Search
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Hostage (2005) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
Chief of Police Jeff Talley (Bruce Willis) is a man filled with turmoil. A former S.W.A.T. officer and top hostage negotiator for the Los Angeles Police Department, Talley now toils away in a quite California town where crime is light and very infrequent. The change in locales was made necessary for Jeff in the aftermath of a hostage negotiation where things did not go accordingly leaving Jeff with more questions than answers.
As if this is not bad enough, Talley is having difficulties with his wife Jane (Serena Scott Thomas), and his daughter Amanda (Rumer Willis), who is not happy with their relocation to the quiet locale or the strain that is amongst her parents as it is clear that they still love each other very much.
The quiet town is disrupted when a robbery of a successful locale business man goes horribly wrong and ends up with a dead police officer and three hostages being held in a high tech, high security home.
Jeff responds to the incident and soon finds himself dealing with the three young men who are clearly in over their head and very dangerous due to the instability of the situation. Jeff decides to call in the Sheriff’s office as he believe his police force is not suited for this sort of situation and essentially decides to wash his hands of the situation and go home.
While driving home, Jeff is carjacked by a group of individuals who show Jeff that they have taken his wife and daughter hostage and instruct him not to let anyone in or out of the house where the hostage crisis is taking place. Jeff is also instructed to not deviate in any way from his instructions under pain of immediate death for his wife and daughter. His only communication with his new handlers will be via a cell phone, and he is to resume control of the negotiations.
It is learned that there is something in the house that the people holding Jeff’s family need and are willing to resort to very extreme measure to get it.
It is at this point that the very, very gripping and entertaining setup to the film begins to slide, as the second half of the film does not come close to matching the quality of the opening segments.
There are some very good cat and mouse moments as the men in the house start to argue amongst themselves, and interact with the family inside the house. The supporting performances are solid especially those of Jennifer (Michelle Horn), who plays the daughter held captive by the trio and the eerie performance of Ben Foster as the twisted Hostage taker Mars.
Sadly the film decides to turn to a series of brutal images and sequences rather than continue to develop the characters and work the story. The characters often embark on some inane courses of action and do things that not only contradict what we know about their characters but also fly into the lapse of logic as people in their situations would never do. I would love to expand on this by referencing a segment of the film but in the interest of not spoiling the film, I will explain it as when characters are told not to do something, why would they repeatedly do it, and then continue to do so without any consequences?
It is the continued lack of common sense and the and the very over the top and lazy finale to the film that sinks what could have and should have been a much better movie as the film is clearly sunk by the awful final 40 minutes of the show. Willis does a solid job with his role but the last act of the script let him down as even a star of his magnitude and talents cant make up for the films numerous shortcomings.
As if this is not bad enough, Talley is having difficulties with his wife Jane (Serena Scott Thomas), and his daughter Amanda (Rumer Willis), who is not happy with their relocation to the quiet locale or the strain that is amongst her parents as it is clear that they still love each other very much.
The quiet town is disrupted when a robbery of a successful locale business man goes horribly wrong and ends up with a dead police officer and three hostages being held in a high tech, high security home.
Jeff responds to the incident and soon finds himself dealing with the three young men who are clearly in over their head and very dangerous due to the instability of the situation. Jeff decides to call in the Sheriff’s office as he believe his police force is not suited for this sort of situation and essentially decides to wash his hands of the situation and go home.
While driving home, Jeff is carjacked by a group of individuals who show Jeff that they have taken his wife and daughter hostage and instruct him not to let anyone in or out of the house where the hostage crisis is taking place. Jeff is also instructed to not deviate in any way from his instructions under pain of immediate death for his wife and daughter. His only communication with his new handlers will be via a cell phone, and he is to resume control of the negotiations.
It is learned that there is something in the house that the people holding Jeff’s family need and are willing to resort to very extreme measure to get it.
It is at this point that the very, very gripping and entertaining setup to the film begins to slide, as the second half of the film does not come close to matching the quality of the opening segments.
There are some very good cat and mouse moments as the men in the house start to argue amongst themselves, and interact with the family inside the house. The supporting performances are solid especially those of Jennifer (Michelle Horn), who plays the daughter held captive by the trio and the eerie performance of Ben Foster as the twisted Hostage taker Mars.
Sadly the film decides to turn to a series of brutal images and sequences rather than continue to develop the characters and work the story. The characters often embark on some inane courses of action and do things that not only contradict what we know about their characters but also fly into the lapse of logic as people in their situations would never do. I would love to expand on this by referencing a segment of the film but in the interest of not spoiling the film, I will explain it as when characters are told not to do something, why would they repeatedly do it, and then continue to do so without any consequences?
It is the continued lack of common sense and the and the very over the top and lazy finale to the film that sinks what could have and should have been a much better movie as the film is clearly sunk by the awful final 40 minutes of the show. Willis does a solid job with his role but the last act of the script let him down as even a star of his magnitude and talents cant make up for the films numerous shortcomings.
