Search
Search results
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Ugly by Kelly Vincent in Books
May 29, 2022
I was so happy when I read the synopsis for Ugly by Kelly Vincent. This sounded exactly like the kind of book I needed to get me out of my reading slump. I was correct in my assumption. I absolutely loved this book!
Ugly is the story of a teenager named Nicole, or Nic as she goes by since she hates being called Nicole, Nic is 16 years old and lives in Oklahoma. Nic is made fun of at school and everywhere she goes. She's constantly being mistaken for a male everywhere she goes. During her sophomore school year, she starts questioning her sexuality and her gender identity.
It's obvious that the author knew exactly what she was talking about before writing Ugly from being gender non-conforming to even the therapy sessions Nic goes to. Ugly is definitely a well written book for sure. I like how Ugly draws attention to the struggles of not conforming to every day gender and sexual standards. I also want to give a shout out to the author for mentioning asexuality in the book. (I wish more LGBTQ+ books would talk about asexuality.) However, one minor gripe I have is that it mentions a character might be asexual because they didn't want/hadn't been in a relationship. Asexuality is the lack of sexual attraction. Asexuals still can want a romantic relationship. Aromanticism is the lack of romantic attraction. (Even then, asexuality and aromanticism have many more identities under their umbrella.) If the character was an aromantic asexual, it would have made more sense why they didn't want a relationship. Other than that, I loved everything about Ugly. My favorite part of the book (although all of it was fantastic) was when Nic goes to Scotland and sees just how different the people over there are compared to the people in the United States. I felt the same way as Nic when I lived in the United Kingdom. It did feel like people in the UK were less judgmental and more accepting than people here in the US.
Reading Ugly was like being in the mind of a teenager throughout a school year in their life. While the book goes through even the mundane day to day life of Nic, I still thoroughly enjoyed reading about Nic's life. Her struggle of trying to fit in whilst being made fun of and bullied really resonated with me. I felt like I was reading a biography about my life almost. I've never identified more with a book before! I think many teens and adults that were bullied, even those that are secure in their sexuality, will be able to relate to Nic on some level. Nic was the most relatable character I have ever read about. I would have loved to be friends with someone like her back in school (and even today). I also loved Nic's best friend Sam. Sam was just about the opposite of Nic both personality wise and looks wise. I loved how much Sam really cared about Nic.
Trigger warnings for Ugly include profanity, underage drinking, some minor drug use, some talks of politics, child molestation (though the book doesn't go into detail), bullying (including characters telling another character "kill yourself"), and depression.
Overall, Ugly is a book that should be in every school library as well as every public library. I feel like it's such an important book for teens (and adults), especially for those struggling with their sexuality and/or gender identity in this day and age. The research the author has put into the book as well as the author's ability to write a solid novel help to make Ugly such a fantastic read. I would definitely recommend Ugly by Kelly Vincent to everyone aged 14+ whether they are part of the LGBTQ+ community or not. This is a book that everyone should read due to its important topic.
(A special thank you to Goddess Fish Promotions for providing me with an eBook of Ugly by Kelly Vincent in exchange for a fair and honest review.)
Ugly is the story of a teenager named Nicole, or Nic as she goes by since she hates being called Nicole, Nic is 16 years old and lives in Oklahoma. Nic is made fun of at school and everywhere she goes. She's constantly being mistaken for a male everywhere she goes. During her sophomore school year, she starts questioning her sexuality and her gender identity.
It's obvious that the author knew exactly what she was talking about before writing Ugly from being gender non-conforming to even the therapy sessions Nic goes to. Ugly is definitely a well written book for sure. I like how Ugly draws attention to the struggles of not conforming to every day gender and sexual standards. I also want to give a shout out to the author for mentioning asexuality in the book. (I wish more LGBTQ+ books would talk about asexuality.) However, one minor gripe I have is that it mentions a character might be asexual because they didn't want/hadn't been in a relationship. Asexuality is the lack of sexual attraction. Asexuals still can want a romantic relationship. Aromanticism is the lack of romantic attraction. (Even then, asexuality and aromanticism have many more identities under their umbrella.) If the character was an aromantic asexual, it would have made more sense why they didn't want a relationship. Other than that, I loved everything about Ugly. My favorite part of the book (although all of it was fantastic) was when Nic goes to Scotland and sees just how different the people over there are compared to the people in the United States. I felt the same way as Nic when I lived in the United Kingdom. It did feel like people in the UK were less judgmental and more accepting than people here in the US.
Reading Ugly was like being in the mind of a teenager throughout a school year in their life. While the book goes through even the mundane day to day life of Nic, I still thoroughly enjoyed reading about Nic's life. Her struggle of trying to fit in whilst being made fun of and bullied really resonated with me. I felt like I was reading a biography about my life almost. I've never identified more with a book before! I think many teens and adults that were bullied, even those that are secure in their sexuality, will be able to relate to Nic on some level. Nic was the most relatable character I have ever read about. I would have loved to be friends with someone like her back in school (and even today). I also loved Nic's best friend Sam. Sam was just about the opposite of Nic both personality wise and looks wise. I loved how much Sam really cared about Nic.
Trigger warnings for Ugly include profanity, underage drinking, some minor drug use, some talks of politics, child molestation (though the book doesn't go into detail), bullying (including characters telling another character "kill yourself"), and depression.
Overall, Ugly is a book that should be in every school library as well as every public library. I feel like it's such an important book for teens (and adults), especially for those struggling with their sexuality and/or gender identity in this day and age. The research the author has put into the book as well as the author's ability to write a solid novel help to make Ugly such a fantastic read. I would definitely recommend Ugly by Kelly Vincent to everyone aged 14+ whether they are part of the LGBTQ+ community or not. This is a book that everyone should read due to its important topic.
(A special thank you to Goddess Fish Promotions for providing me with an eBook of Ugly by Kelly Vincent in exchange for a fair and honest review.)
Darren (1599 KP) rated Alice Through the Looking Glass (2016) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: Alice Through the Looking Glass starts as Alice (Wasikowska) returns from one of her voyages around the world only to find her dreams of seeing the world have been taken from her. Escaping the real world Wonderland calls Alice back with Queen Mirana (Hathaway) and the rest of the characters need Alice to bring the Hatter (Depp) back to his senses after he falls through memories of his loss.
Alice must travel back through time to save the Hatter’ family and bring him back to his colourful ways. Alice finds herself having to go to Time (Cohen) himself to find a way to save the Hatter where she finds herself coming across an old foe Iracebeth (Carter) who wants to use time to control the kingdoms regaining her crown.
Alice Through the Looking Glass does what Oz the Great and Powerful and Wicked have done to The Wizard of Oz by making us want to sympathise with the villainous characters by showing us how they got driven into evil ways because of the bad decisions by the good one. The travel through time works because it does explain certain moments from the story like why Hatter and co have been waiting so long for the tea party. In the end this just tries slightly too much to not bring any new villainous threat to the world to show Alice the important lesson in the real life she is living.
Actor Review
Johnny Depp: Hatter Tarrant Hightopp has gone into a deep depression when he learns to remember the fate of his family, Alice is trying to go through his past to stop this event so we get to meet Hatter as he was younger and struggling to decide whether to follow in his father’s footsteps. Johnny continues his streak of quirky roles but does get over shadowed by Mia.
Mia Wasikowska: Alice is now an adventurer who travels the world only to return home and find her future gone and being forced to give up her dreams. When she returns to Wonderland she must battle the forces of time to save her old friend Hatter and learn to accept her own changes in her life. Mia is good in this role but it is strange seeing an older version of Alice.
Helena Bonham Carter: Iracebeth is the evil queen who lost her crown in the first film, she wants to use time to change the past keeping her power over the kingdoms, but this time we learn about what drove her to be the way she is. Helena continues her blatant rip off performance from Queenie in Blackadder.
Anne Hathaway: Mirana is the good queen of the kingdom who asks Alice to help the Hatter only for us to learn about her younger ways. Anne is very basic in this supporting performance where she doesn’t get much to work with.
