Search
Search results
Toca Life: Town
Education and Entertainment
App
*App Store Best of 2014* You rule this Town, a play world where anything and everyone is welcome!...
Christmas Song Collection - Xmas songs for Kids
Education and Games
App
~~~ 6 wonderful Christmas spirited, animated and interactive children songs inside! ~~~ ~~~ Child...
Summer Pop – Match Puzzle Game
Games
App
Play the hottest puzzle game Summer Pop this summer for free! Limited time offer: Enjoy unlimited...
Kids Song Collection - Playful Nursery Rhymes
Education and Games
App
~~~ 6 amazing animated, interactive children songs inside! ~~~ ~~~ Child friendly environment with...
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Life Of Pi (2012) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 10, 2019)
Ang Lee has directed some very artistic and emotionally charged films in his career and his new movie, Life of Pi is certainly no exception. But can his take on Yann Martel’s 2001 novel of the same name live up to his usual high standards?
In short, the answer is a resounding yes. From the stunning special effects and beautiful acting to the heart-warming story, it captivates from beginning to end like no other film released this year.
The film begins with a pet hate of mine, the credits. I always think a movie that starts with its credits is usually a huge let-down but something was different here, as soon as the brilliantly filmed names flash across the screen, I knew this film was going to be spectacular, just how spectacular however, I was not prepared for.
The story is, essentially what the title says it is, the life of a boy called Pi and his extraordinary journey from childhood, through adolescence and finally into adulthood. It seems quite simple and perhaps nothing too innovative or different, but the way Lee has captured the magic of the novel really does shine through on screen.
In the present day, Rafe Spall plays a budding writer searching for inspiration for his next big book. He comes across Irrfan Khan who plays the adult Pi and has an unbelievable story to tell. So, as he begins to narrate this incredible journey, the viewer is transported to when Pi was a boy.
It’s true that the film takes a while to get going and the scenes in Pi’s native India are perhaps the most testing of the entire film. The momentum is built up slowly as the boy travels through school life whilst his family run a small zoo in their hometown. Alas, the perfection of his childhood is ruined when his entire family decide to relocate to Canada due to an economic crisis. They are packed onto a tanker with the zoo animals on-board and begin the journey to their new life.
Whilst on the last leg of their journey, their ship is ravaged by a severe storm and Pi’s family is lost, along with most of the zoo animals and, in a scene that even betters the emotionally charged sinking in Titanic and the CGI packed sinking in Poseidon, their tanker is lost to the ocean.
Thankfully he survives, along with an injured zebra, a naughty hyena and a motherly orangutan in a small life-boat. It’s safe to say that the zebra and ape don’t last too long on-board a ship with a hyena and they are picked off as lunch. However, also sailing with them is Richard Parker, a Bengal tiger and he forms the basis of the film, along with Pi. At first, after Richard Parker makes light work of the hyena, the relationship between Pi and his new shipmate is somewhat strained, a constant battle between who is going to eat who and the only sensible option is for Pi to live on separate raft tied to the life-boat.
However, a few days pass and finally they can share a boat, albeit after a couple of amusing scenes involving urine and some flying fish.
Richard Parker is a beautiful animal to say the least, a mixture of live action tigers, CGI animation and animatronics really brings him to life, which is good considering he is the only other character in the film. This is where Ang Lee’s brilliance as a director shines, bringing warmth and heart to a character that is not only not real, but an animal, without the ability to talk and share feelings. Credit must also be given to newcomer Suraj Sharma who plays Pi Patel absolutely brilliantly. I simply could not believe this was his first big acting role; his performance is nothing short of stunning.
Then there are the special effects and 3D. Everything is a wonder to behold and the 3D is a help in enjoying the film, rather than a hindrance which it continues to be in other movies. There are two scenes in particular which really stand out, including a lot of jellyfish and a few thousand meerkats. I won’t say anything else, as they need to be seen to be believed.
Moreover, in the depths of this film lies a huge emotional core, the story of a boy and his ‘pet’ and the perils they face, the togetherness they bring to one another is touching to say the least and let’s just say there were more than a few sniffles coming from the rows behind me in the cinema. However, it is more than just a story of companionship; there is a deep religious message about believing in god even if he seems to not be there 100% of the time. Whether or not you choose to read into this is your decision, but it’s there throughout.
