Search
Search results
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated Just One of the Guys in Books
Apr 27, 2018
Okay, I'm going to tell you why Just One of the Guys is not only one of my new favorite Higgins books, but one of my new favorite romances period.
1. The heroine is different. She's not super feminine in her character, but she's definitely feminine in her desires and her passion and her attitude. Growing up with four older brothers, Chastity Virginia (yeah, that's her name. I know, right?) yells when she's mad, throws punches with intent, and won trophies in college for rowing. She's a quarter inch away from being six feet tall, and she's got man-shoulders. She runs 10-mile races up hills for kicks. But she's thirty, she wants her passion to be returned, and her body is telling her that she should have already made at least three babies by now. I mean, how many romance novels do you read with female protagonists like that? most of the time they're young, innocent, unable to take care of themselves, and feminine. Chastity is not the typical female protagonist ... and that's one of the reasons I like her so much.
2. Like any good novel, there are a few sub-plots running through this novel; one is the failing marriage of one of Chastity's brothers, named Mark. He and his wife are going through hell (and possibly divorce and child custody problems) but they still love each other. There is this chapter (chapter 22--it's seared into my head) that made me cry because it was so amazing. See, Chastity babysat for Mark's soon-to-be-ex-wife, and she didn't tell him. When he found out, he blew up at her. Then later when he apologized they started talking, and he opened up to her about how badly he wants to make things right. she gave him a little advice and they had a sob-fest and in the end it worked out so perfectly. But the thing that got me was that so many stories I've read with failing relationships are about trying to get over the person, instead of reconciling. It was beautiful and inspiring and I read the chapter 3 times because I loved it so much.
3. Another one of those sub-plots was the relationship between Chastity’s parents. They’re officially divorced, but they still hang out all the time for dinner, they still love each other, and her dad just assumes her mom will wait around for him to retire. But that isn’t the case. Her mom starts dating again and throws everyone for a loop. Then when she gets into a serious relationship, shit really hits the fan. I was surprised by the outcome. I won’t say what it was for the sake of keeping this review spoiler-free. But I will say that it was different. It wasn’t the same-old same-old over again. Suffice to say, this book was the opposite of Happyland-syndrome.
4. The romance between Chastity and Trevor was so epic. I’m not going to say anything else about it because I don’t want to risk spoiling it. It has to be read in order. You can’t know anything out of order. But trust me, it was epic and wonderful and powerful and perfect and beautiful.
Like all of Higgins's books, the writing is fun, easy to read, relaxed, and a little snarky. This one was a little awkward because some of it was written in a different tense than what she does now, but it's one of her earlier books, and I can't hold that against her.
Anyway, you should go get this book. Amazon, B&N, Paperbackswap, your local book store, etc. Trust me, it’s worth it.
Content/recommendation: Some language, mention of sex (but nothing explicit) Ages 17+
1. The heroine is different. She's not super feminine in her character, but she's definitely feminine in her desires and her passion and her attitude. Growing up with four older brothers, Chastity Virginia (yeah, that's her name. I know, right?) yells when she's mad, throws punches with intent, and won trophies in college for rowing. She's a quarter inch away from being six feet tall, and she's got man-shoulders. She runs 10-mile races up hills for kicks. But she's thirty, she wants her passion to be returned, and her body is telling her that she should have already made at least three babies by now. I mean, how many romance novels do you read with female protagonists like that? most of the time they're young, innocent, unable to take care of themselves, and feminine. Chastity is not the typical female protagonist ... and that's one of the reasons I like her so much.
2. Like any good novel, there are a few sub-plots running through this novel; one is the failing marriage of one of Chastity's brothers, named Mark. He and his wife are going through hell (and possibly divorce and child custody problems) but they still love each other. There is this chapter (chapter 22--it's seared into my head) that made me cry because it was so amazing. See, Chastity babysat for Mark's soon-to-be-ex-wife, and she didn't tell him. When he found out, he blew up at her. Then later when he apologized they started talking, and he opened up to her about how badly he wants to make things right. she gave him a little advice and they had a sob-fest and in the end it worked out so perfectly. But the thing that got me was that so many stories I've read with failing relationships are about trying to get over the person, instead of reconciling. It was beautiful and inspiring and I read the chapter 3 times because I loved it so much.
3. Another one of those sub-plots was the relationship between Chastity’s parents. They’re officially divorced, but they still hang out all the time for dinner, they still love each other, and her dad just assumes her mom will wait around for him to retire. But that isn’t the case. Her mom starts dating again and throws everyone for a loop. Then when she gets into a serious relationship, shit really hits the fan. I was surprised by the outcome. I won’t say what it was for the sake of keeping this review spoiler-free. But I will say that it was different. It wasn’t the same-old same-old over again. Suffice to say, this book was the opposite of Happyland-syndrome.
4. The romance between Chastity and Trevor was so epic. I’m not going to say anything else about it because I don’t want to risk spoiling it. It has to be read in order. You can’t know anything out of order. But trust me, it was epic and wonderful and powerful and perfect and beautiful.
Like all of Higgins's books, the writing is fun, easy to read, relaxed, and a little snarky. This one was a little awkward because some of it was written in a different tense than what she does now, but it's one of her earlier books, and I can't hold that against her.
Anyway, you should go get this book. Amazon, B&N, Paperbackswap, your local book store, etc. Trust me, it’s worth it.
