Search
Search results
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated Brightburn (2019) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Super Nasty
Brightburn is a short film that moves at a blistering pace but its the calm moments where the movie truly shines. Brightburn successfully turns the entire superhero genre on its head going almost full horror movie on us & while it does fall into the trap of using to many horror cliches its a really interesting, fun & stand out movie. If I were to compare it I'd say its a mix of A Quiet Place, Midnight Special & The Children leaning towards the horror side of things more than anything else but there are sprinkles of Scifi & obviously dabs of Superhero here & there. Visually its such a looker the screen often painted fully in deep inky blackness with the only thing breaking it up being the warm glow of natural light coming from a lamp or street light. This not only helps create great atmosphere but heightens tension by limiting the viewers vision perfectly. There are neat swaps between camera techniques too eg from an almost raw found footage style to a really cool slightly obstructed first person scene. Action doesnt disapoint & the film makes the viewer wait for its violence & big pay offs making it more impactful when it finally hits. Acting is great & Elizabeth Banks clearly steals the show here. Theres a running comparison of Brandon to predatory animals such as a wasp, jellyfish or Wolf & I found the creepiest elements of the film were the slower paced scenes where we see him discover, adapt & learn how to evolve into a more successful killing machine (ie studying human anatomy) & also the impact of his actions begin to tear up his happy home & constantly disappoint his loving parents. Theres a big metaphore about adoption & the difficulties it can bring for both the new parents & the child (especially when the child hits the age where questions need to be answered) & at one point I wondered if that was really the overall message the film was actually trying to relay because this scene was so full of realistic emotion. Brightburn at times can be very predictable & show its budget constrains too but as a first film I really did dig its format & would definitely like to see a sequel or two to it for sure.
mmb02191 (81 KP) rated the PC version of Kingdom Come Deliverance in Video Games
Jan 24, 2019
Story (3 more)
Skill Tree
Historical accuracy
Characters
New favorite game
This game, right from the beginning, is beautiful, immersive, and really freaking hard (but in the best of ways).
You start out as Henry, and you suck. At everything. I fell off my horse a couple times, can't read, died immediately when trying to fight a soldier. It was great.
This game isn't your usual game where you're a hero expected to beat some evil force. Truth is, you're a peasant, and no one outside of Skalitz (your home town) really likes you all that much.
You don't know how to really do anything, from the obvious like swordfighting (you're a peasant...) to things like reading and even speech (convincing people of things)
This game has such a realistic leveling up system. You get better at skills the more you practice them, just like in real life.
At the beginning, Henry barely knows how to hold a bow, it going all over the screen and the arrows going definitely NOT where you want them to go. It would take my 20 shots to kill a stationary rabbit....
But you get better. You improve. Henry learns through hard work and sweat. His hand steadies, his aim improves (with help from you of course!) and soon you're catching plenty of (illegally poached) animals.
Unlike many games, fighting is not always the answer. Sometimes you have to be creative with your solutions to issues instead of just swinging a sword. Maybe persuade the guard to let you go, or bribe him.
Another mechanic that is very realistic, you have to make sure Henry takes care of himself. He needs to eat and sleep, but shouldn't overeat or drink, or he will feel sluggish. If you're in a fight and covered with blood, people aren't going to trust you, and are going to freak out a little. Make sure you keep Henry clean! There are water troughs that you can find to splash some water on yourself, or go to a bathhouse for a more thorough cleaning.
Overall, this is the best game I have ever played. There is always something to do, and once I am playing, I can't stop.
You start out as Henry, and you suck. At everything. I fell off my horse a couple times, can't read, died immediately when trying to fight a soldier. It was great.
This game isn't your usual game where you're a hero expected to beat some evil force. Truth is, you're a peasant, and no one outside of Skalitz (your home town) really likes you all that much.
You don't know how to really do anything, from the obvious like swordfighting (you're a peasant...) to things like reading and even speech (convincing people of things)
This game has such a realistic leveling up system. You get better at skills the more you practice them, just like in real life.
At the beginning, Henry barely knows how to hold a bow, it going all over the screen and the arrows going definitely NOT where you want them to go. It would take my 20 shots to kill a stationary rabbit....
But you get better. You improve. Henry learns through hard work and sweat. His hand steadies, his aim improves (with help from you of course!) and soon you're catching plenty of (illegally poached) animals.
Unlike many games, fighting is not always the answer. Sometimes you have to be creative with your solutions to issues instead of just swinging a sword. Maybe persuade the guard to let you go, or bribe him.