Life of Pi is something really special, a magical journey that needs to be seen to be believed. Very rarely, a film comes along that touches your heart, your soul and your head and this is one of those films. Everything from the performances of all the actors, the beautiful recreation of Richard Parker and stunning special effects make this film as revolutionary as Avatar was in 2009. It is not only the best film of 2012; it is one of the best films ever made. Please, I urge all of you who read this, go see it, and witness history in the making.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2012/12/22/life-of-pi-review-2012/
In short, the answer is a resounding yes. From the stunning special effects and beautiful acting to the heart-warming story, it captivates from beginning to end like no other film released this year.
The film begins with a pet hate of mine, the credits. I always think a movie that starts with its credits is usually a huge let-down but something was different here, as soon as the brilliantly filmed names flash across the screen, I knew this film was going to be spectacular, just how spectacular however, I was not prepared for.
The story is, essentially what the title says it is, the life of a boy called Pi and his extraordinary journey from childhood, through adolescence and finally into adulthood. It seems quite simple and perhaps nothing too innovative or different, but the way Lee has captured the magic of the novel really does shine through on screen.
In the present day, Rafe Spall plays a budding writer searching for inspiration for his next big book. He comes across Irrfan Khan who plays the adult Pi and has an unbelievable story to tell. So, as he begins to narrate this incredible journey, the viewer is transported to when Pi was a boy.
It’s true that the film takes a while to get going and the scenes in Pi’s native India are perhaps the most testing of the entire film. The momentum is built up slowly as the boy travels through school life whilst his family run a small zoo in their hometown. Alas, the perfection of his childhood is ruined when his entire family decide to relocate to Canada due to an economic crisis. They are packed onto a tanker with the zoo animals on-board and begin the journey to their new life.
Whilst on the last leg of their journey, their ship is ravaged by a severe storm and Pi’s family is lost, along with most of the zoo animals and, in a scene that even betters the emotionally charged sinking in Titanic and the CGI packed sinking in Poseidon, their tanker is lost to the ocean.
Thankfully he survives, along with an injured zebra, a naughty hyena and a motherly orangutan in a small life-boat. It’s safe to say that the zebra and ape don’t last too long on-board a ship with a hyena and they are picked off as lunch. However, also sailing with them is Richard Parker, a Bengal tiger and he forms the basis of the film, along with Pi. At first, after Richard Parker makes light work of the hyena, the relationship between Pi and his new shipmate is somewhat strained, a constant battle between who is going to eat who and the only sensible option is for Pi to live on separate raft tied to the life-boat.
However, a few days pass and finally they can share a boat, albeit after a couple of amusing scenes involving urine and some flying fish.
Richard Parker is a beautiful animal to say the least, a mixture of live action tigers, CGI animation and animatronics really brings him to life, which is good considering he is the only other character in the film. This is where Ang Lee’s brilliance as a director shines, bringing warmth and heart to a character that is not only not real, but an animal, without the ability to talk and share feelings. Credit must also be given to newcomer Suraj Sharma who plays Pi Patel absolutely brilliantly. I simply could not believe this was his first big acting role; his performance is nothing short of stunning.
Then there are the special effects and 3D. Everything is a wonder to behold and the 3D is a help in enjoying the film, rather than a hindrance which it continues to be in other movies. There are two scenes in particular which really stand out, including a lot of jellyfish and a few thousand meerkats. I won’t say anything else, as they need to be seen to be believed.
Moreover, in the depths of this film lies a huge emotional core, the story of a boy and his ‘pet’ and the perils they face, the togetherness they bring to one another is touching to say the least and let’s just say there were more than a few sniffles coming from the rows behind me in the cinema. However, it is more than just a story of companionship; there is a deep religious message about believing in god even if he seems to not be there 100% of the time. Whether or not you choose to read into this is your decision, but it’s there throughout.
Life of Pi is something really special, a magical journey that needs to be seen to be believed. Very rarely, a film comes along that touches your heart, your soul and your head and this is one of those films. Everything from the performances of all the actors, the beautiful recreation of Richard Parker and stunning special effects make this film as revolutionary as Avatar was in 2009. It is not only the best film of 2012; it is one of the best films ever made. Please, I urge all of you who read this, go see it, and witness history in the making.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2012/12/22/life-of-pi-review-2012/
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Shape of Water (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
A mystical tale of fish and fingers.
