Search
Search results
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Marriage Story (2019) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020
To say I found this hard to watch could not be more understated. Any adult that has risked their whole life on a true love that runs its course and then fails must surely feel the same. It happens to most of us once or twice in a lifetime, and resonates forever. Such is the level of truth and sadness on display in Noah Baumbach’s beautifully written and directed tale of two people in turmoil, whose biggest obstacle is not one another, but the dispassion and ineffectiveness of legality, and even friends and family, to resolve big issues of a personal nature.
As with the obvious reference point of the seminal take on divorce, Robert Benton’s 1979 Oscar winner Kramer Vs. Kramer, the point is not at all about taking sides and choosing a winner… because everyone loses in a break-up. The only thing you can hope is that it doesn’t tear the child / children apart, and that at least some memory of the love that once was isn’t entirely forgotten. You also hope that you will survive, once you realise you are not part of a whole any more, and you must now figure out who you are and where to go. Even the grief of death is sometimes not as devastating. And this beyond mature film acknowledges that.
Not that it is all doom and gloom. There is some real humour and joy wrapped up inside the detail of Marriage Story’s script. As you would expect from the guy who gave us the massively under-rated The Squid and the Whale, from 2005. It assumes an emotional intelligence similar to the best films of Woody Allen, with which he clearly shares some sense of creative style and sensibility. But let’s not open that can of worms at this juncture.
The idea that Scarlett Johansson can even be thought of as a double Oscar nominee this year may be galling to some naysayers, but it comes as no surprise to me at all. Despite a career touching on the lighter side of cinema, there are some bold artistic choices in there too, and personally I have always seen that potential. As Nicole, she not only creates a fully rounded character different from anything I have ever seen her do; believable and interesting in every way, but also holds her own against one of the major talents working in film today – Mr Adam Driver. And that is no mean feat! Another balance comparison that can be made to the epic battle of Streep Vs Hoffman, decades before. And as with Streep before her, there are moments where we entirely see her side of things and stop questioning male vs female politics and just see the person battling underneath it all.
However, and not remotely because I am likely to relate to the male point of view, the work Adam Driver is doing here is close to transcendent! I have made no secret of wanting Joaquin Phoenix to win every accolade going for his turn in Joker. And what a shame the two have to be compared, because Driver’s work here is second to none! I find it so completely exciting for the future of cinema that he is out there doing his thing – evidently, it is about as breath-taking as screen acting has ever been!
It is not only his ability to convey vulnerability and humanity in every role he takes on; it his control that really impresses. To such an extent that I begin to wonder if there is anything he could not do better than 99% of anyone working today, if well cast. Make no mistake, at any level, this is one of hell of a talent, making the right choices in the roles he does at almost every crossroads. Consider the latest Star Wars trilogy without him, and ponder what weak popcorn fare it might have been without him?
Marriage Story as a complete piece is worthy of dissection and multiple re-watches. I am happy to say that, only hours after seeing it myself. There simply isn’t a doubt. As a serious commentary on break-ups then it may be, at the moment, tertiary in my mind to both the aforementioned Kramer Vs Kramer and the sickeningly sad Blue Valentine. But, it is perhaps more real than either of those, and will certainly build in my psyche as time passes.
In conclusion: Yes! I have no inclination to fault it. And may have more to say at a different point…
As with the obvious reference point of the seminal take on divorce, Robert Benton’s 1979 Oscar winner Kramer Vs. Kramer, the point is not at all about taking sides and choosing a winner… because everyone loses in a break-up. The only thing you can hope is that it doesn’t tear the child / children apart, and that at least some memory of the love that once was isn’t entirely forgotten. You also hope that you will survive, once you realise you are not part of a whole any more, and you must now figure out who you are and where to go. Even the grief of death is sometimes not as devastating. And this beyond mature film acknowledges that.
Not that it is all doom and gloom. There is some real humour and joy wrapped up inside the detail of Marriage Story’s script. As you would expect from the guy who gave us the massively under-rated The Squid and the Whale, from 2005. It assumes an emotional intelligence similar to the best films of Woody Allen, with which he clearly shares some sense of creative style and sensibility. But let’s not open that can of worms at this juncture.
The idea that Scarlett Johansson can even be thought of as a double Oscar nominee this year may be galling to some naysayers, but it comes as no surprise to me at all. Despite a career touching on the lighter side of cinema, there are some bold artistic choices in there too, and personally I have always seen that potential. As Nicole, she not only creates a fully rounded character different from anything I have ever seen her do; believable and interesting in every way, but also holds her own against one of the major talents working in film today – Mr Adam Driver. And that is no mean feat! Another balance comparison that can be made to the epic battle of Streep Vs Hoffman, decades before. And as with Streep before her, there are moments where we entirely see her side of things and stop questioning male vs female politics and just see the person battling underneath it all.
However, and not remotely because I am likely to relate to the male point of view, the work Adam Driver is doing here is close to transcendent! I have made no secret of wanting Joaquin Phoenix to win every accolade going for his turn in Joker. And what a shame the two have to be compared, because Driver’s work here is second to none! I find it so completely exciting for the future of cinema that he is out there doing his thing – evidently, it is about as breath-taking as screen acting has ever been!
It is not only his ability to convey vulnerability and humanity in every role he takes on; it his control that really impresses. To such an extent that I begin to wonder if there is anything he could not do better than 99% of anyone working today, if well cast. Make no mistake, at any level, this is one of hell of a talent, making the right choices in the roles he does at almost every crossroads. Consider the latest Star Wars trilogy without him, and ponder what weak popcorn fare it might have been without him?
