Search
Search results
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Cosmic Run: Express in Tabletop Games
Oct 27, 2021
Components are obviously an integral part of games. Some games are beasts when it comes to components – boasting large numbers of included components to bolster the gameplay. And then you have games that have mastered the art of gameplay utilizing a minimal number of components. Cosmic Run: Express is one of these games, consisting of only 25 cards. But does the gameplay hold up for such a physically small game? Read on to find out!
The latest game in Dr. Finn’s Cosmic Run universe, Cosmic Run: Express pits two players against each other, racing to be the first to reach 3 new planets. It is a game of area influence and simultaneous action selection played over a series of rounds in which players are playing cards to the 3 planets to advance their movement trackers the necessary 12 points to reach the planets. To setup the game, place the 3 planet cards in numerical order between the two players. Each player takes a set of 3 movement trackers in their chosen color and places one on their side of each planet card. All of the movement trackers are set to 0 for the start of the game. Players are dealt 6 ship cards, and the game is ready to play!
To begin a round, players look at their hand of 6 cards and choose 2 to pass to their opponent. Taking the new cards into your hand, you can decide to discard 1 card and draw a new card. This is not required, but can be performed by each player in each round. Next, players will simultaneously choose a card from their hand to be played face-up next to any planet, beneath their corresponding movement tracker. You can only play a maximum of 2 cards per planet.. If the color of the card you play at a planet matches the color at the top of your movement tracker, you may immediately move your tracker up by 1. Play continues, simultaneously playing cards, until all 6 cards in hand have been played and each movement tracker has 2 cards next to it.
Now we move to the scoring/movement phase. Starting with Planet 1, compare the 2-card hands and determine which player played the best hand. The hierarchy for determining best hand is described in the rules, and that player earns 2 movement points for that planet, and adjusts their tracker accordingly. After scoring best hand, players score arrows. Underneath the number on each card is an arrow pointing either left or right, with a corresponding color. Beginning with the player who did not win best hand, look at the arrows on their 2-card hand, and score movement points if the arrows match any cards in their adjacent planets. Repeat these scoring steps for Planets 2 and 3. If, by the end of scoring, a player has earned 12 movement points and reached all 3 planets, that player is the winner! If not all 3 planets have been reached, collect all the cards, shuffle them, deal 6 to each player, and begin a new round. Rounds continue until one player has reached all 3 planets.
As a fan of the Cosmic Run universe, I was excited when I saw Cosmic Run: Express on Kickstarter. It seemed light, simple, and in the same universe as other games I loved, so I decided to back it. How does it fare? I think it’s great! For starters, I really appreciate that it is a small, portable game that can be played virtually anywhere. Lots of games these days are real table-hogs, and I enjoy the minimalistic approach of this game. Getting into the gameplay – it requires way more strategy than you initially think. There are 3 different ways in which you can score movement points (color matching, best hand, and arrow scoring) and you need to utilize all 3 for success. You are constantly evaluating your hand of cards and trying to determine which placements will yield the most points for you. Maybe you don’t have a color match, but the arrow on that card could make up for that and earn you up to 2 movement points. Another neat strategic point is that you have to pay attention to your opponent as well. The best hand points are a direct head-to-head between players, so not only do you have to maximize your own strategic points with card placement, you have to watch your opponent’s card placements and see if you can get a better hand than they do for a given planet. You are constantly engaged in this game, and that’s what I love about it.
Another great thing about Cosmic Run: Express is that it plays so quickly and effortlessly. Yes, at first there’s a tiny bit of a learning curve to remember the hierarchy for best hand, but after a couple of rounds the game flow is streamlined. It only takes 10-15 minutes to play, so it is easy to play “just one more” when you’re done. It’s light and fast enough to be a great filler between games, but it is also strategic enough to hold its own in a full game night.
So overall, how do we feel about this game? For being a nice and small 2-player game, it packs quite a punch! I was very pleasantly surprised by the amount of engagement and strategy in this game, and it is definitely one that I want to play multiple times in a row. So mission accomplished, Dr. Finn – in this case, less IS more. It’s a great little card game, and I highly recommend giving it a shot if you’re looking for something small but mighty. Purple Phoenix games gives Cosmic Run: Express a stellar 9 / 12.
The latest game in Dr. Finn’s Cosmic Run universe, Cosmic Run: Express pits two players against each other, racing to be the first to reach 3 new planets. It is a game of area influence and simultaneous action selection played over a series of rounds in which players are playing cards to the 3 planets to advance their movement trackers the necessary 12 points to reach the planets. To setup the game, place the 3 planet cards in numerical order between the two players. Each player takes a set of 3 movement trackers in their chosen color and places one on their side of each planet card. All of the movement trackers are set to 0 for the start of the game. Players are dealt 6 ship cards, and the game is ready to play!
To begin a round, players look at their hand of 6 cards and choose 2 to pass to their opponent. Taking the new cards into your hand, you can decide to discard 1 card and draw a new card. This is not required, but can be performed by each player in each round. Next, players will simultaneously choose a card from their hand to be played face-up next to any planet, beneath their corresponding movement tracker. You can only play a maximum of 2 cards per planet.. If the color of the card you play at a planet matches the color at the top of your movement tracker, you may immediately move your tracker up by 1. Play continues, simultaneously playing cards, until all 6 cards in hand have been played and each movement tracker has 2 cards next to it.
Now we move to the scoring/movement phase. Starting with Planet 1, compare the 2-card hands and determine which player played the best hand. The hierarchy for determining best hand is described in the rules, and that player earns 2 movement points for that planet, and adjusts their tracker accordingly. After scoring best hand, players score arrows. Underneath the number on each card is an arrow pointing either left or right, with a corresponding color. Beginning with the player who did not win best hand, look at the arrows on their 2-card hand, and score movement points if the arrows match any cards in their adjacent planets. Repeat these scoring steps for Planets 2 and 3. If, by the end of scoring, a player has earned 12 movement points and reached all 3 planets, that player is the winner! If not all 3 planets have been reached, collect all the cards, shuffle them, deal 6 to each player, and begin a new round. Rounds continue until one player has reached all 3 planets.
As a fan of the Cosmic Run universe, I was excited when I saw Cosmic Run: Express on Kickstarter. It seemed light, simple, and in the same universe as other games I loved, so I decided to back it. How does it fare? I think it’s great! For starters, I really appreciate that it is a small, portable game that can be played virtually anywhere. Lots of games these days are real table-hogs, and I enjoy the minimalistic approach of this game. Getting into the gameplay – it requires way more strategy than you initially think. There are 3 different ways in which you can score movement points (color matching, best hand, and arrow scoring) and you need to utilize all 3 for success. You are constantly evaluating your hand of cards and trying to determine which placements will yield the most points for you. Maybe you don’t have a color match, but the arrow on that card could make up for that and earn you up to 2 movement points. Another neat strategic point is that you have to pay attention to your opponent as well. The best hand points are a direct head-to-head between players, so not only do you have to maximize your own strategic points with card placement, you have to watch your opponent’s card placements and see if you can get a better hand than they do for a given planet. You are constantly engaged in this game, and that’s what I love about it.
Another great thing about Cosmic Run: Express is that it plays so quickly and effortlessly. Yes, at first there’s a tiny bit of a learning curve to remember the hierarchy for best hand, but after a couple of rounds the game flow is streamlined. It only takes 10-15 minutes to play, so it is easy to play “just one more” when you’re done. It’s light and fast enough to be a great filler between games, but it is also strategic enough to hold its own in a full game night.
