Search
Search results
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Top Pop in Tabletop Games
Jul 22, 2021
THANK YOU, TALON STRIKES STUDIOS! I recently moved from Illinois to Tennessee (where things are mostly “Coke”) and I have always grown up calling soft drinks “pop,” so when I saw a group was creating a game using the proper terminology, I jumped at the chance. Stackable bottlecaps AND a bidding mechanic? I’m so in. This may not be everyone’s jam, but it’s working for me!
Top Pop is a 2-5 player (well, I would say 3-5) card game of market penetration and territory influence. In it, players are representatives of rival pop manufacturers bent on skyrocketing their company’s popularity in various major cities across the country. The winning rep is they who can diversify their influence and hit influential cities hard and often.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, and I do not know for sure if the final components will be any different from these shown. Also, it is not my intention to detail every rule in the game, as there are just too many. You are invited to download the rulebook, back the game through the Kickstarter campaign, or through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
To setup a game of Top Pop, refer to the rulebook to determine the starting resources per number of players. Each game is setup differently depending on how many players are involved. Shuffle the deck of city cards, and if using the optional City Power or Scenario variants, place these cards on the table for all to access as well. Each player chooses a color, receives the appropriate starting resources and the game is ready to begin!
On the active player’s turn, they will complete the following steps: Collect City Cards, Play a City Card, Take Caps, Place Stacks, and then Draw a Card. The first turn of the game Collect City Cards is skipped, but after that, each card the active player owns the largest stack of tops on they will collect. Caps that were stacked on the card are redistributed depending on where the card was placed (in front of the active player or a rival player). Next, the player will Play a City Card from their hand either in front of themselves or in front of a rival player. This is an important step to consider because once a card has been claimed then caps are distributed according to card placement, as referenced in the first step. Also noteworthy here is that if a card is placed in front of a rival, the active player takes one of said rival’s caps (Take Caps) from the bank of caps in the middle of table as well as a cap of the active player’s choice.
Now that the active player presumably has some caps with which to play, they Place Stacks on any City Card(s) they wish. The stacks of caps need to be the tallest stack on the card, must include a cap of the same color of the player who currently owns the highest stack, and must also be topped with a cap of the active player’s color. Any amount of caps may be added to a City Card in order to achieve these requirements, and the active player may place stacks on any number of City Cards in play. Once the active player has placed all caps they wish, they must then Draw a Card and prepare for their next turn.
As City Cards are played, caps placed out in stacks, and players winning bids on cards, players are jockeying for endgame points. The game ends after a player collects their sixth City Card and every other player has a chance to spend their remaining caps to claim cards. At the end of the game, points are awarded for having simple majority in each city as well as points for collecting a more diversified set of City Cards. The player with the most points scored at the end of the game wins!
Components. Again, this is a prototype copy of the game, so components are in no way final. Most notably, the final copies of Top Pop will include nice plastic stackable bottlecaps that look way better than the painted wooden discs (which for a prototype, are actually quite nice). The City Cards look and feel complete to me, and are pretty impressive. I like the art quite a bit and the game’s style is spot on. I am very excited to see how this one ends up, and I think gamers will love handling the finished bottlecaps.
There is a lot going on here that is hard to put into words. I played this solely three-player and included the City Powers with a few Scenarios (Kickstarter exclusives, I understand). I found the base game to be very good, but adding in those optional rules really makes it pop for me (I know you saw what I did there). Every player is constantly engaged throughout, and the tactical play always has me considering tons of options. I would not necessarily want to play this with extremely AP-prone players, but it is quick enough to include them as well from time to time.
What I like most about Top Pop, in addition to the overall aesthetic (even in the prototype), is the tactics in watching what other players are collecting, where the cards are placed, and cross-referencing all that with your personal bottlecap economy. There are just so many things to consider on each turn that makes me hungry for more and more plays. I say this a lot, but when I think about a game and ways I would attack it differently outside of the game session, that is a mark of a great game to me. And this one is a great game to me.
If you are looking for a uniquely-themed bidding card game with (promised) excellent components, I urge you to check out the Kickstarter campaign, which ends August 7, 2021. And on a personal note, I’m so excited to have both Chicago and New Orleans in this game. Two of my favorite cities in the world!
Top Pop is a 2-5 player (well, I would say 3-5) card game of market penetration and territory influence. In it, players are representatives of rival pop manufacturers bent on skyrocketing their company’s popularity in various major cities across the country. The winning rep is they who can diversify their influence and hit influential cities hard and often.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, and I do not know for sure if the final components will be any different from these shown. Also, it is not my intention to detail every rule in the game, as there are just too many. You are invited to download the rulebook, back the game through the Kickstarter campaign, or through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
To setup a game of Top Pop, refer to the rulebook to determine the starting resources per number of players. Each game is setup differently depending on how many players are involved. Shuffle the deck of city cards, and if using the optional City Power or Scenario variants, place these cards on the table for all to access as well. Each player chooses a color, receives the appropriate starting resources and the game is ready to begin!
On the active player’s turn, they will complete the following steps: Collect City Cards, Play a City Card, Take Caps, Place Stacks, and then Draw a Card. The first turn of the game Collect City Cards is skipped, but after that, each card the active player owns the largest stack of tops on they will collect. Caps that were stacked on the card are redistributed depending on where the card was placed (in front of the active player or a rival player). Next, the player will Play a City Card from their hand either in front of themselves or in front of a rival player. This is an important step to consider because once a card has been claimed then caps are distributed according to card placement, as referenced in the first step. Also noteworthy here is that if a card is placed in front of a rival, the active player takes one of said rival’s caps (Take Caps) from the bank of caps in the middle of table as well as a cap of the active player’s choice.
Now that the active player presumably has some caps with which to play, they Place Stacks on any City Card(s) they wish. The stacks of caps need to be the tallest stack on the card, must include a cap of the same color of the player who currently owns the highest stack, and must also be topped with a cap of the active player’s color. Any amount of caps may be added to a City Card in order to achieve these requirements, and the active player may place stacks on any number of City Cards in play. Once the active player has placed all caps they wish, they must then Draw a Card and prepare for their next turn.
As City Cards are played, caps placed out in stacks, and players winning bids on cards, players are jockeying for endgame points. The game ends after a player collects their sixth City Card and every other player has a chance to spend their remaining caps to claim cards. At the end of the game, points are awarded for having simple majority in each city as well as points for collecting a more diversified set of City Cards. The player with the most points scored at the end of the game wins!