Content/recommendation: Some language, mention of sex (but nothing explicit) Ages 17+
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Lies We Tell Ourselves in Books
Dec 17, 2018
<i>This ARC was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review</i>
<i>Lies We Tell Ourselves</i> by Robin Talley is a realistic tale about the beginning of the integration of coloured people into white schools in late 1950s America. In Virginia it is 1959 and ten Negros are beginning their first day at Jefferson Highschool. The experience is narrated from one of the ten, Sarah’s, perspective. In other parts of the novel the voice changes to that of Linda, a particularly nasty white girl, who is one of countless students opposed to integration.
Although many young people will have been taught about the black civil right movement it is still shocking to read about the horrible things they had to endure. By writing in the first person, Talley encourages the reader to try to understand how they would feel in a similar situation. Sarah and her friends instantly become the victims of verbal and physical abuse that members of authority turn a blind eye to.
To Sarah, Linda is a nasty spoilt bully who, although does not join in with the taunting and abuse, is as bad as the rest of them. Through reading Linda’s account it becomes clear that her behaviour has a lot to do with her home life, in particularly with her father’s attitude towards her. After being forced to partner Sarah for a French project Linda begins to question why there is so much emphasis on skin colour, however not wanting to be shunned by her own friends she keeps these thoughts to herself.
Sarah is also struggling to come to terms with her sexual preference for girls. It has been drilled into her that these thoughts are a sin. She hides her true feelings from everyone and constantly berates herself mentally for being “unnatural”. But it turns out she may not be the only one with these thoughts.
The lies referred to in the title are not the blatant or harmful lies but rather the lies the characters believe or even want to believe. Each chapter begins with a lie that reflects what is occurring in the novel at that time; for example “There’s no need to be afraid” and “I don’t care what they think of me.” This is an interesting way of telling the story as it emphasizes Sarah’s determination to keep going despite what she is subjected to. It also reveals the mental struggles she faces. On the other hand the lies disclose Linda’s conflicting feelings towards the South’s current situation and segregation laws.
Although not a religious novel, each part begins with the title of a Christian hymn. It was the norm for everyone to go to church and, despite the separate churches, was something black and white people did. Sarah and Linda have faith in God yet they both use the bible’s teachings for opposing arguments. The religious aspect also highlights Sarah’s self-hatred and belief that she has fallen into sin.
Unfortunately in today’s world there are still issues with racism and homophobia however after reading <i>Lies We Tell Ourselves</i> it is evident that these situations have vastly improved, at least in the Western world, since the 1950s. Without children such as Sarah going through these horrible experiences nothing would have changed. There would still be separate schools, slavery and inaccurate opinions about race inequality. America has a lot to thank these brave students who were the first to create mixed race schools.
Overall this is a brilliant book. Well written and realistic, it really draws the reader in to the characters’ stories. Although <i>Lies We Tell Ourselves</i> is a work of fiction, it is historically accurate and can teach a lot about America’s history to young adults today.
<i>Lies We Tell Ourselves</i> by Robin Talley is a realistic tale about the beginning of the integration of coloured people into white schools in late 1950s America. In Virginia it is 1959 and ten Negros are beginning their first day at Jefferson Highschool. The experience is narrated from one of the ten, Sarah’s, perspective. In other parts of the novel the voice changes to that of Linda, a particularly nasty white girl, who is one of countless students opposed to integration.
Although many young people will have been taught about the black civil right movement it is still shocking to read about the horrible things they had to endure. By writing in the first person, Talley encourages the reader to try to understand how they would feel in a similar situation. Sarah and her friends instantly become the victims of verbal and physical abuse that members of authority turn a blind eye to.
To Sarah, Linda is a nasty spoilt bully who, although does not join in with the taunting and abuse, is as bad as the rest of them. Through reading Linda’s account it becomes clear that her behaviour has a lot to do with her home life, in particularly with her father’s attitude towards her. After being forced to partner Sarah for a French project Linda begins to question why there is so much emphasis on skin colour, however not wanting to be shunned by her own friends she keeps these thoughts to herself.
Sarah is also struggling to come to terms with her sexual preference for girls. It has been drilled into her that these thoughts are a sin. She hides her true feelings from everyone and constantly berates herself mentally for being “unnatural”. But it turns out she may not be the only one with these thoughts.
The lies referred to in the title are not the blatant or harmful lies but rather the lies the characters believe or even want to believe. Each chapter begins with a lie that reflects what is occurring in the novel at that time; for example “There’s no need to be afraid” and “I don’t care what they think of me.” This is an interesting way of telling the story as it emphasizes Sarah’s determination to keep going despite what she is subjected to. It also reveals the mental struggles she faces. On the other hand the lies disclose Linda’s conflicting feelings towards the South’s current situation and segregation laws.
Although not a religious novel, each part begins with the title of a Christian hymn. It was the norm for everyone to go to church and, despite the separate churches, was something black and white people did. Sarah and Linda have faith in God yet they both use the bible’s teachings for opposing arguments. The religious aspect also highlights Sarah’s self-hatred and belief that she has fallen into sin.
Unfortunately in today’s world there are still issues with racism and homophobia however after reading <i>Lies We Tell Ourselves</i> it is evident that these situations have vastly improved, at least in the Western world, since the 1950s. Without children such as Sarah going through these horrible experiences nothing would have changed. There would still be separate schools, slavery and inaccurate opinions about race inequality. America has a lot to thank these brave students who were the first to create mixed race schools.
Overall this is a brilliant book. Well written and realistic, it really draws the reader in to the characters’ stories. Although <i>Lies We Tell Ourselves</i> is a work of fiction, it is historically accurate and can teach a lot about America’s history to young adults today.