So overall, how do we feel about this game? For being a nice and small 2-player game, it packs quite a punch! I was very pleasantly surprised by the amount of engagement and strategy in this game, and it is definitely one that I want to play multiple times in a row. So mission accomplished, Dr. Finn – in this case, less IS more. It’s a great little card game, and I highly recommend giving it a shot if you’re looking for something small but mighty. Purple Phoenix games gives Cosmic Run: Express a stellar 9 / 12.
Lottie disney bookworm (1056 KP) rated The Story of Silence in Books
Jun 17, 2021
An Arthurian tale, adapted from a 13th century lost poem, containing dragons and knights but tackling the fluid notion of gender? Sign me up! Literally! Thank you to Eidelweiss+ and HarperVoyager for the opportunity to read this in exchange for an honest review.
Silence is born a girl, but due to the laws of inheritance is raised a boy, with only 3 people knowing their true gender (one of whom, initially, is not Silence). The Story of Silence follows Silence from birth, showing their struggles between Nature and Nurture in the medieval period.
The writing style of this fantasy novel is remarkable, with an almost lyrical, ballad quality to it. The settings of Cornwall, and later Brittany, are described in such a way that captivates the reader, transporting them to the jousting fields, the towering castles and the courts of Earls and Kings.
The writing is at a slower pace, a literary journey rather than a sprint and for that reason I didn’t quite get the feeling of “I can’t put this down”, particularly in the middle of the novel. However, the twists and turns in Silence’s life were always quick to pull me back in.
As a character, the reader loves Silence from the very beginning. None of the struggles of their life are of their own making. Indeed, there are moments within this story where it would have been much simpler to tell the truth but Silence does not, displaying true knightly qualities of courage and loyalty. If I had one criticism of this book it is that, after his first “courses”, Silence doesn’t seem to find disguising his Nature very difficult., Yes, he binds his chest but he also travels on the road with male companions for years with no further mention of the more natural signs of his true nature.
The cast of characters surrounding Silence are also excellent, we have the troubled Earl Cador who, despite his original plan, it seems cannot love his child as he should; Griselle and the seneschal who do love and care for Silence and then there is Merlin.
Now, I know Silence should be my favourite character but Merlin stole the show in my opinion! There is no stoical wizard in Myers’ world, oh no! Merlin is a naked, disgusting old man who has an awful habit of laughing out loud at the unseen futures of those he passes. I also appreciated how Merlin wasn’t a solution to Silence’s problems (in fact the opposite is true!). Despite the magical undercurrent within this story, Merlin doesn’t fix everything with the flick of a magic wand – conversely he forces Silence to look inside and solve their own riddle, emphasising that you do not need to fit into one category or another, you can be both, you can be what you decide to be.
It should also be noted that, up to this point in the novel, Silence is referred to with the male pronoun, as that is how he sees himself. He is a boy. He is a knight! However, on processing Merlin’s world this pronoun notably changes to they and their. A beautiful detail that resonated how Silence had accepted their true identity.
The characterisation of women in The Story of Silence is something that has been picked up on a lot by my fellow reviewers and yes, the women in this book are often sex-crazed, deceitful, disloyal creatures. This is also an issue that is directly discussed within the author’s note, further proving that this was not an intentional slight on women. Alex Myers is an author, they are telling a story and that story takes place in the 13th century when, unfortunately, women were depicted like this. The main despicable action by a woman is essential to stay true to the poem. Was it frustrating as a female reader? Sometimes. But are there an equal number of ugly characteristics shown in the male characters? Absolutely!
The Story of Silence is a slow-burning tale which steadily unfurls into a captivating narrative which will stay with the reader long after the final page. The original 13th century poem captures the concept of gender so beautifully but Alex Myers takes this even further, handling Silence’s journey with love and compassion. I feel very lucky to have read this.
Silence is born a girl, but due to the laws of inheritance is raised a boy, with only 3 people knowing their true gender (one of whom, initially, is not Silence). The Story of Silence follows Silence from birth, showing their struggles between Nature and Nurture in the medieval period.
The writing style of this fantasy novel is remarkable, with an almost lyrical, ballad quality to it. The settings of Cornwall, and later Brittany, are described in such a way that captivates the reader, transporting them to the jousting fields, the towering castles and the courts of Earls and Kings.
The writing is at a slower pace, a literary journey rather than a sprint and for that reason I didn’t quite get the feeling of “I can’t put this down”, particularly in the middle of the novel. However, the twists and turns in Silence’s life were always quick to pull me back in.
As a character, the reader loves Silence from the very beginning. None of the struggles of their life are of their own making. Indeed, there are moments within this story where it would have been much simpler to tell the truth but Silence does not, displaying true knightly qualities of courage and loyalty. If I had one criticism of this book it is that, after his first “courses”, Silence doesn’t seem to find disguising his Nature very difficult., Yes, he binds his chest but he also travels on the road with male companions for years with no further mention of the more natural signs of his true nature.
The cast of characters surrounding Silence are also excellent, we have the troubled Earl Cador who, despite his original plan, it seems cannot love his child as he should; Griselle and the seneschal who do love and care for Silence and then there is Merlin.
Now, I know Silence should be my favourite character but Merlin stole the show in my opinion! There is no stoical wizard in Myers’ world, oh no! Merlin is a naked, disgusting old man who has an awful habit of laughing out loud at the unseen futures of those he passes. I also appreciated how Merlin wasn’t a solution to Silence’s problems (in fact the opposite is true!). Despite the magical undercurrent within this story, Merlin doesn’t fix everything with the flick of a magic wand – conversely he forces Silence to look inside and solve their own riddle, emphasising that you do not need to fit into one category or another, you can be both, you can be what you decide to be.
It should also be noted that, up to this point in the novel, Silence is referred to with the male pronoun, as that is how he sees himself. He is a boy. He is a knight! However, on processing Merlin’s world this pronoun notably changes to they and their. A beautiful detail that resonated how Silence had accepted their true identity.
The characterisation of women in The Story of Silence is something that has been picked up on a lot by my fellow reviewers and yes, the women in this book are often sex-crazed, deceitful, disloyal creatures. This is also an issue that is directly discussed within the author’s note, further proving that this was not an intentional slight on women. Alex Myers is an author, they are telling a story and that story takes place in the 13th century when, unfortunately, women were depicted like this. The main despicable action by a woman is essential to stay true to the poem. Was it frustrating as a female reader? Sometimes. But are there an equal number of ugly characteristics shown in the male characters? Absolutely!
The Story of Silence is a slow-burning tale which steadily unfurls into a captivating narrative which will stay with the reader long after the final page. The original 13th century poem captures the concept of gender so beautifully but Alex Myers takes this even further, handling Silence’s journey with love and compassion. I feel very lucky to have read this.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Love, Simon (2018) in Movies
Jun 29, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
Simon Spier keeps a huge secret from his family, his friends, and all of his classmates: he's gay. When that secret is threatened, Simon must face everyone and come to terms with his identity.
I had been looking forward to this one, book adaptation... of course I was going to be... so getting this as our secret screening was fun great. But it really divided the pack and there was much discussion online about it after. But not so much about the film. I'm going to get the grumpy portion of this out of the way first.
I think this is only the second secret screening I've been to. The first one was Molly's Game, which again, was one I'd been looking forward to seeing, and when the card came up at the beginning I think only one person left. It certainly wasn't many. The card comes up for this one... well, it was like a mass exodus. Without the film even rolling I think we lost about half a dozen people. After the first couple of minutes we lost another load. It was that second lot that made me lose faith in humanity a little, because it wasn't more than seconds after Simon says that he's gay that I heard disapproving noises and footsteps trotting out of seats.
Most people online said the same thing about their cinemas. And I know that you don't have to watch every film ever made. But don't just turn your nose up at it because (and here's me being optimistic) it's a young adult film/novel. If you turned your nose up at it because its main character is gay... well... welcome to the real world, they're here, they're queer, and they're here to stay.
