Search

Search only in certain items:

40x40

Alex Proyas recommended The Godfather (1972) in Movies (curated)

 
The Godfather (1972)
The Godfather (1972)
1972 | Crime, Drama

"Well, you know, it’s interesting because my favorite films are ones that I keep watching. I just don’t think there have been many great science fiction films made. I mean, 2001 is genius, there’s no question it’s a masterpiece, but I’ve already picked a Kubrick film. I find Dr. Strangelove a more user-friendly and enjoyable film to look at and watch repeatedly. I can watch it endlessly. Blade Runner is a masterpiece, but I don’t know that I would put it in my top 5 at this stage. Maybe at some other point in my life, I would’ve. I picked a Hitchcock film. Kubrick, Hitchcock, and Tarkovsky are my absolute Holy Trinity, you know? I’ve picked one from each person now. Oh! Okay, here’s a curveball. Um, no, I don’t want to say that one… I was going to say The Wizard of Oz, which I really like, but I don’t know that I’d put it in my top five, but in my top twenty. [Long pause] Godfather, I’d say. Just a flawless film, something that’s so beautifully crafted and so perfectly structured and designed, that I can watch it endlessly and enjoy it every single time."

Source
  
Memento (2000)
Memento (2000)
2000 | Mystery, Thriller
Heady Trip
Christopher Nolan first burst onto the scene (for me) with MEMENTO, a 2000 film about a man with a rare condition - he cannot store any short term memories - and is looking for the man that murdered his wife and hit him on the head, thus causing this condition. The twist of the film - and the "trick" that makes this film work -is that it is told backwards (the last scene is first, the 2nd to last scene is 2nd...the first scene is last) so we, the audience, have no memory of what happened just before this scene and, thus, are suffering from the same inability to access what has happened just before as the main character.

This "trick" works very well and holds the film together, we are peeling apart the onion (or, more appropriately, we are putting the peels back on the onion) as the film progresses, gaining greater knowledge as we go along and, with each new piece of "old" information, we gain a new - and in most cases different - view of the scene that we just saw, keeping the audience off-balance for the entire film.

Nolan shows a sure-handedness in his direction of this film. It is clear he had a vision that he wanted to put on the screen and with the screenplay written by Nolan and his long-time collaborator, his brother Jonathan Nolan, Christopher Nolan has a canvas to paint his off-kilter picture and play with the themes of time and memory - themes he would come back to over again.

As the man with the memory loss, Leonard, Guy Pearce solidified himself for me (at the time) as a fine actor that is worth watching (this, afterall, was just a few years after LA CONFIDENTIAL). His Leonard is earnest and straightforward and while he does have a "tick" to show that his memory is erasing (to clue us, the audience in), he marches (backward) through this film strongly.

Aiding Pearce is veteran character actor Joe Pantoliano as Teddy - a cop who is helping Leonard find his wife's killer (or is he?). "Joey Pants" (as he is known) is perfect for this type of ambiguous character, never really trusting him, but trusting him "just enough". Also jumping in is Trinity, herself, Carrie-Ann Moss - an actress that I thought was going to build on this (and the Matrix) and become quite the star. It didn't quite work out.

I enjoyed this mystery and was thinking about how well it works if you ran the scenes in chronological order - upon reflection, I realized that if you did that, holes get punched into things pretty quickly. So, don't do that, but do rent or stream or pull the old DVD of MEMENTO off your bookshelves, it is worth your time.

Letter Grade: A-

8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
  
The Clovehitch Killer (2018)
The Clovehitch Killer (2018)
2018 | Drama, Horror, Mystery
Story: The Clovehitch Killer starts as we head to a small town that has been living in the shadow of a serial killer branded Clovehitch because of his style of knot. We meet the picture-perfect family with Don (McDermott), Tyler (Plummer), Susie (Sherman) and Cindy (Mathis) who go to church every week.

When Tyler discovers a photo in his father’s car, he starts to think the killer could be closer to home than he first thought, he turns to the local Kassi (Beaty) who has been studying the killer for years to see if his father could be the town’s serial killer.

