Search
Search results
Sassy Brit (97 KP) rated The Hunger in Books
Jun 5, 2019
The Hunger by Alma Katsu is based on the true events of Donner Party tragedy where a party of pioneers travelling west came to a crossroads and the leader, George Donner had to make a decision to take the well documented but longer route across the desert towards California, or to take the untested path, which was rumoured to be far shorter. His decision could mean life or death to the families travelling with him.
It’s kind of funny that the first time I heard of the Donner Party was on one of my favourite horror films, The Shining, written by Stephen King and directed Stanley Kubrick. Jack Nicholson acting as the character Jack Torrance, mentions the Donner Party and it’s how the name came about for the Donner Pass on Interstate 80 in Northern California. Since hearing about this in the film I was eager to look it up, so when I read the synopsis of The Hunger, I had to read it!
This book is broken up into monthly sections starting from June 1846 to April 1847. The latter of which is actually the prologue and supplies the details of the findings of one man, Lewis Keseberg, the last known survivor of the Donna Party event. This makes for an intriguing hook for the rest of the book and I couldn’t wait to see what had happened. Why had no one else survived?
The Hunger is an atmospheric re-imagining of the Donner Party disaster, which blends true horror with the supernatural and is ideal for historical, paranormal and even dark horror fans! It’s full of drama, mystery, intrigue and is downright spooky. The tension Alma Katsu adds, it amazing! I really sympathised for the families, those that had no idea what was going on, and even those that were forced to survive the only way they knew how. I don’t think I’ve ever read a story about Westward migration that is so chilling! This is a study of human endurance tested to its very limits – and beyond. How far would YOU go in order to survive?
It’s kind of funny that the first time I heard of the Donner Party was on one of my favourite horror films, The Shining, written by Stephen King and directed Stanley Kubrick. Jack Nicholson acting as the character Jack Torrance, mentions the Donner Party and it’s how the name came about for the Donner Pass on Interstate 80 in Northern California. Since hearing about this in the film I was eager to look it up, so when I read the synopsis of The Hunger, I had to read it!
This book is broken up into monthly sections starting from June 1846 to April 1847. The latter of which is actually the prologue and supplies the details of the findings of one man, Lewis Keseberg, the last known survivor of the Donna Party event. This makes for an intriguing hook for the rest of the book and I couldn’t wait to see what had happened. Why had no one else survived?
The Hunger is an atmospheric re-imagining of the Donner Party disaster, which blends true horror with the supernatural and is ideal for historical, paranormal and even dark horror fans! It’s full of drama, mystery, intrigue and is downright spooky. The tension Alma Katsu adds, it amazing! I really sympathised for the families, those that had no idea what was going on, and even those that were forced to survive the only way they knew how. I don’t think I’ve ever read a story about Westward migration that is so chilling! This is a study of human endurance tested to its very limits – and beyond. How far would YOU go in order to survive?
Joe Julians (221 KP) rated The Disaster Artist (2017) in Movies
Jan 30, 2018
James Franco (1 more)
The tone
Far from a disaster
If you haven't seen The Room, then I urge you to do so at once. It's a bemusing, confusing, unintentionally hilarious 90 odd minutes that fully deserves all the cult screenings and bewildered wonder that it has garnered over the years. It's without question a perfect awful movie. And here with The Disaster Artist, based on the book of the same name, we get to see the story of just went on to get this film made.
To start with, James Franco is perfect as the mysterious and downright bonkers Tommy Wiseau. His voice, his mannerisms, his almost childlike tantrum throwing approach to life, he manages to make an almost unbelievable man fully believable. He's backed up by a cast that commit to the roles, but other than Dave Franco, don't get a huge amount of time in the spotlight. That's not a criticism as such, by design the two central figures in this are Tommy and Greg Sistero- his friend and fellow budding actor.
I suspect if you are a "fan" of The Room, you'll likely get a lot more out of this than if you had little to know knowledge of the film it depicts the making of. It's a blast getting to see certain iconic scenes recreated for this and to hear the origin stories behind key lines- "you're tearing me apart, Lisa" being one such moment that took me by surprise. The original film is a messy nonsensical experience and it's fun to see that almost everyone working on it viewed it as such even when it was being made. Everyone except Tommy that is.