Marriage Story as a complete piece is worthy of dissection and multiple re-watches. I am happy to say that, only hours after seeing it myself. There simply isn’t a doubt. As a serious commentary on break-ups then it may be, at the moment, tertiary in my mind to both the aforementioned Kramer Vs Kramer and the sickeningly sad Blue Valentine. But, it is perhaps more real than either of those, and will certainly build in my psyche as time passes.
In conclusion: Yes! I have no inclination to fault it. And may have more to say at a different point…
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Death to 2020 in TV
Jan 22, 2021
The annual event of Charlie Brooker’s Yearly Wipe is the one piece of satire I have been sure not to miss over the years. But 2020 has been a bit different, and finding himself in lockdown like everyone else, Brooker re-imagines the format into a full on talking-heads mockumentary that does away with himself as host in favour of a cross Atlantic vibe and a narration from the bass tones of Laurence Fishburne, no less.
There are also some random big names delivering the sarcastic views on the headlines too: Samuel L. Jackson kicks it all off; Hugh Grant adds to his list of heavily made up characters (and is probably the highlight) as a crusty old historian who struggles to put it all into context; Lisa Kudrow represents the Trump mentality in the form of a Republican press officer who plays hard and loose with the facts and the enforcement of facts; and even Tracey Ullman is dragged out of obscurity to play The Queen (which I didn’t entirely see the point of).
Last, but actually far from least, is Joe Keery, who most will recognise as Steve Harrington in Stranger Things – he represents all youth and the social media generation, claiming some of the most pertinent lines of observation about attitudes and the need to be noticed and relevant, using the news as a basis to flaunt your own opinion and gain followers, as well as a soapbox to show the world how much you have suffered as the world suffers.
Diane Morgan, known for her hilarious regilar turns as Philomena Cunk, tries out an alternate role as the world’s most average woman, who has “finished” Netflix, but understands little of what has happened around her own bubble in the world at large. I mean, it is baffling, all of it! And together these voices and others fairly represent a lot of different types of fool to be lampooned. I missed Cunk, but essentially it served the same purpose.
You can expect from the Brooker team there will be no punches pulled, and at its best moments, Death to 2020, is almost worth standing up and applauding for making sense of things we have all been thinking for almost a year. Of course, part of the joke being that to make an historical documentary about a year that wasn’t even over at the time it was released on Netflix is as bizarre and ridiculous as the way any other news item has been the entire time we have experienced it in reality.
There is a British slant on things for a while, but inevitably the target becomes the US election and the Trump administration, which is a gold mine for all things silly, because it barely needs admonishing to become entirely bonkers! I felt like it could have been a little longer than just over an hour, to fit every angle of Covid and Trump and Boris and everything else in, but it also almost outstays its welcome as it is, so in the end I think they made the right call in leaving some issues out. Despite that it does move along at such a pace that often the joke flies past you before you can properly think about it.
The problem with it as a production is that it is neither a movie or a TV show, but some kind of inbetween thing, with as many ideas that don’t work as the ones that do, and not as many laugh out loud moments as there maybe should have been. Nor were there many moments of real weight, where the rug of comedy is pulled from under your feet and the truth and gravity of events is seen in terrifying reality and perspective for a moment – a trick Brooker usually employs on Yearly Wipe. And that was a shame. I missed that part of it, and felt it needed it.
For me, it was a take it or leave it kind of thing. Sure, it killed an hour or so and wasn’t bad in any way, but it wasn’t anything you’re gonna be shouting from the rooftops about. Maybe one or two moments will come up in conversation between two friends that saw it, but no one is saying “wow, that really hit the nail on the head”. Rather, it was a little silly, somewhat distracting and entirely throw-away.
Bring back the old format, Charlie, when you can. It was much more effective, and funny! I think you know that yourself.
There are also some random big names delivering the sarcastic views on the headlines too: Samuel L. Jackson kicks it all off; Hugh Grant adds to his list of heavily made up characters (and is probably the highlight) as a crusty old historian who struggles to put it all into context; Lisa Kudrow represents the Trump mentality in the form of a Republican press officer who plays hard and loose with the facts and the enforcement of facts; and even Tracey Ullman is dragged out of obscurity to play The Queen (which I didn’t entirely see the point of).
Last, but actually far from least, is Joe Keery, who most will recognise as Steve Harrington in Stranger Things – he represents all youth and the social media generation, claiming some of the most pertinent lines of observation about attitudes and the need to be noticed and relevant, using the news as a basis to flaunt your own opinion and gain followers, as well as a soapbox to show the world how much you have suffered as the world suffers.
Diane Morgan, known for her hilarious regilar turns as Philomena Cunk, tries out an alternate role as the world’s most average woman, who has “finished” Netflix, but understands little of what has happened around her own bubble in the world at large. I mean, it is baffling, all of it! And together these voices and others fairly represent a lot of different types of fool to be lampooned. I missed Cunk, but essentially it served the same purpose.
You can expect from the Brooker team there will be no punches pulled, and at its best moments, Death to 2020, is almost worth standing up and applauding for making sense of things we have all been thinking for almost a year. Of course, part of the joke being that to make an historical documentary about a year that wasn’t even over at the time it was released on Netflix is as bizarre and ridiculous as the way any other news item has been the entire time we have experienced it in reality.