 

Thoughts on The Clovehitch Killer

 

Characters – Don is the father of the family, he has always helped his son with his boy scout assignments including knot tying, he helps around the neighbourhood too with his time in the church. He is hiding a secret that his son starts to figure out and does what he can to keep this from the rest of the world, Don is created in the same light as what we saw The Trinity Killer in Dexter. Tyler is the son that starts to think his father is the serial killer that scared the town, he tries to investigate which only makes things more difficult to one believe the truth and two keep a secret from his father. Cindy is the wife of Don, she is involved in the church believing they are living a happy life. Kassi is the estranged teenager in the town, she is considered an outsider because if her search for the Clovehitch killer, she is the one that Tyler turns to for help.

Performances – Dylan McDermott does give us a very disturbing performance which shows us just how easily a serial killer could operate in this world. Charlie Plummer gives us a strong performance as 2018 year was a fantastic year for him. Samantha Mathis is here and doesn’t get that much to do in the film, while Madisen Beaty brings the investigation figure to life well through the film.

Story – The story here follows a teenager that starts to believe his father is the town’s serial killer and starts investigating whether this is true or not. This is an interesting spin on the serial killer film, we do go down the line that Dexter had with the character which is all good because we see how one operates and manages to keep things secret from their family. The idea that the son is trying to learn the truth keeps us on edge, but seeing the action unfolding we get an intense story that manages to keep nearly everything calm through the events of the film.

Horror/Mystery – The horror follows the idea of a serial killer being in the family, it gets to show us how they can seem like they are everyday people which only makes the serial killer coming off worse. The mystery of the film follows whether he is the killer or not, well it is meant to, only for it to give away everything way to early.

Settings – The film uses the small town settings to make us believe just how the town has been in fear since the serial killer, it shows how one could operate without being looked at differently.

Special Effects – The effects in the film are very simple, we get to see just how he does the kills, only we don’t need to see anything graphic.


Scene of the Movie – The newest victim.

That Moment That Annoyed Me – It could have been slightly more mysterious or just given us that he is a killer early on, it just doesn’t commit either side.

Final Thoughts – This is a horror film that does take things in new direction which keeps us on edge even if it does miss a chance to commit to one side of the film.

 

Overall: Serial killer film with a twist.
  
Hope's Deceit (The Fated #2)
Hope's Deceit (The Fated #2)
Angela McPherson | 2015 | Science Fiction/Fantasy, Young Adult (YA)
10
10.0 (1 Ratings)
Book Rating
The dude is back! Morpheus reigns supreme with his sarcasm and cocky attitude, although you do also see a softer side to him occasionally. As for the rest of the characters, they continue to change and grow with each situation, divulging their secrets and showing strength where none was expected.

Trinity still has her hands full as she tries to learn about her powers and prepares for her eighteenth birthday which is rapidly approaching. Things are not all sunshine and roses with her and Blain - some of which is caused by miscommunication, some by age (she is only 17 after all) and some by circumstances. Every time they were together, my heart was in my mouth! I really want them to be together, but can also understand how the others say that Blain makes her weak. I really hope that she will start to show her true strength now, she has reason enough - and that is all I will say so that I don't give out any spoilers.

The one character I didn't get on with as much in this book is Trinity's dad. He seemed to have whiplash with his emotions and I just couldn't keep up. Still, this is a small thing and also understandable as a father realises he has to let his daughter grow up, even if these circumstances are slightly unusual! 😉
 
Well-written, fast-paced and chock full of emotion, you will be held prisoner by this book, turning the pages as you immerse yourself within the storyline. With no spelling or grammatical errors that I found, this was an amazing second book and I am now on tenterhooks whilst I wait for the third. If you like Urban Fantasy with a bit of Greek Mythology thrown in, then I can highly recommend this book and the first one in the series. Absolutely fantastic.
 
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and my comments here are my honest opinion. *
 
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Nov 13, 2015
  
40x40

Darren (1599 KP) rated Dolls (2019) in Movies

Jul 2, 2019  
Dolls (2019)
Dolls (2019)
2019 |
6
6.0 (1 Ratings)
Movie Rating
Story: Dolls starts when alcoholic children’s book author Robert Holbrook (Downey) moves into his recently deceased mother’s home to start work on his latest work, when he is joined by his teenage daughter Sammey (Simpson) who wants to get away from her mother.

