Search
Search results
Hear No Evil (Brotherhood #3)
10.0
Rate It
Book
Riley Duncan is haunted by a past he can’t remember. Something happened in the isolated cabin he...
Contemporary Young_Adult Romance Suspense
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) in Movies
Jul 31, 2019
The film Tarantino was born to make
ONCE UPON A TIME...IN HOLLYWOOD is the film that Quentin Tarantino was born to make and it is his Masterpiece.
Your enjoyment of this film will be in direct correlation with how you reacted to the previous statement.
Lovingly set in Hollywood of the late 1960's, OUATIH tells the tale of 3 performers in LaLa Land who's stories are undercut by - and eventually intersect with - the growing dread of the Hippie CounterCulture of the time and, specifically, the Charles Manson cult that would erupt in violence.
Leonardo DiCaprio stars as fading Cowboy star Rick Dalton who has been relegated to guest starring villain roles on TV and is contemplating a move to Italian "Spaghetti" Westerns. This is DiCaprio's strongest acting job in (perhaps) his career and one that showcases his range as a performer - and he nails it. His Rick Dalton is a real human being. Sometimes confident, often times at odds with himself, and filled with self doubt. It is a bravura performance, one that I am confident we will be hearing a lot more of come Awards season.
Ably counterbalancing him - and providing the strong core to this film - is Brad Pitt's Cliff Booth, Rick Dalton's stunt double, who is just trying to live day to day. He is the quintessential Hollywood/California "whatever" dude who blows with wherever the wind blows him - including into questionable places. This is Pitt's strongest performance in (perhaps) his career as well - and if Pitt wasn't there to provide the strength and core to this film than DiCaprio's performance would be seen as cartoonish and over-the-top, but this counterbalance is there, which strengthens both performances. I'm afraid that DiCaprio will win all the Acting Awards accolades (his part is much more flashy/flamboyant), but I think Pitt is every bit as good and I would LOVE to see his name called during Awards season.
There are many, many actors making extended cameos in this film, from members of the Tarantino "stock company" like Michael Madsen, Bruce Dern, Kurt Russell and Zoe Bell to newcomers Timothy Olyphant, Emile Hirsch, Margaret Qualley, Dakota Fanning and Al Pacino - all have a scene (or 2) that (I'm sure) each actor saw as "delicious" and their willingness to go along with whatever Tarantino wanted them to do is apparent on the screen.
Faring less well is Margot Robbie in the underwritten role of real-life actress Sharon Tate who met her death at the hands of the Manson cult (this isn't a spoiler, it's a footnote in history). Her role is tangential to the main story of the DiCaprio/Pitt characters and it feels...tangential. Robbie does what she can with the role, but she is under-served by the script and direction of Tarantino.
So let's talk about writer/director Quentin Tarantino. A self-described "movie buff", Tarantino spares no detail in showing the audience the sights and sounds of a bygone era - Hollywood in the days of transition from the studio system to a more "television-centric" system. His visuals are wonderful and you spend the first 2 1/2 hours of this 2 hour, 45 minute film meandering through scenes/scenarios/people that are filled with mood and atmosphere and REALLY, REALLY GREAT music, but don't really seem to go anywhere. I was (pleasantly) surprised by how little violence/blood is involved in this and I give Tarantino - the director - credit. For he plays with audiences expectations of him, this movie and the actual, real-life events of this time. While this film is an homage to specific time, it is undercut by an impending sense of doom that keeps you on edge. It is the journey, not the destination that is the joy of this part of the film.
But, when all these disparate storylines/scenerios/characters and events eventually collide, the final 15-20 minutes of this film is quintessential Tarantino - exploding in violence that is horrific, bloody - and damned funny. It is an auteur in full control of his faculties and he controls the items in his "play-set" superbly to bring this film to a very satisfying climax for me.
But...this film is not for everyone. Some will LOVE the first 2 1/2 hours and HATE the last 15-20 minutes while others will LOVE the last 15-20 minutes, but wonder why they had to suffer through the first 2 1/2 hours. For me, I LOVED IT ALL. It is one of the very best Writer/Directors of our time operating at the top of his game - driving some "A-List" actors to career-best performances.
And that's good enough for me.
Letter Grade: A
9 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Your enjoyment of this film will be in direct correlation with how you reacted to the previous statement.
Lovingly set in Hollywood of the late 1960's, OUATIH tells the tale of 3 performers in LaLa Land who's stories are undercut by - and eventually intersect with - the growing dread of the Hippie CounterCulture of the time and, specifically, the Charles Manson cult that would erupt in violence.
Leonardo DiCaprio stars as fading Cowboy star Rick Dalton who has been relegated to guest starring villain roles on TV and is contemplating a move to Italian "Spaghetti" Westerns. This is DiCaprio's strongest acting job in (perhaps) his career and one that showcases his range as a performer - and he nails it. His Rick Dalton is a real human being. Sometimes confident, often times at odds with himself, and filled with self doubt. It is a bravura performance, one that I am confident we will be hearing a lot more of come Awards season.
Ably counterbalancing him - and providing the strong core to this film - is Brad Pitt's Cliff Booth, Rick Dalton's stunt double, who is just trying to live day to day. He is the quintessential Hollywood/California "whatever" dude who blows with wherever the wind blows him - including into questionable places. This is Pitt's strongest performance in (perhaps) his career as well - and if Pitt wasn't there to provide the strength and core to this film than DiCaprio's performance would be seen as cartoonish and over-the-top, but this counterbalance is there, which strengthens both performances. I'm afraid that DiCaprio will win all the Acting Awards accolades (his part is much more flashy/flamboyant), but I think Pitt is every bit as good and I would LOVE to see his name called during Awards season.
