Search
Search results
James P. Sumner (65 KP) rated Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw (2019) in Movies
Aug 1, 2019
A surprisingly pleasant thrill-ride!
The Fast & The Furious franchise paused to allow two of it's most memorable, larger-than-life characters to branch out on their own with this action-packed offering of explosions and humour.
I have to admit, I had my reservations about this one. Firstly, it's basically a F&F movie... we all know what they are and what to expect, which is why we love them. Except it's not a proper F&F movie, and I was worried labelling it as part of that story universe would burden it with unrealistic expectations. Secondly, I've spent the last few months trying to avoid trailers for it, when I realised they were basically showing the entire film in them. After the first three or four, I was left genuinely concerned they had nothing left to show me. I thought there was no way they could have any eye candy that I hadn't at least seen a snapshot of.
So, I entered the cinema expecting very little. Which is probably why I left the cinema feeling very happy and satisfied.
Saying this is a F&F movie is like saying Captain America and Guardians of the Galaxy are Marvel movies. Yes, they technically are, but they are two hugely different types of movie. The similarities are obviously more prevalent here, along with the formulaic and predictable buddy-cop routine, but this film manages to confidently and successfully stand on its own two feet, and not in the shadow of Vin Diesel as I first feared.
And yes, the trailers showed snippets of pretty much every major action sequence, but weirdly, they didn't give away as much you would think. There are also some nice surprises in there. I won't spoil them, but let's just say I'm very impressed at how they managed to keep the cameos under wraps!
Okay, let's get into it. The plot (such as it is) revolves around a mysterious tech firm trying to get a hold of a deadly virus, using Idris Elba's enjoyable villain, Brixton to track it down. It takes all of five minutes for things to go sideways, leaving Hattie Shaw on the run from the bad guys. The Powers That Be (the CIA and MI6) decide they need the best bad guy trackers in the business to hunt down Brixton and retrieve this virus, and the girl... thus saving the world. The former recruits Mr. Johnson; the latter, Mr. Statham. As we know from the trailers, Vanessa Kirby portrays Shaw's sister - it becomes a family affair and we're off to the races.
The on-screen chemistry between Statham and Johnson is clear to see. The comedic dialogue they have lands a lot more than it misses. There's perhaps a bit too much gung-ho stereotyping and fan-service catchphrases, but again, you have to expect that kind of thing from a film like this.
What I liked about it was that whilst they didn't re-invent the wheel, it didn't feel like a carbon-copy of every other action film, like so many others do. It had heart. It had character. Yes, some of the stunts were silly. Yes, the bad guy being genetically-enhanced was a bit weird - blending sci-fi with real-world action whilst never actually acknowledging it took some getting used to. But the film just kinda worked. It was very good without being great. It was predictable but still managed to be enjoyable. It's a good two-hour investment of your time for an afternoon/evening out with the family.
Hobbs and Shaw is proof that whatever your criticisms, whatever your reservations, anything Dwayne Johnson touches turns to gold right now. It's also what a potential future Expendables reboot will probably look like.
Meanwhile F&F9 is now filming (sans Statham and Johnson, apparently) and with an inevitable H&S sequel surely not too far away, you can't help but wonder if they're gearing this all up to be a super-charged, car-based competitor to the MCU. The ending, two mid-credits and one post-credits scene in this film clearly set up another outing and tease a sinister, overarching enemy with ties to the character's pasts... could this be a way to link it all back to Vin Diesel and Co? Could a crossover Summer blockbuster be the only way to tell this story? If early box office figures are anything to go by here, the smart money would say yes.
Go, enjoy, eat popcorn and leave your brain and the real world in the car.
I have to admit, I had my reservations about this one. Firstly, it's basically a F&F movie... we all know what they are and what to expect, which is why we love them. Except it's not a proper F&F movie, and I was worried labelling it as part of that story universe would burden it with unrealistic expectations. Secondly, I've spent the last few months trying to avoid trailers for it, when I realised they were basically showing the entire film in them. After the first three or four, I was left genuinely concerned they had nothing left to show me. I thought there was no way they could have any eye candy that I hadn't at least seen a snapshot of.
So, I entered the cinema expecting very little. Which is probably why I left the cinema feeling very happy and satisfied.
Saying this is a F&F movie is like saying Captain America and Guardians of the Galaxy are Marvel movies. Yes, they technically are, but they are two hugely different types of movie. The similarities are obviously more prevalent here, along with the formulaic and predictable buddy-cop routine, but this film manages to confidently and successfully stand on its own two feet, and not in the shadow of Vin Diesel as I first feared.
And yes, the trailers showed snippets of pretty much every major action sequence, but weirdly, they didn't give away as much you would think. There are also some nice surprises in there. I won't spoil them, but let's just say I'm very impressed at how they managed to keep the cameos under wraps!
Okay, let's get into it. The plot (such as it is) revolves around a mysterious tech firm trying to get a hold of a deadly virus, using Idris Elba's enjoyable villain, Brixton to track it down. It takes all of five minutes for things to go sideways, leaving Hattie Shaw on the run from the bad guys. The Powers That Be (the CIA and MI6) decide they need the best bad guy trackers in the business to hunt down Brixton and retrieve this virus, and the girl... thus saving the world. The former recruits Mr. Johnson; the latter, Mr. Statham. As we know from the trailers, Vanessa Kirby portrays Shaw's sister - it becomes a family affair and we're off to the races.
The on-screen chemistry between Statham and Johnson is clear to see. The comedic dialogue they have lands a lot more than it misses. There's perhaps a bit too much gung-ho stereotyping and fan-service catchphrases, but again, you have to expect that kind of thing from a film like this.
What I liked about it was that whilst they didn't re-invent the wheel, it didn't feel like a carbon-copy of every other action film, like so many others do. It had heart. It had character. Yes, some of the stunts were silly. Yes, the bad guy being genetically-enhanced was a bit weird - blending sci-fi with real-world action whilst never actually acknowledging it took some getting used to. But the film just kinda worked. It was very good without being great. It was predictable but still managed to be enjoyable. It's a good two-hour investment of your time for an afternoon/evening out with the family.
Hobbs and Shaw is proof that whatever your criticisms, whatever your reservations, anything Dwayne Johnson touches turns to gold right now. It's also what a potential future Expendables reboot will probably look like.