When Robert and Sammey discover three creepy dolls in the attic, Robert decides that he wants to use these characters to create his latest story, known as the Attic Dolls. When a sister of a former patient Margaret (Wallace) appears, she warns Sammey about the evil inside the dolls that come out to play when you look away.

 

Thoughts on Dolls

 

Characters – Robert is an alcoholic children’s author, he has made mistakes in his life which has left his family facing financial ruin, his daughter struggle to be able to face a college future, he has moved out to focus on his new book, which will see him being joined by his daughter. The latest book idea uses the creepy dolls found in the attic of his mother’s home, which will see him suffer nightmares as he looks to withdraw from his drinking problems. Sammey is his 17-year-old daughter who wants to live with him over her mother, she has been on certain medications, though it is unclear what is wrong with her to need them. She first gets scared by the dolls believing the story she hears about them, while trying to remain rebellious about her future. Margaret was the sister of one of the patient’s of Robert’s mother, she warns the family about the evil from the dolls which might be connected to the deaths.

Performances – Thomas Downey is strong through the film, we believe that he is going through troubles. Trinity Simpson is entertaining in her role, she brings the fear of what is going on to make us believe everything happening. Dee Wallace is the biggest name in the film, she is in a supporting role, which lets her bring the experience to the film.

Story – The story here follows a family that move into a house of a deceased relative only to discover three creepy dolls in the attic, soon strange things start happening around the house as it appears the dolls come to life when people aren’t looking. This story does play into the creepy dolls genre of horror which does to use mental health and addiction to try and reflect the situation going on through the events of the film. It does start by going in one direction, but it does feel like it is going to target on a rampage, then throws another twist to them in and it does seem to rush a lot of the story going on through the film. it does end in a very confusing manor which could make most of the film feel almost redundant.

Horror – The horror in this comes from the dolls which do feel creepy and make us feel uneasy wondering what they will be doing next.

Settings – The film is set in the one location which is the house, it is filled with locations where the dolls could sneak around without being seen, only heard, which does play into the rules created.

Special Effects – The effects in the film are only used when they are needed, they are simply with certain small movements which does help the film unfold.


Scene of the Movie – The dolls appearance.

That Moment That Annoyed Me – The ending.

Final Thoughts – This is a new creepy doll movie, which has been the it feature at the moment, with Child’s Play and Annabelle in the cinema, this one does have a creepy feel to it even if the story does seem to be rushed.

 

Overall: Creepy Fun horror.
  
The Man Who Knew Infinity (2016)
The Man Who Knew Infinity (2016)
2016 | International, Drama
6
7.3 (3 Ratings)
Movie Rating
In 1914, Srinivasa Ramanujan (Dev Patel) traveled from his poverty-stricken existence in Madras, India to Trinity College, Cambridge in the hope that he would have his theories published and be recognized for the mathematical genius he was. While there, despite facing racism, hostility and severe illness, he formed an important relationship with G.H. Hardy (Jeremy Irons) that would lead to breakthroughs in mathematics that are still relevant today.

 

It would be easy to prattle on about the tremendous talent onscreen in The Man Who Knew Infinity and with a supporting cast that features some of Britain’s best; we get exactly what we’d expect from the likes of Jeremy Irons, Toby Jones and Kevin McNally. All at the top of their game, they serve the story well with nuanced and well-rounded performances, and I’m certainly not going to take anything away from the exceptional jobs they’ve all done here. All the praise this film deserves however, needs to be directed at Dev Patel. In his role as Ramanujan, he’s completely stepped out of the shadow of his big-screen debut in Slumdog Millionaire and has proved his worth as a leading man capable of carrying the weight of an entire feature. Distancing himself also from the lovable, bumbling hotel owner in The Best Exotic Marigold movies, with Ramanujan he is allowed the room to display an incredible range, from quiet intensity to outspoken, unbridled passion and determination. Kudos also to the writers for not going The Big Short route (e.g. talking down to the uninitiated with ridiculous cutaways), but by using simple logic and examples to help convey complex information relevant to the plot.