I was pleased to see that lots of people gave it a chance, and many seemed to enjoy it. There was a lot of hate for it from others though, and honestly, when you read the comments for it... well, just don't read the comments. For every good there is a bad, but most of the bad either just walked out or don't really give much in the way of a genuine excuse. Several feel like they're being cheated by Cineworld for showing things that aren't blockbusters... people... this isn't how these things work. Trust me, the company comes to the middle man who presents it to the consumer. Business 101. Companies know that you're going to pay to see their big blockbusters and buy their merchandise... why would they give it to you for free? (Yes I know we all have Unlimited cards and essentially get them for free, but you get my meaning.) There's already hype around them, they don't need more. Anyway, away from my rant.
Love, Simon was a wonderful film, and despite what some are saying, (sorry, swerving into rant territory there again) it was laugh out loud funny... and everyone was laughing. Except those people who left without giving it a chance... wow, sorry, I just can't let this go.
If you haven't quite forgotten your teenage years you'll see lots of bits in this that really ring a bell. Those awkward moments, the crushes, the annoying teachers, the pain. If you've experienced any of them then there will be bits that you physically react to. You can feel the emotions that are running around the characters, you know the decisions they're making are good, bad and terrible, and you can almost see the future. As the story unfolds you really do get pulled along with Simon. You feel his pain and you feel his joy.
A genuine smile inducing film. I think you can see my favourite bit in one of the trailers... straight people not having to come out... it honestly cracked me up.
Of course the book is in the TBR, I'll get round to it eventually. But regardless of how it stacks up next to the book is was a wonderful film. You can only hope that it is enlightening to some that watch it, and helpful to others.
I had been looking forward to this one, book adaptation... of course I was going to be... so getting this as our secret screening was fun great. But it really divided the pack and there was much discussion online about it after. But not so much about the film. I'm going to get the grumpy portion of this out of the way first.
I think this is only the second secret screening I've been to. The first one was Molly's Game, which again, was one I'd been looking forward to seeing, and when the card came up at the beginning I think only one person left. It certainly wasn't many. The card comes up for this one... well, it was like a mass exodus. Without the film even rolling I think we lost about half a dozen people. After the first couple of minutes we lost another load. It was that second lot that made me lose faith in humanity a little, because it wasn't more than seconds after Simon says that he's gay that I heard disapproving noises and footsteps trotting out of seats.
Most people online said the same thing about their cinemas. And I know that you don't have to watch every film ever made. But don't just turn your nose up at it because (and here's me being optimistic) it's a young adult film/novel. If you turned your nose up at it because its main character is gay... well... welcome to the real world, they're here, they're queer, and they're here to stay.
I was pleased to see that lots of people gave it a chance, and many seemed to enjoy it. There was a lot of hate for it from others though, and honestly, when you read the comments for it... well, just don't read the comments. For every good there is a bad, but most of the bad either just walked out or don't really give much in the way of a genuine excuse. Several feel like they're being cheated by Cineworld for showing things that aren't blockbusters... people... this isn't how these things work. Trust me, the company comes to the middle man who presents it to the consumer. Business 101. Companies know that you're going to pay to see their big blockbusters and buy their merchandise... why would they give it to you for free? (Yes I know we all have Unlimited cards and essentially get them for free, but you get my meaning.) There's already hype around them, they don't need more. Anyway, away from my rant.
Love, Simon was a wonderful film, and despite what some are saying, (sorry, swerving into rant territory there again) it was laugh out loud funny... and everyone was laughing. Except those people who left without giving it a chance... wow, sorry, I just can't let this go.
If you haven't quite forgotten your teenage years you'll see lots of bits in this that really ring a bell. Those awkward moments, the crushes, the annoying teachers, the pain. If you've experienced any of them then there will be bits that you physically react to. You can feel the emotions that are running around the characters, you know the decisions they're making are good, bad and terrible, and you can almost see the future. As the story unfolds you really do get pulled along with Simon. You feel his pain and you feel his joy.
A genuine smile inducing film. I think you can see my favourite bit in one of the trailers... straight people not having to come out... it honestly cracked me up.
Of course the book is in the TBR, I'll get round to it eventually. But regardless of how it stacks up next to the book is was a wonderful film. You can only hope that it is enlightening to some that watch it, and helpful to others.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Mary Poppins Returns (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
A valiant attempt to recreate a masterpiece.
How do you repaint a masterpiece: the Mona Lisa of children’s fantasy cinema? Some would say “You shouldn’t try”.
As I’ve said before, Mary Poppins was the first film I saw when it came out (or soon afterwards) at a very impressionable age…. I was said to have bawled my eyes out with “THE MAGIC NANNY IS GOING AWAY!!” as Julie Andrews floated off! So as my last cinema trip of 2018 I went to see this sequel, 54 years after the original, with a sense of dread. I’m relieved to say that although the film has its flaws it’s by no means the disaster I envisaged.
The plot
It’s a fairly lightweight story. Now all grown up, young Michael from the original film (Ben Whishaw) has his own family. His troubles though come not singly but in battalions since not only is he grieving a recent loss but he is also about to be evicted from 17 Cherry Tree Lane. Help is at hand in that his father, George Banks, had shares with the Fidelity Fiduciary Bank. But despite their best efforts neither he, his sister Jane (Emily Mortimer) nor their chirpy “strike a light” lamplighter friend Jack (Lin-Manuel Miranda) can find the all-important share certificates. With the deadline from bank manager Wilkins (Colin Firth) approaching, it’s fortuitous that Mary Poppins (Emily Blunt) drops in to look after the Banks children – John (Nathanael Saleh), Anabel (Pixie Davies) and Georgie (Joel Dawson) – in her own inimitable fashion.
Songs that are more Meh-ry Poppins
I know musical taste is very personal. My biggest problem with the film though was that the songs by Marc Shaiman were, to me, on the lacklustre side. Only one jumped out and struck me: the jaunty vaudeville number “A Cover is not the Book”. Elsewhere they were – to me – unmemorable and nowhere near as catchy as those of “The Greatest Showman“. (What amplified this for me was having some of the classic Sherman-brothers themes woven into the soundtrack that just made me realise what I was missing!) Richard M Sherman – now 90 – was credited with “Music Consultant” but I wonder how much input he actually had?
The other flaws
Another issue I had with the film was that it just tried WAAYYY too hard to tick off the key attributes of the original:
‘Mary in the mirror’ – check
‘Bottomless carpet bag’ – check
‘Initial fun in the nursery’ – check
‘Quirky trip to a cartoon land’ – check
‘Dance on the ceiling with a quirky relative’ – check
‘Chirpy chimney sweeps’ – check (“Er… Mr Marshall… we couldn’t get chimney sweeps… will lamplighters do?” “Yeah, good enough”)
Another thing that struck me about the film – particularly as a film aimed at kids – is just how long it is. At 2 hours and 10 minutes it’s a bladder-testing experience for adults let alone younger children. (It’s worth noting that this is still 9 minutes shorter than the original, but back in the 60’s we had FAR fewer options to be stimulated by entertainment and our attention spans were – I think – much longer as a result!)
What it does get right
But with this whinging aside, the film does get a number of things spit-spot on.
Emily Blunt is near perfection as Poppins. (In the interests of balance my wife found her bizarrely clipped accent very grating, but I suspect P.L. Travers would have approved!). Broadway star Lin-Manuel Miranda also does a good job as Jack, although you wonder whether the ‘society of cockney actors’ must again be in a big grump about the casting! I found Emily Mortimer just delightful as the grown-up Jane, although Ben Whishaw‘s Michael didn’t particularly connect with me.