With perfect timing after scooping 13 Oscar nominations, “The Shape of Water” arrives for preview screenings in the UK. Is it worth all the hype?
Well, in a word, yes.
Not since Spielberg entranced the world in 1982 with a love story between an isolated and lonely child and an alien, stranded a million light-years from home, have we seen a magical fairy-tale so well told.
Cleaning up at the (box) office. Sally Hawkins and Doug Jones as the creature.
Here Lewisham’s own Sally Hawkins (“Paddington”, “Godzilla“) plays Elisa Esposito, an attractive but mousy mute living above a cinema and next door to her best friend: a struggling artist called Giles (Richard Jenkins). Sexually-frustrated, Elisa works out those tensions in the bath every morning before heading off to work as a cleaner at a government research institute. Together with partner Zelda Fuller (Octavia Spencer, “Hidden Figures“) she is asked to clean a highly secured room where a mysterious aquatic creature is being studied by the cruel and militaristic Strickland (Michael Shannon, “Midnight Special“, “Nocturnal Animals“) and the more compassionate scientist Hoffstetler. (The latter is played by Michael Stuhlbarg (“Miss Sloane“, “Steve Jobs“) in a performance that wasn’t recognised by the Academy, but for me really held the film’s story together). Elisa forms a relationship with the creature, and as the scientific investigations turn darker, she becomes determined to help him.
When you think about it, the similarities in the screenplay with E.T. are quite striking. But this is most definitely not a kid’s film, containing full frontal nudity, sex and some considerable violence, some of it “hands-over-the-eyes” worthy. Most of this violence comes courtesy of Shannon’s character, who is truly monstrous. He is uncontrollably vicious, single-minded and amoral: a hand over the mouth to silence his wife during vigourous sex cleverly belies where his true lust currently lies. (Shannon is just so convincing in all of his roles that, after “Nocturnal Animals“, it is a bit of a surprise to see that he is still alive and well!)
It’s worth pointing out for balance at this point that my wife thought this portrayal was over-egged for its villany, and she rated the film less highly than I did because of it.
Michael Shannon as evil incarnate.
So its no Oscar nomination this time for Shannon as a supporting actor. But that honour goes to Richard Jenkins, who is spectacularly good as the movie-musical-loving and pie-munching neighbour who is drawn unwillingly into Elisa’s plans. Giles is a richly fashioned character – also the film’s narrator – who struggles to fit in with the cruel and rascist 1962 world that he finds himself in. “Sometimes I think I was born too early or too late for my life” he bemoans to the creature whose loneliness he relates to. A scene in a cafe where he fastidiously wipes all traces of pie-filling from his tongue is masterfully done.
Richard Hawkins and Sally Hawkins, hatching a plan.
Octavia Spencer is also Oscar nominated for Best Supporting Actress, and it’s a magical partnership she shares with Hawkins, with each bouncing off each other wonderfully.
This leads to a ‘no brainer’ Oscar nomination for Sally Hawkins who delivers a star turn. She has to go through such a huge range of emotions in this film, and she genuinely makes you really care about the outcome like few films this year. It’s a little tricky since I haven’t seen “I Tonya” or “Ladybird” yet, but I would have thought that Ms Hawkins is going to possibly give Frances McDormand the closest run for her money on March 4th. My money would still be on McDormand for “3 Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri“, but the Oscar voters are bound to love “The Shape of Water”. For like “La La Land” last year, the film is (rather surprisingly for me) another love letter to Hollywood’s golden years, with Elisa and Giles living out their lives with classic movie music and dance numbers: a medium that Elisa only ever truly finds here “voice” through.
Eliza and Zelda about to give two fingers to the establishment.
In the technical categories the Oscar nominations were for Cinematography (Dan Laustsen); Film Editing (Sidney Wolinsky); Sound Editing (Nathan Robitaille and Nelson Ferreira); Sound Mixing (Glen Gauthier, Christian Cooke and Brad Zoern); Production Design (Paul D. Austerberry, Jeffrey A. Melvin and Shane Vieau); Original Score (Alexandre Desplat) and Costume Design (Luis Sequeira). And you really wouldn’t want to bet against any of these not to win, for the film is a technical delight. Right from the dreamlike opening titles (arguably, they missed a deserved nomination here for Visual Effects), the film is gorgeous to look at, with such brilliant detail in the production design that there is interesting stuff to look at in every frame. And the film editing is extraordinary: Elisa wobbles on the bucket she’s standing on, but it’s Strickland’s butt, perched on a table, that slips off. This is a film that deserves multiple repeat viewings.