Support Cast: Alice Through the Looking Glass has a big supporting cast with Sacha Baron Cohen shining as Time itself chasing Alice down through time.
Director Review: James Bobin – James gives us a solid sequel but seems to mix Oz the Great and Powerful with time travel.
Adventure: Alice Through the Looking Glass does put Alice on an adventure she could only dream of through time itself.
Family: Alice Through the Looking Glass does feel slightly too dark for the youngest members of family to enjoy.
Fantasy: Alice Through the Looking Glass builds on the fantasy world created on the first outing looking deeper into the backstory of the characters involved.
Settings: Alice Through the Looking Glass brings us back to the Wonderland location with the inclusion of the time warehouse location.
Special Effects: Alice Through the Looking Glass is a film you can almost feel the green screen behind the actors.
Suggestion: Alice Through the Looking Glass is only one to try really I don’t think it is one that is that special. (Try It)
Best Part: Time is a good character.
Worst Part: Just feels like a copy of Oz the Great and the Powerful with time travel.
Believability: No
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Budget: $170 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 53 Minutes
Tagline: This spring, it’s time for a little madness.
Overall: Simple sequel that offers nothing new to the overall Wonderland world.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/06/23/alice-through-the-looking-glass-2016/
Alice must travel back through time to save the Hatter’ family and bring him back to his colourful ways. Alice finds herself having to go to Time (Cohen) himself to find a way to save the Hatter where she finds herself coming across an old foe Iracebeth (Carter) who wants to use time to control the kingdoms regaining her crown.
Alice Through the Looking Glass does what Oz the Great and Powerful and Wicked have done to The Wizard of Oz by making us want to sympathise with the villainous characters by showing us how they got driven into evil ways because of the bad decisions by the good one. The travel through time works because it does explain certain moments from the story like why Hatter and co have been waiting so long for the tea party. In the end this just tries slightly too much to not bring any new villainous threat to the world to show Alice the important lesson in the real life she is living.
Actor Review
Johnny Depp: Hatter Tarrant Hightopp has gone into a deep depression when he learns to remember the fate of his family, Alice is trying to go through his past to stop this event so we get to meet Hatter as he was younger and struggling to decide whether to follow in his father’s footsteps. Johnny continues his streak of quirky roles but does get over shadowed by Mia.
Mia Wasikowska: Alice is now an adventurer who travels the world only to return home and find her future gone and being forced to give up her dreams. When she returns to Wonderland she must battle the forces of time to save her old friend Hatter and learn to accept her own changes in her life. Mia is good in this role but it is strange seeing an older version of Alice.
Helena Bonham Carter: Iracebeth is the evil queen who lost her crown in the first film, she wants to use time to change the past keeping her power over the kingdoms, but this time we learn about what drove her to be the way she is. Helena continues her blatant rip off performance from Queenie in Blackadder.
Anne Hathaway: Mirana is the good queen of the kingdom who asks Alice to help the Hatter only for us to learn about her younger ways. Anne is very basic in this supporting performance where she doesn’t get much to work with.
Support Cast: Alice Through the Looking Glass has a big supporting cast with Sacha Baron Cohen shining as Time itself chasing Alice down through time.
Director Review: James Bobin – James gives us a solid sequel but seems to mix Oz the Great and Powerful with time travel.
Adventure: Alice Through the Looking Glass does put Alice on an adventure she could only dream of through time itself.
Family: Alice Through the Looking Glass does feel slightly too dark for the youngest members of family to enjoy.
Fantasy: Alice Through the Looking Glass builds on the fantasy world created on the first outing looking deeper into the backstory of the characters involved.
Settings: Alice Through the Looking Glass brings us back to the Wonderland location with the inclusion of the time warehouse location.
Special Effects: Alice Through the Looking Glass is a film you can almost feel the green screen behind the actors.
Suggestion: Alice Through the Looking Glass is only one to try really I don’t think it is one that is that special. (Try It)
Best Part: Time is a good character.
Worst Part: Just feels like a copy of Oz the Great and the Powerful with time travel.
Believability: No
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Budget: $170 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 53 Minutes
Tagline: This spring, it’s time for a little madness.
Overall: Simple sequel that offers nothing new to the overall Wonderland world.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/06/23/alice-through-the-looking-glass-2016/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Mary Poppins Returns (2018) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Disney knocks it out of the park
It was 1964 when the world was introduced to a practically-perfect British nanny in Walt Disney’s Mary Poppins. Back then, Julie Andrews starred as the eponymous character alongside Dick van Dyke and David Tomlinson. It was an instant hit and became one of Disney’s most-loved feature films.
That is, by everyone apart from the author of Mary Poppins, PL Travers. So incensed by what she felt was Disney’s misunderstanding of her source material, she banned all future work with the studio.
So, 54 years later and with Travers’ estate finally agreeing to a sequel (I wonder how much Disney executives had to pay for that), we get a sequel that no-one was really asking for. Mary Poppins Returns brings the titular character back into the hearts of newcomers and fans alike, but is the film as practically-perfect in every way like its lead? Or is it a bit of a dud?
Now an adult with three children, bank teller Michael Banks (Ben Whishaw) learns that his house will be repossessed in five days unless he can pay back a loan. His only hope is to find a missing certificate that shows proof of valuable shares that his father left him years earlier. Just as all seems lost, Michael and his sister Jane (Emily Mortimer) receive the surprise of a lifetime when Mary Poppins (Emily Blunt), the beloved nanny from their childhood, arrives to save the day and take the Banks family on a magical, fun-filled adventure.
Emily Blunt as Mary Poppins? You’re right to be sceptical. After all, how can an American actress bring to life a character so quintessentially British? Remarkably, she does it, with a cracking British accent to match. Blunt is, as she is in all her films, picture-perfect and oozing charisma. In fact, the entire cast is fabulous with the likes of Colin Firth and Meryl Streep joining the party as a sneaky bank manager and Mary Poppins’ cousin respectively. We’ve also got Julie Walters popping up every now and then as Ellen the housekeeper.
The new Banks children are absolutely wonderful. Pixie Davies, Nathanael Saleh and Joel Dawson show a range of emotions that would make seasoned actors blush, but here they thrive and look like they were having a blast. And that’s a trait clearly shared by the entire cast. Lin-Manuel Miranda’s plucky lamp-lighter, Jack, is obviously having the time of his life and this makes the whimsical nature of Mary Poppins Returns even more apparent.
In its hey-day, Mary Poppins was a technical revolution. Mixing live-action with colourful animation made the screen burst alive with imagination. Of course, special effects have moved on in the 50+ years that Mary has been away from our screens, but you’ll be pleased to know that each sequence feels just as magical.
From under the sea adventures to topsy-turvy houses, the ‘action’ scenes are beautifully filmed by director Rob Marshall. One scene in particular, involving hundreds of lamp-lighters is absolutely astounding and exquisitely choreographed.
The finale is typical sickly-sweet Disney, but in a movie populated by cartoon penguins, Irish dogs and the meaning of childhood, why shouldn’t it be?
The setting of Depression-era London lives and breathes before your very eyes. The CGI and practical effects used to create the capital in 1935 is astonishing, and testament to the teams behind the film. That £130million budget was clearly very well spent.
Then there are the songs. We all know the masterpieces from the original, but will there be any here that children will still be singing along to when they grow older? That’s debatable, but there are three or four that have the potential to be future classics. Look out for Trip the Light Fantastic, which makes up part of the film’s best scenes.
The finale is typical sickly-sweet Disney, but in a movie populated by cartoon penguins, Irish dogs and the meaning of childhood, why shouldn’t it be? The world is filled with such atrocities, it’s nice to sit back, relax with the family and enjoy a film that allows you to escape into your own imagination.
Any downsides? Well, while the pacing is nearly spot on, there’s no denying that Mary Poppins Returns is a long film by family film standards. At 130 minutes, it feels like this sequel is perhaps more for fans of the original than the children that the older film was clearly made for.
