Search

Search only in certain items:

E
Echoes
4
4.0 (1 Ratings)
Book Rating
<b><i>I received this book for free from in exchange for an honest review. This does not affect my opinion of the book or the content of my review.</i></b>
<h2><strong><cite>Echoes</cite></strong><strong> by Alice Reeds is so confusing yet interesting at the exact same time.</strong></h2>
Alice Reed's latest novel is <i>super</i> vague in its synopsis with two teens (Fiona and Miles) applying for an internship and somehow waking up on a deserted island with no recollection of how they got there in the first place.

<strong>I can't tell if my feelings are a good thing or a bad thing. </strong>I have so many thoughts and feelings about <i>Echoes</i>, so I'm going to run around in the middle. &#x1f914;
<h3><strong><i>Echoes</i></strong><strong> is confusing AF</strong></h3>
Reeds lays out this book in two time periods - Berlin and the island. Berlin is supposedly right before they got to the island, but I am left with so many questions of <i>how</i> they even got there.

Heck, I'm left with so many questions after finishing the novel. If that was Reeds's intention, she did a phenomenal job with it, because I'm confused AF with a vague idea of what even happened.
<h3><strong>There is instalove</strong></h3>
You don't even need to try to know that this is instalove and enemies to lovers on the spot. Fiona and Miles are high school enemies - they've hated each other from the moment they met and <i>somehow</i> ended up on an island together. Alone. What else is going to happen in the world of book tropes? &#x1f937;
<h3><strong>To be honest, this book makes you think</strong></h3>
I don't think I've walked away even one step ahead from each chapter without having to retrace my steps and think about what really happened. This might be why I'm still super confused - I'm constantly asking, "How did this happen?" and "Why did this happen?"

<strong>I had to step away </strong><strong><i>a lot</i></strong><strong> because I was confused.</strong> My brain was just pure:

<img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-2767" src="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/317/2017/08/what-the-fuck.gif"; alt="" width="320" height="159" />

I'm still lost and I have not returned from this lostness. (Maybe I was tired.)
<h3><strong>It still kept you interested despite the confusion</strong></h3>
I <i>nearly</i> DNFed this book, but I wanted to know <i>what</i> happened and what <i>will</i> happen at the end. Fortunately for fictional books, I don't get killed for being curious.
<h3><strong>The characters felt pretty flat and writing was meh</strong></h3>
I didn't care too much about Fiona and Miles - sure I want them alive, but do I care? Not really... I cared more about how they got there in the first and how they got from Berlin to a deserted island. All I got from the characters is:
<ol>
  <li>Fiona is a champion kickboxer</li>
  <li>Miles is a wealthy and popular kid at school</li>
  <li>Their fathers didn't really give a shit about them</li>
</ol>
Plus the writing! First of all, let's set aside that confusion and focus on the writing by itself, which was okay, but definitely not the best. <strong>There was a lot of telling and descriptions that made me want to roll over and fall asleep</strong> than "I WANT TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENS NEXT." And for me, meh writing + confusion = does not have the desire to continue the book.
<h2><strong>Honestly, </strong><i><strong>Echoes</strong></i><strong> is just plain confusion, which is great if you want to be confused. I just felt like I had no answers by the end of the book when all I wanted </strong><strong><i>were</i></strong><strong> answers.</strong></h2>

<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/echoes-by-alice-reeds/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
  
For once, I think my instincts were right (not that I ever listen) about Going Down in Flames. I was expecting a lot more.

The idea and the concept were unique and interesting. Shape-shifting dragons? Check. Oddball at a prestigious boarding school Bryn is being sent to on her sixteenth birthday? Check. Proof that the Directorate isn't always right? Check. TRYING to stay alive? Ooo, interesting. Check! All the ingredients of a great book. I was even so excited about DRAGONS!
<img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-cuqBh1sDPEY/U6NzNu6g3hI/AAAAAAAADhs/Pb2oaXOydkQ/s1600/how_to_train_your_dragon_2_gif_by_thegrzebol-d6wlb2k.gif"; height="106" width="320">
Plus, the pretty cover and the tag line: If her love life is going down in flames, she might as well spark a revolution.

