Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Supernova (2020) in Movies
Jun 24, 2021
Tucci and Firth - an acting masterclass (1 more)
A slow and very moving study of a difficult subject
“You’re not supposed to mourn someone before they die.”
Sam (Colin Firth) is a famous concert pianist. Tusker (Stanley Tucci) a famous author. But Tusker has Alzheimer's, and is starting to go downhill. The loving couple take their battered motorhome on a last great adventure round England's Lake District, taking in a visit with Sam's sister Lil while there.
Positives:
- "Love is a many splendored thing" as the song goes, and seldom has it been expressed so poignantly as in "Supernova". Harry Macqueen's script builds up a truly loving relationship between the two men. Any homophobes should be strapped into chairs and forced to watch this movie: perhaps that would cause some semblance of understanding to emerge in their petrified brains. (Who am I kidding?)
- Supporting the story brilliantly are Colin Firth and Stanley Tucci. Tucci has been in so many great movies over the years that it's no surprise to me that his acting moved me to tears. But when I think of Colin Firth (Hampshire's own! He went to my daughter's college!) my mind tends to skip over his dramatic roles in films like "The King's Speech" and "A Single Man". Instead, I tend to dwell on his lighter, fluffier roles, like "Bridget Jones" and "Mamma Mia". As such, I forget what a truly great actor he is. And here, he hits it out of the park! With all the Covid release confusion, I'm not sure whether "Supernova" is up for awards next year, or whether it has been cruelly overlooked from last year's awards. I truly hope it's the former, since both men are at the peak of their craft here.
- The cinematography by Dick Pope is beautiful. To be fair, you could put a Super 8 camera in the Lake District on a sunny day and it would look great. But the camera work here makes it look its best.
Negatives:
- Not really a negative for me, but it's about as far away from an "action film" as you can get. "Fast and Furious 9" is showing next door! This is an extremely slow, character-led piece that won't be for everyone.
- I wasn't totally convinced by the symptoms shown. Early in the film, Tusker wanders off in a daze, but seems comparatively compos mentis for most of the rest of the film. Perhaps this is just my ignorance of the randomness and unpredictability of the disease (anyone in the know - please enlighten me).
Summary Thoughts on "Supernova": As is often the way with cinema, genre films can come along like London buses. First this month we had Anthony Hopkin's Oscar-winning turn as a dementia sufferer in "The Father", and now "Supernova" appears. This takes a different approach to the subject. Not as flashy or clever. But no less effective at portraying the tragedy that this wretched disease wreaks with relationships, often making them a living hell.
Having straight actors play gay characters will no doubt provoke the usual outcry from the cancel culture. But if it's good acting - and it is a masterclass from the two leads in my book - such that you BELIEVE the story, then that's the whole point of the craft.
Like "The Father", this is a tough watch. I felt pretty well emotionally wrung-out by the end of it. But, it was well worth the wait in my book.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the "One Mann's Movies" review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/06/24/supernova-youre-not-supposed-to-mourn-someone-before-they-die/. Thanks.)
Positives:
- "Love is a many splendored thing" as the song goes, and seldom has it been expressed so poignantly as in "Supernova". Harry Macqueen's script builds up a truly loving relationship between the two men. Any homophobes should be strapped into chairs and forced to watch this movie: perhaps that would cause some semblance of understanding to emerge in their petrified brains. (Who am I kidding?)
- Supporting the story brilliantly are Colin Firth and Stanley Tucci. Tucci has been in so many great movies over the years that it's no surprise to me that his acting moved me to tears. But when I think of Colin Firth (Hampshire's own! He went to my daughter's college!) my mind tends to skip over his dramatic roles in films like "The King's Speech" and "A Single Man". Instead, I tend to dwell on his lighter, fluffier roles, like "Bridget Jones" and "Mamma Mia". As such, I forget what a truly great actor he is. And here, he hits it out of the park! With all the Covid release confusion, I'm not sure whether "Supernova" is up for awards next year, or whether it has been cruelly overlooked from last year's awards. I truly hope it's the former, since both men are at the peak of their craft here.
- The cinematography by Dick Pope is beautiful. To be fair, you could put a Super 8 camera in the Lake District on a sunny day and it would look great. But the camera work here makes it look its best.
Negatives:
- Not really a negative for me, but it's about as far away from an "action film" as you can get. "Fast and Furious 9" is showing next door! This is an extremely slow, character-led piece that won't be for everyone.
- I wasn't totally convinced by the symptoms shown. Early in the film, Tusker wanders off in a daze, but seems comparatively compos mentis for most of the rest of the film. Perhaps this is just my ignorance of the randomness and unpredictability of the disease (anyone in the know - please enlighten me).
Summary Thoughts on "Supernova": As is often the way with cinema, genre films can come along like London buses. First this month we had Anthony Hopkin's Oscar-winning turn as a dementia sufferer in "The Father", and now "Supernova" appears. This takes a different approach to the subject. Not as flashy or clever. But no less effective at portraying the tragedy that this wretched disease wreaks with relationships, often making them a living hell.
Having straight actors play gay characters will no doubt provoke the usual outcry from the cancel culture. But if it's good acting - and it is a masterclass from the two leads in my book - such that you BELIEVE the story, then that's the whole point of the craft.
Like "The Father", this is a tough watch. I felt pretty well emotionally wrung-out by the end of it. But, it was well worth the wait in my book.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the "One Mann's Movies" review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/06/24/supernova-youre-not-supposed-to-mourn-someone-before-they-die/. Thanks.)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Endless (2020) in Movies
Oct 19, 2020
Alexandra Shipp's acting is OK (1 more)
The British Columbian scenary
A Ghost "Ditto" - but without the star quality
Riley (Alexandra Shipp) and Chris (Nicholas Hamilton) are teenage lovers about to be torn apart... but not in the way you think. Riley is about to turn her back on her talent for comic book art to follow her parent's wishes: to study law on the other side of the country in Georgetown. Chris is from the other side of the tracks - aren't they always in these films? - living in a one-parent family with his mother Lee (Bond-girl Famke Janssen).
But fate is about to push them even further apart as - with an advert as to why drinking, texting and driving don't mix - Chris is killed in a car crash. Tragedy - when the feeling's gone and you can't go on! Can their love for each other reach beyond death itself, and if so, at what cost?
We've been here before of course with the Demi Moore / Patrick Swayze hit "Ghost" from 1990. That was an Oscar winner (Best Supporting Actress for Whoopi Goldberg and screenplay by Bruce Joel Rubin). Will "Endless" - a teen-love version - match this potential? Unfortunately, without a potter's wheel in sight, it doesn't stand a ghost of a chance.
It feels like it's not for the want of trying from the five youngsters* at the heart of the action, with Eddie Ramos and Zoë Belkin playing the lover's best friends and DeRon Horton being the limbo-trapped ghost-guide equivalent to the subway dropout from "Ghost". (* I say "youngsters", but most seem to be in their late twenties!) )
All seem to invest their energy into the project. Unfortunately, with the exception of Alexandra Shipp, the energy is not matched with great acting talent. Poor Nicholas Hamilton (the bully from "It") seems to have a particularly limited range, with his resting expression being "gormless".
