Search
Search results
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Unrivalled in Books
May 25, 2017
Indistinctive
This ARC was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review
Unrivalled is the first book in a new young adult series by Alyson Noël. Set in Hollywood, this story takes a look at what it is like to be young and famous, as well as what it is like to be aspiring to be. The lives of four eighteen year olds from completely different circumstances are suddenly thrown together in a prestigious competition to become the best promoter of VIP nightclubs owned by the infamous Ira Redmond.
Layla and Tommy, from less notable backgrounds, are determined to become famous through journalism and guitar playing. For Layla, this competition means winning enough money to go to college in New York. For Tommy, the prize will help him to move up from his lowly rented apartment and begin to make himself known. Aster, on the other hand, is already rich, she does not care about the money, she cares about winning. Winning means being noticed, which for an aspiring actress is an important career move.
The fourth character is already famous and is a face that Redmond has challenged the competitors to get to enter their respective nightclubs. Madison Brooks has made her way to the top as America’s hottest teenage actress – yet how she has managed this is unclear. As the story goes on it becomes clear that Madison has a shaky past that is constantly trying to catch up with her. No one other than her trusted staff know of the true Madison, so when she goes missing the police suspect foul play. The only problem is Layla, Tommy and Aster are so mixed up in recent events surrounding Madison that they immediately become the prime suspects.
Unrivalled is a book that needs a required taste to fully enjoy. The focus is on celebrity life style, which for me is not something I am interested in. I found myself lacking in sympathy for any of the characters – although I slightly liked Layla’s ambition to become a reporter as journalism and writing IS something I am drawn to. What is annoying is that Unrivalled is only the first novel in a series, so I never got to find out what happened to Madison after plowing through pages of tedious narrative. But to be honest, I do not really care about the result.
It is my lack of interest in the subject matter that consequently leaves me to only give this book a two star rating. However, I would like to emphasize that Noël knows how to write. For the right target audience Unrivalled will be a captivating novel. It emphasizes the glamorous and the not-so-glamorous aspects of becoming famous, which the three contestants soon discover: as Shakespeare put it “All that glitters is not gold.”
If you have an interest in celebrity culture, teenage romance and a bit of mystery, then this book may well be for you. If not, you may be headed for disappointment.
Unrivalled is the first book in a new young adult series by Alyson Noël. Set in Hollywood, this story takes a look at what it is like to be young and famous, as well as what it is like to be aspiring to be. The lives of four eighteen year olds from completely different circumstances are suddenly thrown together in a prestigious competition to become the best promoter of VIP nightclubs owned by the infamous Ira Redmond.
Layla and Tommy, from less notable backgrounds, are determined to become famous through journalism and guitar playing. For Layla, this competition means winning enough money to go to college in New York. For Tommy, the prize will help him to move up from his lowly rented apartment and begin to make himself known. Aster, on the other hand, is already rich, she does not care about the money, she cares about winning. Winning means being noticed, which for an aspiring actress is an important career move.
The fourth character is already famous and is a face that Redmond has challenged the competitors to get to enter their respective nightclubs. Madison Brooks has made her way to the top as America’s hottest teenage actress – yet how she has managed this is unclear. As the story goes on it becomes clear that Madison has a shaky past that is constantly trying to catch up with her. No one other than her trusted staff know of the true Madison, so when she goes missing the police suspect foul play. The only problem is Layla, Tommy and Aster are so mixed up in recent events surrounding Madison that they immediately become the prime suspects.
Unrivalled is a book that needs a required taste to fully enjoy. The focus is on celebrity life style, which for me is not something I am interested in. I found myself lacking in sympathy for any of the characters – although I slightly liked Layla’s ambition to become a reporter as journalism and writing IS something I am drawn to. What is annoying is that Unrivalled is only the first novel in a series, so I never got to find out what happened to Madison after plowing through pages of tedious narrative. But to be honest, I do not really care about the result.
It is my lack of interest in the subject matter that consequently leaves me to only give this book a two star rating. However, I would like to emphasize that Noël knows how to write. For the right target audience Unrivalled will be a captivating novel. It emphasizes the glamorous and the not-so-glamorous aspects of becoming famous, which the three contestants soon discover: as Shakespeare put it “All that glitters is not gold.”
If you have an interest in celebrity culture, teenage romance and a bit of mystery, then this book may well be for you. If not, you may be headed for disappointment.
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated Every Other Day in Books
Apr 27, 2018
Warning: Spoilers ahead. And they'll probably be in all caps.
I have mixed feelings about Every Other Day.
The good:
It literally got my adrenaline pumping. Barnes has a good voice for YA novels.
I loved the protagonists and I hated the antagonists. I love Skylar, she's my favorite! I would want her to be my little sister. I love Bethany! (well, in a love-hate kind of way. I like her snark and her sarcasm.) I love Kali. She's totally my favorite kind of kick-ass heroine with supernatural powers.
The not so good:
I almost stopped reading this book a few times. Once right in the middle of chapter 2, because what was happening didn't really click with what the summary said was going to happen. I put it down for a while. When I finally picked it up again, it got exciting right at the end of that chapter.
I tore through it until right before the halfway mark, when something happened and I took it the wrong way and thought "oh no, she's turning into a vampire, it's one of THOSE books," and got really mad, and wanted to quit again. But I kept reading and discovered my assumption was incorrect. And then I read some more and I discovered that she was, indeed, part vampire. I mean, I guess I should have known what with the hourglass filled with blood. But seriously?