Meanwhile F&F9 is now filming (sans Statham and Johnson, apparently) and with an inevitable H&S sequel surely not too far away, you can't help but wonder if they're gearing this all up to be a super-charged, car-based competitor to the MCU. The ending, two mid-credits and one post-credits scene in this film clearly set up another outing and tease a sinister, overarching enemy with ties to the character's pasts... could this be a way to link it all back to Vin Diesel and Co? Could a crossover Summer blockbuster be the only way to tell this story? If early box office figures are anything to go by here, the smart money would say yes.
Go, enjoy, eat popcorn and leave your brain and the real world in the car.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Bring Me Their Hearts (Bring Me Their Hearts, #1) in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<b><i>I received this book for free from Publisher in exchange for an honest review. This does not affect my opinion of the book or the content of my review.</i></b>
<i><b>Bring Me Their Hearts</b></i><b> has plenty of sass, snark and </b><b>humor laced throughout</b>, which is no surprise considering one of the biggest reasons why I loved Sara Wolf's debut novel is the sass and humor (I can now officially count on Wolf to make me laugh). This book literally starts with Zera comparing the king's worth to a <i>potato</i>.
<h2>Potatoes aside, let's talk about Sara Wolf's dive from contemporary into fantasy, aka <b>how did </b><b><i>Bring Me Their Hearts</i></b><b> do???</b></h2>
Because that is the most important question: is the book good? Is it as bloodeh as the title? Let me give you the 411.
<h3><b>If you're looking for a good dose of sass, snark and humor, count on it.</b></h3>
Zera has a comeback for <i>everything</i>. Of course, she says she can't help herself because it's how she deals with it since she became Heartless, which is essentially a witch's pet monster. If you can't deal with her comebacks, then suck it up an drop off a cliff is what she'll likely tell you. But the amount of sass is 👌👌👌 and #100percentapproved.
<h3><b>But let's be a little honest here: sometimes Isis Blake appears too much in Zera.</b></h3>
Isis Blake is <a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/blog-tour-love-me-never-by-sara-wolf-arc-review-and-giveaway/">the main character of Wolf's <i>Lovely Vicious</i> series</a> and sometimes she appears way too much in Zera. Think two people stuck in one body = identity crisis much?
Maybe I am complaining too much here because regardless of how Isis seems to appear occasionally in Zera, <b>I still enjoyed Zera's voice.</b> And I still approve of snarkcisms used. So I'll just sit in a corner and hush up.
<h3><b>Let's take a moment to appreciate a side character (really, we should appreciate most side characters).</b></h3>
Meet Malachite, who is officially one of my favorite characters of <i>Bring Me Their Hearts</i> simply because he was wonderful and had no filter for being a royal bodyguard. 11/10 would adopt.
But we all know, Ms. Wolf, that you're going to kill Malachite later on, right? And kill my feels along with it?
<h3><b>There is this weird issue of the beginning being kind of out of place but used as a lovely hook.</b></h3>
<i>Bring Me Their Hearts</i> starts us in a court before backtracking a few weeks and then continuing. <i>Please note I am a very forgetful person</i> but we're in Zera's world of Heartless and witches and then Training101 for 30% of the book. I completely forgot everything by that point aside from a potato being involved.
But it's used as a lovely hook, so I'm not exactly complaining too much (someone fix my memory please and thank you).
<h3><b>Common Fantasy Plot #2927: Got 'em!</b></h3>
Eventually, you get to the point where you see the most common plotlines aka royalty is secretly venturing out in the world of plebians to be a badass and accidentally meets potential love interest aka the main character.
<h3><b>I was expecting this to be more bloody? I did not get more bloody.</b></h3>
I got a lot of court intrigue, sass, humor, but I was expecting more blood for some reason. I got more near the end though, because Heartless are monsters after all.
<h3><b>Hold up, this is the first novel?</b></h3>
I was expecting this to be a standalone but hahaha no nice try, Sophia. Come back in the future to satiate your curiosities in book two.
<i>Bring Me Their Hearts</i> wasn't horrible if you enjoy a snarky little monster who really just wants everything to be all good and dandy (but hahaha, life isn't going to be that nice) and a nice little note tacked on the end that says, "come back soon for more!"
While I wanted a little more blood because I'm smol and evil thoughts run through my brain sometimes, this was fun to read, and I have hopes for the second novel.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/blog-tour-bring-me-their-hearts-by-sara-wolf-arc-review/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<i><b>Bring Me Their Hearts</b></i><b> has plenty of sass, snark and </b><b>humor laced throughout</b>, which is no surprise considering one of the biggest reasons why I loved Sara Wolf's debut novel is the sass and humor (I can now officially count on Wolf to make me laugh). This book literally starts with Zera comparing the king's worth to a <i>potato</i>.
<h2>Potatoes aside, let's talk about Sara Wolf's dive from contemporary into fantasy, aka <b>how did </b><b><i>Bring Me Their Hearts</i></b><b> do???</b></h2>
Because that is the most important question: is the book good? Is it as bloodeh as the title? Let me give you the 411.
<h3><b>If you're looking for a good dose of sass, snark and humor, count on it.</b></h3>
Zera has a comeback for <i>everything</i>. Of course, she says she can't help herself because it's how she deals with it since she became Heartless, which is essentially a witch's pet monster. If you can't deal with her comebacks, then suck it up an drop off a cliff is what she'll likely tell you. But the amount of sass is 👌👌👌 and #100percentapproved.
<h3><b>But let's be a little honest here: sometimes Isis Blake appears too much in Zera.</b></h3>
Isis Blake is <a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/blog-tour-love-me-never-by-sara-wolf-arc-review-and-giveaway/">the main character of Wolf's <i>Lovely Vicious</i> series</a> and sometimes she appears way too much in Zera. Think two people stuck in one body = identity crisis much?
Maybe I am complaining too much here because regardless of how Isis seems to appear occasionally in Zera, <b>I still enjoyed Zera's voice.</b> And I still approve of snarkcisms used. So I'll just sit in a corner and hush up.
<h3><b>Let's take a moment to appreciate a side character (really, we should appreciate most side characters).</b></h3>
Meet Malachite, who is officially one of my favorite characters of <i>Bring Me Their Hearts</i> simply because he was wonderful and had no filter for being a royal bodyguard. 11/10 would adopt.
But we all know, Ms. Wolf, that you're going to kill Malachite later on, right? And kill my feels along with it?
<h3><b>There is this weird issue of the beginning being kind of out of place but used as a lovely hook.</b></h3>
<i>Bring Me Their Hearts</i> starts us in a court before backtracking a few weeks and then continuing. <i>Please note I am a very forgetful person</i> but we're in Zera's world of Heartless and witches and then Training101 for 30% of the book. I completely forgot everything by that point aside from a potato being involved.
