Search
Search results
Two Jersey Brothers: Stories from Our Haledon Boyhood 1939-1953
10.0
Rate It
Book
Two Jersey Brothers recounts the boyhoods of brothers Nick and Bob Finamore in the small, quiet,...
memoir biography bookbuzz
Abandoned Things
10.0
Rate It
Book
Frankie is a fifth-year college student with a secret. He's the writer and creator of the popular...
MM Science Fiction Fantasy Enemies to Lovers Romance
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Paths of Glory (1957) in Movies
Feb 18, 2024
Early Kubrick Masterpiece
Dore Schary, then head of production of MGM, like Stanley Kubrick’s first film, THE KILLING (1956) so he hired Kubrick to develop film stories from the studios pile of scripts and purchased novels. Finding nothing the he liked, Kubrick remembered reading Humprhey Cobb’s anti-war novel PATHS OF GLORY and suggested that. Schary (like every other studio exec in Hollywood at the time) turned down the opportunity to make this bleak anti-war film.
When Schary was fired by MGM, Kubrick went to Kirk Douglas (who liked THE KILLING as well and was anxious to work with Kubrick). Using his clout as one of the Major Stars of Hollywood at the time, Douglas got United Artists to agree to make the picture.
Starring Douglas, PATHS OF GLORY tells the WWI tale of a group of soldiers who mutiny when asked to take on a suicide mission to take the impregnable “ANTHILL”.
In this film, Kubrick starts to come into his own as a unique and visionary filmmaker who would insist on take after take until he got the exact shot he was looking for.
The highlight of the film is the 5 minute tracking shot of the troops attacking the Anthill, a tracking shot that films such as SAVING PRIVATE RYAN and 1917 owe a debt to. It is a masterclass of filmmaking from Kubrick.
As for Douglas – who was also used to having complete control of his films – PATHS OF GLORY was a battle of wills between Kubrick and Douglas with each man coming out on top (at times)…to the betterment of the film.
On the acting front, Douglas has never been better as the Commander of the unit that has the mutiny and who decides to defend the soldiers who are on trial for mutiny and cowardice and who quickly realizes that the trial is a sham and that there is no way for him these soldiers to get a fair trial.
Adolph Menjou (the 1937 version of A STAR IS BORN) and George Macready (GILDA) are appropriately blustery and out-of-touch as the Senior Officers who give (and then defend) their impossible orders. Richard Anderson (Oscar in the SIX MILLION DOLLAR MAN) is slimey and slippery as the prosecuting attorney (who knows that the outcome of the trial is a done-deal) while Ralph Meeker (THE DIRTY DOZEN), Joe Turkel (the bartender in THE SHINING) and Timothy Carey (who famously clashed with Kubrick during filming in a calculated attempt to get some publicity for himself and was subsequently fired from the film) are the unfortunate 3 who are put on trial as representatives of their troops while the outstanding performance in this film is fomer child actor Wayne Morris (KID GALAHAD) as drunken Lt. Roget.
Even though this film is about ½ war battle film and ½ a court-room drama, it is the visuals of the folly of war that will stick with the audience long after it is over…and stick with it it does as this film was selected for preservation in the United States Film Registry in 1992 and is still listed in IMDB’s TOP 100 Rated films.
Letter Grade A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
When Schary was fired by MGM, Kubrick went to Kirk Douglas (who liked THE KILLING as well and was anxious to work with Kubrick). Using his clout as one of the Major Stars of Hollywood at the time, Douglas got United Artists to agree to make the picture.
Starring Douglas, PATHS OF GLORY tells the WWI tale of a group of soldiers who mutiny when asked to take on a suicide mission to take the impregnable “ANTHILL”.
In this film, Kubrick starts to come into his own as a unique and visionary filmmaker who would insist on take after take until he got the exact shot he was looking for.
The highlight of the film is the 5 minute tracking shot of the troops attacking the Anthill, a tracking shot that films such as SAVING PRIVATE RYAN and 1917 owe a debt to. It is a masterclass of filmmaking from Kubrick.
As for Douglas – who was also used to having complete control of his films – PATHS OF GLORY was a battle of wills between Kubrick and Douglas with each man coming out on top (at times)…to the betterment of the film.
On the acting front, Douglas has never been better as the Commander of the unit that has the mutiny and who decides to defend the soldiers who are on trial for mutiny and cowardice and who quickly realizes that the trial is a sham and that there is no way for him these soldiers to get a fair trial.