Point is, it was hard for me to read for an extended period of time, because I got frustrated.
I couldn't quite tell if it had a plot, or just a lot of events that happened. (See my post about plotless books here for more about that.)
It took me a good long time to get through it. For something so exciting, you would think it would be easier to read more than two or three chapters at a time. I'm not sure why: Maybe the drama was getting to my head and I just had to put it down.
WHAT THE CRAP IS WITH SKYLAR DYING OMIGOD SHE WAS MY FREAKING FAVORITE!!!!1 *breathes* okay Haley, you can handle this… be professional… *sobs and hits head against wall* Okay you can't just kill off a main character like that. Skylar was the reason I kept reading the book and then YOU KILLED HER.
VAMPIRE? REALLY? SERIOUSLY?? LIKE WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH YOUNG ADULT VAMPIRE NOVELS OUT THERE, SOMEONE PLEASE WRITE SOMETHING ORIGINAL.
That was not an ending. It needed like, four more sentences. Also: the fact that it is totally the first book in a series? Gah. What's wrong with writing stand-alones?
Obviously, for me, there is more bad than good: but, it was addicting enough that I HAD to finish it.
So. You can decide if you want to read it or not. It really depends on your taste, and what you want in a YA novel.
Recommended for ages 14+
I have mixed feelings about Every Other Day.
The good:
It literally got my adrenaline pumping. Barnes has a good voice for YA novels.
I loved the protagonists and I hated the antagonists. I love Skylar, she's my favorite! I would want her to be my little sister. I love Bethany! (well, in a love-hate kind of way. I like her snark and her sarcasm.) I love Kali. She's totally my favorite kind of kick-ass heroine with supernatural powers.
The not so good:
I almost stopped reading this book a few times. Once right in the middle of chapter 2, because what was happening didn't really click with what the summary said was going to happen. I put it down for a while. When I finally picked it up again, it got exciting right at the end of that chapter.
I tore through it until right before the halfway mark, when something happened and I took it the wrong way and thought "oh no, she's turning into a vampire, it's one of THOSE books," and got really mad, and wanted to quit again. But I kept reading and discovered my assumption was incorrect. And then I read some more and I discovered that she was, indeed, part vampire. I mean, I guess I should have known what with the hourglass filled with blood. But seriously?
Point is, it was hard for me to read for an extended period of time, because I got frustrated.
I couldn't quite tell if it had a plot, or just a lot of events that happened. (See my post about plotless books here for more about that.)
It took me a good long time to get through it. For something so exciting, you would think it would be easier to read more than two or three chapters at a time. I'm not sure why: Maybe the drama was getting to my head and I just had to put it down.
WHAT THE CRAP IS WITH SKYLAR DYING OMIGOD SHE WAS MY FREAKING FAVORITE!!!!1 *breathes* okay Haley, you can handle this… be professional… *sobs and hits head against wall* Okay you can't just kill off a main character like that. Skylar was the reason I kept reading the book and then YOU KILLED HER.
VAMPIRE? REALLY? SERIOUSLY?? LIKE WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH YOUNG ADULT VAMPIRE NOVELS OUT THERE, SOMEONE PLEASE WRITE SOMETHING ORIGINAL.
That was not an ending. It needed like, four more sentences. Also: the fact that it is totally the first book in a series? Gah. What's wrong with writing stand-alones?
Obviously, for me, there is more bad than good: but, it was addicting enough that I HAD to finish it.
So. You can decide if you want to read it or not. It really depends on your taste, and what you want in a YA novel.
Recommended for ages 14+
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated 10 Cloverfield Lane (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Somewhat misleading but thrilling nonetheless
It’s best to start off this review as honest as possible. If you’re expecting a fully-fledged sequel or even a prequel to Matt Reeves’ brilliant monster horror, Cloverfield in 10 Cloverfield Lane, you’ll be very disappointed.
But, if you’re expecting a superbly written, well-acted and claustrophobic thriller, then this is definitely the film for you. Dan Trachtenberg, who makes his directorial debut with this feature, has crafted a taut film that has no real connection with the 2008 hit. So is it as good?
10 Cloverfield Lane follows Michelle (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) as she embarks on a new chapter in her life after a break-up. Unfortunately, a car crash leaves her seriously injured and unconscious. After waking up in an underground bunker, she meets her saviour in Howard (John Goodman), and as the story progresses, Michelle and fellow resident Emmett, try to make a bid for freedom.
The performances by the cast of three are terrific with Winstead coming on leaps and bounds since her role in Final Destination 3 and John Goodman is absolutely incredible. Cloverfield utilised its monster very well, but Goodman is more than a match with a simple shaking of his fists – his booming voice and burly frame mean he was a perfect casting choice and a human as psychotic as Howard is infinitely more terrifying to me than any monster.
It’s all very Hitchcockian, claustrophobic and exceptionally tense. Director Dan Trachtenberg has a real eye for the smaller details and the underground bunker setting is the perfect location to craft this kind of film. The use of jagged camera angles and low shots help aid the enclosed feeling and you can’t help but become panicked with Michelle, as she desperately tries to figure out a way to freedom.
After the bloated mess of London Has Fallen and the overlong Allegiant, it’s nice to see a film that doesn’t dwell more than it needs to. At 103 minutes, 10 Cloverfield Lane is relatively short and all the better for it. Despite only having three characters and being confined to a few small rooms for the majority of the running time, it never drags or becomes dull.