But it's used as a lovely hook, so I'm not exactly complaining too much (someone fix my memory please and thank you).
<h3><b>Common Fantasy Plot #2927: Got 'em!</b></h3>
Eventually, you get to the point where you see the most common plotlines aka royalty is secretly venturing out in the world of plebians to be a badass and accidentally meets potential love interest aka the main character.
<h3><b>I was expecting this to be more bloody? I did not get more bloody.</b></h3>
I got a lot of court intrigue, sass, humor, but I was expecting more blood for some reason. I got more near the end though, because Heartless are monsters after all.
<h3><b>Hold up, this is the first novel?</b></h3>
I was expecting this to be a standalone but hahaha no nice try, Sophia. Come back in the future to satiate your curiosities in book two.
<i>Bring Me Their Hearts</i> wasn't horrible if you enjoy a snarky little monster who really just wants everything to be all good and dandy (but hahaha, life isn't going to be that nice) and a nice little note tacked on the end that says, "come back soon for more!"
While I wanted a little more blood because I'm smol and evil thoughts run through my brain sometimes, this was fun to read, and I have hopes for the second novel.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/blog-tour-bring-me-their-hearts-by-sara-wolf-arc-review/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Bananagrams in Tabletop Games
Jun 12, 2019
One of the best parts of the board gaming experience is finding a fun group of people with whom to play! Sometimes, though, coordinating a game night is easier said than done. We all must occasionally forego the group experience and face the world as the Lonely Only. But fear not! The world of solo-play is a vast and exciting realm! What follows is a chronicle of my journey into the solo-playing world – notes on gameplay, mechanics, rules, difficulty, and overall experience with solo variations of commonly multiplayer games! I hope this will provide some insight as you continue to grow your collection, or explore your already owned games!
What if I told you that you could play an entire game of Scrabble in about 15 minutes? You wouldn’t believe me, would you? I wouldn’t have believed me either until I discovered Bananagrams. Ok, so it’s not technically Scrabble, but the gist is the same – place tiles and create words! The biggest difference is that there are no points and there is no board. You have a ‘hand’ of letter tiles that you must use to create your own personal crossword faster than your opponents! If anyone uses all of their tiles, all players must draw a new tile from the center of the table and adjust/add to their existing crossword to incorporate the new letter. Once all of the letter tiles are gone, the first player to complete their crossword is the winner!
As a solo game, you play Bananagrams the same way as you would in a group – use your tiles to create your crossword, and the game is over when all of the tiles are used. It’s still a race against the clock – you are just trying to beat your own best time instead of finishing before your opponents.
Some games really were not made to be played solo and, in my opinion, Bananagrams is one of those games. Most of the excitement of this game comes from racing your opponents to finish your crossword before they do. Playing solo just feels a little pointless to me – it’s not as exciting or nearly as fun. You are in complete control when playing solo because the game advances only when you allow it to. In a group game, the game is controlled by the fastest players, and that might not always be you. Yeah, you’re still supposed to be trying to beat your own best time when playing solo, but speed doesn’t feel as necessary because honestly, it isn’t.
The only positive reason I have for playing Bananagrams solo is that it just allows you to practice playing the game. It gives you time to test out different strategies that could then be used in a group game. You can practice creating new words to better utilize your current tiles, or find easy ways to modify your current crossword without losing time. Solo play is a good exercise for your brain. Using the skills you’ve practiced in solo play can help you better succeed in group play. And group play is where Bananagrams really shines.
Bananagrams is a fast and fun game that definitely requires more thought and strategy than its silly title would lead you to believe. However, this is a game I would recommend mainly for group play. Give it a shot solo if you want, but don’t be expecting it to be particularly exciting or fun. I do love to play Bananagrams, but only when I get to play with a group.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/02/21/solo-chronicles-bananagrams/
What if I told you that you could play an entire game of Scrabble in about 15 minutes? You wouldn’t believe me, would you? I wouldn’t have believed me either until I discovered Bananagrams. Ok, so it’s not technically Scrabble, but the gist is the same – place tiles and create words! The biggest difference is that there are no points and there is no board. You have a ‘hand’ of letter tiles that you must use to create your own personal crossword faster than your opponents! If anyone uses all of their tiles, all players must draw a new tile from the center of the table and adjust/add to their existing crossword to incorporate the new letter. Once all of the letter tiles are gone, the first player to complete their crossword is the winner!
As a solo game, you play Bananagrams the same way as you would in a group – use your tiles to create your crossword, and the game is over when all of the tiles are used. It’s still a race against the clock – you are just trying to beat your own best time instead of finishing before your opponents.
Some games really were not made to be played solo and, in my opinion, Bananagrams is one of those games. Most of the excitement of this game comes from racing your opponents to finish your crossword before they do. Playing solo just feels a little pointless to me – it’s not as exciting or nearly as fun. You are in complete control when playing solo because the game advances only when you allow it to. In a group game, the game is controlled by the fastest players, and that might not always be you. Yeah, you’re still supposed to be trying to beat your own best time when playing solo, but speed doesn’t feel as necessary because honestly, it isn’t.
The only positive reason I have for playing Bananagrams solo is that it just allows you to practice playing the game. It gives you time to test out different strategies that could then be used in a group game. You can practice creating new words to better utilize your current tiles, or find easy ways to modify your current crossword without losing time. Solo play is a good exercise for your brain. Using the skills you’ve practiced in solo play can help you better succeed in group play. And group play is where Bananagrams really shines.
Bananagrams is a fast and fun game that definitely requires more thought and strategy than its silly title would lead you to believe. However, this is a game I would recommend mainly for group play. Give it a shot solo if you want, but don’t be expecting it to be particularly exciting or fun. I do love to play Bananagrams, but only when I get to play with a group.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/02/21/solo-chronicles-bananagrams/
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Scoob (2020) in Movies
May 8, 2021
Another film that snuck its way through to VOD (and is thankfully now streaming). As much as I love Scooby Doo, I did not have the desire to pay money to view this one.
Here I would normally put an extended synopsis, but I'll be honest, after watching the film I don't think I could tell you what the story was. I'm not sure it actually matters anyway.
The beginning of the film confused me. From every trailer that I saw I thought this film was about the mini Scooby Gang. At least that's what I remembered. So having seen lots of clips of them as kids, coupled with the posters meant I was left confused when it was hardly a feature of the final product.
