Search
Search results
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated The Incredible Hulk (2008) in Movies
May 9, 2019
"As far as I'm concerned, that man's whole body is property of the U.S. army."
I will defend this gem until the day I die.
The Incredible Hulk is without a doubt one of the most underrated, underappreciated film's that I have ever seen. There it is. I'm just putting it out there. Don't worry, I have my reasons that I'll get into but if you don't like this film, if you hate this film even, I encourage you to read this review. I encourage this because I hope to open your eyes to how beautiful and tragic The Incredible Hulk is.
For one, let's take it back to May 1962 when Stan Lee and Jack Kirby introduced to us, in his very own debut issue, the Hulk himself. According to interviews, Lee spoke of how this film truly captured the essence of the character and the comics. In those comics, General Thunderbolt Ross, along with the military, was always chasing Dr. Banner ever since the accident. This is portrayed brilliantly here by Louis Leterrier. I'm not a huge fan of his work but I got to give credit where credit's due.
I don't even know where to start for positives because there's so many. For one, Edward Norton is brilliant (yes brilliant) as Bruce Banner. His performance is so emotionally subdued, filled with great sadness and longing. They even show him suffering from PTSD, which has never been touched on with this character on film. Really great stuff on Norton's part. We also get to finally see Bruce Banner be a scientist. We've seen it in the future films sure, but not to this extent. Bruce is working with scraps, using solely his wits, in a third world country . . . just like in the comics.
The story of Hulk is really a tragic love story. I got serious King Kong vibes from the similar dynamic here and it's beautiful. The chemistry between Banner and Elizabeth Ross is great. It's so believable; two people put in an impossible situation and making it work. That's love.
Hulk's character is so well realized here. He suffers from PTSD like I said, but the actual monster himself is perfect. They even throw in a bit of a horror vibe for the first Hulk-out scene. Oh yeah, there's numerous Hulk-out scenes!!! There's so many great omages to the comics as well and I loved every bit of it.
Lastly, looking at it from a technical side it's great. The cinematography is extremely well done and a total feast for the eyes. The pacing is great and goes by like the snap of Thanos himself. The editing is top-notch. The soundtrack by Craig Armstrong is one of my favorites of all time and is so iconic and beautiful. Finally, there's a serious tone. FINALLY. There are some well incorporated jokes but unlike some other Marvel films, it's not overbearing.
As for negatives, they are almost none to nonexistent. Really just nitpicks. The taxi scene is a bit unrealistic and silly. It's the only scene of humor that felt a bit forced and silly, yet I can easily ignore it. But since this is an analysis, I had to mention it. Also, unlike Ruffalo's Hulk, Norton's Hulk doesn't look very similar to Norton himself. Again, purely a nitpick.
Overall, I absolutely love The Incredible Hulk
The Incredible Hulk is without a doubt one of the most underrated, underappreciated film's that I have ever seen. There it is. I'm just putting it out there. Don't worry, I have my reasons that I'll get into but if you don't like this film, if you hate this film even, I encourage you to read this review. I encourage this because I hope to open your eyes to how beautiful and tragic The Incredible Hulk is.
For one, let's take it back to May 1962 when Stan Lee and Jack Kirby introduced to us, in his very own debut issue, the Hulk himself. According to interviews, Lee spoke of how this film truly captured the essence of the character and the comics. In those comics, General Thunderbolt Ross, along with the military, was always chasing Dr. Banner ever since the accident. This is portrayed brilliantly here by Louis Leterrier. I'm not a huge fan of his work but I got to give credit where credit's due.
I don't even know where to start for positives because there's so many. For one, Edward Norton is brilliant (yes brilliant) as Bruce Banner. His performance is so emotionally subdued, filled with great sadness and longing. They even show him suffering from PTSD, which has never been touched on with this character on film. Really great stuff on Norton's part. We also get to finally see Bruce Banner be a scientist. We've seen it in the future films sure, but not to this extent. Bruce is working with scraps, using solely his wits, in a third world country . . . just like in the comics.
The story of Hulk is really a tragic love story. I got serious King Kong vibes from the similar dynamic here and it's beautiful. The chemistry between Banner and Elizabeth Ross is great. It's so believable; two people put in an impossible situation and making it work. That's love.
Hulk's character is so well realized here. He suffers from PTSD like I said, but the actual monster himself is perfect. They even throw in a bit of a horror vibe for the first Hulk-out scene. Oh yeah, there's numerous Hulk-out scenes!!! There's so many great omages to the comics as well and I loved every bit of it.
Lastly, looking at it from a technical side it's great. The cinematography is extremely well done and a total feast for the eyes. The pacing is great and goes by like the snap of Thanos himself. The editing is top-notch. The soundtrack by Craig Armstrong is one of my favorites of all time and is so iconic and beautiful. Finally, there's a serious tone. FINALLY. There are some well incorporated jokes but unlike some other Marvel films, it's not overbearing.
