Search

Search only in certain items:

The Fall
The Fall
Bethany Griffin | 2014 | Young Adult (YA)
4
6.0 (2 Ratings)
Book Rating
*puts on best announcer voice* Ahem.

I'd like to present to you the <b>most confusing book of the year</b>, <i>The Fall</i> by Bethany Griffin. It's a <b>very odd and peculiar book </b>based on Edgar Allen Poe's short story, <i>The Fall of the House of Usher</i>. In Griffin's retelling, Madeline Usher believes that she can break the curse on the Ushers, but then she wakes up in a fabulously claustrophobic box called a coffin.

In all seriousness, <i>The Fall</i> is actually <b>a retelling on one of Poe's stories </b>that I didn't actually read, but watched instead (so bad, it was good). From reading the synopsis of Griffin's retelling, <b>it sounded like Madeline Usher had spent most of her life trying to break free from the curse.</b>

I ended up with something different. At least, that's what I would probably end up with if I actually made it to the end of the book, which I chose not to. I totally admit I peeked at the last few pages just to see what would happen, and it was nothing special.

<b>Griffin starts us out right when Madeline wakes up in a coffin. The rest of the book, however, is all flashback from Madeline's childhood, starting from when she was nine. It's a little out of order, but has a pattern to it in a way</b> – one chapter is nine, the next is fifteen, and occasionally there's a diary/journal entry from Lisbeth Usher. I'm no fan of chapters being even remotely out of order (they can get confusing when you're busy and come back to the story a few days later), but <b>at least Griffin had a pattern.</b>

At least, until about page 150. <b>WHERE IS THIRTEEN AND WHY ARE YOU SKIPPED.</b>

Of course, we go back to thirteen in the next chapter and continue the pattern. In my little game of peek-ahead, I found out <b>there <i>is</i> no particular pattern. My hypothesis to all this is Griffin portraying Madeline's madness increasing as her age increases. As Madeline grows older, she becomes madder. </b>How's that for implementing science?

Anyways, about 50 pages later, I'm pretty much going, "Your point is..?" in a very uninterested mental voice that may or may not include a mental eye roll or two in the process. Here's all that I've found out from what I read:
<ol>
  <li>Madeline wakes up in a coffin – Go figure.</li>
  <li>She and her brother Roderick is cursed – Knew that.</li>
  <li>The House of Usher is, well, alive – Knew that.</li>
  <li>The House of Usher is malicious – Knew that, but this was ten times creepier from the cheesy short film.</li>
  <li>Madeline has a desire to break the curse on her family – It's very subtle.</li>
</ol>
In the long run, <b><i>The Fall</i> is written in a scattered format (see my hypothesis!) to emphasize the fact that the House of Usher is alive, malicious, and will do <i>anything</i> to keep an Usher within its walls for all eternity. It's nothing remotely impressive if you read or watched the original.</b>

And this is when the book club kills me.

<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/dnf-review-the-fall-by-bethany-griffin/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
  
Brightburn (2019)
Brightburn (2019)
2019 | Horror
Horror Twist On A Classic Comic Book Icon
Brightburn is a 2019 superhero/horror movie produced by James Gunn and Kenneth Huang. It was directed by David Yarovesky with screenplay written by Mark and Brian Gunn. The film was produced by Screen Gems, Stage 6 Films, Troll Court Entertainment, and the H Collective. The movie stars Elizabeth Banks, David Denman, Jackson A. Dunn, Matt Jones and Meredith Hagnar.


Living in Brightburn, Kansas, Tori (Elizabeth Banks) and Kyle Breyer (David Denman), a young farm couple, struggle with conceiving a child due to fertility issues. One night, a spaceship falls from the sky near their farm. A baby boy is found inside and the couple decide to adopt him and name him Brandon. Years later, it seems Brandon (Jackson A. Dunn) is a typical young boy as he has been raised without the knowledge of his true origin. However this begins to change in very dramatic ways as the spaceship that he arrived in, hidden in a trapdoor in the barn, begins to glow and affect him disturbingly.