Components. Again, this is a prototype copy of the game, so components are in no way final. Most notably, the final copies of Top Pop will include nice plastic stackable bottlecaps that look way better than the painted wooden discs (which for a prototype, are actually quite nice). The City Cards look and feel complete to me, and are pretty impressive. I like the art quite a bit and the game’s style is spot on. I am very excited to see how this one ends up, and I think gamers will love handling the finished bottlecaps.
There is a lot going on here that is hard to put into words. I played this solely three-player and included the City Powers with a few Scenarios (Kickstarter exclusives, I understand). I found the base game to be very good, but adding in those optional rules really makes it pop for me (I know you saw what I did there). Every player is constantly engaged throughout, and the tactical play always has me considering tons of options. I would not necessarily want to play this with extremely AP-prone players, but it is quick enough to include them as well from time to time.
What I like most about Top Pop, in addition to the overall aesthetic (even in the prototype), is the tactics in watching what other players are collecting, where the cards are placed, and cross-referencing all that with your personal bottlecap economy. There are just so many things to consider on each turn that makes me hungry for more and more plays. I say this a lot, but when I think about a game and ways I would attack it differently outside of the game session, that is a mark of a great game to me. And this one is a great game to me.
If you are looking for a uniquely-themed bidding card game with (promised) excellent components, I urge you to check out the Kickstarter campaign, which ends August 7, 2021. And on a personal note, I’m so excited to have both Chicago and New Orleans in this game. Two of my favorite cities in the world!
Lyndsey Gollogly (2893 KP) rated When You Disappeared in Books
Sep 16, 2022
167 of 230
Kindle
When you Disappeared
By John Marrs
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
All she wanted was the truth, but she’ll wish she never found out.
When Catherine wakes up alone one morning, she thinks her husband has gone for a run before work. But Simon never makes it to the office. His running shoes are by the front door. Nothing is missing—except him.
Catherine knows Simon must be in trouble. He wouldn’t just leave her. He wouldn’t leave the children.
But Simon knows the truth—about why he left and what he’s done. He knows things about his marriage that it would kill Catherine to find out. The memories she holds onto are lies.
While Catherine faces a dark new reality at home, Simon’s halfway around the world, alive and thriving. He’s doing whatever it takes to stay one step ahead of the truth.
But he can’t hide forever, and when he reappears twenty-five years later, Catherine will finally learn who he is.
And wish she’d stayed in the dark.
Holy crap that was a bit good! It was so different to what I thought it was going to be. I couldn’t put it down the characters drew you in. Who’d have thought one simple lack of communication in a perfectly happy relationship would cause so much destruction. I don’t think I’d have been able to stop where Catherine did at the end! Also do you have after hearing an authors voice automatically hear it when read their work? Nope? Just me than kinda weird 😂.
Kindle
When you Disappeared
By John Marrs
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
All she wanted was the truth, but she’ll wish she never found out.
When Catherine wakes up alone one morning, she thinks her husband has gone for a run before work. But Simon never makes it to the office. His running shoes are by the front door. Nothing is missing—except him.
Catherine knows Simon must be in trouble. He wouldn’t just leave her. He wouldn’t leave the children.
But Simon knows the truth—about why he left and what he’s done. He knows things about his marriage that it would kill Catherine to find out. The memories she holds onto are lies.
While Catherine faces a dark new reality at home, Simon’s halfway around the world, alive and thriving. He’s doing whatever it takes to stay one step ahead of the truth.
But he can’t hide forever, and when he reappears twenty-five years later, Catherine will finally learn who he is.
And wish she’d stayed in the dark.
Holy crap that was a bit good! It was so different to what I thought it was going to be. I couldn’t put it down the characters drew you in. Who’d have thought one simple lack of communication in a perfectly happy relationship would cause so much destruction. I don’t think I’d have been able to stop where Catherine did at the end! Also do you have after hearing an authors voice automatically hear it when read their work? Nope? Just me than kinda weird 😂.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Destroyer (2018) in Movies
Sep 13, 2019
Characters – Erin Bell is a police officer that went so deep undercover that she lost her family, 17-years-later the leader of that gang has returned, this will give the Erin a chance to make peace with this case, trying to put her addiction problems a side, Erin won’t take any abuse from anybody, she will step over the line of the law to make sure she puts an end to this case. Silas is the leader of the gang, he makes his followers do anything to prove themselves to him and will lead them in breaking the law, he has gone into hiding, with his return making him a target for Erin. Petra is one of the main followers in the gang, she is one that is still active with Silas, showing that her addiction is still controlling her life. Chris is the partner that worked with Erin in the undercover job, we see how they got to learn to work together to make themselves seem like a couple.
Performances – Nicole Kidman gives one of her career best performances ever single scene we see her committed to this role where she demands your attention unlike any performance, we have ever seen from her before. Toby Kebbell does make us believe his character is on edge and a threat through each and every scene he appears in. Tatiana Maslany and Sebastian Stan complete the main supporting cast which shows us they can step up to look strong against Kidman through the film.
Story – The story here follows a former undercover police officers that wants to make amends for her case which ended in tragedy and has made her lose out part of her life when it comes to family, turning her to her own addictions. The first thing to know about this that we have two times being viewed, it is easy to tell the two apart because of the length of Erin’s hair. As Erin is trying to locate Silas, we get the flashbacks to her interactions with the gang members as she gets to relocate them as she is searching for Silas. Away from the investigation side of the story, Erin is also trying to rebuild her relationship with her daughter one that she shattered with her problems in the past. The mix of the two stories shows us just how dysfunctional this life can become for anyone that gets too deep within the undercover job.
Action/Crime – The action in the film follows the events of the robbery, how it went down and how the escape was planned. We do enter the crime world, which sees how Erin went undercover and operated within the gang, followed by how she bent the laws to track Silas back down.
Settings – The film is set in LA which as always is a wonderful backdrop for the criminal underworld, it shows us just how crime can get done around the city without people seeing it come.
Scene of the Movie – The robbery.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The final encounter.
Final Thoughts – This is brilliant crime thriller that shows that Nicole Kidman is one of the greatest actresses of her generation, we have a story that keeps you guessing with an anti-hero in Erin that needs to fix her life.
Overall: Gripping Tense Thriller
Performances – Nicole Kidman gives one of her career best performances ever single scene we see her committed to this role where she demands your attention unlike any performance, we have ever seen from her before. Toby Kebbell does make us believe his character is on edge and a threat through each and every scene he appears in. Tatiana Maslany and Sebastian Stan complete the main supporting cast which shows us they can step up to look strong against Kidman through the film.