Where things get a little murky for me is with how you are supposed to feel by the time the brilliant end credits roll (there's exact recreations of certain moments played side by side that are great fun.) It seems as though we are meant to be inspired by Tommy and what he has achieved, like in the end this is supposed to be a feel-good movie about never giving up on your dreams. That's all well and good, but Tommy Wiseau doesn't come across particularly well in this. He's a temper tantrum throwing and at times scary man to be around. One scene in particular during the shooting of the 'belly button sex scene' portrays him as a pretty horrible man, one that gets his way by being somewhat of a bully. This isn't addressed again fully and it's hard to feel like cheering him on by the time the big premiere screening rolls round. There's also his about face when it comes to claiming the movie was meant to be a comedy- something nobody believes. On the one hand, it's a smart move to take what he has and run with it, but there's also something sad about him not having something he cared so passionately about be received in the way it was intended. This is something else that is glossed over, but then Wiseau would never speak so candidly to give the writers anything to work with.
Overall this is a great movie and a fascinating watch. Would highly recommend.
To start with, James Franco is perfect as the mysterious and downright bonkers Tommy Wiseau. His voice, his mannerisms, his almost childlike tantrum throwing approach to life, he manages to make an almost unbelievable man fully believable. He's backed up by a cast that commit to the roles, but other than Dave Franco, don't get a huge amount of time in the spotlight. That's not a criticism as such, by design the two central figures in this are Tommy and Greg Sistero- his friend and fellow budding actor.
I suspect if you are a "fan" of The Room, you'll likely get a lot more out of this than if you had little to know knowledge of the film it depicts the making of. It's a blast getting to see certain iconic scenes recreated for this and to hear the origin stories behind key lines- "you're tearing me apart, Lisa" being one such moment that took me by surprise. The original film is a messy nonsensical experience and it's fun to see that almost everyone working on it viewed it as such even when it was being made. Everyone except Tommy that is.
Where things get a little murky for me is with how you are supposed to feel by the time the brilliant end credits roll (there's exact recreations of certain moments played side by side that are great fun.) It seems as though we are meant to be inspired by Tommy and what he has achieved, like in the end this is supposed to be a feel-good movie about never giving up on your dreams. That's all well and good, but Tommy Wiseau doesn't come across particularly well in this. He's a temper tantrum throwing and at times scary man to be around. One scene in particular during the shooting of the 'belly button sex scene' portrays him as a pretty horrible man, one that gets his way by being somewhat of a bully. This isn't addressed again fully and it's hard to feel like cheering him on by the time the big premiere screening rolls round. There's also his about face when it comes to claiming the movie was meant to be a comedy- something nobody believes. On the one hand, it's a smart move to take what he has and run with it, but there's also something sad about him not having something he cared so passionately about be received in the way it was intended. This is something else that is glossed over, but then Wiseau would never speak so candidly to give the writers anything to work with.
Overall this is a great movie and a fascinating watch. Would highly recommend.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Polar (2019) in Movies
Feb 7, 2019 (Updated Feb 7, 2019)
Extremely Polarizing
Wow, what a train wreck this turned out to be..
Think diet John Wick meets an immature, garish comic book full of pantomime villains and you have Polar. Sometimes you see a movie and can't help but wonder, "What the hell were they thinking?" Unfortunately this is one of those times. There are folks out there that have crafted a solid script and are struggling to get their movie funded and made, meanwhile there is low level trash like this being paid for and distributed by a huge platform like Netflix?! It is an outrageous and pretty sad state of affairs.
Without a doubt the worst part of this thing is the god awful assortment of villains. They are so annoying and infuriating in every scene they are in and only get worse as the movie goes on. Half the movie is spent following this massively irritating group as they hunt for Mads Mikkelsen's character and they are so unlikable, but not in the way that they are supposed to be. They all work for the main villain, who is inexplicably played by Matt Lucas from Little Britain. That's right, Vicky Pollard is this movie's main antagonist. He is god awful here and I genuinely don't even know what they were attempting to do with this character. Every scene that he is in feels like a discarded Little Britain sketch.
