Search
How to Vex a Vampire
10.0
Rate It
Book
Finn Getting into the vampire-only detective unit was the easy part; what’s going to be more...
ClareR (5721 KP) rated The Startup Wife in Books
Mar 20, 2022
I really enjoyed this satirical story of love and marriage in the setting of an app startup. It’s a book of two halves, really: a love story, and how you set an app is set up and start a business.
Computer scientist Asha, meets up with her high school crush, Cyrus, they fall in love and get married. Along with Cyrus’ friend Jules, Asha develops an app based on Cyrus’ beliefs. And the app really takes off - which is where the second part of the book kicks in.
Cyrus goes from reluctant participant in the venture, to being a guru who enthrals thousands of subscribers each day with his motivational webcasts. He IS the face of WAI, and Asha’s role is almost forgotten. Even when it becomes something of a phenomenon, Asha’s development and programming expertise is pushed aside to make way for her clearly more charismatic husband. The problem is, and this is what really started to put me off his character, Cyrus buys into his own charisma. He thinks he and the app are capable of doing far more than they realistically can do, and disaster awaits. If only they’d listened to Asha.
Asha is the loyal wife, but faced with being constantly undermined at work, and not being supported by Cyrus, things are bound to come to a head. And they certainly do! Everything that can go wrong, does!
I really liked the way that the author looked at how social media and apps should have a responsibility towards their users. People get carried away online, thinking that anything is possible, and social media can reinforce this.
I also think that the way that Asha was pushed out and her role trivialised was representative of many women in the workplace. In particular, the way that their investor ignored Asha in meetings, directing technical questions (her job) to the male partners.
Parts of this book really made me laugh, other parts showed the online world as trivial and shallow. It portrayed the dangers of trusting a programme with no human perception of situations. It’s a great book which not only entertained me, but really got me thinking.
Computer scientist Asha, meets up with her high school crush, Cyrus, they fall in love and get married. Along with Cyrus’ friend Jules, Asha develops an app based on Cyrus’ beliefs. And the app really takes off - which is where the second part of the book kicks in.
Cyrus goes from reluctant participant in the venture, to being a guru who enthrals thousands of subscribers each day with his motivational webcasts. He IS the face of WAI, and Asha’s role is almost forgotten. Even when it becomes something of a phenomenon, Asha’s development and programming expertise is pushed aside to make way for her clearly more charismatic husband. The problem is, and this is what really started to put me off his character, Cyrus buys into his own charisma. He thinks he and the app are capable of doing far more than they realistically can do, and disaster awaits. If only they’d listened to Asha.
Asha is the loyal wife, but faced with being constantly undermined at work, and not being supported by Cyrus, things are bound to come to a head. And they certainly do! Everything that can go wrong, does!
I really liked the way that the author looked at how social media and apps should have a responsibility towards their users. People get carried away online, thinking that anything is possible, and social media can reinforce this.
I also think that the way that Asha was pushed out and her role trivialised was representative of many women in the workplace. In particular, the way that their investor ignored Asha in meetings, directing technical questions (her job) to the male partners.
Parts of this book really made me laugh, other parts showed the online world as trivial and shallow. It portrayed the dangers of trusting a programme with no human perception of situations. It’s a great book which not only entertained me, but really got me thinking.
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated The Grip of It in Books
May 12, 2018
Here we are about a week after I finished reading The Grip of It by Jac Jemc, and I’m still not quite sure how I feel about it. I expected something a bit more horrifying and, though it certainly has a sense of urgency to it, it lacked the final answers that I enjoy so much in a haunted house novel.
The characters of The Grip of It are millennials, and apparently, we do not worry about our jobs. What I mean by this is that Julie and James, our main characters, are stereotypes to a fault and this bothers me. It bothers me because their behavior, in response to their house’s issues, does not reflect proportionately upon my generation. James more or less walks out of his job and doesn’t bother getting another one, whilst Julie shows up at her workplace inappropriately. I suppose this isn’t something that should bother me so much and might have slipped past my radar entirely if it weren’t for the blurb on the back cover of the book. If you’ve been following my blog for any length of time, you’ll know I abhor stereotypes. Especially those that do not truly represent a group of people. /rant over
The story itself isn’t horrible, but it’s not really anything new either. Most of it is driven by the style of writing. For instance, you can clearly feel the differences in Julie and James’s personalities. Julie’s point-of-view contains lots of run-on sentences and has a high-anxiety feel to it–which is the opposite of many of her actions, oddly enough. James, on the other hand, has a lackadaisical feel. As for the haunting? Little is truly revealed as to its origins and very few questions are asked, leaving this book to focus primarily on the characters and how events affect them, rather than the reality of what’s going on. In fact, one might argue that the couple is simply going mad.
