create something very odd in this casting. Live action Kim acts physically like the cartoon does and yet somehow the personality didn't make the crossover with it.
The idea to take Kim down from the inside is one we've seen before with Eric the synthodrone who was used to further the Little Diablo world domination plan. It's a good narative and the twist we're given here isn't a bad one but the execution feels off.
The film turns the Kim Possible formula into a women kicking ass story but they do it really badly. Mrs. Dr. P. and Nana P. are brought on board and then just used as padding and left to be inept in a corner, it's a poor use of characters and a poor use of source material.
Of course the most important part is did they do Rufus right On the whole he wasn't bad and he certainly got his normal opportunity to come to the rescue so I'm going to say good job on that.
What you should do
Don't call her, don't beep her, if you want to watch Kim Possible then watch the series, this film needs to be forgotten in the depths of Disney+.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
The ability to fly through the air like I'm a cartoon character.
I love Disney TV movies but I really wish they'd stick to originals or property that was already live action... stop remaking things that really don't need it.
Let's address the casting first.
Sean Giambrone as Ron was a solid bit of casting, the right amount of awkward and bumbling, the only thing is that for anyone who watches The Goldbergs he might just be a little too recognisable, but then I doubt many people will watch both of these things. Michael P. Northey as Mr Barkin, he was good, I was generally impressed... but in a world where we have Patrick Warburton why would we not cast Patrick Warburton? Patton Oswalt does evil genius voice fantastically and as Professor Demeantor he was a great pick. Getting a narrow pass, and it's the very finest of passess, Todd Stashwick. I enjoy him when he pops up in shows but he's no Drakken. He was also done wrong by the make-up department.
Everyone else? That's a no. Possibly the worst casting was on the Possible family themselves. I adore Alyson Hannigan but her Mrs. Dr. P. was no bueno. Same goes for Mr. Dr. P. After seeing them on screen I kind of assumed the story was going to revolve around them having been kidnapped and replaced by Bebes with extra nice programming. Jim and Tim were devoid of any of the character their cartoon counterparts had. And then there's Kim, I'm not sure there would have been anyone I'd have been happy with in this role but they've managed to create something very odd in this casting. Live action Kim acts physically like the cartoon does and yet somehow the personality didn't make the crossover with it.
The idea to take Kim down from the inside is one we've seen before with Eric the synthodrone who was used to further the Little Diablo world domination plan. It's a good narative and the twist we're given here isn't a bad one but the execution feels off.
The film turns the Kim Possible formula into a women kicking ass story but they do it really badly. Mrs. Dr. P. and Nana P. are brought on board and then just used as padding and left to be inept in a corner, it's a poor use of characters and a poor use of source material.
Of course the most important part is did they do Rufus right On the whole he wasn't bad and he certainly got his normal opportunity to come to the rescue so I'm going to say good job on that.
What you should do
Don't call her, don't beep her, if you want to watch Kim Possible then watch the series, this film needs to be forgotten in the depths of Disney+.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
The ability to fly through the air like I'm a cartoon character.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Rick and Morty - Season 3 in TV
Feb 29, 2020
A big thank you to Smashbomb for this fantastic prize, make sure you take a look at their giveaways for the chance to win some amazing things.
Rick and Morty continues to follow the adventures of the members of the Smith household. When Jerry asks Beth to choose between him and Rick, the strength of their marriage is tested. Jerry is confronted with the loss of his family, while Beth begins to discover her independence again. Morty and Summer deal with their parents' separation by seeking more control over their lives. Rick's nihilistic way of life continues to prevent him from bonding with his family, as he remains unable to change his self-destructive behaviour.
At the end of season 2 Rick and the Smiths have hidden on a tiny version of Earth outside of the Federation's jurisdiction, Earth has been taken over and Rick has surrendered himself to save his family. We open season 3 with Rick in the Federation's custody being interrogated and we instantly get reminded that Rick doesn't do anything without having some sort of ulterior motive.
How can you not love the series that brought us Pickle Rick? I don't for a second know how anyone could think that Rick could create a rat/insect body when he is just a pickle, but he's the smartest man on the planet so I'm willing to believe it was entirely possible.
For me, a series that takes its characters on a journey without getting bogged down in a single storyline is always my favourite. Rick and Morty certainly manages to do this with its constantly jumping scenarios. The one story that does pop up throughout this season is Beth and Jerry's divorce. Rick, despite always being a bit of a dick to everyone, has always had it out for Jerry so this news doesn't phase him at all but the rest of the family are suffering in their own ways. Throughout the series we see Summer and Morty compensating with Rick's adventures and reconciling some of their ongoing personal issues through their experiences. While none of it is realistic, it's entirely relatable.