The one bright spot in the film is Mads Mikkelsen's turn as Duncan, the ex-hitman being hunted throughout the film by his ex-employers who serves as our main protagonist. I love seeing Mads in anything he appears in, so I actually found the scenes with him in them pretty enjoyable, and frankly they were the only thing that stopped this movie from being scored a pathetic 1/10.
Overall, this is total mess. It is the worst type of comic book movie and doesn't seem appealing to anyone over the age of 12. Please don't waste your time with this garbage, there are much better movies out there based on graphic novels that don't only cater to horny, brain-dead teenagers.
Think diet John Wick meets an immature, garish comic book full of pantomime villains and you have Polar. Sometimes you see a movie and can't help but wonder, "What the hell were they thinking?" Unfortunately this is one of those times. There are folks out there that have crafted a solid script and are struggling to get their movie funded and made, meanwhile there is low level trash like this being paid for and distributed by a huge platform like Netflix?! It is an outrageous and pretty sad state of affairs.
Without a doubt the worst part of this thing is the god awful assortment of villains. They are so annoying and infuriating in every scene they are in and only get worse as the movie goes on. Half the movie is spent following this massively irritating group as they hunt for Mads Mikkelsen's character and they are so unlikable, but not in the way that they are supposed to be. They all work for the main villain, who is inexplicably played by Matt Lucas from Little Britain. That's right, Vicky Pollard is this movie's main antagonist. He is god awful here and I genuinely don't even know what they were attempting to do with this character. Every scene that he is in feels like a discarded Little Britain sketch.
The one bright spot in the film is Mads Mikkelsen's turn as Duncan, the ex-hitman being hunted throughout the film by his ex-employers who serves as our main protagonist. I love seeing Mads in anything he appears in, so I actually found the scenes with him in them pretty enjoyable, and frankly they were the only thing that stopped this movie from being scored a pathetic 1/10.
Overall, this is total mess. It is the worst type of comic book movie and doesn't seem appealing to anyone over the age of 12. Please don't waste your time with this garbage, there are much better movies out there based on graphic novels that don't only cater to horny, brain-dead teenagers.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
A Near Perfect Film/Comic Book Movie With A Piece Missing
Contains spoilers, click to show
This film did a great job in making the Joker or rather Arthur a sympathetic character. Joaquin Phoenix did a phenomenal job in this movie. His laugh made me really feel for this character, it sounded sad but also painful, like it physically hurt him. I really felt for Arthur and it actually made me feel bad for him equally when he was getting beat up and assaulted but also just berated and treated bad by others. People were talking about the violence in the movie and how it was graphic and disturbing but what bothered me more were the parts where Arthur was having violence done on him, it made me sad for him. I thought a lot of the movie was well done. The double twist in him finding his mother's letter to Thomas Wayne saying he (Arthur) is his son only to find out that he was adopted was a great reveal. Still makes me wonder what the truth really is, because later he does find a photograph with Thomas Wayne's initials on the back. Either he really is his son and Wayne had it covered up, which he totally has the means to do, or maybe she was delusional about it. I also thought it was cool how they showed Arthur also had delusions of grandeur in the begging when he is watching the Murray show and he imagines himself as a guest there. Like I said this movie was really well done in a lot of ways but there were somethings that bothered me. One right off the back is that Bruce Wayne is just a kid in this movie and if Arthur is supposed to be the Joker he would be way older than he should be when Wayne becomes Batman. To mere there wasn't a lot that Arthur really did as Joker. Nothing grandiose or epic like what I've become accustomed to with the Joker in other incarnations. There was no plans or power moves like in The Dark Knight or parade and taking over the city like in 1989's Batman. They really could have called the movie something else since he really only becomes the Joker at the end of the movie for not really that long even. I know it's supposed to be an origin story of how he becomes the Joker but it wasn't even going off of any of the comics and just loosely based on the version of Joker from The Killing Joke and then given the "Hollywood" treatment. I think I just expected more Joker from a movie called Joker. I thought the ending was perfect if it would have ended with him on top of the car when they helped him escape. I honestly don't know why they should that little part with him in Arkham, I don't think it added anything and kind of took away from it. The only thing I can think of is they didn't want to end it that dark. I have to say that if your judging this film from not being a big fan of Joker, the comics or the films and only on as a stand alone film it's probably like a 9/10. But for me since at it's core it is a comic book movie I give it an 8/10.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets (2017) in Movies
Jan 22, 2021
Where to begin with Luc Besson? The masterpiece of Leon aside, he is notorious for creating beautifully bonkers visual treats that twist and turn like a monkey on cocaine, making as much sense. This comic book adaptation starts well, with some jaw dropping CG design and a decent concept – it truly is a dreamscape of glorious colour and imagination rarely matched… but so is Tim Burton’s Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, and we all know how awful that is.