There are many, many actors making extended cameos in this film, from members of the Tarantino "stock company" like Michael Madsen, Bruce Dern, Kurt Russell and Zoe Bell to newcomers Timothy Olyphant, Emile Hirsch, Margaret Qualley, Dakota Fanning and Al Pacino - all have a scene (or 2) that (I'm sure) each actor saw as "delicious" and their willingness to go along with whatever Tarantino wanted them to do is apparent on the screen.
Faring less well is Margot Robbie in the underwritten role of real-life actress Sharon Tate who met her death at the hands of the Manson cult (this isn't a spoiler, it's a footnote in history). Her role is tangential to the main story of the DiCaprio/Pitt characters and it feels...tangential. Robbie does what she can with the role, but she is under-served by the script and direction of Tarantino.
So let's talk about writer/director Quentin Tarantino. A self-described "movie buff", Tarantino spares no detail in showing the audience the sights and sounds of a bygone era - Hollywood in the days of transition from the studio system to a more "television-centric" system. His visuals are wonderful and you spend the first 2 1/2 hours of this 2 hour, 45 minute film meandering through scenes/scenarios/people that are filled with mood and atmosphere and REALLY, REALLY GREAT music, but don't really seem to go anywhere. I was (pleasantly) surprised by how little violence/blood is involved in this and I give Tarantino - the director - credit. For he plays with audiences expectations of him, this movie and the actual, real-life events of this time. While this film is an homage to specific time, it is undercut by an impending sense of doom that keeps you on edge. It is the journey, not the destination that is the joy of this part of the film.
But, when all these disparate storylines/scenerios/characters and events eventually collide, the final 15-20 minutes of this film is quintessential Tarantino - exploding in violence that is horrific, bloody - and damned funny. It is an auteur in full control of his faculties and he controls the items in his "play-set" superbly to bring this film to a very satisfying climax for me.
But...this film is not for everyone. Some will LOVE the first 2 1/2 hours and HATE the last 15-20 minutes while others will LOVE the last 15-20 minutes, but wonder why they had to suffer through the first 2 1/2 hours. For me, I LOVED IT ALL. It is one of the very best Writer/Directors of our time operating at the top of his game - driving some "A-List" actors to career-best performances.
And that's good enough for me.
Letter Grade: A
9 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
The Little Witch at School
Book and Education
App
"The Little Witch at School" is an artful blend of stories, games and cartoons. !! Featured in the...
Amanda (96 KP) rated More Than We Can Tell (Letters to the Lost # 2) in Books
Mar 14, 2019
One of the things I don’t pay attention to when I read a book is if it is in a series. Most of the time I’ll catch it, but in this case, I didn’t know it was part of the LETTERS TO THE LOST verse. I didn’t catch it till the book REFERENCED a scene from that book. I adored LETTERS TO THE LOST. This book DID reference, but it is a stand alone story, so if you want to read it, you DO NOT have to read LETTERS TO THE LOST – although I HIGHLY recommend it.
Each chapter is told in separate POV’s
Rev Fletcher – He lives with his foster parents and is closed off due to physical torment from his highly religious nut father.
Emma Blue – Known as Azure M in her online game – She created this game and has made it public for other users to play, one user in particular is harassing her. Her parents are a different story. Her mother is a bit controlling while her father is more of a friend who designs video games.
This book, for starters, totally DID NOT use one of my least favorite tropes and have non existent parents in a world where it’s teenagers telling this story. Kudos for giving parents roles of being parents – with the exception of Emma’s father. He doesn’t really play the role of father, and it kind of makes it known in the story, which is fine with me.
Emma keeps this new game she created to herself mostly because her mother has tried to get her away from games, going as far as turning off the internet. See, if I were trying to do that, I would have taken the router/modem with me as well, not just unplugged it. That’s just me. She finds comfort in not only an online friend she made called, ETHAN, but also when she meets REV outside a church.
Rev has his own baggage. His father gave up his parental rights, and now, he’s emailing Rev and basically stirring up old resentment, but also feelings of wanting to please his father. I feel bad for Rev and I can’t even get frustrated with him when he completely shuts down even though his best friend tries to get him to talk and help him.
Emma was being stubborn, although most times I can understand with her mother, but when things escalate between her and ETHAN (and I mean they ESCALATED!) I wanted to just shake her for being so…stupid.
It is NEVER OKAY to not at least be supportive of your friend’s interest, even if you don’t find it all that interesting – just saying.
Despite a few annoyances, some from Emma and her mother, but also Rev on some occasions, I actually enjoyed this book. I liked how this story unraveled and how that while it’s told from another verse, it’s still a book by itself. I’m left with more questions than answers. I like how the author didn’t use one of my least favorite tropes even though she could have. I wind up really liking Emma’s mother and she has put up with A LOT – so it was nice seeing how Emma actually TRIES to let her mother into her life, even if there are still baby steps to be made.
Rev realizes that his father, despite being this man who tortured, he is just a man.
It was an enjoyable read with a couple of twists that maybe I should have seen coming, but I didn’t. I don’t think that’s a bad thing, however. You really get a sense of where Rev lives and his adoptive parents.
I won’t give away anymore than LETTERS TO THE LOST is worth the read. If anything, just so you can get all excited like I did when it’s referenced in this book.
Each chapter is told in separate POV’s
Rev Fletcher – He lives with his foster parents and is closed off due to physical torment from his highly religious nut father.
Emma Blue – Known as Azure M in her online game – She created this game and has made it public for other users to play, one user in particular is harassing her. Her parents are a different story. Her mother is a bit controlling while her father is more of a friend who designs video games.
This book, for starters, totally DID NOT use one of my least favorite tropes and have non existent parents in a world where it’s teenagers telling this story. Kudos for giving parents roles of being parents – with the exception of Emma’s father. He doesn’t really play the role of father, and it kind of makes it known in the story, which is fine with me.