Another mechanic that is very realistic, you have to make sure Henry takes care of himself. He needs to eat and sleep, but shouldn't overeat or drink, or he will feel sluggish. If you're in a fight and covered with blood, people aren't going to trust you, and are going to freak out a little. Make sure you keep Henry clean! There are water troughs that you can find to splash some water on yourself, or go to a bathhouse for a more thorough cleaning.
Overall, this is the best game I have ever played. There is always something to do, and once I am playing, I can't stop.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Dark Waters (2019) in Movies
Nov 28, 2019
Dark Waters, the screenplay developed from the New York Times Magazine article: The Lawyer Who Became DuPont’s Worst Nightmare. The article tells of Robert Bilott (Mark Ruffalo), a corporate environmental lawyer, who headed the years long battle against DuPont in one of the landmark cases that held the company accountable for their actions.
Bilott, is visited by a farmer, Wilbur Tennant (Jim Azelvandre), who was an acquaintance of his Grandmother. As a child, he visited her home in West Virginia during the summers and had fond memories of that farm. Robert, having worked with DuPont on many cases, felt confident that he would be able to sort out the situation for Tennant. What he does not realize until he visits Wilbur’s farm is that the situation is more dire than he had known.
Wilbur had arrived with multiple VHS tapes recording the various issues that were happening to his farm animals. Bilott witnesses the mass graves that littered Tennant’s farm from his herd that had died from various illnesses. Wilbur is convinced that the reason is the dump that DuPont has created next to his property.
Mark Ruffalo’s portrayal of Bilott is an exercise in subtlety. He becomes more purpose driven once his investigation and research in the information that DuPont had sent due to discovery. Anne Hathaway plays Sarah Bilott, Robert’s wife and steadfast partner. Over the years, Sarah had been supportive, however as the case drags on and Rob’s pay gets cut repeatedly, the strain begins to show.
This film has a stellar cast. From Tim Robbins, as Tom Terp, the managing partner at the firm, Victor Garber as DuPont’s in-house counsel. Mare Winningham as Darlene Kiger, a lead plaintiff in the class action suit and Bill Pullman as Harry Dietzler, lead counsel for the plaintiffs.
This movie has the quality that awards season loves. It is a David vs. Goliath, under dog wins story. Mark Ruffalo does a great portrayal of a man who initially does not want to pursue the case, then shifts to the defender of the people.
This movie is along the lines of Erin Brockovich and Norma Rae.
4.5 out of 5 Stars
Bilott, is visited by a farmer, Wilbur Tennant (Jim Azelvandre), who was an acquaintance of his Grandmother. As a child, he visited her home in West Virginia during the summers and had fond memories of that farm. Robert, having worked with DuPont on many cases, felt confident that he would be able to sort out the situation for Tennant. What he does not realize until he visits Wilbur’s farm is that the situation is more dire than he had known.
Wilbur had arrived with multiple VHS tapes recording the various issues that were happening to his farm animals. Bilott witnesses the mass graves that littered Tennant’s farm from his herd that had died from various illnesses. Wilbur is convinced that the reason is the dump that DuPont has created next to his property.
Mark Ruffalo’s portrayal of Bilott is an exercise in subtlety. He becomes more purpose driven once his investigation and research in the information that DuPont had sent due to discovery. Anne Hathaway plays Sarah Bilott, Robert’s wife and steadfast partner. Over the years, Sarah had been supportive, however as the case drags on and Rob’s pay gets cut repeatedly, the strain begins to show.
This film has a stellar cast. From Tim Robbins, as Tom Terp, the managing partner at the firm, Victor Garber as DuPont’s in-house counsel. Mare Winningham as Darlene Kiger, a lead plaintiff in the class action suit and Bill Pullman as Harry Dietzler, lead counsel for the plaintiffs.
This movie has the quality that awards season loves. It is a David vs. Goliath, under dog wins story. Mark Ruffalo does a great portrayal of a man who initially does not want to pursue the case, then shifts to the defender of the people.
This movie is along the lines of Erin Brockovich and Norma Rae.
4.5 out of 5 Stars
ClareR (5603 KP) rated The Four Winds in Books
Feb 28, 2021
The Four Winds is about one woman’s determination to keep her family safe in extremely difficult circumstances. It was a tough, emotional read - and I couldn’t put it down.
It’s a period of history that I know little about. I mean, I’ve watched films set in this period where people live on ramshackle farms, or in shanty-type towns, and I knew that it was something to do with the Great Depression. This book describes the side of the story of a family of farmers who lived in the Dust Bowl of Texas.
