Search
Betsson Casino Games,Live Casino & Sports Betting
Games and Sports
App
The excitement never stops with the Betsson Casino Games, Live Casino & Sports Betting app. Live...
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Knives Out (2019) in Movies
Mar 6, 2020
Consistent Blast
In the Whodunit drama, detective Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig) has to uncover who killed famous author Harlan Thrombey (Christopher Plummer).
Acting: 10
I can’t speak enough about the amazing performances that made this movie come alive. I honestly don’t know where to start or who had the best chops because they were all so wonderful. Jamie Lee Curtis has always been one of my favorite actresses and her role didn’t disappoint here. She’s Linda Robinson who serves as somewhat of a matriarch in the family. She delivers her lines with such perfect timing and such fluid grace that it’s hard not to love her character. I also appreciated Jaeden Martell’s role in the movie. I can only imagine how hard it is as the youngest cast member when you have all these heavy-hitting stars beside you, but he definitely held his own by putting on a performance here that was even better than his role in It, in my opinion.
Beginning: 10
You are immediately thrown into this story from jump like you are springboarding into the sky. The intrigue is immediate which gave me an instant feeling that I was going to like this movie. It’s a perfect setup for what is to come.
Characters: 10
Nothing short of spectacular. Again, where do I start? I love that every single one of these characters in the movie have a rich story that’s connected to the deceased. There is also some kind of growth (whether negative or positive) with each character which is hard to juggle when you’re talking about managing runtime as well as screentime. I could pinpoint one specific role, but I loved each and every single one of them. That’s not a very common thing to say.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Director Rian Johnson really hits home on the visuals with an interesting blend of vivid colors and bleak imagery. I have a great appreciation with how the movie was ultimately cut. It’s a film that doesn’t rush, but takes its time, really capturing special dramatic moments. It almost feels like a Wes Anderson meets Stephen King type of cinematic adventure.
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 10
From shock value to mystery, Knives Out keeps you on your toes start to finish. It’s funny, it’s smart, and, most importantly, it’s original. This kind of movie has been done dozens of times before and this one is, by far, the most unique of the bunch. It truly is in a class of its own.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 9
With a 130-minute runtime, it’s only natural that there would be a slip-up in pace here and there. Fortunately, the slowdowns are very brief and barely noticeable. I can only think of one or two moments where I thought, “They could’ve cut that.” The momentum is pretty incredible otherwise.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
Ends strongly, yet smoothly with a finite resolution. I found it funny that the ending was actually a subtle knife into the hearts of the antagonists. The conclusion is a beautiful whisper.
Overall: 99
Knives Out is hilarious yet touching at the same time. With an original storyline, consistent pace, and brilliant characters the movie succeeds on just about every level. It was both refreshing and unexpected to watch a movie this grand.
Acting: 10
I can’t speak enough about the amazing performances that made this movie come alive. I honestly don’t know where to start or who had the best chops because they were all so wonderful. Jamie Lee Curtis has always been one of my favorite actresses and her role didn’t disappoint here. She’s Linda Robinson who serves as somewhat of a matriarch in the family. She delivers her lines with such perfect timing and such fluid grace that it’s hard not to love her character. I also appreciated Jaeden Martell’s role in the movie. I can only imagine how hard it is as the youngest cast member when you have all these heavy-hitting stars beside you, but he definitely held his own by putting on a performance here that was even better than his role in It, in my opinion.
Beginning: 10
You are immediately thrown into this story from jump like you are springboarding into the sky. The intrigue is immediate which gave me an instant feeling that I was going to like this movie. It’s a perfect setup for what is to come.
Characters: 10
Nothing short of spectacular. Again, where do I start? I love that every single one of these characters in the movie have a rich story that’s connected to the deceased. There is also some kind of growth (whether negative or positive) with each character which is hard to juggle when you’re talking about managing runtime as well as screentime. I could pinpoint one specific role, but I loved each and every single one of them. That’s not a very common thing to say.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Director Rian Johnson really hits home on the visuals with an interesting blend of vivid colors and bleak imagery. I have a great appreciation with how the movie was ultimately cut. It’s a film that doesn’t rush, but takes its time, really capturing special dramatic moments. It almost feels like a Wes Anderson meets Stephen King type of cinematic adventure.
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 10
From shock value to mystery, Knives Out keeps you on your toes start to finish. It’s funny, it’s smart, and, most importantly, it’s original. This kind of movie has been done dozens of times before and this one is, by far, the most unique of the bunch. It truly is in a class of its own.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 9
With a 130-minute runtime, it’s only natural that there would be a slip-up in pace here and there. Fortunately, the slowdowns are very brief and barely noticeable. I can only think of one or two moments where I thought, “They could’ve cut that.” The momentum is pretty incredible otherwise.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
Ends strongly, yet smoothly with a finite resolution. I found it funny that the ending was actually a subtle knife into the hearts of the antagonists. The conclusion is a beautiful whisper.
