Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) in Movies
Jun 20, 2020
Tarantino makes good movies, I like them, but I don't love them. When everyone was raving about the OUATIH trailer I was sitting back going "that looks okay, but..." I wasn't sure I could see how they were going to mix the two strands of the story together, or why. After seeing it I'm still not sure.
I'm not going to do an extended synopsis for this, partly because I'm not sure what the point was to a lot of it. 2 hours and 41 minutes is a lot of time to fill with such random stuff. There are essentially to films here, and I definitely would have wanted to watch one of them. It doesn't matter how many times I think about this film, I can't make sense of why these stories were put together.
There's a lot of acting talent in this, obviously. I'm not a particular fan of DiCaprio, I can't give you a real reason behind that. I don't mind some of his older films but recently nothing has really caught my eye. He has some excellent moments in this though. I particularly liked the scene where he's on set explaining the story of his novel to his young co-star. The audience and Rick are able to reach the realisation at the same time, it's a moving moment that was annoyingly ruined for me by Trudi's lines afterwards. I guess it does reflect the way Hollywood is though so in that respect it was spot on.
Brad Pitt swooped in and stole the show though. There's a very laid back and sometimes cheeky sense to Cliff, and most of his scenes had me engaged with what was going on. The only thing I would say though is that occasionally you just see Brad Pitt and other characters he's portrayed in this performance. He really does have a strong presence though and apart from those small blips he was by far the best performance of the film and my favourite scenes were his fight with Bruce Lee and the last ten minutes. Both of these were done so well and Pitt's reactions were perfect.
The cast has a lot of bit parters in it, I'm never quite sure what gets something classed as a cameo over a "proper" role. As we're in Hollywood there are obviously a lot of Hollywood stars making appearances and they've all got really strong casting behind them, but they barely get any screen time. We get some Sharon Tate background from Steve McQueen (Damien Lewis) at a party, later on we have Bruce Lee appear for the onset fight scene, there are a lot of faces popping up everywhere.
I briefly want to mention Bruce Lee in this film, since seeing the film I read a couple of pieces about his portrayal in this... I know nothing about him as a person beyond his martial arts skills and while I did find the Lee/Booth fight scene amusing I thought it was a little... off? Lee comes across as a bit of an arse, there's no denying that. Like I said, I know nothing about him, this could be a true depiction but I feel like I would have heard that before if he was. Regardless of the truth, the character didn't come across well, he could easily have been given a slightly cocky demeanour to allow for the challenge to happen without giving him that persona.
I haven't got enough time to talk about every actor in the film but there wasn't anyone who stuck out as being bad, every role was handled reasonably well. Whether they all needed to be there though is another matter.
Earlier I mentioned that the film has two story threads, those being Rick Dalton/Cliff Booth and Sharon Tate. We get the odd crossover moment with the two but ultimately there's no proper link until the end. One of the problems going into the film is that if you don't know anything about Sharon Tate and Charles Manson then one of these storylines isn't going to make a great deal of sense. I'd be interested to see how people going in without that knowledge found the story overall, there have to be some out there right?
OUATIH almost seems like an introduction to Manson being in Mindhunter season 2, you've even got potential crossover as he's played by the same guy. I found the Manson inclusion to be very misleading in the advertising. His appearance is beyond brief in the final cut and it felt like we were due a lot more after watching the trailer. I think I would have preferred the movie if it was weighted the other way with the Tate/Manson side as the focus and the Dalton/Booth side at the add on.
Despite Pitt's performance, the great setting and some other small highlight this film just didn't hit the right notes for me. It was so long, I could have forgiven that had there been a more complex link between the two bits of story. I went in with low expectations and when I came out those were only just met.
If you're considering leaving partway through this there are three reasons that you should stick it out.
- Brad Pitt as Cliff Booth
- Booth's dog
- The last ten minutes (give or take)
The 18 certificate is there for "strong bloody violence", somehow the large amount of drug use doesn't warrant inclusion on the card. Up until around the 2 hour 30 minutes mark this film is a 15. You've had drugs, language and some fights, but nothing that matches up to those last few minutes. They earn that 18 certificate... and it's hilarious. Cliff and his dog are epic and it was worth the rest of the film just to see that, there's some terrible (ridiculous) acting in it that potentially it could have done without but at least I came out slightly less annoyed.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/08/once-upon-time-in-hollywood-movie-review.html
I'm not going to do an extended synopsis for this, partly because I'm not sure what the point was to a lot of it. 2 hours and 41 minutes is a lot of time to fill with such random stuff. There are essentially to films here, and I definitely would have wanted to watch one of them. It doesn't matter how many times I think about this film, I can't make sense of why these stories were put together.
There's a lot of acting talent in this, obviously. I'm not a particular fan of DiCaprio, I can't give you a real reason behind that. I don't mind some of his older films but recently nothing has really caught my eye. He has some excellent moments in this though. I particularly liked the scene where he's on set explaining the story of his novel to his young co-star. The audience and Rick are able to reach the realisation at the same time, it's a moving moment that was annoyingly ruined for me by Trudi's lines afterwards. I guess it does reflect the way Hollywood is though so in that respect it was spot on.
Brad Pitt swooped in and stole the show though. There's a very laid back and sometimes cheeky sense to Cliff, and most of his scenes had me engaged with what was going on. The only thing I would say though is that occasionally you just see Brad Pitt and other characters he's portrayed in this performance. He really does have a strong presence though and apart from those small blips he was by far the best performance of the film and my favourite scenes were his fight with Bruce Lee and the last ten minutes. Both of these were done so well and Pitt's reactions were perfect.
The cast has a lot of bit parters in it, I'm never quite sure what gets something classed as a cameo over a "proper" role. As we're in Hollywood there are obviously a lot of Hollywood stars making appearances and they've all got really strong casting behind them, but they barely get any screen time. We get some Sharon Tate background from Steve McQueen (Damien Lewis) at a party, later on we have Bruce Lee appear for the onset fight scene, there are a lot of faces popping up everywhere.
I briefly want to mention Bruce Lee in this film, since seeing the film I read a couple of pieces about his portrayal in this... I know nothing about him as a person beyond his martial arts skills and while I did find the Lee/Booth fight scene amusing I thought it was a little... off? Lee comes across as a bit of an arse, there's no denying that. Like I said, I know nothing about him, this could be a true depiction but I feel like I would have heard that before if he was. Regardless of the truth, the character didn't come across well, he could easily have been given a slightly cocky demeanour to allow for the challenge to happen without giving him that persona.
I haven't got enough time to talk about every actor in the film but there wasn't anyone who stuck out as being bad, every role was handled reasonably well. Whether they all needed to be there though is another matter.
Earlier I mentioned that the film has two story threads, those being Rick Dalton/Cliff Booth and Sharon Tate. We get the odd crossover moment with the two but ultimately there's no proper link until the end. One of the problems going into the film is that if you don't know anything about Sharon Tate and Charles Manson then one of these storylines isn't going to make a great deal of sense. I'd be interested to see how people going in without that knowledge found the story overall, there have to be some out there right?