Apart from me evidently forgetting the plot of the film, it was a classic Scooby story with a modern twist, and ultimately you can't go wrong with that. You get all the things you expect from masked villains to hair-brained schemes that seem to fool the minions... and that is all pretty satisfying stuff to watch.
A note I made very quickly was that the voices left a lot to be desired. While capturing the essence of the original cast would be very difficult, there's no denying that the actors from the live-action originals did a very good job... here we had no real comparison at all. Gina Rodriguez (who has been knocking it out of the park recently) probably being the only exception. I just truly don't know how anyone could possibly be better than Casey Kasem and Matthew Lillard. MVP of the film was definitely the bike cop when questioning Scooby and Shaggy, quality content, loved the end of his scene.
Despite the nostalgia of everything it doesn't make up for some truly awful dialogue, it's very inconsistent and yoyos between bad and good (when I say good, in this case, I probably mean cheesy). There are a couple of true gems though, my favourite being an early line from Shaggy with some heavy foreshadowing.
The yoyoing of the script is generally reflected in my notes on the film as a whole. For every laugh, there was something negative I wrote down. Scoob! was very self-aware, which was amusing to begin with, but it began to grate a little.
I was at least thankful that the CG animation actually became less of an annoyance as I got into the film, I wasn't a fan. The majority of the film managed to get a pass, but sadly I really disliked the portrayal of Dick Dastardly and Muttley in this style. As much as I'd like a Hanna and Barbera universe, I do not care to see anymore in this look. And absolutely no more Dastardly looking like Gru with his minions.
"But Emma... you gave this film a pretty decent rating and all you've done is grumble about it!" Yes, yes I have. But... I still enjoyed myself, and like I said, for every bad note there was a laugh or a moment that made me happy. And sometimes having a rant about a film's pitfalls is just something you need to do.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/05/scoob-movie-review.html
Here I would normally put an extended synopsis, but I'll be honest, after watching the film I don't think I could tell you what the story was. I'm not sure it actually matters anyway.
The beginning of the film confused me. From every trailer that I saw I thought this film was about the mini Scooby Gang. At least that's what I remembered. So having seen lots of clips of them as kids, coupled with the posters meant I was left confused when it was hardly a feature of the final product.
Apart from me evidently forgetting the plot of the film, it was a classic Scooby story with a modern twist, and ultimately you can't go wrong with that. You get all the things you expect from masked villains to hair-brained schemes that seem to fool the minions... and that is all pretty satisfying stuff to watch.
A note I made very quickly was that the voices left a lot to be desired. While capturing the essence of the original cast would be very difficult, there's no denying that the actors from the live-action originals did a very good job... here we had no real comparison at all. Gina Rodriguez (who has been knocking it out of the park recently) probably being the only exception. I just truly don't know how anyone could possibly be better than Casey Kasem and Matthew Lillard. MVP of the film was definitely the bike cop when questioning Scooby and Shaggy, quality content, loved the end of his scene.
Despite the nostalgia of everything it doesn't make up for some truly awful dialogue, it's very inconsistent and yoyos between bad and good (when I say good, in this case, I probably mean cheesy). There are a couple of true gems though, my favourite being an early line from Shaggy with some heavy foreshadowing.
The yoyoing of the script is generally reflected in my notes on the film as a whole. For every laugh, there was something negative I wrote down. Scoob! was very self-aware, which was amusing to begin with, but it began to grate a little.
I was at least thankful that the CG animation actually became less of an annoyance as I got into the film, I wasn't a fan. The majority of the film managed to get a pass, but sadly I really disliked the portrayal of Dick Dastardly and Muttley in this style. As much as I'd like a Hanna and Barbera universe, I do not care to see anymore in this look. And absolutely no more Dastardly looking like Gru with his minions.
"But Emma... you gave this film a pretty decent rating and all you've done is grumble about it!" Yes, yes I have. But... I still enjoyed myself, and like I said, for every bad note there was a laugh or a moment that made me happy. And sometimes having a rant about a film's pitfalls is just something you need to do.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/05/scoob-movie-review.html
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Spies in Disguise (2019) in Movies
Jan 11, 2020
As my last cinema visit of 2019 I was just hoping for something passable to watch, animation his year has had a few hard knocks so I wasn't optimistic.
Lance is the world's greatest spy, catlike reflexes, excellent deduction skills as well as suave and sophisticated... all the things you'd expect. He's the golden boy of the agency and is ready for another pat on the back and some admiration. But it isn't his lucky day, the device he retrieved is missing from the case and now he's under investigation. He knows that he's innocent but there's damning evidence against him, his only hope is to clear his name, and the only way to do that is to escape the agency and track the real culprit down. His next problem, who can he trust?
This really is Bond for kids, everything is fantastically reminiscent of it, from his slightly too cocky demeanour to the brilliant opening credits. It's a pretty solid film, there's nothing much to dislike. It's essentially Bond mixed with Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs... what's not to love about that?!
I have to wonder about opening kids films this way, it seems to be very common at the moment. The lead needs to have a tragedy to get through the movie and have their moment of realisation. Playmobil did it in a much less subtle way, as did Wonder Park to some extent.
There aren't any real issues with the voice acting, though I do wonder about the choice of Ben Mendelsohn paired with his animated character, the two don't really match as well as the others. But that's not a deal-breaker.
The animation style is very clean and easy to watch. There are before and after shots of some scenes that show what the lighting guy does, it's really interesting to see. After having brought this topic up after seeing Klaus it was nice to see some of the "hidden" parts of animated films. The effort is immense.
Music is used well in parts of the film, and my favourite has to be the "romantic" portion towards the end, very amusingly set up and clearly well thought out.
Walter, our inventor, really does have the sort of imagination that would get him hired by Chester V. My favourite invention was probably the glitter distraction, I believe this may already exist though as it appears to have been deployed in my home over Christmas. This may be the only major continuity note... once Lance brushes the glitter off we don't see any little specks again, completely unrealistic!
There are a lot of great sequences during the film and the action moves it along quickly, add in the humour from the pigeons and all the gadgets and you get something really fun. I will definitely watch this again when it hits streaming. My score may seem a little off considering I didn't hate anything, the reason for this is that it's essentially a lot of other films mixed together. As I said, we've got Bond and Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs with an assortment of action movies and Home Alone 2 thrown in for good measure, which made it enjoyable but not instantly rewatchable.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/01/spies-in-disguise-movie-review.html
Lance is the world's greatest spy, catlike reflexes, excellent deduction skills as well as suave and sophisticated... all the things you'd expect. He's the golden boy of the agency and is ready for another pat on the back and some admiration. But it isn't his lucky day, the device he retrieved is missing from the case and now he's under investigation. He knows that he's innocent but there's damning evidence against him, his only hope is to clear his name, and the only way to do that is to escape the agency and track the real culprit down. His next problem, who can he trust?