WHAT REVOLUTION?!?!?! is my biggest question right at this very moment. There's no revolution, not really. At least, not one that Bryn starts. That revolution, which is apparently peaceful and started by Zavien-Not-Zayn, was there well before Bryn comes around. She doesn't even know about that revolution or even the fact that she's a dragon until said dude starts stalking her for awhile.
<img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-98SDXmeq-i8/U6Nzpun3IGI/AAAAAAAADh0/d0iqv6tv0OU/s1600/giphy.gif"; height="175" width="320">
So I'm really curious as to the definition of revolution here. Because in the long run, it's all sparkly rainbows and unicorns with the abrupt end. The last sentence? Damn Directorate. If anything, damning the Directorate shows there hasn't been a revolution. Sure, Bryn makes her point. She's a crossbreed and she's just like any other dragon. She made a change. To have a love life, that is, but it's not like she gets to choose. I mean, her grandmother and the mom of the dude she hates most attempts at playing matchmaker. Arranged marriage still exists.

*sighs* Not a dramatic change if you ask me. A change for future crossbreeds, sure. Certainly the Directorate wasn't overthrown.
<img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-1ffyT3n870o/U6N0wvDSjhI/AAAAAAAADiA/3S69yaZT8RM/s1600/giphy+(2).gif"; height="176" width="320">
Perhaps the most interesting part of Going Down in Flames for me were the death threats. The way they're written and set up. They're thrown in at surprising, yet right times. Oh, and there's no warning on those attempts. It kept me at the edge of my seat trying to guess where the next attack would be at.

There also seems to be something missing from the characters. Particularly with Jaxon and Bryn. They hate each other and then all of a sudden, he starts helping her. Not just to save his reputation, but to protect her. There is something remotely wrong with a character who hates you from the bottom of their hearts to "protecting you." O_o
<blockquote>Jaxon: I also did it to help you.
Bryn: I saved your life. Don’t get snippy with me.
Jaxon: *slams coffee cup down* I came to secure protection for your life.</blockquote>
Tell me there isn't something wrong with that. O_o Because it ends shortly after, and now I can't really decide if Bryn gets stuck marrying Jaxon due to arranged marriage or she gets to choose who she wants to marry. If there are any other life threatening stuff going on afterward or the dragons that used to hate her now treat her as an equal. If her mother actually gets a happy reunion with her parents. If Zavien is still stuck with his intended or if he and the Revisionists peacefully achieve more individual rights for dragons.
<img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-v3e-NYdq7P8/U6N2FJxKKNI/AAAAAAAADiM/7xswneekUqs/s1600/giphy+(3).gif"; height="239" width="320">
There are just so many questions that aren't answered yet, that this feels like an entire end is missing and Going Down in Flames is the very first of a trilogy or series. Yet... this is a stand alone... according to Goodreads. Am I missing something, or did anyone else who read this feel the same way?
--------------------------
Advanced copy provided by the publisher
Original Rating: 2.5
This review and more found over at <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2014/06/arc-review-going-down-in-flames-by-chris-cannon.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Gi5Rk5yLloA/UtliaUbdL3I/AAAAAAAACbE/J27z92_qrYU/s1600/Official+Banner.png"; /></a>
  
Goosebumps (2015)
Goosebumps (2015)
2015 | Family, Horror, Mystery
I think I speak for most of my generation when I say I grew up on Goosebumps. Many a night I lay terrified and awake after reading one of the twisty tales concocted from the mind of R.L. Stine. Naturally, when Sony announced a Goosebumps movie, I was fearful. But they also had many different stories to tell as there were countless books in the series, all with a different monster. And then they went gave us the plot to the film… I was still fearful.