But these are small gripes in a sequel that pleasantly surprises on each and every turn. While lacking in the typical Disney poignancy, the film’s message is read loud and clear. There’s no doubt that Mary Poppins Returns is yet another hit for the studio and you’re sure to leave the cinema with a huge smile on your face. Mary is back and she means business.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/12/23/mary-poppins-returns-review-disney-knocks-it-out-of-the-park/
That is, by everyone apart from the author of Mary Poppins, PL Travers. So incensed by what she felt was Disney’s misunderstanding of her source material, she banned all future work with the studio.
So, 54 years later and with Travers’ estate finally agreeing to a sequel (I wonder how much Disney executives had to pay for that), we get a sequel that no-one was really asking for. Mary Poppins Returns brings the titular character back into the hearts of newcomers and fans alike, but is the film as practically-perfect in every way like its lead? Or is it a bit of a dud?
Now an adult with three children, bank teller Michael Banks (Ben Whishaw) learns that his house will be repossessed in five days unless he can pay back a loan. His only hope is to find a missing certificate that shows proof of valuable shares that his father left him years earlier. Just as all seems lost, Michael and his sister Jane (Emily Mortimer) receive the surprise of a lifetime when Mary Poppins (Emily Blunt), the beloved nanny from their childhood, arrives to save the day and take the Banks family on a magical, fun-filled adventure.
Emily Blunt as Mary Poppins? You’re right to be sceptical. After all, how can an American actress bring to life a character so quintessentially British? Remarkably, she does it, with a cracking British accent to match. Blunt is, as she is in all her films, picture-perfect and oozing charisma. In fact, the entire cast is fabulous with the likes of Colin Firth and Meryl Streep joining the party as a sneaky bank manager and Mary Poppins’ cousin respectively. We’ve also got Julie Walters popping up every now and then as Ellen the housekeeper.
The new Banks children are absolutely wonderful. Pixie Davies, Nathanael Saleh and Joel Dawson show a range of emotions that would make seasoned actors blush, but here they thrive and look like they were having a blast. And that’s a trait clearly shared by the entire cast. Lin-Manuel Miranda’s plucky lamp-lighter, Jack, is obviously having the time of his life and this makes the whimsical nature of Mary Poppins Returns even more apparent.
In its hey-day, Mary Poppins was a technical revolution. Mixing live-action with colourful animation made the screen burst alive with imagination. Of course, special effects have moved on in the 50+ years that Mary has been away from our screens, but you’ll be pleased to know that each sequence feels just as magical.
From under the sea adventures to topsy-turvy houses, the ‘action’ scenes are beautifully filmed by director Rob Marshall. One scene in particular, involving hundreds of lamp-lighters is absolutely astounding and exquisitely choreographed.
The finale is typical sickly-sweet Disney, but in a movie populated by cartoon penguins, Irish dogs and the meaning of childhood, why shouldn’t it be?
The setting of Depression-era London lives and breathes before your very eyes. The CGI and practical effects used to create the capital in 1935 is astonishing, and testament to the teams behind the film. That £130million budget was clearly very well spent.
Then there are the songs. We all know the masterpieces from the original, but will there be any here that children will still be singing along to when they grow older? That’s debatable, but there are three or four that have the potential to be future classics. Look out for Trip the Light Fantastic, which makes up part of the film’s best scenes.
The finale is typical sickly-sweet Disney, but in a movie populated by cartoon penguins, Irish dogs and the meaning of childhood, why shouldn’t it be? The world is filled with such atrocities, it’s nice to sit back, relax with the family and enjoy a film that allows you to escape into your own imagination.
Any downsides? Well, while the pacing is nearly spot on, there’s no denying that Mary Poppins Returns is a long film by family film standards. At 130 minutes, it feels like this sequel is perhaps more for fans of the original than the children that the older film was clearly made for.
But these are small gripes in a sequel that pleasantly surprises on each and every turn. While lacking in the typical Disney poignancy, the film’s message is read loud and clear. There’s no doubt that Mary Poppins Returns is yet another hit for the studio and you’re sure to leave the cinema with a huge smile on your face. Mary is back and she means business.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/12/23/mary-poppins-returns-review-disney-knocks-it-out-of-the-park/
Lottie disney bookworm (1056 KP) rated Fairest of All: A Tale of the Wicked Queen (Villains #1) in Books
Aug 16, 2019
Review by Disney Bookworm
This is my first foray into the villain’s series so I thought I should read them in order. The collection has been on my “to read” list forever but the twisted tales series kept multiplying and skipping the queue! As I am a good girl and never break the rules, I started with book one: Fairest of All.
I will say that this series of books are quite thin and are an easy read. This may be due to them falling into the Young Adult category but I can safely add them into the “busy working mum” category too. (P.S. Booksirens, NetGalley and Goodreads: this should definitely become a category!)
Personally, I didn’t have high hopes for these books due to some of the reviews that I read beforehand, particularly those that refer to the series as “fan fiction”. However, in these cases, I believe the reviewers in question have missed the point of these novels: these are not to be compared with twisted tales as they are not retellings. These novels provide a backstory to our villains: a different perspective that explores the circumstances around their evil actions.
Fairest of All tells the tale of the Wicked Queen from Snow White before she became wicked. The reader is introduced to a new bride who loves her husband, the king, and adores her new stepdaughter Snow White. Snow returns her stepmother’s love, referring to her as “momma”, and the little family are perfectly happy and content, attending celebrations in the kingdom and having cosy dinners in the castle. Their life truly is idyllic, that is, until the call of battle draws the king away.
Initially little is said of the Queen’s life before she met the king. We know her father was a renowned mirror maker and her mother was considered extraordinarily beautiful before her untimely death.
However, the Queen’s former life is slowly revealed: a heartbreaking tale that exposes the vulnerability of the monarch and endears her to the reader. Suddenly, it seems almost natural that a person so deprived of love could possess such vanity and unthinkable that this character could descend into madness: committing the evil deeds that we know lie in the upcoming pages.
Despite her flaws, I found I never identified with the Queen fully as a human character. I suspect this is because the Queen is only referred to by her title throughout the novel; a curious method by Valentino. Is Valentino keeping us focused on her fate as the Wicked Queen? Perhaps she is suggesting that the Queen has never been her own woman: merely a tortured mirror maker’s daughter who became a figurehead and a mother in one fell swoop?
The Queen is such a complex character that all the other characters in the book seem quite flat in comparison. Again, I suspect this is intentional: the tale is from the Queen’s perspective after all. Nevertheless, the reader is reunited with old characters such as Snow, the huntsman and the mirror as well as being introduced to new characters, the most notable of which are the three cousins of the King.
The Odd Sisters are described as such from the beginning: a titbit I greatly enjoyed as their novel has recently been released. They are fascinating characters, always keeping the reader on their toes and causing us to never quite know whether they are pure evil or simply insane. Their transparent disappointment that the Queen is not an evil stepmother and their candid conversations about magic cause worry for characters and readers alike: it is clear that they have more than a passing impact on the Queen’s demise.
The names of the characters within this novel possess a clear imagery of light and darkness. Snow and Verona (Latin for a true/honest image) bring out a side to the Queen that is the polar opposite of that of the odd sisters and the magic mirror; who is often referred to as “the Slave”. I’m sure this is how the Queen sees the relationship but the reader sees this from an entirely different perspective. Although the face appears to do her bidding, it becomes more apparent that the power within the relationship does not lie with the Queen.
Overall, I really enjoyed this novel. In my opinion it stayed true to the fairytale without purely repeating the story. Valentino humanised the Queen for the reader before promptly showing how hiding your vulnerabilities and not accepting help can lead you down a dangerous path. The Queen is not evil from the beginning: in fact, she shows her capacity for love throughout, but her depression, grief and madness gradually consume her.
For me, the twist in the final few pages make this book a must read. I still can’t decide whether Valentino has made the docile, simple character of Snow into a strong heroine or whether she has upturned all of our childhoods and is hinting at a darker side. Needless to say, I can’t wait to see what comes next.
I will say that this series of books are quite thin and are an easy read. This may be due to them falling into the Young Adult category but I can safely add them into the “busy working mum” category too. (P.S. Booksirens, NetGalley and Goodreads: this should definitely become a category!)