There is a British slant on things for a while, but inevitably the target becomes the US election and the Trump administration, which is a gold mine for all things silly, because it barely needs admonishing to become entirely bonkers! I felt like it could have been a little longer than just over an hour, to fit every angle of Covid and Trump and Boris and everything else in, but it also almost outstays its welcome as it is, so in the end I think they made the right call in leaving some issues out. Despite that it does move along at such a pace that often the joke flies past you before you can properly think about it.
The problem with it as a production is that it is neither a movie or a TV show, but some kind of inbetween thing, with as many ideas that don’t work as the ones that do, and not as many laugh out loud moments as there maybe should have been. Nor were there many moments of real weight, where the rug of comedy is pulled from under your feet and the truth and gravity of events is seen in terrifying reality and perspective for a moment – a trick Brooker usually employs on Yearly Wipe. And that was a shame. I missed that part of it, and felt it needed it.
For me, it was a take it or leave it kind of thing. Sure, it killed an hour or so and wasn’t bad in any way, but it wasn’t anything you’re gonna be shouting from the rooftops about. Maybe one or two moments will come up in conversation between two friends that saw it, but no one is saying “wow, that really hit the nail on the head”. Rather, it was a little silly, somewhat distracting and entirely throw-away.
Bring back the old format, Charlie, when you can. It was much more effective, and funny! I think you know that yourself.
Uptown Oracle (24 KP) rated Clockwork Angel in Books
Jun 30, 2017
Clare exceeds expectations with Clockwork Angel
Clockwork Angel is the first in a trilogy of books. This series is a prequel to The Mortal Instruments, also written by Cassandra Clare. Tessa traveled to London to live with her brother, when he appears missing she is captured. Saved by Will, Tessa lives within the institute with the Shadowhunters helping to find Nate, whilst also finding out what the Magister's evil plan is.
I've heard so many times that The Infernal Devices is so much better than the Mortal Instruments. In comparison I can definitely agree the writing and overall plot is improved. The main issue I had was that in some cases, it was too similar to The Mortal Instruments. My instant thought was Will was similar to Jace although I'm unsure if this was intentional or not. The love triangle was also reminiscent of Clare's previous work.
I enjoyed that Clockwork Angel was set in London rather than New York. I was getting fairly bored of being focused on New York so this gave us a chance to see a new institute. The different location and different time means the institute is extremely different to the one in TMI.
The big question of who is the Magister? in the first chapter was important in the book. I found it both predictable and unpredictable. If Pretty Little Liars has told me anything, if a character claims it's one person, it's probably not them. I was however surprised of who it actually was. So well played, Cassandra Clare.
One of the big improvements is that the adults actually take action. In TMI, there were so many times the teenagers acted purely because the adults weren't doing anything. I was so tired of the adults being incompetent that Charlotte and Henry were a welcome surprise. They also really tried to help Tessa find Nate immediately. There weren't multiple meetings with the Clave before they could do anything.
Clockwork Angel seemed to pick up a lot quicker than TMI and kept pace. The fighting scenes were written better. Less filler content was needed as we already know the world. Although there was a love triangle, a lot less content was put towards building on it. It seemed a lot more like a fantasy than a romance.
Please don't comment any spoilers as I haven't finished the other books yet. But I had a weird thought about Tessa's name being Gray. As the dark sisters are called Black and Dark, does the inclusion of the name Gray fit there? Is this an insight into who she will become? Or who she 'could' become if she is a bad guy? I just thought it was odd to use a name so similar.
I've heard so many times that The Infernal Devices is so much better than the Mortal Instruments. In comparison I can definitely agree the writing and overall plot is improved. The main issue I had was that in some cases, it was too similar to The Mortal Instruments. My instant thought was Will was similar to Jace although I'm unsure if this was intentional or not. The love triangle was also reminiscent of Clare's previous work.
I enjoyed that Clockwork Angel was set in London rather than New York. I was getting fairly bored of being focused on New York so this gave us a chance to see a new institute. The different location and different time means the institute is extremely different to the one in TMI.
The big question of who is the Magister? in the first chapter was important in the book. I found it both predictable and unpredictable. If Pretty Little Liars has told me anything, if a character claims it's one person, it's probably not them. I was however surprised of who it actually was. So well played, Cassandra Clare.
One of the big improvements is that the adults actually take action. In TMI, there were so many times the teenagers acted purely because the adults weren't doing anything. I was so tired of the adults being incompetent that Charlotte and Henry were a welcome surprise. They also really tried to help Tessa find Nate immediately. There weren't multiple meetings with the Clave before they could do anything.
Clockwork Angel seemed to pick up a lot quicker than TMI and kept pace. The fighting scenes were written better. Less filler content was needed as we already know the world. Although there was a love triangle, a lot less content was put towards building on it. It seemed a lot more like a fantasy than a romance.
Please don't comment any spoilers as I haven't finished the other books yet. But I had a weird thought about Tessa's name being Gray. As the dark sisters are called Black and Dark, does the inclusion of the name Gray fit there? Is this an insight into who she will become? Or who she 'could' become if she is a bad guy? I just thought it was odd to use a name so similar.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated A Quiet Place (2018) in Movies
Apr 11, 2018
Not a "horror" movie, but a tense, taught, suspense film
There are many things the new film A QUIET PLACE is. What it is NOT is a "horror" film (as it is being promoted). What this film is is tense, suspenseful, well written, acted & directed, and quite good.