As for negatives, they are almost none to nonexistent. Really just nitpicks. The taxi scene is a bit unrealistic and silly. It's the only scene of humor that felt a bit forced and silly, yet I can easily ignore it. But since this is an analysis, I had to mention it. Also, unlike Ruffalo's Hulk, Norton's Hulk doesn't look very similar to Norton himself. Again, purely a nitpick.
Overall, I absolutely love The Incredible Hulk
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
May 27, 2019
"They said the age of heroes would never come again."
As a huge fan of Zack Snyder's first two efforts inside the DCEU and Patty Jenkins wonderful Wonder Woman, my expectations for Justice League were pretty much through the roof. After the mediocre buzz that it got and all the stuff that happened behind the scenes, I was a little skeptical but still very excited, but after getting out of the theater, one word really just describes how I felt; disappointed.
One of the most wonderful things about the huge explosion of comic book movies has brought, to me personally, is being able to see the comics/cartoons that I grew up on, be brought to life on the big screen. The Justice League animated series was my one of my favorite shows as a kid and seeing seeing them come to screen brought joy to my eyes, and was something of a dream come true and that's the one major point I can give to the film as a whole.
My biggest disappointment in the film is actually Warner Brothers. They are a big bunch of idiots, to be honest. If they would've left Snyder to take his time and actually hired someone who Snyder wanted, the film would've been so much better. It's a sad fact when you can obviously tell which scenes were Snyder's and which were Whedon's. I actually loved every part of the film that you could tell was Zack's; it felt passionate and like it was coming from a fan. Whedon gave shitty one-liners and basically made me feel like I was watching a TV-movie.
A major component to why I actually liked the film was the action. It left me satisfied and I was rooting for them to just kickass and look cool doing it, because when you look at the classic "Justice League" stories, that's basically what it was. But even though the action was pretty stellar; I'm so mad at the fact of Steppenwolf looked so fake and like some of the worst CGI I've ever seen; so it mad the fights a little weak when it looks like the team is fighting a green screen. Also, the last 30-ish minutes kinda saved it for me. It was really "epic" and it felt really pure, I guess is the right word.
The cast. Oh my god the cast was so freaking good. Marvel Studios gets it right a lot of the time, but damn DC you won this one. Ezra Miller & Jason Momoa stood out like a sore thumb at how much better they were. They were so charismatic, yet intense, and altogether just right at place in their characters. Ben Affleck I'm so sorry that Whedon choose to mess you up. Affleck was stellar in BvS yet here, he felt dull and not the Batman I know he could be. Gal Gadot & Ray Fisher were both pretty good, but Gadot felt a little like she was but in the backseat, for sure reason. Henry Cavill though, he was kinda good? I couldn't really tell because half the time he looked like CGI, but I'm sure I'll get over it.
Even though there are some major problems I have with the film; Whedon, crappy CGI, and easily way too short for it too work, Zack Snyder's Justice League still works its way into my enjoyment field and I can see myself watching it further down the line. I definitely hope WB can release a longer, and more put together version, because what we got didn't live up to the hype I had for it.
One of the most wonderful things about the huge explosion of comic book movies has brought, to me personally, is being able to see the comics/cartoons that I grew up on, be brought to life on the big screen. The Justice League animated series was my one of my favorite shows as a kid and seeing seeing them come to screen brought joy to my eyes, and was something of a dream come true and that's the one major point I can give to the film as a whole.
My biggest disappointment in the film is actually Warner Brothers. They are a big bunch of idiots, to be honest. If they would've left Snyder to take his time and actually hired someone who Snyder wanted, the film would've been so much better. It's a sad fact when you can obviously tell which scenes were Snyder's and which were Whedon's. I actually loved every part of the film that you could tell was Zack's; it felt passionate and like it was coming from a fan. Whedon gave shitty one-liners and basically made me feel like I was watching a TV-movie.
A major component to why I actually liked the film was the action. It left me satisfied and I was rooting for them to just kickass and look cool doing it, because when you look at the classic "Justice League" stories, that's basically what it was. But even though the action was pretty stellar; I'm so mad at the fact of Steppenwolf looked so fake and like some of the worst CGI I've ever seen; so it mad the fights a little weak when it looks like the team is fighting a green screen. Also, the last 30-ish minutes kinda saved it for me. It was really "epic" and it felt really pure, I guess is the right word.
The cast. Oh my god the cast was so freaking good. Marvel Studios gets it right a lot of the time, but damn DC you won this one. Ezra Miller & Jason Momoa stood out like a sore thumb at how much better they were. They were so charismatic, yet intense, and altogether just right at place in their characters. Ben Affleck I'm so sorry that Whedon choose to mess you up. Affleck was stellar in BvS yet here, he felt dull and not the Batman I know he could be. Gal Gadot & Ray Fisher were both pretty good, but Gadot felt a little like she was but in the backseat, for sure reason. Henry Cavill though, he was kinda good? I couldn't really tell because half the time he looked like CGI, but I'm sure I'll get over it.