Overall: 99
Knives Out is hilarious yet touching at the same time. With an original storyline, consistent pace, and brilliant characters the movie succeeds on just about every level. It was both refreshing and unexpected to watch a movie this grand.
edjing Mix - dj app
Games and Music
6.3
Rate It
App
Designed in partnership with pro DJs, edjing Mix transforms your iPhone or iPad into a real DJ setup...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Psycho (1960) in Movies
Oct 29, 2018
An all-time great performance by Anthony Perkins
I'm sure all of you have (at least) heard of the 1960 Alfred Hitchcock film, PSYCHO. And I'm sure most of you have seen (at least in part) the famous "shower scene". But when was the last time you really sat down and watched this film? It had been awhile for me and I walked away with the following impression:
PSYCHO is not all that scary, but it is suspenseful as heck with strong Direction by the "Master of Suspense" and very strong performances anchoring the front and back end of the film.
PSYCHO was billed when it came out as a "Janet Leigh Film". So, to give this review context, let's look at who Janet Leigh was at the time. Before shooting PSYCHO, Leigh was generally cast as the ingenue and/or love interest in mainstream fair such as LITTLE WOMEN, ANGELS IN THE OUTFIELD and HOUDINI (a modern "comp" to her might be someone like Anne Hathaway before she started doing "edgier" work). Leigh did show that there was more to her than just being an ingenue when she played the morally ambiguous wife of Charlton Heston's character in Orson Welles' TOUCH OF EVIL. This film (probably) gave Hitchcock the idea to cast Leigh in PSYCHO.
When 1960's audiences first saw Leigh on screen in PSYCHO, I'm sure that most of them were shocked for, instead of being the pure and wholesome ingenue and wife, she plays the entire first scene in a bra and slip. Her character, Marion Crane, is not morally ambiguous, she is morally corrupt - and when Leigh's character has a chance to act on her moral corruptness, she jumps at the chance. The rest of the first half of this film is Leigh trying to get away with her "crime". She is quite good in this part of the film and was nominated for an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress (deservedly so).
And then...Anthony Perkins shows up.
We are about 45 minutes into the 1 hour and 49 minute film when Perkins' Norman Bates first appears on screen and an interesting thing happened - I couldn't take my eyes off of him. I was enjoying Leigh's performance but instantly pushed her aside (and to the background) when Perkins shows up. Without giving plot away, let me say that there is much, much going behind Norman's eyes and the performance by Perkins strongly suggests this, without going over-the-top or being melodramatic. It is a perfect blend of actor, character and performance and I was shocked that he was not even NOMINATED for an Oscar (Peter Ustinov would win for SPARTACUS). Perkins performance is one of the all-time greats with one of the most interesting and unusual characters - and portrayals - of all time.
Much of the credit for Perkins' and Leigh's strong performances have to go to Director Hitchcock who was at the height of his Directing powers (and power). From the "get go", you can feel the Director's hand in this film, building suspense from scene to scene and shot to shot, first with Leigh's character and, later, with Perkins. Both characters are trying to get away with something and Hitchcock pulls his camera in close to make a point - from a distance all seems good, but when you get up close, you can tell that things are very bad, indeed.
The filming of the famous "shower scene" is well documented and is a Master Class in film and editing. It is worth the price of admission on it's own - as is a scene on a staircase with Private Detective Arbogast, played by Martin Balsam. Hitchcock chooses to heighten the realism in this scene on the staircase by going a more esoteric route (rather than traditional filming of the events) and, one can argue, it doesn't belong in this film. Until, that is, you think about it and then it makes great sense and absolutely, positively has to be in this film in that way.
Another aspect of this film that begs to be mentioned is the Film Score by the great Bernard Herrmann - Hitchcock's regular collaborator. The music in this film punctuates the action on the screen - from the persistent beat and pacing of the opening credits music - driving the audience forward into the action - that does not let go, reaching it's peak and crescendo in the shower scene and then floating down gently like an animal catching it's breath after great activity.
Does the entire film hold up almost 60 years later? Almost...but not quite. Most annoying to me was the "wrap-up" scene at the end where a character spells out everything for the audience. As if we are not smart enough to "get it" - and perhaps the audiences in 1960 weren't.
But that is a quibble for a film that is a classic and is one that, if you have not seen (or seen for awhile), begs to be seen. Check out this film, not for the scares, but rather, the suspense that is generated by Hitchcock and his performers throughout. A GREAT entree into the world of Alfred Hitchcock films.
Letter Grade: A
9 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
PSYCHO is not all that scary, but it is suspenseful as heck with strong Direction by the "Master of Suspense" and very strong performances anchoring the front and back end of the film.
PSYCHO was billed when it came out as a "Janet Leigh Film". So, to give this review context, let's look at who Janet Leigh was at the time. Before shooting PSYCHO, Leigh was generally cast as the ingenue and/or love interest in mainstream fair such as LITTLE WOMEN, ANGELS IN THE OUTFIELD and HOUDINI (a modern "comp" to her might be someone like Anne Hathaway before she started doing "edgier" work). Leigh did show that there was more to her than just being an ingenue when she played the morally ambiguous wife of Charlton Heston's character in Orson Welles' TOUCH OF EVIL. This film (probably) gave Hitchcock the idea to cast Leigh in PSYCHO.