Co-written and Directed by John Krasinski (THE OFFICE) and starring Krasinski and his real-life wife, Emily Blunt (LIVE, DIE, REPEAT, the upcoming MARY POPPINS RETURNS), A QUIET PLACE tells the story of an Earth that has been overrun by aliens who hunt humans as food. These creatures are blind and have limited olfactory senses, but what they do have is extremely good hearing, so to stay alive, you must stay quiet.
We are introduced to this world by a family of 5 that have, thus far, survived. It consists of a Mother (Blunt) and Father (Kasinski) and their 3 children, one of whom is deaf. They have learned how to live in this world and we watch them struggle to stay alive - and stay together as a family unit.
This is the Directorial debut of Kasinski and he acquits himself quite well. This film is strongly paced with a sure eye for what this film should look and feel like. His handling of the actors is strong and he is smart enough to realize that this film could wear it's welcome out, so he keeps things short and to the point.
The acting of the children are good and Krasinski is very good in his role, but it is the work of Emily Blunt that really pulls this film along. As the matriarch of the family, you can see the care and concern on her face, her futility in trying to hold things together. Someone get this actress an Oscar already! Maybe not for this film...but...she is an Oscar-caliber actress showing off her abilities.
But...it is the silence that is the differentiating factor of this cinematic experience.
Because of the nature of the premise, this film - by necessity - is (in essence) a silent film. Because of this, an interesting thing happened in the movie theater I was in. At the beginning of the film, I could hear wrappers being handled and popcorn being eaten and drinks being drunk. But...after about 10 minutes, the theater became just as silent as the screen and you were pulled into the silent world of the film.
All in all, a fantastic, unique time at the cinema. As I said, I would not classify this as a "horror" film, but rather a taught, tense, suspense film that had me jumping out of my seat on more than one occasion.
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Co-written and Directed by John Krasinski (THE OFFICE) and starring Krasinski and his real-life wife, Emily Blunt (LIVE, DIE, REPEAT, the upcoming MARY POPPINS RETURNS), A QUIET PLACE tells the story of an Earth that has been overrun by aliens who hunt humans as food. These creatures are blind and have limited olfactory senses, but what they do have is extremely good hearing, so to stay alive, you must stay quiet.
We are introduced to this world by a family of 5 that have, thus far, survived. It consists of a Mother (Blunt) and Father (Kasinski) and their 3 children, one of whom is deaf. They have learned how to live in this world and we watch them struggle to stay alive - and stay together as a family unit.
This is the Directorial debut of Kasinski and he acquits himself quite well. This film is strongly paced with a sure eye for what this film should look and feel like. His handling of the actors is strong and he is smart enough to realize that this film could wear it's welcome out, so he keeps things short and to the point.
The acting of the children are good and Krasinski is very good in his role, but it is the work of Emily Blunt that really pulls this film along. As the matriarch of the family, you can see the care and concern on her face, her futility in trying to hold things together. Someone get this actress an Oscar already! Maybe not for this film...but...she is an Oscar-caliber actress showing off her abilities.
But...it is the silence that is the differentiating factor of this cinematic experience.
Because of the nature of the premise, this film - by necessity - is (in essence) a silent film. Because of this, an interesting thing happened in the movie theater I was in. At the beginning of the film, I could hear wrappers being handled and popcorn being eaten and drinks being drunk. But...after about 10 minutes, the theater became just as silent as the screen and you were pulled into the silent world of the film.
All in all, a fantastic, unique time at the cinema. As I said, I would not classify this as a "horror" film, but rather a taught, tense, suspense film that had me jumping out of my seat on more than one occasion.
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Rachel King (13 KP) rated The Claiming of Sleeping Beauty (Sleeping Beauty, #1) in Books
Feb 11, 2019
Anne Rice wrote a trilogy of books under the pen name A. N. Roquelaure, based on the fairy tale Sleeping Beauty. These books were titled The Claiming of Sleeping Beauty, Beauty's Punishment (Sleeping Beauty), and Beauty's Release: The Conclusion of the Classic Erotic Trilogy of Sleeping Beauty. Yep, you read it right - erotica. The set is the only thing I have ever read by Anne Rice, and the only erotica books I have ever read. I have told maybe one or two other people that I have read the series, because it just does not match up with my "good girl" persona, and it resulted in the shocked expression I was expecting. Why would I read such an abomination? One part boredom, one part fairy tale superfan, and three parts secret naughty indulgence/curiousity (one for each book) - I found the books at a slow point while working at a bookstore, and sneakily read them at the customer service desk when I had nothing else to do.
In the first book, Beauty is awakened from her hundred-year sleep with a deflowering by the Prince. He takes her to his kingdom, where she is trained as a sexual slave and plaything, but she fails to be obedient, so is sent to brutal slavery in the neighboring village. In the second book, she is sold at auction and a power struggle ensues as she refuses to be completely broken by her various punishments. Actual plotline wanes in this one until towards the end some of the psychological aspects of sexual slavery are explored before Beauty is kidnapped for a Sultan. In the third book, the various characters all reach closure in varying forms as the sexual aspects of the plot take on a more religious and philosophical tone, as opposed to the crudity of the European castle and village. By the end of the series, it felt more like I was reading a study of a lifestyle for the education and not so much for the indulgence.