OUATIH almost seems like an introduction to Manson being in Mindhunter season 2, you've even got potential crossover as he's played by the same guy. I found the Manson inclusion to be very misleading in the advertising. His appearance is beyond brief in the final cut and it felt like we were due a lot more after watching the trailer. I think I would have preferred the movie if it was weighted the other way with the Tate/Manson side as the focus and the Dalton/Booth side at the add on.
Despite Pitt's performance, the great setting and some other small highlight this film just didn't hit the right notes for me. It was so long, I could have forgiven that had there been a more complex link between the two bits of story. I went in with low expectations and when I came out those were only just met.
If you're considering leaving partway through this there are three reasons that you should stick it out.
- Brad Pitt as Cliff Booth
- Booth's dog
- The last ten minutes (give or take)
The 18 certificate is there for "strong bloody violence", somehow the large amount of drug use doesn't warrant inclusion on the card. Up until around the 2 hour 30 minutes mark this film is a 15. You've had drugs, language and some fights, but nothing that matches up to those last few minutes. They earn that 18 certificate... and it's hilarious. Cliff and his dog are epic and it was worth the rest of the film just to see that, there's some terrible (ridiculous) acting in it that potentially it could have done without but at least I came out slightly less annoyed.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/08/once-upon-time-in-hollywood-movie-review.html
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Chronicles of Crime: 1400 in Tabletop Games
Oct 21, 2020
Isn’t that box cover just awesome? I never open a preview with a comment about components, but this one warranted it because the box art is so good. Anyway, it’s Paris in the year, well, 1400 AD, and now some strange things are afoot at le Cercle K.
Chronicles of Crime: 1400 (which I shall shorten to 1400 for the duration of this preview) is an app-assisted campaign, murder-infested, cooperative storytelling game for one to four players. If you are familiar with the original Chronicles of Crime, you already know how to play 1400. However, should ye be of the uninitiated, allow me to set the stage for this incredible gaming experience.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup, place the Evidence Board in the middle of the table and the Home Location Board near. Keep all the decks of cards nearby (shuffled or unshuffled, whatever is your liking) as well as the alphabetically-labeled Location Boards. Fire up the Chronicles of Crime app, choose “1400,” and then choose the case you would like to play. The app will walk players through the additional setup steps for the case being played. For this solo preview I played through The Missing Pages case. Also, to be completely upfront I got a 95/110 for a final score, but no big deal.
How do I explain this game succinctly? Well, each of the cases will involve players traveling to different Location Boards and meeting Characters at these locations. Many cases will be involving several Special Items and, new for the 1400 version, Vision Cards that may assist players in putting the case into focus. These Vision Cards do not really give the story away or anything, but are merely a vague framework of possible factors.
By using the app and scanning the QR codes on the boards and cards players will be learning about the case, viewing the scene of the crime(s), inspecting items, chatting up locals for information, and also new for 1400: consulting with the goodest boi dog companion! The dog, Perceval, assists the knight (the players) in cases by sniffing items. A word of caution, though, when you play this game do NOT have Perceval sniff any items until you are completely done with a location because he may drag you to another completely different location right away before you were ready. Not that it happened to me, mind you… okay, it did.
Play will continue not so much in “rounds” but until the players have enough evidence and a good handle on the situation enough to return Home to report to their family members all the details of the crime(s) by scanning answers to their questions about the case. The app then assesses the accuracy of the answers and outputs a score. For reference, though I did receive 95/110 on my first play of 1400 I did only receive a 70/100 on my first runthrough of the original Chronicles of Crime, so playing this style of game several times seems to improve how one plays.
Components. As most items in the box of the game are card or cardboard-based, and all really great quality, I will speak on other component items. Firstly, the art and art style throughout the game is simply stunning. I mean look at that Perceval card! And I already raved about the box cover in my opening statement. This art really speaks to me and it says, “I’m gorgeous.”
The app. I have only great things to say about the app. It’s the same app that you would use for original Chronicles of Crime, and operates the exact same way. For me it has been flawless to use and just a joy to bring technology into the gaming world, even for a game set in the year 1400. I am obviously no purist game enthusiast, as I enjoy these hybrid model games. Once you play with the app you will see how ingenious a system it really is. The app coupled with the nondescript cards and other components in the game make for infinite storytelling possibilities that can only be limited by creativity and time constraints. I love the components in the box AND the marvelous app.
Gameplay for me is also just glorious. I love being able to sit down, setup the game, and let the app tell me what’s going on. So what should I do first? Oh, let’s mosey on down here to this Location Board and drum up some information. Ooh I found an Item! I should bring it back to my Family Location Board and ask my merchant sister about it. Hmm, it’s religious in nature? Okay then, my Monkle (monk uncle) will know something about it. Okay, time to go back to that location and speak with the other person who was in there. OH CRAP, I wasted too much (in game) time and now that other person is gone?! Uh oh, I better stop messing around here…
It’s just amazing, and I love this family of games. I am so stoked to delve more into 1400 and discover more shenanigans happening in Paris. Perceval and I are out to solve all the cases and beg for more. If you are looking for a game that uses a hybrid board game/app model, are a fan of this era in history, or just want to have a really great experience playing a game, I urge you to consider Chronicles of Crime: 1400. It has everything I love in a unique game and I just can’t get enough!
Chronicles of Crime: 1400 (which I shall shorten to 1400 for the duration of this preview) is an app-assisted campaign, murder-infested, cooperative storytelling game for one to four players. If you are familiar with the original Chronicles of Crime, you already know how to play 1400. However, should ye be of the uninitiated, allow me to set the stage for this incredible gaming experience.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup, place the Evidence Board in the middle of the table and the Home Location Board near. Keep all the decks of cards nearby (shuffled or unshuffled, whatever is your liking) as well as the alphabetically-labeled Location Boards. Fire up the Chronicles of Crime app, choose “1400,” and then choose the case you would like to play. The app will walk players through the additional setup steps for the case being played. For this solo preview I played through The Missing Pages case. Also, to be completely upfront I got a 95/110 for a final score, but no big deal.
How do I explain this game succinctly? Well, each of the cases will involve players traveling to different Location Boards and meeting Characters at these locations. Many cases will be involving several Special Items and, new for the 1400 version, Vision Cards that may assist players in putting the case into focus. These Vision Cards do not really give the story away or anything, but are merely a vague framework of possible factors.
By using the app and scanning the QR codes on the boards and cards players will be learning about the case, viewing the scene of the crime(s), inspecting items, chatting up locals for information, and also new for 1400: consulting with the goodest boi dog companion! The dog, Perceval, assists the knight (the players) in cases by sniffing items. A word of caution, though, when you play this game do NOT have Perceval sniff any items until you are completely done with a location because he may drag you to another completely different location right away before you were ready. Not that it happened to me, mind you… okay, it did.
