Search
Lee (2222 KP) rated A Discovery of Witches - Season 1 in TV
Nov 8, 2018 (Updated Nov 8, 2018)
Bit of a slow burn, some good potential though.
A Discovery of Witches is based on the first book of the 'All Souls Trilogy', by Deborah Harkness. We're in a world where witches, vampires and demons all live among us, carrying out normal human jobs and duties. Obviously these creatures are all aware of each other, and it becomes clear that there is a long, complex and very tense history between them all. While us humans remain blissfully unaware.
The show begins in Oxford, England with Diana Bishop (Teresa Palmer), a witch working as a historian. While carrying out research in the local library she discovers a book which had long been considered missing, and mysteriously only shows itself to Diana. It's return triggers a lot of interest within the supernatural community and she finds herself attracting a lot of unwanted attention, beginning with Matthew Clairmont (Matthew Goode), a local geneticist and vampire. They eventually forge a romantic relationship and begin working together to try and solve the mysteries within the book.
My wife absolutely loves this show and looking at some of the reviews for it on IMDB I know I'm in the minority here, but I mostly found A Discovery Of Witches to be a bit dull. The whole thing is very stylishly done, highlighting Oxford as the beautiful city it is, and we also spend a lot of time in Venice, and various other exotic international locations. But it's the slow burn and the characters themselves that didn't really do it for me. The vampires are mostly moody, throwing their weight around and showing off their lightning speed and reactions along with their heightened senses. The witches are generally wise and supposedly more powerful, but rarely exhibit any more power than setting something on fire, rattling something, or making it a bit windy to the point where people get knocked off their feet. And the demons... well, the demons don't really seem to do anything at all, acting and appearing just like normal humans throughout the entire show. There's a lot of dodgy acting, and as much as I've loved Teresa Palmer in other roles prior to this, I don't really feel she's well suited here. It's all just slow burn and forbidden love. Twilight, but with grown-ups and less special effects.
It's just been granted another two seasons, so I'm definitely in the minority with my opinions. To be fair though, there have been some enjoyable moments, and I'm certainly interested in the direction the show appeared to be heading in. The finale cliffhanger definitely opened up some fun and interesting potential for next season too.
The show begins in Oxford, England with Diana Bishop (Teresa Palmer), a witch working as a historian. While carrying out research in the local library she discovers a book which had long been considered missing, and mysteriously only shows itself to Diana. It's return triggers a lot of interest within the supernatural community and she finds herself attracting a lot of unwanted attention, beginning with Matthew Clairmont (Matthew Goode), a local geneticist and vampire. They eventually forge a romantic relationship and begin working together to try and solve the mysteries within the book.
My wife absolutely loves this show and looking at some of the reviews for it on IMDB I know I'm in the minority here, but I mostly found A Discovery Of Witches to be a bit dull. The whole thing is very stylishly done, highlighting Oxford as the beautiful city it is, and we also spend a lot of time in Venice, and various other exotic international locations. But it's the slow burn and the characters themselves that didn't really do it for me. The vampires are mostly moody, throwing their weight around and showing off their lightning speed and reactions along with their heightened senses. The witches are generally wise and supposedly more powerful, but rarely exhibit any more power than setting something on fire, rattling something, or making it a bit windy to the point where people get knocked off their feet. And the demons... well, the demons don't really seem to do anything at all, acting and appearing just like normal humans throughout the entire show. There's a lot of dodgy acting, and as much as I've loved Teresa Palmer in other roles prior to this, I don't really feel she's well suited here. It's all just slow burn and forbidden love. Twilight, but with grown-ups and less special effects.
It's just been granted another two seasons, so I'm definitely in the minority with my opinions. To be fair though, there have been some enjoyable moments, and I'm certainly interested in the direction the show appeared to be heading in. The finale cliffhanger definitely opened up some fun and interesting potential for next season too.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Line That Held Us in Books
Mar 18, 2019
Brutal read with gorgeous storytelling & complex characters
Darl Moody has been after this infamous giant buck for years. So when he hears his neighbor has gone away for a week, he takes the opportunity to go hunting--off-season and illegally--on his land. But Darl never imagined it would end like this: it isn't the buck he kills, it's Carol Brewer, a member of a local family known for violence and hatred. Scared and panicked, Darl turns to his best friend, Calvin Hooper, for help. But when Carol remains missing and his brother Dwayne comes looking for him, the clues quickly point to Darl and Calvin. And Dwayne is looking for vengeance--and someone's blood.
"There were some things worth dying for and some things worth killing for and some things could make a man do all sorts of things he never knew he was capable of until the time came to do them."
Well, this was a dark story about morality and humanity that drew me in to its twisted world immediately. I've never read a book by David Joy before, but wow, he can really write. There's almost a lyrical, poetic manner to the way he puts his words together, which stands in stark contrast to the gruesome tale he tells. Believe me, this isn't a book for the faint of heart. If you're easily offended by gore, this might not be for you.
However, it's certainly an emotional story about family and friendship. I've lived in or near small towns like Darl's and Dwight's--where everyone knows everyone else and family grudges run back generations. Joy captures it perfectly. It's wonderfully descriptive and excellently written, and each of the characters stand out so well. What I found so interesting and surprising was his way of making me feel for all the characters, even though most of them were making poor decisions, even terrible ones. You can feel their conflict and emotions quite clearly.
"Things had a way of never leaving these mountains. Stories took root like everything else... Just as Dwayne told him the night before, a man's mind is its own kind of hell."
Overall, I didn't always enjoy this book, because it's a brutal read at times, but I was wowed by the writing and Joy's storytelling. The characters are complex, and the novel presents some fascinating complexities. It was an interesting and worthwhile read.
"There were some things worth dying for and some things worth killing for and some things could make a man do all sorts of things he never knew he was capable of until the time came to do them."