Personally, I didn’t have high hopes for these books due to some of the reviews that I read beforehand, particularly those that refer to the series as “fan fiction”. However, in these cases, I believe the reviewers in question have missed the point of these novels: these are not to be compared with twisted tales as they are not retellings. These novels provide a backstory to our villains: a different perspective that explores the circumstances around their evil actions.
Fairest of All tells the tale of the Wicked Queen from Snow White before she became wicked. The reader is introduced to a new bride who loves her husband, the king, and adores her new stepdaughter Snow White. Snow returns her stepmother’s love, referring to her as “momma”, and the little family are perfectly happy and content, attending celebrations in the kingdom and having cosy dinners in the castle. Their life truly is idyllic, that is, until the call of battle draws the king away.
Initially little is said of the Queen’s life before she met the king. We know her father was a renowned mirror maker and her mother was considered extraordinarily beautiful before her untimely death.
However, the Queen’s former life is slowly revealed: a heartbreaking tale that exposes the vulnerability of the monarch and endears her to the reader. Suddenly, it seems almost natural that a person so deprived of love could possess such vanity and unthinkable that this character could descend into madness: committing the evil deeds that we know lie in the upcoming pages.
Despite her flaws, I found I never identified with the Queen fully as a human character. I suspect this is because the Queen is only referred to by her title throughout the novel; a curious method by Valentino. Is Valentino keeping us focused on her fate as the Wicked Queen? Perhaps she is suggesting that the Queen has never been her own woman: merely a tortured mirror maker’s daughter who became a figurehead and a mother in one fell swoop?
The Queen is such a complex character that all the other characters in the book seem quite flat in comparison. Again, I suspect this is intentional: the tale is from the Queen’s perspective after all. Nevertheless, the reader is reunited with old characters such as Snow, the huntsman and the mirror as well as being introduced to new characters, the most notable of which are the three cousins of the King.
The Odd Sisters are described as such from the beginning: a titbit I greatly enjoyed as their novel has recently been released. They are fascinating characters, always keeping the reader on their toes and causing us to never quite know whether they are pure evil or simply insane. Their transparent disappointment that the Queen is not an evil stepmother and their candid conversations about magic cause worry for characters and readers alike: it is clear that they have more than a passing impact on the Queen’s demise.
The names of the characters within this novel possess a clear imagery of light and darkness. Snow and Verona (Latin for a true/honest image) bring out a side to the Queen that is the polar opposite of that of the odd sisters and the magic mirror; who is often referred to as “the Slave”. I’m sure this is how the Queen sees the relationship but the reader sees this from an entirely different perspective. Although the face appears to do her bidding, it becomes more apparent that the power within the relationship does not lie with the Queen.
Overall, I really enjoyed this novel. In my opinion it stayed true to the fairytale without purely repeating the story. Valentino humanised the Queen for the reader before promptly showing how hiding your vulnerabilities and not accepting help can lead you down a dangerous path. The Queen is not evil from the beginning: in fact, she shows her capacity for love throughout, but her depression, grief and madness gradually consume her.
For me, the twist in the final few pages make this book a must read. I still can’t decide whether Valentino has made the docile, simple character of Snow into a strong heroine or whether she has upturned all of our childhoods and is hinting at a darker side. Needless to say, I can’t wait to see what comes next.
The Bandersnatch (199 KP) rated A Little Princess in Books
Nov 7, 2019
A little Princess was published in full by Charles Scribner's sons in September of 1905 after being a serialisation in St. Nicholas Magazine in 1887 and being a novella in 1888. The book was named one of the Teachers top books for children in 2007 and in 2012 was ranked 56th in the School Library Journal survey. The story follows Sara Crewe a wealthy heiress being sent off to boarding school in England. Despite being wealthy Sara isn't snobbish and rude but polite, clever and generous befriending several other students and the scullery maid Becky. Sara goes from privilege to a pauper after her fathers scheme with is friend over a diamond mine supposedly fails. After spending a few years working hard at the school she once attended Sara is found by her fathers friend and returned to privilege after finding out the diamond mines actually worked.
There are six film adaptions having been released in 1917, 1939, two in 1995 (One version being Filipino) with the most recent being a Russian film released in 1997. the most well known being the 1995 version being directed by Alfonso Cuaron. There have been seven TV shows based on A Little Princess with the 1973 and 1986 (Maureen Lipton was Miss Minchin) versions being particularly faithful to the books, the 1985, 2006 and 2009 versions were various Japanese anime and another Filipino remake happened in 2007. an episode of Veggietales in 2012 was another version of A little Princess. From 2002 to 2014 there have been several musical adaptions of a little princess as well.
Francis Eliza Hodgson Burnett was born in England on the 24th November 1849 in Cheetham, Manchester, England. When her father died in 1852 her family fell on hard times and Francis was looked after by her grandmother who fuelled her love of reading whilst her mother dealt with the family finances. The family eventually emigrated to the states in 1865 but remained somewhat poor thanks to the end of the American Civil war. Francis started writing in fever trying to help her family get out of the financial hole they were in and did so with her first story being published in the Godey's Lady's book in 1868 eventually being published regularly in its pages alongside Scribner's Monthly, Peterson's Magazine and Harper's Bazaar.
In 1872 Francis agreed to and married family friend Swan Burnett. She continued to write which supported them as they moved to Paris to allow Swan to train as an eye and ear doctor. Francis economised by making clothes for both their sons and for herself. The family returned to the US a few years later where swan managed to set up a doctoring business despite being in debt. For several years afterwards Francis wrote several short stories which were continuously published, Francis eventually turned to children's novels after a meeting with Mary Mapes Dodge the editor of children's magazine St Nicholas. In 1884 Francis set to work on Little Lord Fauntleroy which was serialised in 1885 and published in book form in 1886.
In 1887 Francis returned to England for Queen Victoria's golden jubilee which triggered yearly transatlantic trips between the US and England with her sons. She had fallen ill during this time and had spent time confined to bed, she did however managed to write both The Fortunes of Phillipa Fairfax (only published in the UK) and Sara Crewe or what happened at Miss Minchin's which was rewritten as A Little Princess. In December 1890 Francis and Swans eldest son Lionel died of consumption which spurred his mother into a depression and turn away form the Protestant faith and embrace spiritualism.
In 1898 After their youngest son Vivian finished school, Francis and Swan had divorced (though they had begun to drift apart and were living separate lives several years earlier) and two years later Francis had moved back to England and lived at Great Maytham Hall and married Stephan Townsend, which proved to be a terrible marriage and it ended in 1902. In 1907 Francis returned to the states and spent the next seventeen years in Plandome manor writing several more stories and editing for the Children's Magazine upon the insistence of her Son Vivian. Francis died on October 29th 1924 at the age of 72, she's buried in Roslyn Cemetery and her son Vivian is burred nearby having died in 1937.
I knew of the book as a child but didn't read it until I was a teenager, by then I did know of and had seen the 1995 movie directed by Alfonso Cuaron. The books theme of rising above and succeeding in the face of terrible times is a good thing to reed about. I definitely recommend the book to children and teenagers alike and I give it 9/10.
There are six film adaptions having been released in 1917, 1939, two in 1995 (One version being Filipino) with the most recent being a Russian film released in 1997. the most well known being the 1995 version being directed by Alfonso Cuaron. There have been seven TV shows based on A Little Princess with the 1973 and 1986 (Maureen Lipton was Miss Minchin) versions being particularly faithful to the books, the 1985, 2006 and 2009 versions were various Japanese anime and another Filipino remake happened in 2007. an episode of Veggietales in 2012 was another version of A little Princess. From 2002 to 2014 there have been several musical adaptions of a little princess as well.
Francis Eliza Hodgson Burnett was born in England on the 24th November 1849 in Cheetham, Manchester, England. When her father died in 1852 her family fell on hard times and Francis was looked after by her grandmother who fuelled her love of reading whilst her mother dealt with the family finances. The family eventually emigrated to the states in 1865 but remained somewhat poor thanks to the end of the American Civil war. Francis started writing in fever trying to help her family get out of the financial hole they were in and did so with her first story being published in the Godey's Lady's book in 1868 eventually being published regularly in its pages alongside Scribner's Monthly, Peterson's Magazine and Harper's Bazaar.
