Search
TS
The Seaside House: Living on the Water
Nick Voulgaris and Douglas Friedman
Book
Everyone dreams of a house by the sea, and this book presents the best examples of homes for...
Sophie Calle: And So Forth
Sophie Calle and Marie Desplechin
Book
Throughout her career, the photographer and installation artist Sophie Calle has been creating...
History as Theatrical Metaphor: History, Myth and National Identities in Modern Scottish Drama: 2016
Book
This revelatory study explores how Scottish history plays, especially since the 1930s, raise issues...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Star Trek: Insurrection (1998) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
This is the Trek movie that I’ve probably seen least often. It’s one that is very “planet-bound” ones (another of those is still to come in the series), and as such it has never grabbed my interest in the same way as many of the others. Having watched it again, it’s actually better than I remember it. The rejuvenating capabilities of the planet on Geordi LeForge’s eyes leads to a genuinely moving sunset scene. And love is in the air too. Firstly, between Picard (Patrick Stewart) and the ‘older woman’ Anij (Donna Murphy): very tastefully and nicely done. And secondly, the relationship is also rekindled between Troi (Marina Sirtis) and Riker (Jonathan Frakes), though you have to wonder if Frakes pulled ‘director’s privilege’ in getting the naked bath scene with Sirtis – lucky dog!
That being said, and despite the heavyweight involvement of F. Murray Abraham and Anthony Zerbe. the “First Contact” magic is rather missing here. There’s a sense of desperation when a previously unknown ‘Captain’s Yacht’ hoves into view (as if!) and when the Enterprise’s “manual steering column” (a PS/2 joystick!) pops up!
So, will the TNG era end with a bang or a whimper?
That being said, and despite the heavyweight involvement of F. Murray Abraham and Anthony Zerbe. the “First Contact” magic is rather missing here. There’s a sense of desperation when a previously unknown ‘Captain’s Yacht’ hoves into view (as if!) and when the Enterprise’s “manual steering column” (a PS/2 joystick!) pops up!
So, will the TNG era end with a bang or a whimper?
Kyera (8 KP) rated Batgirl, Volume 2: Son of Penguin in Books
Feb 1, 2018
I fell in love with Babs again when her story was reintroduced in DC's New 52 and she got a costume redesign. As much as I enjoyed Gail Simone's run, it was the collaboration of Cameron Stewart, Brenden Fletcher and Babs Tarr that pulled me back in. I became obsessed with the new costume and loved Babs Tarr's art style. I adored issues 35-52, but then there was another change with DC Rebirth and Batgirl left Burnside. I was not quite as invested in the first few issues (plus I didn't enjoy the art), but that was soon remedied with the introduction of Penguin's son.
The story arc contained in Volume 2: Son of Penguin felt more like the New 52 Batgirl I fell in love with, again. Although the plot was predictable at times, it will still enjoyable. Both Hope Larson's writing and the talents of the artists gave me hope that Batgirl's run will continue to improve. As she is my favourite female superhero (other than Wonder Woman, I truly couldn't choose) I cannot wait to see where this team takes her story.
I would definitely recommend her Batgirl of Burnside arc from the New 52 and her new story in Rebirth to fans of comics and interesting female characters. I may also be biased because in this iteration she is a grad school student who is currently studying to become a librarian, which is exactly what I am doing - so I feel like we are kindred spirits, or twins. Whatever.
The story arc contained in Volume 2: Son of Penguin felt more like the New 52 Batgirl I fell in love with, again. Although the plot was predictable at times, it will still enjoyable. Both Hope Larson's writing and the talents of the artists gave me hope that Batgirl's run will continue to improve. As she is my favourite female superhero (other than Wonder Woman, I truly couldn't choose) I cannot wait to see where this team takes her story.
I would definitely recommend her Batgirl of Burnside arc from the New 52 and her new story in Rebirth to fans of comics and interesting female characters. I may also be biased because in this iteration she is a grad school student who is currently studying to become a librarian, which is exactly what I am doing - so I feel like we are kindred spirits, or twins. Whatever.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Rear Window (1954) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“Hmm… must have splattered a lot”.