Elsa lives with her husband, children and his parents on a farm in Texas. Two children later and with the farm failing, Elsa’s husband leaves them to pursue a better life - on his own. Elsa struggles on with her in-laws and children, determined to give Loreda and Ant (her children) a home where they feel loved. But when Ant nearly dies from dust pneumonia, and the farm fails completely, they make plans to leave for California. Elsa reluctantly leaves her in-laws behind (they refuse to leave their farm), because it’s the only way to save Ant.
California isn’t the promised land of milk and honey. They arrive with little money, nowhere to stay, and Californians don’t want to help them. In fact they believe ‘Okeys’ are feckless, lazy, dirty; they refuse to house or employ them. Elsa’s only choice is to live in a tent in an encampment where poverty and typhoid are rife.
I admired Elsa’s tenacity - she works tirelessly for little money to feed her children. It’s a story of one woman’s survival and her need to protect her family.
I didn’t know anything about the Dust Bowl before I read this. I’d heard the term, but I didn’t know about the dust storms, animals dying after being filled up with dust, and people dying from dust pneumonia. This sounds like an exaggerated story, doesn’t it? But it’s not. None of this was unusual.
The Four Winds is a hard, yet compelling read. This is only the third Kristin Hannah book I’ve read, and it won’t be my last!
Many thanks to St Martin’s Press for my e-copy.
It’s a period of history that I know little about. I mean, I’ve watched films set in this period where people live on ramshackle farms, or in shanty-type towns, and I knew that it was something to do with the Great Depression. This book describes the side of the story of a family of farmers who lived in the Dust Bowl of Texas.
Elsa lives with her husband, children and his parents on a farm in Texas. Two children later and with the farm failing, Elsa’s husband leaves them to pursue a better life - on his own. Elsa struggles on with her in-laws and children, determined to give Loreda and Ant (her children) a home where they feel loved. But when Ant nearly dies from dust pneumonia, and the farm fails completely, they make plans to leave for California. Elsa reluctantly leaves her in-laws behind (they refuse to leave their farm), because it’s the only way to save Ant.
California isn’t the promised land of milk and honey. They arrive with little money, nowhere to stay, and Californians don’t want to help them. In fact they believe ‘Okeys’ are feckless, lazy, dirty; they refuse to house or employ them. Elsa’s only choice is to live in a tent in an encampment where poverty and typhoid are rife.
I admired Elsa’s tenacity - she works tirelessly for little money to feed her children. It’s a story of one woman’s survival and her need to protect her family.
I didn’t know anything about the Dust Bowl before I read this. I’d heard the term, but I didn’t know about the dust storms, animals dying after being filled up with dust, and people dying from dust pneumonia. This sounds like an exaggerated story, doesn’t it? But it’s not. None of this was unusual.
The Four Winds is a hard, yet compelling read. This is only the third Kristin Hannah book I’ve read, and it won’t be my last!
Many thanks to St Martin’s Press for my e-copy.
Erika (17788 KP) rated Peter Rabbit 2: The Runaway (2021) in Movies
Jun 15, 2021
Full disclosure, I absolutely loved the first Peter Rabbit film. I found it completely hilarious and cackled numerous times. The sequel did not make me laugh.
I typically don’t watch straight-up kid movies anymore, because they’re not funny, and they are as annoying as the kids in the audience. This movie completely reminded me of that.
The film begins with the wedding of Bea and Thomas, the rabbits and other members of McGregor’s Garden are all present. The animals are mixed in with the humans, and it looked very odd. I can’t figure out why. Bea and Thomas enter married bliss (?), running a shop in town, and tending the garden. Bea’s first Peter Rabbit book has been published by Thomas himself. Bea receives an offer from a publisher, Nigel Basil-Jones, played by David Oyelowo, to have her book republished so it can reach a wider audience. Bea begins to compromise her integrity to please Nigel and make the rabbits hipper to boost sales. Meanwhile, Peter embraces his bad boy/ mischievous image and makes friends with this super creepy rabbit from the city, participating in food heists.
The two main plotlines really didn’t make sense together and seemed to only be related because they were both about family. Yawn.
James Corden, who I can tolerate most of the time, was so completely annoying. His performance killed any motivation I had to see a possible third movie. This movie was just dumb, but I guess it probably entertained children.
There were a few positives. Oyelowo was hilarious, and one of the best parts of the film. He is the only reason I’m giving this film two-stars His comedy skills are on point and his interactions with Domhnall Gleeson were the best source of adult laughs. I also loved the voice acting of Flopsy, Mopsy, and Cottontail. Though, I was a little bummed that Daisy Ridley did not return as Cottontail.