He just doesn’t have the knack with story and character in the same way as he does with the visuals, often leaving you with the impression that even the actors are confused by what is going on, and why, and what the hell is coming out of their mouths as an excuse for dialogue.
I like Dane De Haan, he has shown a lot of promise in some valiant near misses, such as Chronicle, The Place Beyond the Pines and The Cure For Wellness – three films I enjoyed, with reservations, that were better for him being in them – but he has not quite made it to the A-list as yet. Here, opposite the gorgeously cute but somehow hollow presence Cara Delevingne, he is burdened by a love story with no chemistry and some cringe-worthy banter. As the film ultimately focuses and depends on the likability of this relationship it inevitably fails; melting into comic book kookiness that loses a lot in translation.
I almost found myself hating them and wishing they would die painfully so the film could end, but not quite as much as I hated how fundamentally terrible Clive Owen was as the villain – I mean, so awkward and awful it made how uncomfortable Harrison Ford seemed in Ender’s Game look like an Oscar worthy performance. Risible. Inexcusable. Inexplicable. But that’s Besson where let loose into the realm of full sci-fi.
One corner of joy was Rihanna as the shape-shifting Bubble, who showed a charm and talent for film acting I hadn’t quite expected, and how much fun Ethan Hawke had dressing up and hamming it up as Jolly, her pimp. But essentially, you’d be better off turning the sound off completely and just drinking in the spectrum of imaginative design on display. A film that may hold some cult status into the future, and one small children may get oddly addicted to, but as a functioning and satisfying cinematic story… just, no.
He just doesn’t have the knack with story and character in the same way as he does with the visuals, often leaving you with the impression that even the actors are confused by what is going on, and why, and what the hell is coming out of their mouths as an excuse for dialogue.
I like Dane De Haan, he has shown a lot of promise in some valiant near misses, such as Chronicle, The Place Beyond the Pines and The Cure For Wellness – three films I enjoyed, with reservations, that were better for him being in them – but he has not quite made it to the A-list as yet. Here, opposite the gorgeously cute but somehow hollow presence Cara Delevingne, he is burdened by a love story with no chemistry and some cringe-worthy banter. As the film ultimately focuses and depends on the likability of this relationship it inevitably fails; melting into comic book kookiness that loses a lot in translation.
I almost found myself hating them and wishing they would die painfully so the film could end, but not quite as much as I hated how fundamentally terrible Clive Owen was as the villain – I mean, so awkward and awful it made how uncomfortable Harrison Ford seemed in Ender’s Game look like an Oscar worthy performance. Risible. Inexcusable. Inexplicable. But that’s Besson where let loose into the realm of full sci-fi.
One corner of joy was Rihanna as the shape-shifting Bubble, who showed a charm and talent for film acting I hadn’t quite expected, and how much fun Ethan Hawke had dressing up and hamming it up as Jolly, her pimp. But essentially, you’d be better off turning the sound off completely and just drinking in the spectrum of imaginative design on display. A film that may hold some cult status into the future, and one small children may get oddly addicted to, but as a functioning and satisfying cinematic story… just, no.
