Search
Search results
Acting and its Refusal in Theatre and Film: The Devil Makes Believe
Book
Acting has traditionally been considered a form of pretending or falsehood, compared with the...
Jonah Hill recommended Inventing David Geffen (2012) in Movies (curated)
Sassy Brit (97 KP) rated Timeless: Recreate the Most Iconic Looks from 100 Years of Beauty in Books
Jun 5, 2019
The hardcover version of Timeless: A Century of Iconic Looks by Louise Young, Loulia Sheppard is a stunning and informative book for recreating the most striking make-up and hair styles of the 20th century with step-by-step guides. If you love fashion, different hairstyles and the make-up that goes with these different years, I can see you loving this.
Timeless is indeed a beauty of a book, with glossy photos and clear, concise ‘how to’ steps to recreate the styles and make-up from the early years, and the jazz-age flapper 1930s right up to the 1980s and beyond.
I’m a fan of the sixties, Jean Shrimpton, Twiggy models, and designer Mary Quant, who all influenced the UK and made London an icon fashion hub back in the day. So I really liked how there was quite a chunk dedicated to this (and other) hairstyle and make-up periods. I wish I was old enough to have lived in this era!
It’s also amazing to see just how long brands like Max Factor, Yardley, Ponds, Elizabeth Arden and Revlon have been going. And sad to read how much of the make-up was bought from much-loved shops like Woolworths, which I do remember! (The shop, not buying make-up in the 60s!)
The cultural revolution of the 1960s saw innovative make-up formulations produced, boundaries being pushed and the youthful Swinging London scene influencing looks all over the world. ?????????”
Put together by renowned film, television and make-up artist Louise Young, along with leading film industry hairstylist Loulia Sheppard, this is an outstanding book full of tips, tricks and stunning photos. Whether you’re a fashion guru or just like this as a coffee table book, it’s definitely a conversation starter.
Timeless is indeed a beauty of a book, with glossy photos and clear, concise ‘how to’ steps to recreate the styles and make-up from the early years, and the jazz-age flapper 1930s right up to the 1980s and beyond.
I’m a fan of the sixties, Jean Shrimpton, Twiggy models, and designer Mary Quant, who all influenced the UK and made London an icon fashion hub back in the day. So I really liked how there was quite a chunk dedicated to this (and other) hairstyle and make-up periods. I wish I was old enough to have lived in this era!
It’s also amazing to see just how long brands like Max Factor, Yardley, Ponds, Elizabeth Arden and Revlon have been going. And sad to read how much of the make-up was bought from much-loved shops like Woolworths, which I do remember! (The shop, not buying make-up in the 60s!)
The cultural revolution of the 1960s saw innovative make-up formulations produced, boundaries being pushed and the youthful Swinging London scene influencing looks all over the world. ?????????”
Put together by renowned film, television and make-up artist Louise Young, along with leading film industry hairstylist Loulia Sheppard, this is an outstanding book full of tips, tricks and stunning photos. Whether you’re a fashion guru or just like this as a coffee table book, it’s definitely a conversation starter.
Art is Dead: The asdf Book
Book
In 2008, Thomas "TomSka" Ridgewell uploaded a short animated film to YouTube; he called it...
The Cinema of Cuba: Contemporary Film and the Legacy of the Revolution
Ann Marie Stock, Guy Baron and Antonio Alvarez Pitaluga
Book
Contemporary Cuba is opening up to the rest of the world. Its colonial past and the Communist...
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992) in Movies
Mar 9, 2019
Stays true to the book
This is by far the best adaptation of Bram Stoker’s Dracula novel and aside from the hilarious Dracula: Dead and Loving It, there has never been a decent Dracula film since. The fact that it stays true to the novel is the best thing about this, there’s very little difference between this and the book and I’m so grateful about this. The effects are very old school and in parts a little bit cheesy and very dated watching it back now, but I think that’s part of the charm. It was made in the early 90s after all.
Gary Oldman does a fantastic performance and Anthony Hopkins too is wonderful as Van Helsing, and it’s these two that really make this film as good as it is. The rest of the cast range from good (Richard E Grant), unremarkable (Cary Elwes), to downright awful. And yes, I am talking about Keanu Reeves. I know he was a big star when this was made, but he really is a terrible actor. And he’s even worse when he’s trying to put on a horrendous English accent. I wish they’d have found a decent actor to play Harker, if they had I would’ve scored this a little higher!