The sexual scenes are extremely explicit and graphic with the theme of sado-masochism replete throughout the text, but amazingly, there is still a plotline and decent character development. The first book was my favorite of the three, simply because that is the only book of the three that actually uses the fairy tale in its plotline, and by the third book much of the sex seemed vaguely repetitive and did not affect me as intensely as it did in the beginning. I would even dare to recommend it to those who are of the appropriate age.
I likely have A. N. Roquelaure's influence to thank for my unquestioning devotion to the Kushiel's Legacy series by Jacqueline Carey, now that I think about it...
In the first book, Beauty is awakened from her hundred-year sleep with a deflowering by the Prince. He takes her to his kingdom, where she is trained as a sexual slave and plaything, but she fails to be obedient, so is sent to brutal slavery in the neighboring village. In the second book, she is sold at auction and a power struggle ensues as she refuses to be completely broken by her various punishments. Actual plotline wanes in this one until towards the end some of the psychological aspects of sexual slavery are explored before Beauty is kidnapped for a Sultan. In the third book, the various characters all reach closure in varying forms as the sexual aspects of the plot take on a more religious and philosophical tone, as opposed to the crudity of the European castle and village. By the end of the series, it felt more like I was reading a study of a lifestyle for the education and not so much for the indulgence.
The sexual scenes are extremely explicit and graphic with the theme of sado-masochism replete throughout the text, but amazingly, there is still a plotline and decent character development. The first book was my favorite of the three, simply because that is the only book of the three that actually uses the fairy tale in its plotline, and by the third book much of the sex seemed vaguely repetitive and did not affect me as intensely as it did in the beginning. I would even dare to recommend it to those who are of the appropriate age.
I likely have A. N. Roquelaure's influence to thank for my unquestioning devotion to the Kushiel's Legacy series by Jacqueline Carey, now that I think about it...
Hazel (1853 KP) rated You Were Here in Books
Dec 7, 2018
<i>This ARC was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review </i>
On the five-year anniversary of Jaycee Strangelove’s brother’s death, she goes to visit one of his favourite haunts – an abandoned Victorian mansion that used to be an insane asylum. However, this year she is joined by four other people who, although they do not show it, feel as broken as Jaycee does.
<i>You Were Here</i> by Cori McCarthy is primarily about Jaycee’s dangerous attempts to feel closer to her daredevil brother. Using his old diary as a guide, she is determined to find evidence that her brother had been at the various decrepit places that he wrote about breaking in to. Her behaviour seriously worries others, which is why Jaycee ends up with four unlikely characters tagging along: Natalie, her ex-best friend; Zach, Natalie’s immature boyfriend; Bishop, a guy suffering after a break up; and the selectively mute Mikivikious, her brother’s childhood friend.
Each character is struggling with their own problems, yet they take the time to make Jaycee realize that her brother is gone and she needs to move on. However there is a lot of fighting and sabotage of relationships along the way.
Each character progressively tells the story by alternating chapters. Whilst this is fairly common in fiction – both young adult and adult – McCarthy’s method stands out amongst the others. Bishop likes to express his feelings through art and therefore does not have any written chapters to his name. Instead a few photographs of his artwork are included. Similarly, Mikivikious, a character who barely talks, shows his point of view through a short graphic novel sequence (drawn by the illustrator Sonia Liao). It is really interesting to read(?) parts of the story this way, and it also makes the reader connect to Mik’s struggle to express himself verbally.
It is difficult to like any of the characters to begin with – mostly because their flaws are revealed but their history is yet to be disclosed. Jaycee, the main character, is particularly hard to like. She is depressed and lonely with a serious self-destructive streak. This causes her to be rude, hurtful and sarcastic to everyone around her. It is actually surprising that anyone cares about her at all.
Due to not connecting with any of the characters, I was not all that impressed with this book. I understand the point of portraying certain people, especially Jaycee, in such a negative way, however it made me not really care about the outcome. Future readers need to be aware that the storyline can be very dark and morbid at times. There are also sexual references and foul language.
On the five-year anniversary of Jaycee Strangelove’s brother’s death, she goes to visit one of his favourite haunts – an abandoned Victorian mansion that used to be an insane asylum. However, this year she is joined by four other people who, although they do not show it, feel as broken as Jaycee does.
<i>You Were Here</i> by Cori McCarthy is primarily about Jaycee’s dangerous attempts to feel closer to her daredevil brother. Using his old diary as a guide, she is determined to find evidence that her brother had been at the various decrepit places that he wrote about breaking in to. Her behaviour seriously worries others, which is why Jaycee ends up with four unlikely characters tagging along: Natalie, her ex-best friend; Zach, Natalie’s immature boyfriend; Bishop, a guy suffering after a break up; and the selectively mute Mikivikious, her brother’s childhood friend.
Each character is struggling with their own problems, yet they take the time to make Jaycee realize that her brother is gone and she needs to move on. However there is a lot of fighting and sabotage of relationships along the way.
Each character progressively tells the story by alternating chapters. Whilst this is fairly common in fiction – both young adult and adult – McCarthy’s method stands out amongst the others. Bishop likes to express his feelings through art and therefore does not have any written chapters to his name. Instead a few photographs of his artwork are included. Similarly, Mikivikious, a character who barely talks, shows his point of view through a short graphic novel sequence (drawn by the illustrator Sonia Liao). It is really interesting to read(?) parts of the story this way, and it also makes the reader connect to Mik’s struggle to express himself verbally.