Adolph Menjou (the 1937 version of A STAR IS BORN) and George Macready (GILDA) are appropriately blustery and out-of-touch as the Senior Officers who give (and then defend) their impossible orders. Richard Anderson (Oscar in the SIX MILLION DOLLAR MAN) is slimey and slippery as the prosecuting attorney (who knows that the outcome of the trial is a done-deal) while Ralph Meeker (THE DIRTY DOZEN), Joe Turkel (the bartender in THE SHINING) and Timothy Carey (who famously clashed with Kubrick during filming in a calculated attempt to get some publicity for himself and was subsequently fired from the film) are the unfortunate 3 who are put on trial as representatives of their troops while the outstanding performance in this film is fomer child actor Wayne Morris (KID GALAHAD) as drunken Lt. Roget.
Even though this film is about ½ war battle film and ½ a court-room drama, it is the visuals of the folly of war that will stick with the audience long after it is over…and stick with it it does as this film was selected for preservation in the United States Film Registry in 1992 and is still listed in IMDB’s TOP 100 Rated films.
Letter Grade A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Suspect (Kate Waters #3) in Books
Apr 4, 2019 (Updated Apr 8, 2019)
Intruiging, winning tale
Eighteen-year-old Alexandra O'Connor and Rosie Shaw are backpacking in Thailand for three months. But when they don't contact their families as scheduled, panic ensues. They are reported missing, and journalist Kate Waters begins covering the case as well. But this one feels especially close to her heart, as she can't help but think of her own son, Jake, who has been overseas traveling for two years. As it quickly becomes clear that there's more to Rosie and Alex's case than meets the eye, Kate will soon be drawn to into their world.
For some reason, I must have forgotten that this was another Kate Waters book, so I was really excited when I started reading and realized that both she and DI Bob Sparkes were back in this one. I really liked Barton's previous two books featuring Kate and Bob, THE WIDOW and The Child, and this one was no exception. By this point, they are starting to feel like old friends.
The story is told via short chapters from various points of view: Kate, Bob, and Alex's mother, Lesley. We also get flashbacks to Alex in Bangkok. It's all very effective, as the result is very easy-to read. The story moves along steadily, and it kept me very interested and wondering what had happened to the girls. I also found the story a little frightening and, as many thrillers do, it made me quite frightened for my children to grow up and leave the house!
Kate was her usual self--I just always find myself drawn to her. She's determined and tough, yet vulnerable. I don't know much about the press, especially not in the U.S., but Barton's take on Kate always seems really authentic to me. This makes sense, considering Barton is a former U.K. journalist: it shows. I always enjoy how focused Kate is: ready to do nearly anything to get her story. What's great about this novel is that Barton throws in a compelling personal aspect for both Kate and Bob; for Kate, it really shakes up her take on reporting, which is truly her one constant in life. While it's not easy for her (or for me, really, since I have grown to care for her), I found it interesting to watch her grapple with this. Kate also has to look at the truth and how she might present it when it's more personal for her. It's a stark dilemma, and made the book more fascinating.
"Being a reporter is touchy-feely...We're not here to observe the news happening through a telescope--or Google. You've got to plunge yourself into this job so you can feel things, see things up close, understand them. You've got to get your hands dirty. Right up to the elbows."
At the core, though, there's a very intriguing plot here: what happened to Alex and Rosie? I found the book to be really interesting, and I was sucked up along with Kate and Bob, trying to piece together the various clues as to what had happened. There are several great twists and turns thrown in: a few I guessed at, several that really surprised me. The book does a great job at exploring how the media can put a person on trial, as well as the way we portray ourselves on social media versus what's really happening behind the scenes. All the various shades of truth being presented in different facets--all quite interesting.
Overall, this one was a winner for me. It featured some characters that are old favorites, a compelling mystery, and some intriguing personal elements for said characters. I certainly hope Bob and Kate make a return appearance in another Barton book.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review.
For some reason, I must have forgotten that this was another Kate Waters book, so I was really excited when I started reading and realized that both she and DI Bob Sparkes were back in this one. I really liked Barton's previous two books featuring Kate and Bob, THE WIDOW and The Child, and this one was no exception. By this point, they are starting to feel like old friends.
The story is told via short chapters from various points of view: Kate, Bob, and Alex's mother, Lesley. We also get flashbacks to Alex in Bangkok. It's all very effective, as the result is very easy-to read. The story moves along steadily, and it kept me very interested and wondering what had happened to the girls. I also found the story a little frightening and, as many thrillers do, it made me quite frightened for my children to grow up and leave the house!
Kate was her usual self--I just always find myself drawn to her. She's determined and tough, yet vulnerable. I don't know much about the press, especially not in the U.S., but Barton's take on Kate always seems really authentic to me. This makes sense, considering Barton is a former U.K. journalist: it shows. I always enjoy how focused Kate is: ready to do nearly anything to get her story. What's great about this novel is that Barton throws in a compelling personal aspect for both Kate and Bob; for Kate, it really shakes up her take on reporting, which is truly her one constant in life. While it's not easy for her (or for me, really, since I have grown to care for her), I found it interesting to watch her grapple with this. Kate also has to look at the truth and how she might present it when it's more personal for her. It's a stark dilemma, and made the book more fascinating.