 

For the performances alone, this is a solid entry in the biopic genre, but structurally speaking, it’s the editing that lets the film down. This very easily could have emerged as the next A Beautiful Mind, but between a bloated first act, a middling and wandering second act and a truncated final third, The Man Who Knew Infinity falls just short of greatness. Not only is no attention paid to Ramanujan’s achievements as a child, but too much time is given to details and subplots that are arguably inconsequential to the main narrative. This is especially evident in the inclusion of Bertrand Russell (who lived such a rich and fascinating life himself, it would take several films to do that story justice) and his being here feels like just a hollow excuse to include a cameo from another figure of historical importance. The biggest disservice though comes with the ending where we are denied a much needed catharsis and are left to suffer through a slap-dash, halfhearted montage. A restructuring from a more seasoned hand would have undoubtedly led to stronger word-of-mouth and perhaps a wider release. I also wouldn’t be surprised to learn that this is a case of “too many cooks” as the film has a staggering 43 credited producers. I get that independent features can be forced to source their funding from many places, but you can’t tell me that with all those opinions flying about that some of the original intent didn’t get lost in the noise.

 

As an aside, what Stephen Fry is doing here is beyond me. He’s given two scenes with perhaps a half a dozen lines, leaving his incomparable persona entirely wasted on a completely throwaway character. It’s a pity he wasn’t given a meatier role as one of Ramanujan’s antagonists.
  
God: A Human History
God: A Human History
Reza Aslan | 2017 | Philosophy, Psychology & Social Sciences, Religion
6
5.0 (4 Ratings)
Book Rating
An Ambiguous History
I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.

Where did religion come from? This is the question Reza Aslan, a scholar of religions, attempts to answer in his latest publication, God: A Human History. To date, Aslan has tackled subjects such as the life of Jesus of Nazareth, and the origins, evolution and future of Islam. In this book, the author journeys back to the earliest evidence of human existence and, using a mix of resources, theories and investigations, tries to determine how our ancestors conceived the idea of gods and souls. Maintaining the idea that the majority of humans think of God as a divine version of ourselves, Aslan also looks at the way our perception of life after death has altered due to the changes in our governments and cultures.

Reza Aslan claims that he, a Muslim-devout-Christian-convert-turned-Sufi, is neither trying to prove or disprove the existence of God or gods. Instead, he is providing readers with a thorough history of religion with a strong suggestion that we, as believers, have fashioned God in our image, and not the other way around.

Insisting that belief systems are inherited from each previous generation, Aslan takes a look at ancient cave drawings where he, and many other theorists, surmise that a form of religion was already well underway. Lack of written word results in a lot of speculation and hypothesis as to what these, usually animal-like, drawings represent, however, many have come to the conclusion that early humans had some form of animistic belief system.

Although not a dig at religion, after all, the author is religious himself, the following chapters bring in to question the authenticity of past and present beliefs. With reference to various psychologists, Aslan poses the theory that ancient humans may have misinterpreted dreams as evidence of a spirit realm. With no one qualified to clarify the things they did not understand, anything without a clear explanation may have been attributed to a god or gods.

As the author describes how religious ideas may have developed from these primitive beliefs to the fully detailed faiths of today, he labels the human race as anthropocentric creatures that have based their religions on human traits and emotions. By reporting in this way, it comes across that the past ideas of the soul, spiritual realms, gods and so forth could not possibly be true, yet, as the final chapters suggest, Aslan is still adamant about the existence of God.

Aslan’s narrative speeds up, finally reaching the recognizable religions of today. Beginning with the Israelites, enslaved by the Egyptians, the author explains, using biblical references, how the first successful monotheistic religion came about. However, researchers have studied the early Bible texts and are inconclusive as to whether the God worshipped by the Jews was the only divine being or whether there were others of a similar standing.

Next, Aslan explores Christianity, posing more questions than he solves, for example, is God one or is God three (i.e. the Holy Trinity)? He defines and compares the definitions of monotheism and pantheism, eventually bringing in Islam and the development of Sufism, which he is not afraid of admitting he agrees with.