Well, this was a dark story about morality and humanity that drew me in to its twisted world immediately. I've never read a book by David Joy before, but wow, he can really write. There's almost a lyrical, poetic manner to the way he puts his words together, which stands in stark contrast to the gruesome tale he tells. Believe me, this isn't a book for the faint of heart. If you're easily offended by gore, this might not be for you.
However, it's certainly an emotional story about family and friendship. I've lived in or near small towns like Darl's and Dwight's--where everyone knows everyone else and family grudges run back generations. Joy captures it perfectly. It's wonderfully descriptive and excellently written, and each of the characters stand out so well. What I found so interesting and surprising was his way of making me feel for all the characters, even though most of them were making poor decisions, even terrible ones. You can feel their conflict and emotions quite clearly.
"Things had a way of never leaving these mountains. Stories took root like everything else... Just as Dwayne told him the night before, a man's mind is its own kind of hell."
Overall, I didn't always enjoy this book, because it's a brutal read at times, but I was wowed by the writing and Joy's storytelling. The characters are complex, and the novel presents some fascinating complexities. It was an interesting and worthwhile read.
Greeting Cards App - Pro eCards, Send & Create Custom Fun Funny Personalised Card.s For Social Networking
Social Networking and Lifestyle
6.5
Rate It
App
Start spreading the love with some heartfelt messages of joy, by spending personal Greeting eCards....
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Unsolved Mysteries in TV
Jan 22, 2021 (Updated Jan 22, 2021)
It is a guilty secret of mine that when in the right mood I love to get a small fix of the unexplained or the macabre true crime documentary type thing. They tend to range from truly ridiculous to the mildly convincing, but tend not to have especially high production value. Netflix seem to know there is demand for it however, and every now and again there is a mini-series that can live in the same box as the more serious docs.
Making a Murderer was maybe the first to break through into the mainstream consciousness, some five years ago. I watched the first series of that with a morbid fascination, as did everyone else. The second season was interesting too, but lacked the cliffhanger drive of the first. Then there are three or four parters like the superlative Ted Bundy Tapes, which get to the point and don’t out stay their welcome. Unsolved Mysteries is sort of something in the middle.
The twist on this series is that these six stories are all active cases that remain unsolved by local police forces, and we are encouraged at the end of each one to call a hotline with any info that may lead to an arrest. This is a gimmick, of course, and I can’t imagine the calls and emails they have been getting! Those would make a better TV show than this actually is, for sure.
Each episode is an hour long, which in honesty is twice as long as it needs to be in half the cases. In fact, only two of the six captured my imagination enough to give me chills and want to know what happened. The other four were standard missing person stories that although “unsolved” were pretty mundane. As mundane as murder ever gets… which is a pitfall of watching this stuff… it all gets quite normalised and loses its power to disturb, as it should.
The first to interest me was the first up, the strange story of Rey Rivera, known as “the mystery on the rooftop”. The thing that got me was the hidden note taped to the back of his computer, that read like a coded message, and hinted at involvement with a secret society. That, combined with the fact that his fall to death was impossible, and that his boss put a gagging order on all his staff after the event. Whatever this guy had going on in his life it was weird! And his family knew not one thing about it…
The second was “House of Terror”, the story of a French aristocrat who secretly shot his entire family while they slept, carefully buried them under the back porch with immense care, left no other trace of evidence in the house, then disappeared forever into the mountains, seemingly creating a deliberate false trail on CCTV. What got me here was the calculation and calm of it all, combined with the mystery of not knowing his motive, other than the fact he may have been living a lie about how successful he was financially. Regardless, his actions were so cool and unpanicked, it was like watching something out of the Bourne Identity.
As I say, otherwise it is all pretty standard stuff, and nothing to write home about. But I will remember those two cases and be holding out for any new developments in them. I guess that’s all they want – enough intrigue to keep you hooked for more down the line. Of course, you are never quite sure how manipulative with the “truth” these things are? It seemed to be presented soberly and without a sensationalist angle, but you never know. Why do I watch them at all, that is the biggest mystery…
Making a Murderer was maybe the first to break through into the mainstream consciousness, some five years ago. I watched the first series of that with a morbid fascination, as did everyone else. The second season was interesting too, but lacked the cliffhanger drive of the first. Then there are three or four parters like the superlative Ted Bundy Tapes, which get to the point and don’t out stay their welcome. Unsolved Mysteries is sort of something in the middle.
The twist on this series is that these six stories are all active cases that remain unsolved by local police forces, and we are encouraged at the end of each one to call a hotline with any info that may lead to an arrest. This is a gimmick, of course, and I can’t imagine the calls and emails they have been getting! Those would make a better TV show than this actually is, for sure.
Each episode is an hour long, which in honesty is twice as long as it needs to be in half the cases. In fact, only two of the six captured my imagination enough to give me chills and want to know what happened. The other four were standard missing person stories that although “unsolved” were pretty mundane. As mundane as murder ever gets… which is a pitfall of watching this stuff… it all gets quite normalised and loses its power to disturb, as it should.
The first to interest me was the first up, the strange story of Rey Rivera, known as “the mystery on the rooftop”. The thing that got me was the hidden note taped to the back of his computer, that read like a coded message, and hinted at involvement with a secret society. That, combined with the fact that his fall to death was impossible, and that his boss put a gagging order on all his staff after the event. Whatever this guy had going on in his life it was weird! And his family knew not one thing about it…
The second was “House of Terror”, the story of a French aristocrat who secretly shot his entire family while they slept, carefully buried them under the back porch with immense care, left no other trace of evidence in the house, then disappeared forever into the mountains, seemingly creating a deliberate false trail on CCTV. What got me here was the calculation and calm of it all, combined with the mystery of not knowing his motive, other than the fact he may have been living a lie about how successful he was financially. Regardless, his actions were so cool and unpanicked, it was like watching something out of the Bourne Identity.