In 1872 Francis agreed to and married family friend Swan Burnett. She continued to write which supported them as they moved to Paris to allow Swan to train as an eye and ear doctor. Francis economised by making clothes for both their sons and for herself. The family returned to the US a few years later where swan managed to set up a doctoring business despite being in debt. For several years afterwards Francis wrote several short stories which were continuously published, Francis eventually turned to children's novels after a meeting with Mary Mapes Dodge the editor of children's magazine St Nicholas. In 1884 Francis set to work on Little Lord Fauntleroy which was serialised in 1885 and published in book form in 1886.
In 1887 Francis returned to England for Queen Victoria's golden jubilee which triggered yearly transatlantic trips between the US and England with her sons. She had fallen ill during this time and had spent time confined to bed, she did however managed to write both The Fortunes of Phillipa Fairfax (only published in the UK) and Sara Crewe or what happened at Miss Minchin's which was rewritten as A Little Princess. In December 1890 Francis and Swans eldest son Lionel died of consumption which spurred his mother into a depression and turn away form the Protestant faith and embrace spiritualism.
In 1898 After their youngest son Vivian finished school, Francis and Swan had divorced (though they had begun to drift apart and were living separate lives several years earlier) and two years later Francis had moved back to England and lived at Great Maytham Hall and married Stephan Townsend, which proved to be a terrible marriage and it ended in 1902. In 1907 Francis returned to the states and spent the next seventeen years in Plandome manor writing several more stories and editing for the Children's Magazine upon the insistence of her Son Vivian. Francis died on October 29th 1924 at the age of 72, she's buried in Roslyn Cemetery and her son Vivian is burred nearby having died in 1937.
I knew of the book as a child but didn't read it until I was a teenager, by then I did know of and had seen the 1995 movie directed by Alfonso Cuaron. The books theme of rising above and succeeding in the face of terrible times is a good thing to reed about. I definitely recommend the book to children and teenagers alike and I give it 9/10.
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Finding Esme in Books
Jan 25, 2020
I love reading middle grade fiction, so when the chance to read and review Finding Esme by Suzanne Crowley came up, I jumped at the chance! I was really glad I got a chance to read Finding Esme because it was such an amazing book!
Esme is a 12 year old girl growing up in the 1970's. Her home life isn't very traditional. Her dad is out somewhere being a wanderer, and her mom is too busy worrying about her dad to look after Esme. The only person that really looks after Esme is her grandma Bee. When Esme finds dinosaur bones (which she'd like to keep secret) on a hill by her house, things start changing for Esme.
I really loved the plot of Finding Esme. There is a touch of magical realism within this book that written very well. Esme and her grandmother have certain gifts. They can find lost things and/or people usually. There's also sightings of ghosts although not spooky ghostly sightings. Suzanne Crowley does such a fantastic job of making the magical realism element seem like it's an every day happening in real life. She also does a fantastic job with Esme's dealing of loss and just with the whole plot overall. Although Finding Esme does start out a bit slow, as well as a bit confusing with a bunch of different names, it quickly picks up the pacing. Also, it because clear which character is which quickly. The wording may be confusing for some as it's written in semi-heavy Texas twang and slang throughout. However, context clues help. It was easyish for me to understand being as I was born and raised in Texas.
I must gush now on the characters found in Finding Esme! They were all so fleshed out and felt like they were actual people I was reading about instead of just being fictitious characters. Bee, Esme's grandmother, was probably my favorite character because I loved her no-nonsense approach to things. June Rain was always in la la land since her husband was always up and missing. My heart ached for her, but at the same time, I was angry with her for not paying more attention to her children, Esme and Bo. Sweetmaw was another great character, and I loved her for watching out for Esme when Esme felt she had no one. Finch, Esme's best friend, cared for Esme very much, and it was obvious throughout the novel. He only wanted what was best for Esme even if she had a hard time figuring that out. I loved little Bo, Esme's younger brother. I can't remember if Bo's age is ever mentioned in Finding Esme. I guessed Bo to be around 7 or so based on how he acted. Esme was a fantastically written main character. I could relate to her on so many levels especially when it came to not feeling loved or wanted. I'm sure we've all felt like this at some point in our lives. Esme was wanting to keep her dinosaur bones (which she endearingly refers to as Louella Goodbones) secret just so she could have at least one thing that was just hers. I was angered when her secret bones were no longer her secret (not a spoiler). I just wanted to hug Esme to let her know that she wasn't alone. She seemed like such a sweet girl who had already had to put up with more things than most children her age.
One main thing I feel that I must mention is this is Finding Esme is listed as being a middle grade book. I guess this is because the main character is 12 years old. I felt like this wasn't a typical middle grade read as it lacks a middle grade feel. The wording and narrative seemed to be written towards more of an older audience especially with mentions of things that happened in the past that a middle grade audience may not know about or understand. I feel like Finding Esme would probably go over most middle grader's head with the language and events that happened. Even though Esme is only 12, I feel like adults would enjoy this more or at least a young adult audience.
Trigger warnings for Finding Esme include death, depression, gun violence (although not graphic), an absent father, and profanity (although it was just the word damnation used once).
Overall, Finding Esme is a fantastical read which will tug at your heartstrings and leave you breathless. It's a quick read that you won't want to put down. At least, I didn't! I never wanted it to end if I'm being honest. I would definitely recommend Finding Esme by Suzanne Crowley to those aged 15+. Yes, it's supposed to be a middle grade read, but as I mentioned before, I really think adults and possibly teens would enjoy it more.
--
(A special thank you to Suzanne Crowley for sending me a hardback of Finding Esme in exchange for an honest and unbiased review.)
Esme is a 12 year old girl growing up in the 1970's. Her home life isn't very traditional. Her dad is out somewhere being a wanderer, and her mom is too busy worrying about her dad to look after Esme. The only person that really looks after Esme is her grandma Bee. When Esme finds dinosaur bones (which she'd like to keep secret) on a hill by her house, things start changing for Esme.
I really loved the plot of Finding Esme. There is a touch of magical realism within this book that written very well. Esme and her grandmother have certain gifts. They can find lost things and/or people usually. There's also sightings of ghosts although not spooky ghostly sightings. Suzanne Crowley does such a fantastic job of making the magical realism element seem like it's an every day happening in real life. She also does a fantastic job with Esme's dealing of loss and just with the whole plot overall. Although Finding Esme does start out a bit slow, as well as a bit confusing with a bunch of different names, it quickly picks up the pacing. Also, it because clear which character is which quickly. The wording may be confusing for some as it's written in semi-heavy Texas twang and slang throughout. However, context clues help. It was easyish for me to understand being as I was born and raised in Texas.
I must gush now on the characters found in Finding Esme! They were all so fleshed out and felt like they were actual people I was reading about instead of just being fictitious characters. Bee, Esme's grandmother, was probably my favorite character because I loved her no-nonsense approach to things. June Rain was always in la la land since her husband was always up and missing. My heart ached for her, but at the same time, I was angry with her for not paying more attention to her children, Esme and Bo. Sweetmaw was another great character, and I loved her for watching out for Esme when Esme felt she had no one. Finch, Esme's best friend, cared for Esme very much, and it was obvious throughout the novel. He only wanted what was best for Esme even if she had a hard time figuring that out. I loved little Bo, Esme's younger brother. I can't remember if Bo's age is ever mentioned in Finding Esme. I guessed Bo to be around 7 or so based on how he acted. Esme was a fantastically written main character. I could relate to her on so many levels especially when it came to not feeling loved or wanted. I'm sure we've all felt like this at some point in our lives. Esme was wanting to keep her dinosaur bones (which she endearingly refers to as Louella Goodbones) secret just so she could have at least one thing that was just hers. I was angered when her secret bones were no longer her secret (not a spoiler). I just wanted to hug Esme to let her know that she wasn't alone. She seemed like such a sweet girl who had already had to put up with more things than most children her age.