It is difficult to like any of the characters to begin with – mostly because their flaws are revealed but their history is yet to be disclosed. Jaycee, the main character, is particularly hard to like. She is depressed and lonely with a serious self-destructive streak. This causes her to be rude, hurtful and sarcastic to everyone around her. It is actually surprising that anyone cares about her at all.
Due to not connecting with any of the characters, I was not all that impressed with this book. I understand the point of portraying certain people, especially Jaycee, in such a negative way, however it made me not really care about the outcome. Future readers need to be aware that the storyline can be very dark and morbid at times. There are also sexual references and foul language.
BookblogbyCari (345 KP) rated Law of Attraction in Books
Aug 14, 2018
Book Review by Cari Mayhew.
I listened to this as an audiobook, and I feel this added to the feel of the story and improved my experience of the book. The narrator spoke in a stunning female American accent but would change voices for the male dialogue parts.
I was enticed by the book's description – a romantic drama between two high-flying Lawyers. I was expecting witty dialogue and real tension between the characters. This book is part of a two-book series and is intended for readers over the age of eighteen.
The central character is criminal defense lawyer Gabrielle, who has crushed on prosecutor Braden in their altercations in the Courtroom for several months. Braden, however, is quite the cad, and is known not have had any serious relationships in quite some time.
One evening the two of them meet in the local bar and a serious flirting session ensues. Despite how much characters lust after each other, Gabrielle has no intention of becoming a mere one night stand, and a succession of dates are negotiated.
Their first date is one to remember. Soon after they boyfriend-girlfriend are meeting each other’s family. But, there are some odd complications, and all does not run smoothly. Braden has a narcissistic ex-girlfriend Marla, who still can’t accept that they’ve broken up. More intriguingly, an old crush of Gabrielle’s, Cam, who took Gabrielle’s virginity, comes back into her life shadowing her law firm, and it turns out he’s Braden’s cousin, who is also the man that another ex of Braden’s once cheated with. Then Gabrielle receives threatening notes telling her to stay away from Braden.
Gabrielle and her friends start plotting to find out who is leaving the notes. They aim to get handwriting samples from the 3 people they suspect, and by some strange coincidence, all 3 are at the same secret underground fantasy party which gets raided, providing handwriting samples in the form of written statements.
Then the first book in the series comes to an end before the note writer is identified. Rather than it being one of the people Gabrielle suspects, I suspect the author aims to provide surprise by making it someone closer to home.
One saucy scene was on a par with Fifty Shades of Grey, but this book is not going to take off like Fifty Shades of Grey did. There was nothing unusual in these scenes other than perhaps the locations.
Whilst the book never bored me, I just didn’t care enough about the characters or plot to want to read the second book in the series.
For more of my reviews, check out www.bookblogbycari.com
I listened to this as an audiobook, and I feel this added to the feel of the story and improved my experience of the book. The narrator spoke in a stunning female American accent but would change voices for the male dialogue parts.
I was enticed by the book's description – a romantic drama between two high-flying Lawyers. I was expecting witty dialogue and real tension between the characters. This book is part of a two-book series and is intended for readers over the age of eighteen.
The central character is criminal defense lawyer Gabrielle, who has crushed on prosecutor Braden in their altercations in the Courtroom for several months. Braden, however, is quite the cad, and is known not have had any serious relationships in quite some time.
One evening the two of them meet in the local bar and a serious flirting session ensues. Despite how much characters lust after each other, Gabrielle has no intention of becoming a mere one night stand, and a succession of dates are negotiated.
Their first date is one to remember. Soon after they boyfriend-girlfriend are meeting each other’s family. But, there are some odd complications, and all does not run smoothly. Braden has a narcissistic ex-girlfriend Marla, who still can’t accept that they’ve broken up. More intriguingly, an old crush of Gabrielle’s, Cam, who took Gabrielle’s virginity, comes back into her life shadowing her law firm, and it turns out he’s Braden’s cousin, who is also the man that another ex of Braden’s once cheated with. Then Gabrielle receives threatening notes telling her to stay away from Braden.
Gabrielle and her friends start plotting to find out who is leaving the notes. They aim to get handwriting samples from the 3 people they suspect, and by some strange coincidence, all 3 are at the same secret underground fantasy party which gets raided, providing handwriting samples in the form of written statements.
Then the first book in the series comes to an end before the note writer is identified. Rather than it being one of the people Gabrielle suspects, I suspect the author aims to provide surprise by making it someone closer to home.
One saucy scene was on a par with Fifty Shades of Grey, but this book is not going to take off like Fifty Shades of Grey did. There was nothing unusual in these scenes other than perhaps the locations.
Whilst the book never bored me, I just didn’t care enough about the characters or plot to want to read the second book in the series.
For more of my reviews, check out www.bookblogbycari.com
Roxanne (13 KP) rated The Forest of Hands and Teeth (The Forest of Hands and Teeth, #1) in Books
Nov 14, 2018
___ <b>3 Star Rating</b> ___
I just had to read this one as I fell in love with the front cover, it looked great so I expected a great story.
I had a love/hate relationship with this book, there were bits that were so good I wanted to shout from the rooftops but there were also parts that were so bad I wanted to run to a dark corner and cry.
<u>The bits I loved</u>
1. The suspense - Oh my life and soul I thought my heart was going to give out! That tension was fantastic! The way the author wrote the action scenes were great, the extra long description filled build ups which make you sweat and then straight into the action. The action was always really good with a nice bit of gore and clever tactics...very well done!