Spaceman: An Astronaut's Unlikely Journey to Unlock the Secrets of the Universe
Tanner Colby and Mike Massimino
Book
Mike Massimino's compelling memoir takes us on a brilliant journey where the nerdiest science meets...
HF
How Freakin' Zeitgeist are You?
Book
How Freakin' Zeitgeist Are You? is the definitive collection of Murray Lachlan Young's poems from...
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Scrappy Little Nobody in Books
Feb 1, 2018
Anna Kendrick has been acting (and singing) since childhood, and her autobiography chronicles her growth as an actress and person, as told in little snippets and essays. Grouped in assorted themes, we hear from various stages of Anna's life, spanning her childhood to present day, and learn how Anna, a tiny scrappy kid, became a famous, Oscar-nominated actress. The book touches on her fame, as well as her personal thoughts and feelings.
I've always enjoyed Kendrick and have seen several of her films (and heard her sing about a million times, thanks to my young children and the popularity of the film, <i>Trolls</i>) but didn't know a lot about her early career. Her autobiography does a good job of filling in some of the gaps of Anna's childhood career (working on Broadway at twelve - who knew?!), but isn't told in any chronological order, so we don't get a sense of any real span of her career from Point A to B. Most of the book is told in short little bits. Many of them are quite funny stories, and there are some truly laugh out loud moments. In many cases, Kendrick is a very relatable person, who seems like the type of friend you'd like to hang out with. At other points, she seemed a bit whiny, and for me, the book spent too much time with her protesting about some of the travails of being in the celebrity industry. I can only take so much "woe is me" from famous people who write books about their lives.
The book is on more solid ground when we're reading about Anna's early life, where you gain a true admiration for her talent, and with her silly and snarky stories about her misanthropic personality (misanthropes unite!). Still, the jumping back and forth in time makes it hard to get a true trace on the arc of her life at times, and beyond some of the complaining and expounding on the travails of award shows, press junkets, and the like, there wasn't as much about her post-fame life as I was interested in.
If you like Kendrick's films, or her twitter feed, you'll probably enjoy the book and its organization, even if you find yourself wishing for a little more at the end. She's led an interesting life so far, and I'm sure another autobiography down the road would be quite intriguing.
I've always enjoyed Kendrick and have seen several of her films (and heard her sing about a million times, thanks to my young children and the popularity of the film, <i>Trolls</i>) but didn't know a lot about her early career. Her autobiography does a good job of filling in some of the gaps of Anna's childhood career (working on Broadway at twelve - who knew?!), but isn't told in any chronological order, so we don't get a sense of any real span of her career from Point A to B. Most of the book is told in short little bits. Many of them are quite funny stories, and there are some truly laugh out loud moments. In many cases, Kendrick is a very relatable person, who seems like the type of friend you'd like to hang out with. At other points, she seemed a bit whiny, and for me, the book spent too much time with her protesting about some of the travails of being in the celebrity industry. I can only take so much "woe is me" from famous people who write books about their lives.
The book is on more solid ground when we're reading about Anna's early life, where you gain a true admiration for her talent, and with her silly and snarky stories about her misanthropic personality (misanthropes unite!). Still, the jumping back and forth in time makes it hard to get a true trace on the arc of her life at times, and beyond some of the complaining and expounding on the travails of award shows, press junkets, and the like, there wasn't as much about her post-fame life as I was interested in.
If you like Kendrick's films, or her twitter feed, you'll probably enjoy the book and its organization, even if you find yourself wishing for a little more at the end. She's led an interesting life so far, and I'm sure another autobiography down the road would be quite intriguing.
Where to begin with this book? Well, first off, I thoroughly enjoyed it, and was lost in the story whilst I read - it’s very ‘all-consuming’. The main reason for that is that it’s completely out there! It’s unpredictable. I tried to think of another couple of words to go with that, but I can’t get any better than ‘unpredictable’ to be honest.