This really is Bond for kids, everything is fantastically reminiscent of it, from his slightly too cocky demeanour to the brilliant opening credits. It's a pretty solid film, there's nothing much to dislike. It's essentially Bond mixed with Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs... what's not to love about that?!
I have to wonder about opening kids films this way, it seems to be very common at the moment. The lead needs to have a tragedy to get through the movie and have their moment of realisation. Playmobil did it in a much less subtle way, as did Wonder Park to some extent.
There aren't any real issues with the voice acting, though I do wonder about the choice of Ben Mendelsohn paired with his animated character, the two don't really match as well as the others. But that's not a deal-breaker.
The animation style is very clean and easy to watch. There are before and after shots of some scenes that show what the lighting guy does, it's really interesting to see. After having brought this topic up after seeing Klaus it was nice to see some of the "hidden" parts of animated films. The effort is immense.
Music is used well in parts of the film, and my favourite has to be the "romantic" portion towards the end, very amusingly set up and clearly well thought out.
Walter, our inventor, really does have the sort of imagination that would get him hired by Chester V. My favourite invention was probably the glitter distraction, I believe this may already exist though as it appears to have been deployed in my home over Christmas. This may be the only major continuity note... once Lance brushes the glitter off we don't see any little specks again, completely unrealistic!
There are a lot of great sequences during the film and the action moves it along quickly, add in the humour from the pigeons and all the gadgets and you get something really fun. I will definitely watch this again when it hits streaming. My score may seem a little off considering I didn't hate anything, the reason for this is that it's essentially a lot of other films mixed together. As I said, we've got Bond and Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs with an assortment of action movies and Home Alone 2 thrown in for good measure, which made it enjoyable but not instantly rewatchable.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/01/spies-in-disguise-movie-review.html
Hadley (567 KP) rated The Shining in Books
Apr 6, 2019
Different from the movie (1 more)
Well written
Contains spoilers, click to show
In his most well-known horror story, 'The Shining,' which is either a ghost story or the collapse of a man's mental state, Jack Torrance, a recovering alcoholic who just lost his job teaching at a school, gets hired to be the Winter caretaker of the infamous Overlook Hotel. In this book, the readers follow Jack into a nervous breakdown, as well as his possession by the ghosts of this hotel.
While the Torrance's seem like every other family - a small boy and moving to a new town - we find out that their son, Danny, has special abilities that help him to see things that may or may not happen in the future.
Soon after the family arrives to take over the hotel for the Winter, Danny meets a man named Hallorann - a chef at the hotel - who has the same abilities as him, which he calls 'Shine:' "What you got son, I call it shinin' on, the Bible calls it having visions, and there's scientists that call it precognition. I've read up on it, son. I've studied on it. They all mean seeing the future. Do you understand that?" Hallorann tells Danny.
Why does Danny, or anyone for that matter, have the Shine? King doesn't explain this in the book, it just seems to be something specific people are born with, even Danny's parents take him to a doctor before the snowfall hits to figure out what is going on,but even the doctor believes it's just a child's overactive imagination. Even so, Danny continues to have visions: one is of the room 217 in the Overlook, which even Hallorann told him to never go inside, and the other is of a creature-like man swinging a roque mallet, yelling about someone needing to take their medicine,"Come out! Come out, you little shit! Take your medicine!" We,also,meet his imaginary friend, Tony, who is the one whom continues to show Danny these visions over and over.
Unlike the movie, 'The Shining' book stands on it's own as an almost completely different story, even having Jack wielding a roque mallet and not an axe. Also the infamous scene of the Grady twins showing up in a hallway, asking Danny to play with them, never happened in the book; Hallorann also survives Jack's attack, Wendy is nearly beaten to-death by the roque mallet, and the hedge maze doesn't even exist! Instead, King wrote about topiary animals that came to life to kill you, "The rabbit was down on all fours, cropping grass. Its belly was against the ground. But not ten minutes ago it had been up on its hind legs, of course it had been, he had trimmed its ears...and its belly."
Jack begins to change when he finds a scrapbook in the basement that contains articles and such of things that happened at the Overlook. One such thing that sticks with Jack is about a Masked Ball that took place at the grand opening of the hotel. "Horace M. Derwent Requests The Pleasure of Your Company At a Masked Ball to Celebrate The Grand Opening of THE OVERLOOK HOTEL...Dinner Will Be Served At 8 P.M. Unmasking And Dancing At Midnight August 29,1945...RSVP"
Later on in the story, Jack, Wendy and Danny are awoken by the elevator going up and down by itself, but inside is a surprise,"Then she was up, her cheeks flushed, her forehead as pale and shining as a spirit lamp. 'What about this, Jack? Is this a short circuit?' She threw something and suddenly the hall was full of drifting confetti, red and white and blue and yellow. 'Is this?' A green party streamer, faded to a pale pastel color with age." Continuously, throughout the book,the past hotel guests make themselves known, either by showing up in rooms or leaving things for the family to find.
King shines (pun intended) with this book, he keeps things moving so that readers don't get bored. Known for his horror books, he doesn't disappoint in this one, which I personally think that this is his best work ever. He doesn't jump from scene to scene (like in many of his other books), he flawlessly keeps the timeline going even though he switches from character view points, between Jack, Danny, Wendy and Hallorann.
Although the film 'The Shining' is a classic in the horror movie genre, it is a huge step away from the book itself. "And the Red Death held sway over all." is a line that was never in the movie,but is quite frequent through the book. Even the most recognizable scene of "Here's Johnny!" is not in the book!
Also, Hallorann's character has a much bigger part in the story, the reader gets to see him living his Winter life in Florida, working as a chef in another hotel.. Hallorann even has a back story in the book that is wonderful to read about; we get to accompany him to a lawyer's office where he feels the need to get his Will made out for everything to be left to his sister when he is overcome with the feeling that his life may be about to end,"Hallorann had stepped in and told this McIver that he wanted to make a will,and could McIver help him out? Well, McIver asked,how soon do you want the document? Yesterday, said Hallorann, and threw his head back and laughed."
This 659- page book is well worth the read. You not only get a different take on 'The Shining' that is so well known,but you also get a different ending!'The Shining' will now always be a staple on my book shelf.