Maddy at Maddy Loves Her Classic Films is hosting The Alfred Hitchcockblogathon. A fine idea, celebrating the life and works of the “Master of Suspense”. My contribution comes from his 1954 masterpiece “Rear Window” starring James Stewart and Grace Kelly.
rw-poster
In one pan around his small apartment, and without a word of dialogue required, Hitchcock deftly fills in all the back-story you need: Stewart plays ace photo-journalist L.B. Jefferies, laid up from jetting the world to worn-torn regions by a broken leg in a full-cast with only his courtyard view to entertain him. In sweltering summer temperatures all the apartments are open to the elements, so he can be well entertained by the menagerie before him: “Miss Torso”, the scantily-clad and frequently showering ballerina; a sculptress with an eye towards Henry Moore; a struggling composer (who has his clock wound by someone very familiar!); a newly-wedded bride threatening to wear out the groom; a salesman and his bed-ridden wife; a dog-loving and balcony-sleeping couple; and “Miss Lonelyhearts” – a hard-drinking spinster forced to create imaginary male dinner-guests.
Stewart plays his usual ‘Mr Ordinary’ watching perfectly ordinary goings on in a perfectly ordinary apartment block.
Or not. Jefferies is drawn to some odd-events in the apartment of the salesman (Raymond Burr, still 13 years before his career-defining role in TV’s “Ironside”). His rampant suspicions infect not only his cranky middle-aged physiotherapist Stella (Thelma Ritter) but also his perfect (“too perfect”) girlfriend, the fashion expert Lisa (Grace Kelly). Of course his police friend Doyle (Wendell Corey) is having none of it… there is no evidence of any crime being committed. And the “murdered” wife has been seen being put on a train by her husband, and is sending him letters from the countryside.
Is Jefferies just going stir-crazy? Or is there really something to it?
The set for this film is masterly. Although depicting a genuine location in New York’s Greenwich village the huge set was constructed on the Paramount lot in Hollywood, and you can just imagine the army of carpenters and artists building the multi-layered structure.
It’s one of the stars of the film, allowing for a wealth of detail to be populated: in the apartments; in the street behind; even in the cafe over the other side of the street. And it’s this detail that really makes what could be a highly static film come alive. There are a half dozen films-within-the-film going on at once, with Stewart’s character – and you as the fellow-voyeur – having a multi-pass to watch them all simultaneously.
And watch he does. As what could be perceived as a seriously pervy character – something he is called out on by Stella – Jeffries gets to see an eyeful in particular of the shapely and scantily-clad ballerina (Georgine Darcy, agent-less and only paid $350 for the role!). These scenes must have been deemed quite risque for the year of release.
Where the film rather falters is in the bickering romance between Stewart and Kelly. As a hot-blooded man, I will declare that even today Kelly’s first dream-like appearance (with Vaseline lightly coating the lens) is breathtaking. She’s just the ‘girl-next-door’: if you live next to a palace that is! And yet (with Kelly 21 years Stewart’s junior) she’s just “too perfect” for L.B. , who feels (against her protestations) that she’s ‘too girly’ to hack the life of a war photographer on the road. The mysogeny, common for the day, is gasp-making: “If a girl’s pretty enough, she just has to ‘be'” intones Stewart, to no howls of protest or throwing of saucepans! In fact Kelly is greatly encouraged: “Preview of coming attractions” purrs Kelly, flaunting what she has around the apartment in a negligee.
These scenes though are rather overlong and somewhat get in the way of the murder mystery plot-line. Things really start to warm up when a death occurs, to piercing screams in the night: “Which one of you did it?” shouts a woman to the neighbourhood, as everything – momentarily – stops. “WHICH ONE OF YOU DID IT?”. Given your emotional involvement in the ongoing voyeurism, it’s hard as a viewer not to feel discomforted…. (“well, it wasn’t me”…. shifts uneasily in the seat).
From then on, Hitchcock proceeds to pile on suspenseful jolt after jolt, with first Lisa and then L.B. placed in harms way. While the perpetrator may seem clueless and incompetent, as most murderers of passion probably are, the denouement is satisfying, with a great trial use of green-screen ‘falling’ that would be perfected by Hitchcock for “Vertigo” four years later.
What’s curious for such as classic is that there are a number of fluffed lines in the piece: with two notable ones by Stewart and Kelly. Hitchcock was the master of long and uninterrupted takes, but did he not believe in re-shooting scenes when such errors occurred? Most odd.