Gary Oldman does a fantastic performance and Anthony Hopkins too is wonderful as Van Helsing, and it’s these two that really make this film as good as it is. The rest of the cast range from good (Richard E Grant), unremarkable (Cary Elwes), to downright awful. And yes, I am talking about Keanu Reeves. I know he was a big star when this was made, but he really is a terrible actor. And he’s even worse when he’s trying to put on a horrendous English accent. I wish they’d have found a decent actor to play Harker, if they had I would’ve scored this a little higher!
CONFLICT - the Insiders' Guide to Storytelling in Factual/reality TV & Film: The C.O.N.F.L.I.C.T Toolkit for TV and Film Producers
Book
"The recipe book of great television from one of the best TV makers in the world" Jamie Oliver Story...
Veronica Pena (690 KP) rated The Perks of Being a Wallflower (2012) in Movies
Feb 10, 2020
I firmly believe that this is one of the best movies on the face of the planet. Anyone who knows me and knows my reviews knows how much it bothers me when film adaptations are so bad or so off or they just lose everything the book had. The exact opposite happens here. I think what makes this movie so good and so well put together is that it's still Stephen's story. He wrote the book, then the screenplay, then he directed it so it was his entire vision coming to life on screen and it worked. I think if anyone else would've directed or wrote the script, it wouldn't have translated so well.
Additionally, this cast is phenomenal. Logan Lerman, Emma Watson, Ezra Miller, Nina Dobrev, Mae Whitman, Kate Walsh, Paul Rudd, it just works. There are some parts from the book that didn't make it to the screen and that definitely bummed me out - I wish we could've seen Bill and Charlie's relationship more because it was really important in the book and it provided a lot for Charlie in terms of safety and comfort. I also wish some of the lines were verbatim. When Sam gets mad at Charlie after truth or dare, in the book she says, "what the fuck is wrong with you?" while in the movie she says, "what the hell is wrong with you?" I know that it's not a huge difference but I think that would've landed so much better. Also when Charlie defends Patrick. In the book, he says, "If you ever do this again, I'll tell everyone and I'll tell everyone for real. If you come after him again, I'll blind you." or something along those lines and I think that would've been great, especially with how low and solid Logan gave the line in the film. Just small things like that, I wish would've made it to screen.
Regardless, this film and this story are incredible and worth watching at least once for everyone. The same goes for the book. A must-read.
Additionally, this cast is phenomenal. Logan Lerman, Emma Watson, Ezra Miller, Nina Dobrev, Mae Whitman, Kate Walsh, Paul Rudd, it just works. There are some parts from the book that didn't make it to the screen and that definitely bummed me out - I wish we could've seen Bill and Charlie's relationship more because it was really important in the book and it provided a lot for Charlie in terms of safety and comfort. I also wish some of the lines were verbatim. When Sam gets mad at Charlie after truth or dare, in the book she says, "what the fuck is wrong with you?" while in the movie she says, "what the hell is wrong with you?" I know that it's not a huge difference but I think that would've landed so much better. Also when Charlie defends Patrick. In the book, he says, "If you ever do this again, I'll tell everyone and I'll tell everyone for real. If you come after him again, I'll blind you." or something along those lines and I think that would've been great, especially with how low and solid Logan gave the line in the film. Just small things like that, I wish would've made it to screen.
Regardless, this film and this story are incredible and worth watching at least once for everyone. The same goes for the book. A must-read.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated John Carter (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Edgar Rice Burroughs is famous for literary creations that have inspired countless generations and given birth to numerous film and television projects. You would be hard-pressed to find anybody not familiar with Tarzan, one of Burrough’s great series. John Carter of Mars is another one, and at long last has finally made it to the big screen.
The film is based on the first book of eleven, a series that began in 1911 and ran through 1964 when the last book was published posthumously. John Carter stars Tylor Kitsch as the title character, a bitter Civil War veteran who, despite an accomplished service record, no longer wants anything to do with the military. Instead he is fixated upon finding a cave of gold.