As I say, otherwise it is all pretty standard stuff, and nothing to write home about. But I will remember those two cases and be holding out for any new developments in them. I guess that’s all they want – enough intrigue to keep you hooked for more down the line. Of course, you are never quite sure how manipulative with the “truth” these things are? It seemed to be presented soberly and without a sensationalist angle, but you never know. Why do I watch them at all, that is the biggest mystery…
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Two Popes (2019) in Movies
Jan 26, 2020 (Updated Jan 26, 2020)
Fantastic performances from two old acting pros.
Being inaugurated as a new pope in the last century must have been a source of enormous pride. But there must also have been a nagging thought... at some point you are going to be paraded, stiff as a board, around your work courtyard before being taken back inside to your place of work and buried there!
All that changed in 2013 when Pope Benedict XVI resigned, the first pope to voluntarily do so since Pope Celestine V in 1294. (Pope Gregory XII also resigned in 1415, but he was effectively forced to).
This movie tells the story of that curious situation, when Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio (played by Jonathan Pryce) ended up as Pope Francis while Benedict (Anthony Hopkins) was still alive. The official reason for the pope's resignation appears to have been his advanced age. But the film paints a rather different picture.
The movie starts back in 2005 as we enter the papal conclave. Benedict (Cardinal Ratzinger, as was) is the highly-political German cardinal who desperately wants the papacy; Bergoglio is the highly respected Argentinian cardinal who doesn't seek the office but might have it thrust upon him. (Clearly, when the white smoke clears, history has dictated the outcome).
But flash forward to 2013 and Bergoglio will get another bite of the cherry. Is he worthy of the role? Through flashbacks we return to Perón's unsettling rule over Argentina and the events that made the man.
The two stars are simply outstanding together, and it's no surprise at all that both have been nominated in the Oscar acting categories. They are almost joint leads. But - perhaps to give the film its best awards-season shot - Pryce is down for Best Actor and Hopkins is down for Best Supporting Actor.
Anthony Hopkins in particular for me shone with the brilliant quietness and subtle facial movements that are the mark of a truly confident actor. Less is more.
I was enjoying this movie enormously up until we flashed back to the Argentinian sub-plot. Set in the time of Perón's "Dirty War" when a huge number of people - estimates range from 9,000 to 30,000 - simply went "missing". There's nothing wrong with this sequence of the film. For example, a reunion of Bergoglio with a persecuted priest, Father Jalics (Lisandro Fiks) - is brilliantly and movingly done. It's just that for me it seemed so disjointed. It was jarring to switch from this Evita-era drama to the gentle drama of the papal plot.
If the movie had been 30 minutes shorter and focused on the mental struggles of Benedict I would have preferred it. Curiously - we don't really get to fully understand his divergence from the faith. Bergoglio gets no end of back-story. But Ratzinger's is probably just as interesting, but not explored.
This is still a really fine movie and will appeal to older folks who like a story rich with character acting and not heavy on the action or special effects. The director is Fernando Meirelles (who interestingly directed the Rio Olympics opening ceremony!) and it's written by Anthony McCarten, the man behind the screenplays for "The Theory of Everything", "Darkest Hour" and "Bohemian Rhapsody".
You may still be able to find this in selected cinemas (e.g. Curzon) but it is also streaming on Netflix, which is where I had to watch it.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies at https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/01/26/one-manns-movies-film-review-the-two-popes-2019/ ).
All that changed in 2013 when Pope Benedict XVI resigned, the first pope to voluntarily do so since Pope Celestine V in 1294. (Pope Gregory XII also resigned in 1415, but he was effectively forced to).
This movie tells the story of that curious situation, when Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio (played by Jonathan Pryce) ended up as Pope Francis while Benedict (Anthony Hopkins) was still alive. The official reason for the pope's resignation appears to have been his advanced age. But the film paints a rather different picture.
The movie starts back in 2005 as we enter the papal conclave. Benedict (Cardinal Ratzinger, as was) is the highly-political German cardinal who desperately wants the papacy; Bergoglio is the highly respected Argentinian cardinal who doesn't seek the office but might have it thrust upon him. (Clearly, when the white smoke clears, history has dictated the outcome).
But flash forward to 2013 and Bergoglio will get another bite of the cherry. Is he worthy of the role? Through flashbacks we return to Perón's unsettling rule over Argentina and the events that made the man.
The two stars are simply outstanding together, and it's no surprise at all that both have been nominated in the Oscar acting categories. They are almost joint leads. But - perhaps to give the film its best awards-season shot - Pryce is down for Best Actor and Hopkins is down for Best Supporting Actor.
Anthony Hopkins in particular for me shone with the brilliant quietness and subtle facial movements that are the mark of a truly confident actor. Less is more.
I was enjoying this movie enormously up until we flashed back to the Argentinian sub-plot. Set in the time of Perón's "Dirty War" when a huge number of people - estimates range from 9,000 to 30,000 - simply went "missing". There's nothing wrong with this sequence of the film. For example, a reunion of Bergoglio with a persecuted priest, Father Jalics (Lisandro Fiks) - is brilliantly and movingly done. It's just that for me it seemed so disjointed. It was jarring to switch from this Evita-era drama to the gentle drama of the papal plot.
If the movie had been 30 minutes shorter and focused on the mental struggles of Benedict I would have preferred it. Curiously - we don't really get to fully understand his divergence from the faith. Bergoglio gets no end of back-story. But Ratzinger's is probably just as interesting, but not explored.
This is still a really fine movie and will appeal to older folks who like a story rich with character acting and not heavy on the action or special effects. The director is Fernando Meirelles (who interestingly directed the Rio Olympics opening ceremony!) and it's written by Anthony McCarten, the man behind the screenplays for "The Theory of Everything", "Darkest Hour" and "Bohemian Rhapsody".
You may still be able to find this in selected cinemas (e.g. Curzon) but it is also streaming on Netflix, which is where I had to watch it.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies at https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/01/26/one-manns-movies-film-review-the-two-popes-2019/ ).
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated After Life in TV
Mar 3, 2020
As Ricky Gervais cheekily crow-barred in to his opening speech at the 2020 Golden Globes a few weeks ago, it is possible to watch all of After Life series one in less time than it takes to watch The Irishman. And that is exactly what I did; binged the whole thing on autoplay until it was done! Not to get it over with as soon as possible, but rather because it is hard to turn off – you just keep wanting more.
