Search
Search results
JT (287 KP) rated Easy A (2010) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Flat, dull and lacking in any laughs. Harsh this verdict might be, but I’m afraid it is about the long and the short of it. As Indie films go this does little to highlight those credentials bestowed on other greats such as Clueless or Sixteen Candles. The lovely Emma Stone whose turn in Superbad put her on the road to stardom is short of her best, and at times is cringe worthily bad.
Olive (Stone) is a well liked pupil at high school, but when a little white lie about losing her virginity gets the rumour mill going she is singled out as, well, quite simply a slut.
Drawing on comparisons to The Scarlet Letter, which happens to be one of the books she is studying she takes it upon herself to brandish her attire with the letter A, for adulterer, as well as using her new found status to milk a little money from desperate males keen to move a level or two up the social ladder.
As Indie films go this does little to highlight those credentials bestowed on other greats such as Clueless or Sixteen Candles
Some have compared this to the best teen comedy since Clueless, well forget it, Director Will Gluck does little to inject this film with any laughs whatsoever, and any dramatic interludes seem bland. If anything the characters are somewhat annoying, ranging from Amanda Bynes’s devout Christian who is not really a good advert for all things religious to Olive’s best bud Rhiannon (Aly Michalka) by far and away one of the worst acting performances I have seen for some time.
Even the inclusion of Friends star (yes she’ll always have that tag) Lisa Kudrow as the school councillor or Thomas Haden Church as her teacher husband do little to offer the overall outcome of the plot. Perhaps one of the few shinning lights are Olive’s parents Dill and Rosemary (aptly named), Stanley Tucci and Patricia Clarkson respectively, whose care free guide to parenting should be noted for today’s modern age.
If Gluck thinks he can walk in the same footsteps of a John Hughes master class he is going to have to come up with something better than this. Hughes himself was the Godfather of the teenage comedy for the likes of The Breakfast Club and not forgetting for a second Ferris Bueller’s Day Off.
Easy A tries to hard to follow in the footsteps of the above and even Olive herself references them during the film, with an ending that hardly screams of originality, unless they are paying homage to 80s teen comedies.
Openly, its not good, confused and lost for long periods Stone does her utmost to pull anything back but it ain’t working for her or Gluck here.
Olive (Stone) is a well liked pupil at high school, but when a little white lie about losing her virginity gets the rumour mill going she is singled out as, well, quite simply a slut.
Drawing on comparisons to The Scarlet Letter, which happens to be one of the books she is studying she takes it upon herself to brandish her attire with the letter A, for adulterer, as well as using her new found status to milk a little money from desperate males keen to move a level or two up the social ladder.
As Indie films go this does little to highlight those credentials bestowed on other greats such as Clueless or Sixteen Candles
Some have compared this to the best teen comedy since Clueless, well forget it, Director Will Gluck does little to inject this film with any laughs whatsoever, and any dramatic interludes seem bland. If anything the characters are somewhat annoying, ranging from Amanda Bynes’s devout Christian who is not really a good advert for all things religious to Olive’s best bud Rhiannon (Aly Michalka) by far and away one of the worst acting performances I have seen for some time.
Even the inclusion of Friends star (yes she’ll always have that tag) Lisa Kudrow as the school councillor or Thomas Haden Church as her teacher husband do little to offer the overall outcome of the plot. Perhaps one of the few shinning lights are Olive’s parents Dill and Rosemary (aptly named), Stanley Tucci and Patricia Clarkson respectively, whose care free guide to parenting should be noted for today’s modern age.
If Gluck thinks he can walk in the same footsteps of a John Hughes master class he is going to have to come up with something better than this. Hughes himself was the Godfather of the teenage comedy for the likes of The Breakfast Club and not forgetting for a second Ferris Bueller’s Day Off.
Easy A tries to hard to follow in the footsteps of the above and even Olive herself references them during the film, with an ending that hardly screams of originality, unless they are paying homage to 80s teen comedies.
Openly, its not good, confused and lost for long periods Stone does her utmost to pull anything back but it ain’t working for her or Gluck here.
StockRadars
Finance, Utilities and Stickers
App
* Winner, Financial Industry Software, Asia Pacific ICT Alliance Awards 2014 (APICTA 2014) * Winner,...