Unfortunately, the final third unravels a little of this good work, coming across like the ending to a completely different film; but Trachtenberg’s ideas and reasoning behind the finale are clear throughout, despite the lack of connection to the two acts that preceded it.
Overall, 10 Cloverfield Lane is a smart and well-thought out thriller that is related to Cloverfield in name only. That’s no bad thing, as the film we are left with is one of the best directorial debuts in years, even though its muddled ending leaves somewhat of a sour taste.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/03/20/somewhat-misleading-but-thrilling-nonetheless-10-cloverfield-lane-review/
But, if you’re expecting a superbly written, well-acted and claustrophobic thriller, then this is definitely the film for you. Dan Trachtenberg, who makes his directorial debut with this feature, has crafted a taut film that has no real connection with the 2008 hit. So is it as good?
10 Cloverfield Lane follows Michelle (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) as she embarks on a new chapter in her life after a break-up. Unfortunately, a car crash leaves her seriously injured and unconscious. After waking up in an underground bunker, she meets her saviour in Howard (John Goodman), and as the story progresses, Michelle and fellow resident Emmett, try to make a bid for freedom.
The performances by the cast of three are terrific with Winstead coming on leaps and bounds since her role in Final Destination 3 and John Goodman is absolutely incredible. Cloverfield utilised its monster very well, but Goodman is more than a match with a simple shaking of his fists – his booming voice and burly frame mean he was a perfect casting choice and a human as psychotic as Howard is infinitely more terrifying to me than any monster.
It’s all very Hitchcockian, claustrophobic and exceptionally tense. Director Dan Trachtenberg has a real eye for the smaller details and the underground bunker setting is the perfect location to craft this kind of film. The use of jagged camera angles and low shots help aid the enclosed feeling and you can’t help but become panicked with Michelle, as she desperately tries to figure out a way to freedom.
After the bloated mess of London Has Fallen and the overlong Allegiant, it’s nice to see a film that doesn’t dwell more than it needs to. At 103 minutes, 10 Cloverfield Lane is relatively short and all the better for it. Despite only having three characters and being confined to a few small rooms for the majority of the running time, it never drags or becomes dull.
Unfortunately, the final third unravels a little of this good work, coming across like the ending to a completely different film; but Trachtenberg’s ideas and reasoning behind the finale are clear throughout, despite the lack of connection to the two acts that preceded it.
Overall, 10 Cloverfield Lane is a smart and well-thought out thriller that is related to Cloverfield in name only. That’s no bad thing, as the film we are left with is one of the best directorial debuts in years, even though its muddled ending leaves somewhat of a sour taste.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/03/20/somewhat-misleading-but-thrilling-nonetheless-10-cloverfield-lane-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Hitman: Agent 47 (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Clinical and incomprehensible
The transition from video game to movie is notoriously difficult to get right. From box-office disasters like Super Mario Bros. to the poorly received Resident Evil franchise, it appears no film is spared from either financial woe or critically panning.
Hitman has become one of the most popular game series’ ever but the 2007 film of the same name failed to kick-start the franchise’s transition to the silver screen. Now, eight years later, Rupert Friend stars as the red tie-wearing assassin in Hitman: Agent 47, but does it succeed as a reboot?
Friend stars as the titular character, an emotionless killer hell-bent on tracking down the creator of the ‘Agent Program’ from which he was created. Alongside him for the ride is Hannah Ware’s Katia Van Dees, a young fearful woman searching for a man she does not know.
The usually excellent Zachary Quinto (Star Trek) also stars as a clichéd villain in a thankless role blighted by stilted dialogue and cardboard emotions. This most certainly isn’t his finest work.
The story is incredibly simple, barely fitting into the film’s slender 96 minute running time and the clinical filming style of director Aleksander Bach really doesn’t help. Beautiful locations like Berlin and Singapore are wasted in favour of sleek office sets, populated by one-dimensional characters that we couldn’t care less about.
Nevertheless, Friend plays the emotionless Agent 47 with ease and is one of the highlights in a film lacking in any real punch – it’s all been done before, and better.
Ware is disappointingly wooden, though her veneer seems to crack towards the finale and we get to see the character she could have played. It’s a shame that for the majority of Hitman’s running time we see no real prowess in her performance.
The action sequences are slick and nicely choreographed but Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation did them only last month and in a more detailed and ultimately successful style.
However, clever gun-work is mixed nicely with the film’s 15 certificate and each barrel discharge feels much more real. It’s certainly more interesting than the two sequels to Taken and many other action thrillers that sport the 12A rating.
The climax leaves things wide open for a sequel, but the ending is incomprehensible to anyone who hasn’t played the games and leaves a bad taste in the mouth – probably not a great thing when trying to get audiences excited for a follow up.
Overall, Hitman: Agent 47 is much like its titular character. A slick outer shell hides not a lot underneath with a cast of wasted talent and a been-there-done-that attitude to the stunts. There’s some great sequences, but you’ll have to dig deep to find any real merit here.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/08/30/clinical-and-incomprehensible-hitman-agent-47-review/
Hitman has become one of the most popular game series’ ever but the 2007 film of the same name failed to kick-start the franchise’s transition to the silver screen. Now, eight years later, Rupert Friend stars as the red tie-wearing assassin in Hitman: Agent 47, but does it succeed as a reboot?
Friend stars as the titular character, an emotionless killer hell-bent on tracking down the creator of the ‘Agent Program’ from which he was created. Alongside him for the ride is Hannah Ware’s Katia Van Dees, a young fearful woman searching for a man she does not know.