It’s not a complicated idea – Tony’s wife has died of cancer and he wishes he was dead too. Surrounded by tedious work colleagues in a dead end job, a father in a home with dementia, and having only a very hungry dog to lean on, he is filled with such bitterness and grief that he decides there is no point not doing anything he wants and being as nasty as possible to all around him.
The show glides effortlessly between hilarious situations, filled with sharp dialogue / small moments of comedy genius, and genuinely sad moments that leave a lump in the throat. It is a trick Gervais has been honing in all his shows since The Office, and now he has it down to a work of art you just have to applaud. No matter how ridiculous, it always seems rooted in truth and real emotion. Each vitriolic outburst is written so well we empathise with Tony almost every time, because he is usually right; and when he isn’t right, that moment of awkwardness is used with almost preternatural understanding of the audience to demonstrate the point of the whole conceit.
It boils down to the truth that no matter how much you want to give up on life and people, you can’t forget that happiness is a gift. Not just yours, but anyone’s. And to go around being an arsehole, wallowing in self-pity is entirely selfish, even if you have good reason to be that way. Distilled into less than 3 hours in total, After Life is no less than a magic trick, in not only achieving the passing on of that message, but in entertaining us every single minute in the meantime!
Thinking of how to rate it, I just can’t find much fault in what it sets out to be. It isn’t a grand or expensive production, it feels humble and economical, but oh so very focused. Do we want more bells and whistles? Have we come to expect that from our entertainment now. Is that what is missing? I feel I would recommend this show to anyone, and am very much looking forward to a second season in the Spring, but I also feel like it doesn’t need to have its trumpet over-blown; it’s just a lovely, funny, simple show about being alive.
It’s not a complicated idea – Tony’s wife has died of cancer and he wishes he was dead too. Surrounded by tedious work colleagues in a dead end job, a father in a home with dementia, and having only a very hungry dog to lean on, he is filled with such bitterness and grief that he decides there is no point not doing anything he wants and being as nasty as possible to all around him.
The show glides effortlessly between hilarious situations, filled with sharp dialogue / small moments of comedy genius, and genuinely sad moments that leave a lump in the throat. It is a trick Gervais has been honing in all his shows since The Office, and now he has it down to a work of art you just have to applaud. No matter how ridiculous, it always seems rooted in truth and real emotion. Each vitriolic outburst is written so well we empathise with Tony almost every time, because he is usually right; and when he isn’t right, that moment of awkwardness is used with almost preternatural understanding of the audience to demonstrate the point of the whole conceit.
It boils down to the truth that no matter how much you want to give up on life and people, you can’t forget that happiness is a gift. Not just yours, but anyone’s. And to go around being an arsehole, wallowing in self-pity is entirely selfish, even if you have good reason to be that way. Distilled into less than 3 hours in total, After Life is no less than a magic trick, in not only achieving the passing on of that message, but in entertaining us every single minute in the meantime!
Thinking of how to rate it, I just can’t find much fault in what it sets out to be. It isn’t a grand or expensive production, it feels humble and economical, but oh so very focused. Do we want more bells and whistles? Have we come to expect that from our entertainment now. Is that what is missing? I feel I would recommend this show to anyone, and am very much looking forward to a second season in the Spring, but I also feel like it doesn’t need to have its trumpet over-blown; it’s just a lovely, funny, simple show about being alive.
Sassy Brit (97 KP) rated Burning Ridge in Books
Jun 5, 2019
Burning Ridge by Margaret Mizushima is a fast-paced and engrossing police procedural. It features Matti Cobb and her K-9 German Shepherd partner Robo, which makes these stories appealing to not only those who enjoy mysteries, but also to animal lovers.
Having done her homework, the author spoke with and shadowed those that train dogs. “I have a friend who retired from training tracking dogs. She allowed me to watch her train for tracking and evidence detection. I was inspired by her to write about a female canine handler. In fact, she had a dog named Robo, which I based the story dog Robo on. He could do so many things: Patrol, apprehend, track, and even pick up on gun powder to find hidden shells and casings.”
8171DUdQgiL._AC_UL115_Ridge
The plot has veterinarian Cole Walker and his two young daughters enjoying their trail ride in the Colorado mountains until they find a man’s charred boot with a decomposing foot in it. Called in to search for the rest of the body Matti and Robo find him. It is then Mattie realizes there is a personal link to her own troubled past.
This book explores her disturbed childhood, having been placed in foster homes since the age of six. Her father was convicted of abusing her mother who later abandoned her and her brother. This is why she and Cole are taking the relationship slow although it is obvious they love each other.
Because her husband is a vet, Mizushima knows something about the profession. “I always wanted to write a vet as a protagonist. Similar to my husband, Cole is a mixed practice vet, which means he treats large and small animals. He has to overcome some personal problems after his wife left him and his daughters. Both he and Mattie are hesitant to connect because of their baggage with abandonment issues. This is why I wrote, ‘And as much as she wanted to, she had trouble allowing him past the wall she built to protect her feelings.’ He is a work driven, a type-A personality, but soft-hearted. She is kind, athletic, spunky, a loner, independent, and vulnerable.”
What makes this novel special is the relationship between the partners. Robo is not written as some Superdog, but with realistic traits. Mattie and Robo are a dedicated team who have a strong bond professionally and personally. He is truly her best friend, and when she goes missing Robo uses his search and rescue skills to find her.
Having lived in Colorado all her life, Mizushima is able to create a realistic setting. She seems to draw from current events since there have been so many wildfires this season. In the novel, she uses it to enhance the action where the fire becomes an antagonist. “I grew in a small town on a ranch. I used the mountains because there is a sense of suspense and danger. This is why I wrote in the book quote, ‘Blazing orang lit the ridge above her, rapidly feeding on timber and eating its way downward. Balls of fire leapt from tree to tree, the dry needles wicking flames into branches and sap, setting off booming explosions in the treetops.’”