Story – The story here follows a former undercover police officers that wants to make amends for her case which ended in tragedy and has made her lose out part of her life when it comes to family, turning her to her own addictions. The first thing to know about this that we have two times being viewed, it is easy to tell the two apart because of the length of Erin’s hair. As Erin is trying to locate Silas, we get the flashbacks to her interactions with the gang members as she gets to relocate them as she is searching for Silas. Away from the investigation side of the story, Erin is also trying to rebuild her relationship with her daughter one that she shattered with her problems in the past. The mix of the two stories shows us just how dysfunctional this life can become for anyone that gets too deep within the undercover job.
Action/Crime – The action in the film follows the events of the robbery, how it went down and how the escape was planned. We do enter the crime world, which sees how Erin went undercover and operated within the gang, followed by how she bent the laws to track Silas back down.
Settings – The film is set in LA which as always is a wonderful backdrop for the criminal underworld, it shows us just how crime can get done around the city without people seeing it come.
Scene of the Movie – The robbery.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The final encounter.
Final Thoughts – This is brilliant crime thriller that shows that Nicole Kidman is one of the greatest actresses of her generation, we have a story that keeps you guessing with an anti-hero in Erin that needs to fix her life.
Overall: Gripping Tense Thriller
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated Primary Victim in Books
Apr 27, 2018
Primary Victim by Christopher Cihlar
Genre: Crime Fiction, Crime thriller
Rating: 4.5/5
Summary (from back of book): A serial killer whose victims don’t die. An innocent man who believes he is guilty. A police officer who may solve the crime but in doing so gives the killer exactly what he wants. A legal defense that challenges the very core ideals of justice.
Primary Victim is a thriller that tests both the psychological breaking point of an individual and the strength of the legal system governing society.
Review:
I’ll admit up front that I have a weakness for crime fiction—but this book was amazing. Words escape my mind as I try to explain how blown away I am by this book. I gasped and grinned and nearly cried and laughed at the surprises thrown at me through this stunning debut novel.
The psychological aspect of PRIMARY VICTIM was mainly found in the “Victim,” Brice. I won’t say what happens to him, but it amazed me as his mind began to twist and change through the course of the story.
The plot: PRIMARY VICTIM was full of twists and turns that I never expected, and it had me sitting on the edge of my seat the entire time. I couldn’t put it down! The viewpoint alternates between the criminal, the police officer, and the (living) victim, and switches back and forth at the most inconvenient places, forcing you to read on.
Characters: All the characters in PRIMARY VICTIM were strongly developed with real personalities. I hate books where people are just to perfect to be real (what I call “happyland syndrome”)—this book had the good guys and the bad guys, the the ones you hoped it all worked out for them, and the ones that you wished would be the next to die because they were such jerks (cough Nick cough).
By the end of the book I wasn’t sure what Michael (the criminal) was going to pull out of his hat, and was, from the very first page to the very last, impressed with Michael’s genius and creativity. At times I actually found myself almost cheering for him, but had to remind myself that he was the bad guy. It was almost hard to see him as the bad guy at times, because of his “work—” Michael considered himself a God in a world that needed one and didn’t have one, victimizing the people that he thought needed to be victimized.
Brice and Sarah were such a perfect yet sad couple, and for the sake of keeping the review spoiler-free, I won’t say anything… but I thought I was going to cry at one point.
Writing: The writing was the weakest point of this book. The prose itself seemed written in an unfamiliar style, minimizing comas in the sentences, and it made for a harder read. I caught myself occasionally re-reading sentences and paragraphs to understand what had happened. Aside from the prose, the vocabulary was broad enough and the pacing was good.
As of now, PRIMARY VICTIM is unedited, but there is only an occasional grammatical error, formatting error, or typo scattered through the book. However, all in all, it didn’t take away from the story.
Content: There was brief mention of sex between husband and wife (example: “they made love,” no other details, and the fact that they’re married made it that much better), and an occasional foul word from an angry officer, but other than that this book was refreshingly clean. I applaud Christopher for writing a crime thriller with low content—especially compared to some of the other crime thrillers out there. Maybe he can start a revolution. It’s true, people—you can have a good book without excessive sex and language!
Recommendation: Ages 14+ to lovers of Crime fiction, thrillers, and psychological thrillers.
Genre: Crime Fiction, Crime thriller
Rating: 4.5/5
Summary (from back of book): A serial killer whose victims don’t die. An innocent man who believes he is guilty. A police officer who may solve the crime but in doing so gives the killer exactly what he wants. A legal defense that challenges the very core ideals of justice.
Primary Victim is a thriller that tests both the psychological breaking point of an individual and the strength of the legal system governing society.
Review:
I’ll admit up front that I have a weakness for crime fiction—but this book was amazing. Words escape my mind as I try to explain how blown away I am by this book. I gasped and grinned and nearly cried and laughed at the surprises thrown at me through this stunning debut novel.
The psychological aspect of PRIMARY VICTIM was mainly found in the “Victim,” Brice. I won’t say what happens to him, but it amazed me as his mind began to twist and change through the course of the story.
The plot: PRIMARY VICTIM was full of twists and turns that I never expected, and it had me sitting on the edge of my seat the entire time. I couldn’t put it down! The viewpoint alternates between the criminal, the police officer, and the (living) victim, and switches back and forth at the most inconvenient places, forcing you to read on.
Characters: All the characters in PRIMARY VICTIM were strongly developed with real personalities. I hate books where people are just to perfect to be real (what I call “happyland syndrome”)—this book had the good guys and the bad guys, the the ones you hoped it all worked out for them, and the ones that you wished would be the next to die because they were such jerks (cough Nick cough).
By the end of the book I wasn’t sure what Michael (the criminal) was going to pull out of his hat, and was, from the very first page to the very last, impressed with Michael’s genius and creativity. At times I actually found myself almost cheering for him, but had to remind myself that he was the bad guy. It was almost hard to see him as the bad guy at times, because of his “work—” Michael considered himself a God in a world that needed one and didn’t have one, victimizing the people that he thought needed to be victimized.
Brice and Sarah were such a perfect yet sad couple, and for the sake of keeping the review spoiler-free, I won’t say anything… but I thought I was going to cry at one point.
Writing: The writing was the weakest point of this book. The prose itself seemed written in an unfamiliar style, minimizing comas in the sentences, and it made for a harder read. I caught myself occasionally re-reading sentences and paragraphs to understand what had happened. Aside from the prose, the vocabulary was broad enough and the pacing was good.