Play will continue not so much in “rounds” but until the players have enough evidence and a good handle on the situation enough to return Home to report to their family members all the details of the crime(s) by scanning answers to their questions about the case. The app then assesses the accuracy of the answers and outputs a score. For reference, though I did receive 95/110 on my first play of 1400 I did only receive a 70/100 on my first runthrough of the original Chronicles of Crime, so playing this style of game several times seems to improve how one plays.
Components. As most items in the box of the game are card or cardboard-based, and all really great quality, I will speak on other component items. Firstly, the art and art style throughout the game is simply stunning. I mean look at that Perceval card! And I already raved about the box cover in my opening statement. This art really speaks to me and it says, “I’m gorgeous.”
The app. I have only great things to say about the app. It’s the same app that you would use for original Chronicles of Crime, and operates the exact same way. For me it has been flawless to use and just a joy to bring technology into the gaming world, even for a game set in the year 1400. I am obviously no purist game enthusiast, as I enjoy these hybrid model games. Once you play with the app you will see how ingenious a system it really is. The app coupled with the nondescript cards and other components in the game make for infinite storytelling possibilities that can only be limited by creativity and time constraints. I love the components in the box AND the marvelous app.
Gameplay for me is also just glorious. I love being able to sit down, setup the game, and let the app tell me what’s going on. So what should I do first? Oh, let’s mosey on down here to this Location Board and drum up some information. Ooh I found an Item! I should bring it back to my Family Location Board and ask my merchant sister about it. Hmm, it’s religious in nature? Okay then, my Monkle (monk uncle) will know something about it. Okay, time to go back to that location and speak with the other person who was in there. OH CRAP, I wasted too much (in game) time and now that other person is gone?! Uh oh, I better stop messing around here…
It’s just amazing, and I love this family of games. I am so stoked to delve more into 1400 and discover more shenanigans happening in Paris. Perceval and I are out to solve all the cases and beg for more. If you are looking for a game that uses a hybrid board game/app model, are a fan of this era in history, or just want to have a really great experience playing a game, I urge you to consider Chronicles of Crime: 1400. It has everything I love in a unique game and I just can’t get enough!
Gareth von Kallenbach (977 KP) rated Toni Erdmann (2016) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
Well Now! *over exaggerated sigh of relief* After my first movie review of the year it is a suspicious coincidence as well as a welcome relief, that I have the incredibly good fortune to bring you the review of a movie that is not only good but it’s original, sometimes confusing, weird, downright funny, and German. Hey, sometimes when you are disappointed with a domestic film it’s best to look at a foreign film. That ‘strategy’ applies to any movie viewer in any country I can assure you. Today’s film for your consideration is already making waves and winning awards in Germany, Europe, and around the world. It’s making such a significant fuss that as of February 7th, its confirmed that Jack Nicholson is coming out of self-imposed retirement to portray the lead in an American remake of the movie!
‘Toni Erdmann’ is an Austrian-German dramatic comedy written, directed, and co-produced by Maren Abe. The film stars famed Austrian actor Peter Simonischek as Winfried Conradi (the character was based on the directors father a purported prankster) a divorced music teacher and father whose considered by his family, friends, and students to be a hippie. He has the reputation of being a prankster and is notorious for playing practical jokes. He is estranged from his daughter Ines (Sandra Huller). An ambitious business woman working for a company in Romania. They rarely speak except for family gatherings at which Ines is usually on her phone conducting business and actually spends little time with the family. Her father in particular. The only friendship Winfried has is with his blind and deaf dog. One night, after a family gathering and paying a visit to his mother, Winfried falls asleep in his front yard only to wake up and find that his beloved dog has passed away during the night. Feeling lost and dwelling on the past, he travels to Bucharest where his daughter currently consults for an oil company. He finds the office complex where she is based and waits in the lobby for several hours. Finally, he catches a glimpse of Ines walking through the lobby with several board members of her client’s company and sneaks up behind them wearing sunglasses and his trademarked fake teeth while pretending to read a newspaper. Ines notices but completely ignores Winfried. Despite the failure of his practical joke, Ines contacts her father and invites him to a reception at the American embassy in Bucharest where they have a chance encounter with the CEO of a German oil company Mr. Henneberg with whom Ines has been desperately trying arrange business dealings with. While paying little attention to Ines, ironically Henneberg begins a conversation with Winfried in which he casually and jokingly mentioned that he has hired a replacement daughter because Ines is always so busy. Much to the surprise of both, Henneberg invites Ines and her father to join him and his entourage for drinks at a trendy bar where he continues to brush off Ines but only after sharing Winfried’s joke with his colleagues.
Ines is so absorbed in her work she seems to only tolerate her father’s presence and after a few days, Winfried decides to leave feeling alienated as though he’s getting in the way of his daughter’s life. A few days later, Ines and two of her friends are out having drinks when Winfried appears at the bar. Wearing a wig and his trademark false teeth he chimes in on the conversation between his daughter and her friends and comically introduces himself as ‘Toni Erdmann’ a consultant and life coach. Ines two friends continue to converse with him trying their best not to laugh while Winfried continues to ‘enhance’ his character much to the dismay of Ines.
Meanwhile, Ines day-to-Day work routine becomes more frustrating as she seems to be going nowhere with her career despite her best efforts. Becoming almost amused with her father’s character, Ines decides to play along with the character and even invites ‘Erdmann’ to spend time with her at work and with her friends and later even to a business meeting. Strangely enough, the ‘Erdmann’ character created by her father has become a strange and hilarious means of bonding with her father leading to one misadventure after another in which she decides she no longer cares about her current state of being and proceeds to alienate her boss and her colleagues and a way that’s reminiscent of her father’s ‘prankster tendencies’.
This film did not disappoint. It’s funny, it’s shocking, it’s awkward at some points. Most importantly, it’s original. It flys in the face of routine and redundancy and like many great films implies that in the end, the most important thing is family. When worse comes to worse family might not always get you out of trouble but they will certainly provide the catalyst for an escape from the hum drum of whatever is eating at your life.
‘Toni Erdmann’ has already been nominated for ‘Best Film Of The Year’ by critics in several countries including France and England. It premiered at the Cannes film festival last year in the ‘Un Certain Regard’ category of the film festival but the night before its premiere, the judges and critics gave it such praise it was immediately added to the more prestigious ‘Palme d’Or’ category and went on to receive high praise at its premiere. It has already won 20 awards in serval countries with many more awards pending. I’m calling this film 4 out of 5 stars. The film clocks in at 162 minutes. A bit long on the tooth for running time but DO NOT let that discourage you from seeing the film. Do yourself a favor and check out ‘Toni Erdmann’ now and see the original in all it’s hilarious glory. As I mentioned earlier, it’s been confirmed that Jack Nicholson is coming out of retirement to portray the lead in the American remake. This film is totally something you would’ve seen Mr. Nicholson doing early in his career back when he was just getting started as an actor. Even with this in mind someone somewhere along the line could still screw it up.