The usually excellent Zachary Quinto (Star Trek) also stars as a clichéd villain in a thankless role blighted by stilted dialogue and cardboard emotions. This most certainly isn’t his finest work.
The story is incredibly simple, barely fitting into the film’s slender 96 minute running time and the clinical filming style of director Aleksander Bach really doesn’t help. Beautiful locations like Berlin and Singapore are wasted in favour of sleek office sets, populated by one-dimensional characters that we couldn’t care less about.
Nevertheless, Friend plays the emotionless Agent 47 with ease and is one of the highlights in a film lacking in any real punch – it’s all been done before, and better.
Ware is disappointingly wooden, though her veneer seems to crack towards the finale and we get to see the character she could have played. It’s a shame that for the majority of Hitman’s running time we see no real prowess in her performance.
The action sequences are slick and nicely choreographed but Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation did them only last month and in a more detailed and ultimately successful style.
However, clever gun-work is mixed nicely with the film’s 15 certificate and each barrel discharge feels much more real. It’s certainly more interesting than the two sequels to Taken and many other action thrillers that sport the 12A rating.
The climax leaves things wide open for a sequel, but the ending is incomprehensible to anyone who hasn’t played the games and leaves a bad taste in the mouth – probably not a great thing when trying to get audiences excited for a follow up.
Overall, Hitman: Agent 47 is much like its titular character. A slick outer shell hides not a lot underneath with a cast of wasted talent and a been-there-done-that attitude to the stunts. There’s some great sequences, but you’ll have to dig deep to find any real merit here.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/08/30/clinical-and-incomprehensible-hitman-agent-47-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Focus (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Reasonably Accomplished
Will Smith desperately needed a film to catapult him back onto the silver screen A-list after M. Night Shyamalan’s critical and commercial disaster After Earth.
The Hollywood favourite recently spoke about how the movie bruised his ego and made him reassess his position as a serious actor. His latest film Focus, is the first after a brief hiatus, but does it mark a return to form?
Focus follows the story of Nicky Spurgeon (Smith), a seasoned con-man who becomes romantically involved with a young woman, played by Margot Robbie. Naturally, life manages to get in the way and years later Nicky is in Buenos Aires trying to carry out his biggest scam yet – but it doesn’t all run smoothly.
The story is reasonably accomplished but struggles to discern just what genre it is trying to be. There’s a tinge of romantic comedy, a drop of
hard-hitting drama and the occasional slice of Taken-esque thrills which all mix together and leave a rather sour taste in the mouth.
Focusing on one particular theme would have been a better prospect for directors Glenn Ficarra and John Requa, but it wasn’t meant to be and what the audience is left with is a mish-mash of genres which doesn’t quite gel like it was clearly intended.
The film relies heavily on the stunning locations of Buenos Aires and New Orleans, as well as the charisma and chemistry from its two leads rather than delving into character developments and this works well. Smith is a commanding presence and dominates every scene demonstrating just why we fell in love with him all those years ago.
Moreover, Robbie is a force to be reckoned with and comes up against the attitude of Smith’s character very well. Her steely, yet vulnerable persona is one of the main highlights in the film.
Focus starts off slowly with nothing of any real significance happening in the opening hour and this is disappointing given the film’s well-worn genre. Many similar films, Oceans Eleven as a prime example, wear their themes with much more confidence.
Apart from a few cleverly choreographed shots showing the con-artists in action during the first 20 minutes, Focus comes across as rather half-baked, almost dull.
However, fast-forward to the final third and it finally kicks into gear. As we follow Smith try and pull off a hugely risky scam, the audience is thrown numerous red herrings with the story never settling until the end credits roll.
Overall, Focus was a test of Will Smith’s prowess as an actor following on from After Earth’s failings and thankfully he shows how versatile he is. Margot Robbie is also engaging to watch and their on-screen chemistry is positively sizzling, but when a film has such an identity crisis, it’s hard to focus on anything else.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/03/01/reasonably-accomplished-focus-review/
The Hollywood favourite recently spoke about how the movie bruised his ego and made him reassess his position as a serious actor. His latest film Focus, is the first after a brief hiatus, but does it mark a return to form?
Focus follows the story of Nicky Spurgeon (Smith), a seasoned con-man who becomes romantically involved with a young woman, played by Margot Robbie. Naturally, life manages to get in the way and years later Nicky is in Buenos Aires trying to carry out his biggest scam yet – but it doesn’t all run smoothly.
The story is reasonably accomplished but struggles to discern just what genre it is trying to be. There’s a tinge of romantic comedy, a drop of
hard-hitting drama and the occasional slice of Taken-esque thrills which all mix together and leave a rather sour taste in the mouth.
Focusing on one particular theme would have been a better prospect for directors Glenn Ficarra and John Requa, but it wasn’t meant to be and what the audience is left with is a mish-mash of genres which doesn’t quite gel like it was clearly intended.
The film relies heavily on the stunning locations of Buenos Aires and New Orleans, as well as the charisma and chemistry from its two leads rather than delving into character developments and this works well. Smith is a commanding presence and dominates every scene demonstrating just why we fell in love with him all those years ago.
Moreover, Robbie is a force to be reckoned with and comes up against the attitude of Smith’s character very well. Her steely, yet vulnerable persona is one of the main highlights in the film.
Focus starts off slowly with nothing of any real significance happening in the opening hour and this is disappointing given the film’s well-worn genre. Many similar films, Oceans Eleven as a prime example, wear their themes with much more confidence.