This is a gripping tale that has a message of hope. With Robo at her side Mattie is trying to overcome her childhood demons and learn to tear down the wall she has built, allowing Cole and his daughters into her life.
Having done her homework, the author spoke with and shadowed those that train dogs. “I have a friend who retired from training tracking dogs. She allowed me to watch her train for tracking and evidence detection. I was inspired by her to write about a female canine handler. In fact, she had a dog named Robo, which I based the story dog Robo on. He could do so many things: Patrol, apprehend, track, and even pick up on gun powder to find hidden shells and casings.”
8171DUdQgiL._AC_UL115_Ridge
The plot has veterinarian Cole Walker and his two young daughters enjoying their trail ride in the Colorado mountains until they find a man’s charred boot with a decomposing foot in it. Called in to search for the rest of the body Matti and Robo find him. It is then Mattie realizes there is a personal link to her own troubled past.
This book explores her disturbed childhood, having been placed in foster homes since the age of six. Her father was convicted of abusing her mother who later abandoned her and her brother. This is why she and Cole are taking the relationship slow although it is obvious they love each other.
Because her husband is a vet, Mizushima knows something about the profession. “I always wanted to write a vet as a protagonist. Similar to my husband, Cole is a mixed practice vet, which means he treats large and small animals. He has to overcome some personal problems after his wife left him and his daughters. Both he and Mattie are hesitant to connect because of their baggage with abandonment issues. This is why I wrote, ‘And as much as she wanted to, she had trouble allowing him past the wall she built to protect her feelings.’ He is a work driven, a type-A personality, but soft-hearted. She is kind, athletic, spunky, a loner, independent, and vulnerable.”
What makes this novel special is the relationship between the partners. Robo is not written as some Superdog, but with realistic traits. Mattie and Robo are a dedicated team who have a strong bond professionally and personally. He is truly her best friend, and when she goes missing Robo uses his search and rescue skills to find her.
Having lived in Colorado all her life, Mizushima is able to create a realistic setting. She seems to draw from current events since there have been so many wildfires this season. In the novel, she uses it to enhance the action where the fire becomes an antagonist. “I grew in a small town on a ranch. I used the mountains because there is a sense of suspense and danger. This is why I wrote in the book quote, ‘Blazing orang lit the ridge above her, rapidly feeding on timber and eating its way downward. Balls of fire leapt from tree to tree, the dry needles wicking flames into branches and sap, setting off booming explosions in the treetops.’”
This is a gripping tale that has a message of hope. With Robo at her side Mattie is trying to overcome her childhood demons and learn to tear down the wall she has built, allowing Cole and his daughters into her life.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Jojo Rabbit (2019) in Movies
Jan 22, 2021
Another favourite from the awards season that came with some strong acclaim from amongst friends and trusted reviewers, WWII satire Jojo Rabbit, from the likeable and unique mind of Taika Waititi, was always high on my list as a must see movie.
I have followed the Kiwi’s original output since way back, and always enjoyed his quirky sense of humour and childlike charm. Either Eagle vs Shark or The Flight of the Conchords would have been my first encounter; and by the time of Hunt for the Wilderpeople and Thor: Ragnarok I had become a tentative fan. Never entirely bowled over by his style and content in the same way as, say, Wes Anderson (to whom some compare his outlook on the creative world), and never rolling around on the floor in hysterics at his naivety and comedy of manners, nevertheless, I like the guy a lot.
So when I heard he had adapted a fantasy novel about Nazi Germany from the point of view of a child, and would be playing Hitler himself, I knew instantly where he would be pitching this. The idea of it being offensive in any way was not a concern or even a thought, and anyone that did react that way is just… ridiculous and deliberately missing the point for the sake of finding something to be outraged about.
Of course subjects of genocide, political repression and evil existing in the world should and must be treated with a sensitivity to a degree, and amongst the silly lampooning and most extreme moments of satire that care is evident. There are moments of real gravity and tenderness in the mix here, thanks in large to some wonderful performances from the adult actors, notably the ever reliable Sam Rockwell and the increasingly strong and impressive Scarlett Johansson, who picked up her second Oscar nomination for this, after Marriage Story ticked the box for true drama.
The film focuses and relies on young Roman Griffin Davis as the eponymous Jojo, a happy little boy who sees goodness and light in an ever darkening world around him. Waititi as director works well with kids, placing the idea of charm and likability above acting prowess per se. And that is both the strength and ultimate weakness of this premise. He is charming and likeable, and cute and sweet and very watchable, but his inexperience in front of the camera and ability to find a range of emotions is often tested beyond his tender years, and can therefore break the magic spell that is woven in the best scenes.
The humour itself also doesn’t always hit the mark. Sometimes it is merely amusing rather than something laugh out loud funny, much as an average Mel Brooks film always was. And that can lead to a feel of something uneven and rambling, as the story struggles to find what it really wants to say. In its final moments it does land on an overlying message that leaves you with a winning impression, and you leave feeling that you saw something you enjoyed, but not something you would unreservedly recommend to everyone. In fact if someone said they didn’t enjoy it, or get the joke at all, then I would respect that view.
Under a microscope of scrutiny it doesn’t hold up that well, and I wonder how a few years of distance will treat it, once our sensibilities shift again with time. There are a few moments when the heart of the film connects with it’s silly bone and resonates, but not nearly enough. I personally wanted more of that. But, sadly, whenever JoJo threatens to grow up it retreats back into childhood and shies away from commenting on anything serious or truly meaningful. But, of course, that is not the point. As an entertainment it is a wonderful, unique and lovely film. And that should really be all that it is judged by.
In conclusion, a curiosity I will look forward to watching again, but don’t think quite makes the grade as an instant classic. It only reinforced however how much I like Rockwell and Johansson, and will always be curious about what Waititi is up to next.