Bong Mines Entertainment (15 KP) rated The Art of Letting Go by Mauwe in Music
Jun 7, 2019
Mauwe (Portia & Jay) is a Bristol-based indie-pop duo. Not too long ago, they released their debut EP, entitled, “The Art of Letting Go”.
The 5-track project is a chronicle of love lessons that Mauwe learned in life. Also, hopefulness is the common theme throughout the EP.
“That’s All”
That’s All wishes an old flame the best. Nothing more nothing less. The song is sung from a female’s point of view, where the woman in question is thinking about her ex-boyfriend.
She knows their relationship is over. Plus, she’s dealing with the fact that he has moved on with another woman. But that doesn’t stop her from telling him that she’s thinking about him.
“Smoked a Pack”
Smoke a Pack is an edgy song about a woman that’s waiting for a phone call from a man she regrets being in a relationship with. While waiting, she realizes she should have never gotten into a relationship with him in the first place.
The woman is thinking about her friends warning her not to get into the relationship and other regretful actions. The situation is nerve-racking so she smokes a pack of cigarettes. She’s trying to release her stress and anger the cheapest way she knows how.
“Gold”
Gold is an apprehensive song about falling for someone new. The song places a woman that’s drunk in love with a man that makes her feel like gold.
The woman compares her current state of drunken love to someone who is on drink number three. Depending on what that person is drinking, probably means she’s feeling good inside.
“Walls”
Walls is an emotional R&B/Soul ballad. It’s about a woman who’s losing her mind. Although she’s out of a broken relationship, her heart is still imprisoned there.
The woman is going insane trying to forget her ex’s name. She used to have control, but since he let her go, she writes on the walls to past time. Sometimes, love is a pretty gloomy thing isn’t it?
“Strangers”
If you’ve ever taken the time to look back at some of life’s more challenging moments, accompanied by a tub of Ben & Jerry’s or a bottle of wine, you’ll probably relate to Strangers.
The song is built on the sereneness of solitary thought. On moments that give us the clarity needed to see things how they really were.
Mauwe’s songwriting directions have a clear lineage to what they were influenced by prior to their formation.
Jay outlines contemporary folk and electronica as his staples growing up.
In conclusion, we highly recommend that you listen to Mauwe’s debut EP, entitled, “The Art of Letting Go”.
https://www.bongminesentertainment.com/mauwe-art-letting-go/
The 5-track project is a chronicle of love lessons that Mauwe learned in life. Also, hopefulness is the common theme throughout the EP.
“That’s All”
That’s All wishes an old flame the best. Nothing more nothing less. The song is sung from a female’s point of view, where the woman in question is thinking about her ex-boyfriend.
She knows their relationship is over. Plus, she’s dealing with the fact that he has moved on with another woman. But that doesn’t stop her from telling him that she’s thinking about him.
“Smoked a Pack”
Smoke a Pack is an edgy song about a woman that’s waiting for a phone call from a man she regrets being in a relationship with. While waiting, she realizes she should have never gotten into a relationship with him in the first place.
The woman is thinking about her friends warning her not to get into the relationship and other regretful actions. The situation is nerve-racking so she smokes a pack of cigarettes. She’s trying to release her stress and anger the cheapest way she knows how.
“Gold”
Gold is an apprehensive song about falling for someone new. The song places a woman that’s drunk in love with a man that makes her feel like gold.
The woman compares her current state of drunken love to someone who is on drink number three. Depending on what that person is drinking, probably means she’s feeling good inside.
“Walls”
Walls is an emotional R&B/Soul ballad. It’s about a woman who’s losing her mind. Although she’s out of a broken relationship, her heart is still imprisoned there.
The woman is going insane trying to forget her ex’s name. She used to have control, but since he let her go, she writes on the walls to past time. Sometimes, love is a pretty gloomy thing isn’t it?
“Strangers”
If you’ve ever taken the time to look back at some of life’s more challenging moments, accompanied by a tub of Ben & Jerry’s or a bottle of wine, you’ll probably relate to Strangers.
The song is built on the sereneness of solitary thought. On moments that give us the clarity needed to see things how they really were.
Mauwe’s songwriting directions have a clear lineage to what they were influenced by prior to their formation.
Jay outlines contemporary folk and electronica as his staples growing up.
In conclusion, we highly recommend that you listen to Mauwe’s debut EP, entitled, “The Art of Letting Go”.
https://www.bongminesentertainment.com/mauwe-art-letting-go/
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The Kitchen (2019) in Movies
Nov 7, 2019
Times are tough in Hells Kitchen, people need to diversify to stay on top. Three gangsters decide to do just that but manage to fall on the wrong side of the law on their first outing. As they are locked up their wives are left to pick up the pieces. They'll be looked after, that's the promise they hear but the money they get won't even cover their rent.
The three women are desperate but see an opportunity in the gap their imprisoned husbands have left. What the mob needs is a woman's touch.
Melissa McCarthy amuses me, her comedy really hits the spot, then she appeared in Can You Ever Forgive Me? and I was so happy to see she could do drama too. Tiffany Haddish was much the same, I've seen her in lots of comedy and find her to be entertaining (if a little over played) so when her name popped up on this I was interested to see how she handled "sensible". I was very pleased with the result, but we'll get there.