Almost unrecognisable was David Warner as the now wheelchair-bound Admiral Boom. His first mate is none other than Jim Norton of “Father Ted” Bishop Brennan fame (thanks to my daughter Jenn for pointing that one out)!
Also watch out (I’d largely missed it before I realised!) for a nice pavement cameo by Karen Dotrice, the original Jane, asking directions to number 19 Cherry Tree Lane.
What the film also gets right is to implement the old-school animation of the “Jolly Holidays” segment of the original. That’s a really smart move. Filmed at Shepperton Studios in London, this is once again a great advert for Britain’s film technicians. The London sets and the costumes (by the great Sandy Powell) are just superb.
Some cameo cherries on the cake
Finally, the aces in the hole are the two cameos near the end of the film. And they would have been lovely surprises as well since neither name appears in the opening credits. It’s therefore a CRYING SHAME that they chose to let the cat out of the bag in the trailer (BLOODY MARKETING EXECS!). In case you haven’t seen the trailer, I won’t spoil it for you here. But as a magical movie experience the first of those cameos moved me close to tears. He also delivers a hum-dinger of a plot twist that is a genuinely welcome crossover from the first film.
Final Thoughts
Rob Marshall directs, and with a pretty impossible task he delivers an end-product that, while it didn’t completely thrill me, did well not to trash my delicate hopes and dreams either. Having just listened to Kermode and Mayo’s review (and it seems that Mark Kermode places Poppins on a similar pedestal to me) the songs (and therefore the “Place Where Lost Things Go” song) just didn’t resonate with me in the same way, and so, unlike Kermode, I mentally never bridged the gap to safely enjoying it.
But what we all think is secondary. Because if some three or four year old out there gets a similarly lifelong love of the cinema by watching this, then that’s all that matters.
As I’ve said before, Mary Poppins was the first film I saw when it came out (or soon afterwards) at a very impressionable age…. I was said to have bawled my eyes out with “THE MAGIC NANNY IS GOING AWAY!!” as Julie Andrews floated off! So as my last cinema trip of 2018 I went to see this sequel, 54 years after the original, with a sense of dread. I’m relieved to say that although the film has its flaws it’s by no means the disaster I envisaged.
The plot
It’s a fairly lightweight story. Now all grown up, young Michael from the original film (Ben Whishaw) has his own family. His troubles though come not singly but in battalions since not only is he grieving a recent loss but he is also about to be evicted from 17 Cherry Tree Lane. Help is at hand in that his father, George Banks, had shares with the Fidelity Fiduciary Bank. But despite their best efforts neither he, his sister Jane (Emily Mortimer) nor their chirpy “strike a light” lamplighter friend Jack (Lin-Manuel Miranda) can find the all-important share certificates. With the deadline from bank manager Wilkins (Colin Firth) approaching, it’s fortuitous that Mary Poppins (Emily Blunt) drops in to look after the Banks children – John (Nathanael Saleh), Anabel (Pixie Davies) and Georgie (Joel Dawson) – in her own inimitable fashion.
Songs that are more Meh-ry Poppins
I know musical taste is very personal. My biggest problem with the film though was that the songs by Marc Shaiman were, to me, on the lacklustre side. Only one jumped out and struck me: the jaunty vaudeville number “A Cover is not the Book”. Elsewhere they were – to me – unmemorable and nowhere near as catchy as those of “The Greatest Showman“. (What amplified this for me was having some of the classic Sherman-brothers themes woven into the soundtrack that just made me realise what I was missing!) Richard M Sherman – now 90 – was credited with “Music Consultant” but I wonder how much input he actually had?
The other flaws
Another issue I had with the film was that it just tried WAAYYY too hard to tick off the key attributes of the original:
‘Mary in the mirror’ – check
‘Bottomless carpet bag’ – check
‘Initial fun in the nursery’ – check
‘Quirky trip to a cartoon land’ – check
‘Dance on the ceiling with a quirky relative’ – check
‘Chirpy chimney sweeps’ – check (“Er… Mr Marshall… we couldn’t get chimney sweeps… will lamplighters do?” “Yeah, good enough”)
Another thing that struck me about the film – particularly as a film aimed at kids – is just how long it is. At 2 hours and 10 minutes it’s a bladder-testing experience for adults let alone younger children. (It’s worth noting that this is still 9 minutes shorter than the original, but back in the 60’s we had FAR fewer options to be stimulated by entertainment and our attention spans were – I think – much longer as a result!)
What it does get right
But with this whinging aside, the film does get a number of things spit-spot on.
Emily Blunt is near perfection as Poppins. (In the interests of balance my wife found her bizarrely clipped accent very grating, but I suspect P.L. Travers would have approved!). Broadway star Lin-Manuel Miranda also does a good job as Jack, although you wonder whether the ‘society of cockney actors’ must again be in a big grump about the casting! I found Emily Mortimer just delightful as the grown-up Jane, although Ben Whishaw‘s Michael didn’t particularly connect with me.
Almost unrecognisable was David Warner as the now wheelchair-bound Admiral Boom. His first mate is none other than Jim Norton of “Father Ted” Bishop Brennan fame (thanks to my daughter Jenn for pointing that one out)!
Also watch out (I’d largely missed it before I realised!) for a nice pavement cameo by Karen Dotrice, the original Jane, asking directions to number 19 Cherry Tree Lane.
What the film also gets right is to implement the old-school animation of the “Jolly Holidays” segment of the original. That’s a really smart move. Filmed at Shepperton Studios in London, this is once again a great advert for Britain’s film technicians. The London sets and the costumes (by the great Sandy Powell) are just superb.
Some cameo cherries on the cake
Finally, the aces in the hole are the two cameos near the end of the film. And they would have been lovely surprises as well since neither name appears in the opening credits. It’s therefore a CRYING SHAME that they chose to let the cat out of the bag in the trailer (BLOODY MARKETING EXECS!). In case you haven’t seen the trailer, I won’t spoil it for you here. But as a magical movie experience the first of those cameos moved me close to tears. He also delivers a hum-dinger of a plot twist that is a genuinely welcome crossover from the first film.
Final Thoughts
Rob Marshall directs, and with a pretty impossible task he delivers an end-product that, while it didn’t completely thrill me, did well not to trash my delicate hopes and dreams either. Having just listened to Kermode and Mayo’s review (and it seems that Mark Kermode places Poppins on a similar pedestal to me) the songs (and therefore the “Place Where Lost Things Go” song) just didn’t resonate with me in the same way, and so, unlike Kermode, I mentally never bridged the gap to safely enjoying it.
But what we all think is secondary. Because if some three or four year old out there gets a similarly lifelong love of the cinema by watching this, then that’s all that matters.
ArecRain (8 KP) rated Indecent/Wicked in Books
Jan 18, 2018
I was not expecting this omnibus to be as great as it was. When I requested it, I thought it was just going to be another run of the mill erotic novel. And while there really wasnt anything special about it, I still love it more than I should.
First, I loved the complication of the characters. They each have their story, their dirty little secrets, and what makes them tick. There was nothing glamorous or fairytale like to this story. It showed the ugly side of the relationships along with the good, which was usually the sex. The erotic scenes were pretty spicy, but nothing fantastic. I was reading it more for the story than the erotic factor.
The first story has to do with Lucky and Colin. Lucky has her own inner demons and a past that has messed with her perception of men. Colin is a psychologist who seem to cant turn it off when interacting with Lucky who doesnt want him digging in her brain. It was interesting to see how their relationship developed and how they dealt with each others faults.
The second story concerns Luckys co-worker and friends Renae and Colins best friend Will. Will thinks Renae is a lesbian which is was initially stopped him from chasing her tail. Currently, he is courting someone else, but when Renae makes the first move, Will is certainly not passing up the chance. Will and Renaes relationship is less complicated than Colin and Luckys, but that still doesnt mean they dont have their issues to work through.