Apart from a few cleverly choreographed shots showing the con-artists in action during the first 20 minutes, Focus comes across as rather half-baked, almost dull.
However, fast-forward to the final third and it finally kicks into gear. As we follow Smith try and pull off a hugely risky scam, the audience is thrown numerous red herrings with the story never settling until the end credits roll.
Overall, Focus was a test of Will Smith’s prowess as an actor following on from After Earth’s failings and thankfully he shows how versatile he is. Margot Robbie is also engaging to watch and their on-screen chemistry is positively sizzling, but when a film has such an identity crisis, it’s hard to focus on anything else.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/03/01/reasonably-accomplished-focus-review/
Hazel (1853 KP) rated The Secret Diary of Hendrik Groen, 83 Years Old in Books
Dec 7, 2018
<i>This ARC was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review </i>
Think <i>Adrian Plass</i> but with octogenarians and this is the result. <i>The Secret Diary of Hendrik Groen, 83 ¼ Years Old</i> is a years long journal beginning on 1st January 2013. Hendrik hates old people, an unfortunate predicament as he live in a home for the elderly. He set himself the task of writing a daily account about the “life of the inmates of a care home in North Amsterdam,” with the purpose of it being read after his death by readers, or “inmates” who wish to know what to expect in their old age.
Whether the contents of this diary are true or exaggerated does not matter, as what it produces is a laugh-out-loud story, a pleasure to read. From cake in the fish tank, to complaints about leaky nether regions, Hendrik provides a brutally honest account of the highs and lows of being an OAP.
<i>The Secret Diary of Hendrik Groen, 83 ¼ Years Old</i> encompasses a selection of unique and presumably real characters. Readers are bound to discover someone who reminds them of an elderly relative, or even themselves! There is the diabetic, rude, gin loving Evert – Henrdik’s best friend of many years – who is never without a witty comeback for the bossy, self-important director of the home. On the other hand, levelheaded Eefje, who Hendrik is rather fond of, shows a completely different view of elderly mentality. Despite the stereotypes associated with care home patients, Hendrik and friends still have as much fun as possible; after all, they may be Old but not Dead.
Speaking of dead, Hendrik makes a number of jokes and references to euthanasia, which may seem like poor taste to some readers. However, when all the friends around you are literally living the final years of their lives, why not joke about it instead of worry? Naturally there are sad diary entries about the inevitable deaths of his contemporaries throughout the year, but Hendrik does not let it get him down for long. Hendrik and his close friends make the most of the time they have left, and if that involves speeding along the roads of Amsterdam on their souped-up mobility scooters, then that is exactly what they will do.
<i>The Secret Diary of Hendrik Groen, 83 ¼ Years Old</i> is a gem of a book and comes highly recommended to readers of all ages. Hendrik ‘s effortlessly funny, sarcastic remarks stress what the average citizen is too polite to voice. Once you begin it is hard to put down. Unfortunately a year is not long enough and you will end up wanting more. Whatever the future holds for us, let’s hope we become someone like Hendrik Groen.
Think <i>Adrian Plass</i> but with octogenarians and this is the result. <i>The Secret Diary of Hendrik Groen, 83 ¼ Years Old</i> is a years long journal beginning on 1st January 2013. Hendrik hates old people, an unfortunate predicament as he live in a home for the elderly. He set himself the task of writing a daily account about the “life of the inmates of a care home in North Amsterdam,” with the purpose of it being read after his death by readers, or “inmates” who wish to know what to expect in their old age.
Whether the contents of this diary are true or exaggerated does not matter, as what it produces is a laugh-out-loud story, a pleasure to read. From cake in the fish tank, to complaints about leaky nether regions, Hendrik provides a brutally honest account of the highs and lows of being an OAP.
<i>The Secret Diary of Hendrik Groen, 83 ¼ Years Old</i> encompasses a selection of unique and presumably real characters. Readers are bound to discover someone who reminds them of an elderly relative, or even themselves! There is the diabetic, rude, gin loving Evert – Henrdik’s best friend of many years – who is never without a witty comeback for the bossy, self-important director of the home. On the other hand, levelheaded Eefje, who Hendrik is rather fond of, shows a completely different view of elderly mentality. Despite the stereotypes associated with care home patients, Hendrik and friends still have as much fun as possible; after all, they may be Old but not Dead.
Speaking of dead, Hendrik makes a number of jokes and references to euthanasia, which may seem like poor taste to some readers. However, when all the friends around you are literally living the final years of their lives, why not joke about it instead of worry? Naturally there are sad diary entries about the inevitable deaths of his contemporaries throughout the year, but Hendrik does not let it get him down for long. Hendrik and his close friends make the most of the time they have left, and if that involves speeding along the roads of Amsterdam on their souped-up mobility scooters, then that is exactly what they will do.
<i>The Secret Diary of Hendrik Groen, 83 ¼ Years Old</i> is a gem of a book and comes highly recommended to readers of all ages. Hendrik ‘s effortlessly funny, sarcastic remarks stress what the average citizen is too polite to voice. Once you begin it is hard to put down. Unfortunately a year is not long enough and you will end up wanting more. Whatever the future holds for us, let’s hope we become someone like Hendrik Groen.