I have followed the Kiwi’s original output since way back, and always enjoyed his quirky sense of humour and childlike charm. Either Eagle vs Shark or The Flight of the Conchords would have been my first encounter; and by the time of Hunt for the Wilderpeople and Thor: Ragnarok I had become a tentative fan. Never entirely bowled over by his style and content in the same way as, say, Wes Anderson (to whom some compare his outlook on the creative world), and never rolling around on the floor in hysterics at his naivety and comedy of manners, nevertheless, I like the guy a lot.
So when I heard he had adapted a fantasy novel about Nazi Germany from the point of view of a child, and would be playing Hitler himself, I knew instantly where he would be pitching this. The idea of it being offensive in any way was not a concern or even a thought, and anyone that did react that way is just… ridiculous and deliberately missing the point for the sake of finding something to be outraged about.
Of course subjects of genocide, political repression and evil existing in the world should and must be treated with a sensitivity to a degree, and amongst the silly lampooning and most extreme moments of satire that care is evident. There are moments of real gravity and tenderness in the mix here, thanks in large to some wonderful performances from the adult actors, notably the ever reliable Sam Rockwell and the increasingly strong and impressive Scarlett Johansson, who picked up her second Oscar nomination for this, after Marriage Story ticked the box for true drama.
The film focuses and relies on young Roman Griffin Davis as the eponymous Jojo, a happy little boy who sees goodness and light in an ever darkening world around him. Waititi as director works well with kids, placing the idea of charm and likability above acting prowess per se. And that is both the strength and ultimate weakness of this premise. He is charming and likeable, and cute and sweet and very watchable, but his inexperience in front of the camera and ability to find a range of emotions is often tested beyond his tender years, and can therefore break the magic spell that is woven in the best scenes.
The humour itself also doesn’t always hit the mark. Sometimes it is merely amusing rather than something laugh out loud funny, much as an average Mel Brooks film always was. And that can lead to a feel of something uneven and rambling, as the story struggles to find what it really wants to say. In its final moments it does land on an overlying message that leaves you with a winning impression, and you leave feeling that you saw something you enjoyed, but not something you would unreservedly recommend to everyone. In fact if someone said they didn’t enjoy it, or get the joke at all, then I would respect that view.
Under a microscope of scrutiny it doesn’t hold up that well, and I wonder how a few years of distance will treat it, once our sensibilities shift again with time. There are a few moments when the heart of the film connects with it’s silly bone and resonates, but not nearly enough. I personally wanted more of that. But, sadly, whenever JoJo threatens to grow up it retreats back into childhood and shies away from commenting on anything serious or truly meaningful. But, of course, that is not the point. As an entertainment it is a wonderful, unique and lovely film. And that should really be all that it is judged by.
In conclusion, a curiosity I will look forward to watching again, but don’t think quite makes the grade as an instant classic. It only reinforced however how much I like Rockwell and Johansson, and will always be curious about what Waititi is up to next.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated War of the Worlds (2005) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
In a summer season of grand blockbusters, War of the Worlds” is perhaps the biggest dud in years, and is a failure of epic proportions. The film is a remake of the classic 1953 film of the same name which like the new one is inspired from the H.G. Wells novel of 1898.
The new version is directed by Steven Spielberg, and stars Tom Cruise as Ray Ferrier, a divorced dockworker who is spending some time with his estranged children, Robbie (Justin Chatwin), and Rachael (Dakota Fanning), while his ex-wife and her new husband take a trip.
The children are very cold to Ray as they feel they were dumped on their mother as Ray only cares about himself. When a series of freak electrical storms hits various cities around the world, Ray attempts to comfort his children who are disturbed by the storm as well as the fact that all electronic devices have ceased to function.
Ray leaves the children at home and ventures into the neighborhood and is soon facing a waking nightmare as giant machines burst from the ground laying waste to everything in their paths.
Ray gathers his family and flees in a working vehicle trying to stay one step ahead of the alien machines in an attempt to find safety and reunite the children with their mother in Boston.
As basic as the above plot outline is, it is pretty much the entire plot of the film. There is little else to it aside from a few interruptions such as the family seeking shelter in a couple of houses or facing an angry mob as they attempt to reach a ferry.
While a thin plot can be excused for many action films, what cannot be excused are the painfully bad lack of any excitement in the film and the lack of any compelling action or suspense.
We are supposed to believe that the world is being destroyed by the alien’s but aside from a few blasted bridges, and small buildings, we see a surprising lack of carnage. There are no sequences of classic landmarks being reduced to rubble, there are no scenes of vast armies locked in a desperate struggle against the invaders.
Instead, we get a sequence of helicopters firing, and a line of soldiers firing, but they never show us what they are shooting at, nor do we see the alien retaliation behind a bright explosion and a few vehicles emerging on fire. This is particularly frustrating when you consider that the 1954 version at least showed a few tanks being blasted outright.
Another issue I had with the film was the painfully obvious superimposed backdrops as during the films limited action scenes; the background was clearly inserted into the shot as it was so fuzzy that it did not fit in with the events in the foreground.
While I am willing to dismiss this as stylistic nitpicking what cannot be ignored is that for most of the films running length, the cast does little more than stand around waiting for something to happen.
There are no great segments of character development, no insight into why the aliens waited all this time to attack when they could have done so centuries earlier, why they want the planet, and numerous other plot holes, some of which are so glaring. One of my favorites was the guy who was able to use a video camera to record the opening attacks when it was clearly shown that all electronic devices were rendered useless.
Much has been made of Cruise’s recent off screen actions and I must say that those have been far more interesting and engaging than his performance here. Cruise spends the majority of the film in a wide-eyed gaze or frantically moving and yelling. His character like his annoyingly bratty daughter are so unsympathetic, I found myself hoping that the aliens would take them out and end our suffering.
I hate stated prior that I thought this film may have problems as in light of films such as “ID4”, the story would seem bland to modern audiences unless the action was increased and there was a dynamic story with interesting characters. Sadly all of those are missing from a film that also has one of the worst endings in recent history.