The pandemic of teenage suicides is disturbing, and reflects their despair at the state of the world left for them by previous generations. Parents with money think that they can prevent their childs’ suicide and cure their anxiety throwing money and anti-depressants at the ‘problem’, and sending them to an Anxiety Abatement Centre - and that’s how Simon meets the Prophet and Louise. And that’s where the quest begins.
It turns out that adults are responsible for more than Climate Change. You can add child abuse and big Pharma into the mix as well. And then there’s the political state of the country, where no party is any better than the other, and what’s more, they’re interchangeable. There was a lot of head nodding going on as I read.
And Noah Hawley breaks the 4th wall as he talks directly to the reader, talking about his thought process in writing the novel.
This book is a huge exaggeration of the state of the world, at the same time as it’s not. I hope it doesn’t come to the things that happen in Anthem, but we’ve seen snapshots of it on the news already.
It’s just the right level of crazy, believable, unbelievable, mind-blowing fiction that keeps me well-entertained. I know Noah Hawley is a screen writer, and I can see this as a film - hey, I’d watch it.
The pandemic of teenage suicides is disturbing, and reflects their despair at the state of the world left for them by previous generations. Parents with money think that they can prevent their childs’ suicide and cure their anxiety throwing money and anti-depressants at the ‘problem’, and sending them to an Anxiety Abatement Centre - and that’s how Simon meets the Prophet and Louise. And that’s where the quest begins.
It turns out that adults are responsible for more than Climate Change. You can add child abuse and big Pharma into the mix as well. And then there’s the political state of the country, where no party is any better than the other, and what’s more, they’re interchangeable. There was a lot of head nodding going on as I read.
And Noah Hawley breaks the 4th wall as he talks directly to the reader, talking about his thought process in writing the novel.
This book is a huge exaggeration of the state of the world, at the same time as it’s not. I hope it doesn’t come to the things that happen in Anthem, but we’ve seen snapshots of it on the news already.
It’s just the right level of crazy, believable, unbelievable, mind-blowing fiction that keeps me well-entertained. I know Noah Hawley is a screen writer, and I can see this as a film - hey, I’d watch it.
Hazel (2934 KP) rated The Chestnut Man in Books
Mar 24, 2019
A great debut
If that cover doesn't draw you in and make you pick it up, you are a lost soul !!!
And if the cover doesn't do it for you, the story certainly will. It does make for uncomfortable reading at times given the subject matter but it is a story about a serial killer so some gruesome descriptions of the crimes shouldn't come as too much of a surprise.
The plot is gripping, dark and thrilling and the pace of the book is ideal with a seamless mix of murder, politics and police procedure all wrapped up in a perfect psychological thriller package. I actually don't normally like what is called Scandi-noir after having previously tried and failed to read one by a very successful author but this one is excellent.
The characters are fantastic - I know it's a good book when I can see the characters as real people and imagine who would play them if the book were made into a film or TV series - the Danish actor, Kim Bodnia, from The Bridge (Bron/Broen) and Killing Eve would be perfect for the role of Hess.
This is the debut novel by this author, although he has written the highly acclaimed series "The Killing", and a very accomplished debut it is and my thanks must go to the publisher, Penguin UK - Michael Joseph, via NetGalley for my copy in return for an honest review.
And if the cover doesn't do it for you, the story certainly will. It does make for uncomfortable reading at times given the subject matter but it is a story about a serial killer so some gruesome descriptions of the crimes shouldn't come as too much of a surprise.
The plot is gripping, dark and thrilling and the pace of the book is ideal with a seamless mix of murder, politics and police procedure all wrapped up in a perfect psychological thriller package. I actually don't normally like what is called Scandi-noir after having previously tried and failed to read one by a very successful author but this one is excellent.
The characters are fantastic - I know it's a good book when I can see the characters as real people and imagine who would play them if the book were made into a film or TV series - the Danish actor, Kim Bodnia, from The Bridge (Bron/Broen) and Killing Eve would be perfect for the role of Hess.
This is the debut novel by this author, although he has written the highly acclaimed series "The Killing", and a very accomplished debut it is and my thanks must go to the publisher, Penguin UK - Michael Joseph, via NetGalley for my copy in return for an honest review.