Goosebumps introduces us to Zach (Dylan Minnette) who, along with his mother, Gale (Amy Ryan), moved to the small town of Madison, Delaware one year after his father passed away. With quick resolve, Zach meets his neighbor, Hannah (Odeya Rush), whom he finds very intriguing. And as any protective father would do, Hannah’s creepy father (Jack Black) tries to scare off Zach. But as Zach is trying to get to the bottom of exactly who this family is, he discovers locked Goosebumps manuscripts in Hannah’s father’s study. Accidentally opening The Abominable Snowman of Pasadena, Zach soon discovers that there is something special about these manuscripts as the stories themselves, or rather the monsters from them, begin to come to life… for real. Can Zach, Hannah and her Father, along with the bumbling Champ (Ryan Lee), save Madison from the monsters? Watch and see.

I had to constantly remind myself of the target audience for this film for about an hour after seeing it. I was hoping for so much more, and while it had mildly entertaining moments, I have feeling that this film is going to fall flat for most adults. Jack Black played the same part he has become really good at over the years, and it almost seems like he is basically playing it straight now. But it was kind of awesome to see some of the ideas of these books come to life, and with the evil Slappy the dummy (voiced by Black) at the helm, things did truly get out of hand. But I just found myself picking out plot holes and inconsistencies in the movie, which is highly unlike me. I may realize things like that much later after watching for most films, but this one I was noticing everything as I was watching it. This doesn’t bode well at all. For example, Hannah takes Zach to an abandoned carnival that was right in the middle of the woods. Hannah explains that they ran out of money before they finished building. So first, no one builds a permanent carnival like this in the middle of the woods, where the trees would interfere with pretty much everything the way it was set up. And it’s not like the trees grew up around the carnival, the technology was too new and the trees too big for that to make any sense. The other thing is, Hannah pulls a big lever and gets power to the carnival to light it up. First, why is there even power to an abandoned carnival? And let’s say we just accept that there is power to this place, we’re missing the second part. Hannah indicates that she visits the place often, but why haven’t the cops showed up to investigate why there was power at this abandoned carnival. The lights were clearly visible for miles, especially from up on top of the Ferris Wheel where we find Hannah and Zach.

But again… I remind myself of the intended audience. There were many youngsters in the screening with us. And most, if not all, really enjoyed the film. There was a continuous stream of laughter or gasps, as appropriate for the feel of the movie, and many after the film were incredibly happy. So I cannot say they missed their mark.

Ultimately, I ask myself the same question I always do: will I buy the movie on home release? The answer is probably yes, as I know a couple kids who would really enjoy the film, but I wouldn’t be making the purchase if it were just me in the picture. I give it 3 out of 5 stars. I would have given it a two, but I bring myself back to thinking about the target audience. And they definitely knocked it out of the water in that demographic.
(2)   
Elementos
Elementos
2015 | Abstract Strategy
I am going to be honest. I am typically not a fan of abstract strategy games unless they have some kind of interesting theme on them: Azul (a Golden Feather Award winner), Patchwork, Reef, Onitama, Hive. These are all in my Top 100 of All Time, but they also have some sort of theme working for them to help me digest the immense calculating nature of most abstracts. So when I tell you that Elementos has also now breached my Top 100 with a very loose theme, I’m kinda shook myself.

So the winner of Elementos is the player that can get their wand (the wooden stick) to one of the three squares on the opponent’s side of the board (a la American football). This is accomplished by moving the element discs down the board and overtaking discs using the game’s elemental weakness wheel: fire burns trees, trees drink water, water douses fire. Movement can be made to any space obliquely, straight forward, or forward diagonally, unless the piece being moved is carrying the wand. Those wand-carrying pieces can only be moved straight forward.