Although tighter and more claustrophobic that some of his better known films, this is a firm favourite of mine. If you’ve never seen it, its well worth you checking out.
rw-poster
In one pan around his small apartment, and without a word of dialogue required, Hitchcock deftly fills in all the back-story you need: Stewart plays ace photo-journalist L.B. Jefferies, laid up from jetting the world to worn-torn regions by a broken leg in a full-cast with only his courtyard view to entertain him. In sweltering summer temperatures all the apartments are open to the elements, so he can be well entertained by the menagerie before him: “Miss Torso”, the scantily-clad and frequently showering ballerina; a sculptress with an eye towards Henry Moore; a struggling composer (who has his clock wound by someone very familiar!); a newly-wedded bride threatening to wear out the groom; a salesman and his bed-ridden wife; a dog-loving and balcony-sleeping couple; and “Miss Lonelyhearts” – a hard-drinking spinster forced to create imaginary male dinner-guests.
Stewart plays his usual ‘Mr Ordinary’ watching perfectly ordinary goings on in a perfectly ordinary apartment block.
Or not. Jefferies is drawn to some odd-events in the apartment of the salesman (Raymond Burr, still 13 years before his career-defining role in TV’s “Ironside”). His rampant suspicions infect not only his cranky middle-aged physiotherapist Stella (Thelma Ritter) but also his perfect (“too perfect”) girlfriend, the fashion expert Lisa (Grace Kelly). Of course his police friend Doyle (Wendell Corey) is having none of it… there is no evidence of any crime being committed. And the “murdered” wife has been seen being put on a train by her husband, and is sending him letters from the countryside.
Is Jefferies just going stir-crazy? Or is there really something to it?
The set for this film is masterly. Although depicting a genuine location in New York’s Greenwich village the huge set was constructed on the Paramount lot in Hollywood, and you can just imagine the army of carpenters and artists building the multi-layered structure.
It’s one of the stars of the film, allowing for a wealth of detail to be populated: in the apartments; in the street behind; even in the cafe over the other side of the street. And it’s this detail that really makes what could be a highly static film come alive. There are a half dozen films-within-the-film going on at once, with Stewart’s character – and you as the fellow-voyeur – having a multi-pass to watch them all simultaneously.
And watch he does. As what could be perceived as a seriously pervy character – something he is called out on by Stella – Jeffries gets to see an eyeful in particular of the shapely and scantily-clad ballerina (Georgine Darcy, agent-less and only paid $350 for the role!). These scenes must have been deemed quite risque for the year of release.
Where the film rather falters is in the bickering romance between Stewart and Kelly. As a hot-blooded man, I will declare that even today Kelly’s first dream-like appearance (with Vaseline lightly coating the lens) is breathtaking. She’s just the ‘girl-next-door’: if you live next to a palace that is! And yet (with Kelly 21 years Stewart’s junior) she’s just “too perfect” for L.B. , who feels (against her protestations) that she’s ‘too girly’ to hack the life of a war photographer on the road. The mysogeny, common for the day, is gasp-making: “If a girl’s pretty enough, she just has to ‘be'” intones Stewart, to no howls of protest or throwing of saucepans! In fact Kelly is greatly encouraged: “Preview of coming attractions” purrs Kelly, flaunting what she has around the apartment in a negligee.
These scenes though are rather overlong and somewhat get in the way of the murder mystery plot-line. Things really start to warm up when a death occurs, to piercing screams in the night: “Which one of you did it?” shouts a woman to the neighbourhood, as everything – momentarily – stops. “WHICH ONE OF YOU DID IT?”. Given your emotional involvement in the ongoing voyeurism, it’s hard as a viewer not to feel discomforted…. (“well, it wasn’t me”…. shifts uneasily in the seat).
From then on, Hitchcock proceeds to pile on suspenseful jolt after jolt, with first Lisa and then L.B. placed in harms way. While the perpetrator may seem clueless and incompetent, as most murderers of passion probably are, the denouement is satisfying, with a great trial use of green-screen ‘falling’ that would be perfected by Hitchcock for “Vertigo” four years later.
What’s curious for such as classic is that there are a number of fluffed lines in the piece: with two notable ones by Stewart and Kelly. Hitchcock was the master of long and uninterrupted takes, but did he not believe in re-shooting scenes when such errors occurred? Most odd.