As of now, PRIMARY VICTIM is unedited, but there is only an occasional grammatical error, formatting error, or typo scattered through the book. However, all in all, it didn’t take away from the story.
Content: There was brief mention of sex between husband and wife (example: “they made love,” no other details, and the fact that they’re married made it that much better), and an occasional foul word from an angry officer, but other than that this book was refreshingly clean. I applaud Christopher for writing a crime thriller with low content—especially compared to some of the other crime thrillers out there. Maybe he can start a revolution. It’s true, people—you can have a good book without excessive sex and language!
Recommendation: Ages 14+ to lovers of Crime fiction, thrillers, and psychological thrillers.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Last Letter from Your Lover (2021) in Movies
Aug 9, 2021
Engaging love story (at least, the one in the 60's) (2 more)
Lush production values, especially production design and cinematography
Great cast - especially Shailene Woodley and Ben Cross
A proper old-fashioned love story that older viewers will appreciate.
Is "chick flick" a phrase that you can use these days? I guess not, since it infers that a movie is only of interest to a particular gender. Perhaps "Sunday afternoon film" is a better phrase. And "The Last Letter From Your Lover" is a real SAF.
Positives:
- "They don't make them like this any more" the saying goes. This is a love story cum melodrama that is well told by director Augustine Frizzell, in only her second feature. The film zips backwards and forwards between different time periods, trusting the audience to keep up with where we are. The dialogue is suitably soupy for a film of this type, based on a Jojo Moyes book (who wrote "Me Before You", also well-filmed). I've seen a critic review in "The Times" where they mocked the sentimentality of the love letters: but part of me would love to say "OK - let's hear what you would have written"!
- The story ticks all the boxes to keep you engaged. Although never moved to tears, a scene towards the end of the movie certainly generated a lump in the throat.
- All the leads are great. Shailene Woodley has been a personal favourite actress since her amazing turn in "The Descendants". And she certainly doesn't disappoint here.
- The production design is lush, particularly with the 60's scenes of London and the Riviera (reminiscent for me of the recent remake of "Rebecca"). This is nicely brought out by the cinematography (by George Steel), with some of the scenes being 'hang on the wall' beautiful to look at.
- It's wonderful to see the late Ben Cross in the movie, and he gives an excellent and touching performance. Cross died of cancer in August 2020 at the age of just 72. This is probably not his last movie, since he was in another - "The Devil's Light" - currently in post-production. Such a sad loss to the industry.
Negatives:
- The movie tries to construct a love story in the 60's and one in the present day 2020's, contrasting the different rules and values at play. The 60's one works; the 20's one really didn't for me. Ellie comes across as a very unlikeable person. The contrast between the lack of communications in the 60's (waiting at a station, not sure if someone will turn up or not) and today's chat/SMS rich 'always on' world could perhaps have been brought out more. With my Dr Bob directorial hat on, I would have ditched the present-day love story entirely and focused in on two professional detectives uncovering the past together: not everything needs to involve love and sex.
- The film has a couple of rain sequences that are highly unconvincing. One Riviera in-car scene particularly made me chuckle. "TURN FIRE HOSE ON!" You can almost see the blue sky and people cavorting on the beach behind them!
Summary Thoughts on "The Last Letter from Your Lover": There are actually few films around these days that feature love stories outside the teenage years. This is an 'old-fashioned' film that will appeal to an older age group, looking for style, romance and escapism. It reminded me in turns of movies like "The Two Faces of January" and "The Age of Adeline" in its mood and presentation. I'm probably not the target audience for this movie and I really enjoyed it. But the illustrious Mrs Movie Man probably is. And she declared that she absolutely loved it!
Ignore the sniffy newspaper and ex-newspaper critics. I'd declare this to be a "recommended".
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web, Facebook or Tiktok. Thanks.)
Positives:
- "They don't make them like this any more" the saying goes. This is a love story cum melodrama that is well told by director Augustine Frizzell, in only her second feature. The film zips backwards and forwards between different time periods, trusting the audience to keep up with where we are. The dialogue is suitably soupy for a film of this type, based on a Jojo Moyes book (who wrote "Me Before You", also well-filmed). I've seen a critic review in "The Times" where they mocked the sentimentality of the love letters: but part of me would love to say "OK - let's hear what you would have written"!
- The story ticks all the boxes to keep you engaged. Although never moved to tears, a scene towards the end of the movie certainly generated a lump in the throat.
- All the leads are great. Shailene Woodley has been a personal favourite actress since her amazing turn in "The Descendants". And she certainly doesn't disappoint here.
- The production design is lush, particularly with the 60's scenes of London and the Riviera (reminiscent for me of the recent remake of "Rebecca"). This is nicely brought out by the cinematography (by George Steel), with some of the scenes being 'hang on the wall' beautiful to look at.
- It's wonderful to see the late Ben Cross in the movie, and he gives an excellent and touching performance. Cross died of cancer in August 2020 at the age of just 72. This is probably not his last movie, since he was in another - "The Devil's Light" - currently in post-production. Such a sad loss to the industry.
Negatives:
- The movie tries to construct a love story in the 60's and one in the present day 2020's, contrasting the different rules and values at play. The 60's one works; the 20's one really didn't for me. Ellie comes across as a very unlikeable person. The contrast between the lack of communications in the 60's (waiting at a station, not sure if someone will turn up or not) and today's chat/SMS rich 'always on' world could perhaps have been brought out more. With my Dr Bob directorial hat on, I would have ditched the present-day love story entirely and focused in on two professional detectives uncovering the past together: not everything needs to involve love and sex.
- The film has a couple of rain sequences that are highly unconvincing. One Riviera in-car scene particularly made me chuckle. "TURN FIRE HOSE ON!" You can almost see the blue sky and people cavorting on the beach behind them!
Summary Thoughts on "The Last Letter from Your Lover": There are actually few films around these days that feature love stories outside the teenage years. This is an 'old-fashioned' film that will appeal to an older age group, looking for style, romance and escapism. It reminded me in turns of movies like "The Two Faces of January" and "The Age of Adeline" in its mood and presentation. I'm probably not the target audience for this movie and I really enjoyed it. But the illustrious Mrs Movie Man probably is. And she declared that she absolutely loved it!
Ignore the sniffy newspaper and ex-newspaper critics. I'd declare this to be a "recommended".
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web, Facebook or Tiktok. Thanks.)