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated Pale Blue Scratch in Books
Aug 21, 2018
Full review can be found on: diaryofdifference.com/2018/06/18/pale-blue-scratch-jay-dinitto-book-review/
I was lucky enough to be approached by Jay DiNitto himself, and he sent me a copy of his first novel - Pale Blue Scratch in exchange for an honest review. This is a book unlike anything else I have ever read, and it left me impressed. I dearly enjoyed it, and maybe you will too.
As mentioned above, this is a book unlike any other that I have read. It is a great mix of fiction / action / fast-paced scenes / philosophy / psychology and a little bit of time-travelling.
Even though we have two main characters - Elizabeth and Vincent, this book focused more on Elizabeth, for various reasons.
<img src="https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1455591169l/28919161.jpg"/>;
There were times when the scenes were slow, and somewhat a bit dull, but there were also times when there were fast-paced scenes that make me bite my nails. Though, as a whole, I found the story to not quite fit my taste. It felt like Elizabeth didn’t have a great or a strong enough reason to do this adventure.
Elizabeth’s character - now this is something quite amusing! I have never met a character like this - so twisted in a cute hippocrytical way. A nun with an adorable sense of humor, that goes around on a mission to make a time-travel machine, and happens to hurt people on her way… I loved her character in a very weird way (don’t judge!)
Now Vincent didn’t quite hit the mark. He seemed more of a plain character, like a little copy of someone else, somewhere, once upon a time. He gave the impression of a person that, unlike Elizabeth, didn’t quite knew where he belonged and what he’s doing. It felt like it didn’t bother him at all. And that’s alright. The moment when this started to hurt me was at the end - when he didn’t change a bit.
Even though a bit disappointed that I didn’t get to read much about time-travelling as I would want to, this book was quite amusing and it covered various random topics that I quite liked. I loved that variety when one moment you talk about religion, the other moment a great action scene happens, and then here we are again, discussing life philosophy.
All in all, to sum it all up - I greatly enjoyed this book! It was definitely unusual read, and unique in every single way. And if you love fiction / action / a bit of time-travelling / humor and philosophy, this might be easily your new favourite book!
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="http://innahcrazy.tumblr.com/">Tumblr</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>; |
I was lucky enough to be approached by Jay DiNitto himself, and he sent me a copy of his first novel - Pale Blue Scratch in exchange for an honest review. This is a book unlike anything else I have ever read, and it left me impressed. I dearly enjoyed it, and maybe you will too.
As mentioned above, this is a book unlike any other that I have read. It is a great mix of fiction / action / fast-paced scenes / philosophy / psychology and a little bit of time-travelling.
Even though we have two main characters - Elizabeth and Vincent, this book focused more on Elizabeth, for various reasons.
<img src="https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1455591169l/28919161.jpg"/>;
There were times when the scenes were slow, and somewhat a bit dull, but there were also times when there were fast-paced scenes that make me bite my nails. Though, as a whole, I found the story to not quite fit my taste. It felt like Elizabeth didn’t have a great or a strong enough reason to do this adventure.
Elizabeth’s character - now this is something quite amusing! I have never met a character like this - so twisted in a cute hippocrytical way. A nun with an adorable sense of humor, that goes around on a mission to make a time-travel machine, and happens to hurt people on her way… I loved her character in a very weird way (don’t judge!)
Now Vincent didn’t quite hit the mark. He seemed more of a plain character, like a little copy of someone else, somewhere, once upon a time. He gave the impression of a person that, unlike Elizabeth, didn’t quite knew where he belonged and what he’s doing. It felt like it didn’t bother him at all. And that’s alright. The moment when this started to hurt me was at the end - when he didn’t change a bit.
Even though a bit disappointed that I didn’t get to read much about time-travelling as I would want to, this book was quite amusing and it covered various random topics that I quite liked. I loved that variety when one moment you talk about religion, the other moment a great action scene happens, and then here we are again, discussing life philosophy.
All in all, to sum it all up - I greatly enjoyed this book! It was definitely unusual read, and unique in every single way. And if you love fiction / action / a bit of time-travelling / humor and philosophy, this might be easily your new favourite book!
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="http://innahcrazy.tumblr.com/">Tumblr</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>; |
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Sherlock Holmes (2009) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
The stories of master detective Sherlock Holmes have delighted readers, listeners, and viewers for well over a century. The tales have grown from the stories by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle to include radio, television, and film. Director Guy Ritchie casts Robert Downey Jr. as a slightly dysfunctional but brilliant Holmes who, along with his partner Dr. Watson (Jude Law), have just stopped a bizarre ceremony and ended a murder spree in the process.
The people of London are grateful to be free of the terror induced by Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong), but solving the mystery leaves Holmes somewhat despondent and uninterested in solving other mysteries. Most likely because Watson is moving out of their home and office to complete his pending marriage plans. The lack of complexity in the cases Holmes is requested to take leaves him abundant time to sulk in his study and scare the housing staff with his bizarre behavior and inventions.
The monotony of Holmes’s life is abruptly ended when Blackwood summons him shortly before his scheduled execution for his crimes. Blackwood indicates that a dark plot is in the works and though his claims are dismissed by the authorities as the desperate ravings of a madman about to be executed, Holmes begins to think there is more to the case than meets the eye. Things take a bizarre turn when Blackwood appears to rise from the dead and starts a new wave of terror over the city. Pressed into action, Holmes and Watson uncover a series of clues that reveal a diabolic plot that will alter the balance of power in England.