Before watching this season I decided to rewatch seasons 1 and 2, because it's the sensible thing to do. It felt like we got much better family interaction and inclusions in season 3, I doubt if you work it out that there's much difference between them but that it's more to do with the quality of what we got. With the family going through upheaval we got a lot of stories that actually go to prove that Rick really does care deep down even if he would never openly admit it.
Morty does develop somewhat in this season, he isn't just the bumbling sidekick any more. He's learned a lot over their adventures, and while he's still not on Rick standards, there are moments where we see that he's growing. His dealings with Rick during Vindicators 3 take a step towards actually standing up for himself more and showing him that he understands more about the inner workings of Rick mind than he realises. In The Whirly Dirly Conspiracy, his part of the episode is almost like that of a Rick and Morty adventure when Morty gets to choose, he stands back and watches while Beth makes a hash of things and then swoops in at the last minute to do things that need to be done... admittedly that last bit probably isn't a good character trait to develop but he's realised that (in their messed up sort of world) sometimes someone needs to learn a lesson.
The season as a whole was very good and I liked the way that we came full circle and almost reset the universe for season four. Though I still enjoy Rick and Morty in general, this was definitely a high point for what's currently out there. Development of characters, more fun scenarios and just a little bit of fear that somewhere in a sewer a pickle is making a body out of rat parts.
Episode synopsis included here: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/02/rick-and-morty-season-3-tv-dvd-review.html
Rick and Morty continues to follow the adventures of the members of the Smith household. When Jerry asks Beth to choose between him and Rick, the strength of their marriage is tested. Jerry is confronted with the loss of his family, while Beth begins to discover her independence again. Morty and Summer deal with their parents' separation by seeking more control over their lives. Rick's nihilistic way of life continues to prevent him from bonding with his family, as he remains unable to change his self-destructive behaviour.
At the end of season 2 Rick and the Smiths have hidden on a tiny version of Earth outside of the Federation's jurisdiction, Earth has been taken over and Rick has surrendered himself to save his family. We open season 3 with Rick in the Federation's custody being interrogated and we instantly get reminded that Rick doesn't do anything without having some sort of ulterior motive.
How can you not love the series that brought us Pickle Rick? I don't for a second know how anyone could think that Rick could create a rat/insect body when he is just a pickle, but he's the smartest man on the planet so I'm willing to believe it was entirely possible.
For me, a series that takes its characters on a journey without getting bogged down in a single storyline is always my favourite. Rick and Morty certainly manages to do this with its constantly jumping scenarios. The one story that does pop up throughout this season is Beth and Jerry's divorce. Rick, despite always being a bit of a dick to everyone, has always had it out for Jerry so this news doesn't phase him at all but the rest of the family are suffering in their own ways. Throughout the series we see Summer and Morty compensating with Rick's adventures and reconciling some of their ongoing personal issues through their experiences. While none of it is realistic, it's entirely relatable.
Before watching this season I decided to rewatch seasons 1 and 2, because it's the sensible thing to do. It felt like we got much better family interaction and inclusions in season 3, I doubt if you work it out that there's much difference between them but that it's more to do with the quality of what we got. With the family going through upheaval we got a lot of stories that actually go to prove that Rick really does care deep down even if he would never openly admit it.
Morty does develop somewhat in this season, he isn't just the bumbling sidekick any more. He's learned a lot over their adventures, and while he's still not on Rick standards, there are moments where we see that he's growing. His dealings with Rick during Vindicators 3 take a step towards actually standing up for himself more and showing him that he understands more about the inner workings of Rick mind than he realises. In The Whirly Dirly Conspiracy, his part of the episode is almost like that of a Rick and Morty adventure when Morty gets to choose, he stands back and watches while Beth makes a hash of things and then swoops in at the last minute to do things that need to be done... admittedly that last bit probably isn't a good character trait to develop but he's realised that (in their messed up sort of world) sometimes someone needs to learn a lesson.
The season as a whole was very good and I liked the way that we came full circle and almost reset the universe for season four. Though I still enjoy Rick and Morty in general, this was definitely a high point for what's currently out there. Development of characters, more fun scenarios and just a little bit of fear that somewhere in a sewer a pickle is making a body out of rat parts.