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated Asbury Park in Books
Nov 8, 2019
Virginia State Trooper Samuel 'Sailor' Doyle is recovering from his previous case, also trying to save his marriage and his job. Although he is a national hero he is suspended and under investigation for shooting a suspect while under the influence of prescription pain killers. To rehabilitate he takes his wife, young son and baby daughter to the beach near Asbury Park in New Jersey.
Doyle's problems are many: His wife has discovered that he had an affair, he is in withdrawal from his drug and alcohol abuse and he is still recovering from being shot. But far from getting away from it all his vacation just throws mysterious deaths at Doyle and strange things happen. He hears Pink Floyd's Wish You Were Here playing from what seems like every car that passes and every shop he goes into as well as an old callope fairground tune. He starts to persuade himself that events are connected and sets out to find out what is going on.
This book definitely follows its own path and refused to be pigeon- holed into one genre or another. In the main this is a police procedural with Doyle assisting the local police with a gang related shooting and his own investigations into events that occurred in the 1970s in Canada. But the weirdness of the Pink Floyd, scratches and greasepaint (to name just a few of the odd occurrences that Doyle encounters) takes it beyond this and into the realms of the paranormal with Doyle convinced he is being haunted by the ghost of a dead teenager - or that he is going insane.
All this means that it is going to divide opinion (and quick check of the scores given to the book confirm that). It is not a standard police procedural so will disappoint if that is what is expected. But neither is it a ghost or horror story in the classic sense and so will disappoint if that is what is expected as well. What it is is an exploration of despair, revenge and redemption set against the decaying backdrop of the faded glory of the towns between Asbury Park and Spring Lake. Take the story on its own merits and go where it leads is my advice. Live a little.
I really liked the writing. There is a very noir feel to the way Doyle narrates the events first person and a certain nihilism to a lot of his observations that can be quite amusing. The other characters are also good and his interations with them very well written. Hodges the local detective he both assists and irritates is great as is her right hand man, Ed Hess to name just two.
The pace is slow, giving the story time to unfold but never dull or boring. When events do occur they are almost jarring and some of the more supernatural experiences of Doyle did send shivers down my spine.
The revelations of the story behind everything does work (in the terms of the book) and closure is finally achieved at the end, I couldn't think of a loose end that wasn't tidied up. Yes there isn't a rational explanation for everything - at least not if filtered by Doyle's somewhat damaged perception - but there is an explanation.
I didn't hesitate to give this book 5 stars. It was one of those that I enjoyed reading hugely and didn't want to get to the end... but wanted to get to the end to find out what happened. Overall I rate this book very highly.
Rating: Lots of violence, language and dead bodies
Doyle's problems are many: His wife has discovered that he had an affair, he is in withdrawal from his drug and alcohol abuse and he is still recovering from being shot. But far from getting away from it all his vacation just throws mysterious deaths at Doyle and strange things happen. He hears Pink Floyd's Wish You Were Here playing from what seems like every car that passes and every shop he goes into as well as an old callope fairground tune. He starts to persuade himself that events are connected and sets out to find out what is going on.
This book definitely follows its own path and refused to be pigeon- holed into one genre or another. In the main this is a police procedural with Doyle assisting the local police with a gang related shooting and his own investigations into events that occurred in the 1970s in Canada. But the weirdness of the Pink Floyd, scratches and greasepaint (to name just a few of the odd occurrences that Doyle encounters) takes it beyond this and into the realms of the paranormal with Doyle convinced he is being haunted by the ghost of a dead teenager - or that he is going insane.
All this means that it is going to divide opinion (and quick check of the scores given to the book confirm that). It is not a standard police procedural so will disappoint if that is what is expected. But neither is it a ghost or horror story in the classic sense and so will disappoint if that is what is expected as well. What it is is an exploration of despair, revenge and redemption set against the decaying backdrop of the faded glory of the towns between Asbury Park and Spring Lake. Take the story on its own merits and go where it leads is my advice. Live a little.
I really liked the writing. There is a very noir feel to the way Doyle narrates the events first person and a certain nihilism to a lot of his observations that can be quite amusing. The other characters are also good and his interations with them very well written. Hodges the local detective he both assists and irritates is great as is her right hand man, Ed Hess to name just two.
The pace is slow, giving the story time to unfold but never dull or boring. When events do occur they are almost jarring and some of the more supernatural experiences of Doyle did send shivers down my spine.
The revelations of the story behind everything does work (in the terms of the book) and closure is finally achieved at the end, I couldn't think of a loose end that wasn't tidied up. Yes there isn't a rational explanation for everything - at least not if filtered by Doyle's somewhat damaged perception - but there is an explanation.
I didn't hesitate to give this book 5 stars. It was one of those that I enjoyed reading hugely and didn't want to get to the end... but wanted to get to the end to find out what happened. Overall I rate this book very highly.
Rating: Lots of violence, language and dead bodies
156Reviews (7 KP) rated Dark Waters (2019) in Movies
May 1, 2020
Films are important.
Films are important to us all for many different reasons, they show what we are, what we can be, what we aspire to be, of who we are. Sometimes that comes in the form of escapism, of dreaming that we can be better, Mark Ruffalo is no stranger to the genre I'm referring to, sometimes shows us our darkest fears and that we can overcome them, and sometimes, it shows us just how low, we as people can get, and never offer any kind of redemption. Dark Waters manages to be all of these things. A small intro before the film began had me franticly signing up to numerous petitions the second the film ended, joining a cause I didn't even know existed before I sat down to watch. This is why film is important, and why you should watch Dark Waters as soon as you can. So why the 3 out of 5 rating? Surely a film that EVERYONE should watch should get top marks, right? Unfortunately not.
