Search
Search results
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated Nights in Rodanthe in Books
Jan 25, 2019
Nights in Rodanthe
Nicholas Sparks is the romance genius. He is able to create stories of people falling in love, like no author I have read a book from yet. He puts so much emotion and feeling into the pages, that after one of his books, reading another romance seems boring.
Having read almost all of his books, I decided to finish all the ones I haven’t read, and when I suddenly encountered this one in the library, I told myself – ‘’Hey, why not?’’
The synopsis was intriguing, as all of his books are, but unlike the others, Nights in Rodanthe left me disappointed. With his books – this was the first time I ever felt like that. And that is why I need to mention this.
First of all, the story is very predictable. Too predictable – even. I knew what was going to happen from the very first chapters, and I was expecting at least a little bit of a plot twist, but nothing really happened.
Secondly, the romance was fake. The falling in love part? I didn’t see it. I just can’t imagine people falling in love in three days. I am sorry – but it is impossible. Crush, interest, lust, someone paying attention to you, and you feeling goosebumps – I can understand it all. But in three days, I can’t imagine anyone falling so deeply for one another, that you can’t look at another person ever again, and they are all you think about, all day.
Honestly – how well can you get to know a person in three days? Will you get to know the real person? When you’ve never seen them sad, angry, how they behave in company, how they behave when drunk, when upset, when they are doing daily chores, like going at work (note – this all happened while they were sort-of on vacation).
I can remember how many summers I have spent going on vacation for ten days, and thinking I was in love with someone. I am sure you have gone through the same.
So, knowing all this above, I just couldn’t feel for these people as I used to feel with many from Sparks’s characters in other books. And don’t judge me, that this would be the sole reason why I rate this book the way I do. After all, it’s a romance novel.
On the other side though – it is an emotional novel. If you, for a moment forget how fast this romance happened and how unreal it is, the story is going to deeply hurt your soul, and crush you into pieces. Fake romance or not, you are going to shed a few tears for sure.
To wrap this up – I didn’t like it. I am not into fake, impossible romance. But this book seems to be a hit or miss, so if you like Nicholas Sparks – I still encourage you to read it. You never know, it might be your favourite book from him so far.
Having read almost all of his books, I decided to finish all the ones I haven’t read, and when I suddenly encountered this one in the library, I told myself – ‘’Hey, why not?’’
The synopsis was intriguing, as all of his books are, but unlike the others, Nights in Rodanthe left me disappointed. With his books – this was the first time I ever felt like that. And that is why I need to mention this.
First of all, the story is very predictable. Too predictable – even. I knew what was going to happen from the very first chapters, and I was expecting at least a little bit of a plot twist, but nothing really happened.
Secondly, the romance was fake. The falling in love part? I didn’t see it. I just can’t imagine people falling in love in three days. I am sorry – but it is impossible. Crush, interest, lust, someone paying attention to you, and you feeling goosebumps – I can understand it all. But in three days, I can’t imagine anyone falling so deeply for one another, that you can’t look at another person ever again, and they are all you think about, all day.
Honestly – how well can you get to know a person in three days? Will you get to know the real person? When you’ve never seen them sad, angry, how they behave in company, how they behave when drunk, when upset, when they are doing daily chores, like going at work (note – this all happened while they were sort-of on vacation).
I can remember how many summers I have spent going on vacation for ten days, and thinking I was in love with someone. I am sure you have gone through the same.
So, knowing all this above, I just couldn’t feel for these people as I used to feel with many from Sparks’s characters in other books. And don’t judge me, that this would be the sole reason why I rate this book the way I do. After all, it’s a romance novel.
On the other side though – it is an emotional novel. If you, for a moment forget how fast this romance happened and how unreal it is, the story is going to deeply hurt your soul, and crush you into pieces. Fake romance or not, you are going to shed a few tears for sure.
To wrap this up – I didn’t like it. I am not into fake, impossible romance. But this book seems to be a hit or miss, so if you like Nicholas Sparks – I still encourage you to read it. You never know, it might be your favourite book from him so far.
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated The Moonstone in Books
Nov 20, 2019
Of all the books I had to read at school, The Moonstone was probably the only novel I really enjoyed. It is one of the first 'whodunnit' type of books and, remarkably, it manages to hit virtually every requirement of the genre dead centre. If this book was written today, it would still be a classic.
The Moonstone of the title is a rare yellow diamond, stolen from an Indian shrine by colonialists. Thought to be unlucky it is left to the young Rachel Verinder. The night after her 18th birthday party the stone is stolen from her rooms, and the rest of the novel describes how the various players eventually manage to solve the crime.
The plot features twists and turns galore, false trails and red herrings enough for two detective stories. Although the crime involved is 'only' theft rather than the more usual murder it is no less engaging as a story. The characters are well drawn and - social reformer that Collins was - there are strong women and intelligent and interesting servants as well as the landed gentry and philanthropists that inhabit the world of country estates in the mid 19th century that the novel is set in.
One feature of the book is that the story is told from the viewpoint of a number of the players. Firstly (and for nearly half the book) we are introduced to the Verinders and the theft by Gabriel Betteredge, a long serving family retainer who is head of the staff and a sort of de facto butler. Betteredge's narrative is charming and witty, full of dry asides and observations. His habit of picking passages from Robinson Crusoe and applying them to daily life is a quirk that is completely in keeping with his character.
Once the story moves to London, the narrative is taken up by various other characters, sometimes just for a short journal entry, sometimes for extended periods of time. Collins imbues each of these parts with a different voice really skillfully, keeping each character very separate.
The solution to the mystery of who stole the diamond and why is convoluted but also very simple. The whole story is well crafted and fits together really well.
The only negative points really are those imposed on Collins by the time he was writing this. There is an overlong introduction about the diamond in India (it seems that in Victorian novels the long winded introduction is somehow expected by the reader) and the pace slows somewhat in London as there is a lot of description about the character's social standings and financial affairs that just aren't as relevant today.
Nevertheless this really is as good a book as I remember. I certainly rate Collins a lot higher than Charles Dickens as a writer. Definitely recommended for anyone who likes a detective mystery which will keep the reader guessing until the very end.