God: A Human History is disappointingly short, ending with the feeble conclusion that humans are born with the ability to be convinced of the existence of a divine being and the soul, but it is our own choice to decide whether or not to believe in them. The remaining third of the book is an abundance of notes on the texts, bibliographical references, and Reza Aslan’s personal opinions about the ideas and theories mentioned in his history of religion.

Although an extensive history on the origins of religion, God: A Human History leaves readers none the wiser as to whether their belief is founded in truth or whether it is something that has evolved over time due to lack of understanding about the world. Granted, it was not the aim of the book to prove or disprove the existence of God, however, it may unintentionally sow seeds of doubt or, potentially, anger devout believers. However, there is no attempt at persuading readers to believe one thing or another, thus making it suitable for people of all religion and none.
  
God: A Human History
God: A Human History
Reza Aslan | 2017 | Philosophy, Psychology & Social Sciences, Religion
6
5.0 (4 Ratings)
Book Rating
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.
</i>
Where did religion come from? This is the question Reza Aslan, a scholar of religions, attempts to answer in his latest publication, <i>God: A Human History.</i> To date, Aslan has tackled subjects such as the life of Jesus of Nazareth, and the origins, evolution and future of Islam. In this book, the author journeys back to the earliest evidence of human existence and, using a mix of resources, theories and investigations, tries to determine how our ancestors conceived the idea of gods and souls. Maintaining the idea that the majority of humans think of God as a divine version of ourselves, Aslan also looks at the way our perception of life after death has altered due to the changes in our governments and cultures.

Reza Aslan claims that he, a Muslim-devout-Christian-convert-turned-Sufi, is neither trying to prove or disprove the existence of God or gods. Instead, he is providing readers with a thorough history of religion with a strong suggestion that we, as believers, have fashioned God in our image, and not the other way around.

Insisting that belief systems are inherited from each previous generation, Aslan takes a look at ancient cave drawings where he, and many other theorists, surmise that a form of religion was already well underway. Lack of written word results in a lot of speculation and hypothesis as to what these, usually animal-like, drawings represent, however, many have come to the conclusion that early humans had some form of animistic belief system.

Although not a dig at religion, after all, the author is religious himself, the following chapters bring in to question the authenticity of past and present beliefs. With reference to various psychologists, Aslan poses the theory that ancient humans may have misinterpreted dreams as evidence of a spirit realm. With no one qualified to clarify the things they did not understand, anything without a clear explanation may have been attributed to a god or gods.

As the author describes how religious ideas may have developed from these primitive beliefs to the fully detailed faiths of today, he labels the human race as anthropocentric creatures that have based their religions on human traits and emotions. By reporting in this way, it comes across that the past ideas of the soul, spiritual realms, gods and so forth could not possibly be true, yet, as the final chapters suggest, Aslan is still adamant about the existence of God.

Aslan’s narrative speeds up, finally reaching the recognizable religions of today. Beginning with the Israelites, enslaved by the Egyptians, the author explains, using biblical references, how the first successful monotheistic religion came about. However, researchers have studied the early Bible texts and are inconclusive as to whether the God worshipped by the Jews was the only divine being or whether there were others of a similar standing.

Next, Aslan explores Christianity, posing more questions than he solves, for example, is God one or is God three (i.e. the Holy Trinity)? He defines and compares the definitions of monotheism and pantheism, eventually bringing in Islam and the development of Sufism, which he is not afraid of admitting he agrees with.

<i>God: A Human History </i>is disappointingly short, ending with the feeble conclusion that humans are born with the ability to be convinced of the existence of a divine being and the soul, but it is our own choice to decide whether or not to believe in them. The remaining third of the book is an abundance of notes on the texts, bibliographical references, and Reza Aslan’s personal opinions about the ideas and theories mentioned in his history of religion.

Although an extensive history on the origins of religion, <i>God: A Human History </i>leaves readers none the wiser as to whether their belief is founded in truth or whether it is something that has evolved over time due to lack of understanding about the world. Granted, it was not the aim of the book to prove or disprove the existence of God, however, it may unintentionally sow seeds of doubt or, potentially, anger devout believers. However, there is no attempt at persuading readers to believe one thing or another, thus making it suitable for people of all religion and none.
  