‘Toni Erdmann’ is an Austrian-German dramatic comedy written, directed, and co-produced by Maren Abe. The film stars famed Austrian actor Peter Simonischek as Winfried Conradi (the character was based on the directors father a purported prankster) a divorced music teacher and father whose considered by his family, friends, and students to be a hippie. He has the reputation of being a prankster and is notorious for playing practical jokes. He is estranged from his daughter Ines (Sandra Huller). An ambitious business woman working for a company in Romania. They rarely speak except for family gatherings at which Ines is usually on her phone conducting business and actually spends little time with the family. Her father in particular. The only friendship Winfried has is with his blind and deaf dog. One night, after a family gathering and paying a visit to his mother, Winfried falls asleep in his front yard only to wake up and find that his beloved dog has passed away during the night. Feeling lost and dwelling on the past, he travels to Bucharest where his daughter currently consults for an oil company. He finds the office complex where she is based and waits in the lobby for several hours. Finally, he catches a glimpse of Ines walking through the lobby with several board members of her client’s company and sneaks up behind them wearing sunglasses and his trademarked fake teeth while pretending to read a newspaper. Ines notices but completely ignores Winfried. Despite the failure of his practical joke, Ines contacts her father and invites him to a reception at the American embassy in Bucharest where they have a chance encounter with the CEO of a German oil company Mr. Henneberg with whom Ines has been desperately trying arrange business dealings with. While paying little attention to Ines, ironically Henneberg begins a conversation with Winfried in which he casually and jokingly mentioned that he has hired a replacement daughter because Ines is always so busy. Much to the surprise of both, Henneberg invites Ines and her father to join him and his entourage for drinks at a trendy bar where he continues to brush off Ines but only after sharing Winfried’s joke with his colleagues.
Ines is so absorbed in her work she seems to only tolerate her father’s presence and after a few days, Winfried decides to leave feeling alienated as though he’s getting in the way of his daughter’s life. A few days later, Ines and two of her friends are out having drinks when Winfried appears at the bar. Wearing a wig and his trademark false teeth he chimes in on the conversation between his daughter and her friends and comically introduces himself as ‘Toni Erdmann’ a consultant and life coach. Ines two friends continue to converse with him trying their best not to laugh while Winfried continues to ‘enhance’ his character much to the dismay of Ines.
Meanwhile, Ines day-to-Day work routine becomes more frustrating as she seems to be going nowhere with her career despite her best efforts. Becoming almost amused with her father’s character, Ines decides to play along with the character and even invites ‘Erdmann’ to spend time with her at work and with her friends and later even to a business meeting. Strangely enough, the ‘Erdmann’ character created by her father has become a strange and hilarious means of bonding with her father leading to one misadventure after another in which she decides she no longer cares about her current state of being and proceeds to alienate her boss and her colleagues and a way that’s reminiscent of her father’s ‘prankster tendencies’.
This film did not disappoint. It’s funny, it’s shocking, it’s awkward at some points. Most importantly, it’s original. It flys in the face of routine and redundancy and like many great films implies that in the end, the most important thing is family. When worse comes to worse family might not always get you out of trouble but they will certainly provide the catalyst for an escape from the hum drum of whatever is eating at your life.
‘Toni Erdmann’ has already been nominated for ‘Best Film Of The Year’ by critics in several countries including France and England. It premiered at the Cannes film festival last year in the ‘Un Certain Regard’ category of the film festival but the night before its premiere, the judges and critics gave it such praise it was immediately added to the more prestigious ‘Palme d’Or’ category and went on to receive high praise at its premiere. It has already won 20 awards in serval countries with many more awards pending. I’m calling this film 4 out of 5 stars. The film clocks in at 162 minutes. A bit long on the tooth for running time but DO NOT let that discourage you from seeing the film. Do yourself a favor and check out ‘Toni Erdmann’ now and see the original in all it’s hilarious glory. As I mentioned earlier, it’s been confirmed that Jack Nicholson is coming out of retirement to portray the lead in the American remake. This film is totally something you would’ve seen Mr. Nicholson doing early in his career back when he was just getting started as an actor. Even with this in mind someone somewhere along the line could still screw it up.
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated Lockdown (Escape from Furnace, #1) in Books
Apr 27, 2018
<b> My summary: </b> Alex was like any other boy. Go to school, hang out with his group, and control the monkey bars. But when he started stealing, his life changed for the worse. Out of nowhere, his best friend is murdered, and he is framed for it. he is sent to the child prison: a Hell hole. Worse than Hell. Furnace. When he’s there, he is disgusted with the way people live. Kids do hard labor like chipping rock. Gangs kill kids. and he isn’t the only innocent person who was framed. But there’s no hope of escape. Nobody can escape furnace. Or at least, that’s what they all say. <i> But that’s only because nobody ever has… </i>
<b> What I felt: </b> Personally, the first time I looked at the cover, I found it just a little disturbing. I thought “eh, I doubt very seriously I’ll like that book. But hey—they want to send me a free book? I’ll take a free book.” So no, I didn’t really like the cover. They could have done much better, either artistically or graphically or even with the colors. But that’s just me as an artist and a girl :D so I did judge it. boy was that a mistake.
The first sentence of this book seemed to grab me by the neck: “If I stopped running, I was dead.” From there, the entire book held me and wouldn’t let me go, from that first sentence to the very end. In fact, it held me after the end, too. I distinctly remember my blood racing, heart beating, sweating, adrenalin searing through my veins while I read this book! It was breathtaking and riveting to the last word. And even after the last word. I sat there, staring at the blank page, gasping and panting like a dog from lack of oxygen from reading a book. (that doesn’t happen very often, people.)
<b> Characters: </b> The characters in this book were very relatable. They weren’t super people, they were real. They handled the horrific experiences of Furnace the same way I would have—screaming in their sleep, crying, throwing up from the horrors.
<b> Writing: </b> the writing was very good—not one of those books where the author just says what he wants to say. Alexander Gordon Smith followed my creative writing teachers’ first rule: Show, don’t tell. It was an amazing thing to read, the language was very full in vocabulary, and it had good prose. There wasn’t any really bad foul language either, like some of the other teen books I’ve been reading lately.
Recommendation: this book is a thriller, not a horror book, even though it’s mildly graphic (mildly. Not really that bad. Descriptive enough to be kinda gross at times… but hey, it could be just because I’m a girl.). It’s not the most horrific book I’ve ever read, but it’s certainly not for an eight-year-old. Personally I’d recommend it for anyone fourteen and up (but that’s just me).
Here is a link for a giveaway for this book! http://haleymathiot.blogspot.com/2009/09/win-lockdown.html
<b> What I felt: </b> Personally, the first time I looked at the cover, I found it just a little disturbing. I thought “eh, I doubt very seriously I’ll like that book. But hey—they want to send me a free book? I’ll take a free book.” So no, I didn’t really like the cover. They could have done much better, either artistically or graphically or even with the colors. But that’s just me as an artist and a girl :D so I did judge it. boy was that a mistake.