The look of everything in The Kitchen felt spot on. All the little touches really pulled the 70's feel together and gace each character their own vibe that lined up perfectly with their development through the film.
Music certainly helped on this front, though part of me was sad that they used "It's A Man's Man's Man's World." I know it fits perfectly with the tone and the subject but it felt so cliché for that to be the first thing we go and I actually sighed when it came on.
Our three wives make an interesting mix as a team, a collection that you couldn't see being friends under normal circumstances but they've been brought together out of necessity. I liked the way we got to see their lives unfold from the beginning. Their home life with their husbands and then their reactions as the men are charged. Kathy looking upset, Ruby with a look of disappointment that he should have been smarter, and Claire's smile as the court gives her a reprieve from his violence.
We see their progression to becoming a success in town happen quite quickly on screen and I thought that worked well. It left all the internal politics out until there was something bigger at stake to deal with.
The women all take on a path of their own, it diversifies their abilities but you know that something has to give. Every little piece that's added to their story felt like it was right to be there, nothing was unnecessary.
There's a certain amount of stereotype acting in The Kitchen but it works well when it comes to the gangs and their interactions together. Both Kathy (McCarthy) and Ruby (Haddish) have that in them too at one point or another but it's a little less evident in general.
As I said at the beginning, Melissa McCarthy's step into drama had been a hit with me and her portrayal of Kathy was no different. She went from an attentive wife and mother who minds her own business to a mob boss and entrepeneur, it's such a smooth transition that you'd wonder if she was doing something fishy on the side already.
Tiffany Haddish was amazing too, her dramatic skills really brought Ruby to life and it was a wonderfully believable performance.
Then there's Claire played by Elisabeth Moss. She's had great success in The Handmaid's Tale and I do binge watch that once the series is out, but truth be told I don't really like they way she brings her character in either to life. Claire is a woman abused by her husband, she's attacked by a homeless man and then "rescued" by Gabriel, a hitman who has skills that become and obsession for her. Her transition is the only one that doesn't sit right, yes I believe she'd try to take back her power wherever she could but her whole arc seems a little crazy.
As a crime drama it's probably missing something to take it over the line into an amazing effort but I enjoyed it for the most part. It didn't leave things unanswered and with so many different strands going on that was entirely possible.
Passing comment... I love Common, he needs to be in all the things.
What you should do
It's worth a watch when it hits streaming sites.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Some quality retro clothing.
The three women are desperate but see an opportunity in the gap their imprisoned husbands have left. What the mob needs is a woman's touch.
Melissa McCarthy amuses me, her comedy really hits the spot, then she appeared in Can You Ever Forgive Me? and I was so happy to see she could do drama too. Tiffany Haddish was much the same, I've seen her in lots of comedy and find her to be entertaining (if a little over played) so when her name popped up on this I was interested to see how she handled "sensible". I was very pleased with the result, but we'll get there.
The look of everything in The Kitchen felt spot on. All the little touches really pulled the 70's feel together and gace each character their own vibe that lined up perfectly with their development through the film.
Music certainly helped on this front, though part of me was sad that they used "It's A Man's Man's Man's World." I know it fits perfectly with the tone and the subject but it felt so cliché for that to be the first thing we go and I actually sighed when it came on.
Our three wives make an interesting mix as a team, a collection that you couldn't see being friends under normal circumstances but they've been brought together out of necessity. I liked the way we got to see their lives unfold from the beginning. Their home life with their husbands and then their reactions as the men are charged. Kathy looking upset, Ruby with a look of disappointment that he should have been smarter, and Claire's smile as the court gives her a reprieve from his violence.
We see their progression to becoming a success in town happen quite quickly on screen and I thought that worked well. It left all the internal politics out until there was something bigger at stake to deal with.
The women all take on a path of their own, it diversifies their abilities but you know that something has to give. Every little piece that's added to their story felt like it was right to be there, nothing was unnecessary.
There's a certain amount of stereotype acting in The Kitchen but it works well when it comes to the gangs and their interactions together. Both Kathy (McCarthy) and Ruby (Haddish) have that in them too at one point or another but it's a little less evident in general.
As I said at the beginning, Melissa McCarthy's step into drama had been a hit with me and her portrayal of Kathy was no different. She went from an attentive wife and mother who minds her own business to a mob boss and entrepeneur, it's such a smooth transition that you'd wonder if she was doing something fishy on the side already.
Tiffany Haddish was amazing too, her dramatic skills really brought Ruby to life and it was a wonderfully believable performance.
Then there's Claire played by Elisabeth Moss. She's had great success in The Handmaid's Tale and I do binge watch that once the series is out, but truth be told I don't really like they way she brings her character in either to life. Claire is a woman abused by her husband, she's attacked by a homeless man and then "rescued" by Gabriel, a hitman who has skills that become and obsession for her. Her transition is the only one that doesn't sit right, yes I believe she'd try to take back her power wherever she could but her whole arc seems a little crazy.
As a crime drama it's probably missing something to take it over the line into an amazing effort but I enjoyed it for the most part. It didn't leave things unanswered and with so many different strands going on that was entirely possible.