The monster feeding the monster. Nick Searcy as General Hoyt with Strickland (Michael Shannon).
An the helm is the multi-talented Guillermo del Toro (“Pacific Rim”, “Crimson Peak”) who both directed and co-wrote the exceptionally smart screenplay (with Vanessa Taylor, “Divergent”) and is nominated for both. I actually found the story to be rather predictable, as regards Elisa’s story arc, but that in no way reduced my enjoyment of the film. For the “original screenplay” is nothing if not “original”…. it’s witty, intelligent and shocking at different turns.
The violence and sex won’t be for everyone… but this is a deep and rich movie experience that everyone who loves the movies should at least appreciate… hopefully in a dry cinema!
Well, in a word, yes.
Not since Spielberg entranced the world in 1982 with a love story between an isolated and lonely child and an alien, stranded a million light-years from home, have we seen a magical fairy-tale so well told.
Cleaning up at the (box) office. Sally Hawkins and Doug Jones as the creature.
Here Lewisham’s own Sally Hawkins (“Paddington”, “Godzilla“) plays Elisa Esposito, an attractive but mousy mute living above a cinema and next door to her best friend: a struggling artist called Giles (Richard Jenkins). Sexually-frustrated, Elisa works out those tensions in the bath every morning before heading off to work as a cleaner at a government research institute. Together with partner Zelda Fuller (Octavia Spencer, “Hidden Figures“) she is asked to clean a highly secured room where a mysterious aquatic creature is being studied by the cruel and militaristic Strickland (Michael Shannon, “Midnight Special“, “Nocturnal Animals“) and the more compassionate scientist Hoffstetler. (The latter is played by Michael Stuhlbarg (“Miss Sloane“, “Steve Jobs“) in a performance that wasn’t recognised by the Academy, but for me really held the film’s story together). Elisa forms a relationship with the creature, and as the scientific investigations turn darker, she becomes determined to help him.
When you think about it, the similarities in the screenplay with E.T. are quite striking. But this is most definitely not a kid’s film, containing full frontal nudity, sex and some considerable violence, some of it “hands-over-the-eyes” worthy. Most of this violence comes courtesy of Shannon’s character, who is truly monstrous. He is uncontrollably vicious, single-minded and amoral: a hand over the mouth to silence his wife during vigourous sex cleverly belies where his true lust currently lies. (Shannon is just so convincing in all of his roles that, after “Nocturnal Animals“, it is a bit of a surprise to see that he is still alive and well!)
It’s worth pointing out for balance at this point that my wife thought this portrayal was over-egged for its villany, and she rated the film less highly than I did because of it.
Michael Shannon as evil incarnate.
So its no Oscar nomination this time for Shannon as a supporting actor. But that honour goes to Richard Jenkins, who is spectacularly good as the movie-musical-loving and pie-munching neighbour who is drawn unwillingly into Elisa’s plans. Giles is a richly fashioned character – also the film’s narrator – who struggles to fit in with the cruel and rascist 1962 world that he finds himself in. “Sometimes I think I was born too early or too late for my life” he bemoans to the creature whose loneliness he relates to. A scene in a cafe where he fastidiously wipes all traces of pie-filling from his tongue is masterfully done.
Richard Hawkins and Sally Hawkins, hatching a plan.
Octavia Spencer is also Oscar nominated for Best Supporting Actress, and it’s a magical partnership she shares with Hawkins, with each bouncing off each other wonderfully.
This leads to a ‘no brainer’ Oscar nomination for Sally Hawkins who delivers a star turn. She has to go through such a huge range of emotions in this film, and she genuinely makes you really care about the outcome like few films this year. It’s a little tricky since I haven’t seen “I Tonya” or “Ladybird” yet, but I would have thought that Ms Hawkins is going to possibly give Frances McDormand the closest run for her money on March 4th. My money would still be on McDormand for “3 Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri“, but the Oscar voters are bound to love “The Shape of Water”. For like “La La Land” last year, the film is (rather surprisingly for me) another love letter to Hollywood’s golden years, with Elisa and Giles living out their lives with classic movie music and dance numbers: a medium that Elisa only ever truly finds here “voice” through.