The first sentence of this book seemed to grab me by the neck: “If I stopped running, I was dead.” From there, the entire book held me and wouldn’t let me go, from that first sentence to the very end. In fact, it held me after the end, too. I distinctly remember my blood racing, heart beating, sweating, adrenalin searing through my veins while I read this book! It was breathtaking and riveting to the last word. And even after the last word. I sat there, staring at the blank page, gasping and panting like a dog from lack of oxygen from reading a book. (that doesn’t happen very often, people.)
<b> Characters: </b> The characters in this book were very relatable. They weren’t super people, they were real. They handled the horrific experiences of Furnace the same way I would have—screaming in their sleep, crying, throwing up from the horrors.
<b> Writing: </b> the writing was very good—not one of those books where the author just says what he wants to say. Alexander Gordon Smith followed my creative writing teachers’ first rule: Show, don’t tell. It was an amazing thing to read, the language was very full in vocabulary, and it had good prose. There wasn’t any really bad foul language either, like some of the other teen books I’ve been reading lately.
Recommendation: this book is a thriller, not a horror book, even though it’s mildly graphic (mildly. Not really that bad. Descriptive enough to be kinda gross at times… but hey, it could be just because I’m a girl.). It’s not the most horrific book I’ve ever read, but it’s certainly not for an eight-year-old. Personally I’d recommend it for anyone fourteen and up (but that’s just me).
Here is a link for a giveaway for this book! http://haleymathiot.blogspot.com/2009/09/win-lockdown.html
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated The Wicked and the Just in Books
Feb 15, 2019
<i>The Wicked and the Just</i> doesn't have much in the way of a plot, it more focuses on the everyday lives of two very different girls in 13th century Wales, one who's English and lives inside the walls of Caernarvon, the other a Welsh servant, who lives outside the walls, than on any particular focal point. This changes in the latter part of the book when an event that has been gnawing at the fringes suddenly erupts.
My first impression of Cecily is that she's a colossal brat. She's English, thinks she's better than the Welsh (while also fearing they're going to kill her) and her so-called "betters" as well, pouts and connives to get her father to do as she wants, complains...a lot, and doesn't seem to like anyone other than the friends she was forced to leave behind, her father (sometimes), and her dog. But can you blame her if that's how she was raised and didn't know any better? My feelings about her ran the gamut, as did her behavior, it had its ups and downs as does just about anyone. She can be quite funny with her sly remarks or thoughts, but she can also be cruel, kind, loathsome, understanding, and pathetic. Everytime I thought I was about to like her, she'd do something terrible and I thought her lower than dirt, then she'd have her eyes opened to see her surroundings and then she didn't seem so bad. It went like that quite a lot, and by the end, I felt quite bad for her. Gwinny, on the other hand, though while I didn't like her exactly, I understood her right away and sympathized with her position. She is one angry and vengeful person, who through sheer willpower, somehow manages to hold most of it back. The sections told through her eyes are usually shorter than Cecily's, but they get right to the point and have enough information that I didn't feel anything necessary was excluded. The interactions between the two girls are fraught with dislike, loathing, and begrudging understanding, before it all starts over again. Until the last section the characters are the main plot, where after that point the story really explodes into a fast-paced, suspenseful read, which I'll not spoil if you're not familiar with that part of history (I wasn't). You couldn't tear this book from my hands during these last sixty pages if you tried, I was absolutely riveted. The emotions were high, the situations scary, and more than anything it made me grateful. Grateful to have a roof over my head, grateful for the food I can afford to eat, just grateful all around that I don't have to live as the Welsh did, as many others did in the course of history. A word of warning, as with changing circumstances in life there is no concrete ending to the story, which suits the book well. It ends while just beginning and I can't think of a more fitting finish to the story. A good, solid, thought-provoking novel that has a possible crossover appeal to both history-loving teens and adults.
Originally reviewed: September 10
Received: Amazon Vine
My first impression of Cecily is that she's a colossal brat. She's English, thinks she's better than the Welsh (while also fearing they're going to kill her) and her so-called "betters" as well, pouts and connives to get her father to do as she wants, complains...a lot, and doesn't seem to like anyone other than the friends she was forced to leave behind, her father (sometimes), and her dog. But can you blame her if that's how she was raised and didn't know any better? My feelings about her ran the gamut, as did her behavior, it had its ups and downs as does just about anyone. She can be quite funny with her sly remarks or thoughts, but she can also be cruel, kind, loathsome, understanding, and pathetic. Everytime I thought I was about to like her, she'd do something terrible and I thought her lower than dirt, then she'd have her eyes opened to see her surroundings and then she didn't seem so bad. It went like that quite a lot, and by the end, I felt quite bad for her. Gwinny, on the other hand, though while I didn't like her exactly, I understood her right away and sympathized with her position. She is one angry and vengeful person, who through sheer willpower, somehow manages to hold most of it back. The sections told through her eyes are usually shorter than Cecily's, but they get right to the point and have enough information that I didn't feel anything necessary was excluded. The interactions between the two girls are fraught with dislike, loathing, and begrudging understanding, before it all starts over again. Until the last section the characters are the main plot, where after that point the story really explodes into a fast-paced, suspenseful read, which I'll not spoil if you're not familiar with that part of history (I wasn't). You couldn't tear this book from my hands during these last sixty pages if you tried, I was absolutely riveted. The emotions were high, the situations scary, and more than anything it made me grateful. Grateful to have a roof over my head, grateful for the food I can afford to eat, just grateful all around that I don't have to live as the Welsh did, as many others did in the course of history. A word of warning, as with changing circumstances in life there is no concrete ending to the story, which suits the book well. It ends while just beginning and I can't think of a more fitting finish to the story. A good, solid, thought-provoking novel that has a possible crossover appeal to both history-loving teens and adults.
Originally reviewed: September 10
Received: Amazon Vine
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Wedding Ringer (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Best reserved for the DVD shelf
The comedy genre is one which goes through many cycles. You can go for years with lacklustre efforts featuring big-name celebrities like Norbit and Johnny English: Reborn, but every so often something special comes along to remind you how funny films can be – a la Bridesmaids or The Heat.
This year’s first offering is The Wedding Ringer. Fronted by Kevin Hart and Josh Gad, it follows the story of a loner who is forced to hire a best man to ensure his upcoming wedding goes without a hitch. But will it have you in fits of laughter or running from the altar?
Jeremy Garelick directs a film that despite a few chuckles here and there and the odd laugh-out-loud moment never really manages to settle into a groove and as such it all feels a little, well vanilla.
Dough Harris (Gad) is a man with a secret, one so big he is unable to share it with his obnoxious fiancée Gretchen – the normally adorable Kaley Cuoco-Sweeting in an against type performance. He simply hasn’t got any friends and is forced to hire Jimmy Callahan (Hart) as his best man to make himself look less of a loser.