The Moonstone of the title is a rare yellow diamond, stolen from an Indian shrine by colonialists. Thought to be unlucky it is left to the young Rachel Verinder. The night after her 18th birthday party the stone is stolen from her rooms, and the rest of the novel describes how the various players eventually manage to solve the crime.
The plot features twists and turns galore, false trails and red herrings enough for two detective stories. Although the crime involved is 'only' theft rather than the more usual murder it is no less engaging as a story. The characters are well drawn and - social reformer that Collins was - there are strong women and intelligent and interesting servants as well as the landed gentry and philanthropists that inhabit the world of country estates in the mid 19th century that the novel is set in.
One feature of the book is that the story is told from the viewpoint of a number of the players. Firstly (and for nearly half the book) we are introduced to the Verinders and the theft by Gabriel Betteredge, a long serving family retainer who is head of the staff and a sort of de facto butler. Betteredge's narrative is charming and witty, full of dry asides and observations. His habit of picking passages from Robinson Crusoe and applying them to daily life is a quirk that is completely in keeping with his character.
Once the story moves to London, the narrative is taken up by various other characters, sometimes just for a short journal entry, sometimes for extended periods of time. Collins imbues each of these parts with a different voice really skillfully, keeping each character very separate.
The solution to the mystery of who stole the diamond and why is convoluted but also very simple. The whole story is well crafted and fits together really well.
The only negative points really are those imposed on Collins by the time he was writing this. There is an overlong introduction about the diamond in India (it seems that in Victorian novels the long winded introduction is somehow expected by the reader) and the pace slows somewhat in London as there is a lot of description about the character's social standings and financial affairs that just aren't as relevant today.
Nevertheless this really is as good a book as I remember. I certainly rate Collins a lot higher than Charles Dickens as a writer. Definitely recommended for anyone who likes a detective mystery which will keep the reader guessing until the very end.
JT (287 KP) rated Sleep Tight (2011) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Jaume Balagueró brought terror to our screens with [Rec] in 2007, a tightly filmed horror set inside the walls of an apartment block over run with flesh eating zombies.
In Sleep Tight Balagueró again goes back inside an apartment block, this time the zombies are replaced by normal residents and a concierge with a sinister secret. César (Luis Tosar) is unhappy, and has been pretty much all his life, from the opening shot we see him standing on a ledge high above the streets preparing himself to drop to the concrete below.
He goes about his daily business with meticulous routine greeting the residents with a wry smile and engaging them in conversation day to day, but deep down he loathes it.It seems that his quest is to make others just as unhappy as he is, with main target being the gorgeous Clara (Marta Etura). Initially César seems pleasant enough, he’s polite and courteous and is always making himself available to those who need his help, whether it’s from feeding dogs to fumigating apartments.
It’s when we finally see him under Clara’s bed lying in wait that you realize that Balagueró is about to deliver us a 21st century boogieman. The lengths that César will go to to put Clara in harm’s way will leave you with your jaw open. The idea being that he wants to break her, “we’ll wipe that smile off her face,” he tells his bed ridden mother in hospital.
This almost nods right away to a Hitchcockian feel to the film, think of César as the Spanish version of Norman Bates without the dress, although at one point he does toy with the idea of using a large kitchen knife. During his torment of poor Clara he infests her house with bugs, injects things into her moisturizing products and even goes so far as to sleep in the same bed, with a little help from chloroform.
It would be unfair to explain anything more as it would give too much of the story away, and when Clara’s boyfriend Marcos arrives on the scene things only get worse. During the film you almost feel sorry for César and you’d be guilty for feeling anything but admiration towards him, at his dedication the very least.
It’s a voyeuristic nightmare, more so for the audience as Clara doesn’t really have much of a clue what is going on. Even when César is caught in the apartment during one of the films more gripping scenes he has an embarrassed excuse.
Balagueró proves to critics that he can capture as much tension and suspense through conventional cameras as opposed to the point of view of a hand held camcorder, which he used so effectively throughout [Rec] and its sequel.
Sleep Tight is an edgy slow burning thriller, a different take on the horror genre that will leave you gasping after the final act.
In Sleep Tight Balagueró again goes back inside an apartment block, this time the zombies are replaced by normal residents and a concierge with a sinister secret. César (Luis Tosar) is unhappy, and has been pretty much all his life, from the opening shot we see him standing on a ledge high above the streets preparing himself to drop to the concrete below.
He goes about his daily business with meticulous routine greeting the residents with a wry smile and engaging them in conversation day to day, but deep down he loathes it.It seems that his quest is to make others just as unhappy as he is, with main target being the gorgeous Clara (Marta Etura). Initially César seems pleasant enough, he’s polite and courteous and is always making himself available to those who need his help, whether it’s from feeding dogs to fumigating apartments.
It’s when we finally see him under Clara’s bed lying in wait that you realize that Balagueró is about to deliver us a 21st century boogieman. The lengths that César will go to to put Clara in harm’s way will leave you with your jaw open. The idea being that he wants to break her, “we’ll wipe that smile off her face,” he tells his bed ridden mother in hospital.
This almost nods right away to a Hitchcockian feel to the film, think of César as the Spanish version of Norman Bates without the dress, although at one point he does toy with the idea of using a large kitchen knife. During his torment of poor Clara he infests her house with bugs, injects things into her moisturizing products and even goes so far as to sleep in the same bed, with a little help from chloroform.
It would be unfair to explain anything more as it would give too much of the story away, and when Clara’s boyfriend Marcos arrives on the scene things only get worse. During the film you almost feel sorry for César and you’d be guilty for feeling anything but admiration towards him, at his dedication the very least.
It’s a voyeuristic nightmare, more so for the audience as Clara doesn’t really have much of a clue what is going on. Even when César is caught in the apartment during one of the films more gripping scenes he has an embarrassed excuse.
Balagueró proves to critics that he can capture as much tension and suspense through conventional cameras as opposed to the point of view of a hand held camcorder, which he used so effectively throughout [Rec] and its sequel.
Sleep Tight is an edgy slow burning thriller, a different take on the horror genre that will leave you gasping after the final act.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Broken Hearts Gallery (2020) in Movies
Oct 8, 2020
Lucy (Geraldine Viswanathan) works in a very well-known art gallery owned by the ever so extraordinary Eva Woolf (Bernadette Peters). It has been a dream of hers since she was very young to work as a curator in a gallery and she is starting as an assistant at “The Woolf”.