None of the adult actors fair much better, with Famke Janssen being particularly unconvincing.
As I said, the exception here is Alexandra Shipp, who had a supporting role in "Love, Simon" and a more centre-stage role as "Storm" in the otherwise disappointing "X-Men: Dark Phoenix". Here she remains eminently watchable, but is hog-bound by a seriously dodgy script.
If you read my bob-the-movie-man blog regularly, you will know I reach for my flame-thrower at the appearance of voiceovers. And the start of this movie made me shudder with fear as a "tell, not show" approach was followed. It's a mild blessing that the script - by Andre Case and O'Neil Sharma - used this device purely as a slightly lazy way to set the scene and the voiceover didn't rear its ugly head again.
However, on a broader basis, the screenplay doesn't excite - predictability is its middle name - and it contains lines of dialogue that are absolute stinkers. There are whole sections of the movie that defy belief, with a police investigation in particular appearing completely incompetent. The result is that it adds neither drama or tension.
Through my career in IT I've had the great fortune to travel to a number of small cities in Canada, and all have appealed with their consistently picturesque qualities and consistently quirky individuals! Here we have the cities of Kelowna and Vernon in British Columbia playing California, and the drone cinematography (by Frank Borin and Mark Dobrescu) displays the dramatic lake-filled scenery to the full.
With so many cookie-cutter movies out there, it feels like the non-horror "Ghost" recipe (or "Heaven Can Wait" / "It's a Wonderful Life" / "A Matter of Life and Death" / delete per your preference) is well overdue for a makeover. Unfortunately, director Scott Speer's attempt just isn't good enough to fill the void. And that's a shame.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the bob-the-movie-man review here - https://rb.gy/mzq6jx . Thanks.)
But fate is about to push them even further apart as - with an advert as to why drinking, texting and driving don't mix - Chris is killed in a car crash. Tragedy - when the feeling's gone and you can't go on! Can their love for each other reach beyond death itself, and if so, at what cost?
We've been here before of course with the Demi Moore / Patrick Swayze hit "Ghost" from 1990. That was an Oscar winner (Best Supporting Actress for Whoopi Goldberg and screenplay by Bruce Joel Rubin). Will "Endless" - a teen-love version - match this potential? Unfortunately, without a potter's wheel in sight, it doesn't stand a ghost of a chance.
It feels like it's not for the want of trying from the five youngsters* at the heart of the action, with Eddie Ramos and Zoë Belkin playing the lover's best friends and DeRon Horton being the limbo-trapped ghost-guide equivalent to the subway dropout from "Ghost". (* I say "youngsters", but most seem to be in their late twenties!) )
All seem to invest their energy into the project. Unfortunately, with the exception of Alexandra Shipp, the energy is not matched with great acting talent. Poor Nicholas Hamilton (the bully from "It") seems to have a particularly limited range, with his resting expression being "gormless".
None of the adult actors fair much better, with Famke Janssen being particularly unconvincing.
As I said, the exception here is Alexandra Shipp, who had a supporting role in "Love, Simon" and a more centre-stage role as "Storm" in the otherwise disappointing "X-Men: Dark Phoenix". Here she remains eminently watchable, but is hog-bound by a seriously dodgy script.
If you read my bob-the-movie-man blog regularly, you will know I reach for my flame-thrower at the appearance of voiceovers. And the start of this movie made me shudder with fear as a "tell, not show" approach was followed. It's a mild blessing that the script - by Andre Case and O'Neil Sharma - used this device purely as a slightly lazy way to set the scene and the voiceover didn't rear its ugly head again.
However, on a broader basis, the screenplay doesn't excite - predictability is its middle name - and it contains lines of dialogue that are absolute stinkers. There are whole sections of the movie that defy belief, with a police investigation in particular appearing completely incompetent. The result is that it adds neither drama or tension.
Through my career in IT I've had the great fortune to travel to a number of small cities in Canada, and all have appealed with their consistently picturesque qualities and consistently quirky individuals! Here we have the cities of Kelowna and Vernon in British Columbia playing California, and the drone cinematography (by Frank Borin and Mark Dobrescu) displays the dramatic lake-filled scenery to the full.
With so many cookie-cutter movies out there, it feels like the non-horror "Ghost" recipe (or "Heaven Can Wait" / "It's a Wonderful Life" / "A Matter of Life and Death" / delete per your preference) is well overdue for a makeover. Unfortunately, director Scott Speer's attempt just isn't good enough to fill the void. And that's a shame.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the bob-the-movie-man review here - https://rb.gy/mzq6jx . Thanks.)
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Peterloo (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
Peterloo was a daunting prospect even before getting into the screen. 154 minutes... that's 2 hours and 34 minutes of a very bleak piece of history.
If you've read some of my comments before about real-life event films you'll know that I struggle with the fact that it feels like I'm judging the subject rather than the film itself. Peterloo is no exception.
There is a truly impressive cast bringing this story to life. Lots of faces you'll recognise from one thing or another. I did have to stop myself from exclaiming out loud "Jack Boswell!" when he popped up and that certainly wasn't the only pointing at the screen moment. Performances all round were very good, whether they be someone to sympathise with, or someone to loathe.
You use the word massacre in the description of a film and you know it isn't going to be an easy watch. Unfortunately it was a difficult watch for a completely different reason. This film didn't seem accessible at all. You have to applaud them for wanting to bring a whole story to the screen without cutting lots of pieces out. The timeline seems to generally flow well and it did feel like we were getting the whole journey from start to finish.
Here's where I have a major problem.
The sheer length of this film. While I don't doubt that all the bits were important it honestly felt very repetitive. That coupled with the language made it a very dry watch. I nearly gave up and left. The couple behind me did. Which was actually a godsend because once they did I didn't feel so bad about having to move about to stop myself dozing off. This could easily have been 45 minutes shorter than it was, sacrificing something from the film would have given it a quicker pace to draw you.
What upset me most about this is that the powerful ending that was done so well felt entirely swamped by the long and drawn out beginning. When the scene unfolds you know what's coming but there's no way to prepare yourself for what they've created on the screen. In that moment I was thankful that I'd managed to stick it out just to get to that point. It was done in such a way that you completely understood what was happening and it came with an emotion that brought this tragedy shockingly to life.
Sadly that moment was stolen by this film's villain, time. This scene just kept going. There was a moment where it felt like it had come to a close... and yet it went on. I wasn't entirely surprised with that after seeing the beginning of the film, but I was disappointed. To add insult to injury we were given a brief dialogue at the end that felt very much like an after thought. And with that, I was done.
This is yet another film I've seen recently that felt like it would have been more suited to a multi episode TV series. It had very clear parts and I can't help but think that it would have benefited from being broken up into more manageable sections.
What you should do
Unless you're a massive history enthusiast I can't recommend this one to you. I really feel like your time would be better spent researching the story on the internet or finding a book in the library about it.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
It's difficult to want for anything in this period of history, but there's no denying that I would love to give that printer a go.