When 1960's audiences first saw Leigh on screen in PSYCHO, I'm sure that most of them were shocked for, instead of being the pure and wholesome ingenue and wife, she plays the entire first scene in a bra and slip. Her character, Marion Crane, is not morally ambiguous, she is morally corrupt - and when Leigh's character has a chance to act on her moral corruptness, she jumps at the chance. The rest of the first half of this film is Leigh trying to get away with her "crime". She is quite good in this part of the film and was nominated for an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress (deservedly so).
And then...Anthony Perkins shows up.
We are about 45 minutes into the 1 hour and 49 minute film when Perkins' Norman Bates first appears on screen and an interesting thing happened - I couldn't take my eyes off of him. I was enjoying Leigh's performance but instantly pushed her aside (and to the background) when Perkins shows up. Without giving plot away, let me say that there is much, much going behind Norman's eyes and the performance by Perkins strongly suggests this, without going over-the-top or being melodramatic. It is a perfect blend of actor, character and performance and I was shocked that he was not even NOMINATED for an Oscar (Peter Ustinov would win for SPARTACUS). Perkins performance is one of the all-time greats with one of the most interesting and unusual characters - and portrayals - of all time.
Much of the credit for Perkins' and Leigh's strong performances have to go to Director Hitchcock who was at the height of his Directing powers (and power). From the "get go", you can feel the Director's hand in this film, building suspense from scene to scene and shot to shot, first with Leigh's character and, later, with Perkins. Both characters are trying to get away with something and Hitchcock pulls his camera in close to make a point - from a distance all seems good, but when you get up close, you can tell that things are very bad, indeed.
The filming of the famous "shower scene" is well documented and is a Master Class in film and editing. It is worth the price of admission on it's own - as is a scene on a staircase with Private Detective Arbogast, played by Martin Balsam. Hitchcock chooses to heighten the realism in this scene on the staircase by going a more esoteric route (rather than traditional filming of the events) and, one can argue, it doesn't belong in this film. Until, that is, you think about it and then it makes great sense and absolutely, positively has to be in this film in that way.
Another aspect of this film that begs to be mentioned is the Film Score by the great Bernard Herrmann - Hitchcock's regular collaborator. The music in this film punctuates the action on the screen - from the persistent beat and pacing of the opening credits music - driving the audience forward into the action - that does not let go, reaching it's peak and crescendo in the shower scene and then floating down gently like an animal catching it's breath after great activity.
Does the entire film hold up almost 60 years later? Almost...but not quite. Most annoying to me was the "wrap-up" scene at the end where a character spells out everything for the audience. As if we are not smart enough to "get it" - and perhaps the audiences in 1960 weren't.
But that is a quibble for a film that is a classic and is one that, if you have not seen (or seen for awhile), begs to be seen. Check out this film, not for the scares, but rather, the suspense that is generated by Hitchcock and his performers throughout. A GREAT entree into the world of Alfred Hitchcock films.
Letter Grade: A
9 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Cytress in Tabletop Games
May 13, 2022
You ever play a game where you feel completely overwhelmed at first, but then slowly figure everything out just to fall in love with it? I really hadn’t… until Cytress. This thing is beastly, huge, and like 4 main games crammed into one experience and one box. I really wasn’t planning on letting on to my final thoughts so quickly, but here we are.
So like I mentioned, this game is an utter beast. I mean this lovingly, but for many different purposes. First, it will take some time to fully read the rulebook and understand everything mentioned within. Secondly, it will take way more time than you think to setup for the first game. Just stick with it – I promise it is worth it. Thirdly, players who are familiar with the game have a giant advantage over those who do not, so my immediate suggestion is to make a commitment to play with the same players as often as possible.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, and I do not know for sure if the final components will be any different from these shown. Also, it is not my intention to detail every rule in the game, as there are just too many. You are invited to download the rulebook, back the game through the Kickstarter campaign, or through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
Typically in my reviews I like to explain the setup and paraphrase the rules to give a great idea of how the game looks and plays. This time, however, I just don’t think I can paraphrase the rules well enough to do anything justice. That said, I will provide a link to the designer explaining the game and provide photos and my final thoughts at the end as normal.
I should get back to normal format now.
Components. Just as a reminder, we were sent a preview copy of the game. That said, we were sent a box just FULL of components. There are about a billion cards of different types and sizes, translucent tracking cubes, tunnel/tube pieces, standees, boards, chits, and even DeLorean-looking ships. Everything in my box was really great quality, especially for a prototype preview copy. It is difficult to tell from the Kickstarter campaign page what the final game will look like (with final components and all), but even if it came to backers the same quality as what I was forwarded, I imagine backers would be decently satisfied.
Okay, I know I did not explain the game at all, but if you watched the video, you will understand why. Essentially, players are trying to score the most points and get their team into the floating city of Stratos. They accomplish this by building tall tubes on the main board. Influence in each subsection (or neighborhood I guess) on the main board allows players to build these tubes, and completing missions for different crime bosses allows influence over the different neighborhoods. Throughout the game players are able to leverage their resources at several locations, and even increase effectiveness of their characters through different means of leveling up. It’s a great combination of mechanics and design choices that Laura would more than likely give it a chef’s kiss.
I will always have extreme fondness for games that allow me to level up my character. Years and years of playing RPGs both digitally and tabletopally have fed my love of character development. Cytress allows me to indulge that part of my gaming preferences and really create characters that are interesting for me to play. I mean, if I am playing a character in a game, I would prefer to have some say in how they are built. Immediately Cytress scores big points from me for this factor alone.