Even though there are some major problems I have with the film; Whedon, crappy CGI, and easily way too short for it too work, Zack Snyder's Justice League still works its way into my enjoyment field and I can see myself watching it further down the line. I definitely hope WB can release a longer, and more put together version, because what we got didn't live up to the hype I had for it.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Alien: Covenant (2017) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Bigger isn't always better
Ridley Scott’s Alien prequel Prometheus wasn’t as warmly received as the veteran director had hoped for upon its release in 2012. In pitching the film for the coveted 12A market, Scott lost the majority of what made his 1979 masterpiece, rated 18, such an epic adventure.
So, five years on, Scott returns with a follow-up that aims to answer those irritating questions that Prometheus left us with. But is Alien: Covenant a return to form for the series? Or yet another damp squib?
Bound for a remote planet on the far side of the galaxy, crew members (Katherine Waterston, Billy Crudup, Danny McBride) of the colony ship Covenant discover a distress signal from what they believe to be an uncharted paradise. While there, they meet David (Michael Fassbender), the synthetic survivor of the doomed Prometheus expedition. However, this new mysterious world soon turns dangerous when a hostile alien life-form forces the crew into a deadly fight for survival.
In Covenant, Scott has tried to take the series back to its horror roots. This is a gory and at times difficult film to stomach, but it just isn’t scary. Despite gaining a 15 certification from the BBFC, Covenant feels like Prometheus on steroids – it’s certainly bigger and in many ways better than its predecessor, but it fails to move this ailing franchise in any new direction.
Naturally, character development takes a backseat here, as it does with many films in the genre, but Scott cleverly casts his characters as loving couples, which raises the emotion once the inevitable bloodshed starts to occur.
That cast is most definitely Covenant’s strongest suit. Prometheus had a distinctly unlikeable roster of characters that didn’t gel together. Here, the way they interact is believable and each of the couplings has a degree of chemistry that helps give their deaths some emotional heft.
Katherine Waterston channels Sigourney Weaver to some extent and makes a good leading lady and Danny McBride’s Tennessee is an excellent presence in an against-type performance from the comedian. However, Michael Fassbender’s portrayal of androids Walter and David is exceptional.
To look at, this is by far the best film in the series. Scott has crafted a detailed, haunting world that emits a damp, grey colour palate. The action is expertly shot, but this is to be expected from a director with decades in the industry. Even the Covenant ship itself feels more grounded in reality when compared to the technology of the Prometheus.
Unfortunately, once the remaining crew arrive ‘safely’ back onboard the Mother ship, things start to unravel rapidly. The film takes far too long to land on the uncharted planet meaning that the final act is rushed and this is a real shame considering the middle 45 minutes feature some of the best sequences in the entire series.
It is nice to see our favourite movie extra-terrestrial’s back in the confines of a spaceship, and the CGI used to bring them to life means they move with a fluidity like never before, but there just isn’t enough of it. It needs more Xenomorph.
Elsewhere, Jed Kurzel’s beautiful score lifts the film in its first half, becoming deeply unnerving and claustrophobic in its second. The change in tone is obvious and helps signify the optimism of the crew as they land, compared with the terror as those that remain leave the planet.
Overall, Alien: Covenant improves on Prometheus in the sense that it feels like a true Alien film, rather than a half-baked idea to cash in on the franchise. Unfortunately, a poor final act, a lack of new direction and yet another frustratingly open story means we still may not get the answers we so desperately want until the inevitable sequel arrives in a few years time.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/05/12/bigger-isnt-always-better-alien-covenant-review/
So, five years on, Scott returns with a follow-up that aims to answer those irritating questions that Prometheus left us with. But is Alien: Covenant a return to form for the series? Or yet another damp squib?
Bound for a remote planet on the far side of the galaxy, crew members (Katherine Waterston, Billy Crudup, Danny McBride) of the colony ship Covenant discover a distress signal from what they believe to be an uncharted paradise. While there, they meet David (Michael Fassbender), the synthetic survivor of the doomed Prometheus expedition. However, this new mysterious world soon turns dangerous when a hostile alien life-form forces the crew into a deadly fight for survival.
In Covenant, Scott has tried to take the series back to its horror roots. This is a gory and at times difficult film to stomach, but it just isn’t scary. Despite gaining a 15 certification from the BBFC, Covenant feels like Prometheus on steroids – it’s certainly bigger and in many ways better than its predecessor, but it fails to move this ailing franchise in any new direction.
Naturally, character development takes a backseat here, as it does with many films in the genre, but Scott cleverly casts his characters as loving couples, which raises the emotion once the inevitable bloodshed starts to occur.
That cast is most definitely Covenant’s strongest suit. Prometheus had a distinctly unlikeable roster of characters that didn’t gel together. Here, the way they interact is believable and each of the couplings has a degree of chemistry that helps give their deaths some emotional heft.