Undoubtedly players will find themselves wanting to enter a space containing an opponent’s disc. Following the movement rules and elemental wheel described above, the attacking piece can overtake the opponent’s space and remove the opponent’s disc from the board. Easy, right? Let me explain the kicker here. The discs are double-sided and have different elements on the flip-side. So for an action (instead of moving) a player can simply flip any of their discs to the other side – perhaps to block movement, or setup a takeover on the next turn. As you only have one action to use on your turn you may not flip and move on the same turn. The other allowable action on a turn is to pass the wand to another friendly piece, observing movement rules for wand movement as well. The benefit with this is that the wand-carrying discs can neither attack nor BE attacked. Need to protect your tree from that fire ahead? Pass it the wand and be safe.

The rule sheet states that at any time you may peek at what element is on the flip-side of any piece at any time, but there is a variant described where you play the game without peeking, and we found that to be a more enjoyable way to play. You just never know if the other side of your tree is a fire or a water, and it sometimes results in turns where you effectively shoot yourself in the foot. Yes, it diminishes the tactics of the game, and if you would rather plan your moves well ahead of your turns like a Chess Grand Master, so be it. I kinda like the chaotic nature of not knowing what’s on the other side.

Components. So this is a clam shell wooden box that pulls double duty as the game board and storage for the other components. It is of good quality, and is reminiscent of the keepsake boxes one might find at Hobby Lobby or the like. The discs are painted and silk-screened plywood discs with a hole in the middle to accept the wand. The wand itself is a length of wooden dowel. All of these components are of good quality, but I wish a different finish was applied to the wood. The finish on the copy I was sent for review isn’t really conducive to sliding pieces on, so I suggest you pick up the pieces (any Average White Band fans here?) and place them where they need to go. Do as I say, not as I do.

Overall this is a really great game that I know will see lots of play in my house. My wife likes abstracts a lot and I predict she will enjoy this one as much as she adores Blokus (which she adores a TON). For the ease of teaching, play, and that itch to play just one more time, we at Purple Phoenix Games give this one a no-peek 9 / 12. If you are a fan of Chess, Checkers, or any of the other abstract strategy games I listed earlier, you should really check this one out. It’s a little different and a lot fun.
(3)   
40x40

Sarah (7800 KP) rated Crisis (2021) in Movies

Feb 19, 2021  
Crisis (2021)
Crisis (2021)
2021 | Crime, Drama, Thriller
Worth it just for Oldman
Crisis is a 2021 film from write, director and producer Nicholas Jarecki, who previously brought us 2012's Arbitrage starring Richard Gere. Crisis is a story about drugs, namely opioids, and follows three separate yet related narratives about opioids and their impact on US society. There's an undercover DEA agent posing as a drug trafficker arranging a Fentanyl smuggling operation between Canada and the US (Armie Hammer), a recovering addict architect determined to track down those responsible for her son's involvement in narcotics (Evangeline Lilly), and a university professor (Gary Oldman) who's research laboratory uncovers dangerous revelations about a new drug that they've been paid to research by a very influential drug company and their executives (Luke Evans).

The main purpose of Crisis appears to be highlighting two entirely juxtaposed real life issues with opioids - the illegal smuggling and import of street drugs and the completely legal yet questionable drugs introduced by drug companies with full support of the government. For most, neither of these stories should be particularly surprising as they're fairly common knowledge and have been featured in countless films and documentaries over the years, although I think this may be the first time the two stories have been shown together in a film. And for Crisis this really works - showing the two contrasting issues makes for a more interesting and unique story rather than concentrating solely on one that we've seen many times before, especially as its split into three separate narratives.