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Love Me Never (Lovely Vicious #1) in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<b><i>I received this book for free from Publisher in exchange for an honest review. This does not affect my opinion of the book or the content of my review.</i></b>
<i>Love Me Never</i> is such a risky read for me, but the synopsis screamed, "I'M INTERESTING. TAKE A CHANCE ON ME." It might not be <a title="Imperfect Chemistry by Mary Frame" href="http://www.bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-imperfect-chemistry-by-mary-frame"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">cute and adorable</a>, but it has the best tagline ever: <i>Don't love your enemy. Declare war on him.</i>
Thus resulting in a person who avoids contemporary taking a plunge (I seem to be doing this a lot lately...) and hoping for the best. <i>Love Me Never</i> isn't a book I would go for – we have a main character who obviously has a horrific past and a guy who is a popular douche bag. Put them together in a high school and they hate each other's guts and attempt to ruin each other's lives.
<em>BUT THE TAGLINE, THOUGH. It screams next favorite contemporary book, self!</em> This coming from frantic little brain cells while deciding whether or not I want to read the book.
It didn't go bad at all. In fact, I think I spent more time giggling over the book than actually analyzing it with my reviewing lenses. I spent more time writing laughing emojis than actually writing legit notes. And I spent more time late at night trying not to laugh so hard and waking up my mom in the process.
Definitely a sign of a good book when I'm rendered into a puddle of giggles.
From early on in the book, Isis Blake comes across as someone extremely sarcastic and snarky. She comes across as someone who is always angry and bitter with the world. But inside, Isis is a girl who encountered someone who hurt her emotionally and possibly physically, and as a result, Isis comes out of that event as someone with very low self-esteem.
Jack Hunter, on the other hand... is quite similar to Isis in terms of personality, although his self-esteem is on the opposite end of the spectrum. In the few pages of the book where Sara allows a peek into Jack's mind and thoughts, he comes across as someone covering up sadness – he's not as angry and bitter as he wants the rest of the world to think.
And then there's the revenge. It is definitely petty revenge – Isis launches a war on Jack all because of an apology who reminds Isis of her past self. Some of the things Isis and Jack put upon each other is so ridiculous and stupid, but their reactions and words makes it humorous and enjoyable. The best kind of pettiness to read about.
<i>Love Me Never</i> is vengeful, dark, hilarious – cliché as this may sound, it is definitely a book worth reading.
<blockquote>A first kiss... that's something a girl should cherish. It's something you should share with someone you really love. You shouldn't lose it in a petty high school battle of wills to someone you hate.</blockquote>
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/blog-tour-love-me-never-by-sara-wolf-arc-review-and-giveaway/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<i>Love Me Never</i> is such a risky read for me, but the synopsis screamed, "I'M INTERESTING. TAKE A CHANCE ON ME." It might not be <a title="Imperfect Chemistry by Mary Frame" href="http://www.bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-imperfect-chemistry-by-mary-frame"; target="_blank" rel="noopener">cute and adorable</a>, but it has the best tagline ever: <i>Don't love your enemy. Declare war on him.</i>
Thus resulting in a person who avoids contemporary taking a plunge (I seem to be doing this a lot lately...) and hoping for the best. <i>Love Me Never</i> isn't a book I would go for – we have a main character who obviously has a horrific past and a guy who is a popular douche bag. Put them together in a high school and they hate each other's guts and attempt to ruin each other's lives.
<em>BUT THE TAGLINE, THOUGH. It screams next favorite contemporary book, self!</em> This coming from frantic little brain cells while deciding whether or not I want to read the book.
It didn't go bad at all. In fact, I think I spent more time giggling over the book than actually analyzing it with my reviewing lenses. I spent more time writing laughing emojis than actually writing legit notes. And I spent more time late at night trying not to laugh so hard and waking up my mom in the process.
Definitely a sign of a good book when I'm rendered into a puddle of giggles.
From early on in the book, Isis Blake comes across as someone extremely sarcastic and snarky. She comes across as someone who is always angry and bitter with the world. But inside, Isis is a girl who encountered someone who hurt her emotionally and possibly physically, and as a result, Isis comes out of that event as someone with very low self-esteem.
Jack Hunter, on the other hand... is quite similar to Isis in terms of personality, although his self-esteem is on the opposite end of the spectrum. In the few pages of the book where Sara allows a peek into Jack's mind and thoughts, he comes across as someone covering up sadness – he's not as angry and bitter as he wants the rest of the world to think.
And then there's the revenge. It is definitely petty revenge – Isis launches a war on Jack all because of an apology who reminds Isis of her past self. Some of the things Isis and Jack put upon each other is so ridiculous and stupid, but their reactions and words makes it humorous and enjoyable. The best kind of pettiness to read about.
<i>Love Me Never</i> is vengeful, dark, hilarious – cliché as this may sound, it is definitely a book worth reading.
<blockquote>A first kiss... that's something a girl should cherish. It's something you should share with someone you really love. You shouldn't lose it in a petty high school battle of wills to someone you hate.</blockquote>
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/blog-tour-love-me-never-by-sara-wolf-arc-review-and-giveaway/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
James P. Sumner (65 KP) rated Game Of Thrones in TV
Jul 1, 2019
Winter has come and gone... and there won't ever be anything like it again!
Contains spoilers, click to show
Game of Thrones. The only show that drove people to brag on social media about the fact they've never seen it every time a new series came out!
I watched this from Season 3, quickly binging the first two seasons about a week before it aired. I'm not a huge Fantasy fan, but this show really was something else. Despite the setting, it gave us everything - blood, guts, drama, sex... even comedy. It gave us some of the most vile and hated antagonists to ever grace the screen, and it made heroes out of the unlikeliest of people.
Watching it week-to-week was difficult for a couple of reasons. One, so much is going on (especially in the earlier seasons) that you can forget a lot in a week, and you find yourself questioning everything. Two, it's so bloody good, you didn't want to wait a whole week to get your fix! Obviously, now it's finished, the second issue is no longer relevant - it's available to binge to your heart's content, which you absolutely should do.
I want to address the recent criticism of the eighth and final season. We waited over two years for it, and many people felt it was rushed, too short and too shallow. I would say 75% of people who watched the last season were left disappointed. Myself included.
But a few days after it had finished, I found myself thinking about the series as a whole more and more. I was reading articles online, theories and arguments about how and why the story played out the way it did. I realised I had felt somewhat detached watching Season 8 because it HAD been two years since I watched Season 7. It's as if I'd forgotten what it was like to watch it.
So, having never seen any episode more than once, I went back to the beginning and watched all eight seasons in a little under three weeks...
SO MUCH BETTER the second time around!