Naturally things don’t go quite to plan with a selection of mildly amusing set-pieces involving bachelor parties, dogs and dancing interspersed with genuinely touching scenes which look at self-worth and finding true love and friendship.
Unfortunately this is where things begin to unravel. A mixture of slapstick and more complex comedic elements are put into a film which isn’t quite sure which genre it is trying to be, outright comedy or romantic comedy drama.
Hart plays Jimmy well and Gad is good as the bumbling yet sweet Doug, but the former seems to be on autopilot for the majority of The Wedding Ringer’s 101 minute running time while the latter seems to be just going through the motions, exhibiting no real connection with the script.
Other characters including a selection of hired groomsmen and close family barely register as cardboard cut-outs, never mind major characters in a motion picture.
However, the real fun to be had here is in the more childish sequences with one involving a dog, and another featuring an extended danceringer-dancing sequence having the audience in fits of laughter, though again these moments are few and far between.
Ultimately then, The Wedding Ringer isn’t as disappointing as it could have been but falls short of the comedic standard that audiences now expect when paying the increasingly expensive price of a cinema ticket.
Despite some reasonably charming performances, a couple of stand-out scenes and a cracking soundtrack, The Wedding Ringer fits into a bracket reserved for comedy films which could have delivered so much, but in the end just didn’t go quite far enough and it leaves Bridesmaids at the top of the pile for wedding-themed hilarity.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/02/22/best-reserved-for-the-dvd-shelf-the-wedding-ringer-review/
This year’s first offering is The Wedding Ringer. Fronted by Kevin Hart and Josh Gad, it follows the story of a loner who is forced to hire a best man to ensure his upcoming wedding goes without a hitch. But will it have you in fits of laughter or running from the altar?
Jeremy Garelick directs a film that despite a few chuckles here and there and the odd laugh-out-loud moment never really manages to settle into a groove and as such it all feels a little, well vanilla.
Dough Harris (Gad) is a man with a secret, one so big he is unable to share it with his obnoxious fiancée Gretchen – the normally adorable Kaley Cuoco-Sweeting in an against type performance. He simply hasn’t got any friends and is forced to hire Jimmy Callahan (Hart) as his best man to make himself look less of a loser.
Naturally things don’t go quite to plan with a selection of mildly amusing set-pieces involving bachelor parties, dogs and dancing interspersed with genuinely touching scenes which look at self-worth and finding true love and friendship.
Unfortunately this is where things begin to unravel. A mixture of slapstick and more complex comedic elements are put into a film which isn’t quite sure which genre it is trying to be, outright comedy or romantic comedy drama.
Hart plays Jimmy well and Gad is good as the bumbling yet sweet Doug, but the former seems to be on autopilot for the majority of The Wedding Ringer’s 101 minute running time while the latter seems to be just going through the motions, exhibiting no real connection with the script.
Other characters including a selection of hired groomsmen and close family barely register as cardboard cut-outs, never mind major characters in a motion picture.
However, the real fun to be had here is in the more childish sequences with one involving a dog, and another featuring an extended danceringer-dancing sequence having the audience in fits of laughter, though again these moments are few and far between.
Ultimately then, The Wedding Ringer isn’t as disappointing as it could have been but falls short of the comedic standard that audiences now expect when paying the increasingly expensive price of a cinema ticket.
Despite some reasonably charming performances, a couple of stand-out scenes and a cracking soundtrack, The Wedding Ringer fits into a bracket reserved for comedy films which could have delivered so much, but in the end just didn’t go quite far enough and it leaves Bridesmaids at the top of the pile for wedding-themed hilarity.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/02/22/best-reserved-for-the-dvd-shelf-the-wedding-ringer-review/
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Patchwork in Tabletop Games
Jun 12, 2019
Two grandmas duking it out to see who can sew the mightiest quilt of all time! They have a limited time and some questionable patch choices. Can Granny Ethel work in that huge three-button patch? Will Big Mama Sue go for the small square patches to completely fill her rows and columns? Welcome to the duel of the century in Patchwork. Pick your golden oldie and let’s rumble!
This game is a gem. It really is the bee’s knees. So you have in the box a bunch of quilt patch tiles that are in wonky shapes that you have to Tetris together to score points. It’s that simple! Now here are the catches. You can’t just take any ol’ piece you want, not every piece scores, and you have to manage your time track.
DISCLAIMER: I have the fancy button upgrades from the BGG store, so when you see the play pic below it will look a little different than when using the cardboard chips that come in retail. It was a good $5 upgrade methinks. -T
All the polyominoes are arranged in a circle (okay, probably an ellipse like ours usually are) and you are only able to take one of the three patches next to this little pawn in clockwise manner. Then the pawn moves to the location of the selected patch. Once you have your piece, you place it in your gridded player mat (in cream corn yellow or split pea soup green). If you manage to be the first player to complete a 7×7 completed square you get a bonus token worth 7 points. Hot dog!
The second catch is that not every piece will score. Only the pieces that have cute little button icons will score. Every time scoring is done during the game you will receive a button for each button shown in your quilt. As buttons are used for buying the patches from the circle AND they are your VPs at game end, you really have to determine how much a patch is really worth to you.
Finally, every piece you choose from the offering will cost you time to sew it into your quilt. You will move your time track pawn on the tracker ahead as many spaces as the piece shows, and whomever is behind in the time track goes next. The game ends once both players have made it to the end of the time tracker.
Okay, so the theme here for me is a non-issue. I’m not a quilter, and quilting has never been interesting to me. That aside, this game is super great. I really enjoy trying to optimize my turn by choosing patches that provide as many buttons as possible with the least amount of time sacrificed. Sometimes I go for the 7 point bonus token, but sometimes I feel like buttons are the way to go.
We here at Purple Phoenix Games give this one a Matlock-sized 15 / 18.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/03/19/patchwork-review/
This game is a gem. It really is the bee’s knees. So you have in the box a bunch of quilt patch tiles that are in wonky shapes that you have to Tetris together to score points. It’s that simple! Now here are the catches. You can’t just take any ol’ piece you want, not every piece scores, and you have to manage your time track.
DISCLAIMER: I have the fancy button upgrades from the BGG store, so when you see the play pic below it will look a little different than when using the cardboard chips that come in retail. It was a good $5 upgrade methinks. -T
All the polyominoes are arranged in a circle (okay, probably an ellipse like ours usually are) and you are only able to take one of the three patches next to this little pawn in clockwise manner. Then the pawn moves to the location of the selected patch. Once you have your piece, you place it in your gridded player mat (in cream corn yellow or split pea soup green). If you manage to be the first player to complete a 7×7 completed square you get a bonus token worth 7 points. Hot dog!
The second catch is that not every piece will score. Only the pieces that have cute little button icons will score. Every time scoring is done during the game you will receive a button for each button shown in your quilt. As buttons are used for buying the patches from the circle AND they are your VPs at game end, you really have to determine how much a patch is really worth to you.