Katherine Waterston channels Sigourney Weaver to some extent and makes a good leading lady and Danny McBride’s Tennessee is an excellent presence in an against-type performance from the comedian. However, Michael Fassbender’s portrayal of androids Walter and David is exceptional.
To look at, this is by far the best film in the series. Scott has crafted a detailed, haunting world that emits a damp, grey colour palate. The action is expertly shot, but this is to be expected from a director with decades in the industry. Even the Covenant ship itself feels more grounded in reality when compared to the technology of the Prometheus.
Unfortunately, once the remaining crew arrive ‘safely’ back onboard the Mother ship, things start to unravel rapidly. The film takes far too long to land on the uncharted planet meaning that the final act is rushed and this is a real shame considering the middle 45 minutes feature some of the best sequences in the entire series.
It is nice to see our favourite movie extra-terrestrial’s back in the confines of a spaceship, and the CGI used to bring them to life means they move with a fluidity like never before, but there just isn’t enough of it. It needs more Xenomorph.
Elsewhere, Jed Kurzel’s beautiful score lifts the film in its first half, becoming deeply unnerving and claustrophobic in its second. The change in tone is obvious and helps signify the optimism of the crew as they land, compared with the terror as those that remain leave the planet.
Overall, Alien: Covenant improves on Prometheus in the sense that it feels like a true Alien film, rather than a half-baked idea to cash in on the franchise. Unfortunately, a poor final act, a lack of new direction and yet another frustratingly open story means we still may not get the answers we so desperately want until the inevitable sequel arrives in a few years time.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/05/12/bigger-isnt-always-better-alien-covenant-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Finding Dory (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Is it a return to form for Pixar/
For years, Pixar was an unstoppable force. The studio combined stunning animation with thought-provoking stories that adults and children could enjoy. From Toy Story to Wall.E, everyone, at some point will have watched a Pixar film.
Then a few things caused the bubble to burst. Firstly, other companies upped their game, big time, with Dreamworks in particular being hot on the heels of their rival. Secondly, Pixar’s own partner, Disney started churning out great animated films with Zootropolis and Wreck-it Ralph worth a mention.
Finally, Pixar lost its way. Cars and its dreadful sequel, followed by an underwhelming prequel to Monsters Inc and the marketing disaster that was The Good Dinosaur all culminated in a studio damaged by its own high standards. Now, in 2016, we have a sequel to arguably Pixar’s best film, Finding Nemo, but does Finding Dory build on its predecessor or sink faster than a stone?
Dory (Ellen DeGeneres) is a wide-eyed, blue tang fish who suffers from memory loss. The one thing she can remember is she somehow became separated from her parents as a child. With help from Nemo and Marlin, Dory embarks on an epic adventure to find them. Her journey brings her to the Marine Life Institute, a rehabilitation centre for diverse ocean species and from there; she tries to reunite with her long-lost relatives.
Finding Dory opens with a neatly packaged throwback to its predecessor, providing an easy way of getting the audience up to speed with what came before it – after all, it’s been 13 years since the release of the first film. From then on, it’s full steam ahead with a story that lacks the subtlety of Finding Nemo, but is engaging nonetheless.
The animation is you guessed it, exceptional. Nemo was one of the best films to showcase Pixar’s talents and its sequel continues that trend. The vibrancy of the colour palette is breath-taking and each shimmering wave makes you feel part of the watery depths. The blacks feel endless and the diversity of marine life just adds to the sparkle.
For adults, there are some cracking references to other films. Would you believe me if I told you Pixar managed to shoehorn an Alien homage in there? Well, they did, and it works beautifully. Couple that with a surprise turn from Sigourney Weaver as a park announcer and it’s a recipe for laughs all around.
Ellen DeGeneres takes centre stage this time around and rightly so. Dory is a loveable character, especially in her wide-eyed youth, and a very well-written one, despite her constant forgetfulness. Elsewhere, Idris Elba provides some laughs as a lazy sea lion and Ed O’Neill steals the show as a grumpy octopus.
Unfortunately, the final act of the film delves into unnecessarily and uncharacteristically silly territory. The joy of Pixar’s other works is that, despite their often out-of-this-world themes, they still feel grounded in reality. Dory’s finale is so ridiculous that it spoils the effect of the plot.
Nevertheless, you’ll be reaching for your tissues more than once as director and scriptwriter Andrew Stanton combines that heart-warming story with some lovely dialogue that will resonate with all generations.
Overall, Finding Dory isn’t the outright success it could’ve been, but it doesn’t continue the slip in Pixar’s quality either. The animation is truly wonderful and some of the references to more adult films are worked in very cleverly – but that final act; it’s just awful.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/08/01/is-it-a-return-to-form-for-pixar-finding-dory-review/
Then a few things caused the bubble to burst. Firstly, other companies upped their game, big time, with Dreamworks in particular being hot on the heels of their rival. Secondly, Pixar’s own partner, Disney started churning out great animated films with Zootropolis and Wreck-it Ralph worth a mention.