If you've read some of my comments before about real-life event films you'll know that I struggle with the fact that it feels like I'm judging the subject rather than the film itself. Peterloo is no exception.
There is a truly impressive cast bringing this story to life. Lots of faces you'll recognise from one thing or another. I did have to stop myself from exclaiming out loud "Jack Boswell!" when he popped up and that certainly wasn't the only pointing at the screen moment. Performances all round were very good, whether they be someone to sympathise with, or someone to loathe.
You use the word massacre in the description of a film and you know it isn't going to be an easy watch. Unfortunately it was a difficult watch for a completely different reason. This film didn't seem accessible at all. You have to applaud them for wanting to bring a whole story to the screen without cutting lots of pieces out. The timeline seems to generally flow well and it did feel like we were getting the whole journey from start to finish.
Here's where I have a major problem.
The sheer length of this film. While I don't doubt that all the bits were important it honestly felt very repetitive. That coupled with the language made it a very dry watch. I nearly gave up and left. The couple behind me did. Which was actually a godsend because once they did I didn't feel so bad about having to move about to stop myself dozing off. This could easily have been 45 minutes shorter than it was, sacrificing something from the film would have given it a quicker pace to draw you.
What upset me most about this is that the powerful ending that was done so well felt entirely swamped by the long and drawn out beginning. When the scene unfolds you know what's coming but there's no way to prepare yourself for what they've created on the screen. In that moment I was thankful that I'd managed to stick it out just to get to that point. It was done in such a way that you completely understood what was happening and it came with an emotion that brought this tragedy shockingly to life.
Sadly that moment was stolen by this film's villain, time. This scene just kept going. There was a moment where it felt like it had come to a close... and yet it went on. I wasn't entirely surprised with that after seeing the beginning of the film, but I was disappointed. To add insult to injury we were given a brief dialogue at the end that felt very much like an after thought. And with that, I was done.
This is yet another film I've seen recently that felt like it would have been more suited to a multi episode TV series. It had very clear parts and I can't help but think that it would have benefited from being broken up into more manageable sections.
What you should do
Unless you're a massive history enthusiast I can't recommend this one to you. I really feel like your time would be better spent researching the story on the internet or finding a book in the library about it.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
It's difficult to want for anything in this period of history, but there's no denying that I would love to give that printer a go.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Reminiscence (2021) in Movies
Aug 24, 2021
Needed a better Director - like one of the Nolan boys
Christopher Nolan is one of the greatest Directors of our time usually making films that have an attribute of time in them. His brother, Jonathan Nolan, has had a hand in most of his brother’s terrific works as well as the creative force behind such “trippy” TV series as PERSON OF INTEREST and the recent revival of WESTWORLD. In both of these TV Series, Jonathan Nolan was assisted by his wife, Lisa Joy.
Lisa Joy has written and directed her own “trippy, play with time” film, REMINISCENCE that has quite a few of the hallmarks of a Christopher (or Jonathan) Nolan film - but it also has one very unsettling aspect to it - it plays like a twice over copy of something else.
REMINISCENCE is a classic neo-noir with our hero being smitten by the femme fatale which draws him into her world, where murder, criminal activities and low-lifes run rampant all with a downbeat tone.
This sounds like a terrific premise for a Christopher Nolan film, unfortunately, in the hands of Lisa Joy, it is like watching a local community theater production of a Broadway musical.
The first 1/3 of this film is one long, laborious setup for the tragedy that will unfold and it is told at an uninteresting snail’s pace. Reminiscence picks up a bit in the middle with a pretty good action scene - and plot twist - before squandering this momentum with mediocrity at the end.
Joy’s script - which was on Hollywood’s infamous “blacklist’ of scripts for many, many years (a list of screenplays that are generally praised, but for some reason or another have not been produced), is at the core of the problem. The dialogue is not very interesting and dripping with heavy film noire clichés. She does not follow the Hollywood doctrine of “show, don’t tell”. She TELLS the audience much, much more than is needed and never really gives the audience any credit for figuring things out for themselves.
For example, there is a “dirty cop” that is central to the plot (there always is in this type of film). So, how do the other characters in the film address him? “You’re the dirty cop…”
I’d laugh if I wasn’t so bored.
What DOES work in this film is the acting of Hugh Jackman (as our hero), Rebecca Ferguson (as the femme fatale) and - especially - Thandie Newton as the “Gal Friday” of Jackman’s. Someone needs to give this talented actress a true showcase of her talents.
Someone also needs to give good ol’ Cliff Curtis a vehicle for his talents - he is one of the most misused good performers in Hollywood and he is misused in this film as well.
And…don’t get me started on the special effects. If you are going to make a trippy, sci-fi, futuristic neo-noire thriller, you probably shouldn’t cut the corner on the special effects, but this film does that, amazingly.
But…with a good Director at the helm there is enough “good enough” here (especially in the acting) that you should be able to pull something decent out of it.
But…Joy is making her theatrical film directing debut - exactly the type of director that this film does not need. What this film needed wasn’t a rookie director like Joy, it needed a Nolan - either Jonathan or (preferably) Christopher to make this work. But, one will have to be contented with a copy of a copy.
And that’s just not good enough.
Letter Grade: C+ (the performances of the leads almost salvage things.
5 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Lisa Joy has written and directed her own “trippy, play with time” film, REMINISCENCE that has quite a few of the hallmarks of a Christopher (or Jonathan) Nolan film - but it also has one very unsettling aspect to it - it plays like a twice over copy of something else.
REMINISCENCE is a classic neo-noir with our hero being smitten by the femme fatale which draws him into her world, where murder, criminal activities and low-lifes run rampant all with a downbeat tone.
This sounds like a terrific premise for a Christopher Nolan film, unfortunately, in the hands of Lisa Joy, it is like watching a local community theater production of a Broadway musical.
The first 1/3 of this film is one long, laborious setup for the tragedy that will unfold and it is told at an uninteresting snail’s pace. Reminiscence picks up a bit in the middle with a pretty good action scene - and plot twist - before squandering this momentum with mediocrity at the end.
Joy’s script - which was on Hollywood’s infamous “blacklist’ of scripts for many, many years (a list of screenplays that are generally praised, but for some reason or another have not been produced), is at the core of the problem. The dialogue is not very interesting and dripping with heavy film noire clichés. She does not follow the Hollywood doctrine of “show, don’t tell”. She TELLS the audience much, much more than is needed and never really gives the audience any credit for figuring things out for themselves.
For example, there is a “dirty cop” that is central to the plot (there always is in this type of film). So, how do the other characters in the film address him? “You’re the dirty cop…”
I’d laugh if I wasn’t so bored.
What DOES work in this film is the acting of Hugh Jackman (as our hero), Rebecca Ferguson (as the femme fatale) and - especially - Thandie Newton as the “Gal Friday” of Jackman’s. Someone needs to give this talented actress a true showcase of her talents.
Someone also needs to give good ol’ Cliff Curtis a vehicle for his talents - he is one of the most misused good performers in Hollywood and he is misused in this film as well.