For two reasons. Firstly, there was no break in the story at all. Watching it as it aired meant you had a 12-month break every 10 hours, basically. Easy to lose your thread. Easy to forget things. When that doesn't happen, it's much more enjoyable and actually makes a lot more sense. There was so much I'd forgotten over the course of the nine years it was on, I kind of felt like I'd cheated myself, in a way, by not watching Seasons 1-7 before Season 8 aired.
Second, much in the way that Star Wars Episodes 1-3 work better if you've seen 4-6 first, Game of Thrones was actually much more enjoyable having seen the ending, because things make a lot more sense in retrospect.
***This is where it gets spoilery***
It becomes evident early on, even in the first season, that Jon Snow is one to watch. His shocking death at the end of Season 5 caused much confusion and debate. Obviously, his resurrection early in Season 6 put an end to that, and when the secret about his true identity is finally revealed in Season 8, it was a shocking moment, as everything started to fall into place and the true threat became evident.
However...
Having now done Seasons 1-8 back-to-back, the revelation that Jon Snow is, in fact, a Targaryen is far from surprising, given they've been dropping clues about it since back in the first few episodes. Obviously, at the time, these seemingly throwaway comments meant nothing, but now we know, there are numerous conversations throughout the show that border on being spoilers themselves.
Same with Arya Stark and her storyline. Second time around, even from Season 1, it's evident she was destined to slay The Night King. And as with Jon Snow, you never would've picked up on it at the time, but in hindsight it's been obvious for years.
Now, the major criticism about Season 8 was that it felt rushed and that it sacrificed too many characters arcs for the sake of finishing inside of six episodes. Watching it as it aired, I completely agreed. Jon Snow "suddenly" went from a brooding hero to a pointless extra. Daenerys Targaryen "suddenly" went from the freer of slaves and saviour of Westeros to an insane despot who slaughtered half the world because someone took her toys away.
Not true.
It seemed like that after two years of forgetting almost everything that had happened previously, but watching it from start to finish in one go, those things make perfect sense, and aren't actually that sudden. The Mother of Dragons showed clear and obvious signs of becoming The Mad Queen of Ashes very early on in the show. She was always kind and fair and just... but my goodness, did you get it if you pissed her off! Let's not forget she crucified almost 200 slave-owners long after they surrendered to prove a point. And poor Sam Tarly's father and brother! She had a mean streak, and she lived on a knife's edge. At any point since she married Khal Drogo back at the beginning of Season 1, the slightest push and she would snap. Fast forward to Season 8 and, after many years of fighting to fulfil her birthright and take the Iron Throne, she finds out she's not actually the heir to it at all... that's a pretty big push to a woman with a history of losing her shit when things don't go her way. So not much of a surprise at all, really.
And to address the criticism further, I'll analyse this as a writer. I tell stories for a living. When you're writing a novel, you look at it as a triangle, of sorts. It starts off wide and gradually gets to a point. Game of Thrones began very wide, with lots of characters and subplots. But as time goes on, it narrows and becomes more focused on the main threat... the main storylines - the battle against The Night King and the fight for the Iron Throne. Those two things are what nine years of storytelling were working towards, so yes, when you get to the final season and you have to wrap things up, it makes sense that you're going to focus on the big finish - the point of the series.
Not only that, for the first six seasons, the shows writers and creators had their hands held by George R. R. Martin and his source material. But then the TV show caught up with the books, which meant they suddenly had nothing more than a handful of bullet points to work off instead. Not easy to go from one to the other. They can't embellish things too much, because they run the risk of contradicting and undermining future books, which Mr. Martin wouldn't allow them to do. So they had to keep it simple, stick to the point and finish the job they started - nothing more.
Ultimately, no one likes to see their favourite show end. In hindsight, I think a lot of the criticism the final season received was because the audience forgot what came before it, and because they didn't want it to end.
If you're reading this having never watched it before.... first of all, sorry for ruining the story for you (but I did say it contained spoilers, in my defence). But you have the benefit of being able to binge through this, which means you'll get the full, uninterrupted experience, which is well worth the investment of your time to do.
If you HAVE watched the show before, I strongly suggest re-watching it from the beginning, because I enjoyed it far more the second time around.
This is the kind of show that comes along once a generation. The kind of show people talk about daily long after it finished. It redefines TV drama and I can promise you, you'll never see anything like it again.
That said, don't watch it if you're easily offended or grossed out. Or if you like animals. Oh, and don't watch Season 4, Episode 8 whilst you're eating. And don't watch Season 3, Episode 9 if you believe in the afterlife and have your heart set on getting into Heaven. And it's perfectly acceptable to watch Season 6, Episode 9 and feel like that's what you would do if faced with certain death.
Just perfect.
I watched this from Season 3, quickly binging the first two seasons about a week before it aired. I'm not a huge Fantasy fan, but this show really was something else. Despite the setting, it gave us everything - blood, guts, drama, sex... even comedy. It gave us some of the most vile and hated antagonists to ever grace the screen, and it made heroes out of the unlikeliest of people.
Watching it week-to-week was difficult for a couple of reasons. One, so much is going on (especially in the earlier seasons) that you can forget a lot in a week, and you find yourself questioning everything. Two, it's so bloody good, you didn't want to wait a whole week to get your fix! Obviously, now it's finished, the second issue is no longer relevant - it's available to binge to your heart's content, which you absolutely should do.
I want to address the recent criticism of the eighth and final season. We waited over two years for it, and many people felt it was rushed, too short and too shallow. I would say 75% of people who watched the last season were left disappointed. Myself included.
But a few days after it had finished, I found myself thinking about the series as a whole more and more. I was reading articles online, theories and arguments about how and why the story played out the way it did. I realised I had felt somewhat detached watching Season 8 because it HAD been two years since I watched Season 7. It's as if I'd forgotten what it was like to watch it.
So, having never seen any episode more than once, I went back to the beginning and watched all eight seasons in a little under three weeks...
SO MUCH BETTER the second time around!
For two reasons. Firstly, there was no break in the story at all. Watching it as it aired meant you had a 12-month break every 10 hours, basically. Easy to lose your thread. Easy to forget things. When that doesn't happen, it's much more enjoyable and actually makes a lot more sense. There was so much I'd forgotten over the course of the nine years it was on, I kind of felt like I'd cheated myself, in a way, by not watching Seasons 1-7 before Season 8 aired.
Second, much in the way that Star Wars Episodes 1-3 work better if you've seen 4-6 first, Game of Thrones was actually much more enjoyable having seen the ending, because things make a lot more sense in retrospect.