Eliza and Zelda about to give two fingers to the establishment.
In the technical categories the Oscar nominations were for Cinematography (Dan Laustsen); Film Editing (Sidney Wolinsky); Sound Editing (Nathan Robitaille and Nelson Ferreira); Sound Mixing (Glen Gauthier, Christian Cooke and Brad Zoern); Production Design (Paul D. Austerberry, Jeffrey A. Melvin and Shane Vieau); Original Score (Alexandre Desplat) and Costume Design (Luis Sequeira). And you really wouldn’t want to bet against any of these not to win, for the film is a technical delight. Right from the dreamlike opening titles (arguably, they missed a deserved nomination here for Visual Effects), the film is gorgeous to look at, with such brilliant detail in the production design that there is interesting stuff to look at in every frame. And the film editing is extraordinary: Elisa wobbles on the bucket she’s standing on, but it’s Strickland’s butt, perched on a table, that slips off. This is a film that deserves multiple repeat viewings.
The monster feeding the monster. Nick Searcy as General Hoyt with Strickland (Michael Shannon).
An the helm is the multi-talented Guillermo del Toro (“Pacific Rim”, “Crimson Peak”) who both directed and co-wrote the exceptionally smart screenplay (with Vanessa Taylor, “Divergent”) and is nominated for both. I actually found the story to be rather predictable, as regards Elisa’s story arc, but that in no way reduced my enjoyment of the film. For the “original screenplay” is nothing if not “original”…. it’s witty, intelligent and shocking at different turns.
The violence and sex won’t be for everyone… but this is a deep and rich movie experience that everyone who loves the movies should at least appreciate… hopefully in a dry cinema!
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated John Wick: Chapter 3 - Parabellum (2019) in Movies
Jun 3, 2019
Hoping it Doesn't Become a Victim of its Own Success
The world is trying to kill John Wick (Keanu Reeves)…but not before he kills them first.
Acting: 9
Beginning: 10
Characters: 8
This third installment brings back a lot of the characters we have become familiar with in the first two movies. There’s Wick, of course, striking like a black mamba and trying to kill everything in his path. Winston (Ian McShane) is back as the tasteful Manager of the underworld assassin hotel being his usual charming self. I was excited to see hotel concierge Charon (Lance Reddick) get a larger slice of the action this time around as it was long overdue in my opinion.
The rest of the characters? Meh. I could take them or leave them. Reason being, they mostly felt flat for some reason. Take The Adjudicator (Asia Kate Dillon) for example. It felt like she just showed up to be an asshole for two minutes then she would disappear. Her role was annoying at best. But Wick is who we come to see. And Wick delivers. Who cares if he’s shooting at a bunch of cardboard cut-outs?
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Genre: 10
Memorability: 8
Slightly more forgettable than the first two installments as it stumbles through a few parts here and there. There were a number of amazing scenes I can say for certain I haven’t seen done in any other action movie or any movie period. What they did with animals alone was a pleasant treat. I won’t spoil anything that you probably should know already, but I will say that the creativity and the stylistic choices of the kills makes movies like these really hard to forget.
Pace: 10
Plot: 5
There were definitely some parts that left me shaking my head. I don’t know why director Chad Stahelski chose to throw certain things in. It was almost as if they did it for the sake of trying to add more drama. With movies like these, there is no need to force anything as the drama typically comes anyway. The story is all over the place at times, overdone in others.
Resolution: 6
I watched the ending thinking, “Good…but stop there please.” It didn’t leave me wanting more, rather for the series to be done. Not sure what could have been done differently, but I think it stumbles compared to the endings of the first two.
Overall: 86
A solid addition to the franchise for sure. However, I feel it must be said: This series needs to end while it still has life. I know there is a fourth one on the way in a couple of years along with a TV show. Let’s just hope John Wick doesn’t get Hollywooded to death as a victim of its own success.
Acting: 9
Beginning: 10
Characters: 8
This third installment brings back a lot of the characters we have become familiar with in the first two movies. There’s Wick, of course, striking like a black mamba and trying to kill everything in his path. Winston (Ian McShane) is back as the tasteful Manager of the underworld assassin hotel being his usual charming self. I was excited to see hotel concierge Charon (Lance Reddick) get a larger slice of the action this time around as it was long overdue in my opinion.