And…don’t get me started on the special effects. If you are going to make a trippy, sci-fi, futuristic neo-noire thriller, you probably shouldn’t cut the corner on the special effects, but this film does that, amazingly.
But…with a good Director at the helm there is enough “good enough” here (especially in the acting) that you should be able to pull something decent out of it.
But…Joy is making her theatrical film directing debut - exactly the type of director that this film does not need. What this film needed wasn’t a rookie director like Joy, it needed a Nolan - either Jonathan or (preferably) Christopher to make this work. But, one will have to be contented with a copy of a copy.
And that’s just not good enough.
Letter Grade: C+ (the performances of the leads almost salvage things.
5 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Girl on the Train (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
You won’t uncork a bottle of Malbec again without thinking of this film…
“The Girl on a Train” is the film adaptation of the best-seller by Paula Hawkins, transported from the London suburbs to New York’s Hastings-on-Hudson.
It’s actually rather a sordid story encompassing as it does alcoholism, murder, marital strife, deceit, sexual frustration, an historical tragedy and lashings and lashings of violence. Emily Blunt (“Sicario”, “Edge of Tomorrow”) plays Rachel, a divorcee with an alcohol problem who escapes into an obsessive fantasy each day as she passes her former neighbourhood on her commute into the city. Ex-husband Tom (Justin Theroux, “Zoolander 2”) lives in her old house with his second wife Anna (Rebecca “MI:5” Ferguson) and new baby Evie. But her real fantasy rests with cheerleader-style young neighbour Megan (Haley Bennett) who is actually locked in a frustratingly child-free marriage (frustrating for him at least) with the controlling and unpredictable Scott (Luke Evans, “The Hobbit”). A sixth party in this complex network is Megan’s psychiatrist Dr Kamal Abdic (Édgar Ramírez, “Joy”).
In pure Hitchcockian style Megan witnesses mere glimpses of events from her twice-daily train and from these pieces together stories that suitably feed her psychosis. When ‘shit gets real’ and a key character goes missing, Megan surfaces her suspicions and obsessions to the police investigation (led by Detective Riley, the ever-excellent Allison Janney from “The West Wing”) and promptly makes herself suspect number one.
Readers of the book will already be aware of the twists and turns of the story, so will watch the film from a different perspective than I did. (Despite my best intentions I never managed to read the book first).
First up, you would have to say that Emily Blunt’s performance is outstanding in an extremely challenging acting role. Every nuance of shame, confusion, grief, fear, doubt and anger is beautifully enacted: it would not be a surprise to see her gain her first Oscar nomination for this. All the other lead roles are also delivered with great professionalism, with Haley Bennett (a busy month for her, with “The Magnificent Seven” also out) being impressive and Rebecca Ferguson, one of my favourite current actresses, delivering another measured and delicate performance.
Girl on a Train, The
Rebecca Ferguson as Anna – “there were three of us in this marriage so it was a bit crowded”
The supporting roles are also effective, with Darren Goldstein as the somewhat creepy “man in the suit” and “Friends” star Lisa Kudrow popping up in an effective and pivotal role. The Screen Guild Awards have an excellent category for an Ensemble Cast in a Motion Picture, and it feels appropriate to nominate this cast for that award.
So it’s a blockbuster book with a rollercoaster story and a stellar cast, so what could go wrong? Well, something for sure. This is a case in point where I suspect it is easier to slowly peel back Rachel’s lost memory with pages and imagination than it is with dodgy fuzzy images on a big screen. Although the film comes in at only 112 minutes, the pacing in places is too slow (the screenplay by Erin Cressida Wilson takes its time) and director Tate Taylor (“The Help”) is no Hitchcock, or indeed a David Fincher (since the film has strong similarities to last year’s “Gone Girl”: when the action does happen it lacks style, with the violence being on the brutal side and leaving little to the imagination.
It’s by no means a bad film, and worth seeing for the acting performances alone. But it’s not a film I think that will trouble my top 10 for the year.
It’s actually rather a sordid story encompassing as it does alcoholism, murder, marital strife, deceit, sexual frustration, an historical tragedy and lashings and lashings of violence. Emily Blunt (“Sicario”, “Edge of Tomorrow”) plays Rachel, a divorcee with an alcohol problem who escapes into an obsessive fantasy each day as she passes her former neighbourhood on her commute into the city. Ex-husband Tom (Justin Theroux, “Zoolander 2”) lives in her old house with his second wife Anna (Rebecca “MI:5” Ferguson) and new baby Evie. But her real fantasy rests with cheerleader-style young neighbour Megan (Haley Bennett) who is actually locked in a frustratingly child-free marriage (frustrating for him at least) with the controlling and unpredictable Scott (Luke Evans, “The Hobbit”). A sixth party in this complex network is Megan’s psychiatrist Dr Kamal Abdic (Édgar Ramírez, “Joy”).
In pure Hitchcockian style Megan witnesses mere glimpses of events from her twice-daily train and from these pieces together stories that suitably feed her psychosis. When ‘shit gets real’ and a key character goes missing, Megan surfaces her suspicions and obsessions to the police investigation (led by Detective Riley, the ever-excellent Allison Janney from “The West Wing”) and promptly makes herself suspect number one.
Readers of the book will already be aware of the twists and turns of the story, so will watch the film from a different perspective than I did. (Despite my best intentions I never managed to read the book first).
First up, you would have to say that Emily Blunt’s performance is outstanding in an extremely challenging acting role. Every nuance of shame, confusion, grief, fear, doubt and anger is beautifully enacted: it would not be a surprise to see her gain her first Oscar nomination for this. All the other lead roles are also delivered with great professionalism, with Haley Bennett (a busy month for her, with “The Magnificent Seven” also out) being impressive and Rebecca Ferguson, one of my favourite current actresses, delivering another measured and delicate performance.
Girl on a Train, The
Rebecca Ferguson as Anna – “there were three of us in this marriage so it was a bit crowded”
The supporting roles are also effective, with Darren Goldstein as the somewhat creepy “man in the suit” and “Friends” star Lisa Kudrow popping up in an effective and pivotal role. The Screen Guild Awards have an excellent category for an Ensemble Cast in a Motion Picture, and it feels appropriate to nominate this cast for that award.
So it’s a blockbuster book with a rollercoaster story and a stellar cast, so what could go wrong? Well, something for sure. This is a case in point where I suspect it is easier to slowly peel back Rachel’s lost memory with pages and imagination than it is with dodgy fuzzy images on a big screen. Although the film comes in at only 112 minutes, the pacing in places is too slow (the screenplay by Erin Cressida Wilson takes its time) and director Tate Taylor (“The Help”) is no Hitchcock, or indeed a David Fincher (since the film has strong similarities to last year’s “Gone Girl”: when the action does happen it lacks style, with the violence being on the brutal side and leaving little to the imagination.
It’s by no means a bad film, and worth seeing for the acting performances alone. But it’s not a film I think that will trouble my top 10 for the year.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Christine (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
If it bleeds, it leads.