This novel was so realistic to me in terms of relationships, the troubles that come with them, and how the couple works through them. It was something refreshingly new, especially since, while they didnt get the happy endings we normal expect from such novels, everything still worked out in the end.
First, I loved the complication of the characters. They each have their story, their dirty little secrets, and what makes them tick. There was nothing glamorous or fairytale like to this story. It showed the ugly side of the relationships along with the good, which was usually the sex. The erotic scenes were pretty spicy, but nothing fantastic. I was reading it more for the story than the erotic factor.
The first story has to do with Lucky and Colin. Lucky has her own inner demons and a past that has messed with her perception of men. Colin is a psychologist who seem to cant turn it off when interacting with Lucky who doesnt want him digging in her brain. It was interesting to see how their relationship developed and how they dealt with each others faults.
The second story concerns Luckys co-worker and friends Renae and Colins best friend Will. Will thinks Renae is a lesbian which is was initially stopped him from chasing her tail. Currently, he is courting someone else, but when Renae makes the first move, Will is certainly not passing up the chance. Will and Renaes relationship is less complicated than Colin and Luckys, but that still doesnt mean they dont have their issues to work through.
This novel was so realistic to me in terms of relationships, the troubles that come with them, and how the couple works through them. It was something refreshingly new, especially since, while they didnt get the happy endings we normal expect from such novels, everything still worked out in the end.
Merissa (13197 KP) rated The Princess: Tales of Kelnore (Royals #1) in Books
Jan 17, 2025
THE PRINCESS is the first book in The Tales of Kelnore and from the very beginning, it is clear in so many ways that this is NOT Pern Coen!!!
Told from multiple perspectives, we focus on Aurelia, Luca, Dimitri, and Fabian. Each of them has a story to tell and secrets to keep, it's just some are clearer than others at this moment. There are so many wars going on in this book, whether it's against raiders, magic, themselves, or even husbands. Every part was brilliantly written and left me not wanting it to end.
Poor Aurelia! How dare she ask questions or have an opinion, let alone eat a full portion. Yeesh, I really dislike Kelnore and their way of thinking. #SorryNotSorry. Fabian is the heir to the empire, knowing his duty is to do what his father tells him, including who he will marry. Dimitri is Aurelia's twin brother who is a little more lenient with her but doesn't fully understand her. Luca is a Captain under Dimitri's command. Dimitri has taken him under his wing, even though Luca has a secret that could get him executed if found out.
I love this world that Ms Carey has written. I will be honest and say I prefer the values of Pern Coen, but that just makes this story so much more interesting. To be able to compare one land with another while being completely engrossed in the personal lives of the characters is wonderful. I could waffle on longer as there are many things I haven't touched upon, but instead, I will simply say this is an outstanding book that I was completely hooked on and HIGHLY RECOMMEND.
** same worded review will appear elsewhere **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Jan 12, 2025
Told from multiple perspectives, we focus on Aurelia, Luca, Dimitri, and Fabian. Each of them has a story to tell and secrets to keep, it's just some are clearer than others at this moment. There are so many wars going on in this book, whether it's against raiders, magic, themselves, or even husbands. Every part was brilliantly written and left me not wanting it to end.
Poor Aurelia! How dare she ask questions or have an opinion, let alone eat a full portion. Yeesh, I really dislike Kelnore and their way of thinking. #SorryNotSorry. Fabian is the heir to the empire, knowing his duty is to do what his father tells him, including who he will marry. Dimitri is Aurelia's twin brother who is a little more lenient with her but doesn't fully understand her. Luca is a Captain under Dimitri's command. Dimitri has taken him under his wing, even though Luca has a secret that could get him executed if found out.
I love this world that Ms Carey has written. I will be honest and say I prefer the values of Pern Coen, but that just makes this story so much more interesting. To be able to compare one land with another while being completely engrossed in the personal lives of the characters is wonderful. I could waffle on longer as there are many things I haven't touched upon, but instead, I will simply say this is an outstanding book that I was completely hooked on and HIGHLY RECOMMEND.
** same worded review will appear elsewhere **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Jan 12, 2025
Darren (1599 KP) rated Eight Legged Freaks (2002) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
Story: Eight Legged Freaks starts by showing us the Mike Parker (Terra) visiting Joshua the spider expert of the town who has been feeding his spiders enlarged crickets and of course they now escape. One week later when Mike goes to return his mother Sheriff Samantha Parker (Wuhrer) stops the visit because of waste being dumped into the local watering hole.
With this we get to see the rebellious teenage daughter Ashley (Johansson) who is dating bad boy biker Bret (Czuchry) step-son of Mayor Wade (Rippy) who is trying to cover up the fact the town is nearly broke. Chris McCormick (Arquette) a local who returned to town after his father’s death refusing to sell the mine in a deal which could save the town.
When Mike makes it back to Joshua’s he learns of the super-sized spiders that have been released into this small town, the resident must now fight against the spiders that have infested the town.
Thoughts on Eight Legged Freaks
Characters/Performance – Chris McCormick returns to his hometown to claim what is his, the mine, he also needs to make up for the mistakes he has made and this gives him the perfect chance too. Sheriff Parker is a single mother of two trying to keep the local community together and being the former love interest of Chris. Mike is the expert on everything going on playing out as the reminder to all the different spiders attacking styles. Ashley is the bad girl daughter of Samantha who is mostly trying to discover who she is. We have the rest of the town which includes the conspiracy crazed radio host, the greedy mayor the comic relief deputy.
Performance wise, David Arquette is great in this leading role managing the comedy side of everything as well as the action horror when needed. Kari Wuhrer fits the part of sexy sheriff very well too. Both Scott Terra and Scarlett Johansson are good choices too. The rest of the actors all give good performances to fit the films mentality.
Story – Small town gets invaded by giant spiders thanks to cost cutting measures. We do have a reluctantly hero needing to help save the day but otherwise this is everything you need in a creature feature, plenty of potential victims, plenty of creature and plenty of laughs.
Action/Comedy/Horror – The action is all big and plans into the idea of the comedy being used in the creature feature side of the film.
Settings – The small town setting helps with the story telling here because they have no communication with the outside world after the attack starts and not many escape routes of places to hide.
Special Effects – We have a mix of practical and CGI here which all help create the low budget feel behind this film and while moments have dated other parts are all fun.
Final Thoughts – This is by far one of my favourite creature features out there, it is fun, over the top and filled with perfect comic timing, never trying to be serious.
Overall: Purely fun creature feature.
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/10/27/a-z-halloween-horror-eight-legged-freaks-2002/
With this we get to see the rebellious teenage daughter Ashley (Johansson) who is dating bad boy biker Bret (Czuchry) step-son of Mayor Wade (Rippy) who is trying to cover up the fact the town is nearly broke. Chris McCormick (Arquette) a local who returned to town after his father’s death refusing to sell the mine in a deal which could save the town.
When Mike makes it back to Joshua’s he learns of the super-sized spiders that have been released into this small town, the resident must now fight against the spiders that have infested the town.
Thoughts on Eight Legged Freaks
Characters/Performance – Chris McCormick returns to his hometown to claim what is his, the mine, he also needs to make up for the mistakes he has made and this gives him the perfect chance too. Sheriff Parker is a single mother of two trying to keep the local community together and being the former love interest of Chris. Mike is the expert on everything going on playing out as the reminder to all the different spiders attacking styles. Ashley is the bad girl daughter of Samantha who is mostly trying to discover who she is. We have the rest of the town which includes the conspiracy crazed radio host, the greedy mayor the comic relief deputy.