In a race against time, Holmes and Watson must also deal with their unresolved issues regarding Watson’s pending marriage as well as a mysterious, seductive woman from Holmes’s past (Rachel Mc Adams). What follows is a winning combination of comedy, action, mystery, and a touch of romance Ritchie knows he has a strong cast and gives Downey, Law, and Mc Adams ample room to explore their characters yet keeps them within the story.
The plot of the film may be the weakest point and at times its uncertain if it is an action buddy film or a caper picture. It attempts to blend the two but often comes up short, lacking enough action for my taste. The plot may also be confusing to some as it lacks a cohesive structure and seems to be a free roaming entity that exists within a general framework.
Downey and Law work well with one another and Downey gives a strong, clever performance in a role that requires both physical and cerebral dexterity. Mc Adams is good as the love interest in the film but would have benefited from more time to better expand her character which I hope will happen in future films.
While the film may not come across as a traditional American studio film, there is a lot to like about this new Holmes and the new franchise it launches for fans old and new.
The people of London are grateful to be free of the terror induced by Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong), but solving the mystery leaves Holmes somewhat despondent and uninterested in solving other mysteries. Most likely because Watson is moving out of their home and office to complete his pending marriage plans. The lack of complexity in the cases Holmes is requested to take leaves him abundant time to sulk in his study and scare the housing staff with his bizarre behavior and inventions.
The monotony of Holmes’s life is abruptly ended when Blackwood summons him shortly before his scheduled execution for his crimes. Blackwood indicates that a dark plot is in the works and though his claims are dismissed by the authorities as the desperate ravings of a madman about to be executed, Holmes begins to think there is more to the case than meets the eye. Things take a bizarre turn when Blackwood appears to rise from the dead and starts a new wave of terror over the city. Pressed into action, Holmes and Watson uncover a series of clues that reveal a diabolic plot that will alter the balance of power in England.
In a race against time, Holmes and Watson must also deal with their unresolved issues regarding Watson’s pending marriage as well as a mysterious, seductive woman from Holmes’s past (Rachel Mc Adams). What follows is a winning combination of comedy, action, mystery, and a touch of romance Ritchie knows he has a strong cast and gives Downey, Law, and Mc Adams ample room to explore their characters yet keeps them within the story.
The plot of the film may be the weakest point and at times its uncertain if it is an action buddy film or a caper picture. It attempts to blend the two but often comes up short, lacking enough action for my taste. The plot may also be confusing to some as it lacks a cohesive structure and seems to be a free roaming entity that exists within a general framework.
Downey and Law work well with one another and Downey gives a strong, clever performance in a role that requires both physical and cerebral dexterity. Mc Adams is good as the love interest in the film but would have benefited from more time to better expand her character which I hope will happen in future films.
While the film may not come across as a traditional American studio film, there is a lot to like about this new Holmes and the new franchise it launches for fans old and new.
JT (287 KP) rated The Intouchables (2012) in Movies
Mar 17, 2020
Beautifully acted (2 more)
Well-directed
Heart warming
A foreign film that everyone should watch
I don’t think there has been one foreign film that I have watched that I have not liked or one that has not moved me in some way. It’s good to be able to pull away from mainstream Hollywood films and delve into another language.
This time I went for a heartwarming tale about a French aristocrat and a man from the projects who form an unlikely bond. Driss (Omar Sy) struggles in life, he lives at home with a large extended family and does his best to make ends meet.
Looking to show the benefits office that he is trying to find work so he can claim is not the easiest way to make money. On the other side, Philippe (François Cluzet) is dependent on everyone in his life, since a paragliding accident left him paralyzed from the neck down.
During an interview process to find his next carer in which Driss applies for the pair seemingly hit it off, and so begins a wonderful and awe-inspiring story. Driss who has never really needed to take responsibility after being pushed out on the street by his Aunt finds a new companion in Philippe.
Philippe too has found someone to share a smile with again, a laugh and most importantly someone that does not pity him which he feels is the most important. There is no particular story in this to adhere to, it’s about the growing relationship between two different people from opposite ends of the financial spectrum and how important they realise they are to each other.
Driss has to come to grips with the lifestyle that Philippe leads, how he has to be on call at every hour of the day, but living inside the large Parisian mansion he gets a taste of what his life is like to be wealthy and to seemingly have it all.
When Driss discovers that Philippe has an epistolary relationship with a woman he forces him to speak to her on the phone as opposed to the continual writing of letters, even going so far as to set him up on a date. Dris and Philippe force each other to step out of their comfort zones and to realize there is so much more in life.
The film’s serious nature is broken in parts by some beautiful light-hearted comedy, Driss realizing what the rubber gloves are for, and that foot cream is not shampoo. It’s been a while since I genuinely laughed out loud at any film.
When Philippe and Driss decide it is time to part ways there is a deflating sense of sadness that their relationship is over, but both men soon discover that they need each other in their life more than ever. Based on a true story it’s a brilliantly written and well-directed film that tugs at the heartstrings but will have you smiling all the way through.
This time I went for a heartwarming tale about a French aristocrat and a man from the projects who form an unlikely bond. Driss (Omar Sy) struggles in life, he lives at home with a large extended family and does his best to make ends meet.
Looking to show the benefits office that he is trying to find work so he can claim is not the easiest way to make money. On the other side, Philippe (François Cluzet) is dependent on everyone in his life, since a paragliding accident left him paralyzed from the neck down.
During an interview process to find his next carer in which Driss applies for the pair seemingly hit it off, and so begins a wonderful and awe-inspiring story. Driss who has never really needed to take responsibility after being pushed out on the street by his Aunt finds a new companion in Philippe.