Life is precious. Bad times always get good again eventually. Winter turns to spring and you feel the warmth of the sun on your face again. So what drives someone – anyone – to the point of despair sufficient for them to ignore all of the potential upturns and to take their own life?
Christine tells the tragic tale of Florida TV news reporter Christine Chubbuck who committed suicide live on air in 1974. Yes, this is a spoiler, but since most people have some sense of what a film is about before they go to see it, it’s not really a big one. And I think in this case, knowing the outcome is pretty essential since otherwise you will likely spend 2 hours getting increasingly irritated by the erratic behaviour of the lead character and may possibly turn it off. With this movie, the telling is in the journey – not the destination.
London-born Rebecca Hall (“The Town”) plays the 30 year old virgin Christine; a damaged article with past mental issues, she has been moved by her mother Peg (J Smith-Cameron) from Boston to Florida to make a fresh start. But the station is struggling and Christine’s insistence on pursuing dull but worthy stories, such as zoning disputes, isn’t helping: she is driving her boss (Tracy Letts) to distraction. Despite her spiky demeanour and unapproachable nature, her colleagues including Jean (Maria Dizzia), the show’s anchor (and potential deflowerer) George (Michael C Hall) and weatherman Steve (Timothy Simons from “Veep”) all do their best to support her. It is part of the true tragedy of the piece that her downward spiral continues despite their best efforts.
Hall is outstanding in the role. She portrays the crazily compulsive behaviour of Chubbuck extremely well: perfectionism gone wild as she attempts to edit out 3 seconds off a clip while the film is already in the machine. At times the other-worldliness and creepiness of her character become extremely unsettling; an excruciating scene with a married couple in a bar being a case in point. Overall it’s an extremely thoughtful portrayal that is as quiet and unassuming as Ruth Negga’s in “Loving” (but without the smiles or the charm). I would like to think that after the Oscars team picked the ‘obvious contenders’ of Portman, Stone and Huppert, and with a place ‘reserved’ for Streep, they were left with Negga and Hall and had a “dammit, we can only pick 1 out of 2 here” moment.
Letts as the crotchety station chief also delivers a fine performance, and it’s a shame that the script never gave us the chance to see his post-shooting reactions, since the ‘if only’ ramifications for him in particular must have been huge.
In retrospect, Chubbuck’s actions were bizarre: taking her life in such a public way (and insisting the show be recorded for her “reels”) strikes of narcissism and a bitter revenge. While the film is no doubt based on the true recollections of the real-life participants, the screenplay by Craig Shilowich, in an impressive writing debut, for me never quite closed that loop: why this way rather that a car and a hosepipe?
Directed by Antonio Campos, this is never an easy watch. It’s a bit like watching a car crash in ultra-slow motion, and pretty much mandates that you watch an episode of “Father Ted” afterwards to cheer yourself up! But it’s a fascinating study in mental decline, and it’s a useful reminder that it behoves all of us to pay more attention to others around us and reach out with real help if needed before the worst can happen.
Christine tells the tragic tale of Florida TV news reporter Christine Chubbuck who committed suicide live on air in 1974. Yes, this is a spoiler, but since most people have some sense of what a film is about before they go to see it, it’s not really a big one. And I think in this case, knowing the outcome is pretty essential since otherwise you will likely spend 2 hours getting increasingly irritated by the erratic behaviour of the lead character and may possibly turn it off. With this movie, the telling is in the journey – not the destination.
London-born Rebecca Hall (“The Town”) plays the 30 year old virgin Christine; a damaged article with past mental issues, she has been moved by her mother Peg (J Smith-Cameron) from Boston to Florida to make a fresh start. But the station is struggling and Christine’s insistence on pursuing dull but worthy stories, such as zoning disputes, isn’t helping: she is driving her boss (Tracy Letts) to distraction. Despite her spiky demeanour and unapproachable nature, her colleagues including Jean (Maria Dizzia), the show’s anchor (and potential deflowerer) George (Michael C Hall) and weatherman Steve (Timothy Simons from “Veep”) all do their best to support her. It is part of the true tragedy of the piece that her downward spiral continues despite their best efforts.
Hall is outstanding in the role. She portrays the crazily compulsive behaviour of Chubbuck extremely well: perfectionism gone wild as she attempts to edit out 3 seconds off a clip while the film is already in the machine. At times the other-worldliness and creepiness of her character become extremely unsettling; an excruciating scene with a married couple in a bar being a case in point. Overall it’s an extremely thoughtful portrayal that is as quiet and unassuming as Ruth Negga’s in “Loving” (but without the smiles or the charm). I would like to think that after the Oscars team picked the ‘obvious contenders’ of Portman, Stone and Huppert, and with a place ‘reserved’ for Streep, they were left with Negga and Hall and had a “dammit, we can only pick 1 out of 2 here” moment.
Letts as the crotchety station chief also delivers a fine performance, and it’s a shame that the script never gave us the chance to see his post-shooting reactions, since the ‘if only’ ramifications for him in particular must have been huge.
In retrospect, Chubbuck’s actions were bizarre: taking her life in such a public way (and insisting the show be recorded for her “reels”) strikes of narcissism and a bitter revenge. While the film is no doubt based on the true recollections of the real-life participants, the screenplay by Craig Shilowich, in an impressive writing debut, for me never quite closed that loop: why this way rather that a car and a hosepipe?
Directed by Antonio Campos, this is never an easy watch. It’s a bit like watching a car crash in ultra-slow motion, and pretty much mandates that you watch an episode of “Father Ted” afterwards to cheer yourself up! But it’s a fascinating study in mental decline, and it’s a useful reminder that it behoves all of us to pay more attention to others around us and reach out with real help if needed before the worst can happen.
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated The Girl Who Could Breathe Under Water in Books
Jan 2, 2022
I will admit that I've been in a reading slump for awhile. However, when I read the synopsis for The Girl Who Could Breathe Under Water by Erin Bartels, it sounded just like the book I need to get me out of my slump. Luckily I was right!
I thoroughly enjoyed the plot of The Girl Who Could Breathe Under Water by Erin Bartels. It was definitely interesting to see how and why writers put a little bit of truth in their books. I was very interested in trying to find out what was truth and what was fiction in Kendra's life. I wanted to know if the bad thing was really as Kendra remembered it or if it was just something she had stretched the truth about. This book does have a few plot twists, and while I did predict one, I found myself guessing incorrectly at the other twists. The author does a fantastic job at typing up any and all loose ends by the end of the book. I must say that I also very much enjoyed the writing and language Erin Bartels used. Her descriptive prose put me right into the heart of the story. I was drawn in with every word, and once I started reading, it was hard for me to stop. Even though this book does deal with some heavy subjects, Bartels did an excellent job at writing about them with much care and sensitivity. (Be sure to read the author's note at the end of the book for a bit more insight into the novel. You won't regret it.)