"Being a reporter is touchy-feely...We're not here to observe the news happening through a telescope--or Google. You've got to plunge yourself into this job so you can feel things, see things up close, understand them. You've got to get your hands dirty. Right up to the elbows."
At the core, though, there's a very intriguing plot here: what happened to Alex and Rosie? I found the book to be really interesting, and I was sucked up along with Kate and Bob, trying to piece together the various clues as to what had happened. There are several great twists and turns thrown in: a few I guessed at, several that really surprised me. The book does a great job at exploring how the media can put a person on trial, as well as the way we portray ourselves on social media versus what's really happening behind the scenes. All the various shades of truth being presented in different facets--all quite interesting.
Overall, this one was a winner for me. It featured some characters that are old favorites, a compelling mystery, and some intriguing personal elements for said characters. I certainly hope Bob and Kate make a return appearance in another Barton book.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review.
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated If You Find Me in Books
Jun 6, 2018
(This review can be found on my blog <a href="http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.com/">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a>).
I read about this book from a blog, and I was intrigued. I knew this was one book I had to read. When I found out I had won a copy through a blog competition, I was thrilled! Luckily, I wasn't disappointed with If You Find Me by Emily Murdoch. I absolutely loved the plot twists!!
Carey is a fifteen year old girl who lives in the middle of the woods. Her mother is a meth addict, so she's left Carey alone to fend for herself and to take care of her 6 year old sister Janessa. When Carey and her sister are taken from all they've ever known and thrust into "normal" life, Carey doesn't know if she'll be able to cope. However, the "normal" world will make her question everything she's ever known especially when it comes to her mother.
I just want to say that the title of this book is actually mentioned in the book! Aside from that, the title does suit the book very well. Carey seems lost all throughout the book so the title fits with the theme.
I like the cover for the most part although I would've preferred to see maybe a dirty Carey instead of a normal looking teenage girl. I do enjoy the woods in the background especially since that's where Carey was raised.
As for the world building, I think it was good, but it could've been more believable. The way Carey spoke was a little too polished for what I would imagine a girl who grew up away from civilization to speak. I know that it mentions how Carey taught her and her sister to read and such from books her mother brought home, but still. I also thought Carey started speaking "normally" all too soon. Perhaps that's just me since I've never grown up away from civilization.
The pacing was great in If You find Me. It did start off a bit slow, and I was wondering if I was just in for one big disappointment. I was lucky because the pacing picked up within the next couple of chapters, and I was in for one smooth ride. I couldn't put the book down after that.
The characters were very well developed, and I found myself relating to all of them as best as my experience would let me. I loved Carey and how strong she was after how much she had endured. I thought Janessa was just the sweetest little girl. I could feel how much she loved Carey and how much Carey loved her. Delaney was written as a great mean girl. I found myself wanting to slap her so many times throughout the book!! Ryan was adorable, and I loved how he treated Carey. My favorite character though was Pixie. She was the best friend I wished I had. I absolutely loved her dress sense as well!
As for the dialogue, I loved Carey's internal monologue the most. I loved reading about what she thought and felt about everything. The way the characters interacted with each other was never awkward at all. The whole dialogue ran smoothly. I don't really remember any swearing in this book either.
The only disappointing thing I found was the ending. It left me wanting to know what ever became of Carey after the big reveal. I don't want to go into details due to spoilers, but if you read it, you'll know what I mean.
If You Find Me by Emily Murdoch is an easy and enjoyable read that will leave readers thinking about it long after they've finished reading it. It is a very thought provoking piece of literature.
I'd recommend this book to everyone aged 13+ who wants to read something stimulating!
If You Find Me by Emily Murdoch gets a 4.5 out of 5.
I read about this book from a blog, and I was intrigued. I knew this was one book I had to read. When I found out I had won a copy through a blog competition, I was thrilled! Luckily, I wasn't disappointed with If You Find Me by Emily Murdoch. I absolutely loved the plot twists!!
Carey is a fifteen year old girl who lives in the middle of the woods. Her mother is a meth addict, so she's left Carey alone to fend for herself and to take care of her 6 year old sister Janessa. When Carey and her sister are taken from all they've ever known and thrust into "normal" life, Carey doesn't know if she'll be able to cope. However, the "normal" world will make her question everything she's ever known especially when it comes to her mother.
I just want to say that the title of this book is actually mentioned in the book! Aside from that, the title does suit the book very well. Carey seems lost all throughout the book so the title fits with the theme.