However, the problem with Crisis is that not all of the narratives are as engaging as intended. Evangeline Lilly puts in a wonderful and emotional performance as architect and mother Claire, but her narrative becomes a little unrealistic as she becomes bent on revenge at those responsible for involving her son in the drugs underworld. And unfortunately Armie Hammer's narrative as undercover federal agent Jake is nothing original, with a smuggling operation and drugs bust that we've seen in many other films, some of which I'm afraid have done it a lot better. The most interesting narrative though is that of Gary Oldman as Dr Tyrone Brower, whose struggle over whether to tell the truth about a new dangerous drug or take the money from his drug company employers is a surprisingly thrilling morality tale. It's helped by a superb turn from Oldman himself and a wonderful supporting role from Greg Kinnear (who I've adored since 1997's As Good As It Gets), and the verbal sparring scenes between Brower and Kinnear's university Dean are probably the best in the film. It's a shame however that Luke Evans isn't given as much to do with his part in this narrative, even with his questionable American accent.

The biggest problem I had with all of the narratives is that unlike similar films that intertwine related narratives that eventually intersect dramatically (think 2006's Best Picture Oscar winner Crash), the narratives here don't all come together in the way I was expecting, which was rather disappointing.
Cinematography-wise, director and writer Jarecki does a good job as the film looks and feels good, and really highlights the US and Canadian settings. The soundtrack only adds to the overall tense and suspenseful feel of the film, although it does feature the typical pulsing, drum beat style that seems to be standard for a modern thriller. And the script, while possibly a little clichéd especially around the drugs bust and smuggling, is good and with his supporting acting role as Jake's fellow DEA agent Stan, Nicholas Jarecki could be one to watch in future.

Overall, Crisis is a good thriller that tells the story of well-known drug issues in a different way and does well in highlighting real life concerns. For the most part it succeeds in bringing an interesting set of narratives together for a fairly gripping albeit slightly long film, and despite my preconceptions about how its intersecting storylines should play out, it is an enjoyable watch, although for the most part thanks to the talents of Gary Oldman.
(3)   
Truth Seekers - Season 1
Truth Seekers - Season 1
2020 | Comedy
Enjoyably British
Truth Seekers is the latest collaboration from Nick Frost and Simon Pegg, and centres around employees of a network services provider who run a YouTube channel as amateur paranormal investigators.

The series follows Gus Roberts (Nick Frost), the top installation engineer for network provider Smyle. He lives with his dad (Malcolm McDowell) and investigates paranormal activities in his spare time, running his own YouTube channel as ‘The Truth Seeker’. His boss Dave (Simon Pegg) pairs Gus with a new employee Elton John (Samson Kayo), and Truth Seekers follows the pair as they increasingly encounter paranormal and mysterious entities as they go about their daily work, including a haunted young woman called Astrid (Emma D’Arcy).

Truth Seekers starts off as a case by episode series, with a new spooky encounter every time (think Supernatural but very British) and then mid-way works into a bigger overall plot involving Julian Barratt’s Dr Peter Toynbee that seems to tie all the earlier elements together. As a supernatural horror show, this works really well. It doesn’t rely on typical jump scares, and instead uses well known horror situations to be as creepy as possible. Admittedly this is a tad cliched – think of all the known supernatural experiences you’d expect to see (psychiatric hospitals, hotels, demons and satanic books to name a few) and you’ll definitely find them here. However this doesn’t matter as they’re done well and in such a smart, creepy and very British way. Even the special effects are impressive for something that looks like it should be fairly low budget.

Whilst this is made out to be a horror comedy, it’s the comedy side that appears to be a little lacking. Don’t get me wrong, this has its’s funny and witty moments and seems to relish all of the pop culture references it throws in at every opportunity, however it doesn’t seem quite as edgy and quick witted as Frost and Pegg’s previous collaborations. Frost delivers his usual deadpan style well and is ably supported by Samson Kayo’s Elton as his rather adorable and unwitting partner. The standout though is unsurprisingly Malcolm McDowell as Gus’ dad Richard. Right from the first episode McDowell shines and is an absolute riot. Every scene he’s in gives rise to so many laughs and in particular there’s one scene featuring him going upstairs on a stair lift so slowly that nearly had me crying with laughter. But despite this the humour is maybe a little lacking from what we’d expect. I also felt like some of the pop culture references were a little forced and unnatural, which is a shame as there were also a lot that worked quite well – nods to Aliens and The Shawshank Redemption were particularly appreciated.