Despite the fact that he served for the Confederacy, John Carter draws the attention of the U.S. Cavalry whose leader is anxious to recruit an officer of Carter’s skills and experience to aid them in their skirmishes with the Apache tribes. No longer willing to fight or get involved, Carter declines the offer but soon finds himself caught in the middle of an unplanned battle between both sides. As he attempts to find shelter for himself and a wounded officer, Carter accidentally stumbles upon the cave of gold he was seeking.
Carter’s surprise soon turns to shock when he’s attacked by a mysterious individual who presses a glowing amulet in his hand and utters a phrase that transports John Carter instantly to the planet Mars. Of course, Carter at first has no idea where he is but soon realizes that he has incredible leaping abilities due to the lower gravity of the planet.
Shortly after his arrival he gains the attention of Tars Tarkas (Willem Dafoe), the chief of a race of tall, skinny, four armed alien warriors. At first intrigued by Carter, Tarkas and his people become divided over what to do with the new arrival. This becomes further complicated when airships arrive and begin a massive gunbattle. Carter immediately leaps into action with his newfound ability which quickly gains the attention of Dejah Thoris (Lynn Collins), princess of the city of Helium.
It is learned that Princess Dejah is being forced to marry an evil warlord who possesses an awesome destructive ability and is using it to subjugate all those he encounters. Desperate to save their city, the princess is offered up to appease the warlord. Naturally this does not sit well with the free-spirited and feisty princess and before long she and John Carter find themselves united in their quest to save Helium. Despite his reluctance to get involved and fight, Carter realizes the princess may be his only way to get home.
A stranger in a strange land, with danger all around him, John Carter takes his audience on an epic adventure. Despite having little star power, the movie works exceptionally well with amazing special effects. The CGI used to create the various alien characters infuses them with personality and vitality rarely seen in artificially created characters. The film is visually spectacular from the legions of aliens locked in combat, to the stark splendor of the planet and its inhabitants.
Even though the film was presented in converted 3-D which, as many of you will know has long been a very touchy subject with me, the final product was actually better than most conversions. While it was nowhere near the quality of films shot in 3-D, it nonetheless offered an immersive quality to epic battle scenes and did not rely on the gimmicky trick of trying to make things pop out of the screen in order to sell the film.
Kitsch does a great job handling the action of the film and manages to interact with his CGI costars in a believable enough manner to establish as much chemistry with them as he did with the flesh and blood Collins. Although some moments of the film drag, it does have enough action to sustain the nearly two-hour runtime with a touch of humor and romance thrown in for good measure.
I first became aware of the film a year ago at the D23 Expo when Disney showed a few clips and had Kitsch, Collins and Dafoeon hand to promote the pending release. While intriguing, I did not see anything that really made the film stand out as a must-see. I am very happy to say that upon seeing the completed film, the scenes that were shown to us not only had even greater effects in the finished product but were also much more entertaining and dynamic once shown within the full context of the story line.
Director Andrew Stanton, who has made a name for himself with his animated films at Pixar, skillfully blends live-action and CGI to create a very energetic and enjoyable action-adventure film that was a very pleasant surprise.
While the acting, character development, and plot are nothing spectacular in and of themselves, they combined well and set the stage effectively for what should be a series of John Carter films in the future.
The film is based on the first book of eleven, a series that began in 1911 and ran through 1964 when the last book was published posthumously. John Carter stars Tylor Kitsch as the title character, a bitter Civil War veteran who, despite an accomplished service record, no longer wants anything to do with the military. Instead he is fixated upon finding a cave of gold.
Despite the fact that he served for the Confederacy, John Carter draws the attention of the U.S. Cavalry whose leader is anxious to recruit an officer of Carter’s skills and experience to aid them in their skirmishes with the Apache tribes. No longer willing to fight or get involved, Carter declines the offer but soon finds himself caught in the middle of an unplanned battle between both sides. As he attempts to find shelter for himself and a wounded officer, Carter accidentally stumbles upon the cave of gold he was seeking.