I like the cover for the most part although I would've preferred to see maybe a dirty Carey instead of a normal looking teenage girl. I do enjoy the woods in the background especially since that's where Carey was raised.
As for the world building, I think it was good, but it could've been more believable. The way Carey spoke was a little too polished for what I would imagine a girl who grew up away from civilization to speak. I know that it mentions how Carey taught her and her sister to read and such from books her mother brought home, but still. I also thought Carey started speaking "normally" all too soon. Perhaps that's just me since I've never grown up away from civilization.
The pacing was great in If You find Me. It did start off a bit slow, and I was wondering if I was just in for one big disappointment. I was lucky because the pacing picked up within the next couple of chapters, and I was in for one smooth ride. I couldn't put the book down after that.
The characters were very well developed, and I found myself relating to all of them as best as my experience would let me. I loved Carey and how strong she was after how much she had endured. I thought Janessa was just the sweetest little girl. I could feel how much she loved Carey and how much Carey loved her. Delaney was written as a great mean girl. I found myself wanting to slap her so many times throughout the book!! Ryan was adorable, and I loved how he treated Carey. My favorite character though was Pixie. She was the best friend I wished I had. I absolutely loved her dress sense as well!
As for the dialogue, I loved Carey's internal monologue the most. I loved reading about what she thought and felt about everything. The way the characters interacted with each other was never awkward at all. The whole dialogue ran smoothly. I don't really remember any swearing in this book either.
The only disappointing thing I found was the ending. It left me wanting to know what ever became of Carey after the big reveal. I don't want to go into details due to spoilers, but if you read it, you'll know what I mean.
If You Find Me by Emily Murdoch is an easy and enjoyable read that will leave readers thinking about it long after they've finished reading it. It is a very thought provoking piece of literature.
I'd recommend this book to everyone aged 13+ who wants to read something stimulating!
If You Find Me by Emily Murdoch gets a 4.5 out of 5.
James P. Sumner (65 KP) rated Official Secrets (2019) in Movies
Oct 16, 2019
Should this tense, dramatic thriller remain a Secret?
I was lucky enough to be invited to an advanced screening of this film, ahead of it's general release.
"Official Secrets (2019)" is a tense and clever thriller based on real events that occurred during the beginning of the Iraq War in 2003. Keira Knightley plays Katherine Gun, a British spy-turned-whistleblower who worked for GCHQ at the time. She leaked confidential information to the press, exposing illegal activities at the highest levels of government intended to falsely justify the invasion of Iraq. Backed by a high-calibre support cast, which includes Matt Smith and Ralph Fiennes, this film serves to show you the true story of what happened during this shadowy and questionable chapter in our history.
The film uses actual news footage from the time to great effect, making you feel as if you're watching a biographical documentary on the History Channel. Knightley is captivating as the Robin Hood-esque lead, delivering a truly believable and heartfelt performance throughout. It wasn't until the credits began to roll and they showed you footage of the real Katherine Gun from news reels at the time that you realise just how good Knightley's performance really was. From the way she dressed to the tone in which she spoke and the small mannerisms of her personality, it was a very, very good portrayal.
As with most films like this, I imagine certain events and aspects of the story were dramatised or exaggerated for the purposes of cinema, but at no point did it ever feel like it. Any changes to real events were subtle enough that you couldn't spot them without detailed knowledge of what really happened at the time - something, it turns out, very few people actually had.
Matt Smith is both charming and uncompromising as the stubborn reporter who champions Gun's crusade for the truth, giving her support and a platform to get her message out to the world. Similarly, Ralph Fiennes looks right at home as the lawyer who defends her in the public eye.
I admit that certain aspects and legalities within the plot felt, at times, a little far-fetched, but honestly, the film did such a good job of telling this story, I'm inclined to think that's still how things actually happened.
Spoilers aren't as much of an issue for films like this, as you already know the outcome. But this film isn't about the destination, it's about the journey. It shines a spotlight on the down-and-dirty world of global politics, as well as how difficult it can sometimes be to choose to do the right thing.
The film moves along at a slow yet perfect pace. It doesn't look or feel like a Hollywood movie, which I think is a very good thing. Instead, it feels like a BBC drama, similar to Line of Duty or Luther or Spooks, and that's exactly the kind of approach this film needed to work.
I went into this admittedly understanding very little of what went on back in 2003. I was much younger and wasn't interested in geopolitics, or even the news in general. But seeing this film piqued my interest, and after a few hours of Googling the events depicted in the film, I'm even more in awe of just how well made this was. Kudos to everyone involved.
My only criticism, if I had to give one, would be the number of times people had to say "Official Secrets Act"... I get that's what the film is about, but it seemed like every character had a quota for the number of times they had to mention it! But that's just nit-picking for nit-picking's sake. This truly is a cracking film. One of the gems of the year that's not to be missed!