There is no build up, no final confrontation, no moment of high tension to get to the payoff; it just ends with a whimper. One would think that a grand battle or an effects royale is in store instead, it plays out in a very matter of fact fashion with shockingly little action or suspense.
I could go on and on, but suffice it to say that between the weak acting, tired, thin plot, and infrequent and underwhelming action and effects, this is a film that exists only due to the talents of Cruise and Spielberg., That being said, I have to wonder how and why they could not have picked a better product than this stale offering.
The new version is directed by Steven Spielberg, and stars Tom Cruise as Ray Ferrier, a divorced dockworker who is spending some time with his estranged children, Robbie (Justin Chatwin), and Rachael (Dakota Fanning), while his ex-wife and her new husband take a trip.
The children are very cold to Ray as they feel they were dumped on their mother as Ray only cares about himself. When a series of freak electrical storms hits various cities around the world, Ray attempts to comfort his children who are disturbed by the storm as well as the fact that all electronic devices have ceased to function.
Ray leaves the children at home and ventures into the neighborhood and is soon facing a waking nightmare as giant machines burst from the ground laying waste to everything in their paths.
Ray gathers his family and flees in a working vehicle trying to stay one step ahead of the alien machines in an attempt to find safety and reunite the children with their mother in Boston.
As basic as the above plot outline is, it is pretty much the entire plot of the film. There is little else to it aside from a few interruptions such as the family seeking shelter in a couple of houses or facing an angry mob as they attempt to reach a ferry.
While a thin plot can be excused for many action films, what cannot be excused are the painfully bad lack of any excitement in the film and the lack of any compelling action or suspense.
We are supposed to believe that the world is being destroyed by the alien’s but aside from a few blasted bridges, and small buildings, we see a surprising lack of carnage. There are no sequences of classic landmarks being reduced to rubble, there are no scenes of vast armies locked in a desperate struggle against the invaders.
Instead, we get a sequence of helicopters firing, and a line of soldiers firing, but they never show us what they are shooting at, nor do we see the alien retaliation behind a bright explosion and a few vehicles emerging on fire. This is particularly frustrating when you consider that the 1954 version at least showed a few tanks being blasted outright.
Another issue I had with the film was the painfully obvious superimposed backdrops as during the films limited action scenes; the background was clearly inserted into the shot as it was so fuzzy that it did not fit in with the events in the foreground.
While I am willing to dismiss this as stylistic nitpicking what cannot be ignored is that for most of the films running length, the cast does little more than stand around waiting for something to happen.
There are no great segments of character development, no insight into why the aliens waited all this time to attack when they could have done so centuries earlier, why they want the planet, and numerous other plot holes, some of which are so glaring. One of my favorites was the guy who was able to use a video camera to record the opening attacks when it was clearly shown that all electronic devices were rendered useless.
Much has been made of Cruise’s recent off screen actions and I must say that those have been far more interesting and engaging than his performance here. Cruise spends the majority of the film in a wide-eyed gaze or frantically moving and yelling. His character like his annoyingly bratty daughter are so unsympathetic, I found myself hoping that the aliens would take them out and end our suffering.
I hate stated prior that I thought this film may have problems as in light of films such as “ID4”, the story would seem bland to modern audiences unless the action was increased and there was a dynamic story with interesting characters. Sadly all of those are missing from a film that also has one of the worst endings in recent history.
There is no build up, no final confrontation, no moment of high tension to get to the payoff; it just ends with a whimper. One would think that a grand battle or an effects royale is in store instead, it plays out in a very matter of fact fashion with shockingly little action or suspense.
I could go on and on, but suffice it to say that between the weak acting, tired, thin plot, and infrequent and underwhelming action and effects, this is a film that exists only due to the talents of Cruise and Spielberg., That being said, I have to wonder how and why they could not have picked a better product than this stale offering.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Castle: The Detective Card Game in Tabletop Games
Jul 17, 2021
Let’s talk about TV for a second.What would be your all-time favorite TV show? For me, that answer is Castle. I had never heard of it until college, when it was already in its 5th season, but I instantly loved it. I may or may not have gone out and bought all of the seasons to binge watch, and now own all 8 seasons of the show. If you ask me, the series ended too soon, but that’s a conversation for another forum. Anyway, where was I? Oh yeah, games. One wonderful Christmas morning, I opened up a present under the tree and found myself face to face with a Castle card game! I didn’t even know that one existed, but I was so eager to play! Does this game based around my favorite TV show actually play well, or does the attempt to turn this show into a game fall flat?
In Castle: The Detective Card Game (referred to as just Castle for the rest of this review) is a murder-mystery card game in which players assume the role of a character from the show, and work to gather evidence and conduct investigations in order to solve the murder at hand! To set up a game, give every player a Character card that represents one of the main characters from the show. Each Character card has a unique Special Ability to be used during play. Shuffle the Suspect cards, and randomly draw five to be placed face-up in the middle of the table. Select one Guilty token and four Not Guilty tokens – shuffle them together face-down and then place one token on each of the Suspect cards. Shuffle the deck of Investigation cards, deal 3 to each player, place the remaining cards into a Draw deck, and the game is ready to begin!
Moving in clockwise order, players will take turns performing one of the following actions: Draw a card, Discard one card to draw two cards, Play a Special Text card, Use your Special Ability, or Confront a Suspect. The first two actions regarding drawing cards are pretty self-explanatory. Throughout the game, you might draw into your hand an Investigation card with Special Text. You may play a Special Text card, and perform the specified action on your turn. Each Character has a Special Ability that can be used once per game, so plan wisely and use it appropriately! The last action, Confront a Suspect, is what the entire game is leading to. In order to Confront a Suspect, you must have the three Investigation cards listed on the bottom of the Suspect card in hand. When performing this action, you will reveal the three requisite Investigation cards, and then you flip the token on that Suspect card. If the token reads Guilty, then you have won the game! If the token reads Not Guilty, perform the action listed on the token, remove that Suspect and token from the game, discard your used Investigation cards, and play continue with a narrowed Suspect pool! The goal is to be the first player to find the Guilty party before the Draw deck runs out of cards.