The Letters of Richard Cobden: Volume IV: 1860-1865
Book
The Letters of Richard Cobden (1804-1865) provides, in four printed volumes, the first critical...
Walking with the Muses: A Memoir
Book
"Taking her reader through fifty years of fashion from the intersection of the Civil Rights...
SG
Shallow Graves: The Hunt for the New Bedford Highway Serial Killer
Book
Eleven women went missing over the spring and summer of 1988 in New Bedford, Massachusetts, an old...
Dictionary of Classical Mythology
Book
Jenny March's acclaimed Dictionary of Classical Mythology, first published in 1998 but long out of...
Into the Black: The Electrifying True Story of How the First Flight of the Space Shuttle Nearly Ended in Disaster
Book
On 12th April 1981 a revolutionary new spacecraft blasted off from Florida on her maiden flight....
The United States of Beer: A Regional History of the All-American Drink
Book
From the author of "the definitive history of bourbon" (Sacramento Bee) comes the epic true tale of...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The Girl Before in Books
Feb 21, 2021
The Girl Before has left me uncertain. I'm going to try and explain that, but having pondered it for some time I'm still not exactly sure how I feel about it.
The books is split into short chapters from one of two points of view, Emma, the previous tenant and Jane, the new tenant. This works well although took me slightly longer to get used to, not because of the characters or the story line, but because of the writing itself.
Something I noticed fairly quickly was that there are whole sections of this book where speech is basically ignored. It'll appear as you would expect it to in the writing but there are no speech marks to highlight it. At the time of reading it was horrendously annoying, having just flicked through a few pages while writing this I have noticed that all the speech marks are used in Jane's chapters and not in Emma's. I can only assume that it's meant to reflect the two different characters and their personalities, but frustrating is the only way to describe it. I constantly noticed it as I read but made no link to any reason for it until this very minute. If it is a device, I can't say it was very successful, honestly it felt more like a massive error had been made in editing.
That aside, the author has created some very engaging characters. You pick up enough about them as you progress through the book to pick up things of the upcoming story and that always entices you to read on. The book also has a lot of unsettling male characters in it. The women in comparison seem relatively normal. This could be another way to get you on board with the two leads of the book and make you protective of them. But again, that's not something I noticed until after I'd finished the book.
What is there to say about that ending? Unexpected? Overkill?
I enjoy a twist and turn as much as the next person but this book throws them at you. Kudos to the author again for crafting the story well, I did not guess all the twists that it ended up taking. Some were necessary but others seemed to just be there to have a conclusion to every piece of the story. An effort which didn't entirely feel pleasing.
It was an entertaining read, and at just over 400 pages it's easy to whizz through in a day. There's a preview at the end for Believe Me. Reading it just now I'm drawing parallels between how chapters are designed to match their character, I don't think it's for me as a style but the story itself is mildly intriguing. Hopefully it showcases some more well developed characters.
The books is split into short chapters from one of two points of view, Emma, the previous tenant and Jane, the new tenant. This works well although took me slightly longer to get used to, not because of the characters or the story line, but because of the writing itself.
Something I noticed fairly quickly was that there are whole sections of this book where speech is basically ignored. It'll appear as you would expect it to in the writing but there are no speech marks to highlight it. At the time of reading it was horrendously annoying, having just flicked through a few pages while writing this I have noticed that all the speech marks are used in Jane's chapters and not in Emma's. I can only assume that it's meant to reflect the two different characters and their personalities, but frustrating is the only way to describe it. I constantly noticed it as I read but made no link to any reason for it until this very minute. If it is a device, I can't say it was very successful, honestly it felt more like a massive error had been made in editing.
That aside, the author has created some very engaging characters. You pick up enough about them as you progress through the book to pick up things of the upcoming story and that always entices you to read on. The book also has a lot of unsettling male characters in it. The women in comparison seem relatively normal. This could be another way to get you on board with the two leads of the book and make you protective of them. But again, that's not something I noticed until after I'd finished the book.
What is there to say about that ending? Unexpected? Overkill?