Episode synopsis included here: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/02/rick-and-morty-season-3-tv-dvd-review.html
Rich, detailed, but strange narrative style at times!
I was sooo keen to read this - especially after watching the TV series, which I completely loved. For the most part, I wasn't disappointed. It's such a novel way of exploring Henry VIII's relationship with Anne Boleyn, not to mention the complex divorce proceedings that preceded it - through the eyes of Thomas Cromwell, the man partially responsible for orchestrating the whole thing.
Immediately, I was struck by Hilary Mantel's remarkable ability to capture life of that time - making it seem strangely familiar, despite the fact it was hundreds of years ago. She made it all seem so real, largely due to her richness of detail, not to mention expert knowledge of the era. The little notes of humour throughout are what really bring it to life - so often, history is treated with utmost seriousness, yet Mantel is absolutely correct - I'm sure people were cracking jokes and saying silly things in the Tudor era too!
The relationships were likewise beautifully illustrated, and the death of Cromwell's wife, genuinely moving. For me, this was one of the most impressive moments of the book, as Mantel captures grief so powerfully and yet so simply.
One thing I did find strange though - the way Mantel uses pronouns throughout the book. I pondered for ages about why it jarred on me every so often, and I think it's because the 3rd person narrative is so intimate, it almost feels like a 1st person in places. Then, when she uses 'he' again, rather than 'I', it is momentarily confusing. I found myself wondering what the book would have been like had she just told it in first person through Cromwell's eyes - my personal belief is that it might have worked better.
Also, although the richness of the detail was spectacular, there were times when I felt that it held up the narrative slightly. I appreciate her desire to capture every moment of these tumultuous historic events, but at times, I did find them a wee bit boring.
However, for the most part, I was really into this book, and loved the character of Cromwell to bits. A man from a humble background, unfailingly pragmatic and clever - fabulous stuff!
Immediately, I was struck by Hilary Mantel's remarkable ability to capture life of that time - making it seem strangely familiar, despite the fact it was hundreds of years ago. She made it all seem so real, largely due to her richness of detail, not to mention expert knowledge of the era. The little notes of humour throughout are what really bring it to life - so often, history is treated with utmost seriousness, yet Mantel is absolutely correct - I'm sure people were cracking jokes and saying silly things in the Tudor era too!
The relationships were likewise beautifully illustrated, and the death of Cromwell's wife, genuinely moving. For me, this was one of the most impressive moments of the book, as Mantel captures grief so powerfully and yet so simply.
One thing I did find strange though - the way Mantel uses pronouns throughout the book. I pondered for ages about why it jarred on me every so often, and I think it's because the 3rd person narrative is so intimate, it almost feels like a 1st person in places. Then, when she uses 'he' again, rather than 'I', it is momentarily confusing. I found myself wondering what the book would have been like had she just told it in first person through Cromwell's eyes - my personal belief is that it might have worked better.
Also, although the richness of the detail was spectacular, there were times when I felt that it held up the narrative slightly. I appreciate her desire to capture every moment of these tumultuous historic events, but at times, I did find them a wee bit boring.
However, for the most part, I was really into this book, and loved the character of Cromwell to bits. A man from a humble background, unfailingly pragmatic and clever - fabulous stuff!
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Papillon (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
Henry “Papillon” Charriere (Charlie Hunnam) is a safecracker making his name in the Parisian underworld. But when he decides to keep some diamonds from a big score to himself his luck changes. He is framed for a murder and given a life sentence. Even worse for Papillon is that he is being shipped to the Devil’s Island penal colony in French Giana. With no chance at an appeal his only chance at freedom is to escape. On the long boat ride from France to South America he finds an unlikely ally in the form of the forger Louis Dega (Rami Malek). The slight and awkward Dega does not want to escape but rather just survive long enough to have his appeal heard. Papillon agrees to protect Dega in exchange for financing any escape plan Papillon can devise. With Dega’s financial backing Papillon now only has to figure out how to escape from prison no one has been known to escape from on an island surrounded by rivers and ocean, unforgiving jungle and guards who shoot to kill.
Papillon is based on a true story and adapted from the novels “Papillon” and “Banco” written by Charriere himself. This is the second film adaptation of these novels. The other film, also Papillon, is from 1973 stared Steve McQueen and Dustin Hoffman. I have not seen the 1973 version but I did enjoy the story and could be worth viewing to get another directors vision.