The rest of the characters? Meh. I could take them or leave them. Reason being, they mostly felt flat for some reason. Take The Adjudicator (Asia Kate Dillon) for example. It felt like she just showed up to be an asshole for two minutes then she would disappear. Her role was annoying at best. But Wick is who we come to see. And Wick delivers. Who cares if he’s shooting at a bunch of cardboard cut-outs?
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Genre: 10
Memorability: 8
Slightly more forgettable than the first two installments as it stumbles through a few parts here and there. There were a number of amazing scenes I can say for certain I haven’t seen done in any other action movie or any movie period. What they did with animals alone was a pleasant treat. I won’t spoil anything that you probably should know already, but I will say that the creativity and the stylistic choices of the kills makes movies like these really hard to forget.
Pace: 10
Plot: 5
There were definitely some parts that left me shaking my head. I don’t know why director Chad Stahelski chose to throw certain things in. It was almost as if they did it for the sake of trying to add more drama. With movies like these, there is no need to force anything as the drama typically comes anyway. The story is all over the place at times, overdone in others.
Resolution: 6
I watched the ending thinking, “Good…but stop there please.” It didn’t leave me wanting more, rather for the series to be done. Not sure what could have been done differently, but I think it stumbles compared to the endings of the first two.
Overall: 86
A solid addition to the franchise for sure. However, I feel it must be said: This series needs to end while it still has life. I know there is a fourth one on the way in a couple of years along with a TV show. Let’s just hope John Wick doesn’t get Hollywooded to death as a victim of its own success.
Louise (64 KP) rated Furiously Happy in Books
Jul 2, 2018
So! where do I start! hmmmm....
This a non-fiction memoir about a woman, Jenny Lawson who suffers from mental illness, but not just one she has a whole mixed bag of mental health problems, Jenny suffers from depression, anxiety, insomnia, ADD and others.
This is her memoir of how she copes with mental health and what is like to live with these debilitating illnesses. The book is told in several short stories of Jenny's life, there are also pictures added in several of the chapters.(proof that these things really happened).
Her husband Victor is a saint that's all I can say, Jenny is crazy but in a good way crazy, she just talks about the most random things ever, but this a symptom of anxiety you over think things and you can tell by her writing.
This book is very funny, and Jenny isn't bothered about the stigma that is still attached to mental health, she is just being herself which is so refreshing.
I never heard of Jenny Lawson when I requested this book, I was more drawn to the synopsis and the amazing raccoon on the front cover. Jenny is a taxidermist's daughter and has a lot of love for stuffed animals which is clear in the book and shown with pictures.
I really could relate to Jenny as I suffer from depression and anxiety, I knew where she was coming from and when she was explaining they symptoms, I was like yes, I get that too! The book is very funny in places, but there are parts which I think are just silly!
My favourite part of the book has to be when she is trying to convinve Victor to get another cat so she can call it the 'President', her ideas are very witty and weird - i mean who thinks of stuff like this.
Whilst this book was good and funny, I was wanting her to be a bit more serious in some parts. I wanted to know how she really felt without trying to make it humorous. And yeah I know it's a serious topic and she is trying to make it light-hearted but I feel that maybe she is still holding back on what she really wants to say.
There is a trigger warning for this book, it does discuss self harm and suicide, so if you are easily offended I would not suggest it for you. Also there is a lot of swearing/cussing.
This is Jenny's second book, first being Let's pretend this never happened and also she has her own blog called the bloggess which I will be following.
I would recommend this book for anyone suffering from mental illness or has a family member/friends that does.
I rated this book 3.5 stars out of 5.
For more of my reviews please check out www.louiselovesbooks.wordpress.com
This a non-fiction memoir about a woman, Jenny Lawson who suffers from mental illness, but not just one she has a whole mixed bag of mental health problems, Jenny suffers from depression, anxiety, insomnia, ADD and others.
This is her memoir of how she copes with mental health and what is like to live with these debilitating illnesses. The book is told in several short stories of Jenny's life, there are also pictures added in several of the chapters.(proof that these things really happened).
Her husband Victor is a saint that's all I can say, Jenny is crazy but in a good way crazy, she just talks about the most random things ever, but this a symptom of anxiety you over think things and you can tell by her writing.
This book is very funny, and Jenny isn't bothered about the stigma that is still attached to mental health, she is just being herself which is so refreshing.