The film begins with Rob Bilott (Mark Ruffalo), a corporate defence attorney, whose office is visited by a farmer from his home town, trying to raise a legal case against DuPont, a multi-billion dollar business, the towns biggest employer, and a chemical company at the heart of potentially poisoning the towns water supply. As Billot investigates the scale of the issue, and its inevitable cover up, it all becomes alarmingly clear. Thousands of people are being poisoned, they're health will likely deteriorate and life threatening illnesses are now a high probability. To take a line from the recent movie Bombshell “somebody has to stand up, somebody has to get mad.”
That anger that should be felt, but for all the terrifying facts about the poisoning these people received on a daily basis, it never comes, the rage should be palpable. Instead it opts for giving us all the information, teaching about regulation and government intervention, or lack thereof, and the only temper in the film shows comes as a heated exchange in a board room that blows over as soon as it comes, and protesters outside courtrooms for fleeting moments throughout the movie. It should be seething instead of showing, giving us the knowledge we need through gritted teeth, not clinical, scientific and impersonal.
Dark Waters is off the mark with its tone, Mark Ruffalo's high-priced lawyer is too uncertain, a little too every-man, never really portrayed a hot-shot or an underdog, and the supporting cast fall into “Good Guy” or “Bad Guy” far too easily with no exploration into any depth of character. One scene has a DuPont representative, shown in great detail, every undisputable, despicable thing that his company has done to these people, and listens attentively, never upset or defiant but instead seeming slightly bored, before getting up and leaving. Every scene feels like it should be emotionally hard-hitting but never raises above a tap on the shoulder.
As the lesson goes on, the complete lack of morals DuPont has, becomes shockingly clear as they drag the case on for as long as they can, making sure Billot's firm spend more money and time than they are willing to pay. Bilot's home life becomes strained, which distracts from the main thread more than adds to it plot, he becomes distant from his wife, a woefully underused Anne Hathaway, and his health deteriorates under the weight of fighting, and in the end, the conclusion is murkier than the water supply. But he still fights, and in real life, Rob Billot is still fighting to this day to help the West Virginia community, and to change the way the corporations are regulated worldwide.
This film is important, and everyone should see it because it's message, just don't see it for its entertainment value, because that's few and far between.
Films are important to us all for many different reasons, they show what we are, what we can be, what we aspire to be, of who we are. Sometimes that comes in the form of escapism, of dreaming that we can be better, Mark Ruffalo is no stranger to the genre I'm referring to, sometimes shows us our darkest fears and that we can overcome them, and sometimes, it shows us just how low, we as people can get, and never offer any kind of redemption. Dark Waters manages to be all of these things. A small intro before the film began had me franticly signing up to numerous petitions the second the film ended, joining a cause I didn't even know existed before I sat down to watch. This is why film is important, and why you should watch Dark Waters as soon as you can. So why the 3 out of 5 rating? Surely a film that EVERYONE should watch should get top marks, right? Unfortunately not.
The film begins with Rob Bilott (Mark Ruffalo), a corporate defence attorney, whose office is visited by a farmer from his home town, trying to raise a legal case against DuPont, a multi-billion dollar business, the towns biggest employer, and a chemical company at the heart of potentially poisoning the towns water supply. As Billot investigates the scale of the issue, and its inevitable cover up, it all becomes alarmingly clear. Thousands of people are being poisoned, they're health will likely deteriorate and life threatening illnesses are now a high probability. To take a line from the recent movie Bombshell “somebody has to stand up, somebody has to get mad.”
That anger that should be felt, but for all the terrifying facts about the poisoning these people received on a daily basis, it never comes, the rage should be palpable. Instead it opts for giving us all the information, teaching about regulation and government intervention, or lack thereof, and the only temper in the film shows comes as a heated exchange in a board room that blows over as soon as it comes, and protesters outside courtrooms for fleeting moments throughout the movie. It should be seething instead of showing, giving us the knowledge we need through gritted teeth, not clinical, scientific and impersonal.
Dark Waters is off the mark with its tone, Mark Ruffalo's high-priced lawyer is too uncertain, a little too every-man, never really portrayed a hot-shot or an underdog, and the supporting cast fall into “Good Guy” or “Bad Guy” far too easily with no exploration into any depth of character. One scene has a DuPont representative, shown in great detail, every undisputable, despicable thing that his company has done to these people, and listens attentively, never upset or defiant but instead seeming slightly bored, before getting up and leaving. Every scene feels like it should be emotionally hard-hitting but never raises above a tap on the shoulder.
As the lesson goes on, the complete lack of morals DuPont has, becomes shockingly clear as they drag the case on for as long as they can, making sure Billot's firm spend more money and time than they are willing to pay. Bilot's home life becomes strained, which distracts from the main thread more than adds to it plot, he becomes distant from his wife, a woefully underused Anne Hathaway, and his health deteriorates under the weight of fighting, and in the end, the conclusion is murkier than the water supply. But he still fights, and in real life, Rob Billot is still fighting to this day to help the West Virginia community, and to change the way the corporations are regulated worldwide.
This film is important, and everyone should see it because it's message, just don't see it for its entertainment value, because that's few and far between.