The 2018 version is powered but a captivating story of survival and the unlikely friendship of two men thrust together in a harsh environment. Both Hunnam (King Arthur, Pacific Rim) and Malek (Mr. Robot – TV Series, Night at the Museum) give excellent performances. The rest of the cast is okay but these two stars give great performances. Danish director Michael Noer (R, Northwest) does a decent job in the telling of the story visually. There was blood in one scene that was a pink colored and did not look anything like blood and that was a little distracting. The prison seemed realistic and grimy, but also weirdly bright.
Overall I enjoyed this film. I didn’t have any expectations going in and was pleasantly surprised but interesting story. At 2 hours and 13 minutes it does seem a bit too long. This would be a film I would enjoy watching at home and not necessarily something I would spend theater money on.
Papillon is based on a true story and adapted from the novels “Papillon” and “Banco” written by Charriere himself. This is the second film adaptation of these novels. The other film, also Papillon, is from 1973 stared Steve McQueen and Dustin Hoffman. I have not seen the 1973 version but I did enjoy the story and could be worth viewing to get another directors vision.
The 2018 version is powered but a captivating story of survival and the unlikely friendship of two men thrust together in a harsh environment. Both Hunnam (King Arthur, Pacific Rim) and Malek (Mr. Robot – TV Series, Night at the Museum) give excellent performances. The rest of the cast is okay but these two stars give great performances. Danish director Michael Noer (R, Northwest) does a decent job in the telling of the story visually. There was blood in one scene that was a pink colored and did not look anything like blood and that was a little distracting. The prison seemed realistic and grimy, but also weirdly bright.
Overall I enjoyed this film. I didn’t have any expectations going in and was pleasantly surprised but interesting story. At 2 hours and 13 minutes it does seem a bit too long. This would be a film I would enjoy watching at home and not necessarily something I would spend theater money on.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Conversations With A Killer: The Ted Bundy Tapes in TV
Mar 3, 2020
The third of these was the most powerful for me. It was Confessions of a killer: the Ted Bundy tapes. I mean… I had no idea. His name was in my imagination somewhere as a candidate for pure evil, but I had no notion of the level of media hype and drama behind and before this. Which is why I recommend this absolutely comprehensive 4 part series as the best in this dubious category I have yet to see.
With the benefit of at least some hindsight, we can see in this case the epitome of such terms as “serial killer” and “sociopath”. Looking at it in pure terms of an idea worthy of dramatic exploration, then this is it! And, interestingly, to this date, besides the Zac Efron misfire, it is a story beyond worthy of correct telling, the basis of which should be the real footage. Because nothing is more bizarre than the real man and what he not only attempted to do, but actually did.
Take the basic idea that one individual is capable of murdering 30 plus women and girls over a period of two decades… then accept that he systematically went back to the corpses and committed acts of necropholia and decapitation without ever skipping a beat in what he perceived as his true persona as a competent lawyer in his own right, and you have the stuff of true nightmare. Add to that the fact that he escaped custody twice, and defended himself in court to such a charming extent that the judge himself admitted an affinity with him, and you have the recipe for something that transcends fact and becomes myth. Don’t believe me? Watch for yourself.
Do I agree with these cases being shown as entertainment? No, I don’t. Essentially. Because they are rarely told from the victim’s point of view. We have a fascination with an unsolved mystery and grim death that is undeniably curious. The cult of personality pervades, and we should be wary of why we get involved with this stuff. As addictive TV it is undeniably going to continue. Please be careful of the line between understanding and entertainment. God forbid I would give these shows a rating, as if it were a thing worthy of encouragement. It is the most undeniable yet horrific side effect of our media growth imaginable. Watch at your peril. But watch discerningly with interest.
With the benefit of at least some hindsight, we can see in this case the epitome of such terms as “serial killer” and “sociopath”. Looking at it in pure terms of an idea worthy of dramatic exploration, then this is it! And, interestingly, to this date, besides the Zac Efron misfire, it is a story beyond worthy of correct telling, the basis of which should be the real footage. Because nothing is more bizarre than the real man and what he not only attempted to do, but actually did.
Take the basic idea that one individual is capable of murdering 30 plus women and girls over a period of two decades… then accept that he systematically went back to the corpses and committed acts of necropholia and decapitation without ever skipping a beat in what he perceived as his true persona as a competent lawyer in his own right, and you have the stuff of true nightmare. Add to that the fact that he escaped custody twice, and defended himself in court to such a charming extent that the judge himself admitted an affinity with him, and you have the recipe for something that transcends fact and becomes myth. Don’t believe me? Watch for yourself.