Finally, Pixar lost its way. Cars and its dreadful sequel, followed by an underwhelming prequel to Monsters Inc and the marketing disaster that was The Good Dinosaur all culminated in a studio damaged by its own high standards. Now, in 2016, we have a sequel to arguably Pixar’s best film, Finding Nemo, but does Finding Dory build on its predecessor or sink faster than a stone?
Dory (Ellen DeGeneres) is a wide-eyed, blue tang fish who suffers from memory loss. The one thing she can remember is she somehow became separated from her parents as a child. With help from Nemo and Marlin, Dory embarks on an epic adventure to find them. Her journey brings her to the Marine Life Institute, a rehabilitation centre for diverse ocean species and from there; she tries to reunite with her long-lost relatives.
Finding Dory opens with a neatly packaged throwback to its predecessor, providing an easy way of getting the audience up to speed with what came before it – after all, it’s been 13 years since the release of the first film. From then on, it’s full steam ahead with a story that lacks the subtlety of Finding Nemo, but is engaging nonetheless.
The animation is you guessed it, exceptional. Nemo was one of the best films to showcase Pixar’s talents and its sequel continues that trend. The vibrancy of the colour palette is breath-taking and each shimmering wave makes you feel part of the watery depths. The blacks feel endless and the diversity of marine life just adds to the sparkle.
For adults, there are some cracking references to other films. Would you believe me if I told you Pixar managed to shoehorn an Alien homage in there? Well, they did, and it works beautifully. Couple that with a surprise turn from Sigourney Weaver as a park announcer and it’s a recipe for laughs all around.
Ellen DeGeneres takes centre stage this time around and rightly so. Dory is a loveable character, especially in her wide-eyed youth, and a very well-written one, despite her constant forgetfulness. Elsewhere, Idris Elba provides some laughs as a lazy sea lion and Ed O’Neill steals the show as a grumpy octopus.
Unfortunately, the final act of the film delves into unnecessarily and uncharacteristically silly territory. The joy of Pixar’s other works is that, despite their often out-of-this-world themes, they still feel grounded in reality. Dory’s finale is so ridiculous that it spoils the effect of the plot.
Nevertheless, you’ll be reaching for your tissues more than once as director and scriptwriter Andrew Stanton combines that heart-warming story with some lovely dialogue that will resonate with all generations.
Overall, Finding Dory isn’t the outright success it could’ve been, but it doesn’t continue the slip in Pixar’s quality either. The animation is truly wonderful and some of the references to more adult films are worked in very cleverly – but that final act; it’s just awful.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/08/01/is-it-a-return-to-form-for-pixar-finding-dory-review/
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Purple Hearts in Books
Dec 7, 2018
<i>This ARC was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review </i>
An epic tale of a reimagined World War II comes to an explosive end in this third and final book <i>Purple Hearts</i>. Michael Grant created an alternative history in which women were allowed to enter the army and fight alongside the men on the front lines in Europe. Having earned accolades, promotions and the right to go home to America at the conclusion of the previous book, Rio, Frangie and Rainy decide to stay for the remains of the war. It is 6th June 1944, and the battle on the sands of Omaha Beach is about to begin – D-Day.
The story rushes into the horrors of the D-Day landings where Rio, now a Sergeant, is leading her platoon through the treacherous battleground, whilst Frangie, the medic, tries to patch up fallen comrades. The author teases the reader with the introduction of new characters who promptly get killed during this fateful day and battles further along the line. There is no sugar coating the horrific experience of soldiers and civilians, regardless of whether the scenes are fictionalized or not.
The difficulty with writing a work of fiction about the final years of World War II is that the majority of readers will already know the facts. Therefore, it was impossible for Grant to compose a drastic alternative history. Despite the inclusion of women soldiers, the main events occur exactly as they did in reality, beginning with D-Day before moving on to Liberated France, the Hürtgen Forest, the Battle of the Bulge, and, eventually, VE Day.
The three main characters have undergone complete transformations since the beginning of book one. No longer are they the innocent girls mocked for the belief they could be as strong as male soldiers. As horror after horror unfolds, readers are left with only the hope that these three survive.
Throughout book one and two, the narrative was interspersed with a commentary from an anonymous female soldier in a bed at the 107th evacuee hospital in Würzburg, Germany. As promised at the beginning of the series, readers finally find out which character this nameless voice belongs to, although it is dragged out until the final pages of the book.
The title, <i>Purple Hearts</i>, refers to the medal earned by soldiers injured in battle. Rio, Frangie and Rainy have each received one, along with a few other characters. Unfortunately, many are killed in the battles, some who have been in the story from the start, making this an extremely shocking book. It goes to show how dangerous war is and the brutality WWII soldiers experienced. It is a surprise that as many survived as they did.
Although at this point the main focus of the story is the war, there is still the underlying theme of equality, both for women and for black people. Frangie provides the insight into the segregation of blacks, being assigned to black-only patrols and having white patients refuse to be treated by her. However, as the war gets more violent, these lines get blurred until it is (mostly) no longer important the colour of a soldier or medic’s skin.