Passing comment... I love Common, he needs to be in all the things.
What you should do
It's worth a watch when it hits streaming sites.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Some quality retro clothing.
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated Three Heart Echo in Books
May 16, 2018
Three Heart Echo by Keary Taylor ended up on my reading list by yet another mislabeling on NetGalley, I must admit. As seen in the title image above, the book is a paranormal suspense. If you’ve read my blog for any length of time, you’ll no doubt guess that I grabbed it from the horror genre titles. Fortunately, after revisiting its cover I can at least say that its actual genre is the right one. While Three Heart Echo does have some elements of horror, it reads more like a paranormal-themed Lifetime movie.
Taking place soon after the death of Jack Caraway, Three Heart Echo tells the story of two vastly different people meeting and, you guessed it, falling in love. It’s not that simple though, and several of the more twisted things that one might expect from a horror novel surface throughout the plot. Iona Faye, a frail woman mourning the death of her fiance, seeks out Sully Whitmore, a man rumored to be able to speak to the dead. Together, the two unravel the darkness of Jack’s past while racing against time to unravel not one, but two curses.
The plot is fairly linear, with only one unexpected twist at the end. That twist defines much of the book though, and I have to admit that I actually felt anger flare up within me. I’ve gotta give Taylor kudos for that one. What I don’t like, besides the heavily romantic subplot, is the fact that, as readers see in many romance books, we’re dealing with two Mary Sue characters. Iona is described as a beautiful fawn whilst Sully is a giant Viking of a man. Catch my drift? Oh, and poor dead Jack? Apparently, he’s a stunner too.
While the plot is straightforward, Taylor also alternates between perspectives on chapters. Now, as a reader, you may think I mean she goes back and forth between past and present. It’s common enough when we read books, after all. Unfortunately, what I mean is that Taylor switches between perspectives of Sully and Iona. For the most part, the switches follow a pattern. There is some story overlap/repetition within those shifts, but it isn’t terrible. What perturbs me about these perspectives is that every now and then, there’s a break to the pattern where it may take some readers a moment to realize that the book has suddenly shifted to the past without warning.
Back to the romance side of things, there are far too many cliches. Poor, helpless main character gets an indescribable pain in their chest and they can’t fathom why it feels like their heart races when they look upon their love interest. As if that’s not bad enough, you know from the get-go that there’s going to be a love story involved. It’s not well enough to leave it a paranormal suspense, we might as well make it a romance too. Because y’know, two attractive people can’t simply be friends!
Speaking of chest pain, there’s another thing about this book that absolutely irked me. I could understand if one character had an odd need to count things. It happens and OCD is a real thing; but, what I’m referring to, is the need by both characters to take exactly five steps, to blink four times, to wait for three heartbeats before they do something so much as take a breath.
Finally, what the hell is a grand opus? The actual term is magnum opus. I’lll hope it was just a typo that was fixed in the final, published copy of the Three Heart Echo. Overall, the story itself is engaging to a degree, but it definitely wasn’t my style. I think it belongs more in the paranormal romance genre than it does horror.
I’d like to thank NetGalley and the author for providing me with a free copy for the purpose of review.
Taking place soon after the death of Jack Caraway, Three Heart Echo tells the story of two vastly different people meeting and, you guessed it, falling in love. It’s not that simple though, and several of the more twisted things that one might expect from a horror novel surface throughout the plot. Iona Faye, a frail woman mourning the death of her fiance, seeks out Sully Whitmore, a man rumored to be able to speak to the dead. Together, the two unravel the darkness of Jack’s past while racing against time to unravel not one, but two curses.
The plot is fairly linear, with only one unexpected twist at the end. That twist defines much of the book though, and I have to admit that I actually felt anger flare up within me. I’ve gotta give Taylor kudos for that one. What I don’t like, besides the heavily romantic subplot, is the fact that, as readers see in many romance books, we’re dealing with two Mary Sue characters. Iona is described as a beautiful fawn whilst Sully is a giant Viking of a man. Catch my drift? Oh, and poor dead Jack? Apparently, he’s a stunner too.
While the plot is straightforward, Taylor also alternates between perspectives on chapters. Now, as a reader, you may think I mean she goes back and forth between past and present. It’s common enough when we read books, after all. Unfortunately, what I mean is that Taylor switches between perspectives of Sully and Iona. For the most part, the switches follow a pattern. There is some story overlap/repetition within those shifts, but it isn’t terrible. What perturbs me about these perspectives is that every now and then, there’s a break to the pattern where it may take some readers a moment to realize that the book has suddenly shifted to the past without warning.
Back to the romance side of things, there are far too many cliches. Poor, helpless main character gets an indescribable pain in their chest and they can’t fathom why it feels like their heart races when they look upon their love interest. As if that’s not bad enough, you know from the get-go that there’s going to be a love story involved. It’s not well enough to leave it a paranormal suspense, we might as well make it a romance too. Because y’know, two attractive people can’t simply be friends!