40x40

Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Normal People in Books

Mar 19, 2020  
Normal People
Normal People
Sally Rooney | 2018 | Fiction & Poetry
6
6.8 (8 Ratings)
Book Rating
Marianne and Connell form a relationship in school, starting to talk to one another when Connell comes to pick up his mother at her job cleaning for Marianne's family. But at school itself, they pretend not to know each other, fiercely aware of where they stand in the social structure: Connell is a popular soccer star, while Marianne is smart but a social outcast. Things change a year later, when they are both studying at Trinity College. Marianne has found her social circle and is popular among her group of friends. Connell is known as smart, but feels awkward. The two's relationship ebbs and flows--at times, they are deeply in love; at other moments, they date other people and rarely speak.

I'm not exactly sure what to say about this one. I listened to this book over a couple of months as I traveled off and on for work. It felt very slow, and while I know part of it was the stops and starts when I was traveling, but some of it was the book itself. I can definitely recognize the brilliance others found in this novel. Rooney is a wonderful writer, and there were passages that I wish I could capture and save to savor later. At other moments, I wanted to hurry things along quite badly... she turned the water on in the shower, the water came out, the water fell to the floor, etc. Things are described in great detail, and often, I found myself frustrated at that.

This not a plot-driven novel, but a character-driven one. Told from the alternating perspectives of Marianne and Connell over time, it examines various points in their life. At times, they may even go back in time in their various point-of-view segment, forcing you to keep up with exactly what is happening and when. There is much explaining and much examining. A lot of talk of feelings and such. It's a very complex novel. I definitely did grow to be interested in Marianne and Connell, but it did take some time.

As I said, I can see why this book earned such rave reviews, but it wasn't entirely for me. I was frustrated that Marianne and Connell couldn't just talk to each other. The ending of the book left me annoyed--all this for that--and I often wanted things to happen more quickly than they did. Still, I appreciated Rooney's lovely writing. If you want a complicated look at how one relationship can affect two so-called normal people over time, this one is definitely for you. 3 stars.
  
40x40

Mel Rodriguez recommended GoodFellas (1990) in Movies (curated)

 
GoodFellas (1990)
GoodFellas (1990)
1990 | Crime, Drama, Thriller

"I grew up in kind of a rough neighborhood and there was kind of this whole gangster thing, too. I think that’s the opening line: “As far back as I can remember I always wanted to be a gangster.” And I think there was a part of me that felt the same way. I just loved Robert De Niro’s work, all those guys really. Man, the acting, and everything about that movie — almost flawless film. And I’ve loved all of Scorsese’s films. Just his working relationship with Robert De Niro, from Mean Streets on; there are so many movies that I love with the two of them. I feel like everything kind of comes together in Goodfellas in some way. Goodfellas has kind of got it all. That was probably one of my favorite films as a kid, so I carried a picture of Goodfellas in my wallet. With De Niro and Pesci and Liotta, it was like, you know, the trinity [laughing]. I mean, really, Goodfellas was kind of like my Star Wars [laughing]. Really just the pacing of that film, everything, just how realistic. And at times it’s just jarring how violent it is. And hilarious too. It’s f—ing hilarious. I mean, I know it’s not funny that you would wrap a telephone cord around a guy’s neck. That’s not funny at all! The whole situation is terrible! But I think on some level, really, you kind of care for these guys and I think that’s what Scorsese is able to do in his films, is make these guys so human that we are able to somehow relate to them and, on some level, even kind of root for them, even though some of the stuff they do is just really despicable. I mean, the stuff that Joe Pesci does is just awful and I don’t think you really necessarily root for him; he’s kind of a hot head. The thing is, obviously, I know these things are bad. I do know how life can go one way or another, and that it’s not all just black and white, and there are many different situations and twists and turns in life. I feel these things sometimes and say, “Oh wow, I knew a guy like that. And I knew a guy like that.” And so I am very into gangster movies just because I feel, in some ways, I don’t think I have the heart for it, honestly. I’d have a nervous breakdown as a gangster. I’d be a very nervous gangster. I’d be the gangster that pops a lot of Klonopin."

Source