I was so excited to get my hands on this books, and just as disappointed and underwhelmed when I finished reading it. I devoured each page waiting eagerly for something to really happen, but in the end I’m left with unanswered questions. This isn’t always a bad thing, but when you’re questioning the book as a whole… well that says something.
The characters of The Grip of It are millennials, and apparently, we do not worry about our jobs. What I mean by this is that Julie and James, our main characters, are stereotypes to a fault and this bothers me. It bothers me because their behavior, in response to their house’s issues, does not reflect proportionately upon my generation. James more or less walks out of his job and doesn’t bother getting another one, whilst Julie shows up at her workplace inappropriately. I suppose this isn’t something that should bother me so much and might have slipped past my radar entirely if it weren’t for the blurb on the back cover of the book. If you’ve been following my blog for any length of time, you’ll know I abhor stereotypes. Especially those that do not truly represent a group of people. /rant over
The story itself isn’t horrible, but it’s not really anything new either. Most of it is driven by the style of writing. For instance, you can clearly feel the differences in Julie and James’s personalities. Julie’s point-of-view contains lots of run-on sentences and has a high-anxiety feel to it–which is the opposite of many of her actions, oddly enough. James, on the other hand, has a lackadaisical feel. As for the haunting? Little is truly revealed as to its origins and very few questions are asked, leaving this book to focus primarily on the characters and how events affect them, rather than the reality of what’s going on. In fact, one might argue that the couple is simply going mad.
I was so excited to get my hands on this books, and just as disappointed and underwhelmed when I finished reading it. I devoured each page waiting eagerly for something to really happen, but in the end I’m left with unanswered questions. This isn’t always a bad thing, but when you’re questioning the book as a whole… well that says something.
Sharing the Work: What My Family and Career Taught Me About Breaking Through (and Holding the Door Open for Others)
Book
"Myra Strober's Sharing the Work is the memoir of a woman who has learned that 'having it all' is...
Erika (17788 KP) rated Kindred (2020) in Movies
Jul 10, 2021
Kindred is a psychological thriller/horror about the reluctantly pregnant Charlotte (Tamara Lawrance) after her boyfriend, Ben (Edward Holcroft), dies in a workplace accident. After this accident, Charlotte is taken in by Ben’s mother (Fiona Shaw), and creepy stepbrother, Thomas (Jack Lowden). They proceed to basically torture her and question her sanity.
Prior to the accident, Charlotte and Ben visit the decrepit family home to announce they’re moving to Australia for a new start. It obviously did not go over well. After this visit, Charlotte finds out she’s pregnant, and that news gets passed around the small town, and that's how Ben finds out. Charlotte expresses that she doesn’t necessarily want the baby, but it was pretty much brushed aside – red flag, RUN GIRL!
This is when the main portion of the film begins, and they take her in under the guise of taking care of her and the baby. It was pretty obvious the only reason they took care of her, because she was the incubator for the grandchild.
This was basically a 21st Century version of Gaslight (1940/1944). The film wasn’t necessarily unique, and the ending was as expected. As always with films now, it’s about the journey, since you already know the end. There was very heavy-handed symbolism with the crow, which for me, began to get a little tedious, but I understood why it was there.
Full disclosure, I only watched the film because Jack Lowden was in it. I figured, if it’s not good, at least there was someone pretty to look at. As I watched this, I asked myself, is Thomas just a really beautiful dummy who constantly announces he’s making lunch? Hmm.
Tamara Lawrance was great in the film, she was compelling, and you did hope that she would be successful in escaping from the creepy family, and wallpaper-peeling house. Also, I liked that she correctly portrayed the serious frustration of expressing concern to doctors and other medical personnel, and not being taken seriously because the issues are related to female reproductive organs.
My curiosity was what made me keep watching, but I wasn’t necessarily completely engaged the entire time. The tension didn’t really stay the entire time. Although I did have the issues with the predictability, I did still surprising like the film. I’m glad I didn’t let it Rest in Peace in my Hulu watchlist graveyard.
Prior to the accident, Charlotte and Ben visit the decrepit family home to announce they’re moving to Australia for a new start. It obviously did not go over well. After this visit, Charlotte finds out she’s pregnant, and that news gets passed around the small town, and that's how Ben finds out. Charlotte expresses that she doesn’t necessarily want the baby, but it was pretty much brushed aside – red flag, RUN GIRL!
This is when the main portion of the film begins, and they take her in under the guise of taking care of her and the baby. It was pretty obvious the only reason they took care of her, because she was the incubator for the grandchild.