Pretty straight-forward, right? I think so, and that’s one of the things I really like about this game. The gameplay is fast and simple, and makes for a quick little set collection game. Another neat element of this game is that although it is based around the Castle TV show, you do not need to have watched any of the show to play. Anyone can play and not feel like they are missing any vital information if they haven’t seen the show, and that makes it accessible to all players, not just fans of the show.
Even though I love the show, I have to admit that the gameplay, although fast and simple, is heavily dependent on the luck of the draw. Throughout the game, you are working to collect sets of the necessary Investigation cards for individual suspects, but the only way in which cards are distributed is through drawing them from the deck. There isn’t an offering that you ‘pay’ certain resources for coveted cards, there’s no real way to know in advance what card you are going to draw, etc. It really depends on how the deck was shuffled whether you will be successful or not. There are no real opportunities to strategize, and that keeps the overall gameplay kind of stagnant. Yes, there are Special Text cards and each Character has a unique ability, but deciding when to use them is kind of a shot in the dark due to the dependence on luck.
Let’s talk components for a minute. All of the Investigation and Character cards use photos or stills from the actual TV show. Again, you need not have watched it to play, but the use of the stills makes the game more immersive and nostalgic for those that have seen it. I love looking at the cards and trying to remember from which episode each still is, and if I remember who the killer was in that specific scenario. It’s just a fun little thing. The cards are all of good sturdy quality and will hold up decently in the long run. The Guilty/Not Guilty tokens in this game are some thick and heavy poker chips and they are AWESOME. They are so high quality, I just love to manipulate them, and they add some cool ‘bling’ to the game.
All in all, is Castle a great card game? No, not necessarily. It is a fun little murder mystery game, but not one that requires and real strategy or brain power to successfully play. Do I like it though? Absolutely, because it is based on my favorite show! If you’re looking for a nice filler game, or a game that doesn’t require too much focus, give Castle: The Detective Card Game a shot. That being said, I feel like only fans of the show will be trying this game, but I guess you can prove me wrong! Purple Phoenix Games give this a mischievous 6 / 12.
In Castle: The Detective Card Game (referred to as just Castle for the rest of this review) is a murder-mystery card game in which players assume the role of a character from the show, and work to gather evidence and conduct investigations in order to solve the murder at hand! To set up a game, give every player a Character card that represents one of the main characters from the show. Each Character card has a unique Special Ability to be used during play. Shuffle the Suspect cards, and randomly draw five to be placed face-up in the middle of the table. Select one Guilty token and four Not Guilty tokens – shuffle them together face-down and then place one token on each of the Suspect cards. Shuffle the deck of Investigation cards, deal 3 to each player, place the remaining cards into a Draw deck, and the game is ready to begin!
Moving in clockwise order, players will take turns performing one of the following actions: Draw a card, Discard one card to draw two cards, Play a Special Text card, Use your Special Ability, or Confront a Suspect. The first two actions regarding drawing cards are pretty self-explanatory. Throughout the game, you might draw into your hand an Investigation card with Special Text. You may play a Special Text card, and perform the specified action on your turn. Each Character has a Special Ability that can be used once per game, so plan wisely and use it appropriately! The last action, Confront a Suspect, is what the entire game is leading to. In order to Confront a Suspect, you must have the three Investigation cards listed on the bottom of the Suspect card in hand. When performing this action, you will reveal the three requisite Investigation cards, and then you flip the token on that Suspect card. If the token reads Guilty, then you have won the game! If the token reads Not Guilty, perform the action listed on the token, remove that Suspect and token from the game, discard your used Investigation cards, and play continue with a narrowed Suspect pool! The goal is to be the first player to find the Guilty party before the Draw deck runs out of cards.
Pretty straight-forward, right? I think so, and that’s one of the things I really like about this game. The gameplay is fast and simple, and makes for a quick little set collection game. Another neat element of this game is that although it is based around the Castle TV show, you do not need to have watched any of the show to play. Anyone can play and not feel like they are missing any vital information if they haven’t seen the show, and that makes it accessible to all players, not just fans of the show.
Even though I love the show, I have to admit that the gameplay, although fast and simple, is heavily dependent on the luck of the draw. Throughout the game, you are working to collect sets of the necessary Investigation cards for individual suspects, but the only way in which cards are distributed is through drawing them from the deck. There isn’t an offering that you ‘pay’ certain resources for coveted cards, there’s no real way to know in advance what card you are going to draw, etc. It really depends on how the deck was shuffled whether you will be successful or not. There are no real opportunities to strategize, and that keeps the overall gameplay kind of stagnant. Yes, there are Special Text cards and each Character has a unique ability, but deciding when to use them is kind of a shot in the dark due to the dependence on luck.
Let’s talk components for a minute. All of the Investigation and Character cards use photos or stills from the actual TV show. Again, you need not have watched it to play, but the use of the stills makes the game more immersive and nostalgic for those that have seen it. I love looking at the cards and trying to remember from which episode each still is, and if I remember who the killer was in that specific scenario. It’s just a fun little thing. The cards are all of good sturdy quality and will hold up decently in the long run. The Guilty/Not Guilty tokens in this game are some thick and heavy poker chips and they are AWESOME. They are so high quality, I just love to manipulate them, and they add some cool ‘bling’ to the game.
All in all, is Castle a great card game? No, not necessarily. It is a fun little murder mystery game, but not one that requires and real strategy or brain power to successfully play. Do I like it though? Absolutely, because it is based on my favorite show! If you’re looking for a nice filler game, or a game that doesn’t require too much focus, give Castle: The Detective Card Game a shot. That being said, I feel like only fans of the show will be trying this game, but I guess you can prove me wrong! Purple Phoenix Games give this a mischievous 6 / 12.
Sarah (7798 KP) Nov 11, 2018
Karica Truebenbach (156 KP) Nov 12, 2018