Finally, every piece you choose from the offering will cost you time to sew it into your quilt. You will move your time track pawn on the tracker ahead as many spaces as the piece shows, and whomever is behind in the time track goes next. The game ends once both players have made it to the end of the time tracker.
Okay, so the theme here for me is a non-issue. I’m not a quilter, and quilting has never been interesting to me. That aside, this game is super great. I really enjoy trying to optimize my turn by choosing patches that provide as many buttons as possible with the least amount of time sacrificed. Sometimes I go for the 7 point bonus token, but sometimes I feel like buttons are the way to go.
We here at Purple Phoenix Games give this one a Matlock-sized 15 / 18.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/03/19/patchwork-review/
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Point Break (1991) in Movies
Jan 17, 2018
Not Bad
My buddy who recommended Point Break asked for my thoughts almost immediately after I watched it. In a word: Fun. No, it's not going to blow your mind or give you chills, but it's a great film to watch if you're just trying to have a good time. It's like Fast and the Furious before Fast and the Furious became Fast and the Furious. Oh yeah, and with surfer dudes.
Point Break can be a bit over the top at times. One scene in particular involving a chase scene where someone literally threw a dog at Keanu Reeves left me scratching my head and chuckling, but I'm pretty sure I wasn't supposed to be laughing at that point. The plot holes threw me off just as much. Spoiler Alert In the Form of a Question: After Johnny Utah's cover is blown, why the hell is he still hanging out with the bankrobbers?
After a slow start, I managed to find myself engaged in what was unfolding. Keanu Reeves got off to a slow start as well in his role as Johnny Utah, but found his way midway through. It was almost like this was the film where he learned how to act, but director Kathryn Bigelow didn't notice until they were well past the point of reshoots. It doesn't kill the movie, not by a longshot, especially considering its setting.
The ending was extremely ambiguous and, ten years ago, probably would have ruined the entire film for me. Now, it left me asking myself, "What does this mean exactly?" My answer in a sec...
For those of you like me that are new to the film, Point Break is the story of a detective trying to take down a gang of surfers that have become notorious on the bank-robbing circuit as the Ex-Presidents. The film has some fun action sequences, including a house raid midway through that I really enjoyed. I also thought Bigelow captured some powerful shots when it came to expressing the love and power of the ocean. I would love to see this film shot in IMAX today. And I said this film, not the god-awful remake. My favorite shot takes place at a gas station. Bodhi (Patrick Swayze) is burning a car (destroying evidence) to the ground using a gas pump and a lighter. For some reason, it reminded me of the one scene I enjoyed in Batman Vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice where the courtroom explodes and just Superman is left among the flames. Scenes like this, no matter how good or bad a film is, stay etched in your memory for a long time.
So what were my thoughts on the ending? I feel like the waves got the better of Utah and he succumbed to their call. He got a taste of a life that was more easygoing and peaceful. Less rules and restrictions. Ultimately, it was enough for him to throw everything else (badge included) away. And yes, I think he does end up staying with Tyler (Lori Petty).
Glad I saw this film. I give it a 77.
Point Break can be a bit over the top at times. One scene in particular involving a chase scene where someone literally threw a dog at Keanu Reeves left me scratching my head and chuckling, but I'm pretty sure I wasn't supposed to be laughing at that point. The plot holes threw me off just as much. Spoiler Alert In the Form of a Question: After Johnny Utah's cover is blown, why the hell is he still hanging out with the bankrobbers?
After a slow start, I managed to find myself engaged in what was unfolding. Keanu Reeves got off to a slow start as well in his role as Johnny Utah, but found his way midway through. It was almost like this was the film where he learned how to act, but director Kathryn Bigelow didn't notice until they were well past the point of reshoots. It doesn't kill the movie, not by a longshot, especially considering its setting.
The ending was extremely ambiguous and, ten years ago, probably would have ruined the entire film for me. Now, it left me asking myself, "What does this mean exactly?" My answer in a sec...
For those of you like me that are new to the film, Point Break is the story of a detective trying to take down a gang of surfers that have become notorious on the bank-robbing circuit as the Ex-Presidents. The film has some fun action sequences, including a house raid midway through that I really enjoyed. I also thought Bigelow captured some powerful shots when it came to expressing the love and power of the ocean. I would love to see this film shot in IMAX today. And I said this film, not the god-awful remake. My favorite shot takes place at a gas station. Bodhi (Patrick Swayze) is burning a car (destroying evidence) to the ground using a gas pump and a lighter. For some reason, it reminded me of the one scene I enjoyed in Batman Vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice where the courtroom explodes and just Superman is left among the flames. Scenes like this, no matter how good or bad a film is, stay etched in your memory for a long time.
So what were my thoughts on the ending? I feel like the waves got the better of Utah and he succumbed to their call. He got a taste of a life that was more easygoing and peaceful. Less rules and restrictions. Ultimately, it was enough for him to throw everything else (badge included) away. And yes, I think he does end up staying with Tyler (Lori Petty).
Glad I saw this film. I give it a 77.
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated The Scholl Case: The Deadly End of a Marriage in Books
Mar 15, 2018
Also read my review here: http://bookbum.weebly.com/book-reviews/the-scholl-case-by-anja-reich-osang
<i><b>He smiles, but he doesnt show what he has in his heart.</i></b>
I really enjoyed this book, but for reasons I cant really pinpoint. It wasnt like any other true crime book Ive read, it was more like a memoir of Heinrich Scholls life. It was certainly a very dry read in parts, in terms of the actual crime, but I just quite liked reading about how well Heinrich succeed in his life. By the time we got the trial, I was actually very excited to see how it all played out, and I was really rushing through the pages (in a good way). The one big downfall with this book was that I dont know enough about the history of Germany - the war and the fall of the Berlin wall etc - so a lot of the relevance to these events and Scholls life were a little lost on me.
Heinrich was abused mentally as a child and by his wife - even after all his successes in life, so it was kind of unstandable for him to fall into these relationships, with the lady from the town hall and with Nani. and call it love. Because he was never loved beforehand. Its sad really. And his desperation to succeed as an older man was also very upsetting. But he was also wrong to string his wife along for years and years, if he was really unhappy, he should have tried harder to leave her.
Heinrichs wife, Gitti, was a horrid woman! I understand the marriage they had was pretty much a complete sham, but she treated her husband like dirt. Another reason its no surprise Heinrich went looking for other relationships. But I also feel sorry for Gitti, not just because she was murdered, She lost all her family in the most depressing of ways and because she obviously had some troubles of wanting and not succeeding to have the perfect life, and this clearly damaged her. She clearly had some mental issues that made her flit between cursing Heinrich, wanting Heinrich back, and killing herself.
The crime of Brigitte Scholls death is certainly a strange one. Everything points to Heinrich as the murderer, but then it also doesnt. Im not sure I believe it was calculated murder. Manslaughter? Maybe. But murder, no. I actually find it hard to believe he did it at all, but maybe thats because I have so much pity for him.