Although tighter and more claustrophobic that some of his better known films, this is a firm favourite of mine. If you’ve never seen it, its well worth you checking out.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Nirvana (Nirvana #1) in Books
Dec 7, 2018
<i>This ARC was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review </i>
Imagine a world without any bees. That is the world that J. R. Stewart conjures up in this new dystopian series, <i>Nirvana</i>. Twenty years from now, the bees have become extinct. There are no more trees, flowers, fruits or vegetables; and more animals have become extinct as a result. Young adult, Larissa, is living in a world that seems unimaginable, but not only is she dealing with this new way of life, she is also grieving the loss of her husband, Andrew.
Andrew was a scientist, an occupation that earned himself and Larissa a place in the Barracks where he could continue with his important research. They both believed they were lucky to receive this opportunity, but then Andrew went out on a mission and never came back. No matter how hard people try to convince her, Larissa cannot accept that her husband is dead, especially as she has seen him in <i>Nirvana</i> – a virtual reality world. As she struggles to piece together what is real and what is not, secrets are being uncovered that blur the lines between reality and the cybernetic domain.
<i>Nirvana </i>is an interesting concept. Firstly, the issue with the extinction of the bees is a very real concern for scientists at the moment. If bees were to die out there would be no pollination of the vital plants that humans use daily. Humanity would be faced with a future not unlike Larissa’s. Secondly, with the advance in computer technology, virtual reality has become a popular phenomenon in contemporary society, and with more expansion it is likely that something similar to Nirvana will be produced.
As a story, however, nothing exciting really happened. There was no major build up to the ending. Characters were suspected of hiding the truth from the very beginning and therefore it was no surprise when certain facts came to light later in the novel. <i>Nirvana</i> is also a very short first installment of the series, which does not give the story much chance to develop at an adequate pace, thus it is difficult to get our heads around the virtual reality concept that Stewart writes about.
Despite these misgivings there is the chance that the following novels in this series will become more thrilling as the truth begins to unravel about Andrew’s disappearance or death.
Imagine a world without any bees. That is the world that J. R. Stewart conjures up in this new dystopian series, <i>Nirvana</i>. Twenty years from now, the bees have become extinct. There are no more trees, flowers, fruits or vegetables; and more animals have become extinct as a result. Young adult, Larissa, is living in a world that seems unimaginable, but not only is she dealing with this new way of life, she is also grieving the loss of her husband, Andrew.
Andrew was a scientist, an occupation that earned himself and Larissa a place in the Barracks where he could continue with his important research. They both believed they were lucky to receive this opportunity, but then Andrew went out on a mission and never came back. No matter how hard people try to convince her, Larissa cannot accept that her husband is dead, especially as she has seen him in <i>Nirvana</i> – a virtual reality world. As she struggles to piece together what is real and what is not, secrets are being uncovered that blur the lines between reality and the cybernetic domain.
<i>Nirvana </i>is an interesting concept. Firstly, the issue with the extinction of the bees is a very real concern for scientists at the moment. If bees were to die out there would be no pollination of the vital plants that humans use daily. Humanity would be faced with a future not unlike Larissa’s. Secondly, with the advance in computer technology, virtual reality has become a popular phenomenon in contemporary society, and with more expansion it is likely that something similar to Nirvana will be produced.
As a story, however, nothing exciting really happened. There was no major build up to the ending. Characters were suspected of hiding the truth from the very beginning and therefore it was no surprise when certain facts came to light later in the novel. <i>Nirvana</i> is also a very short first installment of the series, which does not give the story much chance to develop at an adequate pace, thus it is difficult to get our heads around the virtual reality concept that Stewart writes about.
Despite these misgivings there is the chance that the following novels in this series will become more thrilling as the truth begins to unravel about Andrew’s disappearance or death.
mi Flight Radar Lite
Travel and Navigation
App
mi Flight Radar turns your iPhone or iPad in to your own personal air traffic radar or flight...
Texture Canada
News and Entertainment
App
Texture is the only app that gives you unlimited access to over 200 top magazines. Enjoy full issues...
Performance Psychology: Theory and Practice
Book
Anyone who has ever competed in a sport, taken an exam, or appeared on stage understands the...