Andy K (10823 KP) rated Electric Dreams (1984) in Movies
Oct 13, 2019
Let me start off by saying I recently purchased a region free DVD/Blu Ray player for myself when I discovered there were films I have not seen in 20+ years because they have never had a DVD/Blu Ray release in the US, but are actually available overseas! When I discovered this fact, among the first movies I purchased is this 1980s classic which has been mostly forgotten due to its unavailability.
Miles is an unorganized, nerdy architect who is delighted to discover a young, beautiful cellist moving in to the apartment above his sparse decorated pad in San Francisco. At the same time, a work colleague tells Miles he should get himself organized so he doesn't miss meetings spending all his time working on a new earthquake=proof brick, his dream pet project. Miles heads to his local electronic store (80s version) and gets talked into buying one of these "new" personal computers which everyone seems to be getting.
After some initial difficulty during set up, Miles decides to fully jump in to the PC world and not only sets up his new toy, but decides to have it fully integrated into his apartment including running his lights, door locks and appliances. He then thinks it would be a good idea to do a mass download of information for his work servers to beef up his own unit's capacity. He quickly realizes this is an overload to his machine when it starts to buzz and flash. In a panic, he douses the machine with some champagne to cool it off inadvertently giving it the spark of "life".
His new machine works quickly to understand its new world around including listening and harmonizing music with the beautiful neighbor upstairs. This leads to the two town house cohabitants developing a relationship. This does not sit well with the PC eventually as "he" has now also evolved to the point where he wants to understand love. Tensions escalate and there is a confrontation for the ultimate fate of the relationships and who will ultimately get the girl.
Since it had been probably 30 years since I had seen Electric Dreams, one of those guilty pleasures from the 80s, I was extremely anxious to rewatch; however, was also worried a new viewing in my adulthood would ruin the magic I had remembered from my youth. I couldn't have been more wrong.
The first thing I had forgotten was all the humor of the film including those awkward moments when Miles and the computer where getting to know each other and the goofy dialogue. Also, it's funny how I read a lot of the functions the computer performed had to be simulated at the time since home PCs were still pretty new to everyone at that point, but now those functions are fairly commonplace including the aforementioned "Smart Home" features among other things.
Yes fine, there are plenty of 80s staples present almost immediately like music montages, bad hairdos, leg warmers and boom boxes, but that still gives the movie charm. After thinking about it, there were elements from other 80s classics like Weird Science, WarGames, and a lot of Short Circuit where an AI was learning about itself. Who remembers Max Headroom?
The soundtrack for the film is also front and center with much of it playing a key role in the budding relationship between Miles and his musical love interest, but it works well and still holds up.
I also have to mention Virginia Madsen. I looked up she was 23 when she made this film (she looked like she was 18), but still looks as remarkable as she did then (80s crush speaking here).
I'm sure I probably still revere this movie more than the people who actually made it, but I can handle that.
Miles is an unorganized, nerdy architect who is delighted to discover a young, beautiful cellist moving in to the apartment above his sparse decorated pad in San Francisco. At the same time, a work colleague tells Miles he should get himself organized so he doesn't miss meetings spending all his time working on a new earthquake=proof brick, his dream pet project. Miles heads to his local electronic store (80s version) and gets talked into buying one of these "new" personal computers which everyone seems to be getting.
After some initial difficulty during set up, Miles decides to fully jump in to the PC world and not only sets up his new toy, but decides to have it fully integrated into his apartment including running his lights, door locks and appliances. He then thinks it would be a good idea to do a mass download of information for his work servers to beef up his own unit's capacity. He quickly realizes this is an overload to his machine when it starts to buzz and flash. In a panic, he douses the machine with some champagne to cool it off inadvertently giving it the spark of "life".
His new machine works quickly to understand its new world around including listening and harmonizing music with the beautiful neighbor upstairs. This leads to the two town house cohabitants developing a relationship. This does not sit well with the PC eventually as "he" has now also evolved to the point where he wants to understand love. Tensions escalate and there is a confrontation for the ultimate fate of the relationships and who will ultimately get the girl.
Since it had been probably 30 years since I had seen Electric Dreams, one of those guilty pleasures from the 80s, I was extremely anxious to rewatch; however, was also worried a new viewing in my adulthood would ruin the magic I had remembered from my youth. I couldn't have been more wrong.
The first thing I had forgotten was all the humor of the film including those awkward moments when Miles and the computer where getting to know each other and the goofy dialogue. Also, it's funny how I read a lot of the functions the computer performed had to be simulated at the time since home PCs were still pretty new to everyone at that point, but now those functions are fairly commonplace including the aforementioned "Smart Home" features among other things.
Yes fine, there are plenty of 80s staples present almost immediately like music montages, bad hairdos, leg warmers and boom boxes, but that still gives the movie charm. After thinking about it, there were elements from other 80s classics like Weird Science, WarGames, and a lot of Short Circuit where an AI was learning about itself. Who remembers Max Headroom?
The soundtrack for the film is also front and center with much of it playing a key role in the budding relationship between Miles and his musical love interest, but it works well and still holds up.
I also have to mention Virginia Madsen. I looked up she was 23 when she made this film (she looked like she was 18), but still looks as remarkable as she did then (80s crush speaking here).
I'm sure I probably still revere this movie more than the people who actually made it, but I can handle that.
SS
ScoreStream Sports Scores
Sports and Social Networking
App
ScoreStream allows you to share scores, photos, videos and chat with fans all over the world. This...
AikidoGuide
Sports and Education
App
THE AIKIDO GUIDE is a powerful tool that fully utilizes app technology to give a unique learning...