Speaking of chest pain, there’s another thing about this book that absolutely irked me. I could understand if one character had an odd need to count things. It happens and OCD is a real thing; but, what I’m referring to, is the need by both characters to take exactly five steps, to blink four times, to wait for three heartbeats before they do something so much as take a breath.
Finally, what the hell is a grand opus? The actual term is magnum opus. I’lll hope it was just a typo that was fixed in the final, published copy of the Three Heart Echo. Overall, the story itself is engaging to a degree, but it definitely wasn’t my style. I think it belongs more in the paranormal romance genre than it does horror.
I’d like to thank NetGalley and the author for providing me with a free copy for the purpose of review.
NAMOO - Wonders of Plant Life
Education and Book
App
Smart toys can make science exciting! NAMOO is a fun, engaging exploration of the life of plants....
Lottie disney bookworm (1056 KP) rated Cinderella Takes the Stage in Books
Apr 26, 2020
This childhood tale of Cinderella is simple and light-hearted with beautiful sentiments and messages throughout: perfect for the little reader in your lives. The illustrations by Adrienne Brown are also incredibly beautiful, with pumpkin carriage watermarks and gorgeous details on each page.
Ella is a young girl, surrounded by the love of her parents in a fairly privileged surrounding. Her days are filled with stories about magic, playing with her new puppy Bruno, taking tea with her parents and preparing for the upcoming puppet competition at the midsummer festival.
It is this competition which is the focus of the short tale, as Cinderella displays her sheer determination to compete and win the prized gold coin, despite her lack of talents in sewing and a puppet which, in her words, looks like a potato.
This determination makes the character of Cinderella inspirational to the young reader, whether they realise that at the time or not. Yes her coveted possession is a silver and gold dress but, despite the tales of magic and fairies that surround her, she does not rely on wishes or her parents to obtain the dress: her sole plan is to earn the gold coin through winning the competition and purchase the dress herself, a refreshing change from the bibbidi, bobbidi boo methods which Tessa Roehl could have so easily reverted to.
Cinderella is not quite perfect though and can be headstrong in her beliefs: quickly jumping to conclusions when she meets a girl her own age who is not quite as well off as herself. As a mother to a seven-year-old, I can readily believe this! Luckily, Cinderella’s parents believe that there is good in every person, a theme which mirrors the original tale and films. Thus, Cinderella learns more about the little girl: significantly benefitting from both the practical lessons which the girl can offer; an insight into the world around her which is not straight out of a fairytale; and finally, the laughter, love and secrets that a childhood friendship offers.
Cinderella and Val are from different worlds, they find beauty in different things and their dreams could not be further apart. However, this does not limit their common interests or indeed their friendship in any capacity and this is something we should all instil in our children. As Tessa Roehl so beautifully puts it: “Our hearts don’t always need to want the same thing. As long as they want something.”
Ella is a young girl, surrounded by the love of her parents in a fairly privileged surrounding. Her days are filled with stories about magic, playing with her new puppy Bruno, taking tea with her parents and preparing for the upcoming puppet competition at the midsummer festival.
It is this competition which is the focus of the short tale, as Cinderella displays her sheer determination to compete and win the prized gold coin, despite her lack of talents in sewing and a puppet which, in her words, looks like a potato.
This determination makes the character of Cinderella inspirational to the young reader, whether they realise that at the time or not. Yes her coveted possession is a silver and gold dress but, despite the tales of magic and fairies that surround her, she does not rely on wishes or her parents to obtain the dress: her sole plan is to earn the gold coin through winning the competition and purchase the dress herself, a refreshing change from the bibbidi, bobbidi boo methods which Tessa Roehl could have so easily reverted to.
Cinderella is not quite perfect though and can be headstrong in her beliefs: quickly jumping to conclusions when she meets a girl her own age who is not quite as well off as herself. As a mother to a seven-year-old, I can readily believe this! Luckily, Cinderella’s parents believe that there is good in every person, a theme which mirrors the original tale and films. Thus, Cinderella learns more about the little girl: significantly benefitting from both the practical lessons which the girl can offer; an insight into the world around her which is not straight out of a fairytale; and finally, the laughter, love and secrets that a childhood friendship offers.
Cinderella and Val are from different worlds, they find beauty in different things and their dreams could not be further apart. However, this does not limit their common interests or indeed their friendship in any capacity and this is something we should all instil in our children. As Tessa Roehl so beautifully puts it: “Our hearts don’t always need to want the same thing. As long as they want something.”
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Spies in Disguise (2019) in Movies
Jan 11, 2020
As my last cinema visit of 2019 I was just hoping for something passable to watch, animation his year has had a few hard knocks so I wasn't optimistic.
Lance is the world's greatest spy, catlike reflexes, excellent deduction skills as well as suave and sophisticated... all the things you'd expect. He's the golden boy of the agency and is ready for another pat on the back and some admiration. But it isn't his lucky day, the device he retrieved is missing from the case and now he's under investigation. He knows that he's innocent but there's damning evidence against him, his only hope is to clear his name, and the only way to do that is to escape the agency and track the real culprit down. His next problem, who can he trust?