This movie was very much horror and with the R-rating it did not disappoint in that category. However for a superhero movie, I definitely felt it could have been better, especially when it came to the storytelling. I felt like the plot wasn't structured enough and it didn't always feel like it was going somewhere except for what it had shown through the trailers. You know, like it showed in the trailers the outcome and the journey to that outcome wasn't as fun or surprising as I thought it was going to be. The kill scenes though were very brutal, which for some reason I wasn't expecting as much, I guess because the one doing them is this super-powered 12 year old. But this was an awesome concept on a very familiar story that everyone has grown up with or heard, which is basically Superman. There are comics from DC and of Superman like Red Son Superman; where it's a "what if" Superman had landed in Russia instead of United States, and there is a Justice League animated film where instead of Superman, Kal-El, the baby that escapes Krypton is Generel Zod's child and instead of landing in Kansas he lands in New Mexico and is raised by Mexican migrant farmers. But I don't think there has been a story to explore this type of different way Superman could have grown up and it was shockingly entertaining to say the least. The mid-credits scene was really cool to see as well and know that the cinematic universe for Brightburn could expand if it does well financially. I'm thinking that it won't with stiff competition such as Aladdin and John Wick 3 but who knows. I give this film a 6/10.
  
Avengers: Infinity War (2018)
Avengers: Infinity War (2018)
2018 | Action, Sci-Fi
Special effects are great, except Bruce Banner's head in the Hulkbuster suit. (4 more)
Great action scenes.
Great seeing just about all the Marvel characters.
PETER DINKLAGE!
Josh Brolin is great as Thanos.
Too talky at points. (5 more)
Some weird, illogical, wtf parts.
Guardians seemed out of place acting so serious.
Wasn't moved by the ending. Was kind of like, "Okay...so what? This is a comic-book movie."
Too long to introduce everyone.
Not funny.
Hype says it's better than it actually is
I knew this movie wasn't going to live up to the hype. Just like Black Panther, it's just an okay movie. Just like every other movie made these days, it starts strong, gets boring, then ends strong. Except it doesn't end too strong. It sort of ends with a whimper. I see memes where people were devastated at the ending. I felt like it was meaningless, as we know this is a comic book movie & all will be put right in the next installment.

I feel one of the main problems of the movie was the humor. When you have great Marvel movies, like The Guardians of the Galaxy films, and Thor: Ragnarok, which relied on a lot of humor and then are intertwined with a movie so dark, so deathly serious & try to keep the humor of those films, it just doesn't work. The Guardians, Thor & Bruce Banner were all throwing out jokes, but they mostly fell flat. It's hard to smile when Thanos is being an absolute terror.

All this being said, I did like the movie. Where I probably wouldn't watch Black Panther again, I would definitely watch this again. I actually have BP a 7, just like this film, I would probably change my score to a 5, as this movie was better, but doesn't deserve higher than a 7.
  
40x40

Mike Carlson (115 KP) May 4, 2018

I've had a problem with the Marvel humor since the illogical dance-off in GotG. I knew there would be issues uniting the dumber (silly for the sake of a laugh rather than well thought out and believable in context) portions of the universe with the smarter, more serious portions.

40x40

Billie Wichkan (118 KP) rated 55 in Books

May 22, 2019  
55
55
10
10.0 (1 Ratings)
Book Rating
*** There were 54 victims before this. Who is number 55? ***

Wilbrook in Western Australia is a sleepy, remote town that sits on the edge of miles and miles of unexplored wilderness. It is home to Police Sergeant Chandler Jenkins, who is proud to run the town’s small police station, a place used to dealing with domestic disputes and noise complaints.
All that changes on a scorching day when an injured man stumbles into Chandler’s station. He’s covered in dried blood. His name is Gabriel. He tells Chandler what he remembers.
He was drugged and driven to a cabin in the mountains and tied up in iron chains. The man who took him was called Heath. Heath told Gabriel he was going to be number 55. His 55th victim.
Heath is a serial killer.
As a manhunt is launched, a man who says he is Heath walks into the same station. He tells Chandler he was taken by a man named Gabriel. Gabriel told Heath he was going to be victim 55.
Gabriel is the serial killer.
Two suspects. Two identical stories. Which one is the truth?

This is a character-driven, tightly plotted thriller that certainly kept me guessing. The descriptions of the outback including a sense of the harshness of the environment year round were extremely vivid.
I really enjoyed the way the past and present were interwoven, bringing a sharpness to the story.
I could not put this book down. From start to finish I needed to keep turning each page to see what was going to happen next. The story really draws you in especially jumping between past and present and both perspectives. This one will keep you thinking and to be honest I think would make a great film.
The ending was just WOW...I did not see that one coming at all.
Looking forward to being able to read more of the same author.
Highly recommended!

I would like to thank Netgalley and Simon and Schuster UK Fiction for an advance copy of 55.
  