Even if you love the movie as much as I do (it is my favorite horror movie of all time), you will love the book just as much. King went above and beyond when he wrote 'The Shining.' Highly recommend!
While the Torrance's seem like every other family - a small boy and moving to a new town - we find out that their son, Danny, has special abilities that help him to see things that may or may not happen in the future.
Soon after the family arrives to take over the hotel for the Winter, Danny meets a man named Hallorann - a chef at the hotel - who has the same abilities as him, which he calls 'Shine:' "What you got son, I call it shinin' on, the Bible calls it having visions, and there's scientists that call it precognition. I've read up on it, son. I've studied on it. They all mean seeing the future. Do you understand that?" Hallorann tells Danny.
Why does Danny, or anyone for that matter, have the Shine? King doesn't explain this in the book, it just seems to be something specific people are born with, even Danny's parents take him to a doctor before the snowfall hits to figure out what is going on,but even the doctor believes it's just a child's overactive imagination. Even so, Danny continues to have visions: one is of the room 217 in the Overlook, which even Hallorann told him to never go inside, and the other is of a creature-like man swinging a roque mallet, yelling about someone needing to take their medicine,"Come out! Come out, you little shit! Take your medicine!" We,also,meet his imaginary friend, Tony, who is the one whom continues to show Danny these visions over and over.
Unlike the movie, 'The Shining' book stands on it's own as an almost completely different story, even having Jack wielding a roque mallet and not an axe. Also the infamous scene of the Grady twins showing up in a hallway, asking Danny to play with them, never happened in the book; Hallorann also survives Jack's attack, Wendy is nearly beaten to-death by the roque mallet, and the hedge maze doesn't even exist! Instead, King wrote about topiary animals that came to life to kill you, "The rabbit was down on all fours, cropping grass. Its belly was against the ground. But not ten minutes ago it had been up on its hind legs, of course it had been, he had trimmed its ears...and its belly."
Jack begins to change when he finds a scrapbook in the basement that contains articles and such of things that happened at the Overlook. One such thing that sticks with Jack is about a Masked Ball that took place at the grand opening of the hotel. "Horace M. Derwent Requests The Pleasure of Your Company At a Masked Ball to Celebrate The Grand Opening of THE OVERLOOK HOTEL...Dinner Will Be Served At 8 P.M. Unmasking And Dancing At Midnight August 29,1945...RSVP"
Later on in the story, Jack, Wendy and Danny are awoken by the elevator going up and down by itself, but inside is a surprise,"Then she was up, her cheeks flushed, her forehead as pale and shining as a spirit lamp. 'What about this, Jack? Is this a short circuit?' She threw something and suddenly the hall was full of drifting confetti, red and white and blue and yellow. 'Is this?' A green party streamer, faded to a pale pastel color with age." Continuously, throughout the book,the past hotel guests make themselves known, either by showing up in rooms or leaving things for the family to find.
King shines (pun intended) with this book, he keeps things moving so that readers don't get bored. Known for his horror books, he doesn't disappoint in this one, which I personally think that this is his best work ever. He doesn't jump from scene to scene (like in many of his other books), he flawlessly keeps the timeline going even though he switches from character view points, between Jack, Danny, Wendy and Hallorann.
Although the film 'The Shining' is a classic in the horror movie genre, it is a huge step away from the book itself. "And the Red Death held sway over all." is a line that was never in the movie,but is quite frequent through the book. Even the most recognizable scene of "Here's Johnny!" is not in the book!
Also, Hallorann's character has a much bigger part in the story, the reader gets to see him living his Winter life in Florida, working as a chef in another hotel.. Hallorann even has a back story in the book that is wonderful to read about; we get to accompany him to a lawyer's office where he feels the need to get his Will made out for everything to be left to his sister when he is overcome with the feeling that his life may be about to end,"Hallorann had stepped in and told this McIver that he wanted to make a will,and could McIver help him out? Well, McIver asked,how soon do you want the document? Yesterday, said Hallorann, and threw his head back and laughed."
This 659- page book is well worth the read. You not only get a different take on 'The Shining' that is so well known,but you also get a different ending!'The Shining' will now always be a staple on my book shelf.
Even if you love the movie as much as I do (it is my favorite horror movie of all time), you will love the book just as much. King went above and beyond when he wrote 'The Shining.' Highly recommend!
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated The Avengers (2012) in Movies
May 9, 2019
Some assembly required
There's a lot about this movie I love (it used to be one of my favorite films to rewatch when I was a teenager), one thing that really stood out to me about watching this again for the first time in awhile, is how much Whedon understands the language of comics.
Whenever people bring that aspect up, they usually talk about the splash panel inspired sequences (the long take through the Battle of New York), but nobody tends to talk about the choices he makes with how he and Seamus McGarvey decide to shoot the smaller scale scenes like they were regular panels.
Take Loki's entrance for example; as the laser begins to open the portal, we cut above, seeing how big the room is and how long the laser is, all in a wide, beautiful shot, taken from an angel to capture the intensity of the villain's entrance, and then that's followed up with a panel inspired close up on Loki's eyes as he breaks into a grin. Or the shot of Natasha being integrated from the prospective of the mirror in the room, and we see various different treasures as it pushes away from it.
Or probably the best example of this, is Steve's introduction; repeatedly working himself up with every punch, flashing back to the events in his life that make him feel the most intense, before punching it straight off its hook, only for him to grab another one of several he has lying there.
It's little touches like this that are sprinkled throughout, making you feel like you're watching a comic book in motion without having to go full on "Scott Pilgrim", "Into The Spider-Verse", "Speed Racer", or even "Batman: The Movie", along with capturing the lavish and striking lighting and colors found within some of the best artists for them.
Plus, while Whedon's writing is known for his sense of humor (for better and worse, especially when it comes to it's impact on the rest of these films post this one), I don't think enough of us take into account how much that humor is there to service the characters, not just the viewers.
Both this and his work with Drew Goddard on "Cabin in the Woods" showcase this perfectly. When Marty in "Cabin" asks if anyone else thinks something weird is going on when Curt contradict himself by saying they should split up, he isn't just saying that for the sake of a gag, it's Whedon and Goddard's way of hinting that he knows more than the others, and establishing that he's immune from these tricks being played on them.
When Steve and Tony are arguing about who's stronger and Steve keeps saying "put on the suit!", once shit hits the fan, he says it once again, but in a way that's far more urgent and fearful, not just being there for the sake of a funny payoff, but as progression for the next series of events that need to play out.
And, man....