Jamie (131 KP) rated Men Explain Things to Me: And Other Essays in Books
Jul 26, 2017
Poorly written (2 more)
Not intersectional
Lack of sources in the physical version
Mediocre essays, I wish I could've liked this more
Disappointment and shallow is probably the most apt descriptions I can think of when describing this book which is really sad because I usually enjoy feminist essays.
The titular essay, Men Explain Things to Me, discusses the author’s experiences with men explaining things with the assumption that she couldn’t possibly know due to her gender. While I was nodding my head that yes, I have experienced this as well, there was not much else. There was little to no research into the history of why this might be or any additional insight into the topic which was really a let down, I didn’t feel like I got much out of it. I should have known that the rest of the essays in this collection would be the same but I was optimistic.
One of the better essays was In Praise of the Threat: What Marriage Equality Really Means which discussed how the fight for marriage equality, or same-sex marriage, has been redefining the traditional gendered views of marriage and I thought that this was really great. However in a later essay Solnit goes on to claim that gay marriage would never have been possible if it weren’t for feminists redefining marriage as a union between equals, which is a statement I found both bold and mildly insulting.
I also need to address a specific statement that became the basis the essay, The Longest War, which was the following:
“Violence doesn’t have a race, a class, a religion,
or a nationality, but it does have a gender.”
It is very apparent that Solnit doesn’t know a thing about intersectionality because any minority can tell you that the statement above is laughably false. Is it true, statistically, that more reported violent crimes are perpetrated by men? Yes. Do people in many societies have an issue with toxic masculinity? Yes. Does this mean, then, that violence has a gender, that it is purely a male problem? No. To say that it doesn’t have a specific race, class, religion, or nationality despite evidence to the contrary throughout history is naïve.
Solnit continues on to rant about how men are the almost exclusive source of violence and assault and how everyone should acknowledge this so we can go about finding solutions. She doesn’t go into much more depth than that or offer up much in the way of solutions herself. A large portion of the essay is just her fluffing up the piece with a literal list of vague examples which might not mean much to folks less knowledgeable about violent crimes. There are also quite a few statistics thrown in with absolutely no sources to back up the claims.
Not that I doubt the information provided, but in times where people cherry pick the news to fit their own narrative books like this become questionable. After flipping through the back of the book I eventually found a note in the acknowledgements section that Solnit chose to edit out her sources for the book version, but that they could be found on the online versions of her essays. It’s careless and lazy for an author that wants to be taken seriously.
Solnit also postulates at several points that because she has published several books that she is an authority and I found that sort of attitude to be self defeating. She talks about another author that she argued with about Virginia Woolfe and claims that she had “won” which just makes the author sound childish, and I wondered what the point of the essay was to begin with. It felt out of place for the rest of the collection and any connections she attempted to make were shaky at best.
I think that Solnit had some good ideas but the execution was extremely poor. Because she spends so much time listing examples and being over dramatic in her descriptions the actual point of discussion in her essays becomes muddled and unclear. There are far better essays out there that address the exact same topics. Men Explain Things to Me just wasn’t worth the time.
The titular essay, Men Explain Things to Me, discusses the author’s experiences with men explaining things with the assumption that she couldn’t possibly know due to her gender. While I was nodding my head that yes, I have experienced this as well, there was not much else. There was little to no research into the history of why this might be or any additional insight into the topic which was really a let down, I didn’t feel like I got much out of it. I should have known that the rest of the essays in this collection would be the same but I was optimistic.
One of the better essays was In Praise of the Threat: What Marriage Equality Really Means which discussed how the fight for marriage equality, or same-sex marriage, has been redefining the traditional gendered views of marriage and I thought that this was really great. However in a later essay Solnit goes on to claim that gay marriage would never have been possible if it weren’t for feminists redefining marriage as a union between equals, which is a statement I found both bold and mildly insulting.
I also need to address a specific statement that became the basis the essay, The Longest War, which was the following:
“Violence doesn’t have a race, a class, a religion,
or a nationality, but it does have a gender.”
It is very apparent that Solnit doesn’t know a thing about intersectionality because any minority can tell you that the statement above is laughably false. Is it true, statistically, that more reported violent crimes are perpetrated by men? Yes. Do people in many societies have an issue with toxic masculinity? Yes. Does this mean, then, that violence has a gender, that it is purely a male problem? No. To say that it doesn’t have a specific race, class, religion, or nationality despite evidence to the contrary throughout history is naïve.
Solnit continues on to rant about how men are the almost exclusive source of violence and assault and how everyone should acknowledge this so we can go about finding solutions. She doesn’t go into much more depth than that or offer up much in the way of solutions herself. A large portion of the essay is just her fluffing up the piece with a literal list of vague examples which might not mean much to folks less knowledgeable about violent crimes. There are also quite a few statistics thrown in with absolutely no sources to back up the claims.
Not that I doubt the information provided, but in times where people cherry pick the news to fit their own narrative books like this become questionable. After flipping through the back of the book I eventually found a note in the acknowledgements section that Solnit chose to edit out her sources for the book version, but that they could be found on the online versions of her essays. It’s careless and lazy for an author that wants to be taken seriously.
Solnit also postulates at several points that because she has published several books that she is an authority and I found that sort of attitude to be self defeating. She talks about another author that she argued with about Virginia Woolfe and claims that she had “won” which just makes the author sound childish, and I wondered what the point of the essay was to begin with. It felt out of place for the rest of the collection and any connections she attempted to make were shaky at best.