<i>Purple Hearts</i> is a brilliant end to a challenging series. Readers become invested in the characters and are drawn into a story that is so true to form that it is easy to forget that women did not actually take part in the fighting. Evidently well researched, Michael Grant has penned a series that educates whilst it entertains, opening readers’ eyes to the truth about war. This is nothing like a textbook full of facts and figures, it is a moving, personal (forget the fictional bit) account of what WWII was really like. Written with young adults in mind, this is a great series for both teens and older readers.
An epic tale of a reimagined World War II comes to an explosive end in this third and final book <i>Purple Hearts</i>. Michael Grant created an alternative history in which women were allowed to enter the army and fight alongside the men on the front lines in Europe. Having earned accolades, promotions and the right to go home to America at the conclusion of the previous book, Rio, Frangie and Rainy decide to stay for the remains of the war. It is 6th June 1944, and the battle on the sands of Omaha Beach is about to begin – D-Day.
The story rushes into the horrors of the D-Day landings where Rio, now a Sergeant, is leading her platoon through the treacherous battleground, whilst Frangie, the medic, tries to patch up fallen comrades. The author teases the reader with the introduction of new characters who promptly get killed during this fateful day and battles further along the line. There is no sugar coating the horrific experience of soldiers and civilians, regardless of whether the scenes are fictionalized or not.
The difficulty with writing a work of fiction about the final years of World War II is that the majority of readers will already know the facts. Therefore, it was impossible for Grant to compose a drastic alternative history. Despite the inclusion of women soldiers, the main events occur exactly as they did in reality, beginning with D-Day before moving on to Liberated France, the Hürtgen Forest, the Battle of the Bulge, and, eventually, VE Day.
The three main characters have undergone complete transformations since the beginning of book one. No longer are they the innocent girls mocked for the belief they could be as strong as male soldiers. As horror after horror unfolds, readers are left with only the hope that these three survive.
Throughout book one and two, the narrative was interspersed with a commentary from an anonymous female soldier in a bed at the 107th evacuee hospital in Würzburg, Germany. As promised at the beginning of the series, readers finally find out which character this nameless voice belongs to, although it is dragged out until the final pages of the book.
The title, <i>Purple Hearts</i>, refers to the medal earned by soldiers injured in battle. Rio, Frangie and Rainy have each received one, along with a few other characters. Unfortunately, many are killed in the battles, some who have been in the story from the start, making this an extremely shocking book. It goes to show how dangerous war is and the brutality WWII soldiers experienced. It is a surprise that as many survived as they did.
Although at this point the main focus of the story is the war, there is still the underlying theme of equality, both for women and for black people. Frangie provides the insight into the segregation of blacks, being assigned to black-only patrols and having white patients refuse to be treated by her. However, as the war gets more violent, these lines get blurred until it is (mostly) no longer important the colour of a soldier or medic’s skin.
<i>Purple Hearts</i> is a brilliant end to a challenging series. Readers become invested in the characters and are drawn into a story that is so true to form that it is easy to forget that women did not actually take part in the fighting. Evidently well researched, Michael Grant has penned a series that educates whilst it entertains, opening readers’ eyes to the truth about war. This is nothing like a textbook full of facts and figures, it is a moving, personal (forget the fictional bit) account of what WWII was really like. Written with young adults in mind, this is a great series for both teens and older readers.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated The House at the Edge of the Night in Books
Dec 7, 2018
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</i>
Castellamare, a small island off the south coast of Italy, is the perfect setting for a captivating epic tale that traces a family from the beginning of the 1900s until the more recent year of 2009. Centred at the island’s only bar ‘The House at the Edge of the Night’, the island inhabitants suffer through two world wars, fascism, tourism and recession, however, the bar determinedly stays standing. But what happens in the rest of the world is largely ignored by the island dwellers that prefer to come to the bar to learn about friendships, betrayals and love affairs.
<i>The House at the Edge of the Night </i>begins on the mainland where the Dr Esposito removes the foundling Amadeo from care. Following in his foster father’s footsteps, Amadea Esposito trains to be a doctor and eventually lands himself a position on Castellamare. Having never had a doctor on the island before, Amadeo is welcomed by almost everyone, however, an illicit affair puts an end to his career. Fortunately, The House at the End of the Night provides Amadeo with an income and a home for his new wife, Pina, and his four children.
The story takes the reader through the Second World War, something that is interesting to read from the Italian’s point of view. Rejecting fascism, the Islanders are enraged when their boys are called up to join the war, especially as many, including Amadeo’s three boys, never return. With only a daughter, Maria-Grazia, remaining, the Esposito’s keep the bar going for lack of anything better to do.
But war brings good things as well as bad. Washed up on sure, the British soldier Robert brings good luck to the superstitious villagers, eventually marrying the lovely Maria-Grazia. The story continues through the childhood of their unruly boys, coming to an end as their granddaughter reaches adulthood.