Emma keeps this new game she created to herself mostly because her mother has tried to get her away from games, going as far as turning off the internet. See, if I were trying to do that, I would have taken the router/modem with me as well, not just unplugged it. That’s just me. She finds comfort in not only an online friend she made called, ETHAN, but also when she meets REV outside a church.
Rev has his own baggage. His father gave up his parental rights, and now, he’s emailing Rev and basically stirring up old resentment, but also feelings of wanting to please his father. I feel bad for Rev and I can’t even get frustrated with him when he completely shuts down even though his best friend tries to get him to talk and help him.
Emma was being stubborn, although most times I can understand with her mother, but when things escalate between her and ETHAN (and I mean they ESCALATED!) I wanted to just shake her for being so…stupid.
It is NEVER OKAY to not at least be supportive of your friend’s interest, even if you don’t find it all that interesting – just saying.
Despite a few annoyances, some from Emma and her mother, but also Rev on some occasions, I actually enjoyed this book. I liked how this story unraveled and how that while it’s told from another verse, it’s still a book by itself. I’m left with more questions than answers. I like how the author didn’t use one of my least favorite tropes even though she could have. I wind up really liking Emma’s mother and she has put up with A LOT – so it was nice seeing how Emma actually TRIES to let her mother into her life, even if there are still baby steps to be made.
Rev realizes that his father, despite being this man who tortured, he is just a man.
It was an enjoyable read with a couple of twists that maybe I should have seen coming, but I didn’t. I don’t think that’s a bad thing, however. You really get a sense of where Rev lives and his adoptive parents.
I won’t give away anymore than LETTERS TO THE LOST is worth the read. If anything, just so you can get all excited like I did when it’s referenced in this book.
Sensitivemuse (246 KP) rated Caraval in Books
Oct 1, 2017
Great magical world with dark undertones
What I loved the most about the book was the setting of Caraval. It’s so beautifully descriptive it feels like a magical place. You’re taken back to the feeling when you were a wee little one and you’re in Disneyland for the first time in your life. It’s that magical feel good feeling that comes back to you when you’re reading the book. At the same time you know things aren’t what they seem and there’s some dark undertones to Caraval. It’s hard not to get swept away (as they have warned you) because everything seems so real and fun.
I loved the plot throughout the book. Like Scarlett, you had doubts as to whether things were real or not. By the time you finished the novel you were still doubting what was real and what wasn’t. Scarlett was at times frustrating and irritating. She hesitated at the wrong times and didn’t listen to anyone when she really needed to. Argh. You wanted to jump in and drag her to point her to the right direction. I didn’t really see her well with Julian because I really saw Julian as more of a means to an end because he guided her throughout the game. However I have to admit, I liked it when he called her ‘Crimson’ it suited his personality at the time (I hope he doesn’t stop calling her that, it adds more to their characters.)
The last few pages of the novel though. Wow. You’re blown away and you’ll have your heart wrenched and torn out of your chest and then it’s put back in. Yet it doesn’t feel the same anymore and you’re left with more questions and wanting more. OH MY GOD I CAN’T WAIT FOR THE SECOND BOOK! I NEED ANSWERS!
Greatly recommended. Immerse yourself into the world and enjoy. You’ll probably get carried away like I did. Get ready for some good twists that are gut wrenching. You’re not left the same after reading it.
I loved the plot throughout the book. Like Scarlett, you had doubts as to whether things were real or not. By the time you finished the novel you were still doubting what was real and what wasn’t. Scarlett was at times frustrating and irritating. She hesitated at the wrong times and didn’t listen to anyone when she really needed to. Argh. You wanted to jump in and drag her to point her to the right direction. I didn’t really see her well with Julian because I really saw Julian as more of a means to an end because he guided her throughout the game. However I have to admit, I liked it when he called her ‘Crimson’ it suited his personality at the time (I hope he doesn’t stop calling her that, it adds more to their characters.)
The last few pages of the novel though. Wow. You’re blown away and you’ll have your heart wrenched and torn out of your chest and then it’s put back in. Yet it doesn’t feel the same anymore and you’re left with more questions and wanting more. OH MY GOD I CAN’T WAIT FOR THE SECOND BOOK! I NEED ANSWERS!
Greatly recommended. Immerse yourself into the world and enjoy. You’ll probably get carried away like I did. Get ready for some good twists that are gut wrenching. You’re not left the same after reading it.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Ready Player One (2018) in Movies
Sep 20, 2018 (Updated Sep 20, 2018)
Not Quite Ready
I saw this movie in the cinema back when it came out in March earlier this year and I honestly didn't feel ready to review it after a single viewing because of all of the references etc that there was to take in. After watching the movie a couple more times and watching a bunch of Easter Egg videos on Youtube, I feel more equipped to discuss the film.
Up top, I never read the book that this film is based on. It has been recommended to me quite a few times, but I have never gotten around to reading it, so I was going into this with no pre-conceived ideas of what it was going to be other than what I had seen in the various trailers for the movie.
Let's start with the good stuff. Although I have some issues with the overabundance of CGI onscreen, as a 3d animator myself I was extremely impressed at the sheer quality of the animation in the movie. I know that this thing had a pretty high budget behind it, but still the level of quality in the animation is really high throughout the film. The references are also pretty cool, at least for the first third of the movie but the novelty of seeing some of your favourite pop culture characters does wear off after a while and ends up feeling like a cheap gimmick before too long. Finally, if all you are looking for is a big dumb fun blockbuster, then this movie provides that in spades.