This really is Bond for kids, everything is fantastically reminiscent of it, from his slightly too cocky demeanour to the brilliant opening credits. It's a pretty solid film, there's nothing much to dislike. It's essentially Bond mixed with Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs... what's not to love about that?!
I have to wonder about opening kids films this way, it seems to be very common at the moment. The lead needs to have a tragedy to get through the movie and have their moment of realisation. Playmobil did it in a much less subtle way, as did Wonder Park to some extent.
There aren't any real issues with the voice acting, though I do wonder about the choice of Ben Mendelsohn paired with his animated character, the two don't really match as well as the others. But that's not a deal-breaker.
The animation style is very clean and easy to watch. There are before and after shots of some scenes that show what the lighting guy does, it's really interesting to see. After having brought this topic up after seeing Klaus it was nice to see some of the "hidden" parts of animated films. The effort is immense.
Music is used well in parts of the film, and my favourite has to be the "romantic" portion towards the end, very amusingly set up and clearly well thought out.
Walter, our inventor, really does have the sort of imagination that would get him hired by Chester V. My favourite invention was probably the glitter distraction, I believe this may already exist though as it appears to have been deployed in my home over Christmas. This may be the only major continuity note... once Lance brushes the glitter off we don't see any little specks again, completely unrealistic!
There are a lot of great sequences during the film and the action moves it along quickly, add in the humour from the pigeons and all the gadgets and you get something really fun. I will definitely watch this again when it hits streaming. My score may seem a little off considering I didn't hate anything, the reason for this is that it's essentially a lot of other films mixed together. As I said, we've got Bond and Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs with an assortment of action movies and Home Alone 2 thrown in for good measure, which made it enjoyable but not instantly rewatchable.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/01/spies-in-disguise-movie-review.html
Lance is the world's greatest spy, catlike reflexes, excellent deduction skills as well as suave and sophisticated... all the things you'd expect. He's the golden boy of the agency and is ready for another pat on the back and some admiration. But it isn't his lucky day, the device he retrieved is missing from the case and now he's under investigation. He knows that he's innocent but there's damning evidence against him, his only hope is to clear his name, and the only way to do that is to escape the agency and track the real culprit down. His next problem, who can he trust?
This really is Bond for kids, everything is fantastically reminiscent of it, from his slightly too cocky demeanour to the brilliant opening credits. It's a pretty solid film, there's nothing much to dislike. It's essentially Bond mixed with Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs... what's not to love about that?!
I have to wonder about opening kids films this way, it seems to be very common at the moment. The lead needs to have a tragedy to get through the movie and have their moment of realisation. Playmobil did it in a much less subtle way, as did Wonder Park to some extent.
There aren't any real issues with the voice acting, though I do wonder about the choice of Ben Mendelsohn paired with his animated character, the two don't really match as well as the others. But that's not a deal-breaker.
The animation style is very clean and easy to watch. There are before and after shots of some scenes that show what the lighting guy does, it's really interesting to see. After having brought this topic up after seeing Klaus it was nice to see some of the "hidden" parts of animated films. The effort is immense.
Music is used well in parts of the film, and my favourite has to be the "romantic" portion towards the end, very amusingly set up and clearly well thought out.
Walter, our inventor, really does have the sort of imagination that would get him hired by Chester V. My favourite invention was probably the glitter distraction, I believe this may already exist though as it appears to have been deployed in my home over Christmas. This may be the only major continuity note... once Lance brushes the glitter off we don't see any little specks again, completely unrealistic!
There are a lot of great sequences during the film and the action moves it along quickly, add in the humour from the pigeons and all the gadgets and you get something really fun. I will definitely watch this again when it hits streaming. My score may seem a little off considering I didn't hate anything, the reason for this is that it's essentially a lot of other films mixed together. As I said, we've got Bond and Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs with an assortment of action movies and Home Alone 2 thrown in for good measure, which made it enjoyable but not instantly rewatchable.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/01/spies-in-disguise-movie-review.html
Carma (21 KP) rated Moonlight Over Manhattan in Books
Jun 17, 2019
Do one thing every day that scares you. I think that is the best advice we could give ourselves on a daily basis. How many times have we just went status quo and always wondered what if. Harriet Knight is status quo. She is an average girl, with an average life, with average problems. But the month between Thanksgiving and Christmas she decides to challenge herself daily. No more status quo, start living outside the box. The plan is going worse than expected though and then she finds herself on the internet dating site date from hell. The best way she can think of to end said date is to jump out of the bathroom window. That is how we meet Harriet.
Harriet is a dog walker/pet sitter along with her twin sister Fliss. The started their own company and it has really taken off. Her sister has recently moved out of their apartment to live in the Hamptons with Seth (read Holiday in the Hamptons, you won’t regret it). Harriet finds herself alone for the first time in a very long time. After jumping out the bathroom window she heads to the ER to get her ankle checked and in walks Dr. Ethan Black.
Ethan Black is all ER all the time. He puts his very heart and soul in to his daily life and enjoys going to work everyday. Maybe the reason his marriage failed is because he puts 100% into his job. 100% means 0% left over for anything else. He is quite happy in his every day routine until his sister calls with an emergency. He'll do anything for his sister, well maybe anything.