Playing a game on different levels is also a really big enjoyment factor for me. I mean this as being able to concentrate my turns to specific but different areas of the board/game, but also that incredible 3D Stratos board creation is simply divine. I really appreciate when designers think in that third dimension and are able to create meaningful design choices to incorporate it (like in Everdell), instead of just throwing a random element for coolness factor. Playing my cards and pushing my cubes to climb ever higher is not only something I enjoy in games, but also in life… if that can be a metaphor for life.
I really could write for hours on what I love about Cytress, but I don’t want to beleaguer the point. This is a game that, if it sounds even remotely interesting to you, should be backed immediately. The campaign ends May 24 so you have some time still, but don’t wait. You certainly don’t want it to slip away. I have had such a blast with Cytress with all the play counts, and I cannot decide which I like best, so I won’t decide – it is great with all play counts! Purple Phoenix Games enthusiastically recommends Cytress to any and all lovers of games. The theme is amazing, presentation is through the roof (almost literally), and the gameplay is surprisingly interesting from a first-time designer. You can thank me for enticing you to back it when you see me at the next convention by buying me a delicious beverage. Then we can play a game of Cytress and school some randos.
So like I mentioned, this game is an utter beast. I mean this lovingly, but for many different purposes. First, it will take some time to fully read the rulebook and understand everything mentioned within. Secondly, it will take way more time than you think to setup for the first game. Just stick with it – I promise it is worth it. Thirdly, players who are familiar with the game have a giant advantage over those who do not, so my immediate suggestion is to make a commitment to play with the same players as often as possible.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, and I do not know for sure if the final components will be any different from these shown. Also, it is not my intention to detail every rule in the game, as there are just too many. You are invited to download the rulebook, back the game through the Kickstarter campaign, or through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
Typically in my reviews I like to explain the setup and paraphrase the rules to give a great idea of how the game looks and plays. This time, however, I just don’t think I can paraphrase the rules well enough to do anything justice. That said, I will provide a link to the designer explaining the game and provide photos and my final thoughts at the end as normal.
I should get back to normal format now.
Components. Just as a reminder, we were sent a preview copy of the game. That said, we were sent a box just FULL of components. There are about a billion cards of different types and sizes, translucent tracking cubes, tunnel/tube pieces, standees, boards, chits, and even DeLorean-looking ships. Everything in my box was really great quality, especially for a prototype preview copy. It is difficult to tell from the Kickstarter campaign page what the final game will look like (with final components and all), but even if it came to backers the same quality as what I was forwarded, I imagine backers would be decently satisfied.
Okay, I know I did not explain the game at all, but if you watched the video, you will understand why. Essentially, players are trying to score the most points and get their team into the floating city of Stratos. They accomplish this by building tall tubes on the main board. Influence in each subsection (or neighborhood I guess) on the main board allows players to build these tubes, and completing missions for different crime bosses allows influence over the different neighborhoods. Throughout the game players are able to leverage their resources at several locations, and even increase effectiveness of their characters through different means of leveling up. It’s a great combination of mechanics and design choices that Laura would more than likely give it a chef’s kiss.
I will always have extreme fondness for games that allow me to level up my character. Years and years of playing RPGs both digitally and tabletopally have fed my love of character development. Cytress allows me to indulge that part of my gaming preferences and really create characters that are interesting for me to play. I mean, if I am playing a character in a game, I would prefer to have some say in how they are built. Immediately Cytress scores big points from me for this factor alone.
Playing a game on different levels is also a really big enjoyment factor for me. I mean this as being able to concentrate my turns to specific but different areas of the board/game, but also that incredible 3D Stratos board creation is simply divine. I really appreciate when designers think in that third dimension and are able to create meaningful design choices to incorporate it (like in Everdell), instead of just throwing a random element for coolness factor. Playing my cards and pushing my cubes to climb ever higher is not only something I enjoy in games, but also in life… if that can be a metaphor for life.
I really could write for hours on what I love about Cytress, but I don’t want to beleaguer the point. This is a game that, if it sounds even remotely interesting to you, should be backed immediately. The campaign ends May 24 so you have some time still, but don’t wait. You certainly don’t want it to slip away. I have had such a blast with Cytress with all the play counts, and I cannot decide which I like best, so I won’t decide – it is great with all play counts! Purple Phoenix Games enthusiastically recommends Cytress to any and all lovers of games. The theme is amazing, presentation is through the roof (almost literally), and the gameplay is surprisingly interesting from a first-time designer. You can thank me for enticing you to back it when you see me at the next convention by buying me a delicious beverage. Then we can play a game of Cytress and school some randos.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Valley of the Moon in Books
Dec 17, 2018
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</i>
For fans of <i>The Time Traveler’s Wife</i> (Niffenegger, 2003) this captivating story by Melanie Gideon is an alluring, spellbinding work of fiction about loving, being loved and finding somewhere you belong. With a touch of time travel in an otherwise typical reality,<i> Valley of the Moon </i>will excite, enrapture and touch readers’ hearts.