The recent marketing stated, “In Theaters. Finally”. I’m not sure this film should have been released in theaters, they should have released it on VOD at Easter-time either in 2020, or 2021.
I typically don’t watch straight-up kid movies anymore, because they’re not funny, and they are as annoying as the kids in the audience. This movie completely reminded me of that.
The film begins with the wedding of Bea and Thomas, the rabbits and other members of McGregor’s Garden are all present. The animals are mixed in with the humans, and it looked very odd. I can’t figure out why. Bea and Thomas enter married bliss (?), running a shop in town, and tending the garden. Bea’s first Peter Rabbit book has been published by Thomas himself. Bea receives an offer from a publisher, Nigel Basil-Jones, played by David Oyelowo, to have her book republished so it can reach a wider audience. Bea begins to compromise her integrity to please Nigel and make the rabbits hipper to boost sales. Meanwhile, Peter embraces his bad boy/ mischievous image and makes friends with this super creepy rabbit from the city, participating in food heists.
The two main plotlines really didn’t make sense together and seemed to only be related because they were both about family. Yawn.
James Corden, who I can tolerate most of the time, was so completely annoying. His performance killed any motivation I had to see a possible third movie. This movie was just dumb, but I guess it probably entertained children.
There were a few positives. Oyelowo was hilarious, and one of the best parts of the film. He is the only reason I’m giving this film two-stars His comedy skills are on point and his interactions with Domhnall Gleeson were the best source of adult laughs. I also loved the voice acting of Flopsy, Mopsy, and Cottontail. Though, I was a little bummed that Daisy Ridley did not return as Cottontail.
The recent marketing stated, “In Theaters. Finally”. I’m not sure this film should have been released in theaters, they should have released it on VOD at Easter-time either in 2020, or 2021.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated The Brood (1979) in Movies
Sep 4, 2020 (Updated Sep 4, 2020)
They're Waiting For You
Man i love David Cronenberg, his horror films are disturbing, disgusting, gory, burtal, horrorfying and terrorfying. All of those words describe this film.
The plot: follows a man and his mentally-ill ex-wife, who has been sequestered by a psychologist known for his controversial therapy techniques. A series of brutal unsolved murders serves as the backdrop for the central narrative.
Conceived by Cronenberg after his own acrimonious divorce, he intended the screenplay as a meditation on a fractured relationship between a husband and wife who share a child, and cast Eggar and Hindle as loose facsimiles of himself and his ex-wife. He would later state that, despite its incorporation of science fiction elements, he considered it his sole feature that most embodied a "classic horror film".
Written in the aftermath of writer-director Cronenberg's divorce from his wife, The Brood has been noted by critics and film scholars for its prominent themes surrounding fears of parenthood, as well as corollary preoccupations with repression and the treatment of mental illness in women.
The Brood is my version of Kramer vs. Kramer, but more realistic." —Cronenberg commenting on his concept of the film, 1979.
In retrospect, Cronenberg stated that he felt The Brood was "the most classic horror film I've done" in terms of structure.
The Brood had cuts demanded for its theatrical release in the United States, Canada, and United Kingdom. Eggar conceived of the idea of licking the new fetuses that her character Nola Carveth has spawned. "I just thought that when cats have their kittens or dogs have puppies (and I think at that time I had about 8 dogs), they lick them as soon as they’re born. Lick, lick, lick, lick, lick…," Eggar said.
However, when the climactic scene was censored, Cronenberg responded: "I had a long and loving close-up of Samantha licking the fetus […] when the censors, those animals, cut it out, the result was that a lot of people thought she was eating her baby. That's much worse than I was suggesting.
Its a distubing film but a excellent film.
The plot: follows a man and his mentally-ill ex-wife, who has been sequestered by a psychologist known for his controversial therapy techniques. A series of brutal unsolved murders serves as the backdrop for the central narrative.
Conceived by Cronenberg after his own acrimonious divorce, he intended the screenplay as a meditation on a fractured relationship between a husband and wife who share a child, and cast Eggar and Hindle as loose facsimiles of himself and his ex-wife. He would later state that, despite its incorporation of science fiction elements, he considered it his sole feature that most embodied a "classic horror film".
Written in the aftermath of writer-director Cronenberg's divorce from his wife, The Brood has been noted by critics and film scholars for its prominent themes surrounding fears of parenthood, as well as corollary preoccupations with repression and the treatment of mental illness in women.
The Brood is my version of Kramer vs. Kramer, but more realistic." —Cronenberg commenting on his concept of the film, 1979.