Harriet agrees to change locations for one of her customers because an emergency takes them out of town. Her regular client "Madi" is staying with her “uncle”, a busy doctor, and needs to get her daily walk there instead of home. Harriet and Ethan meet again and realize they need each other to navigate this new normal. Can Ethan still put his heart and soul into work, but make a relationship work. Can Harriet realize she is great the way she is and "challenge Harriet" is a perfect way to get the happy ever after she craves.
I loved Harriet, more than any single main female character I can think of for a while. She is an every woman, self-conscience, has a stutter, awkward, shy. Being a dog walker/pet sitter myself I feel like Harriet (minus the stutter but just as awkward). I also loved revisiting the O’Neil family in Vermont. The way the author paints the scenery each and every time, makes me want to jump in the car and head to Vermont immediately. One of the other things I enjoy about Sarah Morgan novels is the English phrases that inevitably make their way into the writing. There are usually 3 or 4 common English phrases that don’t quite translate to US actions. I enjoy finding them though, and if not immediately known how they translate, finding the answer. None are every so strange though that it affects the flow of the story.
Even though I received this book in exchange for an honest review, it is another great novel from Sarah Morgan, as if I expected anything less. I am adding this to my From Manhattan with Love shelf immediately, hope you do the same right now.
Harriet is a dog walker/pet sitter along with her twin sister Fliss. The started their own company and it has really taken off. Her sister has recently moved out of their apartment to live in the Hamptons with Seth (read Holiday in the Hamptons, you won’t regret it). Harriet finds herself alone for the first time in a very long time. After jumping out the bathroom window she heads to the ER to get her ankle checked and in walks Dr. Ethan Black.
Ethan Black is all ER all the time. He puts his very heart and soul in to his daily life and enjoys going to work everyday. Maybe the reason his marriage failed is because he puts 100% into his job. 100% means 0% left over for anything else. He is quite happy in his every day routine until his sister calls with an emergency. He'll do anything for his sister, well maybe anything.
Harriet agrees to change locations for one of her customers because an emergency takes them out of town. Her regular client "Madi" is staying with her “uncle”, a busy doctor, and needs to get her daily walk there instead of home. Harriet and Ethan meet again and realize they need each other to navigate this new normal. Can Ethan still put his heart and soul into work, but make a relationship work. Can Harriet realize she is great the way she is and "challenge Harriet" is a perfect way to get the happy ever after she craves.
I loved Harriet, more than any single main female character I can think of for a while. She is an every woman, self-conscience, has a stutter, awkward, shy. Being a dog walker/pet sitter myself I feel like Harriet (minus the stutter but just as awkward). I also loved revisiting the O’Neil family in Vermont. The way the author paints the scenery each and every time, makes me want to jump in the car and head to Vermont immediately. One of the other things I enjoy about Sarah Morgan novels is the English phrases that inevitably make their way into the writing. There are usually 3 or 4 common English phrases that don’t quite translate to US actions. I enjoy finding them though, and if not immediately known how they translate, finding the answer. None are every so strange though that it affects the flow of the story.
Even though I received this book in exchange for an honest review, it is another great novel from Sarah Morgan, as if I expected anything less. I am adding this to my From Manhattan with Love shelf immediately, hope you do the same right now.
Category Therapy: Sorting Words by Categories
Education and Medical
App
Improve mental organization skills. Practice categories in a versatile speech therapy app. When you...
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Cloud Control in Tabletop Games
Dec 31, 2020
We see so often on TV and movies characters looking up at the sky and picking out figures in the clouds. Maybe they see elephants, or airplanes, or ice cream cones. Usually when I look up into the clouds I see impending rain showers, or snowflakes pelting my face, or merely barricades to the sun. I almost never get the fun shapes that I expect, sadly. But now, with Cloud Control in my arsenal, I can make any shape I wish. For victory points!
Cloud Control is a 3-10 player party game of building unique cloud shapes from cues on cards. By manipulating basic cloud shapes players must get their opponents to guess what they are building to score VP kites.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup shuffle the cards into one gigantic pile or into smaller stacks, as shown below. Separate the square cloud shape cards by shape and place them into stacks by shape. Place the VP kites and sand timer nearby and determine the starting player. The game may now begin with the first cloud artist!
On a turn the active player will draw a Shape Card, choose one of the shapes and then have someone start the timer. Within the 90 seconds provided the player will need to grab Cloud Cards from the stacks to create their versions of the shapes prompted. Once the timer runs out, or other players correctly guesses what is being built, both the artist and guessers will receive point kites equal to the difficulty of the shapes identified. Easier creations will score 1VP while more difficult ones will score 3VP. Play then proceeds to the next player in table order to take their turn.
Once every player has had a turn to build, a lightning round will commence. The starting player will choose a Shape Card and then announce to all players the shape to be built. The players will have 90 seconds to each build the shape announced by taking only ONE Cloud Card at a time to add to their creation. Once the timer is out of sand, it is flipped once again for players to explain their creations. At the end of this arguing period all players will vote and the shape with the most votes will earn 5VP.