She has been seeing Max (Utkarsh Ambudkar), the gallery curator for a while. Helping him with information on the artists as well as the likes and dislikes of Eva. On the night of the latest show launch, Eva asks Lucy to step to the podium and introduce Max so he could open the show. In a matter of minutes, Lucy loses her job and is dumped.
Lucy, having been through a traumatic loss, mistakenly hops into a stranger’s car under the assumption that it was her uber. She then proceeds to tell the driver of her night of disaster without registering that she is in the car of a stranger that is not her uber driver. Come to find out, the driver, Nick (Dacre Montgomery) is a budding hotelier trying to build a small boutique hotel.
He drops her off at the apartment, where her roommates immediately cocoon her in a dance that they have done oh so many times.
She has known Nadine (Phillipa Soo) and Amanda (Molly Gordon) since they were in high school. This trio is the partner in crime type of best friends. The interactions between them is so well coordinated I believed that they have been the closest of friends for ages. The same goes for Nick and his best friend Marcos (Arturo Castro).
.This film is the perfect Romantic Comedy that is very well suited for this moment in time.
It is a well-deserved salve on the dearth of darkness in cinema as of late. The lines are funny, the timing of the responses, quick and clever. It is also quirky and charming as well as emotional and sweet.
Natalie Krinsky, the Writer and Director had cast the characters perfectly. The actors drew me into the film as I laughed at their escapades, vicariously experienced celebrations. This movie was a joy to watch. It was sweet, funny, clever, and heartwarming.
Viswanathan embodied Lucy. The character is of the modern twenty something woman in hipsterville. She showed that Lucy is intelligent, imperfect and at times, insecure, but she is brave and willing to forge through anything.
The soundtrack is fantastic, the songs support the scenes and it is a veritable list of the current pop artists that are played in daily rotation.
Beyonce, Taylor Swift, Halsey, Rita Ora, Ariana Grande, and Selena Gomez who is an executive producer on the film.
If this is the direction of the modern romantic comedy, I look forward to the development of this genre as it grows. I rarely want to watch most films a second time. If you like the Romcom, this is one that is thoroughly enjoyable. Well worth the time and the ticket.
She has been seeing Max (Utkarsh Ambudkar), the gallery curator for a while. Helping him with information on the artists as well as the likes and dislikes of Eva. On the night of the latest show launch, Eva asks Lucy to step to the podium and introduce Max so he could open the show. In a matter of minutes, Lucy loses her job and is dumped.
Lucy, having been through a traumatic loss, mistakenly hops into a stranger’s car under the assumption that it was her uber. She then proceeds to tell the driver of her night of disaster without registering that she is in the car of a stranger that is not her uber driver. Come to find out, the driver, Nick (Dacre Montgomery) is a budding hotelier trying to build a small boutique hotel.
He drops her off at the apartment, where her roommates immediately cocoon her in a dance that they have done oh so many times.
She has known Nadine (Phillipa Soo) and Amanda (Molly Gordon) since they were in high school. This trio is the partner in crime type of best friends. The interactions between them is so well coordinated I believed that they have been the closest of friends for ages. The same goes for Nick and his best friend Marcos (Arturo Castro).
.This film is the perfect Romantic Comedy that is very well suited for this moment in time.
It is a well-deserved salve on the dearth of darkness in cinema as of late. The lines are funny, the timing of the responses, quick and clever. It is also quirky and charming as well as emotional and sweet.
Natalie Krinsky, the Writer and Director had cast the characters perfectly. The actors drew me into the film as I laughed at their escapades, vicariously experienced celebrations. This movie was a joy to watch. It was sweet, funny, clever, and heartwarming.
Viswanathan embodied Lucy. The character is of the modern twenty something woman in hipsterville. She showed that Lucy is intelligent, imperfect and at times, insecure, but she is brave and willing to forge through anything.
The soundtrack is fantastic, the songs support the scenes and it is a veritable list of the current pop artists that are played in daily rotation.
Beyonce, Taylor Swift, Halsey, Rita Ora, Ariana Grande, and Selena Gomez who is an executive producer on the film.
If this is the direction of the modern romantic comedy, I look forward to the development of this genre as it grows. I rarely want to watch most films a second time. If you like the Romcom, this is one that is thoroughly enjoyable. Well worth the time and the ticket.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Battle of the Sexes (2016) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
1972: Billie Jean King (played brilliantly by Emma Stone) just became the Grand Slam Champion of the Women’s Tennis Association. She had challenged the inequity of pay between the Men’s and Women’s Tennis Tour. Once she learns that the tournament for the Lawn Tennis Association is paying Women one eighth of the Men’s purse. She goes up against Jack Kramer (Bill Pullman at his misogynistic best). Billie, with her Manager, Gladys Heldman (Sarah Silverman in spectacular form echoing a more subdued version of Bobbie Fleckman) leave the LTA and start their own Women’s Tour. Which became the Virginia Slims tournament.
Around the same time, Bobby (Steve Carell, playing Riggs like a manic Pagliacci) the once Pro Slam Champion who now works in a nondescript office at his father-in-law’s business. Bobby, the dreamer, is a gambler figuratively and literally. The man who’s inner child has taken the reins on the run. He is the clown who needs constant attention, and the showman who could sell the Golden Gate. Carell, gives an exceptional performance, riling us up with cringe-worthy moments and showing us the man that is so certain of his abilities that he forgets the fable of the tortoise and the hare.
We are brought into relationships that these two athletes have with their families and loved ones. Of what they went through before the epic, world famous Battle of the Sexes in the Houston Astrodome. The film serves us a picture of the time where women had recently began the feminine movement and Women’s Liberation. The entire feel of the movie is set solidly in the seventies, the sexism rampant and accepted as the status quo. Misogyny is socially acceptable and Riggs and friends epitomize the attitude.
There is also the story of Billie Jean, realizing an attraction to a woman she meets before the starting her tour. Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough was magnetic), the hairdresser that was instantly drawn to Billie. We also get the treat of seeing the magnificent Alan Cumming as Ted, the charming designer of the women’s fantastic tennis outfits. Wallace Langham as Henry, the tailor.