This was basically a 21st Century version of Gaslight (1940/1944). The film wasn’t necessarily unique, and the ending was as expected. As always with films now, it’s about the journey, since you already know the end. There was very heavy-handed symbolism with the crow, which for me, began to get a little tedious, but I understood why it was there.
Full disclosure, I only watched the film because Jack Lowden was in it. I figured, if it’s not good, at least there was someone pretty to look at. As I watched this, I asked myself, is Thomas just a really beautiful dummy who constantly announces he’s making lunch? Hmm.
Tamara Lawrance was great in the film, she was compelling, and you did hope that she would be successful in escaping from the creepy family, and wallpaper-peeling house. Also, I liked that she correctly portrayed the serious frustration of expressing concern to doctors and other medical personnel, and not being taken seriously because the issues are related to female reproductive organs.
My curiosity was what made me keep watching, but I wasn’t necessarily completely engaged the entire time. The tension didn’t really stay the entire time. Although I did have the issues with the predictability, I did still surprising like the film. I’m glad I didn’t let it Rest in Peace in my Hulu watchlist graveyard.
Fidelity Investments
Finance and Business
App
Put 70 years of Fidelity’s financial experience in the palm of your hand with the Fidelity...
FREE VPN For iPhone And iPad
Utilities and Productivity
App
The smartest VPN app on iOS now FREE! - No registration required - Unlimited bandwidth - Free...
The Wee Treasury of Workday Meditations: Thoughts to Think While You Do the Work
10.0
Rate It
Book
Everything you’ve seen and heard from the movies and television about working in a job is...
Self-Help Motivation Workplace
Forbidden Match (Perfect Match Agency #6)
10.0
Rate It
Book
The Perfect Match Agency’s company policy is No dating in the workplace! Looks like Renn and...
Omegaverse MM Romance
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Assistant (2020) in Movies
May 24, 2020
Julia Garner's performance (1 more)
The tension that manages to be created through a portrayal of the mundane
The movie seems to have a lot of haters on IMDB (a rating at the time of writing of 5.9)... but I refuse to follow "the pack" on this one... I thought it was great. It manages to make the mundane incredibly tense. This is this first (semi-)fictional feature from documentary-maker Kitty Green.... and in my book she does a knock-out job.
We first meet Jane (Julia Garner) at 'God-knows-what-o-clock' in the morning as she arrives at her workplace - a New York film-production company. First to arrive every morning, she turns on the lights, turns on the screens, makes the pot of coffee and cleans off stains from her boss's couch. The stain isn't coffee. A lost gold bracelet is recovered.
For we are in a truly toxic working environment here. 'The boss' - clearly modelled on Harvey Weinstein - is a bullying tyrant who can reduce Jane and her two male assistants (Jon Orsini and Noah Robbins) to quivering wrecks. "WHAT THE F*** DID YOU SAY TO HER" barks the boss down the phone at Jane, after she has had a perfectly reasonable phone conversation with the estranged Mrs Boss.
The toxicity is pervasive though throughout Miram..., sorry...., 'the company'. Jane is almost invisible to her other co-workers who don't give her eye-contact even when she's talking to them and barely register her presence when sharing a lift.
But bullying and workplace toxicity is just part of this story. A steady stream of starlets arrive in the office, like meat deliveries to a butcher. In a chilling sequence, the photocopier churns out photos of beautiful actresses.... a paper-based equivalent of swiping-left or -right in the selection process. None of the "if you... I will" discussions are shown, but they don't need to be: the inference is clear.
Jane is smart, slim and pretty... but not in an obvious 'Hollywood way'. "You'll be OK..." says a co-worker "you're not his type".
But someone who distinctly is "his type" is Sienna (Kristine Froseth), a "very very young" aspiring waitress-come-actress from Boise, who suddenly and unexpectedly arrives as a "new assistant"... to be promptly put up in a swanky hotel room. It's time to act... and Jane approaches the company HR manager (Matthew Macfadyen)....
An old Spielberg trick is to increase tension by keeping the "monster" hidden from view: cue the tanker driver from "Duel" and (for most of the film) the shark from "Jaws". Here, the boss is felt only as a malevolent force and never seen on screen. It's an approach that works brilliantly, focusing the emotion on the effect he has on those flamed.
There is also recognition that these powerful people are also hugely intelligent and manipulative. Seeing that Jane is a valuable asset, the public berating is sometimes followed up with a private email apology.... dripping a few words of encouragement and praise like a few drops of Methadone to a drug-addict.
This is an excellent movie and thoughtfully and elegantly directed. Following a normal day in Jane's work life.... albeit a day where perhaps the penny finally drops... is immersive and engaging. And at only 88 minutes long, the movie never outstays its welcome.