"Official Secrets (2019)" is a tense and clever thriller based on real events that occurred during the beginning of the Iraq War in 2003. Keira Knightley plays Katherine Gun, a British spy-turned-whistleblower who worked for GCHQ at the time. She leaked confidential information to the press, exposing illegal activities at the highest levels of government intended to falsely justify the invasion of Iraq. Backed by a high-calibre support cast, which includes Matt Smith and Ralph Fiennes, this film serves to show you the true story of what happened during this shadowy and questionable chapter in our history.
The film uses actual news footage from the time to great effect, making you feel as if you're watching a biographical documentary on the History Channel. Knightley is captivating as the Robin Hood-esque lead, delivering a truly believable and heartfelt performance throughout. It wasn't until the credits began to roll and they showed you footage of the real Katherine Gun from news reels at the time that you realise just how good Knightley's performance really was. From the way she dressed to the tone in which she spoke and the small mannerisms of her personality, it was a very, very good portrayal.
As with most films like this, I imagine certain events and aspects of the story were dramatised or exaggerated for the purposes of cinema, but at no point did it ever feel like it. Any changes to real events were subtle enough that you couldn't spot them without detailed knowledge of what really happened at the time - something, it turns out, very few people actually had.
Matt Smith is both charming and uncompromising as the stubborn reporter who champions Gun's crusade for the truth, giving her support and a platform to get her message out to the world. Similarly, Ralph Fiennes looks right at home as the lawyer who defends her in the public eye.
I admit that certain aspects and legalities within the plot felt, at times, a little far-fetched, but honestly, the film did such a good job of telling this story, I'm inclined to think that's still how things actually happened.
Spoilers aren't as much of an issue for films like this, as you already know the outcome. But this film isn't about the destination, it's about the journey. It shines a spotlight on the down-and-dirty world of global politics, as well as how difficult it can sometimes be to choose to do the right thing.
The film moves along at a slow yet perfect pace. It doesn't look or feel like a Hollywood movie, which I think is a very good thing. Instead, it feels like a BBC drama, similar to Line of Duty or Luther or Spooks, and that's exactly the kind of approach this film needed to work.
I went into this admittedly understanding very little of what went on back in 2003. I was much younger and wasn't interested in geopolitics, or even the news in general. But seeing this film piqued my interest, and after a few hours of Googling the events depicted in the film, I'm even more in awe of just how well made this was. Kudos to everyone involved.
My only criticism, if I had to give one, would be the number of times people had to say "Official Secrets Act"... I get that's what the film is about, but it seemed like every character had a quota for the number of times they had to mention it! But that's just nit-picking for nit-picking's sake. This truly is a cracking film. One of the gems of the year that's not to be missed!
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Parasite (2019) in Movies
Jan 23, 2020
All I'd been hearing about Parasite was that it was a masterpiece and amazing, so many people were getting to see previews but of course they were all in London. Then Odeon came to the rescue with their Screen Unseen program so I defected from Cineworld for an evening.
The Kim family are desperately trying to make ends meet, their cramped home is uncomfortable and located in one of the shabbiest districts of Seoul. Things take a turn when the son's friend suggests that he takes over his tutoring job for the daughter of a well off family. Ki-woo doesn't have the qualifications but all he needs is to show confidence, he decides to take the job.
Once he gets to the upscale house opportunities start to present themselves and he sees a chance to set his family up with jobs too. Bringing their mother onboard sets in motion something that no one could have seen coming.
I seriously considered not writing a review for this, please excuse me if it seems a little disjointed but I'm still not entirely convinced that I have a proper conclusion.
Coming out of the film I was a little confused, mainly because apart from hearing about it being a masterpiece I had seen people saying it was a horror... IMDb lists it as "comedy, crime, drama", at least I agree with one of those.
The contrast between rich and poor is shown perfectly throughout, from their homes to the human senses expressed, the way it's all represented on screen solidifies the differences between the two families.
In each home environment we also see it, the sleek versus the chaotic, the clean versus the dirty. The Park's designer home is white, open and ordered, the Kim's is claustrophobic, cluttered and busy. The two are illustrated perfectly on each end of the spectrum and the two overlap briefly when the Kim's briefly take over the Park's home.
I thought the acting was good but I wasn't blown away by anything, potentially more of an issue with the script for me as I wasn't keen on some of the character traits that came out. The divide between the two families is obviously something that carries through to their members, but whereas we might expect the rich to be the villains in a story (and yes, they aren't necessarily the best people in the world) it is in fact the poor that are verging on the bad side of things. It does appear that in this instance money is the corrupting influence on the Kims and they get the taste for the high life. All the actors involved are very strong in helping this come across to the audience.