One main thing I feel that I must mention is this is Finding Esme is listed as being a middle grade book. I guess this is because the main character is 12 years old. I felt like this wasn't a typical middle grade read as it lacks a middle grade feel. The wording and narrative seemed to be written towards more of an older audience especially with mentions of things that happened in the past that a middle grade audience may not know about or understand. I feel like Finding Esme would probably go over most middle grader's head with the language and events that happened. Even though Esme is only 12, I feel like adults would enjoy this more or at least a young adult audience.
Trigger warnings for Finding Esme include death, depression, gun violence (although not graphic), an absent father, and profanity (although it was just the word damnation used once).
Overall, Finding Esme is a fantastical read which will tug at your heartstrings and leave you breathless. It's a quick read that you won't want to put down. At least, I didn't! I never wanted it to end if I'm being honest. I would definitely recommend Finding Esme by Suzanne Crowley to those aged 15+. Yes, it's supposed to be a middle grade read, but as I mentioned before, I really think adults and possibly teens would enjoy it more.
--
(A special thank you to Suzanne Crowley for sending me a hardback of Finding Esme in exchange for an honest and unbiased review.)
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Jimmy's Hall (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
It’s not to often that we folks in America have the opportunity to catch any movies from Ireland.
The few that do come along almost certainly rate high on the scale of exceptional movies that one would want to see. I myself can’t remember a ‘bad’ Irish film. Perhaps one of the reasons for that is the fact that this country has a solid history of countless Irish immigrants coming here and helping to build the foundations for America. Well, today’s film for your consideration doesn’t go back THAT far. It doesn’t even take place in America. However, the history of Irish immigrants (specifically one immigrant) does play a role. Only it involves an Irish immigrant how came to America and then several years later returned to Ireland only to be forcibly deported back to America. I know I know. That explanation makes it sound like a comedy and although the film has many lighthearted moments, I can assure you it’s NOT a comedy. In fact, it deals with an influential figure in one of the more politically turbulent periods in Ireland’s history just before the beginning of the Second World War.
‘Jimmy’s Hall’ is a 2014 Irish-British drama directed by English television and film director Kenneth ‘Ken’ Loach. The film focuses on the events leading up to the deportation from Ireland of Jimmy Gralton, who led a precursor to Ireland’s communist party in the county Leitrim.
Starring Barry Ward, Simone Kirby, and Irish character actor Jim Norton, the film opens in 1932. Jimmy (Ward) has just returned to his home to help his mother tend the family farm after spending 10 years in the United States in the midst of the Great Depression coinciding with the establishment of a new government in the aftermath of the Civil War between pro-British and anti-British forces.
Reluctant to anger his old enemies, the church and the landowners who forced him to leave Ireland, but eager to meet the needs of the people of Leitrim, Jimmy (Ward) decides to reopen the ‘Hall’, a center for young people where they can meet to study, talk, dance, play music, learn to read, debate issues of the day. Free to all and open to anyone who wishes to learn while respecting the views and opinions of others, the ‘Hall’ is an immediate success. Not everyone is pleased to see Jimmy resuming his old activities. In particular the church and local priest (Norton) who see Gralton as not only a ‘bad influence’, but also as a follower of Stalin who as history knows sent countless millions (including religious leaders) to their deaths.
Despite the complaints and at times violent reactions on the part of the supporters of the church and the landowners, Gralton tries desperately to make them realize he has absolutely no connection to Stalin and has no desire to bring down the church. Only to better the situation for everyone. Jimmy even invites the local priest to take a leadership role in the Hall’s committee. In the end though, the fears of the church and the state go unchanged. Jimmy is a communist and although he has no connection Stalin the church and the government see them as one in the same. The police take Jimmy into custody at his family’s farm and forcibly deport him back to America even so much as denying him on last chance to see his ailing mother.
In education systems there are books and films which are considered ‘required reading’ or in this case ‘required viewing’. This film should be required viewing. It is not just an excellent film about a historical Irish political figure or as I mentioned earlier a film about a turbulent point in Irish history. It’s an example of the greater ‘world conflict’ between what became the western bloc and the eastern bloc. Both sides in that grater conflict saw each other the same way the two sides in the Irish countryside of the 1930s saw each other. The ones that meant well and only wanted to better the situation for everyone including themselves inspired fear in those who had power and those who had the power inspired fear in those who meant well. This movie showed that not all political figures are evil … nor are all religious figures. It’s the individual or several individuals within those groups that are reluctant to change.
I would highly recommend this film. Regardless of the content it’s an excellent film. If this film is as good as most films made in Ireland, they definitely need to start exporting them on a grander scale. I’d give this film 4 out of 5 stars.
This is your friendly neighborhood photographer ‘The CameraMan’ and on behalf of my fellows at ‘Skewed & Reviewed’ I’d like to say thanks for reading and we’ll see you at the movies
The few that do come along almost certainly rate high on the scale of exceptional movies that one would want to see. I myself can’t remember a ‘bad’ Irish film. Perhaps one of the reasons for that is the fact that this country has a solid history of countless Irish immigrants coming here and helping to build the foundations for America. Well, today’s film for your consideration doesn’t go back THAT far. It doesn’t even take place in America. However, the history of Irish immigrants (specifically one immigrant) does play a role. Only it involves an Irish immigrant how came to America and then several years later returned to Ireland only to be forcibly deported back to America. I know I know. That explanation makes it sound like a comedy and although the film has many lighthearted moments, I can assure you it’s NOT a comedy. In fact, it deals with an influential figure in one of the more politically turbulent periods in Ireland’s history just before the beginning of the Second World War.
‘Jimmy’s Hall’ is a 2014 Irish-British drama directed by English television and film director Kenneth ‘Ken’ Loach. The film focuses on the events leading up to the deportation from Ireland of Jimmy Gralton, who led a precursor to Ireland’s communist party in the county Leitrim.
Starring Barry Ward, Simone Kirby, and Irish character actor Jim Norton, the film opens in 1932. Jimmy (Ward) has just returned to his home to help his mother tend the family farm after spending 10 years in the United States in the midst of the Great Depression coinciding with the establishment of a new government in the aftermath of the Civil War between pro-British and anti-British forces.
Reluctant to anger his old enemies, the church and the landowners who forced him to leave Ireland, but eager to meet the needs of the people of Leitrim, Jimmy (Ward) decides to reopen the ‘Hall’, a center for young people where they can meet to study, talk, dance, play music, learn to read, debate issues of the day. Free to all and open to anyone who wishes to learn while respecting the views and opinions of others, the ‘Hall’ is an immediate success. Not everyone is pleased to see Jimmy resuming his old activities. In particular the church and local priest (Norton) who see Gralton as not only a ‘bad influence’, but also as a follower of Stalin who as history knows sent countless millions (including religious leaders) to their deaths.
Despite the complaints and at times violent reactions on the part of the supporters of the church and the landowners, Gralton tries desperately to make them realize he has absolutely no connection to Stalin and has no desire to bring down the church. Only to better the situation for everyone. Jimmy even invites the local priest to take a leadership role in the Hall’s committee. In the end though, the fears of the church and the state go unchanged. Jimmy is a communist and although he has no connection Stalin the church and the government see them as one in the same. The police take Jimmy into custody at his family’s farm and forcibly deport him back to America even so much as denying him on last chance to see his ailing mother.
In education systems there are books and films which are considered ‘required reading’ or in this case ‘required viewing’. This film should be required viewing. It is not just an excellent film about a historical Irish political figure or as I mentioned earlier a film about a turbulent point in Irish history. It’s an example of the greater ‘world conflict’ between what became the western bloc and the eastern bloc. Both sides in that grater conflict saw each other the same way the two sides in the Irish countryside of the 1930s saw each other. The ones that meant well and only wanted to better the situation for everyone including themselves inspired fear in those who had power and those who had the power inspired fear in those who meant well. This movie showed that not all political figures are evil … nor are all religious figures. It’s the individual or several individuals within those groups that are reluctant to change.
I would highly recommend this film. Regardless of the content it’s an excellent film. If this film is as good as most films made in Ireland, they definitely need to start exporting them on a grander scale. I’d give this film 4 out of 5 stars.