In retrospect, Cronenberg stated that he felt The Brood was "the most classic horror film I've done" in terms of structure.
The Brood had cuts demanded for its theatrical release in the United States, Canada, and United Kingdom. Eggar conceived of the idea of licking the new fetuses that her character Nola Carveth has spawned. "I just thought that when cats have their kittens or dogs have puppies (and I think at that time I had about 8 dogs), they lick them as soon as they’re born. Lick, lick, lick, lick, lick…," Eggar said.
However, when the climactic scene was censored, Cronenberg responded: "I had a long and loving close-up of Samantha licking the fetus […] when the censors, those animals, cut it out, the result was that a lot of people thought she was eating her baby. That's much worse than I was suggesting.
Its a distubing film but a excellent film.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Loving (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Hidden Vigour: Negga excels in another glimpse into America’s racist past.
A few weeks ago when I reviewed “Hidden Figures” I pointed out the how absurd the racist behaviour at NASA in the 60’s must have appeared to a young boy in the audience at my screening. In many ways, “Loving” – a film that has had a lot less publicity and is a less obvious ‘crowd-pleaser’ – makes a useful companion piece to that film.
It tells the true story (yes, yet ANOTHER ‘true story’!) of Richard and Mildred Loving who travelled from their home town of Central Point Virginia to Washington DC where – as a mixed race couple – they could legally get married.
However, on returning to their home state and living together as man and wife, they fell foul of the State’s repulsive antimiscegenation statute which banned inter-racial marriages. The Lovings were found guilty and sentenced to a year in jail, which was suspended on the requirement that – unbelievable but true – the couple leave Virginia and not return (together) for 25 years. The film documents the fight of the couple – largely led by the feisty Mildred (Ruth Negga) – to fight the injustice, taking the case ultimately to the US Supreme Court for an historic ruling.
This was an Oscar-nominated performance by Ruth Negga and, man, is it deserved. It’s a performance of such quiet understated power that it is a joy to watch. But also strong is that of Joel Edgerton (“Midnight Special“, “The Great Gatsby“) as Richard who here adopts a largely sulky and subservient manner that contrasts beautifully with Negga’s perky optimism.
I also loved the performance of Marton Csokas (Celeborn from “The Lord of the Rings”), chillingly unreasonable as the bigoted Sheriff Brooks and Michael Shannon (“Nocturnal Animals“, “Midnight Special“) as the Time photographer Grey Villet, capturing a classic picture that is shown (in standard ‘true story’ fashion) at the end of the film (and below).
Written and directed by Jeff Nichols, whose “Midnight Special” last year made my top 10 of the year, this is a thoughtful and educational piece that should particularly appeal to older viewers keen to see a drama of historical importance beautifully told.
It tells the true story (yes, yet ANOTHER ‘true story’!) of Richard and Mildred Loving who travelled from their home town of Central Point Virginia to Washington DC where – as a mixed race couple – they could legally get married.
However, on returning to their home state and living together as man and wife, they fell foul of the State’s repulsive antimiscegenation statute which banned inter-racial marriages. The Lovings were found guilty and sentenced to a year in jail, which was suspended on the requirement that – unbelievable but true – the couple leave Virginia and not return (together) for 25 years. The film documents the fight of the couple – largely led by the feisty Mildred (Ruth Negga) – to fight the injustice, taking the case ultimately to the US Supreme Court for an historic ruling.
This was an Oscar-nominated performance by Ruth Negga and, man, is it deserved. It’s a performance of such quiet understated power that it is a joy to watch. But also strong is that of Joel Edgerton (“Midnight Special“, “The Great Gatsby“) as Richard who here adopts a largely sulky and subservient manner that contrasts beautifully with Negga’s perky optimism.
I also loved the performance of Marton Csokas (Celeborn from “The Lord of the Rings”), chillingly unreasonable as the bigoted Sheriff Brooks and Michael Shannon (“Nocturnal Animals“, “Midnight Special“) as the Time photographer Grey Villet, capturing a classic picture that is shown (in standard ‘true story’ fashion) at the end of the film (and below).
Written and directed by Jeff Nichols, whose “Midnight Special” last year made my top 10 of the year, this is a thoughtful and educational piece that should particularly appeal to older viewers keen to see a drama of historical importance beautifully told.
Debbiereadsbook (1110 KP) rated Conrad (Assassin's To Order #4) in Books
Oct 13, 2023
saved the best for last!
Independent reviewer for Archaeolibrarian, I was gifted my copy of this book.
This is book 4 in the Assassins To Order series, and I strongly recommend you read books 1 to 3 first. OR at least, book 3 Duron. The Devil pops up first in that book.