There's just so many great moments. Not just the action or the characters working off of each other, but little moments, like the Old Man standing up for Earth to Loki, Steve giving Fury ten bucks after seeing the Helicarrier in action, Bruce mentioning the time he figured he had enough and how he couldn't end it himself, complete with the fear trembling in his voice and facial expression, Loki saying "I'm listening" as Thor was taken away from him, or his monologue to Natasha, the entire New York battle centering around them both trying to keep the army at bay and save as many by standards as possible, just too many to name.
It's one of the most memorable and entertaining blockbusters of this decade and while it doesn't feel as special seeing all of these people in the same movie anymore, it still has them at their best and manages to do it so effortlessly. Like it's one thing that this movie exists, but the fact that it worked is something that'll never not be amazing.
What else can I say, really? It's "The Avengers". You've likely seen it, memed about it, quoted it, referenced it, it doesn't matter, it's been here for nearly ten years now and it's impact is still felt and mentioned. As well as something that's super easy to put on and rewatch, either for some lazy day entertainment, or to revisit during the lead up to their next big adventure.....
Whenever people bring that aspect up, they usually talk about the splash panel inspired sequences (the long take through the Battle of New York), but nobody tends to talk about the choices he makes with how he and Seamus McGarvey decide to shoot the smaller scale scenes like they were regular panels.
Take Loki's entrance for example; as the laser begins to open the portal, we cut above, seeing how big the room is and how long the laser is, all in a wide, beautiful shot, taken from an angel to capture the intensity of the villain's entrance, and then that's followed up with a panel inspired close up on Loki's eyes as he breaks into a grin. Or the shot of Natasha being integrated from the prospective of the mirror in the room, and we see various different treasures as it pushes away from it.
Or probably the best example of this, is Steve's introduction; repeatedly working himself up with every punch, flashing back to the events in his life that make him feel the most intense, before punching it straight off its hook, only for him to grab another one of several he has lying there.
It's little touches like this that are sprinkled throughout, making you feel like you're watching a comic book in motion without having to go full on "Scott Pilgrim", "Into The Spider-Verse", "Speed Racer", or even "Batman: The Movie", along with capturing the lavish and striking lighting and colors found within some of the best artists for them.
Plus, while Whedon's writing is known for his sense of humor (for better and worse, especially when it comes to it's impact on the rest of these films post this one), I don't think enough of us take into account how much that humor is there to service the characters, not just the viewers.
Both this and his work with Drew Goddard on "Cabin in the Woods" showcase this perfectly. When Marty in "Cabin" asks if anyone else thinks something weird is going on when Curt contradict himself by saying they should split up, he isn't just saying that for the sake of a gag, it's Whedon and Goddard's way of hinting that he knows more than the others, and establishing that he's immune from these tricks being played on them.
When Steve and Tony are arguing about who's stronger and Steve keeps saying "put on the suit!", once shit hits the fan, he says it once again, but in a way that's far more urgent and fearful, not just being there for the sake of a funny payoff, but as progression for the next series of events that need to play out.
And, man....
There's just so many great moments. Not just the action or the characters working off of each other, but little moments, like the Old Man standing up for Earth to Loki, Steve giving Fury ten bucks after seeing the Helicarrier in action, Bruce mentioning the time he figured he had enough and how he couldn't end it himself, complete with the fear trembling in his voice and facial expression, Loki saying "I'm listening" as Thor was taken away from him, or his monologue to Natasha, the entire New York battle centering around them both trying to keep the army at bay and save as many by standards as possible, just too many to name.
It's one of the most memorable and entertaining blockbusters of this decade and while it doesn't feel as special seeing all of these people in the same movie anymore, it still has them at their best and manages to do it so effortlessly. Like it's one thing that this movie exists, but the fact that it worked is something that'll never not be amazing.
What else can I say, really? It's "The Avengers". You've likely seen it, memed about it, quoted it, referenced it, it doesn't matter, it's been here for nearly ten years now and it's impact is still felt and mentioned. As well as something that's super easy to put on and rewatch, either for some lazy day entertainment, or to revisit during the lead up to their next big adventure.....
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Beautiful Boy (2018) in Movies
Nov 5, 2018
Well acted, directed and written...and dour
The advertisement for BEAUTIFUL BOY says that it is a "heartbreaking and inspiring experience of survival, relapse and recovery of a family coping with addiction".
Heartbreaking, yes. Survival, relapse? Yes. Inspiring? Not so much.
Telling the tale of the true story of David and Nic Sheff (based on their memoirs), BEAUTIFUL BOY stars Steve Carrell as David and the wonderful Timothee Chalamet as Nic. It chronicles their relationship and David's attempt to help his son who has descended into addiction to drugs up to (and including) crystal meth and heroin. This is a tough tale, told rather unflinchingly and with great love and affection. It is also grim and dower. The highs are not really all that high and the lows are really, really, really low.
Which makes for a tough film to watch - it's a very good film - written, directed and acted well - but it's a tough film to sit through.
Let's start with the performances of the two leads. We view most of this film through the eyes of the Father, played by Steve Carrell. We start the film "in progress", meaning that Carrell's character of David has already come to the realization that his child is in the grips of something that he might not be able to get out of. Because of that, Carrell's character starts sad and somber and goes down from there. It is a well acted performance, but he is not asked to do much more than be sad and somber, punctuated by moments of frustration and anger and is somewhat overshadowed by the showier role and performance by Chalamet as the drug-addicted son.
I have now seen Chalamet in 4 films - INTERSTELLAR, LADYBIRD, CALL ME BY YOUR NAME and now BEAUTIFUL BOY, and in each one of these he was an actor that required your attention. He has a way of drawing you into his character's thoughts and feelings without saying or doing much. He is a "quiet" performer with a strength that is appealing and is no different in this film He was nominated for an Oscar for CALL ME BY YOUR NAME and I will not be surprised if his name is called again this year.
Joining Carrell and Chalamet are Amy Ryan and Maura Tierney as Nic's Mother and Step-Mother. Both are equal to the task that is given them - to be supportive, worried and sad - all at the same time. It would have been interesting to flesh out these roles in this tale, but that would have made this film something different than what it is intended to be - a tale of a father's inability to help his son, no matter how hard he tries.
Ultimately, the issue with this film is there is no variety to it. It stays, for the most part, on one emotional note throughout the course of it's 2 hour running time - somber and sad. That constant feeling of dourness makes this rather slow running film seem even slower, causing quite a bit of rustling and shifting in the chairs.