It is difficult to give a synoptic review without giving too much of the plot away. In short, the book contains the two lives of complete strangers who meet under extremely unlikely circumstances. It is 1975 and Lux Lysander is struggling to make ends meet as a single mother in San Francisco. Estranged from her parents, Benno has become her life; Lux would do anything for him. The other half of the story begins in 1906 in the Californian Sonoma Valley. Joseph has achieved his dream of creating an Edenic community where races and classes can live in harmony. Greengage is a self-sufficient society where everyone is seen as equal, however, something happens to shake up the peace – literally. A huge earthquake mysteriously leaves the valley unharmed but completely surrounded by a deadly fog. No one can leave and no one can enter, that is until Lux does.
Until the two characters’ lives collide, the narrative is fairly typical, but it quickly takes on a theme that most minds would attempt to debunk. Through a wall of fog, Lux can pass between 1975 and 1906, whereas Joseph and his friends can only stay in their own timeline. Lux begins to live a double life: one with her son Benno and one with the antiquated lifestyle of the Greengage community. Unfortunately, it is only possible to pass through the fog on a fall moon, and not necessarily every month.
Lux’s modern appearance and colloquialisms baffle the community but she soon finds herself a place amongst the inhabitants. For a while, Lux is able to keep her two lives separate, but one slip up causes her to temporarily lose the love and trust of her only son. Torn between her own flesh and blood and the only place she feels she belongs, Lux has to decide how far she would go for the people she loves.
One of the key themes of the novel is relationship. Although romance develops toward the latter stages of the story, the majority is focused on familial love and love between friends. Lux and Benno’s relationship is particularly important, especially when their love becomes strained by Lux’s secret dalliance with the past. The other significant theme is about finding oneself. Lux lives in an era where, despite developments in women’s equality, single mothers are still shunned. Conversely, in 1906 where historically things were worse for women, the egalitarian society feels much more like home.
Lux’s temerity is to be admired as she continues to visit the past despite it being beyond the bounds of possibility. More applaudable is her determination to win back her son as well as her distant parents.
Despite being set for the most part in the 1970s and 80s, <i>Valley of the Moon</i> has a futuristic air about it, with an element of fantasy and science fiction. It is almost a version of <i>The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe</i> (Lewis, 1950) but for adults, with more realistic themes. Melanie Gideon admits that she got the idea for the novel from the film <i>Brigadoon</i> (1954) in which the protagonist stumbles across a magical land in the woods. With similarities, Gideon has created her own version of this fairy-tale-like scenario.
Journeying through a range of emotions, <i>Valley of the Moon</i> is a story that engages readers from beginning to end. With ups and downs, the author explores the lives and personalities of the main characters, which develop beautifully over time. This book is not one likely to disappoint its readers.
For fans of <i>The Time Traveler’s Wife</i> (Niffenegger, 2003) this captivating story by Melanie Gideon is an alluring, spellbinding work of fiction about loving, being loved and finding somewhere you belong. With a touch of time travel in an otherwise typical reality,<i> Valley of the Moon </i>will excite, enrapture and touch readers’ hearts.
It is difficult to give a synoptic review without giving too much of the plot away. In short, the book contains the two lives of complete strangers who meet under extremely unlikely circumstances. It is 1975 and Lux Lysander is struggling to make ends meet as a single mother in San Francisco. Estranged from her parents, Benno has become her life; Lux would do anything for him. The other half of the story begins in 1906 in the Californian Sonoma Valley. Joseph has achieved his dream of creating an Edenic community where races and classes can live in harmony. Greengage is a self-sufficient society where everyone is seen as equal, however, something happens to shake up the peace – literally. A huge earthquake mysteriously leaves the valley unharmed but completely surrounded by a deadly fog. No one can leave and no one can enter, that is until Lux does.
Until the two characters’ lives collide, the narrative is fairly typical, but it quickly takes on a theme that most minds would attempt to debunk. Through a wall of fog, Lux can pass between 1975 and 1906, whereas Joseph and his friends can only stay in their own timeline. Lux begins to live a double life: one with her son Benno and one with the antiquated lifestyle of the Greengage community. Unfortunately, it is only possible to pass through the fog on a fall moon, and not necessarily every month.
Lux’s modern appearance and colloquialisms baffle the community but she soon finds herself a place amongst the inhabitants. For a while, Lux is able to keep her two lives separate, but one slip up causes her to temporarily lose the love and trust of her only son. Torn between her own flesh and blood and the only place she feels she belongs, Lux has to decide how far she would go for the people she loves.
One of the key themes of the novel is relationship. Although romance develops toward the latter stages of the story, the majority is focused on familial love and love between friends. Lux and Benno’s relationship is particularly important, especially when their love becomes strained by Lux’s secret dalliance with the past. The other significant theme is about finding oneself. Lux lives in an era where, despite developments in women’s equality, single mothers are still shunned. Conversely, in 1906 where historically things were worse for women, the egalitarian society feels much more like home.
Lux’s temerity is to be admired as she continues to visit the past despite it being beyond the bounds of possibility. More applaudable is her determination to win back her son as well as her distant parents.