Do I agree with these cases being shown as entertainment? No, I don’t. Essentially. Because they are rarely told from the victim’s point of view. We have a fascination with an unsolved mystery and grim death that is undeniably curious. The cult of personality pervades, and we should be wary of why we get involved with this stuff. As addictive TV it is undeniably going to continue. Please be careful of the line between understanding and entertainment. God forbid I would give these shows a rating, as if it were a thing worthy of encouragement. It is the most undeniable yet horrific side effect of our media growth imaginable. Watch at your peril. But watch discerningly with interest.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Inside Out (2015) in Movies
Apr 1, 2020
The Most Emotionally Resonant Pixar Film
When listing the PIXAR films that have the most emotional resonance, the films I hear mentioned most often are TOY STORY 3, WALL-E and the first 20 minutes of UP. While all of those are most definitely emotionally resonant, I would argue that INSIDE OUT is the most emotionally resonant of all the Pixar films.
And not just because the main characters in the film are emotions.
Telling the tale of 11 year old Riley, who's life is upended when her family moves from Minnesota to San Fransico, INSIDE OUT follows this journey through the eyes of Riley's 5 chief emotions - Joy, Sadness, Anger, Disgust and Fear.
As is customary in Pixar films, the voice cast in this film is outstanding. Amy Poehler (well known as the ever-optimistic Leslie Knope in the marvelous TV Series PARKS & RECREATION) is perfectly cast as Joy. Her never ending well of optimism is perfectly placed - and never gets tiresome. As does the voice work of Lewis Black (Anger), Bill Hader (Fear) and Mindy Kahling (Disgust). They are all marvelous. But the revelation of this film for me is the voicework of Phyllis Smith (THE OFFICE) as Sadness. She brings just the right amount of weight and...well...sadness...to her character without bogging down (and bringing down) the proceedings. These 5 work together well (especially Poehler and Smith).
Special notice needs to be made of the voice work of the unique talent that is Richard Kind as the character BingBong. I will not ruin any of the surprise of this character, but I will say I could not think of any other voice for this character - he is that perfect for it.
Credit, of course, for all of this needs to be given to Director Pete Docter (currently the Chief Creative Officer at Pixar). He has shown he has the ability to really tug at the heartstrings with his previous Pixar effort, UP, and he expands on this promise in this film bringing an emotionally rich film that has many, many moments of humor spliced within. He'll be at the helm of the upcoming SOUL and I can't wait to see it.
I'm glad I revisited INSIDE OUT, it is a stronger, better film than I remembered. You'll like it - and your kids will, too!
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
And not just because the main characters in the film are emotions.
Telling the tale of 11 year old Riley, who's life is upended when her family moves from Minnesota to San Fransico, INSIDE OUT follows this journey through the eyes of Riley's 5 chief emotions - Joy, Sadness, Anger, Disgust and Fear.
As is customary in Pixar films, the voice cast in this film is outstanding. Amy Poehler (well known as the ever-optimistic Leslie Knope in the marvelous TV Series PARKS & RECREATION) is perfectly cast as Joy. Her never ending well of optimism is perfectly placed - and never gets tiresome. As does the voice work of Lewis Black (Anger), Bill Hader (Fear) and Mindy Kahling (Disgust). They are all marvelous. But the revelation of this film for me is the voicework of Phyllis Smith (THE OFFICE) as Sadness. She brings just the right amount of weight and...well...sadness...to her character without bogging down (and bringing down) the proceedings. These 5 work together well (especially Poehler and Smith).
Special notice needs to be made of the voice work of the unique talent that is Richard Kind as the character BingBong. I will not ruin any of the surprise of this character, but I will say I could not think of any other voice for this character - he is that perfect for it.
Credit, of course, for all of this needs to be given to Director Pete Docter (currently the Chief Creative Officer at Pixar). He has shown he has the ability to really tug at the heartstrings with his previous Pixar effort, UP, and he expands on this promise in this film bringing an emotionally rich film that has many, many moments of humor spliced within. He'll be at the helm of the upcoming SOUL and I can't wait to see it.
I'm glad I revisited INSIDE OUT, it is a stronger, better film than I remembered. You'll like it - and your kids will, too!
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
I would rate this 3.5/5 stars.
I’ve never been able to find myself wanting to read Stephen King, and after a few attempts when I was younger to start one of his novels, I still couldn’t and so until this book I have never finished a Stephen King. I persevered through this one because it had been lent to me by a friend with a good review and I had watched the tv series based on it a few years ago.