I never heard of Jenny Lawson when I requested this book, I was more drawn to the synopsis and the amazing raccoon on the front cover. Jenny is a taxidermist's daughter and has a lot of love for stuffed animals which is clear in the book and shown with pictures.
I really could relate to Jenny as I suffer from depression and anxiety, I knew where she was coming from and when she was explaining they symptoms, I was like yes, I get that too! The book is very funny in places, but there are parts which I think are just silly!
My favourite part of the book has to be when she is trying to convinve Victor to get another cat so she can call it the 'President', her ideas are very witty and weird - i mean who thinks of stuff like this.
Whilst this book was good and funny, I was wanting her to be a bit more serious in some parts. I wanted to know how she really felt without trying to make it humorous. And yeah I know it's a serious topic and she is trying to make it light-hearted but I feel that maybe she is still holding back on what she really wants to say.
There is a trigger warning for this book, it does discuss self harm and suicide, so if you are easily offended I would not suggest it for you. Also there is a lot of swearing/cussing.
This is Jenny's second book, first being Let's pretend this never happened and also she has her own blog called the bloggess which I will be following.
I would recommend this book for anyone suffering from mental illness or has a family member/friends that does.
I rated this book 3.5 stars out of 5.
For more of my reviews please check out www.louiselovesbooks.wordpress.com
Hazel (1853 KP) rated The Children of Hare Hill in Books
Dec 17, 2018
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</i>
Set in the National Trust owned gardens in Cheshire, Scott McKenzie writes about the loss of a parent from the perspective of young children. <i>The Children of Hare Hill </i>deals with the grief and confusion of those too young to fully comprehend the impact a death has upon the remaining family members. Charlotte, aged 8, and Ben, aged 5, lost their father two years ago and now it is time to say goodbye.
McKenzie sets the story in Hare Hill Gardens, a place he loves to visit with his own children. It is here that the two protagonists are scattering their father’s ashes. Around the gardens are thirteen wooden hares that visitors are encouraged to find, something that the children enjoyed doing with their father numerous times. After their difficult task, Charlotte and Ben fall asleep in the walled garden and, on waking, discover the secret of Hare Hill.
Although still in the same place they fell asleep, Charlotte and Ben are now in a magical version of the gardens where the hares are real animals that have been turned into wooden statues. In order to release them from the spell they have to complete several tricky quests. From riddles to number puzzles the children rely on each other’s knowledge and strengths to save the hares and discover who is waiting for them at the end.
When thinking about magical lands we tend to expect witches and wizards, broomsticks and complicated spells, however that is not the case in <i>The Children of Hare Hill</i>. The tasks that befall the siblings are ones that can be solved by “normal” children with the help of their memories of their father. It is an interesting concept and a beautiful way of remembering the life of a loved one.
It is not clear who the target audience is for this novel. Presumably the ages of the characters and the shortness of the story (166 pages) are more inclined to the younger reader, however the narrative and language suggests otherwise. A child of Charlotte’s age is unlikely to read books containing words such as “serendipitous”, “reminisced” and “crescendo”. Scott McKenzie is such an intellectual writer with a beautiful way with words, yet it backfires when targeted at children.
Putting the target audience issue aside, <i>The Children of Hare Hill</i> is a delightful short story that manages to evoke many emotions in the reader. The sadness that comes with reading about death is overshadowed by the bravery of the siblings, their love for one another and the fun they have solving the riddles and tasks as they race around the gardens. Instead of dwelling on the negative feelings the characters are inevitably feeling, McKenzie focuses on happy memories, making what could have been a heart-wrenching story into a heart warming one instead.
Set in the National Trust owned gardens in Cheshire, Scott McKenzie writes about the loss of a parent from the perspective of young children. <i>The Children of Hare Hill </i>deals with the grief and confusion of those too young to fully comprehend the impact a death has upon the remaining family members. Charlotte, aged 8, and Ben, aged 5, lost their father two years ago and now it is time to say goodbye.
McKenzie sets the story in Hare Hill Gardens, a place he loves to visit with his own children. It is here that the two protagonists are scattering their father’s ashes. Around the gardens are thirteen wooden hares that visitors are encouraged to find, something that the children enjoyed doing with their father numerous times. After their difficult task, Charlotte and Ben fall asleep in the walled garden and, on waking, discover the secret of Hare Hill.