***This is where it gets spoilery***
It becomes evident early on, even in the first season, that Jon Snow is one to watch. His shocking death at the end of Season 5 caused much confusion and debate. Obviously, his resurrection early in Season 6 put an end to that, and when the secret about his true identity is finally revealed in Season 8, it was a shocking moment, as everything started to fall into place and the true threat became evident.
However...
Having now done Seasons 1-8 back-to-back, the revelation that Jon Snow is, in fact, a Targaryen is far from surprising, given they've been dropping clues about it since back in the first few episodes. Obviously, at the time, these seemingly throwaway comments meant nothing, but now we know, there are numerous conversations throughout the show that border on being spoilers themselves.
Same with Arya Stark and her storyline. Second time around, even from Season 1, it's evident she was destined to slay The Night King. And as with Jon Snow, you never would've picked up on it at the time, but in hindsight it's been obvious for years.
Now, the major criticism about Season 8 was that it felt rushed and that it sacrificed too many characters arcs for the sake of finishing inside of six episodes. Watching it as it aired, I completely agreed. Jon Snow "suddenly" went from a brooding hero to a pointless extra. Daenerys Targaryen "suddenly" went from the freer of slaves and saviour of Westeros to an insane despot who slaughtered half the world because someone took her toys away.
Not true.
It seemed like that after two years of forgetting almost everything that had happened previously, but watching it from start to finish in one go, those things make perfect sense, and aren't actually that sudden. The Mother of Dragons showed clear and obvious signs of becoming The Mad Queen of Ashes very early on in the show. She was always kind and fair and just... but my goodness, did you get it if you pissed her off! Let's not forget she crucified almost 200 slave-owners long after they surrendered to prove a point. And poor Sam Tarly's father and brother! She had a mean streak, and she lived on a knife's edge. At any point since she married Khal Drogo back at the beginning of Season 1, the slightest push and she would snap. Fast forward to Season 8 and, after many years of fighting to fulfil her birthright and take the Iron Throne, she finds out she's not actually the heir to it at all... that's a pretty big push to a woman with a history of losing her shit when things don't go her way. So not much of a surprise at all, really.
And to address the criticism further, I'll analyse this as a writer. I tell stories for a living. When you're writing a novel, you look at it as a triangle, of sorts. It starts off wide and gradually gets to a point. Game of Thrones began very wide, with lots of characters and subplots. But as time goes on, it narrows and becomes more focused on the main threat... the main storylines - the battle against The Night King and the fight for the Iron Throne. Those two things are what nine years of storytelling were working towards, so yes, when you get to the final season and you have to wrap things up, it makes sense that you're going to focus on the big finish - the point of the series.
Not only that, for the first six seasons, the shows writers and creators had their hands held by George R. R. Martin and his source material. But then the TV show caught up with the books, which meant they suddenly had nothing more than a handful of bullet points to work off instead. Not easy to go from one to the other. They can't embellish things too much, because they run the risk of contradicting and undermining future books, which Mr. Martin wouldn't allow them to do. So they had to keep it simple, stick to the point and finish the job they started - nothing more.
Ultimately, no one likes to see their favourite show end. In hindsight, I think a lot of the criticism the final season received was because the audience forgot what came before it, and because they didn't want it to end.
If you're reading this having never watched it before.... first of all, sorry for ruining the story for you (but I did say it contained spoilers, in my defence). But you have the benefit of being able to binge through this, which means you'll get the full, uninterrupted experience, which is well worth the investment of your time to do.
If you HAVE watched the show before, I strongly suggest re-watching it from the beginning, because I enjoyed it far more the second time around.
This is the kind of show that comes along once a generation. The kind of show people talk about daily long after it finished. It redefines TV drama and I can promise you, you'll never see anything like it again.
That said, don't watch it if you're easily offended or grossed out. Or if you like animals. Oh, and don't watch Season 4, Episode 8 whilst you're eating. And don't watch Season 3, Episode 9 if you believe in the afterlife and have your heart set on getting into Heaven. And it's perfectly acceptable to watch Season 6, Episode 9 and feel like that's what you would do if faced with certain death.
Just perfect.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Their Finest (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Keep Calm and Carry on Writing.
In a well-mined category, “Their Finest” is a World War 2 comedy/drama telling a tale I haven’t seen told before: the story behind the British Ministry of Information and their drive to produce propaganda films that support morale and promote positive messages in a time of national crisis. For it is 1940 and London is under nightly attack by the Luftwaffe during the time known as “The Blitz”. Unfortunately the Ministry is run by a bunch of toffs, and their output is laughably misaligned with the working class population, and especially the female population: with their husbands fighting overseas, these two groups are fast becoming one and the same. For women are finding and enjoying new empowerment and freedom in being socially unshackled from the kitchen sink.
The brave crew of the Nancy Starling. Bill Nighy as Uncle Frank, with twins Lily and Francesca Knight as the Starling sisters.
Enter Catrin Cole (Gemma Arterton, “The Girl with all the Gifts“) who is one such woman arriving to a dangerous London from South Wales to live with struggling disabled artist Ellis (Jack Huston, grandson of John Huston). Catrin, stretching the truth a little, brings a stirring ‘true’ tale of derring-do about the Dunkirk evacuation to the Ministry’s attention. She is then employed to “write the slop” (the woman’s dialogue) in the writing team headed by spiky Tom Buckley (Sam Claflin, “Me Before You“).
One of the stars of the film within the film is ‘Uncle Frank’ played by the aging but charismatic actor Ambrose Hilliard (Bill Nighy, “Dad’s Army“, “Love Actually”). Catrin proves her worth by pouring oil on troubled waters as the army insist on the introduction of an American airman (Jake Lacy, “Carol“) to the stressful mix. An attraction builds between Catrin and Tom, but how will the love triangle resolve itself? (For a significant clue see the “Spoiler Section” below the trailer, but be warned that this is a major spoiler!).
As you might expect if you’ve seen the trailer the film is, in the main, warm and funny with Gemma Arterton just gorgeously huggable as the determined young lady trying to make it in a misogynistic 40’s world of work. Arterton is just the perfect “girl next door”: (sigh… if I was only 20 years younger and unattached!) But mixed in with the humour and the romantic storyline is a harsh sprinkling of the trials of war and not a little heartbreak occurs. This is at least a 5 tissue movie.
Claflin, who is having a strong year with appearances in a wide range of films, is also eminently watchable. One of his best scenes is a speech with Arterton about “why people love the movies”, a theory that the film merrily and memorably drives a stake through the heart of!