I enjoy a twist and turn as much as the next person but this book throws them at you. Kudos to the author again for crafting the story well, I did not guess all the twists that it ended up taking. Some were necessary but others seemed to just be there to have a conclusion to every piece of the story. An effort which didn't entirely feel pleasing.
It was an entertaining read, and at just over 400 pages it's easy to whizz through in a day. There's a preview at the end for Believe Me. Reading it just now I'm drawing parallels between how chapters are designed to match their character, I don't think it's for me as a style but the story itself is mildly intriguing. Hopefully it showcases some more well developed characters.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Killers Anonymous (2019) in Movies
Jan 3, 2021
A killers' support group? Ooooooh, this could be fun.
A group of killers come together to talk about their problems on the night a US Senator is assassinated in London. As they introduce themselves a bigger picture starts to unfold.
Spoiler alert (though the score will have given that away), this COULD have been fun.
The beginning of this film holds little to no... anything. I was 11 minutes in and had absolutely no idea what was happening. There seemed to be no story, no personality, nothing that made me want to carry on watching. At 22 minutes in I wrote, "what is even the point of this" in my notes. By the end I still couldn't see the point.
This lack of interest was a serious hindrance, neither of the two main storylines had an impact. I'm sitting here now wondering whether the film was too complicated, or not complicated enough... it genuinely could be either. After having finished the film I'm concerned that there are so many things in it that scream "sequel incoming". Please, no.
Talent was crammed into this film though, you just have to look at the poster for the movie to see that, even some of those not featured you'd recognise from other things. And all of those actors weren't that bad, we know they can act well, so the question is... why are they in this? With this cast, I think it says something when even they couldn't save this film from the lacklustre material.
We're introduced to the characters in the group one at a time, giving us an overview of their backstory... I had lots of feelings about this. Firstly, it reminded me of an imitation Bad Times At The El Royale. But beyond that mild excitement that maybe we were about to see something good it was a mish-mash of lots of different things. The style was all over the place, and that seemed to be a theme throughout.
Single lit characters, merging scenes that are happening in different locations, graphic novel drawing, it has a lot happening. That along with the madness of some of the scenes made everything rather choppy.
I'm genuinely trying to think of things to say, but every point I look at makes me sigh... that sad sort of sign that makes you disappointed. There are no redeeming features to this apart from the idea, which is so sad, a killers' support group has so many possibilities and this is what we got. And I've just seen the estimated budget was $26 million... that seems like a lot.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/01/killers-anonymous-movie-review.html
A group of killers come together to talk about their problems on the night a US Senator is assassinated in London. As they introduce themselves a bigger picture starts to unfold.
Spoiler alert (though the score will have given that away), this COULD have been fun.
The beginning of this film holds little to no... anything. I was 11 minutes in and had absolutely no idea what was happening. There seemed to be no story, no personality, nothing that made me want to carry on watching. At 22 minutes in I wrote, "what is even the point of this" in my notes. By the end I still couldn't see the point.
This lack of interest was a serious hindrance, neither of the two main storylines had an impact. I'm sitting here now wondering whether the film was too complicated, or not complicated enough... it genuinely could be either. After having finished the film I'm concerned that there are so many things in it that scream "sequel incoming". Please, no.
Talent was crammed into this film though, you just have to look at the poster for the movie to see that, even some of those not featured you'd recognise from other things. And all of those actors weren't that bad, we know they can act well, so the question is... why are they in this? With this cast, I think it says something when even they couldn't save this film from the lacklustre material.
We're introduced to the characters in the group one at a time, giving us an overview of their backstory... I had lots of feelings about this. Firstly, it reminded me of an imitation Bad Times At The El Royale. But beyond that mild excitement that maybe we were about to see something good it was a mish-mash of lots of different things. The style was all over the place, and that seemed to be a theme throughout.
Single lit characters, merging scenes that are happening in different locations, graphic novel drawing, it has a lot happening. That along with the madness of some of the scenes made everything rather choppy.
I'm genuinely trying to think of things to say, but every point I look at makes me sigh... that sad sort of sign that makes you disappointed. There are no redeeming features to this apart from the idea, which is so sad, a killers' support group has so many possibilities and this is what we got. And I've just seen the estimated budget was $26 million... that seems like a lot.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/01/killers-anonymous-movie-review.html