The start of this novel was very slow and confused me in a few points (but I think that was intentional as our main character – Jake Epping – was also pretty confused at the same time). But because not much was happening, I kept putting the book down, distracted to do something else and really having to force myself to pick it back up. Once I managed to get to part 2, I found that I was much more interested in the story and the plot line and it wasn’t such a chore to make the time to read it. I then had a difficult time to put the book down, and most nights I was only putting it down because I was falling asleep in the middle of a sentence! I read the last quarter of the book in a day, because I just wanted to know what was going to happen and whether he was going to be able to stop the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
Overall, I found the concept very interesting and not just the time travel. I found the concept of the past not wanting to be changed and actively trying to stop someone from changing it interesting, and sometimes it was quite comical the amount of things that went wrong when Jake was trying to change the past. I did, however, find the ending very disappointing. It felt like it was starting to be set up for a different ending and then at the last minute the author decided to change it completely. It just didn’t seem to fit with the set up of the last chapter or so, but I can see why it was done and that the ending that was being set up wouldn’t work in terms of not changing the past.
A very interesting read, but with a disappointing ending, but I would still recommend it!
I’ve never been able to find myself wanting to read Stephen King, and after a few attempts when I was younger to start one of his novels, I still couldn’t and so until this book I have never finished a Stephen King. I persevered through this one because it had been lent to me by a friend with a good review and I had watched the tv series based on it a few years ago.
The start of this novel was very slow and confused me in a few points (but I think that was intentional as our main character – Jake Epping – was also pretty confused at the same time). But because not much was happening, I kept putting the book down, distracted to do something else and really having to force myself to pick it back up. Once I managed to get to part 2, I found that I was much more interested in the story and the plot line and it wasn’t such a chore to make the time to read it. I then had a difficult time to put the book down, and most nights I was only putting it down because I was falling asleep in the middle of a sentence! I read the last quarter of the book in a day, because I just wanted to know what was going to happen and whether he was going to be able to stop the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
Overall, I found the concept very interesting and not just the time travel. I found the concept of the past not wanting to be changed and actively trying to stop someone from changing it interesting, and sometimes it was quite comical the amount of things that went wrong when Jake was trying to change the past. I did, however, find the ending very disappointing. It felt like it was starting to be set up for a different ending and then at the last minute the author decided to change it completely. It just didn’t seem to fit with the set up of the last chapter or so, but I can see why it was done and that the ending that was being set up wouldn’t work in terms of not changing the past.
A very interesting read, but with a disappointing ending, but I would still recommend it!
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Nobody (2021) in Movies
Apr 27, 2021
A Fun Romp
Any fan of one of the greatest TV series of all-time, BREAKING BAD, or it’s spin-off, BETTER CALL SAUL, know the acting chops that Bob Odenkirk brings to the role of slimey, billboard lawyer Saul Goodman. His fast-talking, fast-thinking con-man is a character for the ages.
So, naturally, one would think “action star”.
But, darn it, if it doesn’t work.
Playing a retired undercover agent with a “certain set of skills”, NOBODY follows “Hutch” Mansell as he gets pulled back into using those skills when he helps a young woman who is being harassed on a bus, only to find out the thugs he went against are connected to the Russian Mob.
You can pretty much fill in the blanks from there. This film does not really tread any new ground…but…gosh…it was a fun watch.
Playing a more comedic hero than Liam Neeson in the TAKEN movies or Keanu Reeves’ JOHN WICK, Odenkirk, nonetheless, pulls off the “action hero” qualities just fine and is a winning enough presence on the screen that he holds your attention.
Christopher Lloyd (yes, Doc Brown from BACK TO THE FUTURE) is along for the ride as Odenkirk’s father, who gets pulled into the action when the Russian Mobsters decide to go after Hutch’s family and he looks like he is having a ball with this role.
The rest of the cast is pretty by-the-book (though a special shoutout needs to go to 1980’s heavy, Michael Ironside, who has a short role in this film - I would have loved to have seen more of him). The head Russian mobster is a bit over-the-top for my tastes, but the action sequences more than make up for all of this.
Credit for that must be given to Director Ilya Naishuller (HARDCORE HENRY) for he gives this film a unique look in the fight scenes while constantly having his tongue placed firmly in his cheek. I’ve seen ALOT of action films, so when a film brings something unique and fun to the screen, I sit up and notice.