Ok, onto the stuff that bothered me. As I said above, although the quality of the CGI is pretty incredible, the vast amount of it gets tiresome after a while. I also don't like the character designs at all, Parzival looks like a rejected piece of Final Fantasy artwork, Art3mis looks like a stereotypical version of a what a middle aged man thinks a cool hacker looks like with a weird resemblance to a feline, Aech just looked chunky and awkward, like something from a last-gen Gears Of War game, I-R0k's weird, edgy, fantasy-based design didn't fit his voice or the tone of the scenes he appeared in and Sorrento's avatar just looked distractingly like a dastardly Clark Kent for some reason. Also, these original character designs seemed oddly out of place being surrounded by other characters from franchises that we already know like DC and Mortal Kombat, none of it meshed well.
From this point on I am going to delve into some mid-movie spoilers, so here's your warning.
It really annoyed me how they kept touching on the idea that someone in the Oasis might not necessarily look the same as they do in real life and if you ever met them in real life you would be sorely disappointed, only for the reason for all of this to be a birthmark on Olivia Cooke's character's face. The way that they make her out to some sort of beast-like monster because of a slight skin-irregularity is ridiculous and also kinda offensive. Also, we are told during the movie's opening sequence that the Oasis is a worldwide thing, where people from anywhere on the planet can meet up online and fight together or kill each other for coins, then halfway through the movie, all of the characters meet up in a small ice cream truck in the real world and it turns out that they all live within a few miles of each other. It just made the whole thing feel really small scale. Another issue is that the movie is only 6 months old at this point and it already feels slightly dated. I don't see this movie ageing very well at all and this is both due to the CGI and the references that they choose to include.
Lastly, as I said earlier, if what you want out of this movie is mindless fun, then you'll walk away satisfied, the problem with that is that the movie seems to want to be more than that. The way that the movie treats itself and the way it was marketed along with the fact that it's got Spielberg in the director's chair, signifies that the filmmakers were intending for this to be this generation's Back To The Future or Star Wars and on that front it totally fails. In these other movies that this film is aspiring to be, you care about what happens to the characters and want to see where they go, whereas here the audience cares way more about seeing the next popular franchise references than anything that happens to the main characters at the heart of this story and once you've seen the film, you are going to leave talking about the characters that appeared from outside franchises rather than the ones created for this story. The characters are also instantly forgettable, for example I have seen this film three times now and still couldn't tell you the real world names of any of the characters other than Wade Watts and Sorrento and that's only because he has the same name in the real world as he does in the Oasis. I also don't care if I ever see any of these characters again if I'm being honest. I'm sure there is probably a sequel to this already being planned seeing as it made a bunch of money at the box office and there is apparently a sequel book in the works, but frankly I wouldn't care if I never saw any of these characters again and I don't care where the story is going either.
In conclusion, Ready Player One doesn't achieve the goal that it sets for itself of being a modern sci-fi classic, but there is a lot of fun to be had here along with some impressive animation to boot. The movie has a fairly shallow, hollow feel to it throughout, as if we are scratching the surface of something potentially engaging and worth investing in, but the filmmakers constantly keep distracting us with flashy visuals and obscure pop culture references. If the movie committed to telling a more original story rather than being obsessed with the 80's classics it is exploiting, then it may be more worthwhile. Also, it's definitely not Spielberg's best, this may be a bit harsh but it's probably closer to Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull than Raiders Of The Lost Ark. I wish that Smashbomb had a half star rating system, because although I feel that the movie was better than a 6, I don't like it enough to give it a 7, so a 6.5 would sum up how I felt about the film more accurately.
Up top, I never read the book that this film is based on. It has been recommended to me quite a few times, but I have never gotten around to reading it, so I was going into this with no pre-conceived ideas of what it was going to be other than what I had seen in the various trailers for the movie.
Let's start with the good stuff. Although I have some issues with the overabundance of CGI onscreen, as a 3d animator myself I was extremely impressed at the sheer quality of the animation in the movie. I know that this thing had a pretty high budget behind it, but still the level of quality in the animation is really high throughout the film. The references are also pretty cool, at least for the first third of the movie but the novelty of seeing some of your favourite pop culture characters does wear off after a while and ends up feeling like a cheap gimmick before too long. Finally, if all you are looking for is a big dumb fun blockbuster, then this movie provides that in spades.
Ok, onto the stuff that bothered me. As I said above, although the quality of the CGI is pretty incredible, the vast amount of it gets tiresome after a while. I also don't like the character designs at all, Parzival looks like a rejected piece of Final Fantasy artwork, Art3mis looks like a stereotypical version of a what a middle aged man thinks a cool hacker looks like with a weird resemblance to a feline, Aech just looked chunky and awkward, like something from a last-gen Gears Of War game, I-R0k's weird, edgy, fantasy-based design didn't fit his voice or the tone of the scenes he appeared in and Sorrento's avatar just looked distractingly like a dastardly Clark Kent for some reason. Also, these original character designs seemed oddly out of place being surrounded by other characters from franchises that we already know like DC and Mortal Kombat, none of it meshed well.
From this point on I am going to delve into some mid-movie spoilers, so here's your warning.
It really annoyed me how they kept touching on the idea that someone in the Oasis might not necessarily look the same as they do in real life and if you ever met them in real life you would be sorely disappointed, only for the reason for all of this to be a birthmark on Olivia Cooke's character's face. The way that they make her out to some sort of beast-like monster because of a slight skin-irregularity is ridiculous and also kinda offensive. Also, we are told during the movie's opening sequence that the Oasis is a worldwide thing, where people from anywhere on the planet can meet up online and fight together or kill each other for coins, then halfway through the movie, all of the characters meet up in a small ice cream truck in the real world and it turns out that they all live within a few miles of each other. It just made the whole thing feel really small scale. Another issue is that the movie is only 6 months old at this point and it already feels slightly dated. I don't see this movie ageing very well at all and this is both due to the CGI and the references that they choose to include.