The story is built up to the historic Battle of the Sexes at the Astrodome. We see the work that Billie does in preparation. Daily drills and practice games. Bobby’s confidence in his ability to deliver a win that mirrored the decimation of Margaret Court (Jessica McNamee) who at the time was the top female tennis player in the world.
The directing duo of Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris (Little Miss Sunshine) delivers us a well balanced, heartfelt film with a stellar cast. The soundtrack brings us into the early seventies and the costuming is quantum leap back to the time where polyester leisure suits and colorful shirts were the height of fashion. This is a love story of Billie Jean King and Tennis
Around the same time, Bobby (Steve Carell, playing Riggs like a manic Pagliacci) the once Pro Slam Champion who now works in a nondescript office at his father-in-law’s business. Bobby, the dreamer, is a gambler figuratively and literally. The man who’s inner child has taken the reins on the run. He is the clown who needs constant attention, and the showman who could sell the Golden Gate. Carell, gives an exceptional performance, riling us up with cringe-worthy moments and showing us the man that is so certain of his abilities that he forgets the fable of the tortoise and the hare.
We are brought into relationships that these two athletes have with their families and loved ones. Of what they went through before the epic, world famous Battle of the Sexes in the Houston Astrodome. The film serves us a picture of the time where women had recently began the feminine movement and Women’s Liberation. The entire feel of the movie is set solidly in the seventies, the sexism rampant and accepted as the status quo. Misogyny is socially acceptable and Riggs and friends epitomize the attitude.
There is also the story of Billie Jean, realizing an attraction to a woman she meets before the starting her tour. Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough was magnetic), the hairdresser that was instantly drawn to Billie. We also get the treat of seeing the magnificent Alan Cumming as Ted, the charming designer of the women’s fantastic tennis outfits. Wallace Langham as Henry, the tailor.
The story is built up to the historic Battle of the Sexes at the Astrodome. We see the work that Billie does in preparation. Daily drills and practice games. Bobby’s confidence in his ability to deliver a win that mirrored the decimation of Margaret Court (Jessica McNamee) who at the time was the top female tennis player in the world.
The directing duo of Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris (Little Miss Sunshine) delivers us a well balanced, heartfelt film with a stellar cast. The soundtrack brings us into the early seventies and the costuming is quantum leap back to the time where polyester leisure suits and colorful shirts were the height of fashion. This is a love story of Billie Jean King and Tennis
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Free Guy (2021) in Movies
Dec 14, 2021 (Updated Dec 14, 2021)
Taika Waititi. (2 more)
The cameos.
Impressive special effects.
Not as funny as it could have been. (2 more)
Love being the "hokey" solution.
Mouser.
Artificial Excellence
Filmed in 2019 and finally seeing release after five separate delays from its original July 2020 premiere date, Free Guy is a sci-fi action comedy directed by Shawn Levy (Real Steal, the Night at the Museum trilogy) and written by Matt Lieberman (Scoob!) and Zak Penn (Ready Player One), which follows the life of Guy (Ryan Reynolds), an NPC that and lives and works as a bank teller in Free City.
Completely content with every day being exactly the same as the day before, Guy’s life is changed forever following a chance encounter with a ‘Sunglasses Person’ (the film’s term for player characters) named Molotov Girl (Jodie Comer).
An homage to Grand Theft Auto’s Vice City, with some elements from Fortnite sprinkled in for good measure, Free City is located within a video game of the same name, and boasts a population of various NPCs (non-player characters) as they go through their daily routines completely unaware that they’re stuck within the confines of a video game.
These NPCs cater to the whim of the Sunglasses People, who are seen as unapproachable heroes, but in actuality are just players from the real world who want to loot, steal, and cause chaos in order to achieve virtual richness in free city.
Ryan Reynolds’ real-life demeanor and sense of humor are so similar to his portrayal of Deadpool that almost anything Reynolds has done since 2016 has undoubtedly reminded you of The Merc With A Mouth.
To that end, in Free Guy, Reynolds’ narration of his own story, combined with the film’s explosive action, will definitely have filmgoers reminiscing about Marvel’s pair of R-rated X-men spin-offs – an inevitable circumstance of being a successful actor and allowing oneself to be typecast into roles similar to their most popular one.
While there are some laugh out loud moments in Free Guy, the “Oh, he found the button,” scene being the most notable, the film simply isn’t as funny as you think it’s going to be.
There’s no arguing that Free Guy is amusing to a certain extent, but its repeated gags and attempts at humor, more often than not, fall flat. Taika Waititi’s Antwan character, the man calling the shots when it comes to Free City’s game development, is a highlight of the film.
However, the promotional clip of Waititi’s outtakes released to hype the film, whose content supposedly made it into the film (spoiler alert: they didn’t), is better than any of Antwan’s actual lines of dialogue in the theatrical cut.
The cameos in Free Guy are some of the best surprises to stumble onto while seeing the film. They won’t be spoiled here, though some of them have been spoiled on the internet already, but there are a couple of really fun ones that are so much more entertaining if you go in not expecting them.
In fact, one of the lengthier such cameos, which extends across multiple scenes and features in several minutes of screen time, is a major source for hilarity in Free Guy.
The premise of Free Guy a A background character in a video game becomes sentient – is its most promising aspect. Guy, motivated by a desire to get more out of life than the daily routine he’s accustomed to, essentially betters himself simply because he wants to. In a way, it’s an I, Robot kind of concept burrito’d within a world that would fit within the walls of Ready Player One.
Surprisingly, given its filming before the outbreak of the pandemic, the film is also extremely relatable to how our reality is still under the thumb of an unpredictable coronavirus. Guy being trapped within the walls of Free City and wanting more out of life is an awfully similar sentiment to wanting everything back to normal after being stuck in months-long lockdowns.
Yet, Free Guy’s solid special effects, absurd humor, and surprisingly effective cameos are nearly derailed by how much time it devotes to the its love story.
Guy’s big awakening all comes down to finding the girl of his dreams, which then branches off into a different sort of relationship in the real world that was right under two character’s noses from the start. It feels like it was meant to be this sort of revelation in the film, but comes off as this, “Duh,” moment anyone besides the writers could have predicted.