I think, for me, Sayle and Oliver saved the best for last! I LOVED this, the final book.
Conrad is an assassin, and Kylo a police officer in Paraguay where the lost boys seem to originate from. Kylo has been chasing The Devil for 20 years and calling for an assassin to finally help him seemed like a good idea. Until Conrad gets off the plane and they scent each other: mates!
What I especially liked about this one was that Conrad is fully aware of his sexuality, while his brothers had not been. And Kylo calls to his Dom, much like his lion. And while Kylo is an Alpha male, a panther, he doesn't question Conrad and his connection and what Conrad can do for him, he just goes with it, and accepts what the Fates have planned for him.
Loved that Wyatt pops up, and who with and how THAT all plays out! Kinda saw that coming in the last book, but loved that it gets explained.
The Devil and what happens with all that was a surprise, and I loved the showdown! I'm still not entirely sure how many animals Conrad has, but they range from a blue dragon to a spider and everything inbetween. What happens between them all at the showdown was shocking but Kylo took it all in his stride. Loved that, while Conrad's lion is his most Dominant animal, the dragon has to have the last say!
There is talk of the other assassins, but only Wyatt pops up, The Thalassa guys are mentioned as well, but none appear here. I kinda missed them!
I'll miss ALL these guys, now both series are finished, but I think this really was a fitting end. I do hope we get some follow ups shorts!
I was waiting for this, and it did not disappoint.
5 full and shiny stars
*same worded review will appear elsewhere
This is book 4 in the Assassins To Order series, and I strongly recommend you read books 1 to 3 first. OR at least, book 3 Duron. The Devil pops up first in that book.
I think, for me, Sayle and Oliver saved the best for last! I LOVED this, the final book.
Conrad is an assassin, and Kylo a police officer in Paraguay where the lost boys seem to originate from. Kylo has been chasing The Devil for 20 years and calling for an assassin to finally help him seemed like a good idea. Until Conrad gets off the plane and they scent each other: mates!
What I especially liked about this one was that Conrad is fully aware of his sexuality, while his brothers had not been. And Kylo calls to his Dom, much like his lion. And while Kylo is an Alpha male, a panther, he doesn't question Conrad and his connection and what Conrad can do for him, he just goes with it, and accepts what the Fates have planned for him.
Loved that Wyatt pops up, and who with and how THAT all plays out! Kinda saw that coming in the last book, but loved that it gets explained.
The Devil and what happens with all that was a surprise, and I loved the showdown! I'm still not entirely sure how many animals Conrad has, but they range from a blue dragon to a spider and everything inbetween. What happens between them all at the showdown was shocking but Kylo took it all in his stride. Loved that, while Conrad's lion is his most Dominant animal, the dragon has to have the last say!
There is talk of the other assassins, but only Wyatt pops up, The Thalassa guys are mentioned as well, but none appear here. I kinda missed them!
I'll miss ALL these guys, now both series are finished, but I think this really was a fitting end. I do hope we get some follow ups shorts!
I was waiting for this, and it did not disappoint.
5 full and shiny stars
*same worded review will appear elsewhere
ClareR (5603 KP) rated The East Indian in Books
Jul 13, 2023
I loved The East Indian by Brinda Charry, but boy did it make me mad!
“Tony” (so named because a British man couldn’t pronounce his real name, and we never find out what that is) comes from the Coromandel coast. He travels to London with a white man in order to be his servant, but the man dies on the voyage. In London, Tony has to fend for himself, a child alone in a big city that takes advantage of the vulnerable. Unsurprisingly, Tony is kidnapped, transported to America, and becomes an indentured servant. It looks as though his dreams of becoming a medicine man will never come to pass. But he does make friends with some of the boys on the voyage. When he arrives in America, he is mistaken for a native Indian - he isn’t as black as the Africans - and he’s often referred to as a ‘Moor’.
There’s little wonder that Tony has so many friends, he’s a likeable boy. He hates to see the maltreatment of his fellow indentured servants and slaves.
This book illustrates the lives of indentured servants and the beginning of slavery under British rule in the colonies. It’s not a nice way to live; seen through the eyes of a child it’s both less and more horrific. Tony doesn’t necessarily see how bad things are, because he has no comparison until he starts to get older.
The most infuriating part for me (it’s a long list!), was how Tony and the Africans were ‘othered’ by the white man: they weren’t to be trusted, their ways of life were seen as primitive, they were seen as a belonging or little better than animals.
This book predates slavery as it was to become, but you can see the beginnings of it. As an indentured servant, you belonged to your master.