Performance wise, David Arquette is great in this leading role managing the comedy side of everything as well as the action horror when needed. Kari Wuhrer fits the part of sexy sheriff very well too. Both Scott Terra and Scarlett Johansson are good choices too. The rest of the actors all give good performances to fit the films mentality.
Story – Small town gets invaded by giant spiders thanks to cost cutting measures. We do have a reluctantly hero needing to help save the day but otherwise this is everything you need in a creature feature, plenty of potential victims, plenty of creature and plenty of laughs.
Action/Comedy/Horror – The action is all big and plans into the idea of the comedy being used in the creature feature side of the film.
Settings – The small town setting helps with the story telling here because they have no communication with the outside world after the attack starts and not many escape routes of places to hide.
Special Effects – We have a mix of practical and CGI here which all help create the low budget feel behind this film and while moments have dated other parts are all fun.
Final Thoughts – This is by far one of my favourite creature features out there, it is fun, over the top and filled with perfect comic timing, never trying to be serious.
Overall: Purely fun creature feature.
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/10/27/a-z-halloween-horror-eight-legged-freaks-2002/
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Baby Driver (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
A summer film so cool that air-con is optional.
Sorry for the lack of posts folks…. with a holiday in sunny Portugal, I’ve not been to the pics for weeks!
There’s something inherently appealing about the concept of a getaway driver. A skillful ‘bad-boy’, but not normally bad enough to actually DO the nasty crime stuff…. merely be an active accomplice to it. As a result, it’s a subject that the movies have returned to time after time. I’m old and crusty enough to remember being wowed at seeing Ryan O’Neal in Walter Hill’s “Driver” on the big screen in 1978. And well before that, as a kid, my poor departed mother used to be driven crazy by me begging her to take me to see “The Italian Job” (the original 1969 version) YET again… probably the greatest getaway chase in movie history: I must have seen that film at least 20 times in the cinema. Of course more recently we’ve also had Ryan Gosling and Carey Mulligan in “Drive” on the same theme. Any I’ve forgotten?
But with Edgar Wright at the helm, a big name cast and an enticing trailer, I had high expectations for “Baby Driver” – and boy was I happy! This is such a seriously cool film on so many levels.
Opening with a bank heist followed by a kick-ass car chase, we follow ‘Baby’ (Ansel Elgort, “Allegiant”, “The Fault in our Stars”) as a tinnitus-suffering, music-infused getaway driver under the thumb of the criminal overlord Doc (Kevin Spacey, in icy Frank Underwood mode). Doc recruits an ever-changing mix-tape of villains for each job, including the psychopathic and appropriately named ‘Bats’ (Jamie Foxx, “Sleepless”), the chillingly dangerous Buddy (Jon Hamm, “Mad Men”, “Keeping Up With The Joneses”) and his “Bonnie-style” wife ‘Darling’ (Eiza González) and the moderately incompetent JD (Lanny Joon) (who changed his neck tattoo of “HATE” to “HAT” since it improved his job prospects… LOL…. “everybody loves a hat”!).
Baby’s life gets more complicated when the hoods become aware of his fledgling relationship with fellow-orphan Debora (Lily James) a waitress in a diner and another lever to keep Baby locked into the job that he is just so, so good at.
On the surface this might be perceived as being just another good excuse for a lot of CGI-driven car stunts in the style of “The Fate of the Furious”. But no. Firstly, as Edgar Wright declared before the special screening I saw, all of the car stunts were actually performed for real on the mean streets of Atlanta (and hats off to the film’s stunt coordinator Robert Nagle and his team for these). And secondly, the car scenes are almost secondary to the fabulous story and character development in the film. The script (also by Edgar Wright) is just brilliant. There are genuinely laugh-out loud moments in the movie, with one of the highlights for me being JD tasked with procuring Michael Myers “Halloween” masks for a heist. If you don’t find this scene hilarious, you are not human – official.
The only misstep for me in the script was an unbelievable event (both in terms of likelihood and – particularly – timing) during a closing car park fight***.
Elgort is really strong in the lead role, and suggested to me that if the role of the young Han Solo in the upcoming Star Wars spin-off hadn’t already gone to Alden Ehrenreich, then here was a very strong contender. All of the supporting roles are strong (as you would expect from such a stellar cast) with Jon Hamm being a standout, appearing truly demonic in the closing scenes. The one role I was less sure about in the film was that of Lily James, whose performance as the ‘sweet as apple pie’ waitress seemed a little too “animated” for the big screen in the early scenes – I remember an acting class by Michael Caine where he advised that given the size of movie screens it’s often the case that “stillness is good”. What works well on the small screen (I am a big fan of her roles in historical TV dramas like “Downton Abbey” and the impeccable “War and Peace”) perhaps sometimes needs modifying for the wide-screen experience. I greatly warmed to her portrayal in the action sequences later on though: she’s a great actress and one that this film can hopefully now propel into the higher echelons in Hollywood.
Another star of the film is the fabulous soundtrack coordinated by Oscar-winner Steven Price (“Gravity“) featuring (amongst many other classics) Queen’s “Brighton Rock”, Golden Earring’s “Radar Love”, the Simon and Garfunkel classic (obviously) and Bob & Earl’s “Harlem Shuffle”, all used to brilliant effect. This latter track leads me on to some early Oscar predictions: if this film doesn’t get nominated this year for Oscars for Best Editing (Jonathan Amos and Paul Machliss, “Scott Pilgrim vs the World”) and Best Sound Editing (Julian Slater), then there is no God! The “Harlem Shuffle” coffee run sequence is a masterclass in editing and direction. Starting off with what I thought might turn into a tribute to “Saturday Night Fever”, the scene neatly takes on a style all of its own. It’s use of – erm – “subtitles” is just brilliant.
The often subtle, and occasionally not so subtle, edits between scenes are also truly masterful, making this moviegoer laugh-out-loud with delight periodically at the movie-making skill on display.
All of this is orchestrated by Edgar Wright as director who – for me – has been a little inconsistent over the years (loved, loved, loved “Shaun of the Dead” and “Hot Fuzz”; “The World’s End” – not so much). Here, he delivers in spades and this film rockets immediately into my Films of the Year list for 2017. Awe inspiring.
Beg, steal, borrow, rob a bank – – do what you have to, but make sure you catch this film on the big screen.
There’s something inherently appealing about the concept of a getaway driver. A skillful ‘bad-boy’, but not normally bad enough to actually DO the nasty crime stuff…. merely be an active accomplice to it. As a result, it’s a subject that the movies have returned to time after time. I’m old and crusty enough to remember being wowed at seeing Ryan O’Neal in Walter Hill’s “Driver” on the big screen in 1978. And well before that, as a kid, my poor departed mother used to be driven crazy by me begging her to take me to see “The Italian Job” (the original 1969 version) YET again… probably the greatest getaway chase in movie history: I must have seen that film at least 20 times in the cinema. Of course more recently we’ve also had Ryan Gosling and Carey Mulligan in “Drive” on the same theme. Any I’ve forgotten?
But with Edgar Wright at the helm, a big name cast and an enticing trailer, I had high expectations for “Baby Driver” – and boy was I happy! This is such a seriously cool film on so many levels.
Opening with a bank heist followed by a kick-ass car chase, we follow ‘Baby’ (Ansel Elgort, “Allegiant”, “The Fault in our Stars”) as a tinnitus-suffering, music-infused getaway driver under the thumb of the criminal overlord Doc (Kevin Spacey, in icy Frank Underwood mode). Doc recruits an ever-changing mix-tape of villains for each job, including the psychopathic and appropriately named ‘Bats’ (Jamie Foxx, “Sleepless”), the chillingly dangerous Buddy (Jon Hamm, “Mad Men”, “Keeping Up With The Joneses”) and his “Bonnie-style” wife ‘Darling’ (Eiza González) and the moderately incompetent JD (Lanny Joon) (who changed his neck tattoo of “HATE” to “HAT” since it improved his job prospects… LOL…. “everybody loves a hat”!).