Speaking of the film’s writing, the character of Mouser (Utkarsh Ambudkar) is so poorly written that it’s unbearable and exhausting.
A developer working alongside Antwan and Keys (Joe Kerry), Mouser comes off a rival to the later, acting like he can do Keys’ job better than Keys can and constantly breaking his balls from the moment he is introduced. Throughout the film, Mouser wants to do nothing more than whatever Antwan says, even if it’s morally reprehensible.
But, predictably, in the film’s final moments, Mouser is suddenly Keys’ best friend, wanting to do what’s right all for the sake of a happy ending.
Ultimately, while Free Guy has an amazing concept, it’s trapped within a massively underwhelming execution.
Admittedly, the film looks like it was an absolute blast to make, but also incredibly expensive. This tall budget, combined with public hesitancy to return to theaters and the Delta variant of COVID seemingly on the verge of backtracking all the progress we’ve made since the vaccine became readily available to the public, it makes you wonder if Free Guy has any sort of chance of making a respectable amount of money at the box office or even just breaking even.
Note: This was originally written when the film opened in theaters. Free Guy would go on to make $331.5 million on a $100-$125 million budget. A sequel is currently in the works.
Completely content with every day being exactly the same as the day before, Guy’s life is changed forever following a chance encounter with a ‘Sunglasses Person’ (the film’s term for player characters) named Molotov Girl (Jodie Comer).
An homage to Grand Theft Auto’s Vice City, with some elements from Fortnite sprinkled in for good measure, Free City is located within a video game of the same name, and boasts a population of various NPCs (non-player characters) as they go through their daily routines completely unaware that they’re stuck within the confines of a video game.
These NPCs cater to the whim of the Sunglasses People, who are seen as unapproachable heroes, but in actuality are just players from the real world who want to loot, steal, and cause chaos in order to achieve virtual richness in free city.
Ryan Reynolds’ real-life demeanor and sense of humor are so similar to his portrayal of Deadpool that almost anything Reynolds has done since 2016 has undoubtedly reminded you of The Merc With A Mouth.
To that end, in Free Guy, Reynolds’ narration of his own story, combined with the film’s explosive action, will definitely have filmgoers reminiscing about Marvel’s pair of R-rated X-men spin-offs – an inevitable circumstance of being a successful actor and allowing oneself to be typecast into roles similar to their most popular one.
While there are some laugh out loud moments in Free Guy, the “Oh, he found the button,” scene being the most notable, the film simply isn’t as funny as you think it’s going to be.
There’s no arguing that Free Guy is amusing to a certain extent, but its repeated gags and attempts at humor, more often than not, fall flat. Taika Waititi’s Antwan character, the man calling the shots when it comes to Free City’s game development, is a highlight of the film.
However, the promotional clip of Waititi’s outtakes released to hype the film, whose content supposedly made it into the film (spoiler alert: they didn’t), is better than any of Antwan’s actual lines of dialogue in the theatrical cut.
The cameos in Free Guy are some of the best surprises to stumble onto while seeing the film. They won’t be spoiled here, though some of them have been spoiled on the internet already, but there are a couple of really fun ones that are so much more entertaining if you go in not expecting them.
In fact, one of the lengthier such cameos, which extends across multiple scenes and features in several minutes of screen time, is a major source for hilarity in Free Guy.
The premise of Free Guy a A background character in a video game becomes sentient – is its most promising aspect. Guy, motivated by a desire to get more out of life than the daily routine he’s accustomed to, essentially betters himself simply because he wants to. In a way, it’s an I, Robot kind of concept burrito’d within a world that would fit within the walls of Ready Player One.
Surprisingly, given its filming before the outbreak of the pandemic, the film is also extremely relatable to how our reality is still under the thumb of an unpredictable coronavirus. Guy being trapped within the walls of Free City and wanting more out of life is an awfully similar sentiment to wanting everything back to normal after being stuck in months-long lockdowns.
Yet, Free Guy’s solid special effects, absurd humor, and surprisingly effective cameos are nearly derailed by how much time it devotes to the its love story.
Guy’s big awakening all comes down to finding the girl of his dreams, which then branches off into a different sort of relationship in the real world that was right under two character’s noses from the start. It feels like it was meant to be this sort of revelation in the film, but comes off as this, “Duh,” moment anyone besides the writers could have predicted.
Speaking of the film’s writing, the character of Mouser (Utkarsh Ambudkar) is so poorly written that it’s unbearable and exhausting.
A developer working alongside Antwan and Keys (Joe Kerry), Mouser comes off a rival to the later, acting like he can do Keys’ job better than Keys can and constantly breaking his balls from the moment he is introduced. Throughout the film, Mouser wants to do nothing more than whatever Antwan says, even if it’s morally reprehensible.
But, predictably, in the film’s final moments, Mouser is suddenly Keys’ best friend, wanting to do what’s right all for the sake of a happy ending.
Ultimately, while Free Guy has an amazing concept, it’s trapped within a massively underwhelming execution.
Admittedly, the film looks like it was an absolute blast to make, but also incredibly expensive. This tall budget, combined with public hesitancy to return to theaters and the Delta variant of COVID seemingly on the verge of backtracking all the progress we’ve made since the vaccine became readily available to the public, it makes you wonder if Free Guy has any sort of chance of making a respectable amount of money at the box office or even just breaking even.
Note: This was originally written when the film opened in theaters. Free Guy would go on to make $331.5 million on a $100-$125 million budget. A sequel is currently in the works.
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated The Mayo Clinic Diet Journal: A handy companion journal in Books
Apr 27, 2018
The Mayo Clinic Diet (and journal)
by the weight loss experts at Mayo Clinic
Genre: Health, self-help
Rating: 5
The Mayo Clinic Diet is a great book that guides you through a healthy way to loose weight. They focus on changing your eating habits, eating the right amount of the right thing, self control, self motivation, and staying healthy.
The word “Diet” has a bad reputation. People hear it and shutter. I don’t think Diet was the right word to use in the title of this book, I think they could have used something like “Health guide” or “lifestyle” because it’s not really a diet. Sure there are guides on what to eat, but there aren’t any super strict guidelines saying “don’t eat this” or “you must eat this.” This book is all about loosing weight right, and doing it healthfully.