Despite being set for the most part in the 1970s and 80s, <i>Valley of the Moon</i> has a futuristic air about it, with an element of fantasy and science fiction. It is almost a version of <i>The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe</i> (Lewis, 1950) but for adults, with more realistic themes. Melanie Gideon admits that she got the idea for the novel from the film <i>Brigadoon</i> (1954) in which the protagonist stumbles across a magical land in the woods. With similarities, Gideon has created her own version of this fairy-tale-like scenario.
Journeying through a range of emotions, <i>Valley of the Moon</i> is a story that engages readers from beginning to end. With ups and downs, the author explores the lives and personalities of the main characters, which develop beautifully over time. This book is not one likely to disappoint its readers.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Allied (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
There's a great film in here somewhere
Director Robert Zemeckis has some impressive film credits to his name. From cult classics like Back to the Future to last year’s nausea inducing The Walk, there hasn’t been a genre his skills haven’t graced over the last four decades.
His most recent effort, Allied, sees the veteran director tackle the war genre with a film that certainly has its moments, but just how good is this wartime romantic drama?
Max Vatan (Brad Pitt) and Marianne Beauséjour (Marion Cotillard) are World War II operatives who never reveal their true identities. After falling in love during a risky mission, they hope to leave all that double-dealing behind them and start new lives. Instead, suspicion and danger envelop their marriage as both husband and wife become pitted against each other in an escalating, potentially lethal test that has global consequences.
Allied is an assured piece of film-making that tackles the claustrophobia of war incredibly well, but considering the talent at both ends of the camera, it lacks depth, harmony and above all; a plot that remains coherent throughout.
Brad Pitt and Marion Cotillard are their usual dependable selves but they lack chemistry until the closing act and as a result, their relationship lacks believability, hampering what is in effect, a love story.
Elsewhere, the cinematography is too often blighted by poorly lit scenes that restrict the talents of Allied’s director. Robert Zemeckis is at his best embarking upon projects that leap off the screen with their vibrancy. Take Back to the Future and Forrest Gump as prime examples of this.
Nevertheless, the film’s final act almost makes up for these shortcomings and turns a plodding romantic drama into a tense, well-acted and above all interesting movie that has a great script; it’s just a shame the first hour lacks any punch.
When it comes to special effects, well, they’re used sparingly, with the upside of this being that they liven up the film nicely. The scenes of London during the blitz are harrowingly beautiful, with one sequence in particular being a standout throughout the entire running time.
Overall, Allied is a decent stab at constructing a meaningful wartime romantic drama, though looking to history should have perhaps sent alarm bells ringing; Pearl Harbour anyone. The story is intriguing most definitely, and it has some nice special effects, but the script it’s crafted around lacks depth until the final hour. It’s probably fair to say that this may slip under the radar when we look back at Robert Zemeckis’s illustrious career.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/11/26/theres-a-great-film-in-here-somewhere-allied-review/
His most recent effort, Allied, sees the veteran director tackle the war genre with a film that certainly has its moments, but just how good is this wartime romantic drama?
Max Vatan (Brad Pitt) and Marianne Beauséjour (Marion Cotillard) are World War II operatives who never reveal their true identities. After falling in love during a risky mission, they hope to leave all that double-dealing behind them and start new lives. Instead, suspicion and danger envelop their marriage as both husband and wife become pitted against each other in an escalating, potentially lethal test that has global consequences.
Allied is an assured piece of film-making that tackles the claustrophobia of war incredibly well, but considering the talent at both ends of the camera, it lacks depth, harmony and above all; a plot that remains coherent throughout.
Brad Pitt and Marion Cotillard are their usual dependable selves but they lack chemistry until the closing act and as a result, their relationship lacks believability, hampering what is in effect, a love story.
Elsewhere, the cinematography is too often blighted by poorly lit scenes that restrict the talents of Allied’s director. Robert Zemeckis is at his best embarking upon projects that leap off the screen with their vibrancy. Take Back to the Future and Forrest Gump as prime examples of this.
Nevertheless, the film’s final act almost makes up for these shortcomings and turns a plodding romantic drama into a tense, well-acted and above all interesting movie that has a great script; it’s just a shame the first hour lacks any punch.
When it comes to special effects, well, they’re used sparingly, with the upside of this being that they liven up the film nicely. The scenes of London during the blitz are harrowingly beautiful, with one sequence in particular being a standout throughout the entire running time.
Overall, Allied is a decent stab at constructing a meaningful wartime romantic drama, though looking to history should have perhaps sent alarm bells ringing; Pearl Harbour anyone. The story is intriguing most definitely, and it has some nice special effects, but the script it’s crafted around lacks depth until the final hour. It’s probably fair to say that this may slip under the radar when we look back at Robert Zemeckis’s illustrious career.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/11/26/theres-a-great-film-in-here-somewhere-allied-review/
Kyera (8 KP) rated A Crown of Wishes (The Star-Touched Queen, #2) in Books
Feb 1, 2018
A Crown of Wishes is a companion novel to Roshani Chokshis A Star-Touched Queen, but neither needs to be read to enjoy the other. They can either be read in conjunction or be read as a stand-alone without the story being affected significantly in either case. That being said, A Crown of Wishes takes place later in time than A Star-Touched Queen and if you plan to read both perhaps reading them in chronological order would be best. I personally enjoyed A Crown of Wishes more than A Star-Touched Queen. The writing was equally lyrical and beautiful, but I found it to be more engaging than its predecessor.