Truth Seekers may be lacking a little in humour, but what is there is adeptly delivered by a rather stellar cast. Pegg takes a backseat as boss Dave with an atrocious hairpiece and there are some small roles for Kelly MacDonald, Susie Wokoma and Julian Barratt, but everyone puts in a great performance no matter the screen time. McDowell undoubtedly steals the show, but the main trio of Frost, Kayo and D’Arcy carry the show well between them.

What surprised me the most about Truth Seekers is how short it was. A mere eight episodes running at 30 minutes each doesn’t seem like enough – by the end of the eighth episode I was shocked to see there wasn’t any more, although the final scenes do at least set this up for a second series that will hopefully come to fruition. I was a little concerned about the main plot involving Toynbee as it did get a little convoluted towards the end, and the final scenes do nothing but add to this and hint at a much bigger story going on. This could end up being rather good, but it could also turn what is by and large a very enjoyable British supernatural series into something rather crazy and confused. Only series two will tell.
(4)   
40x40

Illeana Douglas recommended Easy Rider (1969) in Movies (curated)

 
Easy Rider (1969)
Easy Rider (1969)
1969 | Action, Drama

"I begin and end with road-trip movies. Easy Rider was a cultural phenomenon. It depicted the rise of hippie culture, condemned the establishment, harkened back to a mythical America that was being shot in the head metaphorically, and many people, including my own father, so identified with the main characters, Captain America and Billy, that they sought to emulate the values not only of the film but of the filmmakers, Dennis Hopper and Peter Fonda. I wrote about the transformative power Easy Rider had in my life in my book, I Blame Dennis Hopper, and let me tell you, the first time I saw it on TV, all cut up, I thought: This is the movie that ruined our lives and turned us into dirty hippies? I just didn’t get it. The years went by; I became an actress, worked with Dennis Hopper, then Peter Fonda, deemed them both mystics, and thought: Yeah, I need to reinvestigate this film. So cue up the sixties soundtrack: Get your motor running . . . Easy Rider is mainly a road-trip movie about two alienated and rootless hippie bikers who travel on their choppers to make a drug deal, but somewhere along the broken road, Hopper and Fonda reveal themselves in an existential way. For instance, there’s a touching bit of autobiographical improv about the death of Fonda’s mother that Hopper apparently made him shoot. Watching Easy Rider, you never forget that Peter Fonda is the son of Henry Fonda—and that’s pretty existential too! It’s like he’s cinematically rebelling against the very American roles his father played—especially Tom Joad in The Grapes of Wrath. Which, if you think about it, is also a road-trip movie about a broken America. Apparently, Henry Fonda came out of Easy Rider not understanding any of it. I’ve always loved the idea that while Peter was shooting Easy Rider and changing the world, Henry was shooting Yours, Mine and Ours, a Hollywood generation-gap movie, with Lucille Ball. Hopper had his finger on the pulse of the times when he made this film, and not just the peace movement. He came out of the studio system, acting in films like Giant and Rebel Without a Cause, and starred in countless television shows. His work as a director and an actor has been overshadowed by his wild lifestyle, and that’s a shame. Two films you should check out: Hoosiers, in which Hopper acted, and Colors, which he directed. Hopper literally began the independent film movement with this film. He probably also cursed us with hundreds of road-trip movies too—but here is the original. The tagline of Easy Rider was “A man went looking for America. And couldn’t find it anywhere . . .,” and that message still resonates, especially in the character of George Hanson, played so beautifully by Jack Nicholson. Let’s just say the casting of Nicholson as an alcoholic ACLU lawyer was a stroke of luck and genius. His performance opposite Hopper and Fonda, maybe because they were all buddies, is the heart of the film. Every road movie owes a debt to this scene, because every road movie since then seems to have a bonding scene like it, where all the characters reveal their inner hopes, fears, and dreams over a joint or two. They sit around the campfire smoking pot, and Hopper rationalizes that people hate him because he has long hair and is a hippie. Nicholson says, no, they hate you because you’re free. Cut to the thousands of folks who saw this film, quit their jobs, and became hippies! Easy Rider represented a time when freedom meant freedom from material things, freedom from driving in six lanes of traffic to work twelve hours a day at a job you hate. Freedom in 1969 was the land, the land of the free and the brave. Freedom was peace and love. The word freedom has been co-opted. Today, freedom means freedom to be selfish, freedom to carry guns. Freedom to hurt the land and its inhabitants for the sake of commerce. Easy Rider reminds us how far we have strayed from that journey."