The Mayo Clinic Diet asks some basic questions that get the reader thinking, like “why do you want to loose weight,” “what are your goals” etc. and the reason behind them. You really get down in to why you are bothering to change your body. Sure it’s good for you. But there are other reasons why people want to shape up. The Mayo Clinic Diet asks the right questions and gets you thinking so you can find your reasons, so you can find your motivation.
The actual “diet” part of this book is great. It talks about which foods to eat, which things to eat more of, which to eat less of, how to pick the right meat/cheese/milk etc. (note, for the sake of sharing with you a quick opinion, that the only thing I don’t agree with in the book is their view on skim milk. They recommend it. I don’t. It has no nutritional value, and you need whole milk, or low-fat at the least.). It talks about portion control (the key of weight loss!) and offers visual cues for identifying the right serving size, like “hockey puck” and “tennis ball” and “deck of cards” serving size, explains how to eat healthfully (yes there is a special way to eat!), gives advice on what to eat for snacks, lists exercise tips for beginners (easy to follow, not complicated or requiring equipment), and even identifies obstacles you may come across (excuses, habits, depressed thoughts etc.) , and strategies to get through them.
The journal is not necessary for the diet, but is a helpful tool that will guide you through the program. It follows the timeline given in the book, includes space for meal plans, weekly weigh-in, a section for goals and notes for the day, places to record what you ate, and habit tracker, and even a daily food pyramid checklist. It could even be used independently of the diet book, but I recommend using both together because the book has a lot of helpful information, and the journal is a motivating way to put it into action.
Recommendation: Anyone who needs to loose weight but is afraid of “another diet.” This is not the same diet you’re used to. Again, I think “diet” is the wrong word. This is a new lifestyle.
by the weight loss experts at Mayo Clinic
Genre: Health, self-help
Rating: 5
The Mayo Clinic Diet is a great book that guides you through a healthy way to loose weight. They focus on changing your eating habits, eating the right amount of the right thing, self control, self motivation, and staying healthy.
The word “Diet” has a bad reputation. People hear it and shutter. I don’t think Diet was the right word to use in the title of this book, I think they could have used something like “Health guide” or “lifestyle” because it’s not really a diet. Sure there are guides on what to eat, but there aren’t any super strict guidelines saying “don’t eat this” or “you must eat this.” This book is all about loosing weight right, and doing it healthfully.
The Mayo Clinic Diet asks some basic questions that get the reader thinking, like “why do you want to loose weight,” “what are your goals” etc. and the reason behind them. You really get down in to why you are bothering to change your body. Sure it’s good for you. But there are other reasons why people want to shape up. The Mayo Clinic Diet asks the right questions and gets you thinking so you can find your reasons, so you can find your motivation.
The actual “diet” part of this book is great. It talks about which foods to eat, which things to eat more of, which to eat less of, how to pick the right meat/cheese/milk etc. (note, for the sake of sharing with you a quick opinion, that the only thing I don’t agree with in the book is their view on skim milk. They recommend it. I don’t. It has no nutritional value, and you need whole milk, or low-fat at the least.). It talks about portion control (the key of weight loss!) and offers visual cues for identifying the right serving size, like “hockey puck” and “tennis ball” and “deck of cards” serving size, explains how to eat healthfully (yes there is a special way to eat!), gives advice on what to eat for snacks, lists exercise tips for beginners (easy to follow, not complicated or requiring equipment), and even identifies obstacles you may come across (excuses, habits, depressed thoughts etc.) , and strategies to get through them.
The journal is not necessary for the diet, but is a helpful tool that will guide you through the program. It follows the timeline given in the book, includes space for meal plans, weekly weigh-in, a section for goals and notes for the day, places to record what you ate, and habit tracker, and even a daily food pyramid checklist. It could even be used independently of the diet book, but I recommend using both together because the book has a lot of helpful information, and the journal is a motivating way to put it into action.
Recommendation: Anyone who needs to loose weight but is afraid of “another diet.” This is not the same diet you’re used to. Again, I think “diet” is the wrong word. This is a new lifestyle.
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated The Mayo Clinic Diet: Eat well. Enjoy life. Lose weight. in Books
Apr 27, 2018
The Mayo Clinic Diet (and journal)
by the weight loss experts at Mayo Clinic
Genre: Health, self-help
Rating: 5
The Mayo Clinic Diet is a great book that guides you through a healthy way to loose weight. They focus on changing your eating habits, eating the right amount of the right thing, self control, self motivation, and staying healthy.
The word “Diet” has a bad reputation. People hear it and shutter. I don’t think Diet was the right word to use in the title of this book, I think they could have used something like “Health guide” or “lifestyle” because it’s not really a diet. Sure there are guides on what to eat, but there aren’t any super strict guidelines saying “don’t eat this” or “you must eat this.” This book is all about loosing weight right, and doing it healthfully.
The Mayo Clinic Diet asks some basic questions that get the reader thinking, like “why do you want to loose weight,” “what are your goals” etc. and the reason behind them. You really get down in to why you are bothering to change your body. Sure it’s good for you. But there are other reasons why people want to shape up. The Mayo Clinic Diet asks the right questions and gets you thinking so you can find your reasons, so you can find your motivation.
The actual “diet” part of this book is great. It talks about which foods to eat, which things to eat more of, which to eat less of, how to pick the right meat/cheese/milk etc. (note, for the sake of sharing with you a quick opinion, that the only thing I don’t agree with in the book is their view on skim milk. They recommend it. I don’t. It has no nutritional value, and you need whole milk, or low-fat at the least.). It talks about portion control (the key of weight loss!) and offers visual cues for identifying the right serving size, like “hockey puck” and “tennis ball” and “deck of cards” serving size, explains how to eat healthfully (yes there is a special way to eat!), gives advice on what to eat for snacks, lists exercise tips for beginners (easy to follow, not complicated or requiring equipment), and even identifies obstacles you may come across (excuses, habits, depressed thoughts etc.) , and strategies to get through them.