Elsewhere Lacy is hilarious as the hapless airman with zero acting ability; Helen McCrory (“Harry Potter”) as Sophie Smith vamps it up wonderfully as the potential Polish love interest for Hilliard; Richard E Grant (“Logan“) and Jeremy Irons (“The Lion King”, “Die Hard: with a Vengeance”) pop up in useful cameos and Eddie Marsan (“Sherlock Holmes”) is also touching as Hilliard’s long-suffering agent.
But it is Bill Nighy’s Hilliard who carries most of the wit and humour of the film with his pompous thespian persona, basking in the dwindling glory of a much loved series of “Inspector Lynley” films. With his pomposity progressively warming under the thawing effect of Sophie and Catrin, you have to love him! Bill Nighy is, well, Bill Nighy. Hugh Grant gets it (unfairly) in the neck for “being Hugh Grant” in every film, but this pales in comparison with Nighy’s performances! But who cares: his kooky delivery is just delightful and he is a national treasure!
Slightly less convincing for me was Rachael Stirling’s role as a butch ministry busybody with more than a hint of the lesbian about her. Stirling’s performance in the role is fine, but would this really have been so blatant in 1940’s Britain? This didn’t really ring true for me.
While the film gamely tries to pull off London in the Blitz the film’s limited budget (around £25m) makes everything feel a little underpowered and ’empty’: a few hundred more extras in the Underground/Blitz scenes for example would have helped no end. However, the special effects crew do their best and the cinematography by Sebastian Blenkov (“The Riot Club”) suitably conveys the mood: a scene where Catrin gets caught in a bomb blast outside a clothes shop is particularly moving.
As with all comedy dramas, sometimes the bedfellows lie uncomfortably with each other, and a couple of plot twists: one highly predictable; one shockingly unpredictable make this a non-linear watch. This rollercoaster of a script by Gaby Chiappe, in an excellent feature film debut (she actually also has a cameo in the propaganda “carrot film”!), undeniably adds interest and makes the film more memorable. However (I know from personal experience) that the twist did not please everyone in the audience!
Despite its occasionally uneven tone, this is a really enjoyable watch (particularly for more mature audiences) and Danish director Lone Scherfig finally has a vehicle that matches the quality of her much praised Carey Mulligan vehicle “An Education”.
The brave crew of the Nancy Starling. Bill Nighy as Uncle Frank, with twins Lily and Francesca Knight as the Starling sisters.
Enter Catrin Cole (Gemma Arterton, “The Girl with all the Gifts“) who is one such woman arriving to a dangerous London from South Wales to live with struggling disabled artist Ellis (Jack Huston, grandson of John Huston). Catrin, stretching the truth a little, brings a stirring ‘true’ tale of derring-do about the Dunkirk evacuation to the Ministry’s attention. She is then employed to “write the slop” (the woman’s dialogue) in the writing team headed by spiky Tom Buckley (Sam Claflin, “Me Before You“).
One of the stars of the film within the film is ‘Uncle Frank’ played by the aging but charismatic actor Ambrose Hilliard (Bill Nighy, “Dad’s Army“, “Love Actually”). Catrin proves her worth by pouring oil on troubled waters as the army insist on the introduction of an American airman (Jake Lacy, “Carol“) to the stressful mix. An attraction builds between Catrin and Tom, but how will the love triangle resolve itself? (For a significant clue see the “Spoiler Section” below the trailer, but be warned that this is a major spoiler!).
As you might expect if you’ve seen the trailer the film is, in the main, warm and funny with Gemma Arterton just gorgeously huggable as the determined young lady trying to make it in a misogynistic 40’s world of work. Arterton is just the perfect “girl next door”: (sigh… if I was only 20 years younger and unattached!) But mixed in with the humour and the romantic storyline is a harsh sprinkling of the trials of war and not a little heartbreak occurs. This is at least a 5 tissue movie.
Claflin, who is having a strong year with appearances in a wide range of films, is also eminently watchable. One of his best scenes is a speech with Arterton about “why people love the movies”, a theory that the film merrily and memorably drives a stake through the heart of!
Elsewhere Lacy is hilarious as the hapless airman with zero acting ability; Helen McCrory (“Harry Potter”) as Sophie Smith vamps it up wonderfully as the potential Polish love interest for Hilliard; Richard E Grant (“Logan“) and Jeremy Irons (“The Lion King”, “Die Hard: with a Vengeance”) pop up in useful cameos and Eddie Marsan (“Sherlock Holmes”) is also touching as Hilliard’s long-suffering agent.
But it is Bill Nighy’s Hilliard who carries most of the wit and humour of the film with his pompous thespian persona, basking in the dwindling glory of a much loved series of “Inspector Lynley” films. With his pomposity progressively warming under the thawing effect of Sophie and Catrin, you have to love him! Bill Nighy is, well, Bill Nighy. Hugh Grant gets it (unfairly) in the neck for “being Hugh Grant” in every film, but this pales in comparison with Nighy’s performances! But who cares: his kooky delivery is just delightful and he is a national treasure!
Slightly less convincing for me was Rachael Stirling’s role as a butch ministry busybody with more than a hint of the lesbian about her. Stirling’s performance in the role is fine, but would this really have been so blatant in 1940’s Britain? This didn’t really ring true for me.
While the film gamely tries to pull off London in the Blitz the film’s limited budget (around £25m) makes everything feel a little underpowered and ’empty’: a few hundred more extras in the Underground/Blitz scenes for example would have helped no end. However, the special effects crew do their best and the cinematography by Sebastian Blenkov (“The Riot Club”) suitably conveys the mood: a scene where Catrin gets caught in a bomb blast outside a clothes shop is particularly moving.
As with all comedy dramas, sometimes the bedfellows lie uncomfortably with each other, and a couple of plot twists: one highly predictable; one shockingly unpredictable make this a non-linear watch. This rollercoaster of a script by Gaby Chiappe, in an excellent feature film debut (she actually also has a cameo in the propaganda “carrot film”!), undeniably adds interest and makes the film more memorable. However (I know from personal experience) that the twist did not please everyone in the audience!
Despite its occasionally uneven tone, this is a really enjoyable watch (particularly for more mature audiences) and Danish director Lone Scherfig finally has a vehicle that matches the quality of her much praised Carey Mulligan vehicle “An Education”.
Relax Meditation P: Mindfulness Sounds White Noise
Health & Fitness
App
Happiness at your fingertips! Learning and practicing meditation as an integral part of your day...