And, notice I did. For NOBODY is a fun, popcorn flick. One that will be entertaining for the 92 minutes you watch.
Just don’t expect to see it during Awards season next year.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
So, naturally, one would think “action star”.
But, darn it, if it doesn’t work.
Playing a retired undercover agent with a “certain set of skills”, NOBODY follows “Hutch” Mansell as he gets pulled back into using those skills when he helps a young woman who is being harassed on a bus, only to find out the thugs he went against are connected to the Russian Mob.
You can pretty much fill in the blanks from there. This film does not really tread any new ground…but…gosh…it was a fun watch.
Playing a more comedic hero than Liam Neeson in the TAKEN movies or Keanu Reeves’ JOHN WICK, Odenkirk, nonetheless, pulls off the “action hero” qualities just fine and is a winning enough presence on the screen that he holds your attention.
Christopher Lloyd (yes, Doc Brown from BACK TO THE FUTURE) is along for the ride as Odenkirk’s father, who gets pulled into the action when the Russian Mobsters decide to go after Hutch’s family and he looks like he is having a ball with this role.
The rest of the cast is pretty by-the-book (though a special shoutout needs to go to 1980’s heavy, Michael Ironside, who has a short role in this film - I would have loved to have seen more of him). The head Russian mobster is a bit over-the-top for my tastes, but the action sequences more than make up for all of this.
Credit for that must be given to Director Ilya Naishuller (HARDCORE HENRY) for he gives this film a unique look in the fight scenes while constantly having his tongue placed firmly in his cheek. I’ve seen ALOT of action films, so when a film brings something unique and fun to the screen, I sit up and notice.
And, notice I did. For NOBODY is a fun, popcorn flick. One that will be entertaining for the 92 minutes you watch.
Just don’t expect to see it during Awards season next year.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BookInspector (124 KP) rated An Engineered Injustice (Philadelphia Legal, #2) in Books
Sep 24, 2020
More reviews at https://bbookinspector.wordpress.com
Wow, it felt like watching one of those court TV series, which sucks you in, and you want to binge watch all the seasons at once. 😀
The protagonist in this novel was Vaughn, most probably not a very likable person by the society, because he is a defense lawyer. I really liked him in this book though, he sounded like a hero to me 😀 There were a wide variety of characters to choose from, and all of them were quite diverse and very intriguing personalities. Even though there were so many characters, I didn’t get lost in who was who, the author described them all pretty well, I think. I really enjoyed, that author used multiple perspectives to tell the story, it allowed me, as a reader, to understand the characters way better.
I really like trains and somehow this story felt close to my heart. I loved the narrative of this book, and I really enjoyed all the twists and turns, which author had to offer. The villains were given away throughout the book, and there was no surprise effect there, but the whole finding out process and proving Eddy’s innocence was what kept me glued to this book. It was very amusing to read a book, where author’s confidence and experience just shines through. There is plenty of legal terms in this novel, but for me it was a plus, just showed that author knows what he was talking about.
I personally think that Mr. Myers is a very gifted writer, and I loved his writing style in this book, it seems difficult, but for me, it was pretty understandable and easy to read. I really enjoyed the structure of the chapters, it didn’t drag to me, wasn’t too long and was divided into smaller parts. I really liked the setting of this book as well, it has this American spirit about it, and I really loved that. The ending of this novel rounded the whole story very nicely and I loved the outcome. So to conclude, if you like to watch court dramas, do give this book a try, it has very amusing and interesting characters and quite twisty and unexpected narrative. I do hope you will enjoy it as much as I did. 😀
Wow, it felt like watching one of those court TV series, which sucks you in, and you want to binge watch all the seasons at once. 😀
The protagonist in this novel was Vaughn, most probably not a very likable person by the society, because he is a defense lawyer. I really liked him in this book though, he sounded like a hero to me 😀 There were a wide variety of characters to choose from, and all of them were quite diverse and very intriguing personalities. Even though there were so many characters, I didn’t get lost in who was who, the author described them all pretty well, I think. I really enjoyed, that author used multiple perspectives to tell the story, it allowed me, as a reader, to understand the characters way better.
I really like trains and somehow this story felt close to my heart. I loved the narrative of this book, and I really enjoyed all the twists and turns, which author had to offer. The villains were given away throughout the book, and there was no surprise effect there, but the whole finding out process and proving Eddy’s innocence was what kept me glued to this book. It was very amusing to read a book, where author’s confidence and experience just shines through. There is plenty of legal terms in this novel, but for me it was a plus, just showed that author knows what he was talking about.