This is your friendly neighborhood photographer ‘The CameraMan’ and on behalf of my fellows at ‘Skewed & Reviewed’ I’d like to say thanks for reading and we’ll see you at the movies
Nymphomaniac Volume I (2014)
6.7
Rate It
Movie Watch
1. "The Compleat Angler" Inspired by a fly fishing hook in the wall behind her and Seligman's love...
Kyera (8 KP) rated Eliza and Her Monsters in Books
Jan 31, 2018
I always read before I go to bed, so last night I decided to pick up Eliza and Her Monsters by Francesca Zappia. I fell in love and before I knew it, I was 50% done but I thought I could read for another 15 or so minutes – that turned into me finishing the book at midnight. I don’t regret a thing. This is a mental health book that deals with trauma, anxiety, and depression, so I would just like to give all readers a trigger warning. I personally felt that it was beautifully written, but not everyone will feel the same way so I suggest a level of caution if you think you may be triggered by these things. I wouldn’t want anyone to feel harmed by this book or any book.
Just a warning, I do talk about the relationships in this book as well as some plot points. I don’t discuss anything that wasn’t mentioned in the synopsis on the book or Goodreads, but if you haven’t read those then this is your spoiler warning.
Our main character is Eliza, the anonymous creator of the famous webcomic Monsterous Seas. She has always been more comfortable online than dealing with the real world, or real people. All of her friends are online. She has always kept her identity a secret and as the popularity of her work has grown, the fervor to learn her identity has as well.
Eliza has always been content to spend her days in school drawing and talking to no one – that is until there is a new guy in school, Wallace. Against all odds, he is a fan of Monsterous Seas and actually writes fan fiction about it. It doesn’t take long before they become friends and Wallace gets Eliza to come a little more out of her shell. Their friendship was so precious and I loved watching them bond over a story that was so important to each of their lives.
The romance aspect of the book also made me super happy – I legitimately was smiling every time they were super cute together. Even though they each had their issues to deal with, they didn’t push each other past their respective lines of security. They were supportive of one another and I think that Wallace was the perfect foil for Eliza. Yes, they had their troubles but at the end of the day, they were there for one another.
The family dynamic was completely relatable if frustrating at times. Eliza’s parents don’t truly understand what her webcomic is or how famous it is, which causes a lot of friction within the family. Her parents want to understand her more, but Eliza is very closed and protective of herself. While they may not understand the importance of it even if she took the time to explain it and what it means to the world, she doesn’t even give them the chance. Eliza is defensive and her lack of communication is what ultimately leads to the worst crisis she experiences, despite her parent's well-meaning intentions.
The most heart-warming part of the novel was the scene in which one of her brothers stood up for her and supported Eliza. It was such a precious moment and it was nice to see a positive familial connection being formed. Eliza learns throughout the novel that she never gave her family a chance and that maybe she doesn’t really know them. The growth that she experiences over the course of the novel was wonderful to see and gives you hope that (although she’s fictional) perhaps things will change for the better with her family and her life.
As a person who feels infinitely more comfortable talking to someone over the internet than in person, there were many times that I related to Eliza. I completely understand the anxiety of talking to another person, even one-on-one. I cannot imagine the stress and havoc the reveal of your identity to millions of people would have on your psyche and body. My heart broke when we found out her identity was exposed because Francesca wrote a character so real that we could feel her horror and destruction.
There was also some diversity in this book, although it wasn’t as explored as it could have been. Wallace’s family is a unique situation and I would have loved to learn more about them, but understand that it would have slowed down the pacing of the novel. I can’t say more because I don’t want this to have actual spoilers, so just go read the book. While it is not explicitly mentioned in the book, the author wrote in a tweet that she wished her portrayal of ace/demi sexuality was truly addressed. I think that would have brought a wonderful level of diversity that we don’t normally see in books and could use more of.
If it wasn’t clear from my ‘I read it in one sitting into the wee hours of the night’ tale, I absolutely loved this book. It was very relatable and as an introverted fangirl myself, I personally felt represented by this book. Even though I didn’t know about it before it was published, I definitely expect it to make my best of 2017 list. It is a contemporary that, in my opinion, honestly and respectfully tackles mental illness, family relationships and is so wonderfully written that I hope you fall in love with it as well.
Just a warning, I do talk about the relationships in this book as well as some plot points. I don’t discuss anything that wasn’t mentioned in the synopsis on the book or Goodreads, but if you haven’t read those then this is your spoiler warning.
Our main character is Eliza, the anonymous creator of the famous webcomic Monsterous Seas. She has always been more comfortable online than dealing with the real world, or real people. All of her friends are online. She has always kept her identity a secret and as the popularity of her work has grown, the fervor to learn her identity has as well.
Eliza has always been content to spend her days in school drawing and talking to no one – that is until there is a new guy in school, Wallace. Against all odds, he is a fan of Monsterous Seas and actually writes fan fiction about it. It doesn’t take long before they become friends and Wallace gets Eliza to come a little more out of her shell. Their friendship was so precious and I loved watching them bond over a story that was so important to each of their lives.
The romance aspect of the book also made me super happy – I legitimately was smiling every time they were super cute together. Even though they each had their issues to deal with, they didn’t push each other past their respective lines of security. They were supportive of one another and I think that Wallace was the perfect foil for Eliza. Yes, they had their troubles but at the end of the day, they were there for one another.
The family dynamic was completely relatable if frustrating at times. Eliza’s parents don’t truly understand what her webcomic is or how famous it is, which causes a lot of friction within the family. Her parents want to understand her more, but Eliza is very closed and protective of herself. While they may not understand the importance of it even if she took the time to explain it and what it means to the world, she doesn’t even give them the chance. Eliza is defensive and her lack of communication is what ultimately leads to the worst crisis she experiences, despite her parent's well-meaning intentions.
The most heart-warming part of the novel was the scene in which one of her brothers stood up for her and supported Eliza. It was such a precious moment and it was nice to see a positive familial connection being formed. Eliza learns throughout the novel that she never gave her family a chance and that maybe she doesn’t really know them. The growth that she experiences over the course of the novel was wonderful to see and gives you hope that (although she’s fictional) perhaps things will change for the better with her family and her life.
As a person who feels infinitely more comfortable talking to someone over the internet than in person, there were many times that I related to Eliza. I completely understand the anxiety of talking to another person, even one-on-one. I cannot imagine the stress and havoc the reveal of your identity to millions of people would have on your psyche and body. My heart broke when we found out her identity was exposed because Francesca wrote a character so real that we could feel her horror and destruction.
There was also some diversity in this book, although it wasn’t as explored as it could have been. Wallace’s family is a unique situation and I would have loved to learn more about them, but understand that it would have slowed down the pacing of the novel. I can’t say more because I don’t want this to have actual spoilers, so just go read the book. While it is not explicitly mentioned in the book, the author wrote in a tweet that she wished her portrayal of ace/demi sexuality was truly addressed. I think that would have brought a wonderful level of diversity that we don’t normally see in books and could use more of.
If it wasn’t clear from my ‘I read it in one sitting into the wee hours of the night’ tale, I absolutely loved this book. It was very relatable and as an introverted fangirl myself, I personally felt represented by this book. Even though I didn’t know about it before it was published, I definitely expect it to make my best of 2017 list. It is a contemporary that, in my opinion, honestly and respectfully tackles mental illness, family relationships and is so wonderfully written that I hope you fall in love with it as well.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Downsizing (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Tiny People, Big Mess.
From the trailer this film looked quirky, funny and interesting and has been on my “looking forward to” list for many months. Oh dear, what a let down.
Matt Damon (“The Martian“, “The Great Wall“, “Jason Bourne“) and Kristen Wiig (“mother!“, “Ghostbusters“) play Paul and Audrey Safranek. Paul is a laid-back and hardworking occupational therapist; Audrey has materialistic ambitions over and above their available finances. The two decide to “downsize” making use of a revolutionary Norwegian invention that reduces humans, and most other lifeforms, to a fraction of their normal size. This offers huge wealth to the normal American, since the cost of living in downsized form within the mini-estate called LeisureLand is tiny in comparison to “big folks”. But all does not go well in the transition (unlike the trailer, no spoilers here) and Paul needs to find a new purpose in life as bigger problems loom.