Players will each have one more turn to earn points for Shape Cards, and the winner is the player with the most VPs.
Components. This game is a bunch of Cloud Cards, 300 Shape Cards (plus extra blanks if you received the promos), VP kites, and a sand timer. The timer is normal sand timer quality, the cards used throughout the game are all fine quality, and the kites are cute red and gold tokens. The art style in the game is very light and airy and fits very well with the theme. Again, I have no problems with the components from 25th Century Games.
The gameplay is really fun, and turns (though 90 seconds long) seem like they go by so quickly that one could easily lose track of time playing. Having to work super fast because you are trying to score all the shapes on the card is harrying and stressful, or just a little less so if you decide to go big and detailed for just 3VP on one shape. Finding interesting uses for the basic shapes keeps all players active and on the edge of their seats. This truly is a wonderful party game (for when you can have game nights again).
Why didn’t I rate it higher then if I seem to like it so much? Well, for my typical game group, we tend to gravitate toward games with more meat on their bones. So I really do not see this getting played a ton on a regular rotation. That said, I am basing this on our game nights we had pre-COVID so things may certainly change once we are able to get together as a large group again. While I have played this with different player counts, I haven’t been able to get more than four to play. So I am keeping my rating open for now. I could see it improving down the road when I am able to play this with more people. I just really want to test its limit of 10 players and see how it goes. If it can handle 8+ and still be just as fun as with three or four, I will update this review and the graphic up top.
For now, Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a floaty 8 / 12. I do love being able to bust out my creative side and think more in geometric shapes. Every player I have played with seems to also enjoy it quite a bit. It is simple to teach and learn, plays quickly, and offers so many opportunities to laugh hysterically as players attempt to create common items or concepts from uncommon basic cloud shapes. If you are looking for something a little different to bring to game night or offer your friends and family, check out Cloud Control. And post some photos of your better creations. I want to see them!
Cloud Control is a 3-10 player party game of building unique cloud shapes from cues on cards. By manipulating basic cloud shapes players must get their opponents to guess what they are building to score VP kites.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup shuffle the cards into one gigantic pile or into smaller stacks, as shown below. Separate the square cloud shape cards by shape and place them into stacks by shape. Place the VP kites and sand timer nearby and determine the starting player. The game may now begin with the first cloud artist!
On a turn the active player will draw a Shape Card, choose one of the shapes and then have someone start the timer. Within the 90 seconds provided the player will need to grab Cloud Cards from the stacks to create their versions of the shapes prompted. Once the timer runs out, or other players correctly guesses what is being built, both the artist and guessers will receive point kites equal to the difficulty of the shapes identified. Easier creations will score 1VP while more difficult ones will score 3VP. Play then proceeds to the next player in table order to take their turn.
Once every player has had a turn to build, a lightning round will commence. The starting player will choose a Shape Card and then announce to all players the shape to be built. The players will have 90 seconds to each build the shape announced by taking only ONE Cloud Card at a time to add to their creation. Once the timer is out of sand, it is flipped once again for players to explain their creations. At the end of this arguing period all players will vote and the shape with the most votes will earn 5VP.
Players will each have one more turn to earn points for Shape Cards, and the winner is the player with the most VPs.
Components. This game is a bunch of Cloud Cards, 300 Shape Cards (plus extra blanks if you received the promos), VP kites, and a sand timer. The timer is normal sand timer quality, the cards used throughout the game are all fine quality, and the kites are cute red and gold tokens. The art style in the game is very light and airy and fits very well with the theme. Again, I have no problems with the components from 25th Century Games.
The gameplay is really fun, and turns (though 90 seconds long) seem like they go by so quickly that one could easily lose track of time playing. Having to work super fast because you are trying to score all the shapes on the card is harrying and stressful, or just a little less so if you decide to go big and detailed for just 3VP on one shape. Finding interesting uses for the basic shapes keeps all players active and on the edge of their seats. This truly is a wonderful party game (for when you can have game nights again).
Why didn’t I rate it higher then if I seem to like it so much? Well, for my typical game group, we tend to gravitate toward games with more meat on their bones. So I really do not see this getting played a ton on a regular rotation. That said, I am basing this on our game nights we had pre-COVID so things may certainly change once we are able to get together as a large group again. While I have played this with different player counts, I haven’t been able to get more than four to play. So I am keeping my rating open for now. I could see it improving down the road when I am able to play this with more people. I just really want to test its limit of 10 players and see how it goes. If it can handle 8+ and still be just as fun as with three or four, I will update this review and the graphic up top.
For now, Purple Phoenix Games gives this one a floaty 8 / 12. I do love being able to bust out my creative side and think more in geometric shapes. Every player I have played with seems to also enjoy it quite a bit. It is simple to teach and learn, plays quickly, and offers so many opportunities to laugh hysterically as players attempt to create common items or concepts from uncommon basic cloud shapes. If you are looking for something a little different to bring to game night or offer your friends and family, check out Cloud Control. And post some photos of your better creations. I want to see them!