Savages (2012)
Savages (2012)
2012 | Drama, Mystery
6
6.5 (4 Ratings)
Movie Rating
Over the past 15 years, Oliver Stone’s films have been kind of hit or miss to me. It’s as if Stone is still trying to make the same controversial films he became popular for in the 80’s and early 90’s. Only, as an audience, we have become keen to his filmmaking style and therefore his more recent work suffers from the apathy of a “show me something new” culture. Still, despite his failures, Stone does not makes apologies for his work while he continues in his quest to make films about controversial subjects. This time around Stone strives to take us into the violent world of the Mexican drug cartels though a film adaptation of the novel Savages by Don Winslow.

As the film opens we are introduced to “O” (Blake Lively) who, as our narrator, acquaints us with the open yet loving relationship she shares with our two protagonists, Chon and Ben. Chon (Taylor Kitsch), an ex-Navy SEAL, is unquestionably the muscle of the trio’s operation. Chon was the original financier for his high school friend Ben, (Aaron Johnson) the peaceful, charitable, botany genius who has created the most potent marijuana in the world. Together these two embody the perfect man for O, while the three of them enjoy the spoils of the small marijuana empire they created in southern California.

That is until they gain the attention from a Mexican cartel intent on creating a stronger foothold in the southern California area. The cartel offers them a partnership and explains that by teaming up their business will triple in three years. But when the trio refuse the offer, the ruthless head of the cartel, Elena (Selma Hayek), instructs her enforcer, Lado (Benicio Del Toro), to kidnap O and hold her hostage so the boys will cooperate. Soon our heroes use their network of connections, like crooked DEA agent Dennis (John Travolta) and financial broker Spin (Emile Hirsch), to battle the cartel in a series of savage maneuvers to get back their one “shared” love.

Stone has been known to inspire his actors to give Oscar worthy performances. Sadly, you will not find any such performances here. That is not to say that the acting was terrible. It just seemed that the characters themselves are uninspired which is a shame because I would have liked to have seen some growth in this young cast, especially from Taylor Kitsch.

I feel that many critics will be hard on Taylor Kitsch because of his previous epic fails of 2012 (John Carter and Battleship) however I am surprised to admit that, for this movie at least, he gets a pass in my book. Not because he delivers a fantastic performance that makes me believe he’s truly an up and coming talent, but rather because he is convincing in his portrayal of Chon. When O describes our protagonists as each being one half of the perfect man, she refers to Chon as “Hard Steel,” which is exactly what Kitsch plays him as, a one-dimensional, emotionally devoid character with no growth or any real redeeming qualities other than the ability to go to war. Regardless of whether or not Kitsch has any additional acting range not showcased in this film, I cannot penalize him for his performance in this movie. He fit the part that he was cast in fine.

Blake Lively (Gossip Girl, Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants) plays O, short for Ophelia. And yes she channels the mad, love-struck, melancholic character from Hamlet after whom she is named. And while it is easy to make those comparisons to the character of this film, they only appear to be on the surface, if anything. And herein lies the problem. Regardless of how you feel about her open relationship with Ben and Chon, the more I learned about her, the less I cared. Like Kitsch’s character, O is boring and one dimensional. She is the product of being a pretty little rich girl whose mother is off somewhere with husband number twelve. She has been getting stoned every day since she was young and the only place she finds herself loved is in with the company of Chon and Ben. Tragic, I know. While watching the film I honestly thought to myself, if I was Ben or Chon, I would say, “Fuck it. Cut her loose and let’s go to Asia.” She has no redeeming qualities other than being good looking and a good lay. So why would they go through so much trouble for her? The trio’s relationship is weakly tied together by her telling us through narration but never really materializes on screen. At times you get some of a feeling that Ben actually loves her but that love is never really reciprocated from O. It is safe to say that that I did not derive any loving connection from Lively’s performance, though her deliver as a narrator was tolerable.

Aaron Johnson (Kick-Ass) is the one redeeming performance from this young cast. In contrast to Chon, O describes Ben as “Soft Wood” which makes him the better half. Ben is the one character who actually goes through some kind of character arc and growth. Using the wood analogy, we watch him bend from the peaceful Buddhist businessman to the man who will sacrifice everything, to get back this woman he loves. Nowhere is this better embodied than when Ben is faced with the tough choice of sticking to his peaceful beliefs or incinerating a man in cold blood during one of their moves against the cartel. I found myself actually curious about what Ben would do next. Unlike Chon and O, Ben has some depth and struggles with his personal beliefs, his love for O and what needs to be done. Needless to say, Johnson delivers a believable performance that actually helps move along the action and was the only protagonist that kept me interested in their battle.