Jamestown is described so well (sights, sounds and smells) as are the wilder areas: the forests, mountains and rivers. It sounded beautiful, kept that way by Native Americans who were already being driven from their homeland.
It’s a sobering, beautiful story, and I’m so glad that I got the chance to read it - thanks Pigeonhole!
“Tony” (so named because a British man couldn’t pronounce his real name, and we never find out what that is) comes from the Coromandel coast. He travels to London with a white man in order to be his servant, but the man dies on the voyage. In London, Tony has to fend for himself, a child alone in a big city that takes advantage of the vulnerable. Unsurprisingly, Tony is kidnapped, transported to America, and becomes an indentured servant. It looks as though his dreams of becoming a medicine man will never come to pass. But he does make friends with some of the boys on the voyage. When he arrives in America, he is mistaken for a native Indian - he isn’t as black as the Africans - and he’s often referred to as a ‘Moor’.
There’s little wonder that Tony has so many friends, he’s a likeable boy. He hates to see the maltreatment of his fellow indentured servants and slaves.
This book illustrates the lives of indentured servants and the beginning of slavery under British rule in the colonies. It’s not a nice way to live; seen through the eyes of a child it’s both less and more horrific. Tony doesn’t necessarily see how bad things are, because he has no comparison until he starts to get older.
The most infuriating part for me (it’s a long list!), was how Tony and the Africans were ‘othered’ by the white man: they weren’t to be trusted, their ways of life were seen as primitive, they were seen as a belonging or little better than animals.
This book predates slavery as it was to become, but you can see the beginnings of it. As an indentured servant, you belonged to your master.
Jamestown is described so well (sights, sounds and smells) as are the wilder areas: the forests, mountains and rivers. It sounded beautiful, kept that way by Native Americans who were already being driven from their homeland.
It’s a sobering, beautiful story, and I’m so glad that I got the chance to read it - thanks Pigeonhole!
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Pokémon: Detective Pikachu (2019) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Totally Onix-pected
Before we begin, I must apologise for the bad pun, but if any franchise deserves a pun for their first live-action movie adaptation, it’s Pokémon. Growing up in 90s Britain, Pokémon was absolutely everywhere. You couldn’t turn a street corner without seeing Pikachu and his sidekick Ash (or should that be the other way around) emblazoned across every toy shop window or on every bus. It was a true phenomenon that took the world by storm like nothing else.
Fast forward to 2019 and perhaps even more impressively, Pokémon is still very much in people’s consciousness. The adorable Pocket Monsters, if we are referring to them with their full title, are still something of a cultural mainstay across the globe – yet true global box-office success has eluded them.
Enter Pokémon: Detective Pikachu. The first live-action movie from the universally loved series. It’s taken over 20 years to get to this point, but is the resulting film worth the wait? Or are we looking at yet another video game to move adaptation dud?
Ace detective Harry Goodman goes mysteriously missing, prompting his 21-year-old son, Tim (Justice Smith), to find out what happened. Aiding in the investigation is Harry’s former Pokémon partner, wise-cracking, adorable super-sleuth Detective Pikachu (Ryan Reynolds). Finding that they are uniquely equipped to work together, as Tim is the only human who can talk with Pikachu, they join forces to unravel the tangled mystery.
It was a peculiar choice for Warner Bros. and The Pokémon Company to adapt one of the lesser known video games in the franchise in which a talking Pikachu helps a young man solve the mystery of his missing father, but it ended up being a master stroke.
For those not familiar with Pokémon Red, Blue, Yellow etc, the film needs no introduction and no prerequisite of Pokémon knowledge, meaning it’s suitable for Pokémon fans and Pokémon novices.
What the movie does need however, is complete immersion. The central setting of Ryme City is a thriving metropolis in which Pocket Monster and human live alongside each other, free from the battles that brought the franchise universal success. It’s a bold move, putting aside what is essentially the main money-making aspect of the series, but it works well for the most part.
The creature designs are astounding, bringing these historically cartoon animals living and breathing into the 21stCentury
Director Rob Letterman (Goosebumps) creates a vibrant world that is as immersive as anything we’ve seen on the big screen in years. You feel a part of the adventure and to be frank, it took me back to my first experiences with the trading cards and the Gameboy games.
With charm, wit and heart on its side, Pokemon: Detective Pikachu is by far the best video game movie, although that’s not saying much. Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom’s Justice Smith plays the lead role of Tim with gusto and true emotion and his character arc throughout the film is pleasingly well-written for a film in the genre. Bill Nighy adds some class to proceedings as wealthy businessman Howard Clifford and Ken Watanabe pops up now and then as a detective inspector.