Lastly, as I said earlier, if what you want out of this movie is mindless fun, then you'll walk away satisfied, the problem with that is that the movie seems to want to be more than that. The way that the movie treats itself and the way it was marketed along with the fact that it's got Spielberg in the director's chair, signifies that the filmmakers were intending for this to be this generation's Back To The Future or Star Wars and on that front it totally fails. In these other movies that this film is aspiring to be, you care about what happens to the characters and want to see where they go, whereas here the audience cares way more about seeing the next popular franchise references than anything that happens to the main characters at the heart of this story and once you've seen the film, you are going to leave talking about the characters that appeared from outside franchises rather than the ones created for this story. The characters are also instantly forgettable, for example I have seen this film three times now and still couldn't tell you the real world names of any of the characters other than Wade Watts and Sorrento and that's only because he has the same name in the real world as he does in the Oasis. I also don't care if I ever see any of these characters again if I'm being honest. I'm sure there is probably a sequel to this already being planned seeing as it made a bunch of money at the box office and there is apparently a sequel book in the works, but frankly I wouldn't care if I never saw any of these characters again and I don't care where the story is going either.
In conclusion, Ready Player One doesn't achieve the goal that it sets for itself of being a modern sci-fi classic, but there is a lot of fun to be had here along with some impressive animation to boot. The movie has a fairly shallow, hollow feel to it throughout, as if we are scratching the surface of something potentially engaging and worth investing in, but the filmmakers constantly keep distracting us with flashy visuals and obscure pop culture references. If the movie committed to telling a more original story rather than being obsessed with the 80's classics it is exploiting, then it may be more worthwhile. Also, it's definitely not Spielberg's best, this may be a bit harsh but it's probably closer to Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull than Raiders Of The Lost Ark. I wish that Smashbomb had a half star rating system, because although I feel that the movie was better than a 6, I don't like it enough to give it a 7, so a 6.5 would sum up how I felt about the film more accurately.
Darren (1599 KP) rated 40 Days and 40 Nights (2002) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: 40 Days and 40 Nights starts as we meet Matt (Hartnett) who has been struggling with his break up from Nicole (Shaw), this has led Matt to a string of one night stands that lead to him having visions of a black hole. Matt’s brother John (Tree) is in training to become a priest where Matt learns about lent and vows to give up all sexual activity for 40 days and 40 nights.
When his roommate Ryan (Costanzo) decides to spread the news about the vow a betting pool opens up and to make Matt’s life more difficult when he finally meets the perfect woman Erica (Sossamon). Matt has to learn to balance his vow while starting a new relationship where sex is out of the question.
40 Days and 40 Nights is a film I did enjoy watching even if I can see big flaws in the story, this mostly comes from the idea that it is written that every guy is obsessed with sex and couldn’t possible go 40 days without having it. The problems comes where everyone is against Matt rather than having even just one person supporting him through his self-improvement idea. I do however feel the story works for what it is trying to be even if it comes off unbelievable throughout.
Actor Review
Josh Hartnett: Matt Sullivan is a struggling man who can’t get over his ex-girlfriend Nicole. Running through a string of one night stands he wakes from these with a vision of the world coming to an end. Coming up with the idea to give up sexual activity for lent his life becomes a game for people around the world who has bet on when it will end and the perfect woman come into his life his whole life becomes difficult. Josh shows with this performance he can handle comedy.
Shannyn Sossamon: Erica has been struggling to find the right guy and her job doesn’t help. She meets Matt and see him as a different guy to the normal ones she meets but doesn’t fully understand the vow. Shannyn is good in this role being a strong leading lady.
Paulo Costanzo: Ryan is Matt’s roommate who is always looking to go out and meet girls for sex. He keeps watch over Matt after telling everyone about the vow. Paulo is solid as this supporting friend even if this generic.
Adam Tree: John Sullivan is the priest in training brother of Matt’s who doesn’t believe he can achieve his vow because he knows how difficult it is to go through. Adam is solid but in the end is just another supporting character.
Support Cast: 40 Days and 40 Nights has a supporting cast which includes plenty of different characters that are trying to make Matt break his vow with not a single person actually supporting him.
Director Review: Michael Lehmann – Michael gives us a fun comedy even if it is very one sided with the reactions and mind set people are meant to be in.
Comedy: 40 Days and 40 Nights has moments of comedy which mostly surround people trying to make Matt break the vow.
Romance: 40 Days and 40 Nights does try to tackle relationships by trying to make it more about how sex isn’t the most important part of the relationship.
Settings: 40 Days and 40 Nights keeps the settings around San Francisco which is always a great visual location for a film.
Suggestion: 40 Days and 40 Nights is one to try it does have good moments of good comedy but it also has a story which seems to be very much sex is all people think about. (Try It)
Best Part: Hartnett works for comedy.
Worst Part: Not everyone is sex obsessed.
Romantic Moment: No contact date.
Believability: The way things go I would say no.
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Budget: $17 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 36 Minutes
Tagline: It’s Easy to Say But Harder To Do!
Overall: Simple comedy that does work well for what it is trying to achieve.
https://moviesreview101.com/2017/07/25/40-days-and-40-nights-2002/
When his roommate Ryan (Costanzo) decides to spread the news about the vow a betting pool opens up and to make Matt’s life more difficult when he finally meets the perfect woman Erica (Sossamon). Matt has to learn to balance his vow while starting a new relationship where sex is out of the question.
40 Days and 40 Nights is a film I did enjoy watching even if I can see big flaws in the story, this mostly comes from the idea that it is written that every guy is obsessed with sex and couldn’t possible go 40 days without having it. The problems comes where everyone is against Matt rather than having even just one person supporting him through his self-improvement idea. I do however feel the story works for what it is trying to be even if it comes off unbelievable throughout.