A doctor and a barman, Amadeo also had a love for stories. Listening to his patients and patrons fantastical tales, Amadeo keeps note of them all in his personal notebook. Split into five parts, the book contains a story at the beginning of each section that, although mythical, set the scene for the subsequent narrative.
Alienated from the rest of the world, the Islanders are stuck in their ways, attributing any luck – good and bad – to their patron saint, Sant’Agata. Whenever life gets tough, the people on Castellamare turn to prayer, which although is part of their Catholic faith, often comes across as superstitious and irrational. They refuse to believe any logical explanation, preferring to regard their island as a magical, preternatural site.
There is no specific storyline with the usual climax and conclusion; instead, it works as a biography of a fictional family. It is interesting to regard the impact of the rapidly developing world on the island, from the introduction of a building society and the eventual launch of the Europe – something that the Islanders are naturally against. The inhabitants of Castellamare come across as naïve, but their backgrounds and beliefs are far more interesting than the average person.
<i>The House at the Edge of the Night</i> is a story of stories. It provides more than to be expected from a novel. Catherine Banner writes of beautiful settings, compelling characters and fascinating events that both amuse and entertain in a moving way.
With Victoria Hislop’s novels such as <i>The Island</i> being all the rage amongst many female readers, Catherine Banner’s <i>The House at the Edge of the Night </i>is destined for success. It is a great book to read on holiday or at home, and perfect for book clubs. This book is the ideal escape from the stresses of everyday life.
Castellamare, a small island off the south coast of Italy, is the perfect setting for a captivating epic tale that traces a family from the beginning of the 1900s until the more recent year of 2009. Centred at the island’s only bar ‘The House at the Edge of the Night’, the island inhabitants suffer through two world wars, fascism, tourism and recession, however, the bar determinedly stays standing. But what happens in the rest of the world is largely ignored by the island dwellers that prefer to come to the bar to learn about friendships, betrayals and love affairs.
<i>The House at the Edge of the Night </i>begins on the mainland where the Dr Esposito removes the foundling Amadeo from care. Following in his foster father’s footsteps, Amadea Esposito trains to be a doctor and eventually lands himself a position on Castellamare. Having never had a doctor on the island before, Amadeo is welcomed by almost everyone, however, an illicit affair puts an end to his career. Fortunately, The House at the End of the Night provides Amadeo with an income and a home for his new wife, Pina, and his four children.
The story takes the reader through the Second World War, something that is interesting to read from the Italian’s point of view. Rejecting fascism, the Islanders are enraged when their boys are called up to join the war, especially as many, including Amadeo’s three boys, never return. With only a daughter, Maria-Grazia, remaining, the Esposito’s keep the bar going for lack of anything better to do.
But war brings good things as well as bad. Washed up on sure, the British soldier Robert brings good luck to the superstitious villagers, eventually marrying the lovely Maria-Grazia. The story continues through the childhood of their unruly boys, coming to an end as their granddaughter reaches adulthood.
A doctor and a barman, Amadeo also had a love for stories. Listening to his patients and patrons fantastical tales, Amadeo keeps note of them all in his personal notebook. Split into five parts, the book contains a story at the beginning of each section that, although mythical, set the scene for the subsequent narrative.
Alienated from the rest of the world, the Islanders are stuck in their ways, attributing any luck – good and bad – to their patron saint, Sant’Agata. Whenever life gets tough, the people on Castellamare turn to prayer, which although is part of their Catholic faith, often comes across as superstitious and irrational. They refuse to believe any logical explanation, preferring to regard their island as a magical, preternatural site.
There is no specific storyline with the usual climax and conclusion; instead, it works as a biography of a fictional family. It is interesting to regard the impact of the rapidly developing world on the island, from the introduction of a building society and the eventual launch of the Europe – something that the Islanders are naturally against. The inhabitants of Castellamare come across as naïve, but their backgrounds and beliefs are far more interesting than the average person.
<i>The House at the Edge of the Night</i> is a story of stories. It provides more than to be expected from a novel. Catherine Banner writes of beautiful settings, compelling characters and fascinating events that both amuse and entertain in a moving way.
With Victoria Hislop’s novels such as <i>The Island</i> being all the rage amongst many female readers, Catherine Banner’s <i>The House at the Edge of the Night </i>is destined for success. It is a great book to read on holiday or at home, and perfect for book clubs. This book is the ideal escape from the stresses of everyday life.
Louise (64 KP) rated Whisper to Me in Books
Jul 2, 2018
***This review may contain spoilers***
I won this book in a Goodreads giveaway, which let me tell you I was so pleased, I mean who doesn’t like free books?
First off, I need to mention how beautiful the cover is, the colours are amazing (I am a fan of pinks and purples) and the summer evening with fairground in the background just makes you feel like this is going be an epic summer read with loads of fluffyness…..How wrong was I! This book is DARK!