But the main star is of course, Detective Pikachu himself. Ryan Reynolds takes to the role like a Magikarp to water and brings a little of his Deadpool magnetism to the portrayal. It shouldn’t work, but it really does and the humorous little mouse is a delight to spend the film with.
The cinematography too is lovely. John Mathieson, who worked on Robin Hood with Ridley Scott and X-Men: First Class brings to life stunning locations, filled with mystery and magic – and that’s everything you could ask for in a Pokémon movie. The special effects are on the whole, very good. With a reported budget of $150million, you can see where the money has been spent. The creature designs are astounding, bringing these historically cartoon animals living and breathing into the 21stCentury. There are a couple of lapses here and there, but nothing to write home about.
It’s not all good news. The plot is both predictable and nonsensical at the same time, especially towards the film’s climax. The thrill here is definitely not in the story but rather in the exceptional world the film-makers have built. Rumour has it that a sequel is already on the cards, and with a confidently filmed, funny and emotive first outing, the Pokémon franchise continues to be in good health.
Your move Sonic.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2019/05/10/pokemon-detective-pikachu-review-totally-onix-pected/
Fast forward to 2019 and perhaps even more impressively, Pokémon is still very much in people’s consciousness. The adorable Pocket Monsters, if we are referring to them with their full title, are still something of a cultural mainstay across the globe – yet true global box-office success has eluded them.
Enter Pokémon: Detective Pikachu. The first live-action movie from the universally loved series. It’s taken over 20 years to get to this point, but is the resulting film worth the wait? Or are we looking at yet another video game to move adaptation dud?
Ace detective Harry Goodman goes mysteriously missing, prompting his 21-year-old son, Tim (Justice Smith), to find out what happened. Aiding in the investigation is Harry’s former Pokémon partner, wise-cracking, adorable super-sleuth Detective Pikachu (Ryan Reynolds). Finding that they are uniquely equipped to work together, as Tim is the only human who can talk with Pikachu, they join forces to unravel the tangled mystery.
It was a peculiar choice for Warner Bros. and The Pokémon Company to adapt one of the lesser known video games in the franchise in which a talking Pikachu helps a young man solve the mystery of his missing father, but it ended up being a master stroke.
For those not familiar with Pokémon Red, Blue, Yellow etc, the film needs no introduction and no prerequisite of Pokémon knowledge, meaning it’s suitable for Pokémon fans and Pokémon novices.
What the movie does need however, is complete immersion. The central setting of Ryme City is a thriving metropolis in which Pocket Monster and human live alongside each other, free from the battles that brought the franchise universal success. It’s a bold move, putting aside what is essentially the main money-making aspect of the series, but it works well for the most part.
The creature designs are astounding, bringing these historically cartoon animals living and breathing into the 21stCentury
Director Rob Letterman (Goosebumps) creates a vibrant world that is as immersive as anything we’ve seen on the big screen in years. You feel a part of the adventure and to be frank, it took me back to my first experiences with the trading cards and the Gameboy games.
With charm, wit and heart on its side, Pokemon: Detective Pikachu is by far the best video game movie, although that’s not saying much. Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom’s Justice Smith plays the lead role of Tim with gusto and true emotion and his character arc throughout the film is pleasingly well-written for a film in the genre. Bill Nighy adds some class to proceedings as wealthy businessman Howard Clifford and Ken Watanabe pops up now and then as a detective inspector.
But the main star is of course, Detective Pikachu himself. Ryan Reynolds takes to the role like a Magikarp to water and brings a little of his Deadpool magnetism to the portrayal. It shouldn’t work, but it really does and the humorous little mouse is a delight to spend the film with.
The cinematography too is lovely. John Mathieson, who worked on Robin Hood with Ridley Scott and X-Men: First Class brings to life stunning locations, filled with mystery and magic – and that’s everything you could ask for in a Pokémon movie. The special effects are on the whole, very good. With a reported budget of $150million, you can see where the money has been spent. The creature designs are astounding, bringing these historically cartoon animals living and breathing into the 21stCentury. There are a couple of lapses here and there, but nothing to write home about.
It’s not all good news. The plot is both predictable and nonsensical at the same time, especially towards the film’s climax. The thrill here is definitely not in the story but rather in the exceptional world the film-makers have built. Rumour has it that a sequel is already on the cards, and with a confidently filmed, funny and emotive first outing, the Pokémon franchise continues to be in good health.
Your move Sonic.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2019/05/10/pokemon-detective-pikachu-review-totally-onix-pected/