Carter’s surprise soon turns to shock when he’s attacked by a mysterious individual who presses a glowing amulet in his hand and utters a phrase that transports John Carter instantly to the planet Mars. Of course, Carter at first has no idea where he is but soon realizes that he has incredible leaping abilities due to the lower gravity of the planet.
Shortly after his arrival he gains the attention of Tars Tarkas (Willem Dafoe), the chief of a race of tall, skinny, four armed alien warriors. At first intrigued by Carter, Tarkas and his people become divided over what to do with the new arrival. This becomes further complicated when airships arrive and begin a massive gunbattle. Carter immediately leaps into action with his newfound ability which quickly gains the attention of Dejah Thoris (Lynn Collins), princess of the city of Helium.
It is learned that Princess Dejah is being forced to marry an evil warlord who possesses an awesome destructive ability and is using it to subjugate all those he encounters. Desperate to save their city, the princess is offered up to appease the warlord. Naturally this does not sit well with the free-spirited and feisty princess and before long she and John Carter find themselves united in their quest to save Helium. Despite his reluctance to get involved and fight, Carter realizes the princess may be his only way to get home.
A stranger in a strange land, with danger all around him, John Carter takes his audience on an epic adventure. Despite having little star power, the movie works exceptionally well with amazing special effects. The CGI used to create the various alien characters infuses them with personality and vitality rarely seen in artificially created characters. The film is visually spectacular from the legions of aliens locked in combat, to the stark splendor of the planet and its inhabitants.
Even though the film was presented in converted 3-D which, as many of you will know has long been a very touchy subject with me, the final product was actually better than most conversions. While it was nowhere near the quality of films shot in 3-D, it nonetheless offered an immersive quality to epic battle scenes and did not rely on the gimmicky trick of trying to make things pop out of the screen in order to sell the film.
Kitsch does a great job handling the action of the film and manages to interact with his CGI costars in a believable enough manner to establish as much chemistry with them as he did with the flesh and blood Collins. Although some moments of the film drag, it does have enough action to sustain the nearly two-hour runtime with a touch of humor and romance thrown in for good measure.
I first became aware of the film a year ago at the D23 Expo when Disney showed a few clips and had Kitsch, Collins and Dafoeon hand to promote the pending release. While intriguing, I did not see anything that really made the film stand out as a must-see. I am very happy to say that upon seeing the completed film, the scenes that were shown to us not only had even greater effects in the finished product but were also much more entertaining and dynamic once shown within the full context of the story line.
Director Andrew Stanton, who has made a name for himself with his animated films at Pixar, skillfully blends live-action and CGI to create a very energetic and enjoyable action-adventure film that was a very pleasant surprise.
While the acting, character development, and plot are nothing spectacular in and of themselves, they combined well and set the stage effectively for what should be a series of John Carter films in the future.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Nosferatu (Eine Symphonie Des Grauens) (1922) in Movies
Jan 28, 2021
Hugely influential unauthorised adaptation of Dracula. Young estate agent's helper Hutter trots off to Transylvania to oversee the sale of a house to the reclusive (and rather repulsive) Count Orlok; Orlok takes a fancy to Hutter's wife; bad things ensue.
Basically just handles the first half of the book, and bolts a different ending on, but you can still see why the Stoker estate sued. Nevertheless, the presentation of Dracula/Orlok as a near-feral atavism is striking (and also much closer to the book than most films get); the film was designed by practising occultists which may explain the carefully composed visual sense of it (also the use of genuine magical script in some of the scenes). Very creepy and effective, though you have to take the age of the thing into account, not to mention the performance styles. Which soundtrack you listen to may also make a big difference (I recommend James Bernard's Hammer-style offering from the late 1990s). One of the great foundational horror films.
Basically just handles the first half of the book, and bolts a different ending on, but you can still see why the Stoker estate sued. Nevertheless, the presentation of Dracula/Orlok as a near-feral atavism is striking (and also much closer to the book than most films get); the film was designed by practising occultists which may explain the carefully composed visual sense of it (also the use of genuine magical script in some of the scenes). Very creepy and effective, though you have to take the age of the thing into account, not to mention the performance styles. Which soundtrack you listen to may also make a big difference (I recommend James Bernard's Hammer-style offering from the late 1990s). One of the great foundational horror films.