Actor Review
Josh Hartnett: Matt Sullivan is a struggling man who can’t get over his ex-girlfriend Nicole. Running through a string of one night stands he wakes from these with a vision of the world coming to an end. Coming up with the idea to give up sexual activity for lent his life becomes a game for people around the world who has bet on when it will end and the perfect woman come into his life his whole life becomes difficult. Josh shows with this performance he can handle comedy.
Shannyn Sossamon: Erica has been struggling to find the right guy and her job doesn’t help. She meets Matt and see him as a different guy to the normal ones she meets but doesn’t fully understand the vow. Shannyn is good in this role being a strong leading lady.
Paulo Costanzo: Ryan is Matt’s roommate who is always looking to go out and meet girls for sex. He keeps watch over Matt after telling everyone about the vow. Paulo is solid as this supporting friend even if this generic.
Adam Tree: John Sullivan is the priest in training brother of Matt’s who doesn’t believe he can achieve his vow because he knows how difficult it is to go through. Adam is solid but in the end is just another supporting character.
Support Cast: 40 Days and 40 Nights has a supporting cast which includes plenty of different characters that are trying to make Matt break his vow with not a single person actually supporting him.
Director Review: Michael Lehmann – Michael gives us a fun comedy even if it is very one sided with the reactions and mind set people are meant to be in.
Comedy: 40 Days and 40 Nights has moments of comedy which mostly surround people trying to make Matt break the vow.
Romance: 40 Days and 40 Nights does try to tackle relationships by trying to make it more about how sex isn’t the most important part of the relationship.
Settings: 40 Days and 40 Nights keeps the settings around San Francisco which is always a great visual location for a film.
Suggestion: 40 Days and 40 Nights is one to try it does have good moments of good comedy but it also has a story which seems to be very much sex is all people think about. (Try It)
Best Part: Hartnett works for comedy.
Worst Part: Not everyone is sex obsessed.
Romantic Moment: No contact date.
Believability: The way things go I would say no.
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Budget: $17 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 36 Minutes
Tagline: It’s Easy to Say But Harder To Do!
Overall: Simple comedy that does work well for what it is trying to achieve.
https://moviesreview101.com/2017/07/25/40-days-and-40-nights-2002/
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated The Fall in Books
Jan 23, 2020
*puts on best announcer voice* Ahem.
I'd like to present to you the <b>most confusing book of the year</b>, <i>The Fall</i> by Bethany Griffin. It's a <b>very odd and peculiar book </b>based on Edgar Allen Poe's short story, <i>The Fall of the House of Usher</i>. In Griffin's retelling, Madeline Usher believes that she can break the curse on the Ushers, but then she wakes up in a fabulously claustrophobic box called a coffin.
In all seriousness, <i>The Fall</i> is actually <b>a retelling on one of Poe's stories </b>that I didn't actually read, but watched instead (so bad, it was good). From reading the synopsis of Griffin's retelling, <b>it sounded like Madeline Usher had spent most of her life trying to break free from the curse.</b>
I ended up with something different. At least, that's what I would probably end up with if I actually made it to the end of the book, which I chose not to. I totally admit I peeked at the last few pages just to see what would happen, and it was nothing special.
<b>Griffin starts us out right when Madeline wakes up in a coffin. The rest of the book, however, is all flashback from Madeline's childhood, starting from when she was nine. It's a little out of order, but has a pattern to it in a way</b> – one chapter is nine, the next is fifteen, and occasionally there's a diary/journal entry from Lisbeth Usher. I'm no fan of chapters being even remotely out of order (they can get confusing when you're busy and come back to the story a few days later), but <b>at least Griffin had a pattern.</b>
At least, until about page 150. <b>WHERE IS THIRTEEN AND WHY ARE YOU SKIPPED.</b>
Of course, we go back to thirteen in the next chapter and continue the pattern. In my little game of peek-ahead, I found out <b>there <i>is</i> no particular pattern. My hypothesis to all this is Griffin portraying Madeline's madness increasing as her age increases. As Madeline grows older, she becomes madder. </b>How's that for implementing science?
Anyways, about 50 pages later, I'm pretty much going, "Your point is..?" in a very uninterested mental voice that may or may not include a mental eye roll or two in the process. Here's all that I've found out from what I read:
<ol>
<li>Madeline wakes up in a coffin – Go figure.</li>
<li>She and her brother Roderick is cursed – Knew that.</li>
<li>The House of Usher is, well, alive – Knew that.</li>
<li>The House of Usher is malicious – Knew that, but this was ten times creepier from the cheesy short film.</li>
<li>Madeline has a desire to break the curse on her family – It's very subtle.</li>
</ol>
In the long run, <b><i>The Fall</i> is written in a scattered format (see my hypothesis!) to emphasize the fact that the House of Usher is alive, malicious, and will do <i>anything</i> to keep an Usher within its walls for all eternity. It's nothing remotely impressive if you read or watched the original.</b>
And this is when the book club kills me.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/dnf-review-the-fall-by-bethany-griffin/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
I'd like to present to you the <b>most confusing book of the year</b>, <i>The Fall</i> by Bethany Griffin. It's a <b>very odd and peculiar book </b>based on Edgar Allen Poe's short story, <i>The Fall of the House of Usher</i>. In Griffin's retelling, Madeline Usher believes that she can break the curse on the Ushers, but then she wakes up in a fabulously claustrophobic box called a coffin.
In all seriousness, <i>The Fall</i> is actually <b>a retelling on one of Poe's stories </b>that I didn't actually read, but watched instead (so bad, it was good). From reading the synopsis of Griffin's retelling, <b>it sounded like Madeline Usher had spent most of her life trying to break free from the curse.</b>
I ended up with something different. At least, that's what I would probably end up with if I actually made it to the end of the book, which I chose not to. I totally admit I peeked at the last few pages just to see what would happen, and it was nothing special.