2. The dog - You have to have a dog in there somewhere, I love dogs! If the dog survives then that's extra points from me, I just want the animals to be ok...f*ck anyone else!
3. The Unconsecrated - Very well described, I liked the idea of 'The Fast One' and yeah I know they're Zombies...but I like Zombies.
<u>The bits I hated</u>
1. Mary! Mary! Aaaaand...Mary! - Oh what a pain in the ass! I did not like the MC one little bit. She was incredibly selfish, self centred and just plain rude. She was willing to step on anybody to get her own way. Everything was...love, love, love, OMG Mary I love you!
Mary: *Like I give a shit! I just wanna go to the Beach!*
People whom she supposedly loved were dropping like flies around her but oh well that's one less person in the way of her ocean filled dreams.
I'm sorry but I just hoped for this...
<img src="http://i.imgur.com/TJ9LVsr.jpg"; width="300" height="210"/>
2. Lack of character development - Actually, there was none. I still know nothing about the other characters, it's like they were just there to show how 'amazing' Mary really was. I so wanted at least one of the other characters to take centre stage for a while, just so I could see things from a different perspective...but no.
3. Lack of story building - So...why? When? Who? What? Did they live? Die? How did the dog get across the rope the second time?
Why the gates? The fences? Why are there Unconsecrated? What is the Sisterhood all about? What are they hiding? How did this all happen? WTF is Mary's problem?
Ok...so I know there's a second book and I've heard that it doesn't even carry the story on, if that is true I think I'm gonna scream. So many questions!
I just had to read this one as I fell in love with the front cover, it looked great so I expected a great story.
I had a love/hate relationship with this book, there were bits that were so good I wanted to shout from the rooftops but there were also parts that were so bad I wanted to run to a dark corner and cry.
<u>The bits I loved</u>
1. The suspense - Oh my life and soul I thought my heart was going to give out! That tension was fantastic! The way the author wrote the action scenes were great, the extra long description filled build ups which make you sweat and then straight into the action. The action was always really good with a nice bit of gore and clever tactics...very well done!
2. The dog - You have to have a dog in there somewhere, I love dogs! If the dog survives then that's extra points from me, I just want the animals to be ok...f*ck anyone else!
3. The Unconsecrated - Very well described, I liked the idea of 'The Fast One' and yeah I know they're Zombies...but I like Zombies.
<u>The bits I hated</u>
1. Mary! Mary! Aaaaand...Mary! - Oh what a pain in the ass! I did not like the MC one little bit. She was incredibly selfish, self centred and just plain rude. She was willing to step on anybody to get her own way. Everything was...love, love, love, OMG Mary I love you!
Mary: *Like I give a shit! I just wanna go to the Beach!*
People whom she supposedly loved were dropping like flies around her but oh well that's one less person in the way of her ocean filled dreams.
I'm sorry but I just hoped for this...
<img src="http://i.imgur.com/TJ9LVsr.jpg"; width="300" height="210"/>
2. Lack of character development - Actually, there was none. I still know nothing about the other characters, it's like they were just there to show how 'amazing' Mary really was. I so wanted at least one of the other characters to take centre stage for a while, just so I could see things from a different perspective...but no.
3. Lack of story building - So...why? When? Who? What? Did they live? Die? How did the dog get across the rope the second time?
Why the gates? The fences? Why are there Unconsecrated? What is the Sisterhood all about? What are they hiding? How did this all happen? WTF is Mary's problem?
Ok...so I know there's a second book and I've heard that it doesn't even carry the story on, if that is true I think I'm gonna scream. So many questions!
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Lion (2017) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Upon discovering this short film, I was impressed with how well it had performed. During its first year of distribution, it has won 126 awards at a variety of film festivals which is quite the selling point. Walking in to the film, I didn’t know much about it but the air of mystery made my viewing experience even better. The film is set in an isolated cabin, on a snowy night, which creates the perfect backdrop for a horror tale…
From the very first scene you can tell this cabin is not a happy place to be. Straight away we’re created with sounds of domestic violence, making the viewer feel instantly uncomfortable. The father in the film is repulsive and lives in a squalor, with cigarette butts, leftover pizza and empty cans of beer dotted everywhere. Michael Segal really brought this character to life, showing us that not all villains are supernatural or machete wielding psychopaths. Some evil can be found in the average home, behind closed doors, where violence takes over. Sometimes humans can be more terrifying than anything else.
The way Lion deals with domestic violence, particularly against children, was done incredibly well. It’s not an easy topic to cover but this short makes an impact without going too far and making it gratuitous. Part of what makes this film so good is what you don’t see on screen, and how your imagination runs wild. It has a slow burning narrative that builds up the suspense and finally unleashes the climactic moment with only a few minutes to spare, providing closure and satisfaction for the spectator.
I really liked the use of special effects throughout the film, because they blended in nicely with the rest of the scene and weren’t overdone at any point. Cinematically it hits all the right notes for a horror film through it’s use of low-lighting, tense creeping moments, and an excellent use of music. Jump scares and gore weren’t needed in Lion, because it manages to deliver real horror in a much more subtler, but effective way. The presence of the lion throughout was a good motif to use as well, as they’re synonymous with courage and being a fighter. You’ll see what I mean when you watch it.