I think that Solnit had some good ideas but the execution was extremely poor. Because she spends so much time listing examples and being over dramatic in her descriptions the actual point of discussion in her essays becomes muddled and unclear. There are far better essays out there that address the exact same topics. Men Explain Things to Me just wasn’t worth the time.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated the PC version of Fallout 76 in Video Games
Feb 8, 2019
Fallout 76: Getting Better With Each Update
The Fallout series has made the leap online with Fallout 76 and it is an ambitious attempt to take the franchise in a new direction. Set as a resident of Vault 76; players will craft a character and be amongst the first to venture into the Post-Apocalyptic world set in the Virginia wilderness as they attempt to help rebuild a new society.
Along the way players will encounter all manner of mutated creatures and threats that have zero qualms about tearing a player to pieces or bringing an arsenal of weapons to take down players.
Anyone who has played any of the series will know that gathering, trading, and crafting is essential to survival as being able to buy, repair, and exchange weapons and armor is essential as they will break and need to be upgraded frequently.
This is always a trick for some players such as myself as I never know what to fully prioritize when I encounter scrap and can quickly become overburdened. This makes for some very tough choices as player movement will be very restricted and players will be unable to Fast Travel to previously explored areas of the map.
There is also the matter of needing to ensure that an adequate supply of food, beverages, and medicines are available to restore health as in a radiated area; even stopping for lunch can cause potential damage and mutations to happen.
There are numerous weapons available to players from crude Pipe Guns to more advanced energy weapons and machine guns and knives. I have found that Melee weapons such as an Axe or a Sledgehammer can do wonders as they do pack a solid punch but are slow and unyielding.
The map is extremely vast and filled with many areas to explore from old towns to hotels, shops, a mall, an airport, train stations, and pretty much anything else you would expect in a typical community.
One of the biggest issues in the game is the numerous bugs which hampered the game at launch. Bethesda has worked to fix them through several patches but issues still remain as I write this so players will have to understand that this is part of the game and being addressed but they will likely encounter issues along the way.
The game has taken a considerable amount of abuse for the state of the game at launch and while I freely admit there are issues; I have had a lot of fun playing the game and have logged a considerable amount of time in it. Despite the frustrations; I have been drawn back to the game time and again to play more. Players I have encountered have been generally helpful and friendly and the game has not become an open Free For All as the Bounty systems in place make it less appealing for players to pick off inexperienced players who are out minding their own business. Some higher-level players have been very generous in passing and have initiated trades to give me High-Level weapons even though I was not able to use them until I reached a higher level.
There are various Pop-Up events that happen where players can get some nice rewards and slipping into your Power Armor to take down a pack of Scorchers is always a fun experience.
In many ways this is one of the hardest reviews I have had to write as I can see how some people can be disappointed with the game and will take serious issues with the bugs and general direction. I also see the fun in the game and the progress being made with the updates and enjoy the game despite the issues. If you are patient and temper your expectations with the understanding that the game players have now is not the game they will have several months down the road, then Fallout 76 may be the escapist game you are looking for.
3.5 stars out of 5.
Along the way players will encounter all manner of mutated creatures and threats that have zero qualms about tearing a player to pieces or bringing an arsenal of weapons to take down players.
Anyone who has played any of the series will know that gathering, trading, and crafting is essential to survival as being able to buy, repair, and exchange weapons and armor is essential as they will break and need to be upgraded frequently.
This is always a trick for some players such as myself as I never know what to fully prioritize when I encounter scrap and can quickly become overburdened. This makes for some very tough choices as player movement will be very restricted and players will be unable to Fast Travel to previously explored areas of the map.
There is also the matter of needing to ensure that an adequate supply of food, beverages, and medicines are available to restore health as in a radiated area; even stopping for lunch can cause potential damage and mutations to happen.
There are numerous weapons available to players from crude Pipe Guns to more advanced energy weapons and machine guns and knives. I have found that Melee weapons such as an Axe or a Sledgehammer can do wonders as they do pack a solid punch but are slow and unyielding.
The map is extremely vast and filled with many areas to explore from old towns to hotels, shops, a mall, an airport, train stations, and pretty much anything else you would expect in a typical community.
One of the biggest issues in the game is the numerous bugs which hampered the game at launch. Bethesda has worked to fix them through several patches but issues still remain as I write this so players will have to understand that this is part of the game and being addressed but they will likely encounter issues along the way.
The game has taken a considerable amount of abuse for the state of the game at launch and while I freely admit there are issues; I have had a lot of fun playing the game and have logged a considerable amount of time in it. Despite the frustrations; I have been drawn back to the game time and again to play more. Players I have encountered have been generally helpful and friendly and the game has not become an open Free For All as the Bounty systems in place make it less appealing for players to pick off inexperienced players who are out minding their own business. Some higher-level players have been very generous in passing and have initiated trades to give me High-Level weapons even though I was not able to use them until I reached a higher level.
There are various Pop-Up events that happen where players can get some nice rewards and slipping into your Power Armor to take down a pack of Scorchers is always a fun experience.
In many ways this is one of the hardest reviews I have had to write as I can see how some people can be disappointed with the game and will take serious issues with the bugs and general direction. I also see the fun in the game and the progress being made with the updates and enjoy the game despite the issues. If you are patient and temper your expectations with the understanding that the game players have now is not the game they will have several months down the road, then Fallout 76 may be the escapist game you are looking for.