I found Gauri and Vikram to be more likable main characters than Maya and Raja, from the other book. Gauri is tough, she had to be to grow up with the cruel Skanda as her brother and King of Bharata. She trained with warriors and keeps her emotions tucked away. Vikram is the adopted son of the King of Ujijian, but despite his mind, his lack of blood relation to the monarch will force him to be a puppet king. He wishes more than anything to be taken seriously and rule his people fairly, not via a corrupt cabinet.
Vikram was definitely my favourite character in this book, he was witty and cheerfully went out of his way to get under Gauris skin. The relationship and interactions between the two of them went from mutual disdain to begrudging respect authentically. It was nice to see them support one another, even if they didnt have any reason to beyond being partners for the Tournament of Wishes.
The story was more engaging than its predecessor, continuing to build the magical Otherworld but including scenes with faster pacing and action. The Tournament of Wishes was intriguing, as each contestants role and journey were different. No two people experienced the same trials or puzzled through the same clues. It was interesting to attempt to discern what each clue referred to before Vikram inevitably worked it out.
The beautiful prose and flowery writing definitely lent itself to the story. It helped to build a magical and unusual world for readers to slip into. Each vibrant fruit, eerie tree, and terrifying creature come to life in vivid detail. As long as you dont mind words that you really must pay attention to in order to absorb, I believe you will enjoy this book. It might not be your style if you tend to skim and breeze through stories, as this does require a degree of concentration to appreciate. Overall, I would recommend this book to fans of Renee Ahdiehs or Laini Taylors style of writing.
I found Gauri and Vikram to be more likable main characters than Maya and Raja, from the other book. Gauri is tough, she had to be to grow up with the cruel Skanda as her brother and King of Bharata. She trained with warriors and keeps her emotions tucked away. Vikram is the adopted son of the King of Ujijian, but despite his mind, his lack of blood relation to the monarch will force him to be a puppet king. He wishes more than anything to be taken seriously and rule his people fairly, not via a corrupt cabinet.
Vikram was definitely my favourite character in this book, he was witty and cheerfully went out of his way to get under Gauris skin. The relationship and interactions between the two of them went from mutual disdain to begrudging respect authentically. It was nice to see them support one another, even if they didnt have any reason to beyond being partners for the Tournament of Wishes.
The story was more engaging than its predecessor, continuing to build the magical Otherworld but including scenes with faster pacing and action. The Tournament of Wishes was intriguing, as each contestants role and journey were different. No two people experienced the same trials or puzzled through the same clues. It was interesting to attempt to discern what each clue referred to before Vikram inevitably worked it out.
The beautiful prose and flowery writing definitely lent itself to the story. It helped to build a magical and unusual world for readers to slip into. Each vibrant fruit, eerie tree, and terrifying creature come to life in vivid detail. As long as you dont mind words that you really must pay attention to in order to absorb, I believe you will enjoy this book. It might not be your style if you tend to skim and breeze through stories, as this does require a degree of concentration to appreciate. Overall, I would recommend this book to fans of Renee Ahdiehs or Laini Taylors style of writing.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Wedding Crashers (2005) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
In the tricky world of arbitration, John Beckwith (Owen Wilson) and Jeremy Grey (Vince Vaughn), are two of the best in their field. Day after day, John and Jeremy negotiate divorce settlements between many bitter and hostile clients in an attempt to avoid long and drawn out court cases.
As good as John and Jeremy are at mediation, this pales to their real talents as professional wedding crashers. John and Jeremy revel in their ability to crash weddings and in the process scoring all the food, drink and women they can handle as they move from one event to another with ease.
The actions of the two are based on a strict set of rules for crashing weddings that was passed down to Jeremy and have lead to many moments of merriment and debauchery for the duo. The rules are so detailed that everything from cover stories, ways to gain sympathy, and clues for gaining points with the guests are included.
After a very successful wedding season, John and Jeremy are set to take it easy for a while to recover from the barrage of seduction and partying they have subjected themselves to.
Alas, things do not go as planned as Jeremy convinces John to help him crash the wedding event of the year that will have a prominent political figure in attendance. Despite much reluctance, John goes along an in no time, the duo are at the social event of the year.
Eager to slip into their seduction modes, John and Jeremy have concocted their alibis and set their sites a pair of young ladies, Claire and Gloria Cleary (Rachael McAdams) and (Isla fisher). The two are the daughters of rising political figure Secretary Claire (Christopher Walken), who many think may be on the fast track to the Oval Office.
Things take a turn when John agrees to accompany Claire to an island retreat. Seeing the danger and eager to get away from the bizarre Gloria, Jeremy attempts to extricate himself from the situation.
Of course there would not be much of a film if this were to happen, and before long, John and Jeremy are surrounded by vicious boyfriends, over amorous suitors, and enough mayhem to keep the audience laughing.
The laughs come frequently and each situation becomes even more outrageous than the one that preceded it making for some of the most hilarious moments ever committed to film.
Sure the plot is very thing, but Wilson and Vaughn are enjoyable and if you do not mind some crude humor, you are likely to find yourself laughing along at one of the most pleasant comedic surprises of the year.