<b>Griffin starts us out right when Madeline wakes up in a coffin. The rest of the book, however, is all flashback from Madeline's childhood, starting from when she was nine. It's a little out of order, but has a pattern to it in a way</b> – one chapter is nine, the next is fifteen, and occasionally there's a diary/journal entry from Lisbeth Usher. I'm no fan of chapters being even remotely out of order (they can get confusing when you're busy and come back to the story a few days later), but <b>at least Griffin had a pattern.</b>
At least, until about page 150. <b>WHERE IS THIRTEEN AND WHY ARE YOU SKIPPED.</b>
Of course, we go back to thirteen in the next chapter and continue the pattern. In my little game of peek-ahead, I found out <b>there <i>is</i> no particular pattern. My hypothesis to all this is Griffin portraying Madeline's madness increasing as her age increases. As Madeline grows older, she becomes madder. </b>How's that for implementing science?
Anyways, about 50 pages later, I'm pretty much going, "Your point is..?" in a very uninterested mental voice that may or may not include a mental eye roll or two in the process. Here's all that I've found out from what I read:
<ol>
<li>Madeline wakes up in a coffin – Go figure.</li>
<li>She and her brother Roderick is cursed – Knew that.</li>
<li>The House of Usher is, well, alive – Knew that.</li>
<li>The House of Usher is malicious – Knew that, but this was ten times creepier from the cheesy short film.</li>
<li>Madeline has a desire to break the curse on her family – It's very subtle.</li>
</ol>
In the long run, <b><i>The Fall</i> is written in a scattered format (see my hypothesis!) to emphasize the fact that the House of Usher is alive, malicious, and will do <i>anything</i> to keep an Usher within its walls for all eternity. It's nothing remotely impressive if you read or watched the original.</b>
And this is when the book club kills me.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/dnf-review-the-fall-by-bethany-griffin/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Darren (1599 KP) rated The Pelican Brief (1993) in Movies
Jun 21, 2019
Story: The Pelican Brief starts when two Supreme Court Justices are assassinated, bring the country to a stand still in shock. Law student Darby Shaw (Roberts) puts together a theory of who was behind the assassinations, which she presents to her boyfriend and professor Thomas (Shepard), one theory that has turned his head.
After the theory is presented to the people investigating, Darby and Tom start getting targeted, when journalist friend of one of the victims Gray Grantham (Washington) start investigating a bigger conspiracy going on within the government, one that will put both their lives in danger.
Thoughts on The Pelican Brief
Characters – Darby is a law student having an affair with her professor, after the assassinations, she comes up with a theory about who was behind them, which sees her become a target for the people behind it, she doesn’t know who to trust seeing anybody she does get killed, her last resort is Gray. Gray is a journalist that has worked with the victims in the past, he is willing to dig for the truth, he does become Darby’s last resort and works with her to expose the truth which will become the biggest story of his career. Thomas Callahan is the connection between Darby and the people involved, he is a professor, with her theory interesting him at his own risk. We do go through many different political figures in search for the truth here, each one has their own agenda and could be involved.
Performances – Julia Roberts in the leading role is strong as she gives us a strong independent figure that has been running for her life trying to expose the truth. Denzel Washington was a growing star at the time of release, here he makes us believe that he is a star in the role which is filled with the determination and skill to start ahead of the game. The rest of the cast are all strong with them each getting the moments to shine with them all having the importance to the story.
Story – The story follows a law student and journalist that must team up to investigate the assassinations of the two members of the supreme court that puts both their lives in danger as it could bring the political system down. This story does give us plenty of swerves along the way as it does keep us guessing just to where everything will be going, it does show us how a political system will be used to gain an advantage and can be used to cover up anything that will incriminate them. The idea of the cover up shows just how corruption can effect so many lives and is ready to be exposed.
Crime/Mystery – The crime side of the film shows just how the laws can be bent to help the people who want to make the most money, how much they will do to cover up their secrets and how corrupt they will become. The mystery side of the film show just how the corruption needs to be investigated, how far up the chain it could go too.
Settings – The film is set in a couple of major cities in America Washington and New York mostly, which show just how the big companies will use the political power to make the most money.
Scene of the Movie – The video.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It is too long, with too many characters at times.
Final Thoughts – This is a political thriller that does keep you guessing, it shows how far up the chain corruption can go and how covering it up can be the only option.
Overall: Political thriller 101
https://moviesreview101.com/2019/06/19/the-pelican-brief-1993/
After the theory is presented to the people investigating, Darby and Tom start getting targeted, when journalist friend of one of the victims Gray Grantham (Washington) start investigating a bigger conspiracy going on within the government, one that will put both their lives in danger.
Thoughts on The Pelican Brief
Characters – Darby is a law student having an affair with her professor, after the assassinations, she comes up with a theory about who was behind them, which sees her become a target for the people behind it, she doesn’t know who to trust seeing anybody she does get killed, her last resort is Gray. Gray is a journalist that has worked with the victims in the past, he is willing to dig for the truth, he does become Darby’s last resort and works with her to expose the truth which will become the biggest story of his career. Thomas Callahan is the connection between Darby and the people involved, he is a professor, with her theory interesting him at his own risk. We do go through many different political figures in search for the truth here, each one has their own agenda and could be involved.
Performances – Julia Roberts in the leading role is strong as she gives us a strong independent figure that has been running for her life trying to expose the truth. Denzel Washington was a growing star at the time of release, here he makes us believe that he is a star in the role which is filled with the determination and skill to start ahead of the game. The rest of the cast are all strong with them each getting the moments to shine with them all having the importance to the story.