3.5 stars out of 5.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated BlacKkKlansman (2018) in Movies
Oct 1, 2018 (Updated Oct 2, 2018)
Brilliant performances by the entire cast (1 more)
Funny, while still being relevant and sending a serious message
Spike Lee's Best In Years
BlackkKlansman released while I was on holiday, so after playing a bit of catchup at my local cinema, I eventually got around to seeing this film that I was looking forward to ever since seeing the first trailer for it. It lived up to my expectations and I really enjoyed it. Also, just a heads up; I usually don't like to get political in movie reviews, but I feel that with a film as politically charged as this one, it makes it inevitable to get around, so there may be some stuff in here that you disagree with.
The movie worked in several different ways, it definitely worked as a comedy and had me laughing raucously at certain points and then it would drop an important and relevant point on you and suddenly things wouldn't seem so funny any more. All of a sudden, these laughably ignorant racists suddenly became a very real threat, which I don't think was an accident in paralleling how Lee feels about a good amount of modern day Americans like Donald Trump. Remember when he first announced that he was running for office and everybody, (including the current president at that time,) laughed at him? Now he is the most powerful man in the world and poses a very real threat to minorities in the US. I thought that this was a very clever, subtle way to take a shot without being too blatant.
Then there was a slightly more obvious shot at him when characters are discussing a man filled with hate potentially working his way into power and getting the majority of the American public on his side and how awful that would be. Although this particular dig is way more obvious, it still didn't bother me too much and I accepted it as a filmmaker using his platform to send a message to someone that he morally disagrees with.
The final dig was a step too far for me. During a phone conversation between David Duke and Ron Stallworth, Duke says something about getting rid of non-whites to "make America great again." It was so heavy handed that the characters onscreen might as well have turned around and winked at the camera. Please don't get me wrong, I think that Donald Trump is a scumbag and am totally fine with Lee taking a couple of shots at him, but I much preferred the more subtle undertones that he sent his way earlier in the film to this blatantly obvious, slightly cringey callout.
I did enjoy Lee's references to Blaxploitation films of the 70's and I liked the whole aesthetic that this movie had. The score was brilliant and the cast did a great job, the performance that stayed with me the most after the film, was Corey Hawkins monologue as Kwame Ture. He only appears in one scene in the film, but his speech, (in which I felt he strongly channelled Denzel,) was mesmerising and electrifying to watch.
The way that Spike Lee chose to end this movie has stirred some controversy, but I found it to be incredibly powerful and moving. It really sent home the message that this kind of intense, despicable hatred isn't just something that was around in the 70's and 80's, it is something that is still sadly prevalent and happening in today's society and we have people in power, like Trump, who is willing to defend and stand by these people and their violent, hateful behaviour. It was also a fitting tribute to Heather Heyer who was killed when a car crashed into a crowd of people who had been peacefully protesting the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia one-year prior to this film's release.
Overall, this is a funny, entertaining, uncomfortable and anger-inducing film and all of these emotion are equally relevant. I also feel that this movie does exactly what it intends to on a moral level, whether you agree with the ideals portrayed or not, Lee does a terrific job in turning a period piece movie into a painfully relevant message for modern audiences.
The movie worked in several different ways, it definitely worked as a comedy and had me laughing raucously at certain points and then it would drop an important and relevant point on you and suddenly things wouldn't seem so funny any more. All of a sudden, these laughably ignorant racists suddenly became a very real threat, which I don't think was an accident in paralleling how Lee feels about a good amount of modern day Americans like Donald Trump. Remember when he first announced that he was running for office and everybody, (including the current president at that time,) laughed at him? Now he is the most powerful man in the world and poses a very real threat to minorities in the US. I thought that this was a very clever, subtle way to take a shot without being too blatant.
Then there was a slightly more obvious shot at him when characters are discussing a man filled with hate potentially working his way into power and getting the majority of the American public on his side and how awful that would be. Although this particular dig is way more obvious, it still didn't bother me too much and I accepted it as a filmmaker using his platform to send a message to someone that he morally disagrees with.
The final dig was a step too far for me. During a phone conversation between David Duke and Ron Stallworth, Duke says something about getting rid of non-whites to "make America great again." It was so heavy handed that the characters onscreen might as well have turned around and winked at the camera. Please don't get me wrong, I think that Donald Trump is a scumbag and am totally fine with Lee taking a couple of shots at him, but I much preferred the more subtle undertones that he sent his way earlier in the film to this blatantly obvious, slightly cringey callout.
I did enjoy Lee's references to Blaxploitation films of the 70's and I liked the whole aesthetic that this movie had. The score was brilliant and the cast did a great job, the performance that stayed with me the most after the film, was Corey Hawkins monologue as Kwame Ture. He only appears in one scene in the film, but his speech, (in which I felt he strongly channelled Denzel,) was mesmerising and electrifying to watch.
The way that Spike Lee chose to end this movie has stirred some controversy, but I found it to be incredibly powerful and moving. It really sent home the message that this kind of intense, despicable hatred isn't just something that was around in the 70's and 80's, it is something that is still sadly prevalent and happening in today's society and we have people in power, like Trump, who is willing to defend and stand by these people and their violent, hateful behaviour. It was also a fitting tribute to Heather Heyer who was killed when a car crashed into a crowd of people who had been peacefully protesting the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia one-year prior to this film's release.
Overall, this is a funny, entertaining, uncomfortable and anger-inducing film and all of these emotion are equally relevant. I also feel that this movie does exactly what it intends to on a moral level, whether you agree with the ideals portrayed or not, Lee does a terrific job in turning a period piece movie into a painfully relevant message for modern audiences.