This book just leaves you wondering around with your own thoughts. It comes to a conclusion, the charge of murder, but it doesnt lead you to any final decision. The choice is yours to make; is Heinrich Scholl guilty of murdering his wife and dog?
Thanks to Netgalley and Text Publishing for giving me the opportunity to read this in exchange for an honest review.
<i><b>He smiles, but he doesnt show what he has in his heart.</i></b>
I really enjoyed this book, but for reasons I cant really pinpoint. It wasnt like any other true crime book Ive read, it was more like a memoir of Heinrich Scholls life. It was certainly a very dry read in parts, in terms of the actual crime, but I just quite liked reading about how well Heinrich succeed in his life. By the time we got the trial, I was actually very excited to see how it all played out, and I was really rushing through the pages (in a good way). The one big downfall with this book was that I dont know enough about the history of Germany - the war and the fall of the Berlin wall etc - so a lot of the relevance to these events and Scholls life were a little lost on me.
Heinrich was abused mentally as a child and by his wife - even after all his successes in life, so it was kind of unstandable for him to fall into these relationships, with the lady from the town hall and with Nani. and call it love. Because he was never loved beforehand. Its sad really. And his desperation to succeed as an older man was also very upsetting. But he was also wrong to string his wife along for years and years, if he was really unhappy, he should have tried harder to leave her.
Heinrichs wife, Gitti, was a horrid woman! I understand the marriage they had was pretty much a complete sham, but she treated her husband like dirt. Another reason its no surprise Heinrich went looking for other relationships. But I also feel sorry for Gitti, not just because she was murdered, She lost all her family in the most depressing of ways and because she obviously had some troubles of wanting and not succeeding to have the perfect life, and this clearly damaged her. She clearly had some mental issues that made her flit between cursing Heinrich, wanting Heinrich back, and killing herself.
The crime of Brigitte Scholls death is certainly a strange one. Everything points to Heinrich as the murderer, but then it also doesnt. Im not sure I believe it was calculated murder. Manslaughter? Maybe. But murder, no. I actually find it hard to believe he did it at all, but maybe thats because I have so much pity for him.
This book just leaves you wondering around with your own thoughts. It comes to a conclusion, the charge of murder, but it doesnt lead you to any final decision. The choice is yours to make; is Heinrich Scholl guilty of murdering his wife and dog?
Thanks to Netgalley and Text Publishing for giving me the opportunity to read this in exchange for an honest review.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Spies in Disguise (2019) in Movies
Jan 1, 2020
I’m not exactly complaining, but Tom Holland does seem to literally be in everything right now. As I sat ready to watch Spies in Disguise, which features the voice of Tom Holland, there was a trailer for upcoming Pixar movie Onward, featuring the voice of Tom Holland. Then a trailer for Dolittle, starring Robert Downey Jr and featuring the voice of Tom Holland as loyal dog Jip. On top of starring in 2019s highest grossing movie, as everyone’s favourite neighbourhood webslinger, he’s certainly having quite the year right now. And well deserved it is too.
But before we get to his voicing of Walter in Spies in Disguise, we meet much younger Walter, 14 years earlier, building gadgets and being branded a weirdo at school. His police officer mum comforts Walter, telling him that weird is good and the world needs weirdos. And that one day, the invention he’s just tested on his unsuspecting mum - a grenade which explodes into glitter and projects cute kittens - might just come in handy...
Will Smith on the other hand, hasn’t had quite as great a year as Tom Holland. Ridiculed for his blue genie in the run up to the release of Aladdin, he actually wasn’t too bad when the movie came out. But then came the disaster that was Gemini Man. Hopefully though, the upcoming sequel ‘Bad Boys for Life’ will be a return to form for Smith, but for now, starring as the voice of Lance Sterling, the worlds greatest spy, has certainly landed him a winner. A suave, charming, one man operation, we’re shown just how cool and impressive Sterling is as he single-handedly and effortlessly takes out dozens of bad guys using combat skills and a variety of spy gadgets. But Lance is suddenly caught off guard when, instead of releasing a more traditional explosive to take out some goons, he releases a glitter-kitty explosion.
Returning to headquarters a hero, we discover that Walter is now working in the gadgets department, where new tricks and toys for spies are designed and tested. Lance is not impressed with Walter messing up his operation and the pair don’t exactly hit it off on the right foot. But when Lance is wrongly accused of committing a crime, he must go on the run and reluctantly team up with Walter to get the bad guy and clear his name. And how is he going to do that without being seen and caught? Well, just so happens that Walter has invented a way of turning humans into pigeons!
There’s nothing particularly new about the main plot of Spies in Disguise, aside from the pigeon aspect of it all of course. But it’s the fast paced action and humour that really sets this apart from the crowd and quite often reminded me of The Incredibles - great characters and great ideas all mixed together with some impressive visuals and slick action. Both Tom Holland and Will Smith are perfect in their roles and, aside from a bit of a mid-movie dip, Spies in Disguise actually proved to be hugely entertaining.
But before we get to his voicing of Walter in Spies in Disguise, we meet much younger Walter, 14 years earlier, building gadgets and being branded a weirdo at school. His police officer mum comforts Walter, telling him that weird is good and the world needs weirdos. And that one day, the invention he’s just tested on his unsuspecting mum - a grenade which explodes into glitter and projects cute kittens - might just come in handy...
Will Smith on the other hand, hasn’t had quite as great a year as Tom Holland. Ridiculed for his blue genie in the run up to the release of Aladdin, he actually wasn’t too bad when the movie came out. But then came the disaster that was Gemini Man. Hopefully though, the upcoming sequel ‘Bad Boys for Life’ will be a return to form for Smith, but for now, starring as the voice of Lance Sterling, the worlds greatest spy, has certainly landed him a winner. A suave, charming, one man operation, we’re shown just how cool and impressive Sterling is as he single-handedly and effortlessly takes out dozens of bad guys using combat skills and a variety of spy gadgets. But Lance is suddenly caught off guard when, instead of releasing a more traditional explosive to take out some goons, he releases a glitter-kitty explosion.
Returning to headquarters a hero, we discover that Walter is now working in the gadgets department, where new tricks and toys for spies are designed and tested. Lance is not impressed with Walter messing up his operation and the pair don’t exactly hit it off on the right foot. But when Lance is wrongly accused of committing a crime, he must go on the run and reluctantly team up with Walter to get the bad guy and clear his name. And how is he going to do that without being seen and caught? Well, just so happens that Walter has invented a way of turning humans into pigeons!
There’s nothing particularly new about the main plot of Spies in Disguise, aside from the pigeon aspect of it all of course. But it’s the fast paced action and humour that really sets this apart from the crowd and quite often reminded me of The Incredibles - great characters and great ideas all mixed together with some impressive visuals and slick action. Both Tom Holland and Will Smith are perfect in their roles and, aside from a bit of a mid-movie dip, Spies in Disguise actually proved to be hugely entertaining.