Beyond this set up I wasn't left with the gushing feeling that many, MANY others were. Maybe this just went over my head, I'm the first to admit that when I go to a movie I turn my brain down. Maybe it was more thinking than I'm willing to put into a film. When films touch a lot of different genres I feel like I have some trouble with then so this could also contribute to my underwhelmed feeling. My instinct coming out was that I wanted it to be a little darker and closer to a thriller than just drama.
After one viewing I would say I wouldn't have chosen to see it again but there's an Unlimited Screening coming I feel like it's worth giving it a second viewing in case I see something I didn't see before, but I'm not sure how much it will change things.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/01/parasite-movie-review.html
The Kim family are desperately trying to make ends meet, their cramped home is uncomfortable and located in one of the shabbiest districts of Seoul. Things take a turn when the son's friend suggests that he takes over his tutoring job for the daughter of a well off family. Ki-woo doesn't have the qualifications but all he needs is to show confidence, he decides to take the job.
Once he gets to the upscale house opportunities start to present themselves and he sees a chance to set his family up with jobs too. Bringing their mother onboard sets in motion something that no one could have seen coming.
I seriously considered not writing a review for this, please excuse me if it seems a little disjointed but I'm still not entirely convinced that I have a proper conclusion.
Coming out of the film I was a little confused, mainly because apart from hearing about it being a masterpiece I had seen people saying it was a horror... IMDb lists it as "comedy, crime, drama", at least I agree with one of those.
The contrast between rich and poor is shown perfectly throughout, from their homes to the human senses expressed, the way it's all represented on screen solidifies the differences between the two families.
In each home environment we also see it, the sleek versus the chaotic, the clean versus the dirty. The Park's designer home is white, open and ordered, the Kim's is claustrophobic, cluttered and busy. The two are illustrated perfectly on each end of the spectrum and the two overlap briefly when the Kim's briefly take over the Park's home.
I thought the acting was good but I wasn't blown away by anything, potentially more of an issue with the script for me as I wasn't keen on some of the character traits that came out. The divide between the two families is obviously something that carries through to their members, but whereas we might expect the rich to be the villains in a story (and yes, they aren't necessarily the best people in the world) it is in fact the poor that are verging on the bad side of things. It does appear that in this instance money is the corrupting influence on the Kims and they get the taste for the high life. All the actors involved are very strong in helping this come across to the audience.
Beyond this set up I wasn't left with the gushing feeling that many, MANY others were. Maybe this just went over my head, I'm the first to admit that when I go to a movie I turn my brain down. Maybe it was more thinking than I'm willing to put into a film. When films touch a lot of different genres I feel like I have some trouble with then so this could also contribute to my underwhelmed feeling. My instinct coming out was that I wanted it to be a little darker and closer to a thriller than just drama.
After one viewing I would say I wouldn't have chosen to see it again but there's an Unlimited Screening coming I feel like it's worth giving it a second viewing in case I see something I didn't see before, but I'm not sure how much it will change things.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/01/parasite-movie-review.html
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Two Popes (2019) in Movies
Jan 26, 2020 (Updated Jan 26, 2020)
Fantastic performances from two old acting pros.
Being inaugurated as a new pope in the last century must have been a source of enormous pride. But there must also have been a nagging thought... at some point you are going to be paraded, stiff as a board, around your work courtyard before being taken back inside to your place of work and buried there!
All that changed in 2013 when Pope Benedict XVI resigned, the first pope to voluntarily do so since Pope Celestine V in 1294. (Pope Gregory XII also resigned in 1415, but he was effectively forced to).
This movie tells the story of that curious situation, when Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio (played by Jonathan Pryce) ended up as Pope Francis while Benedict (Anthony Hopkins) was still alive. The official reason for the pope's resignation appears to have been his advanced age. But the film paints a rather different picture.
The movie starts back in 2005 as we enter the papal conclave. Benedict (Cardinal Ratzinger, as was) is the highly-political German cardinal who desperately wants the papacy; Bergoglio is the highly respected Argentinian cardinal who doesn't seek the office but might have it thrust upon him. (Clearly, when the white smoke clears, history has dictated the outcome).
But flash forward to 2013 and Bergoglio will get another bite of the cherry. Is he worthy of the role? Through flashbacks we return to Perón's unsettling rule over Argentina and the events that made the man.
The two stars are simply outstanding together, and it's no surprise at all that both have been nominated in the Oscar acting categories. They are almost joint leads. But - perhaps to give the film its best awards-season shot - Pryce is down for Best Actor and Hopkins is down for Best Supporting Actor.
Anthony Hopkins in particular for me shone with the brilliant quietness and subtle facial movements that are the mark of a truly confident actor. Less is more.