The characters in The Girl Who Could Breathe Under Water were written very well. I found myself really loving the character of Kendra. She seemed like the type of girl I could relate to and that I'd love to be friends with. I enjoyed getting to see a glimpse into her memories (even the horrible ones). Her back story was interesting with what she had been through. I wish we could have read more about Andreas' back story. He was a strong character, don't get me wrong, but I felt like I didn't really know him all too well. He was always shrouded in a bit of mystery. Tyler's back story was the most interesting (and a little heartbreaking). Even though I never really cared for Tyler as a person, he was still a very well written character. I wish he would have gotten in trouble for what he did, but just as in real life, not everything happens as it should. I also loved the character of Cami. Although she seems a bit selfish, what she had been through makes it a bit easier to see why she was the way she was. I'm not excusing her actions by no means, but I can see the reasoning behind it. I also loved Robert as Kendra's mentor. He was such a laid back and loving character.
Trigger warnings for The Girl Who Could Breathe Under Water include some slight bullying, sexual harassment, molestation, rape (though not graphic), child prostitution, alcohol, mentions of drug use, death, and suicide.
All in all, The Girl Who Could Breathe Under Water is a beautifully written book showing that even in the fact of tragedy and trauma, we can still rise above our circumstances. I would definitely recommend The Girl Who Could Breath Under Water by Erin Bartels to those ages 16+ who are after a book with great emotional depth.
--
(A special thank you to Revell for providing me with a paperback of The Girl Who Could Breathe Under Water by Erin Bartels in exchange for a fair and honest review.)
I thoroughly enjoyed the plot of The Girl Who Could Breathe Under Water by Erin Bartels. It was definitely interesting to see how and why writers put a little bit of truth in their books. I was very interested in trying to find out what was truth and what was fiction in Kendra's life. I wanted to know if the bad thing was really as Kendra remembered it or if it was just something she had stretched the truth about. This book does have a few plot twists, and while I did predict one, I found myself guessing incorrectly at the other twists. The author does a fantastic job at typing up any and all loose ends by the end of the book. I must say that I also very much enjoyed the writing and language Erin Bartels used. Her descriptive prose put me right into the heart of the story. I was drawn in with every word, and once I started reading, it was hard for me to stop. Even though this book does deal with some heavy subjects, Bartels did an excellent job at writing about them with much care and sensitivity. (Be sure to read the author's note at the end of the book for a bit more insight into the novel. You won't regret it.)
The characters in The Girl Who Could Breathe Under Water were written very well. I found myself really loving the character of Kendra. She seemed like the type of girl I could relate to and that I'd love to be friends with. I enjoyed getting to see a glimpse into her memories (even the horrible ones). Her back story was interesting with what she had been through. I wish we could have read more about Andreas' back story. He was a strong character, don't get me wrong, but I felt like I didn't really know him all too well. He was always shrouded in a bit of mystery. Tyler's back story was the most interesting (and a little heartbreaking). Even though I never really cared for Tyler as a person, he was still a very well written character. I wish he would have gotten in trouble for what he did, but just as in real life, not everything happens as it should. I also loved the character of Cami. Although she seems a bit selfish, what she had been through makes it a bit easier to see why she was the way she was. I'm not excusing her actions by no means, but I can see the reasoning behind it. I also loved Robert as Kendra's mentor. He was such a laid back and loving character.
Trigger warnings for The Girl Who Could Breathe Under Water include some slight bullying, sexual harassment, molestation, rape (though not graphic), child prostitution, alcohol, mentions of drug use, death, and suicide.
All in all, The Girl Who Could Breathe Under Water is a beautifully written book showing that even in the fact of tragedy and trauma, we can still rise above our circumstances. I would definitely recommend The Girl Who Could Breath Under Water by Erin Bartels to those ages 16+ who are after a book with great emotional depth.
--
(A special thank you to Revell for providing me with a paperback of The Girl Who Could Breathe Under Water by Erin Bartels in exchange for a fair and honest review.)
Jamie (131 KP) rated The Shining Girls in Books
Jun 4, 2017
Ambitious & unique story line (1 more)
Handles the web of time paradoxes well
Mash-up of genres is disjointing (2 more)
Romance is distracting at best
Repeated murder scenes gets wearisome
A cool time travel thriller
The Shining Girls follows Harper, a crude serial killer from the 1930’s that can hop through time; and Kirby, the spunky young woman that got away. This book was incredibly ambitious in its premise and I spent a great deal of my time reading the book wondering if it could deliver and I can happily say that I wasn’t disappointed.
The story is a heavily character driven dive through recent American history, from the Great Depression in the 1930’s all the way up to the early 1990’s. I was impressed by the amount of research that was put into this book, each decade having enough detail to get a good feel for the era. Many of the characters were pretty well fleshed out for such short chapters, and I found myself liking many of them.
My favorite part of the story, though, was the tragedy that was Harper because of how very flawed and human he is. He views himself as commanding, charming, persuasive, but to many of his victims he’s just downright creepy. He thinks himself calculating yet he makes mistakes left and right. He has a drive to rise up from the trenches of poverty and starvation from his own era, to be powerful. His choice of victims are all women in a great act of femicide, because he has this dire need to feel masculine. He chooses women that he views as invincible, that shine with ambition in order to assert his dominance by snuffing them out. He thinks he has this divine purpose, a destiny to fulfill because he wants it so desperately, even though the reality is that it’s simply senseless violence with no real meaning. He obsesses over the murders, returning to the scene of the crimes over and over to get off. Harper is pathetic. It was a refreshing change from the stereotypical smooth, genius archetype that glorifies killers. I didn’t know right away that this book was meant to be a feminist novel, but that’s what I took away from not only Harper’s struggle with masculinity, but with the strong and fiercely independent female characters all throughout the book.
There were a couple of problems with the book, however, that I feel need to be addressed. The mash up of genres is both a good and bad aspect of the story. The middle chapters where romance comes into play to me was really distracting and feels out of place. The tagline describing the novel also states that “the girl who wouldn’t die hunts the killer who shouldn’t exist” but honestly, it didn’t feel much like Kirby was really hunting the killer. Looking for connections with other murder cases and investigating some wild hunches, yes, but really she spends most of the book developing her bond with Dan. I would have really liked for this to be more of a cat and mouse type of hunt between Kirby and Harper.
The chapters with Harper were much more interesting, but even those became a little repetitive. We as the reader follow Harper as he stalks his victims in childhood, waiting for the right time to strike when they reach adulthood. While it was necessary for the plot to detail the characters to both connect them to the greater chain of paradoxes and to show Harper’s descent, the violence is excessive and extremely detailed, and after a while it started to feel more like torture porn. It just got tiring after a while.
Despite its flaws, I thought this book was good, and I mean really good. I loved the way that the time paradoxes were handled, time travel stories tend to be tricky and usually end up with a couple of glaring loop holes. The loops are handled in a way that I found satisfying and this book is easily my favorite time travel novel I’ve ever read. It is truly unique and a story I won’t soon forget.
The story is a heavily character driven dive through recent American history, from the Great Depression in the 1930’s all the way up to the early 1990’s. I was impressed by the amount of research that was put into this book, each decade having enough detail to get a good feel for the era. Many of the characters were pretty well fleshed out for such short chapters, and I found myself liking many of them.