I personally think that Mr. Myers is a very gifted writer, and I loved his writing style in this book, it seems difficult, but for me, it was pretty understandable and easy to read. I really enjoyed the structure of the chapters, it didn’t drag to me, wasn’t too long and was divided into smaller parts. I really liked the setting of this book as well, it has this American spirit about it, and I really loved that. The ending of this novel rounded the whole story very nicely and I loved the outcome. So to conclude, if you like to watch court dramas, do give this book a try, it has very amusing and interesting characters and quite twisty and unexpected narrative. I do hope you will enjoy it as much as I did. 😀
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated The Fly (1986) in Movies
Sep 10, 2020
Buzz Buzz
The Fly is a excellent remake of the 1958 version. Cronenberg does it again. All of his 80's films are excellent. I mean the gore, the violence, the horror, the suspense, the thrills, the sci-fi, the visuals, the terror and the acting.
The Plot: When scientist Seth Brundle (Jeff Goldblum) completes his teleportation device, he decides to test its abilities on himself. Unbeknownst to him, a housefly slips in during the process, leading to a merger of man and insect. Initially, Brundle appears to have undergone a successful teleportation, but the fly's cells begin to take over his body. As he becomes increasingly fly-like, Brundle's girlfriend (Geena Davis) is horrified as the person she once loved deteriorates into a monster.
The Fly was critically acclaimed, with most praise going to Goldblum's performance and the special effects. Despite being a gory remake of a classic made by a controversial, non-mainstream director, the film was a commercial success, the biggest of Cronenberg's career, and was the top-grossing film in the United States for two weeks, earning a total domestic gross of $40,456,565.
Film critic Gene Siskel named The Fly as the tenth best film of 1986. In 1989, Premiere and American Film magazines both conducted independent polls of American film critics, directors and other such groups to determine the best films of the 1980s, and The Fly appeared on both lists.
In 2008, the American Film Institute distributed ballots to 1,500 directors, critics and other people associated with the film industry in order to determine the top ten American films in ten different genre categories. Cronenberg's version of The Fly was nominated under the science fiction category, although it did not make the top ten. It was also nominated for AFI's 100 Years... 100 Thrills and AFI's 100 Years...100 Passions and Veronica's warning to Tawny in the film—"Be afraid. Be very afraid."—was nominated for AFI's 100 Years... 100 Movie Quotes.
The quote "Be afraid. Be very afraid." was also used as the film's marketing tagline, and became so ingrained in popular culture (as it—and variants—have appeared in countless films and TV series) that a large number of people who are familiar with the phrase are unaware that it originated in The Fly.
Its a excellent movie.
The Plot: When scientist Seth Brundle (Jeff Goldblum) completes his teleportation device, he decides to test its abilities on himself. Unbeknownst to him, a housefly slips in during the process, leading to a merger of man and insect. Initially, Brundle appears to have undergone a successful teleportation, but the fly's cells begin to take over his body. As he becomes increasingly fly-like, Brundle's girlfriend (Geena Davis) is horrified as the person she once loved deteriorates into a monster.
The Fly was critically acclaimed, with most praise going to Goldblum's performance and the special effects. Despite being a gory remake of a classic made by a controversial, non-mainstream director, the film was a commercial success, the biggest of Cronenberg's career, and was the top-grossing film in the United States for two weeks, earning a total domestic gross of $40,456,565.
Film critic Gene Siskel named The Fly as the tenth best film of 1986. In 1989, Premiere and American Film magazines both conducted independent polls of American film critics, directors and other such groups to determine the best films of the 1980s, and The Fly appeared on both lists.
In 2008, the American Film Institute distributed ballots to 1,500 directors, critics and other people associated with the film industry in order to determine the top ten American films in ten different genre categories. Cronenberg's version of The Fly was nominated under the science fiction category, although it did not make the top ten. It was also nominated for AFI's 100 Years... 100 Thrills and AFI's 100 Years...100 Passions and Veronica's warning to Tawny in the film—"Be afraid. Be very afraid."—was nominated for AFI's 100 Years... 100 Movie Quotes.
The quote "Be afraid. Be very afraid." was also used as the film's marketing tagline, and became so ingrained in popular culture (as it—and variants—have appeared in countless films and TV series) that a large number of people who are familiar with the phrase are unaware that it originated in The Fly.
Its a excellent movie.