Source
  
Saint Maud (2020)
Saint Maud (2020)
2020 | Drama, Horror
9
7.4 (7 Ratings)
Movie Rating
Morfydd Clark - astonishingly good as Maud (1 more)
Expert pacing from debut director Rose Glass
"My Little Saviour": Astonishing Saint Maud delivers psycho-religious chills
Saint Maud is the debut feature from writer/director Rose Glass, and it packs a punch. The film was first seen at last year's London Film Festival, but was due for broader nationwide release soon. What a crushing disappointment it must be for Ms Glass that so few people will likely get to see it in the current climate... at least, not for a while. Since it is an effective little chiller.

Maud (Morfydd Clark) is a palliative nurse looking after ex-choreographer Amanda (Jennifer Ehle). Maud is extremely religious and feels God move in her... regularly. Acting on His guidance, Maud sets out to save the soul of her ailing bohemian charge. But is Amanda beyond reach, and how will the zealot-like Maud react to that rejection?

Morfydd Clark appears so young in this film that you would think this was her debut film. But she's actually 30 years old and has quite an impressive filmography already. Although this is her movie-lead debut, she's had a substantial part alongside Kate Beckinsale in the excellent "Love and Friendship" and smaller parts in "Crawl", "The Personal History of David Copperfield" and the fun "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies". She's likely to get more worldwide exposure soon as a young Galadriel in Amazon's new version of "Lord of the Rings".

As Maud she is simply superb - expressing such a range of joy, hurt and despair that you must think a BAFTA Rising Star nomination should be on the cards.

Clark is ably supported in the leading role by the splendid Jennifer Ehle, still so memorable to me as Elizabeth Bennett from the BBC's "Pride and Prejudice".

Scarborough is also a star of "Saint Maud". The Yorkshire seaside town is another star of the movie. Clearly filmed before lockdown, the rainy and windswept resort looks bleak and unwelcoming. And that's before Covid! Many of those struggling bars and amusement centres, as in other resorts all around the UK, are now on their last legs.

Adam Janota Bzowski supplies the impressively claustrophobic music, which deserves recognition. A scene with Maud, flicking a lighter rhythmically in time with the sonorous beat, is a masterpiece in musical choreography and editing (by Mark Towns).

At the heart of this horror-thriller is whether, following a Dawkins-style argument, fervent religious followers are less insightfully correct and more mentally unstable and misguided. When is the voice of God just the voice in your head? And how would you tell the difference anyway? Piecing together the plot and motivations of Maud was intellectually challenging and rewarding.

I always get a little tense and nervous when I see the word "horror" on a movie bill. I am NOT a great horror fan! But for me, as a 'horror movie', "Saint Maud" is of the 'horror-lite' variety. Highly watchable, it builds more in the way of creeping dread than cheap shocks. There were only a couple of jump-scares (but for me, the one in the finale was a doozy!).

A BBC interview with Rose Glass I just saw says she relates Maud's relationship with God as like many people's relationship with social media. Always looking for support, guidance and affirmation. Interesting.

This is also an obviously female-led picture. All the men are complete tools. no, really, literally they are. It makes me feel ashamed to be among their number.