I was enjoying this movie enormously up until we flashed back to the Argentinian sub-plot. Set in the time of Perón's "Dirty War" when a huge number of people - estimates range from 9,000 to 30,000 - simply went "missing". There's nothing wrong with this sequence of the film. For example, a reunion of Bergoglio with a persecuted priest, Father Jalics (Lisandro Fiks) - is brilliantly and movingly done. It's just that for me it seemed so disjointed. It was jarring to switch from this Evita-era drama to the gentle drama of the papal plot.
If the movie had been 30 minutes shorter and focused on the mental struggles of Benedict I would have preferred it. Curiously - we don't really get to fully understand his divergence from the faith. Bergoglio gets no end of back-story. But Ratzinger's is probably just as interesting, but not explored.
This is still a really fine movie and will appeal to older folks who like a story rich with character acting and not heavy on the action or special effects. The director is Fernando Meirelles (who interestingly directed the Rio Olympics opening ceremony!) and it's written by Anthony McCarten, the man behind the screenplays for "The Theory of Everything", "Darkest Hour" and "Bohemian Rhapsody".
You may still be able to find this in selected cinemas (e.g. Curzon) but it is also streaming on Netflix, which is where I had to watch it.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies at https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/01/26/one-manns-movies-film-review-the-two-popes-2019/ ).
All that changed in 2013 when Pope Benedict XVI resigned, the first pope to voluntarily do so since Pope Celestine V in 1294. (Pope Gregory XII also resigned in 1415, but he was effectively forced to).
This movie tells the story of that curious situation, when Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio (played by Jonathan Pryce) ended up as Pope Francis while Benedict (Anthony Hopkins) was still alive. The official reason for the pope's resignation appears to have been his advanced age. But the film paints a rather different picture.
The movie starts back in 2005 as we enter the papal conclave. Benedict (Cardinal Ratzinger, as was) is the highly-political German cardinal who desperately wants the papacy; Bergoglio is the highly respected Argentinian cardinal who doesn't seek the office but might have it thrust upon him. (Clearly, when the white smoke clears, history has dictated the outcome).
But flash forward to 2013 and Bergoglio will get another bite of the cherry. Is he worthy of the role? Through flashbacks we return to Perón's unsettling rule over Argentina and the events that made the man.
The two stars are simply outstanding together, and it's no surprise at all that both have been nominated in the Oscar acting categories. They are almost joint leads. But - perhaps to give the film its best awards-season shot - Pryce is down for Best Actor and Hopkins is down for Best Supporting Actor.
Anthony Hopkins in particular for me shone with the brilliant quietness and subtle facial movements that are the mark of a truly confident actor. Less is more.
I was enjoying this movie enormously up until we flashed back to the Argentinian sub-plot. Set in the time of Perón's "Dirty War" when a huge number of people - estimates range from 9,000 to 30,000 - simply went "missing". There's nothing wrong with this sequence of the film. For example, a reunion of Bergoglio with a persecuted priest, Father Jalics (Lisandro Fiks) - is brilliantly and movingly done. It's just that for me it seemed so disjointed. It was jarring to switch from this Evita-era drama to the gentle drama of the papal plot.
If the movie had been 30 minutes shorter and focused on the mental struggles of Benedict I would have preferred it. Curiously - we don't really get to fully understand his divergence from the faith. Bergoglio gets no end of back-story. But Ratzinger's is probably just as interesting, but not explored.
This is still a really fine movie and will appeal to older folks who like a story rich with character acting and not heavy on the action or special effects. The director is Fernando Meirelles (who interestingly directed the Rio Olympics opening ceremony!) and it's written by Anthony McCarten, the man behind the screenplays for "The Theory of Everything", "Darkest Hour" and "Bohemian Rhapsody".
You may still be able to find this in selected cinemas (e.g. Curzon) but it is also streaming on Netflix, which is where I had to watch it.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies at https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/01/26/one-manns-movies-film-review-the-two-popes-2019/ ).
Here Come the Warm Jets
Book
"Warren's first book of poems is highly self-reflective, interestingly interrogative, and a lot of...
Hadley (567 KP) rated Stumbling Stoned (The Patchwork Prince #1) in Books
Oct 22, 2020
Dark humor (1 more)
Fast paced
When I realized that Wyck's Stumbling Stoned was like Memento meets a season of Fargo, I was all in. A book about a mental patient with amnesia that has supernatural powers? Yes, please!
I was completely blown away by the twists and turns in this story, and even more so by how well it all fit together. But if you find dark humor distasteful, you won't like this book very much. I found myself giggling at things I probably shouldn't have, but these things made it all the better.