As good as John and Jeremy are at mediation, this pales to their real talents as professional wedding crashers. John and Jeremy revel in their ability to crash weddings and in the process scoring all the food, drink and women they can handle as they move from one event to another with ease.
The actions of the two are based on a strict set of rules for crashing weddings that was passed down to Jeremy and have lead to many moments of merriment and debauchery for the duo. The rules are so detailed that everything from cover stories, ways to gain sympathy, and clues for gaining points with the guests are included.
After a very successful wedding season, John and Jeremy are set to take it easy for a while to recover from the barrage of seduction and partying they have subjected themselves to.
Alas, things do not go as planned as Jeremy convinces John to help him crash the wedding event of the year that will have a prominent political figure in attendance. Despite much reluctance, John goes along an in no time, the duo are at the social event of the year.
Eager to slip into their seduction modes, John and Jeremy have concocted their alibis and set their sites a pair of young ladies, Claire and Gloria Cleary (Rachael McAdams) and (Isla fisher). The two are the daughters of rising political figure Secretary Claire (Christopher Walken), who many think may be on the fast track to the Oval Office.
Things take a turn when John agrees to accompany Claire to an island retreat. Seeing the danger and eager to get away from the bizarre Gloria, Jeremy attempts to extricate himself from the situation.
Of course there would not be much of a film if this were to happen, and before long, John and Jeremy are surrounded by vicious boyfriends, over amorous suitors, and enough mayhem to keep the audience laughing.
The laughs come frequently and each situation becomes even more outrageous than the one that preceded it making for some of the most hilarious moments ever committed to film.
Sure the plot is very thing, but Wilson and Vaughn are enjoyable and if you do not mind some crude humor, you are likely to find yourself laughing along at one of the most pleasant comedic surprises of the year.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Mission: Impossible - Fallout (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) is back and on a mission to stop a terrorist group, known as The Apostles, from acquiring three uranium cores that they will use to create nuclear devices. Hunt and his Impossible Mission Force (IMF) team (Simon Pegg and Ving Rhames) set up a black market deal to purchase the cores. But during the buy Luther (Rhames) is taken hostage. In a rescue attempt Hunt and Benji (Pegg) let the cores slip into the hands of The Apostles. Due to Hunt’s choice to save his team over protecting the cores has put the world in danger of nuclear attack. Luckily, the head of the IMF, Alan Hunley (Alec Baldwin, has received intelligence that an arms dealer known as the White Widow (Vanessa Kirby) is looking to broker a deal for the cores. The only problem is the price is not money but the breaking out of the former IMF nemesis and anarchist Solomon Lane (Sean Harris). Hunt, eager for redemption, agrees to once again track down the cores. But the CIA want to make sure that this time the job is done right, so Director Erica Sloan (Angela Bassett) demands her top cleaner August Walker (Henry Cavill) accompany. With the help of the CIA they will try and break Lane out of prison and save the world from a catastrophic nuclear attack.
This film, the sixth installment of the Mission: Impossible film franchise, is a true action packed summer blockbuster. Written and directed by Christopher McQuarrie (Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation, Jack Reacher) this film has the action and suspense that viewers have come to expect from these films. Cruise, who famously does all of his own stunts, puts in a stellar performance, as does the rest of the cast. Rebecca Ferguson, as assassin and Hunt love interest Ilsa Faust, has good on screen chemistry with Cruise. The overall vision of the film is big and everything is well shot. One example is seamlessly shot motorcycle/car chase through Paris streets, with narrow misses, extreme speeds and iconic scenery. Along with all of the action you get the sometimes corny dialog that you can expect. As long as you expect it, and maybe embrace it, you will definitely enjoy the film. At 2 hours and 27 minutes the runtime might seem long but the pace is really good so it does not feel that long.
This is the best action film of the summer I have seen so far. The attention to detail in the action scenes really shows through. The twists and turns of the story keep you as engaged as the jaw dropping stunts. Maybe not the film for everyone but a great action/spy movie. For me it is definitely a film that should be seen in theaters, maybe more than once.
This film, the sixth installment of the Mission: Impossible film franchise, is a true action packed summer blockbuster. Written and directed by Christopher McQuarrie (Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation, Jack Reacher) this film has the action and suspense that viewers have come to expect from these films. Cruise, who famously does all of his own stunts, puts in a stellar performance, as does the rest of the cast. Rebecca Ferguson, as assassin and Hunt love interest Ilsa Faust, has good on screen chemistry with Cruise. The overall vision of the film is big and everything is well shot. One example is seamlessly shot motorcycle/car chase through Paris streets, with narrow misses, extreme speeds and iconic scenery. Along with all of the action you get the sometimes corny dialog that you can expect. As long as you expect it, and maybe embrace it, you will definitely enjoy the film. At 2 hours and 27 minutes the runtime might seem long but the pace is really good so it does not feel that long.
This is the best action film of the summer I have seen so far. The attention to detail in the action scenes really shows through. The twists and turns of the story keep you as engaged as the jaw dropping stunts. Maybe not the film for everyone but a great action/spy movie. For me it is definitely a film that should be seen in theaters, maybe more than once.