Lion is an incredibly important short film that I believe is a must watch, even for those who don’t tend to reach for horrors. The final card at the end reiterates the important message that is present throughout the film, and it really resonated with me. It’s a film with fantasy elements, yet still deep rooted within reality that it makes you want to stand up and take action in any way you can.
https://jumpcutonline.co.uk/lion-short/
From the very first scene you can tell this cabin is not a happy place to be. Straight away we’re created with sounds of domestic violence, making the viewer feel instantly uncomfortable. The father in the film is repulsive and lives in a squalor, with cigarette butts, leftover pizza and empty cans of beer dotted everywhere. Michael Segal really brought this character to life, showing us that not all villains are supernatural or machete wielding psychopaths. Some evil can be found in the average home, behind closed doors, where violence takes over. Sometimes humans can be more terrifying than anything else.
The way Lion deals with domestic violence, particularly against children, was done incredibly well. It’s not an easy topic to cover but this short makes an impact without going too far and making it gratuitous. Part of what makes this film so good is what you don’t see on screen, and how your imagination runs wild. It has a slow burning narrative that builds up the suspense and finally unleashes the climactic moment with only a few minutes to spare, providing closure and satisfaction for the spectator.
I really liked the use of special effects throughout the film, because they blended in nicely with the rest of the scene and weren’t overdone at any point. Cinematically it hits all the right notes for a horror film through it’s use of low-lighting, tense creeping moments, and an excellent use of music. Jump scares and gore weren’t needed in Lion, because it manages to deliver real horror in a much more subtler, but effective way. The presence of the lion throughout was a good motif to use as well, as they’re synonymous with courage and being a fighter. You’ll see what I mean when you watch it.
Lion is an incredibly important short film that I believe is a must watch, even for those who don’t tend to reach for horrors. The final card at the end reiterates the important message that is present throughout the film, and it really resonated with me. It’s a film with fantasy elements, yet still deep rooted within reality that it makes you want to stand up and take action in any way you can.
https://jumpcutonline.co.uk/lion-short/
Darren (1599 KP) rated Air (2015) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: Air starts in the future when the world has gone through a war, the remaining people live in a bunker in sleep chambers, engineers Bauer (Reedus) and Cartwright (Hounsou) both awaken on a routine cycle to check the equipment before returning to their chambers, but when a fire causes them to lose one of their chambers, they must work together with the resources they have because in 2 hours their air supply runs out.
As the clock ticks down the two must face moral decisions which involve risks to the fellow the sleepers in their bunker but finding a way for them both to get back to sleep is the most important part and any means necessary.
Thoughts on Air
Characters – Bauer seems to be the most resourceful of the two technicians in the chamber, he plays things safe and makes sure he knows the damage of any effect the men do. Cartwright seems to be the one who is about to lose his mind, he has visions of his wife who makes him make the decisions he does. While it could be argued these two men are meant to be considered the lower lives of the selected neither of them is made out to be the good guy while both find themselves making bad decisions through the film.
Performance – Both Norman Reedus and Djimon Hounsou are great actors but in this role the two just don’t give their best performances and end up not helping us care about either character.
Story – The story should work, we have the world ending with the only survivors in sleeping pods with two technicians watching over them every so many months or years. The problems here are clear, we have two unlikable characters who while they do take a step back to solve the problem it does just turn into a mindless battle of who will get the upper hand.
Sci-Fi/Thriller – The sci-fi side of the film comes from idea the world has ended and now the few survivors are underground, we are left wondering how the two men could survive with the only one chamber.
Settings – The film is set within the chamber, it shows the unclear feeling of what is outside and the fear of what is happening with no safety in the chamber.
Special Effects – The effects are used well with most being practical until we see the outside world which is as bleak as we are expecting.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – I just didn’t care about the two characters.
Final Thoughts – This is a sci-fi film that we have seen before, we have seen better before but we have seen worse too and lacks the pace we need in the film.
Overall: Disappointing thriller.
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/06/01/air-2015/
As the clock ticks down the two must face moral decisions which involve risks to the fellow the sleepers in their bunker but finding a way for them both to get back to sleep is the most important part and any means necessary.
Thoughts on Air
Characters – Bauer seems to be the most resourceful of the two technicians in the chamber, he plays things safe and makes sure he knows the damage of any effect the men do. Cartwright seems to be the one who is about to lose his mind, he has visions of his wife who makes him make the decisions he does. While it could be argued these two men are meant to be considered the lower lives of the selected neither of them is made out to be the good guy while both find themselves making bad decisions through the film.
Performance – Both Norman Reedus and Djimon Hounsou are great actors but in this role the two just don’t give their best performances and end up not helping us care about either character.
Story – The story should work, we have the world ending with the only survivors in sleeping pods with two technicians watching over them every so many months or years. The problems here are clear, we have two unlikable characters who while they do take a step back to solve the problem it does just turn into a mindless battle of who will get the upper hand.
Sci-Fi/Thriller – The sci-fi side of the film comes from idea the world has ended and now the few survivors are underground, we are left wondering how the two men could survive with the only one chamber.
Settings – The film is set within the chamber, it shows the unclear feeling of what is outside and the fear of what is happening with no safety in the chamber.
Special Effects – The effects are used well with most being practical until we see the outside world which is as bleak as we are expecting.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – I just didn’t care about the two characters.
Final Thoughts – This is a sci-fi film that we have seen before, we have seen better before but we have seen worse too and lacks the pace we need in the film.
Overall: Disappointing thriller.
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/06/01/air-2015/