The journal is not necessary for the diet, but is a helpful tool that will guide you through the program. It follows the timeline given in the book, includes space for meal plans, weekly weigh-in, a section for goals and notes for the day, places to record what you ate, and habit tracker, and even a daily food pyramid checklist. It could even be used independently of the diet book, but I recommend using both together because the book has a lot of helpful information, and the journal is a motivating way to put it into action.
Recommendation: Anyone who needs to loose weight but is afraid of “another diet.” This is not the same diet you’re used to. Again, I think “diet” is the wrong word. This is a new lifestyle.
by the weight loss experts at Mayo Clinic
Genre: Health, self-help
Rating: 5
The Mayo Clinic Diet is a great book that guides you through a healthy way to loose weight. They focus on changing your eating habits, eating the right amount of the right thing, self control, self motivation, and staying healthy.
The word “Diet” has a bad reputation. People hear it and shutter. I don’t think Diet was the right word to use in the title of this book, I think they could have used something like “Health guide” or “lifestyle” because it’s not really a diet. Sure there are guides on what to eat, but there aren’t any super strict guidelines saying “don’t eat this” or “you must eat this.” This book is all about loosing weight right, and doing it healthfully.
The Mayo Clinic Diet asks some basic questions that get the reader thinking, like “why do you want to loose weight,” “what are your goals” etc. and the reason behind them. You really get down in to why you are bothering to change your body. Sure it’s good for you. But there are other reasons why people want to shape up. The Mayo Clinic Diet asks the right questions and gets you thinking so you can find your reasons, so you can find your motivation.
The actual “diet” part of this book is great. It talks about which foods to eat, which things to eat more of, which to eat less of, how to pick the right meat/cheese/milk etc. (note, for the sake of sharing with you a quick opinion, that the only thing I don’t agree with in the book is their view on skim milk. They recommend it. I don’t. It has no nutritional value, and you need whole milk, or low-fat at the least.). It talks about portion control (the key of weight loss!) and offers visual cues for identifying the right serving size, like “hockey puck” and “tennis ball” and “deck of cards” serving size, explains how to eat healthfully (yes there is a special way to eat!), gives advice on what to eat for snacks, lists exercise tips for beginners (easy to follow, not complicated or requiring equipment), and even identifies obstacles you may come across (excuses, habits, depressed thoughts etc.) , and strategies to get through them.
The journal is not necessary for the diet, but is a helpful tool that will guide you through the program. It follows the timeline given in the book, includes space for meal plans, weekly weigh-in, a section for goals and notes for the day, places to record what you ate, and habit tracker, and even a daily food pyramid checklist. It could even be used independently of the diet book, but I recommend using both together because the book has a lot of helpful information, and the journal is a motivating way to put it into action.
Recommendation: Anyone who needs to loose weight but is afraid of “another diet.” This is not the same diet you’re used to. Again, I think “diet” is the wrong word. This is a new lifestyle.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Girl on the Train (2016) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
A Victim of its marketing
It’s always refreshing to see a film released primarily for the adult market. We all loved The Hunger Games, but imagine what the series could’ve been like had the franchise been given a 15 or even an 18 certification.
And Fifty Shades of Grey may have its critics (me being one of them) but at least it appealed to those of us not interested in sharing cinema screens with rambling tweens. The finest of the adult genre? Well, that has to be Gone Girl. But now there’s a new kid on the block, ready to steal its crown. Is The Girl on the Train a worthy adversary?
Alcoholic Rachel Watson (Emily Blunt) catches daily glimpses of a seemingly perfect couple, Scott (Luke Evans) and Megan (Haley Bennett), from the window of her train. One day, Watson witnesses something shocking unfold in the garden of the strangers’ home. Rachel tells the authorities what she thinks she saw after learning Megan is missing. Unable to trust her memory, the troubled woman begins her own investigation, while police suspect that Rachel may have crossed a dangerous line.
Emily Blunt has become one of Hollywood’s finest actors, constantly adding new genres to her resume. From The Devil Wears Prada to Sicario and beyond, there is nothing she won’t try and The Girl on the Train is bolstered by a career-best performance by the actress. It’s never easy to play a drunk convincingly; you can look to some UK soap operas for proof of that, but she manages to pull it off exceptionally well.
Of the supporting cast, only Justin Theroux makes a lasting impact as Rachel’s ex-husband Tom, now living with his new wife Anna – a lacklustre Rebecca Ferguson. It would be unfair to sling too much mud at a very talented group of actors, but up against Blunt, there really is no comparison.
Elsewhere, the complex narrative of Paula Hawkins’ book translates to a rather messy filming style when viewed on the big screen. Continuous flashbacks from within Rachel’s mind are handled reasonably well by director Tate Taylor (The Help) and he manages to wrench everything together to stop the plot from becoming incoherent.
Unfortunately, The Girl on the Train is a victim of its own intense marketing campaign. The trailers have given away far too much for those who haven’t read the book and whilst the twists and turns aren’t immediately obvious, some of the Cluedo-esque fun has been removed. It’s clear Dreamworks wanted the film to resemble Gone Girl as much as possible, aiming to attract a similar audience, but this may have backfired slightly.
Overall, The Girl on the Train is a particularly faithful adaptation of the novel of the same name, held up by an intense and frankly incredible performance by Emily Blunt. Unfortunately, some of the film’s suspense has been lost by a poorly executed marketing campaign and as such it becomes a passable addition to the adult thriller genre. This year’s Gone Girl it is not.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/10/06/a-victim-of-its-marketing-the-girl-on-the-train-review/
And Fifty Shades of Grey may have its critics (me being one of them) but at least it appealed to those of us not interested in sharing cinema screens with rambling tweens. The finest of the adult genre? Well, that has to be Gone Girl. But now there’s a new kid on the block, ready to steal its crown. Is The Girl on the Train a worthy adversary?
Alcoholic Rachel Watson (Emily Blunt) catches daily glimpses of a seemingly perfect couple, Scott (Luke Evans) and Megan (Haley Bennett), from the window of her train. One day, Watson witnesses something shocking unfold in the garden of the strangers’ home. Rachel tells the authorities what she thinks she saw after learning Megan is missing. Unable to trust her memory, the troubled woman begins her own investigation, while police suspect that Rachel may have crossed a dangerous line.