Philippe too has found someone to share a smile with again, a laugh and most importantly someone that does not pity him which he feels is the most important. There is no particular story in this to adhere to, it’s about the growing relationship between two different people from opposite ends of the financial spectrum and how important they realise they are to each other.
Driss has to come to grips with the lifestyle that Philippe leads, how he has to be on call at every hour of the day, but living inside the large Parisian mansion he gets a taste of what his life is like to be wealthy and to seemingly have it all.
When Driss discovers that Philippe has an epistolary relationship with a woman he forces him to speak to her on the phone as opposed to the continual writing of letters, even going so far as to set him up on a date. Dris and Philippe force each other to step out of their comfort zones and to realize there is so much more in life.
The film’s serious nature is broken in parts by some beautiful light-hearted comedy, Driss realizing what the rubber gloves are for, and that foot cream is not shampoo. It’s been a while since I genuinely laughed out loud at any film.
When Philippe and Driss decide it is time to part ways there is a deflating sense of sadness that their relationship is over, but both men soon discover that they need each other in their life more than ever. Based on a true story it’s a brilliantly written and well-directed film that tugs at the heartstrings but will have you smiling all the way through.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Revenant (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
The movie The Revenant is a new release starring Leonardo DiCaprio
(playing Hugh Glass), Tom Hardy (playing John Fitzgerald), Will Poulter
(playing Jim Bridger), and Forrest Goodluck (playing Glass’ half Indian
son Hawk). It is directed by Alejandro G. Inarritu and Mark L Smith.
Based on previews and ads I had seen for the film; I was really looking
forward to screening this movie.
I am a huge DiCaprio fan, and I have liked most of the recent roles I
have seen Tom Hardy in as well.
The story is based off of true events and follows a novel by Michael
Punke about an actual 19th-century incident in the days of the Western
fur trade. It involves Indian attacks, animal attacks, the struggle for
survival and vengeance.
The background and scenery in the move are breathtaking. The acting is
believable, mostly. The emotions of the characters definitely come
shining through.
Some of the camera shots that the director chooses to hone in on, are
not to my taste. There are only so many up close and personal tight
angle shots of snot running from someone’s nose in a movie that I really
care to see. One time is plenty. There are far more than one of those
types of shots though, and it sort of turned me off.
One of the major scenes involves a vicious bear attack. It was gruesome
and believable and horrifying… the entire audience gasped and squirmed
in their seats uncomfortably.
As much as I wanted to like the film, it just seemed like it dragged on
and on for me. I kept wondering when it was going to end. I’m not sure
if that was because I didn’t like some of the gorier close up shots, or
some of the bouncy camera footage (it makes me feel sick to my stomach)
or if each individual piece of the story itself was just a bit too long
which just added up throughout the movie, but I feel like I spent more
time wondering whether it was going to be over soon, than really truly
getting into the movie. In many longer movies, I am so into the story
that I don’t even notice the passage of time, but that was definitely
not the case for this film.
DiCaprio did a great job portraying a broken, beaten man trying to
survive and ultimately seeking vengeance upon the man who did him wrong,
and Tom Hardy did a great job portraying a man sucked in by greed, but
the performances couldn’t overcome the amount of time spent on getting
from one pint to the next in the film.
I would personally give this movie 2.5 out of 5 stars, but can see how
others would give it a higher rating. It just didn’t turn out to be my
cup of tea.
(playing Hugh Glass), Tom Hardy (playing John Fitzgerald), Will Poulter
(playing Jim Bridger), and Forrest Goodluck (playing Glass’ half Indian
son Hawk). It is directed by Alejandro G. Inarritu and Mark L Smith.
Based on previews and ads I had seen for the film; I was really looking
forward to screening this movie.
I am a huge DiCaprio fan, and I have liked most of the recent roles I
have seen Tom Hardy in as well.
The story is based off of true events and follows a novel by Michael
Punke about an actual 19th-century incident in the days of the Western
fur trade. It involves Indian attacks, animal attacks, the struggle for
survival and vengeance.
The background and scenery in the move are breathtaking. The acting is
believable, mostly. The emotions of the characters definitely come
shining through.
Some of the camera shots that the director chooses to hone in on, are
not to my taste. There are only so many up close and personal tight
angle shots of snot running from someone’s nose in a movie that I really
care to see. One time is plenty. There are far more than one of those
types of shots though, and it sort of turned me off.
One of the major scenes involves a vicious bear attack. It was gruesome
and believable and horrifying… the entire audience gasped and squirmed
in their seats uncomfortably.
As much as I wanted to like the film, it just seemed like it dragged on
and on for me. I kept wondering when it was going to end. I’m not sure
if that was because I didn’t like some of the gorier close up shots, or
some of the bouncy camera footage (it makes me feel sick to my stomach)
or if each individual piece of the story itself was just a bit too long
which just added up throughout the movie, but I feel like I spent more
time wondering whether it was going to be over soon, than really truly
getting into the movie. In many longer movies, I am so into the story
that I don’t even notice the passage of time, but that was definitely
not the case for this film.
DiCaprio did a great job portraying a broken, beaten man trying to
survive and ultimately seeking vengeance upon the man who did him wrong,
and Tom Hardy did a great job portraying a man sucked in by greed, but
the performances couldn’t overcome the amount of time spent on getting
from one pint to the next in the film.
I would personally give this movie 2.5 out of 5 stars, but can see how
others would give it a higher rating. It just didn’t turn out to be my
cup of tea.