Baby’s life gets more complicated when the hoods become aware of his fledgling relationship with fellow-orphan Debora (Lily James) a waitress in a diner and another lever to keep Baby locked into the job that he is just so, so good at.
On the surface this might be perceived as being just another good excuse for a lot of CGI-driven car stunts in the style of “The Fate of the Furious”. But no. Firstly, as Edgar Wright declared before the special screening I saw, all of the car stunts were actually performed for real on the mean streets of Atlanta (and hats off to the film’s stunt coordinator Robert Nagle and his team for these). And secondly, the car scenes are almost secondary to the fabulous story and character development in the film. The script (also by Edgar Wright) is just brilliant. There are genuinely laugh-out loud moments in the movie, with one of the highlights for me being JD tasked with procuring Michael Myers “Halloween” masks for a heist. If you don’t find this scene hilarious, you are not human – official.
The only misstep for me in the script was an unbelievable event (both in terms of likelihood and – particularly – timing) during a closing car park fight***.
Elgort is really strong in the lead role, and suggested to me that if the role of the young Han Solo in the upcoming Star Wars spin-off hadn’t already gone to Alden Ehrenreich, then here was a very strong contender. All of the supporting roles are strong (as you would expect from such a stellar cast) with Jon Hamm being a standout, appearing truly demonic in the closing scenes. The one role I was less sure about in the film was that of Lily James, whose performance as the ‘sweet as apple pie’ waitress seemed a little too “animated” for the big screen in the early scenes – I remember an acting class by Michael Caine where he advised that given the size of movie screens it’s often the case that “stillness is good”. What works well on the small screen (I am a big fan of her roles in historical TV dramas like “Downton Abbey” and the impeccable “War and Peace”) perhaps sometimes needs modifying for the wide-screen experience. I greatly warmed to her portrayal in the action sequences later on though: she’s a great actress and one that this film can hopefully now propel into the higher echelons in Hollywood.
Another star of the film is the fabulous soundtrack coordinated by Oscar-winner Steven Price (“Gravity“) featuring (amongst many other classics) Queen’s “Brighton Rock”, Golden Earring’s “Radar Love”, the Simon and Garfunkel classic (obviously) and Bob & Earl’s “Harlem Shuffle”, all used to brilliant effect. This latter track leads me on to some early Oscar predictions: if this film doesn’t get nominated this year for Oscars for Best Editing (Jonathan Amos and Paul Machliss, “Scott Pilgrim vs the World”) and Best Sound Editing (Julian Slater), then there is no God! The “Harlem Shuffle” coffee run sequence is a masterclass in editing and direction. Starting off with what I thought might turn into a tribute to “Saturday Night Fever”, the scene neatly takes on a style all of its own. It’s use of – erm – “subtitles” is just brilliant.
The often subtle, and occasionally not so subtle, edits between scenes are also truly masterful, making this moviegoer laugh-out-loud with delight periodically at the movie-making skill on display.
All of this is orchestrated by Edgar Wright as director who – for me – has been a little inconsistent over the years (loved, loved, loved “Shaun of the Dead” and “Hot Fuzz”; “The World’s End” – not so much). Here, he delivers in spades and this film rockets immediately into my Films of the Year list for 2017. Awe inspiring.
Beg, steal, borrow, rob a bank – – do what you have to, but make sure you catch this film on the big screen.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Miss Sloane (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“I never know where the line is”.
In a roller-coaster year for political intrigue on both sides of the Atlantic, and with all hell breaking loose again between Trump and ‘The Hill’, here comes “Miss Sloane”.
Jessica Chastain ( “The Martian“, “Interstellar“) plays the titular heroine (I use the term loosely): a pill-popping insomniac who is working herself into an early grave as a top-Washington lobbyist. The game of lobbying is, as she describes, staying one step of the competition and “playing your trump card just after your opponent has played theirs”. But all is not going well for Elizabeth Sloane. For the film opens with her being on trial for corruption in front of a congressional hearing, chaired by Senator Sperling (John Lithgow, “The Accountant“).
Through flashback we see how she got to that point, moving from one firm headed by George Dupont (Sam Waterston, “The Killing Fields”) to another headed by Rodolfo Schmidt (Mark Strong, “Kick Ass”, “Kingsman: The Secret Service“) against the backdrop of the high-stakes lobbying around a new gun-control bill. Her fanatical drive to ‘win at all costs’, and the trail of destruction, through her cutthroat work ethic, that she leaves behind her, digs her an ever-deeper hole as the political and legal net closes in around her.
Jessica Chastain has played strong and decisive women before, most notably in “Zero Dark Thirty”, but probably never to this extreme degree. Here she is like Miranda Priestly from “The Devil Wears Prada”, but not played for laughs. Miss Sloane is an emotionally and physically damaged woman, but a formidable one who takes charge both in the boardroom and in the bedroom, through the unashamed use of male escorts (in the well-muscled form of Jake Lacy, “Their Finest“). As such her character is not remotely likable, but one the I could certainly relate to from past business dealings I’ve had. (And no, I don’t mean as a male prostitute!)
I found Sloane to be one of the more fascinating characters in this year’s releases: I was never being sure whether her actions are being powered from a background of strong moral conviction (fuelled by a devastating childhood incident perhaps?) or through pure greed and lust for power. I thought Chastain excelled in the role, but for balance the illustrious Mrs Mann thought she rather overplayed her hand at times.
Outside of Chastain’s central performance though, this is a very strong ensemble cast. Mark Strong – not with an English accent for once and not playing a heavy – is great as the frustrated boss, as is the seldom-seen Sam Waterston (who, by the way, is the father of Katherine Waterston of current “Alien: Covenant” fame). Christine Baranski (so good in “The Good Wife” and now “The Good Fight”) pops up in a cameo as a flinty Senator. But the outstanding turn for me was Oxford-born Gugu Mbatha-Raw (“Belle”, “Beauty and the Beast” – and yes, I’m aware of the irony in this pairing!). Playing Sloane’s colleague Esme Manucharian – both a lady with a secret in her past as well as possessing a great name – Mbatha-Raw is just riveting and deserving of a Supporting Actress nomination in my book.
What binds the whole two hours together is an extraordinarily skillful script by debut writer Jonathan Perera, which has both a gripping and ever-twisting story as well as a host of quotable lines. Ladies and gentlemen, we may have a new Aaron Sorkin on the block! It’s a brave script, dealing as it does with 2nd amendment issues, since there seems to be nothing that stirs up American comment like gun-control. For those living in the UK (where gun deaths are over 50 times less per capita than in the US) the whole topic is both fascinating and perplexing and there were a lot of nodding heads during Sloane’s TV rant about it being an archaic ‘Wild West’ throwback that should no longer be set in stone. (But it’s not our country any more, so you Americans can do what you like!)
The marvelous Cinematography is by Sebastian Blenkov – the second time this gentleman has come to my attention within a month (the first time being “Their Finest“).
The director is Portsmouth-born Brit John Madden (“Shakespeare in Love”, “The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel”) and he does a great job in sustaining the tension and energy throughout the running time. This all makes it a great shame that the film has not done well at the US box office, perhaps because ( the film was released in December 2016) the public had more than their fill of politics after a bruising and divisive election. (I’m not sure the UK release date now – just before our own General Election – is wise either).