The performances are first rate. Julia Garner is magnificent, and in a year where the Oscars will be "interesting", here's a good candidate for Best Actress I would suggest if not Best Picture. Garner's an actress I'm unfamiliar with: the only one of her previous flicks I've seen was Sin City 2.
Also oily and impressive is Matthew Macfadyen as the HR manager. There's also a sparse but well-used score by Tamar-kali.
The one area I found poor was in the sound design. It's clearly filmed in an office environment, rather than on a sound stage, and unfortunately the combination of the acoustics and the New York accents makes some of the dialogue really difficult to hear. An example is a discussion between two co-workers in an office kitchen, which was completely indecipherable for me.
Should I watch this? In my view, definitely, yes. It's chilling and an insight into the terrible ordeal that many professional women in the film industry, and other industries, have had to put up with before the "Me Too" lid was blown off (and many probably still do). The most telling line in the film? At the end of the "Thanks" in the end-titles: "All those who shared their experiences".
(See the full graphical review at One Mann's Movies here https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/05/24/one-manns-movies-film-review-the-assistant-2020/ . Thanks).
We first meet Jane (Julia Garner) at 'God-knows-what-o-clock' in the morning as she arrives at her workplace - a New York film-production company. First to arrive every morning, she turns on the lights, turns on the screens, makes the pot of coffee and cleans off stains from her boss's couch. The stain isn't coffee. A lost gold bracelet is recovered.
For we are in a truly toxic working environment here. 'The boss' - clearly modelled on Harvey Weinstein - is a bullying tyrant who can reduce Jane and her two male assistants (Jon Orsini and Noah Robbins) to quivering wrecks. "WHAT THE F*** DID YOU SAY TO HER" barks the boss down the phone at Jane, after she has had a perfectly reasonable phone conversation with the estranged Mrs Boss.
The toxicity is pervasive though throughout Miram..., sorry...., 'the company'. Jane is almost invisible to her other co-workers who don't give her eye-contact even when she's talking to them and barely register her presence when sharing a lift.
But bullying and workplace toxicity is just part of this story. A steady stream of starlets arrive in the office, like meat deliveries to a butcher. In a chilling sequence, the photocopier churns out photos of beautiful actresses.... a paper-based equivalent of swiping-left or -right in the selection process. None of the "if you... I will" discussions are shown, but they don't need to be: the inference is clear.
Jane is smart, slim and pretty... but not in an obvious 'Hollywood way'. "You'll be OK..." says a co-worker "you're not his type".
But someone who distinctly is "his type" is Sienna (Kristine Froseth), a "very very young" aspiring waitress-come-actress from Boise, who suddenly and unexpectedly arrives as a "new assistant"... to be promptly put up in a swanky hotel room. It's time to act... and Jane approaches the company HR manager (Matthew Macfadyen)....
An old Spielberg trick is to increase tension by keeping the "monster" hidden from view: cue the tanker driver from "Duel" and (for most of the film) the shark from "Jaws". Here, the boss is felt only as a malevolent force and never seen on screen. It's an approach that works brilliantly, focusing the emotion on the effect he has on those flamed.
There is also recognition that these powerful people are also hugely intelligent and manipulative. Seeing that Jane is a valuable asset, the public berating is sometimes followed up with a private email apology.... dripping a few words of encouragement and praise like a few drops of Methadone to a drug-addict.
This is an excellent movie and thoughtfully and elegantly directed. Following a normal day in Jane's work life.... albeit a day where perhaps the penny finally drops... is immersive and engaging. And at only 88 minutes long, the movie never outstays its welcome.
The performances are first rate. Julia Garner is magnificent, and in a year where the Oscars will be "interesting", here's a good candidate for Best Actress I would suggest if not Best Picture. Garner's an actress I'm unfamiliar with: the only one of her previous flicks I've seen was Sin City 2.
Also oily and impressive is Matthew Macfadyen as the HR manager. There's also a sparse but well-used score by Tamar-kali.
The one area I found poor was in the sound design. It's clearly filmed in an office environment, rather than on a sound stage, and unfortunately the combination of the acoustics and the New York accents makes some of the dialogue really difficult to hear. An example is a discussion between two co-workers in an office kitchen, which was completely indecipherable for me.
Should I watch this? In my view, definitely, yes. It's chilling and an insight into the terrible ordeal that many professional women in the film industry, and other industries, have had to put up with before the "Me Too" lid was blown off (and many probably still do). The most telling line in the film? At the end of the "Thanks" in the end-titles: "All those who shared their experiences".
(See the full graphical review at One Mann's Movies here https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/05/24/one-manns-movies-film-review-the-assistant-2020/ . Thanks).