Story – The story follows a law student and journalist that must team up to investigate the assassinations of the two members of the supreme court that puts both their lives in danger as it could bring the political system down. This story does give us plenty of swerves along the way as it does keep us guessing just to where everything will be going, it does show us how a political system will be used to gain an advantage and can be used to cover up anything that will incriminate them. The idea of the cover up shows just how corruption can effect so many lives and is ready to be exposed.
Crime/Mystery – The crime side of the film shows just how the laws can be bent to help the people who want to make the most money, how much they will do to cover up their secrets and how corrupt they will become. The mystery side of the film show just how the corruption needs to be investigated, how far up the chain it could go too.
Settings – The film is set in a couple of major cities in America Washington and New York mostly, which show just how the big companies will use the political power to make the most money.
Scene of the Movie – The video.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It is too long, with too many characters at times.
Final Thoughts – This is a political thriller that does keep you guessing, it shows how far up the chain corruption can go and how covering it up can be the only option.
Overall: Political thriller 101
https://moviesreview101.com/2019/06/19/the-pelican-brief-1993/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Everybody Knows (Todos Lo Saben) (2018) in Movies
Mar 13, 2019 (Updated Mar 13, 2019)
Excellent acting from Bardem and (especially) Cruz
I have always liked, but not loved, the English language movies that Penelope Cruz and Javier Bardem have been a part of. Part of the issue, I think, is that even though they are dynamic, charismatica and GOOD LOOKING screen presences that embody the very definitioni of the term "MOVIE STAR", they are working in a language that is not their native language, so something, I think, gets lost in translation. So, it was with some excitement that I checked out the Spanish language thriller EVERYBODY KNOWS (Spanish Title: TODOS LO SOBEN).
And...I wasn't disappointed. Both Bardem and (especially) Cruz shine in this familial thriller. Cruz stars as Laura, a native of Spain now living in Argentina. She (and her 2 children) come back to her small village outside of Madrid for the wedding of her younger sister. When a bad thing happens on this trip, Laura must find a way out while dealing with lingering family matters and pressures that come to the fore due to the stress of the situation.
Without putting too much of a fine point on this, Cruz is stunning. Not only is she a beautiful woman who commands the screen whenever she is on, but as her character becomes more and more physically and emotionally torn with "the situation" her raw emotions come out and you see a very real portrayal of a mother who will do anything for her children. This performance is (was?) Academy Award worthy - it is that good. This is a strong actress at the top of her game.
She is more than matched on screen by the less showey, nuanced - yet fun, at times - performance of her real life husband, Javier Bardem, who plays a person from Lara's past that is drawn into the events. Bardem won an Oscar for playing the mysterious, scary hitman, Anton Chigurh in NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MAN. This was a a character who barely spoke. In this film, he plays a lively, extroverted fun-loving person who's whole personae is called into question, quite the contrast to the English language characters I have, heretofore, known him for.
Iranian Director Asghar Farhadi (best known for THE SEPARATION) does a good job driving the story - once it gets started - he is sure handed in handling both the suspense/action moments of this movie as well as the family drama during the "many people talking around a table" scenes. This film led off the Cannes Film Festival last year and was greatly lauded.
It's not a perfect film. My friend who saw the movie with me stated (correctly) that he had never seen a movie that "started so poorly but corrected itself and finished as an excellent film" like this one did. The first 1/2 hour to 45 minutes of this 2 hour and 15 minute film is filled with introducing the myriad of characters associated with this family (and the mystery that enfolds), but it is a scattershot approach to film making and character introduction and Farhadi misses the mark more than he hits the mark during this period.
But once the mystery unfolds - and Cruz and Bardem's characters (and acting) kicks into high gear - things get quite good, quite tense and quite engrossing. Well worth the time to check it out.
Letter Grade B+: (C for the first 45 minutes, A for the last hour and a half)
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And...I wasn't disappointed. Both Bardem and (especially) Cruz shine in this familial thriller. Cruz stars as Laura, a native of Spain now living in Argentina. She (and her 2 children) come back to her small village outside of Madrid for the wedding of her younger sister. When a bad thing happens on this trip, Laura must find a way out while dealing with lingering family matters and pressures that come to the fore due to the stress of the situation.
Without putting too much of a fine point on this, Cruz is stunning. Not only is she a beautiful woman who commands the screen whenever she is on, but as her character becomes more and more physically and emotionally torn with "the situation" her raw emotions come out and you see a very real portrayal of a mother who will do anything for her children. This performance is (was?) Academy Award worthy - it is that good. This is a strong actress at the top of her game.
She is more than matched on screen by the less showey, nuanced - yet fun, at times - performance of her real life husband, Javier Bardem, who plays a person from Lara's past that is drawn into the events. Bardem won an Oscar for playing the mysterious, scary hitman, Anton Chigurh in NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MAN. This was a a character who barely spoke. In this film, he plays a lively, extroverted fun-loving person who's whole personae is called into question, quite the contrast to the English language characters I have, heretofore, known him for.
Iranian Director Asghar Farhadi (best known for THE SEPARATION) does a good job driving the story - once it gets started - he is sure handed in handling both the suspense/action moments of this movie as well as the family drama during the "many people talking around a table" scenes. This film led off the Cannes Film Festival last year and was greatly lauded.
It's not a perfect film. My friend who saw the movie with me stated (correctly) that he had never seen a movie that "started so poorly but corrected itself and finished as an excellent film" like this one did. The first 1/2 hour to 45 minutes of this 2 hour and 15 minute film is filled with introducing the myriad of characters associated with this family (and the mystery that enfolds), but it is a scattershot approach to film making and character introduction and Farhadi misses the mark more than he hits the mark during this period.
But once the mystery unfolds - and Cruz and Bardem's characters (and acting) kicks into high gear - things get quite good, quite tense and quite engrossing. Well worth the time to check it out.
Letter Grade B+: (C for the first 45 minutes, A for the last hour and a half)
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)