Emily Blunt has become one of Hollywood’s finest actors, constantly adding new genres to her resume. From The Devil Wears Prada to Sicario and beyond, there is nothing she won’t try and The Girl on the Train is bolstered by a career-best performance by the actress. It’s never easy to play a drunk convincingly; you can look to some UK soap operas for proof of that, but she manages to pull it off exceptionally well.
Of the supporting cast, only Justin Theroux makes a lasting impact as Rachel’s ex-husband Tom, now living with his new wife Anna – a lacklustre Rebecca Ferguson. It would be unfair to sling too much mud at a very talented group of actors, but up against Blunt, there really is no comparison.
Elsewhere, the complex narrative of Paula Hawkins’ book translates to a rather messy filming style when viewed on the big screen. Continuous flashbacks from within Rachel’s mind are handled reasonably well by director Tate Taylor (The Help) and he manages to wrench everything together to stop the plot from becoming incoherent.
Unfortunately, The Girl on the Train is a victim of its own intense marketing campaign. The trailers have given away far too much for those who haven’t read the book and whilst the twists and turns aren’t immediately obvious, some of the Cluedo-esque fun has been removed. It’s clear Dreamworks wanted the film to resemble Gone Girl as much as possible, aiming to attract a similar audience, but this may have backfired slightly.
Overall, The Girl on the Train is a particularly faithful adaptation of the novel of the same name, held up by an intense and frankly incredible performance by Emily Blunt. Unfortunately, some of the film’s suspense has been lost by a poorly executed marketing campaign and as such it becomes a passable addition to the adult thriller genre. This year’s Gone Girl it is not.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/10/06/a-victim-of-its-marketing-the-girl-on-the-train-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The DUFF (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Disappointingly Generic
The school-set comedy genre has been done to death over the last two decades. From body swap comedies like 17 Again that hang on the pulling power of their stars, to films that now have a cult following like 10 Things I Hate About You, each of them has little to offer once the end credits roll.
With the brilliant Mean Girls being one of the only exceptions to the trend, the latest film to tackle the genre is The DUFF, but is Ari Sandel’s directorial debut worthy of a recommendation?
The DUFF follows daily life at a typical American high-school with typical US teens separated into categories depending on their social standing.
Enter Bianca Piper, played by the brilliant Mae Whitman, a vastly intelligent girl who is unaware of her place in the rankings as the DUFF – Designated Ugly Fat Friend – that is until her hunky next door neighbour Wesley (Robbie Amell) informs her of that fact.
What ensues is a selection of mildly amusing scenes interspersed with some touching social commentary about what it means to be normal in an ever-changing world as Bianca tries to come to terms with her place in the school hierarchy.
Despite the obvious focus on looks and beauty, the film does have a deeper message of self-worth and it’s a shame this is rarely touched upon outside of the finale.
Perhaps The DUFF’s strongest suit is in its unique filming style. The use of technology and social media helps distinguish it from its rivals and what it lacks in story is made up for with clever uses of animation and an engaging soundtrack.
Just when you think the film has decided to settle in a rut and remain there for the duration, it throws you off course with a clever cut-scene or use of technology and there are two moments in particular that had the audience in stitches.
Unfortunately, the rest of the film isn’t that funny. The story is predictable and the will-they-won’t-they romantic subplot is massively clichéd and dull because the characters, apart from Bianca, simply don’t register – there is no reason to care for them.
Mae Whitman is a force to be reckoned with as Bianca and is by far the most intriguing member of a disappointingly bland cast. Elsewhere, Ken Jeong (Community, The Hangover) and Allison Janney (Hairspray) pop up as a concerned teacher and Bianca’s mother, but they are both wasted in ultimately thankless roles.
Overall, it’s easy to feel sorry for films like The DUFF. The school-set genre has fizzled out in recent years and hasn’t got its mojo back despite numerous efforts from movies much less accomplished than this one.
Mae Whitman and the use of Family Guy-esque cut-scenes are the main plus points here, but despite its best intentions, it’s hard to give it too much of a recommendation and is probably best reserved for a late-night DVD viewing.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/04/12/disappointingly-generic-the-duff-review/
With the brilliant Mean Girls being one of the only exceptions to the trend, the latest film to tackle the genre is The DUFF, but is Ari Sandel’s directorial debut worthy of a recommendation?
The DUFF follows daily life at a typical American high-school with typical US teens separated into categories depending on their social standing.
Enter Bianca Piper, played by the brilliant Mae Whitman, a vastly intelligent girl who is unaware of her place in the rankings as the DUFF – Designated Ugly Fat Friend – that is until her hunky next door neighbour Wesley (Robbie Amell) informs her of that fact.
What ensues is a selection of mildly amusing scenes interspersed with some touching social commentary about what it means to be normal in an ever-changing world as Bianca tries to come to terms with her place in the school hierarchy.
Despite the obvious focus on looks and beauty, the film does have a deeper message of self-worth and it’s a shame this is rarely touched upon outside of the finale.
Perhaps The DUFF’s strongest suit is in its unique filming style. The use of technology and social media helps distinguish it from its rivals and what it lacks in story is made up for with clever uses of animation and an engaging soundtrack.
Just when you think the film has decided to settle in a rut and remain there for the duration, it throws you off course with a clever cut-scene or use of technology and there are two moments in particular that had the audience in stitches.
Unfortunately, the rest of the film isn’t that funny. The story is predictable and the will-they-won’t-they romantic subplot is massively clichéd and dull because the characters, apart from Bianca, simply don’t register – there is no reason to care for them.
Mae Whitman is a force to be reckoned with as Bianca and is by far the most intriguing member of a disappointingly bland cast. Elsewhere, Ken Jeong (Community, The Hangover) and Allison Janney (Hairspray) pop up as a concerned teacher and Bianca’s mother, but they are both wasted in ultimately thankless roles.
Overall, it’s easy to feel sorry for films like The DUFF. The school-set genre has fizzled out in recent years and hasn’t got its mojo back despite numerous efforts from movies much less accomplished than this one.
Mae Whitman and the use of Family Guy-esque cut-scenes are the main plus points here, but despite its best intentions, it’s hard to give it too much of a recommendation and is probably best reserved for a late-night DVD viewing.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/04/12/disappointingly-generic-the-duff-review/