It’s clearly written to be a social satire, and there are some clever angles to be explored here: everyone publicly positions their downsizing based on ‘environmental issues’ and ‘saving the planet’, but most everyone’s real reason is the lifestyle benefits. Also lightly touched on, but never deeply explored, are the impacts that the downsizing initiative is having on the broader American economy and property markets, with the ‘big people’ questioning why small people should have the same rights and votes as them.
But the film never really gets into the meat of any of this. Worse than that, the movie never settles on what it is trying to be. I think we can write off “Sci-Fi” pretty early on. But is it a drama? A comedy? A love story? A socialist rant? An environmental cri de coeur? The film jumbles all these aspects together and treats each so halfheartedly that none of them get properly addressed.
Not only are the audience confused: none of the actors seem to be too sure why they’re there either. Damon – never Mr Personality – should have been able to develop some chemistry with the feisty and dynamic Ms Wiig, but even these early scenes plod along with you thinking “what a dull film”. Things perk up slightly at the LeisureLand sales fair, where Neil Patrick Harris (“Gone Girl“) and a naked Laura Dern (“Star Wars: The Last Jedi“) glibly try to sell a luxury doll’s house to the assembled crowd. American consumerism in miniature.
But post-downsizing the film crashes back to ‘Dullesville Arizona’ again, but with added depression, requiring Christophe Waltz (“Django Unchanined”, “Spectre“), as a dodgy Serbian entrepreneur Dusan Mirkovic, to over-act manically to try to add any sort of energy into the film (which he is only mildly successful at doing). There’s a rather bizarre supporting role from Udo Kier – looking for all the world like Terence Stamp – as Mirkovic’s ship-owning pal, and an almost cameo performance from Jason Sudeikis (“Colossal“).
Enter stage-left Thai-born Hong Chau as Ngoc Lan Tran, a Vietnamese cleaner. There’s a clever angle here: where “average American Joes” like Safranek can live like kings, but the poor still have to scrape by, living in ‘skyscraper Portacabins’, as the menial classes: there’s no escaping class structures, even when 5 inches tall. Chau sums up the uneven nature of the film, as she mostly plays her lines for laughs but then (in a spectacularly good bit of acting in the midst of, I have to say, some pretty poor hamming) bursts into uncontrollable tears.
Just when you think things are going to limp to a unmemorable close, the film ups and leaves LeisureLand to add a completely bizarre final act. (It’s pretty unusual in the UK for people to walk out of a cinema mid-film, but a couple did so at this point). This segment bears no relationship to the downsizing theme whatsoever, since all the players at this point could be full-sized. Aside from an amusing “50 shades of f**k” speech from Ngoc Lan Tran and a “massive explosion”, this story goes nowhere, says nothing (at least not to me) and merely irritates. Throw in a completely anti-climatic non-ending and I genuinely shared a “WTF look” with the stranger sat next to me!
This is all very strange, since this comes from Alexander Payne, who also directed and co-wrote “The Descendants”, one of the most impressive films of the decade. Jim Taylor co-writes (as he has co-written numerous other films with Payne).
I note that in this morning’s London Times that their film critic, Kevin Maher – someone who’s views I am generally pretty well aligned with – gave it 4 *’s out of 5. I can only assume that he either saw a completely different cut of the film, or he is a lot cleverer than I am and understood amazing sub-texts that completely passed me by! Maybe… but I have a sneaking suspicion that the general viewing public will more share my opinion on this than his.
I was tempted to give this just one star as it was such a disappointment to me, but the underlying concept is a good one: it is just one that has, in my humble opinion, been implemented in a bizarrely slipshod manner.
Definitely not recommended. Go and see “Coco” instead!
Matt Damon (“The Martian“, “The Great Wall“, “Jason Bourne“) and Kristen Wiig (“mother!“, “Ghostbusters“) play Paul and Audrey Safranek. Paul is a laid-back and hardworking occupational therapist; Audrey has materialistic ambitions over and above their available finances. The two decide to “downsize” making use of a revolutionary Norwegian invention that reduces humans, and most other lifeforms, to a fraction of their normal size. This offers huge wealth to the normal American, since the cost of living in downsized form within the mini-estate called LeisureLand is tiny in comparison to “big folks”. But all does not go well in the transition (unlike the trailer, no spoilers here) and Paul needs to find a new purpose in life as bigger problems loom.
It’s clearly written to be a social satire, and there are some clever angles to be explored here: everyone publicly positions their downsizing based on ‘environmental issues’ and ‘saving the planet’, but most everyone’s real reason is the lifestyle benefits. Also lightly touched on, but never deeply explored, are the impacts that the downsizing initiative is having on the broader American economy and property markets, with the ‘big people’ questioning why small people should have the same rights and votes as them.
But the film never really gets into the meat of any of this. Worse than that, the movie never settles on what it is trying to be. I think we can write off “Sci-Fi” pretty early on. But is it a drama? A comedy? A love story? A socialist rant? An environmental cri de coeur? The film jumbles all these aspects together and treats each so halfheartedly that none of them get properly addressed.
Not only are the audience confused: none of the actors seem to be too sure why they’re there either. Damon – never Mr Personality – should have been able to develop some chemistry with the feisty and dynamic Ms Wiig, but even these early scenes plod along with you thinking “what a dull film”. Things perk up slightly at the LeisureLand sales fair, where Neil Patrick Harris (“Gone Girl“) and a naked Laura Dern (“Star Wars: The Last Jedi“) glibly try to sell a luxury doll’s house to the assembled crowd. American consumerism in miniature.
But post-downsizing the film crashes back to ‘Dullesville Arizona’ again, but with added depression, requiring Christophe Waltz (“Django Unchanined”, “Spectre“), as a dodgy Serbian entrepreneur Dusan Mirkovic, to over-act manically to try to add any sort of energy into the film (which he is only mildly successful at doing). There’s a rather bizarre supporting role from Udo Kier – looking for all the world like Terence Stamp – as Mirkovic’s ship-owning pal, and an almost cameo performance from Jason Sudeikis (“Colossal“).
Enter stage-left Thai-born Hong Chau as Ngoc Lan Tran, a Vietnamese cleaner. There’s a clever angle here: where “average American Joes” like Safranek can live like kings, but the poor still have to scrape by, living in ‘skyscraper Portacabins’, as the menial classes: there’s no escaping class structures, even when 5 inches tall. Chau sums up the uneven nature of the film, as she mostly plays her lines for laughs but then (in a spectacularly good bit of acting in the midst of, I have to say, some pretty poor hamming) bursts into uncontrollable tears.
Just when you think things are going to limp to a unmemorable close, the film ups and leaves LeisureLand to add a completely bizarre final act. (It’s pretty unusual in the UK for people to walk out of a cinema mid-film, but a couple did so at this point). This segment bears no relationship to the downsizing theme whatsoever, since all the players at this point could be full-sized. Aside from an amusing “50 shades of f**k” speech from Ngoc Lan Tran and a “massive explosion”, this story goes nowhere, says nothing (at least not to me) and merely irritates. Throw in a completely anti-climatic non-ending and I genuinely shared a “WTF look” with the stranger sat next to me!
This is all very strange, since this comes from Alexander Payne, who also directed and co-wrote “The Descendants”, one of the most impressive films of the decade. Jim Taylor co-writes (as he has co-written numerous other films with Payne).
I note that in this morning’s London Times that their film critic, Kevin Maher – someone who’s views I am generally pretty well aligned with – gave it 4 *’s out of 5. I can only assume that he either saw a completely different cut of the film, or he is a lot cleverer than I am and understood amazing sub-texts that completely passed me by! Maybe… but I have a sneaking suspicion that the general viewing public will more share my opinion on this than his.
I was tempted to give this just one star as it was such a disappointment to me, but the underlying concept is a good one: it is just one that has, in my humble opinion, been implemented in a bizarrely slipshod manner.
Definitely not recommended. Go and see “Coco” instead!