My favorite part of the story, though, was the tragedy that was Harper because of how very flawed and human he is. He views himself as commanding, charming, persuasive, but to many of his victims he’s just downright creepy. He thinks himself calculating yet he makes mistakes left and right. He has a drive to rise up from the trenches of poverty and starvation from his own era, to be powerful. His choice of victims are all women in a great act of femicide, because he has this dire need to feel masculine. He chooses women that he views as invincible, that shine with ambition in order to assert his dominance by snuffing them out. He thinks he has this divine purpose, a destiny to fulfill because he wants it so desperately, even though the reality is that it’s simply senseless violence with no real meaning. He obsesses over the murders, returning to the scene of the crimes over and over to get off. Harper is pathetic. It was a refreshing change from the stereotypical smooth, genius archetype that glorifies killers. I didn’t know right away that this book was meant to be a feminist novel, but that’s what I took away from not only Harper’s struggle with masculinity, but with the strong and fiercely independent female characters all throughout the book.
There were a couple of problems with the book, however, that I feel need to be addressed. The mash up of genres is both a good and bad aspect of the story. The middle chapters where romance comes into play to me was really distracting and feels out of place. The tagline describing the novel also states that “the girl who wouldn’t die hunts the killer who shouldn’t exist” but honestly, it didn’t feel much like Kirby was really hunting the killer. Looking for connections with other murder cases and investigating some wild hunches, yes, but really she spends most of the book developing her bond with Dan. I would have really liked for this to be more of a cat and mouse type of hunt between Kirby and Harper.
The chapters with Harper were much more interesting, but even those became a little repetitive. We as the reader follow Harper as he stalks his victims in childhood, waiting for the right time to strike when they reach adulthood. While it was necessary for the plot to detail the characters to both connect them to the greater chain of paradoxes and to show Harper’s descent, the violence is excessive and extremely detailed, and after a while it started to feel more like torture porn. It just got tiring after a while.
Despite its flaws, I thought this book was good, and I mean really good. I loved the way that the time paradoxes were handled, time travel stories tend to be tricky and usually end up with a couple of glaring loop holes. The loops are handled in a way that I found satisfying and this book is easily my favorite time travel novel I’ve ever read. It is truly unique and a story I won’t soon forget.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated How to Make a Wish in Books
Apr 8, 2019
Sweet, funny, and heartbreaking at times
Grace has had to grow up too quickly, thanks to her unpredictable mom, Maggie. So when Grace returns from piano camp and realizes that the flighty, alcoholic Maggie has forced her to move in with yet another of her boyfriends, it feels like the last straw. Even worse, his son happens to be Grace's ex--the same ex who posted their sexts all over Tumblr after their breakup--and Maggie has no clue. It feels like the last straw. But then Grace meets Eva, who has moved in with Grace's best friend's family after her own tragedy. Eva and Grace form a fast friendship, and Grace feels her world shift slightly when Eva reveals to her that she's a lesbian. But there's still Maggie to deal with, and her erratic behavior. Grace feels tied to her mother above all, but those ties are preventing her from happiness. Can Grace find the strength to choose herself for once?
Ashley Herring Blake's HOW TO MAKE A WISH was one of the best books I read in 2018. It was gorgeous and heartbreaking and amazing. This book certainly had some echoes of that one; Blake is a wonderful writer, and I will be continuing my quest to track down all of her books.
So Grace is a tough character. I felt for her immensely: she's living the life of adult, basically, trying to care for and worry about her mother, who is a real piece of work. By doing so, she's essentially paralyzed and unable to live her own life. Grace is a talented pianist who dreams of moving to New York to study at a conservatory there, but she lives in fear of living her mom behind. Her mom manipulates this fear, leaning on her daughter at every turn. (She was really a terrible woman; I couldn't make myself feel sorry for her, even though she'd lost her husband when Grace was small.) Still, there were times when I wanted to shake Grace: you have a group of people who do love you and care about you! Go to them, use their support, stop defending your mom, you're not a child anymore! I took this as a sign of Blake's excellent writing abilities, as I was totally immersed in the book to the point that I was frustrated with and in love with her characters.
"I can't leave her. She's my mom; I'm her kid. We belong together."
I really, really loved the Grace/Eva relationship in this book. I mean, what is there not to love? For one thing, Eva is a biracial lesbian. Can we say hurray representation?! I adored this sweet, fragile, yet incredibly tough girl. She was so funny and real to me. And then we have Grace, who was such a realistic bisexual. It's just so heartening to see well-done bisexual relationships portrayed in YA books. Oh my goodness, I wish I had this to read when I was struggling with my bisexuality as a teen. And it makes me so happy to think about teens today reading this and seeing this representation as completely normal.
"But... well, I like who I like. I like the person."
This book definitely sucks you into the characters' lives. It's quite well-written, and I really liked the supporting characters, especially Grace's best friend, Luca and his mom. He's a good friend. These poor kids are dealing with a lot, and your heart goes out to them, watching them struggle. At the same time, Grace and Eva's relationship is so lovely.
"I know a lot of people on this godforsaken waste of space and a lot of people know me. But no one really knows me... I've had a handful of friends here and there, but with the ebb and flow of my existence, it was easier to keep my world as small as possible. Less explaining. Less lying to cover up why I'd moved again. Less worrying about what totally messed-up situation I'd encounter when I brought a friend home."
Overall, I really enjoyed this book. It features intricate characters and a great relationship in Eva and Grace. It's sweet, funny, and heartbreaking at times.
Ashley Herring Blake's HOW TO MAKE A WISH was one of the best books I read in 2018. It was gorgeous and heartbreaking and amazing. This book certainly had some echoes of that one; Blake is a wonderful writer, and I will be continuing my quest to track down all of her books.
So Grace is a tough character. I felt for her immensely: she's living the life of adult, basically, trying to care for and worry about her mother, who is a real piece of work. By doing so, she's essentially paralyzed and unable to live her own life. Grace is a talented pianist who dreams of moving to New York to study at a conservatory there, but she lives in fear of living her mom behind. Her mom manipulates this fear, leaning on her daughter at every turn. (She was really a terrible woman; I couldn't make myself feel sorry for her, even though she'd lost her husband when Grace was small.) Still, there were times when I wanted to shake Grace: you have a group of people who do love you and care about you! Go to them, use their support, stop defending your mom, you're not a child anymore! I took this as a sign of Blake's excellent writing abilities, as I was totally immersed in the book to the point that I was frustrated with and in love with her characters.
"I can't leave her. She's my mom; I'm her kid. We belong together."
I really, really loved the Grace/Eva relationship in this book. I mean, what is there not to love? For one thing, Eva is a biracial lesbian. Can we say hurray representation?! I adored this sweet, fragile, yet incredibly tough girl. She was so funny and real to me. And then we have Grace, who was such a realistic bisexual. It's just so heartening to see well-done bisexual relationships portrayed in YA books. Oh my goodness, I wish I had this to read when I was struggling with my bisexuality as a teen. And it makes me so happy to think about teens today reading this and seeing this representation as completely normal.