Overall, "Saint Maud" is a minor classic. I didn't go in with great expectations of this one, but I was pleasantly surprised. As a small British movie, it packs a punch significantly above its weight. When I came out I was at about a 7* rating. But this is one that really stayed with me, and I've subconsciously thought about little else all day. So for that reason I am going to escalate my rating to something more appropriate.

You might struggle now to see it on the big screen, but if you can do so, it comes with a recommendation from me. I think this one could REALLY be a "Marmite film".... so if you see it, let me know what you thought with a comment on One Mann's Movies here https://rb.gy/9k93ck . (Thanks).
(1)   
Wolfwalkers (2020)
Wolfwalkers (2020)
2020 | Animation, Family
10
9.3 (3 Ratings)
Movie Rating
Coming into this I wasn't sure what to expect, an animated Apple TV film... hmm.

Robyn comes to Ireland with her father, e's been given the job of ridding the area of a pack of wolves that are venturing closer and closer to the town. Keen to hunt just like her father, Robyn sneaks out of the safety of their walled town and into the forest after him. Once there she comes face to face with a wolf, but the encounter isn't what she expected. When she eventually meets Mebh, a wild spirit who lives out in the woods, she discovers what the legend of the wolkwalkers truly means and must find a way to save the pack, and her new friend, from the wrath of the Lord Protector and her father.

The phrase "don't judge a book by its cover" hasn't felt quite so accurate as it does now. When the film starts it has the delicacy of an illustrated picture book (with a hint of Gravity Falls), the colour palette is muted and the strokes look haphazard while being in exactly the right place... and I haven't liked this style of illustration... ever... in the 19 years I was in the book industry. It feels old fashioned (yes, I know that fits with its story) and I immediately felt myself grumble at the fact I was about to sit through a whole film of it.

Wolfwalkers' story is a nice mix of folk story and themes of family and friendship. We follow Robyn as she tries desperately to break free of societies rules and those of her overprotective father, and the overall effect is a surprisingly motivational film about protecting people and doing the right thing.

The only names I recognised off the cast list were Sean Bean and Simon McBurney, and both had the right tone for this film... though Bean ever so slightly like he wasn't always acting to the best of his abilities... but that's not really noticeable when you get swept up in everything.

Our two young ladies in the cast, Honor Kneafsey as Robyn and Eva Whittaker as Mebh, were a delightful match, and when the pair were together on screen they have an amazing chemistry together.

But I want to talk about my favourite thing, and that is very specifically, Mebh. Casting, animation, script, she gets the best of everything that was thrown at this film. Her style is so amazingly accurate for the tale and her story and you can see it in every scene. Her wild characteristics, her playful nature, had all been carefully added to every moment we see her. Whittaker's enthusiastic and emotional vocals bring it all to life in such a wonderful way. Mebh is a delightful creation and full of comedic moments that really made me smile... and that hair... brilliant.

Wolfwalkers' animation (by Cartoon Saloon) might not have been to my taste in the beginning but, with the story and the amazing characters, I soon started to forget about my initial peeves. The design of everything really helps to explain the surroundings, the light and dark of the forest when we first encounter it and then evolves as we progress. The visuals when the townies start encroaching are sad but have a stunning reality to them and in the run-up to the end of the film the way they portray those events is a massive change to the style and makes for a harrowing watch. They've also come up with an ingenious way of showing the wolves and the magic that they're regarded within the story, it's an impressive visual.

All of these wonderful things were topped off with a beautiful soundtrack. Everything fits perfectly, particularly the song "Running With The Wolves" by Aurora, which gave me chills to hear.

Starting this film with such a negative feeling I really didn't think I'd be able to turn it around, but as I watched on and got pulled deeper into the tale and the characters, well, you can tell by my rating that my mind was quickly changed. Wolfwalkers was a beautiful and emotional ride that I would not hesitate to recommend to anyone.

Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/10/wolfwalkers-movie-review.html
(2)