In addition to Johnson, the film is littered with several strong supporting cast members who all deliver solid performances. Selma Hayek is strong as Elena, the leader of the cartel that challenges Ben and Chon. She is a ruthless and shrewd businesswoman and yet has a better “sense of morality” as she explains during her interactions with O and her own daughter. Her enforcer Lado is played by Benicio Del Toro who, with the help of an uncomfortable rapist mustache, comes off as an extremely menacing character. Del Toro solidifies himself on screen by being down right creepy and yet intelligent in his own savage way. During every moment of screen time you expect him to kill someone just because it is good for business.

A needed bit of change of pace is provided by an unexpected performance by Emile Hirsch (Into the Wild) as Ben and Chon’s witty financial broker, Spin. As well as by John Travolta who plays Dennis, the dirty DEA agent who’s in Ben and Chon’s pocket. In fact, even though Travolta’s screen time is maybe a total of 12 minutes, his performance steals the show with his sole bit of comic relief, for lack of a better explanation. Perhaps the strongest acted moment of this film is during a standoff scene between Del Toro and Travolta that in many ways makes me want to know more about those characters. And what that movie would be about.

In typical Stone fashion the movie is shot in a variety of film angles and stylistic devices used to foreshadow and at times create a foreboding presence. Visually the movie provides a strong and believable feeling for the world these characters live in and the way that they operate their business. In addition, narration is used at points to move along the action and provide the audience with insight that otherwise would not have been possible on performances alone. I personally have no problem with narration as long as it is set up from the beginning and used to advance the story, which it is. However in the final act, the movie introduces a film device from left field that completely kills the already weak pacing of the movie. I cannot get into it without giving away the story, but I can see how this device could completely ruin the movie for those patrons who are already disinterested by the time the final act rolls around. Especially for those who do not find any connection to any of the characters. In which case, the pacing of this film will seem slow and drawn out.

I am torn about my review of this film. Savages is something that I wanted to like more than I did. Two of the three protagonists are one dimensional and if it was not for Johnson and the strong supporting cast I might have found the movie boring. It was also completely different from the expectations set by the commercials. Those looking for an action movie will feel misled and will more than likely be disappointed with the film. Not that there is not any action, only it comes between very long periods of dialogue and slow pacing. By the end of the movie, you are either invested in these characters or just waiting for the lights to come up in the theater. And in typical Oliver Stone fashion the movie tries to make us question our own perception of just what it means to be a savage.
  
Coco (2017)
Coco (2017)
2017 | Adventure, Animation
Amazing
The Book of Life was one of my favorite films of 2014. When I first saw the trailer for Coco, it was hard not for me to draw comparisons. A celebration of the Day of the Dead. Mariachi. Centered around music. Coco brings its own flavor, however, a unique experience all its own. In fact, if it weren't for the god-awful twenty-five-minute Frozen short right before (since removed due to numerous complaints), this would have been close to a perfect moviegoing experience.

Little Miguel loves music. He has to sneak away to watch old recordings of his favorite musician Ernesto de la Cruz because the rest of his family thinks music is a curse. Following a mysterious chain of events (don't want to ruin it for you), Miguel finds himself in the Land of the Dead and must somehow find a way to get home before its too late.

The colors. Oh man, the colors. Vibrant, popping off the screen. It screams life even during the scenes in the Land of the Dead. This is one film I wish I would have seen in IMAX. The colors add an amazing pop, from the spirit animals to the city landscapes at night, making this one of the most beautiful animated films I have seen.

The colors alone are just a small touch to the overall creativity and originality behind Coco. The Land of the Dead is loaded with sights to behold, some you might miss if you blink. The attention to detail is spectacular from the cool bridge that guides the dead to the Land of the Living to the colorful spirit animals. I've seen a lot of movies and I haven't seen anything like this.

Not only are the visuals amazing, but the music holds its own as well, driving the entire story in an entertaining and powerful way. There are a lot of touching moments that revolve around the soundtrack. There will be musical numbers that make you laugh while others leave you with more of a somber feel. Maybe I cried a little. Maybe I didn't. You'll never know for sure. One thing I can say is this movie was about as touching as any I have seen this year.

Disney/Pixar is known for leaving you with a great message and Coco is no exception. Miguel was willing to follow his dreams at all costs, even if it cost him his life. How many of us can say the same? Another phenomenal job by Pixar. I give the film a 96.