"But... well, I like who I like. I like the person."
This book definitely sucks you into the characters' lives. It's quite well-written, and I really liked the supporting characters, especially Grace's best friend, Luca and his mom. He's a good friend. These poor kids are dealing with a lot, and your heart goes out to them, watching them struggle. At the same time, Grace and Eva's relationship is so lovely.
"I know a lot of people on this godforsaken waste of space and a lot of people know me. But no one really knows me... I've had a handful of friends here and there, but with the ebb and flow of my existence, it was easier to keep my world as small as possible. Less explaining. Less lying to cover up why I'd moved again. Less worrying about what totally messed-up situation I'd encounter when I brought a friend home."
Overall, I really enjoyed this book. It features intricate characters and a great relationship in Eva and Grace. It's sweet, funny, and heartbreaking at times.
Kara Skinner (332 KP) rated Bascomville in Books
Jun 12, 2019
Genre: Contemporary, Teen
Page Count: 284
Average Goodreads Rating: 4.67 out of 5 stars
My rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars
Welcome to the life of Max Bascom, whose home is Bascomville. Bascomville has its own special kind of normal, where fathers can get job leads from their sons and Christmas dinners can end up to be Chinese take out. Max does his best to navigate Bascomville and to keep it running as smoothly as possible through good times and tragedy. And he also forms a special bond with the girl next door, Janice, who understands Bascomville despite coming from a world much different.
This book is so fabulously written. I usually don’t take review requests, but I’m glad I did for this book. It’s part romance, part literary masterpiece, and it captures “growing up” so well. I wish I had this book when I was in middle school or high school because I can relate to making your own kind of normal.
“Us? Normal?”
“How do you know we aren’t? How do we know everybody doesn’t make their own?”
She considered this for a moment then dismissed it. “If everybody made their own then nothing would be normal. Nothing could ever be normal.”
“Exactly.”
That’s my kind of definition of normal. And I think everyone needs to remember that normalcy doesn’t really exist a little bit more.
I didn’t see the plot twists coming ahead of time and I never got bored. On top of that, this book is incredibly quotable. There’s some good life advice in here, like when Max helped Janice cover up vandalism on her house:
And I knew then that ultimately we can save neither ourselves nor our loved ones from life. We can only live it.
Max is a complex character that I like and dislike. He is, ultimately, human, not a hero. He tends to overreact sometimes when Janice is involved, but for the most part he’s likeable. He’s loyal to his family, loves his little sister, and wishes for a world with a level playing field.
My favorite character is his little sister Lily, though. She actually has it worse than Max. She lives at home with her parents after Max goes to college and has to deal with her mother pretending she doesn’t exist and her father pretending to be her best friend to make up for it. Her home life is lousy at best and she practically raises herself for her last years of high school. But she’s strong enough to not break under pressure and she’s not one for self-pity.
“Fair is for dorks. I don’t need fair to make things work.”– Lily Bascom
So why only a 4.5 instead of a 5?
It’s because of the long descriptions, like this one that characterizes Mr. Birnbaum, Janice’s father, through his workshop.
I stepped inside and caught my breath. It was, to me, a foreign wonderland, this workshop. I am not a particularly handy person, and the panorama of neatly arranged rows of tools hanging on pegboards, the fittings categorized in plastic bins, the copper piping slung above the rafters, the worktables and vises and clamps and braided electrical cords all echoed the prowess of this man. I felt humbled, and strangely calm. I still wasn’t sure if I was doing the right thing but I was no longer nervous about it. I could leave disappointed, even chastised, and be all right with it. Such was the power of Sheldon Birnbaum and this place.
While these descriptions certainly add character and depth to the story, they can sometimes be a little excessive and make my attention lag. This book is certainly not a fluff book and isn’t meant to be one, but the long descriptions make it slightly more harder to get through than it has to be.
This is a good book for anyone to read and I can’t recommend it enough, especially to teens. It helps us remember that we all need to make our own normal.
Page Count: 284
Average Goodreads Rating: 4.67 out of 5 stars
My rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars
Welcome to the life of Max Bascom, whose home is Bascomville. Bascomville has its own special kind of normal, where fathers can get job leads from their sons and Christmas dinners can end up to be Chinese take out. Max does his best to navigate Bascomville and to keep it running as smoothly as possible through good times and tragedy. And he also forms a special bond with the girl next door, Janice, who understands Bascomville despite coming from a world much different.
This book is so fabulously written. I usually don’t take review requests, but I’m glad I did for this book. It’s part romance, part literary masterpiece, and it captures “growing up” so well. I wish I had this book when I was in middle school or high school because I can relate to making your own kind of normal.
“Us? Normal?”
“How do you know we aren’t? How do we know everybody doesn’t make their own?”
She considered this for a moment then dismissed it. “If everybody made their own then nothing would be normal. Nothing could ever be normal.”
“Exactly.”
That’s my kind of definition of normal. And I think everyone needs to remember that normalcy doesn’t really exist a little bit more.
I didn’t see the plot twists coming ahead of time and I never got bored. On top of that, this book is incredibly quotable. There’s some good life advice in here, like when Max helped Janice cover up vandalism on her house:
And I knew then that ultimately we can save neither ourselves nor our loved ones from life. We can only live it.
Max is a complex character that I like and dislike. He is, ultimately, human, not a hero. He tends to overreact sometimes when Janice is involved, but for the most part he’s likeable. He’s loyal to his family, loves his little sister, and wishes for a world with a level playing field.
My favorite character is his little sister Lily, though. She actually has it worse than Max. She lives at home with her parents after Max goes to college and has to deal with her mother pretending she doesn’t exist and her father pretending to be her best friend to make up for it. Her home life is lousy at best and she practically raises herself for her last years of high school. But she’s strong enough to not break under pressure and she’s not one for self-pity.
“Fair is for dorks. I don’t need fair to make things work.”– Lily Bascom
So why only a 4.5 instead of a 5?
It’s because of the long descriptions, like this one that characterizes Mr. Birnbaum, Janice’s father, through his workshop.
I stepped inside and caught my breath. It was, to me, a foreign wonderland, this workshop. I am not a particularly handy person, and the panorama of neatly arranged rows of tools hanging on pegboards, the fittings categorized in plastic bins, the copper piping slung above the rafters, the worktables and vises and clamps and braided electrical cords all echoed the prowess of this man. I felt humbled, and strangely calm. I still wasn’t sure if I was doing the right thing but I was no longer nervous about it. I could leave disappointed, even chastised, and be all right with it. Such was the power of Sheldon Birnbaum and this place.
While these descriptions certainly add character and depth to the story, they can sometimes be a little excessive and make my attention lag. This book is certainly not a fluff book and isn’t meant to be one, but the long descriptions make it slightly more harder to get through than it has to be.
This is a good book for anyone to read and I can’t recommend it enough, especially to teens. It helps us remember that we all need to make our own normal.