But for me, this was a memorable film, and come the end of the year it might well be up there in my top 10 for the year. I’m a sucker for a good political thriller with “All the President’s Men” and “Primary Colors” in my personal list as some of my favourite ever films. If you like those films, “House of Cards” or remember fondly TV series like “The West Wing” or (for those with even longer memories) “Washington Behind Closed Doors” then I would strongly recommend you get out and watch this.
Jessica Chastain ( “The Martian“, “Interstellar“) plays the titular heroine (I use the term loosely): a pill-popping insomniac who is working herself into an early grave as a top-Washington lobbyist. The game of lobbying is, as she describes, staying one step of the competition and “playing your trump card just after your opponent has played theirs”. But all is not going well for Elizabeth Sloane. For the film opens with her being on trial for corruption in front of a congressional hearing, chaired by Senator Sperling (John Lithgow, “The Accountant“).
Through flashback we see how she got to that point, moving from one firm headed by George Dupont (Sam Waterston, “The Killing Fields”) to another headed by Rodolfo Schmidt (Mark Strong, “Kick Ass”, “Kingsman: The Secret Service“) against the backdrop of the high-stakes lobbying around a new gun-control bill. Her fanatical drive to ‘win at all costs’, and the trail of destruction, through her cutthroat work ethic, that she leaves behind her, digs her an ever-deeper hole as the political and legal net closes in around her.
Jessica Chastain has played strong and decisive women before, most notably in “Zero Dark Thirty”, but probably never to this extreme degree. Here she is like Miranda Priestly from “The Devil Wears Prada”, but not played for laughs. Miss Sloane is an emotionally and physically damaged woman, but a formidable one who takes charge both in the boardroom and in the bedroom, through the unashamed use of male escorts (in the well-muscled form of Jake Lacy, “Their Finest“). As such her character is not remotely likable, but one the I could certainly relate to from past business dealings I’ve had. (And no, I don’t mean as a male prostitute!)
I found Sloane to be one of the more fascinating characters in this year’s releases: I was never being sure whether her actions are being powered from a background of strong moral conviction (fuelled by a devastating childhood incident perhaps?) or through pure greed and lust for power. I thought Chastain excelled in the role, but for balance the illustrious Mrs Mann thought she rather overplayed her hand at times.
Outside of Chastain’s central performance though, this is a very strong ensemble cast. Mark Strong – not with an English accent for once and not playing a heavy – is great as the frustrated boss, as is the seldom-seen Sam Waterston (who, by the way, is the father of Katherine Waterston of current “Alien: Covenant” fame). Christine Baranski (so good in “The Good Wife” and now “The Good Fight”) pops up in a cameo as a flinty Senator. But the outstanding turn for me was Oxford-born Gugu Mbatha-Raw (“Belle”, “Beauty and the Beast” – and yes, I’m aware of the irony in this pairing!). Playing Sloane’s colleague Esme Manucharian – both a lady with a secret in her past as well as possessing a great name – Mbatha-Raw is just riveting and deserving of a Supporting Actress nomination in my book.
What binds the whole two hours together is an extraordinarily skillful script by debut writer Jonathan Perera, which has both a gripping and ever-twisting story as well as a host of quotable lines. Ladies and gentlemen, we may have a new Aaron Sorkin on the block! It’s a brave script, dealing as it does with 2nd amendment issues, since there seems to be nothing that stirs up American comment like gun-control. For those living in the UK (where gun deaths are over 50 times less per capita than in the US) the whole topic is both fascinating and perplexing and there were a lot of nodding heads during Sloane’s TV rant about it being an archaic ‘Wild West’ throwback that should no longer be set in stone. (But it’s not our country any more, so you Americans can do what you like!)
The marvelous Cinematography is by Sebastian Blenkov – the second time this gentleman has come to my attention within a month (the first time being “Their Finest“).
The director is Portsmouth-born Brit John Madden (“Shakespeare in Love”, “The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel”) and he does a great job in sustaining the tension and energy throughout the running time. This all makes it a great shame that the film has not done well at the US box office, perhaps because ( the film was released in December 2016) the public had more than their fill of politics after a bruising and divisive election. (I’m not sure the UK release date now – just before our own General Election – is wise either).
But for me, this was a memorable film, and come the end of the year it might well be up there in my top 10 for the year. I’m a sucker for a good political thriller with “All the President’s Men” and “Primary Colors” in my personal list as some of my favourite ever films. If you like those films, “House of Cards” or remember fondly TV series like “The West Wing” or (for those with even longer memories) “Washington Behind Closed Doors” then I would strongly recommend you get out and watch this.
Sassy Brit (97 KP) rated Become The Force: 9 Lessons on Living as a Master Jedi in Books
Jun 5, 2019
Become the Force: 9 Lessons on How to Live as a Jediist Master (For Everyone Who Loves Star Wars) is written by Daniel M. Jones, Theresa Cheung.
Yes, I know what you are thinking! On the surface this does seem a bit of a giggle, but underneath it’s full of light goodness and that is simply a mix of being a good person over a bad person, and seeing the light side as opposed to the dark.
Disclosure: I am a Star Wars fan and I admit to taking a stand and putting my religion down as a Jedi Knight back in the last census of 2001. (Yep, I was one of those naughty people). Partly because of the protest but also partly because I’d always fancied myself as a Jedi Knight and it seemed a bit of a laugh at the time to say my religion was Jediism.
But that’s just it, whether you can truly classify it as a religion or not, this is more about a philosophy of being kind to yourself and each other. Many such teachings have been clearly taken from a mixture of Zen like “religions” as a way to understand your ‘self’ and to help make positive changes in our fast-moving, often stressful world.
In many ways I’d love to follow this path, yet I do see how some may never actually take this seriously, purely on account that some of these philosophies are based on the films, although not as heavily as some groups are. Yes there are other sects that differ and are more about the films than the mindfulness.
And that’s just what it is, mindfulness, living in the present and CBT techniques.
Believing in an energy force which surrounds us and is in all living things may sound like something out of a science fiction book, but it’s not. We are all living, breathing energy.
The author discusses spiritualist principles and ideas from great thinkers throughout history – from Plato to modern day Alan Watts (who proposed that Buddhism could be thought of as a form of psychotherapy and not a religion), and of course it goes without saying, our great philosopher Yoda, too!
I’m impressed at how this book has been put together, and that it is not as crazy as I first thought it might be! lol
Yes, I know what you are thinking! On the surface this does seem a bit of a giggle, but underneath it’s full of light goodness and that is simply a mix of being a good person over a bad person, and seeing the light side as opposed to the dark.
Disclosure: I am a Star Wars fan and I admit to taking a stand and putting my religion down as a Jedi Knight back in the last census of 2001. (Yep, I was one of those naughty people). Partly because of the protest but also partly because I’d always fancied myself as a Jedi Knight and it seemed a bit of a laugh at the time to say my religion was Jediism.
But that’s just it, whether you can truly classify it as a religion or not, this is more about a philosophy of being kind to yourself and each other. Many such teachings have been clearly taken from a mixture of Zen like “religions” as a way to understand your ‘self’ and to help make positive changes in our fast-moving, often stressful world.
In many ways I’d love to follow this path, yet I do see how some may never actually take this seriously, purely on account that some of these philosophies are based on the films, although not as heavily as some groups are. Yes there are other sects that differ and are more about the films than the mindfulness.
And that’s just what it is, mindfulness, living in the present and CBT techniques.
Believing in an energy force which surrounds us and is in all living things may sound like something out of a science fiction book, but it’s not. We are all living, breathing energy.
The author discusses spiritualist principles and ideas from great thinkers throughout history – from Plato to modern day Alan Watts (who proposed that Buddhism could be thought of as a form of psychotherapy and not a religion), and of course it goes without saying, our great philosopher Yoda, too!
I’m impressed at how this book has been put together, and that it is not as crazy as I first thought it might be! lol