Although still in the same place they fell asleep, Charlotte and Ben are now in a magical version of the gardens where the hares are real animals that have been turned into wooden statues. In order to release them from the spell they have to complete several tricky quests. From riddles to number puzzles the children rely on each other’s knowledge and strengths to save the hares and discover who is waiting for them at the end.
When thinking about magical lands we tend to expect witches and wizards, broomsticks and complicated spells, however that is not the case in <i>The Children of Hare Hill</i>. The tasks that befall the siblings are ones that can be solved by “normal” children with the help of their memories of their father. It is an interesting concept and a beautiful way of remembering the life of a loved one.
It is not clear who the target audience is for this novel. Presumably the ages of the characters and the shortness of the story (166 pages) are more inclined to the younger reader, however the narrative and language suggests otherwise. A child of Charlotte’s age is unlikely to read books containing words such as “serendipitous”, “reminisced” and “crescendo”. Scott McKenzie is such an intellectual writer with a beautiful way with words, yet it backfires when targeted at children.
Putting the target audience issue aside, <i>The Children of Hare Hill</i> is a delightful short story that manages to evoke many emotions in the reader. The sadness that comes with reading about death is overshadowed by the bravery of the siblings, their love for one another and the fun they have solving the riddles and tasks as they race around the gardens. Instead of dwelling on the negative feelings the characters are inevitably feeling, McKenzie focuses on happy memories, making what could have been a heart-wrenching story into a heart warming one instead.
Marylegs (44 KP) rated Oryx and Crake (Madd Addam #1) in Books
Aug 14, 2019
Oryx and Crake is a dystopian style post-apocalyptic novel which for the majority focuses on one character, Jimmy, otherwise known as Snowman. The book centres on his life before the fall of a modern civilisation as well as how he move through life afterwards. This world (before the fall) is a perverted but in my opinion not too farfetched realisation of our future. The rich live in compounds with access to all sorts of medications and rejuvenating procedures to lengthen youth and help them remain beautiful. The poor live in the pleeblands, which appears to be not to different from the world we live in now. Food production has been streamlined with scientists creating ‘chicken’ style life forms that have no head/legs as these are not necessary, they just exist in a basic form with no brain function other than to grow. Also in this would entertainment has taken a leap and reality style TV has been twisted so much that it is almost incomprehensible that anyone would watch these shows. It is on one of these shows that Jimmy and his friend Crake first come across Oryx as a young girl. Jimmy and Crake grow up, go to different Universities and begin very different careers. Crake is an enigma, never really part of the human race, although he really does seem to be Jimmy’s friend. He is a genius and begins to develop science in leaps and bounds that could be the end of everything.
This book really got my mind asking questions of myself and science. Often at times it also made me feel anxious and tense in a way not many books have. I don’t see this as a negative, on the contrary I believe it was a positive element to the book. I personally am not a fan of reality shows, and the way entertainment is shown in the book doesn’t seem like a far stretch from what we are currently doing anyway. How many people only watch these shows to see people come to blows? When something horrendous happens on the news, how many people go and try and watch the act online? I am not say in the next few years I expect to see live executions on the TV, but it doesn’t seem like it could never happen. Which is more than worrying. The animal/food production element also doesn’t seem too far off, we can already grow meat in a lab, so how long till we can produce a chicken style organism like in this book. How long till science tries to combine different genes from animals to create new ones.
This is one of the best books I have come across this year and I fully intend to carry on the series. Fully entertaining, fully engrossing, horrific in an addictive way. There is no way to read it without questioning it. I would highly recommend.
This book really got my mind asking questions of myself and science. Often at times it also made me feel anxious and tense in a way not many books have. I don’t see this as a negative, on the contrary I believe it was a positive element to the book. I personally am not a fan of reality shows, and the way entertainment is shown in the book doesn’t seem like a far stretch from what we are currently doing anyway. How many people only watch these shows to see people come to blows? When something horrendous happens on the news, how many people go and try and watch the act online? I am not say in the next few years I expect to see live executions on the TV, but it doesn’t seem like it could never happen. Which is more than worrying. The animal/food production element also doesn’t seem too far off, we can already grow meat in a lab, so how long till we can produce a chicken style organism like in this book. How long till science tries to combine different genes from animals to create new ones.
This is one of the best books I have come across this year and I fully intend to carry on the series. Fully entertaining, fully engrossing, horrific in an addictive way. There is no way to read it without questioning it. I would highly recommend.