Our main character is an amnesiac mental patient known as John Doe, and the entire story is told from his point-of-view. He escapes from the hospital soon after the start of the story with one of the psychiatrists in-tow. We find that Doe has tied up the former in a bathtub while an older man is tied up to a toilet. The man is unknown to the two, and apparently has jet black eyes that make him seem inhuman. And Doe seems to have eaten a fellow patient's finger and upchucked it in the sink- - - something that surprisingly disgusts him - - - and leads him to a drawing on the mirror above, something Doe drew before blacking out.
Doe, after realizing he kidnapped the psychiatrist, quickly lets her go, and goes off on his own with no idea who he is or where he's going. Just when the reader suspects that Doe might find out who he is, he is suddenly swept up into a human trafficking business and mafia dealings he had no idea existed. And because of this, after being drugged by a mafioso, Doe realizes that he has supernatural powers whenever he is hopped-up on drugs.
When Doe makes an escape from the dirty warehouse where young girls are held as sex slaves, he helps these girls by breaking their chains with his bare hands. Not only does he co-lead their escape, but he also ends up saving the daughter of a well-known Mafia boss. However, this leads to Doe being stuck in the middle of a family feud, and he is almost killed by this very same family for knowing just a little too much. And this isn't even half of the story!
Later on, Doe ends up in the hands of a witch, but he realizes quite quickly that she's not the one to fear, but rather who she is working for - - - a man named Zabat- - - who she is delivering our character to. Somehow, Zabat knows exactly who Doe is and why he has supernatural powers, but he refuses to tell him unless Doe helps him first. Doe refuses and, instead, throws himself out of a high rise window. From here, Doe begins to piece some of his life together, but Zabat causes a couple of problems that ends up revealing to the reader that Doe is not human and that the supernatural powers are not a figment of his imagination.
Now, the story is so fast-paced and borders on ridiculous at some points, yet it all fits together quite well; I personally can't think of another way this story could have been told, but that didn't make the book flawless. Stumbling Stoned had some bad writing techniques in it, but not enough that I think readers would put it down.
I can only recommend this book to people who like dark humor, but as far as horror - - - this isn't that type of book. Stumbling Stoned takes readers on a thrill ride through the seedier side of life. I personally believe this is a good book to read to get away from the daily stressors of life. I truly hope that Wyck decides to write a sequel!
I was completely blown away by the twists and turns in this story, and even more so by how well it all fit together. But if you find dark humor distasteful, you won't like this book very much. I found myself giggling at things I probably shouldn't have, but these things made it all the better.
Our main character is an amnesiac mental patient known as John Doe, and the entire story is told from his point-of-view. He escapes from the hospital soon after the start of the story with one of the psychiatrists in-tow. We find that Doe has tied up the former in a bathtub while an older man is tied up to a toilet. The man is unknown to the two, and apparently has jet black eyes that make him seem inhuman. And Doe seems to have eaten a fellow patient's finger and upchucked it in the sink- - - something that surprisingly disgusts him - - - and leads him to a drawing on the mirror above, something Doe drew before blacking out.
Doe, after realizing he kidnapped the psychiatrist, quickly lets her go, and goes off on his own with no idea who he is or where he's going. Just when the reader suspects that Doe might find out who he is, he is suddenly swept up into a human trafficking business and mafia dealings he had no idea existed. And because of this, after being drugged by a mafioso, Doe realizes that he has supernatural powers whenever he is hopped-up on drugs.
When Doe makes an escape from the dirty warehouse where young girls are held as sex slaves, he helps these girls by breaking their chains with his bare hands. Not only does he co-lead their escape, but he also ends up saving the daughter of a well-known Mafia boss. However, this leads to Doe being stuck in the middle of a family feud, and he is almost killed by this very same family for knowing just a little too much. And this isn't even half of the story!
Later on, Doe ends up in the hands of a witch, but he realizes quite quickly that she's not the one to fear, but rather who she is working for - - - a man named Zabat- - - who she is delivering our character to. Somehow, Zabat knows exactly who Doe is and why he has supernatural powers, but he refuses to tell him unless Doe helps him first. Doe refuses and, instead, throws himself out of a high rise window. From here, Doe begins to piece some of his life together, but Zabat causes a couple of problems that ends up revealing to the reader that Doe is not human and that the supernatural powers are not a figment of his imagination.
Now, the story is so fast-paced and borders on ridiculous at some points, yet it all fits together quite well; I personally can't think of another way this story could have been told, but that didn't make the book flawless. Stumbling Stoned had some bad writing techniques in it, but not enough that I think readers would put it down.
I can only recommend this book to people who like dark humor, but as far as horror - - - this isn't that type of book. Stumbling Stoned takes readers on a thrill ride through the seedier side of life. I personally believe this is a good book to read to get away from the daily stressors of life. I truly hope that Wyck decides to write a sequel!