It's an important film about an important subject - I just wish they would have varied the pitch of it from time to time. Well acted, well written - and dour.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Heartbreaking, yes. Survival, relapse? Yes. Inspiring? Not so much.
Telling the tale of the true story of David and Nic Sheff (based on their memoirs), BEAUTIFUL BOY stars Steve Carrell as David and the wonderful Timothee Chalamet as Nic. It chronicles their relationship and David's attempt to help his son who has descended into addiction to drugs up to (and including) crystal meth and heroin. This is a tough tale, told rather unflinchingly and with great love and affection. It is also grim and dower. The highs are not really all that high and the lows are really, really, really low.
Which makes for a tough film to watch - it's a very good film - written, directed and acted well - but it's a tough film to sit through.
Let's start with the performances of the two leads. We view most of this film through the eyes of the Father, played by Steve Carrell. We start the film "in progress", meaning that Carrell's character of David has already come to the realization that his child is in the grips of something that he might not be able to get out of. Because of that, Carrell's character starts sad and somber and goes down from there. It is a well acted performance, but he is not asked to do much more than be sad and somber, punctuated by moments of frustration and anger and is somewhat overshadowed by the showier role and performance by Chalamet as the drug-addicted son.
I have now seen Chalamet in 4 films - INTERSTELLAR, LADYBIRD, CALL ME BY YOUR NAME and now BEAUTIFUL BOY, and in each one of these he was an actor that required your attention. He has a way of drawing you into his character's thoughts and feelings without saying or doing much. He is a "quiet" performer with a strength that is appealing and is no different in this film He was nominated for an Oscar for CALL ME BY YOUR NAME and I will not be surprised if his name is called again this year.
Joining Carrell and Chalamet are Amy Ryan and Maura Tierney as Nic's Mother and Step-Mother. Both are equal to the task that is given them - to be supportive, worried and sad - all at the same time. It would have been interesting to flesh out these roles in this tale, but that would have made this film something different than what it is intended to be - a tale of a father's inability to help his son, no matter how hard he tries.
Ultimately, the issue with this film is there is no variety to it. It stays, for the most part, on one emotional note throughout the course of it's 2 hour running time - somber and sad. That constant feeling of dourness makes this rather slow running film seem even slower, causing quite a bit of rustling and shifting in the chairs.
It's an important film about an important subject - I just wish they would have varied the pitch of it from time to time. Well acted, well written - and dour.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
DBT Diary Card and Skills Coach
Health & Fitness and Medical
App
DBT Diary Card is the only DBT iPhone app designed and created by a licensed and DBT intensively...
Bookapotamus (289 KP) rated Unsheltered in Books
Jun 22, 2018
Not a favorite
I am typically a big fan of Barbara Kingsolver's books. Her writing is exquisite and reads like a dream. She is usually one of the few writers of historical novels I read as it's not really my most favorite genre, but unfortunately this one was a total snooze-fest. I almost quit several times, I was just SO bored! Honestly, nothing really happens in this book, there are a few deaths, a shooting, and drama of beliefs with the push and pull of science vs. God, but it was just so uneventful and without buildup - I found myself really struggling to get through it.
The book is set in two different eras, in the same town, on the same street, in Vineland, NJ. Willa Knox, present day, is fictional. AS is her family. Mary Treat in 1871, is apparently a real person, a lover of science, plants and creatures. The connection between the two stories is a bit weak I felt. Not sure if it was intentional, but it just didn't really capture my attention in the way I believe it was supposed to. In 1871, Thatcher Greenwood (fictional as well I believe?) meets Mary, and they get along because their beliefs mesh well - they believe in science, and follow Darwin's teachings, and Thatcher finds himself in a bit of jam as the town is "ruled" by Landis, a strict believer that God has created everything, and science is witchcraft.
Willa, is struggling when we meet her - in fact, her entire family - every single one of them seems to have some serious issues! I found it depressing and really didn't find myself liking any of the family very much. We see some similar struggles to Thatcher (their houses are both falling down around them) but not much else mirrors the past.
I do know based on initial talk of this novel, and the title of course, that the joining of the past vs present is in the "Unsheltered" aspect of both of these stories, the way Landis mirrors Trump, the ways a world can come unraveled by rules and rulers, as well as the courage to stand for what you believe in. But it just wasn't there for me - it was so subtle, uninspiring, slow and boring.
I did LOVE the plants and stuff - it's the main reason I wanted to read this book, but sadly they just weren't too heavily featured. The little tidbits of random facts about Pitcher Plants and Venus Fly Traps, and some other plants and bugs was pretty fun and fascinating and I wish there was more of it.
In the end - this just fell really flat for me. I know some of the people and events are real, but some are not (which was hard for me to follow) and Barbara's research and writing is top-notch. I just really wanted an engaging story, with a bit more interest, and a lot less heavy eyelid.
The book is set in two different eras, in the same town, on the same street, in Vineland, NJ. Willa Knox, present day, is fictional. AS is her family. Mary Treat in 1871, is apparently a real person, a lover of science, plants and creatures. The connection between the two stories is a bit weak I felt. Not sure if it was intentional, but it just didn't really capture my attention in the way I believe it was supposed to. In 1871, Thatcher Greenwood (fictional as well I believe?) meets Mary, and they get along because their beliefs mesh well - they believe in science, and follow Darwin's teachings, and Thatcher finds himself in a bit of jam as the town is "ruled" by Landis, a strict believer that God has created everything, and science is witchcraft.
Willa, is struggling when we meet her - in fact, her entire family - every single one of them seems to have some serious issues! I found it depressing and really didn't find myself liking any of the family very much. We see some similar struggles to Thatcher (their houses are both falling down around them) but not much else mirrors the past.
I do know based on initial talk of this novel, and the title of course, that the joining of the past vs present is in the "Unsheltered" aspect of both of these stories, the way Landis mirrors Trump, the ways a world can come unraveled by rules and rulers, as well as the courage to stand for what you believe in. But it just wasn't there for me - it was so subtle, uninspiring, slow and boring.
I did LOVE the plants and stuff - it's the main reason I wanted to read this book, but sadly they just weren't too heavily featured. The little tidbits of random facts about Pitcher Plants and Venus Fly Traps, and some other plants and bugs was pretty fun and fascinating and I wish there was more of it.
In the end - this just fell really flat for me. I know some of the people and events are real, but some are not (which was hard for me to follow) and Barbara's research and writing is top-notch. I just really wanted an engaging story, with a bit more interest, and a lot less heavy eyelid.