This book is told as a massive email, 535 pages long! I feel sorry for the guy she is writing to.
The story follows Cassie, she is writing an email to this boy that she met over the summer and tries to explain the reasons behind her actions and to hopefully win him back. The seaside resort that Cassie lives in always brings tourists and Teens looking for summer work, for the past couple of years there have been prostitutes/escorts that go missing but no evidence is left so the killer is at large.In Cassie’s favourite spot at the beach she finds a human foot washed up, after the shock of this discovery she starts hearing a voice inside her head, she is convinced it’s one of the prostitutes and starts investigating and taking matters into her own hands. Along the way she meets this guy and they start hanging out, but she is unable to reveal her secret.
I am going to start off by saying that I didn’t enjoy this book and there are several reasons. I hate having to write negative reviews as this author has taken a lot of time to write this and make a success of it but there were too many flaws for my liking.
First off the book is way to long for a contemporary, it could have easily been 200 pages less,there was a lot of waffle.
I didn’t like the characters!The father suffered from PTSD after being in the Navy SEALS, but to me he felt abusive and really harsh and scary, he was so protective of Cassie and would have these sudden outbursts that I actually feared for her. Cassie was really timid, a bit of a pushover. The guy she has a romance with (you never find out his name) is boring and dull.
HA HA, that brings me on to the romance. It was awful, it was awkward but not in a good way,in a cringe OMG why you doing this way. There was no spark, no angst..nada.
It uses *****for the swear words and that got really tedious in the end and sometimes I didn’t even know what swear word to use,you can fill in the blanks yourself.
Moving on to the things I liked, I enjoyed the focus on the mental health aspect, Cassie is diagnosed with some type of Schizophrenia and she has two different forms of treatment, she has a psychiatrist who just wants to pump drugs in her to solve the problem and then she has cognitive behavioural therapy and you can tell the difference between the good therapist and the bad one. I have read quite a few books about mental health like Depression, Bi-polar and anxiety but none with hearing voices so it was interesting to read something different.
The writing was good it was told in different formats and had some sarcasm and was definitely easy to read.
The ending, I was so damn disappointed with the ending! nothing got resolved, I literally felt I had been robbed. It was like Lake got bored and finished the story early and didn’t tie the ends.
I originally gave this book a 2.5 stars but after reflecting on this I have lowered it to 1.5-2 stars and one of those stars is for the cover.
I won this book in a Goodreads giveaway, which let me tell you I was so pleased, I mean who doesn’t like free books?
First off, I need to mention how beautiful the cover is, the colours are amazing (I am a fan of pinks and purples) and the summer evening with fairground in the background just makes you feel like this is going be an epic summer read with loads of fluffyness…..How wrong was I! This book is DARK!
This book is told as a massive email, 535 pages long! I feel sorry for the guy she is writing to.
The story follows Cassie, she is writing an email to this boy that she met over the summer and tries to explain the reasons behind her actions and to hopefully win him back. The seaside resort that Cassie lives in always brings tourists and Teens looking for summer work, for the past couple of years there have been prostitutes/escorts that go missing but no evidence is left so the killer is at large.In Cassie’s favourite spot at the beach she finds a human foot washed up, after the shock of this discovery she starts hearing a voice inside her head, she is convinced it’s one of the prostitutes and starts investigating and taking matters into her own hands. Along the way she meets this guy and they start hanging out, but she is unable to reveal her secret.
I am going to start off by saying that I didn’t enjoy this book and there are several reasons. I hate having to write negative reviews as this author has taken a lot of time to write this and make a success of it but there were too many flaws for my liking.
First off the book is way to long for a contemporary, it could have easily been 200 pages less,there was a lot of waffle.
I didn’t like the characters!The father suffered from PTSD after being in the Navy SEALS, but to me he felt abusive and really harsh and scary, he was so protective of Cassie and would have these sudden outbursts that I actually feared for her. Cassie was really timid, a bit of a pushover. The guy she has a romance with (you never find out his name) is boring and dull.
HA HA, that brings me on to the romance. It was awful, it was awkward but not in a good way,in a cringe OMG why you doing this way. There was no spark, no angst..nada.
It uses *****for the swear words and that got really tedious in the end and sometimes I didn’t even know what swear word to use,you can fill in the blanks yourself.
Moving on to the things I liked, I enjoyed the focus on the mental health aspect, Cassie is diagnosed with some type of Schizophrenia and she has two different forms of treatment, she has a psychiatrist who just wants to pump drugs in her to solve the problem and then she has cognitive behavioural therapy and you can tell the difference between the good therapist and the bad one. I have read quite a few books about mental health like Depression, Bi-polar and anxiety but none with hearing voices so it was interesting to read something different.
The writing was good it was told in different formats and had some sarcasm and was definitely easy to read.
The ending, I was so damn disappointed with the ending! nothing got resolved, I literally felt I had been robbed. It was like Lake got bored and finished the story early and didn’t tie the ends.
I originally gave this book a 2.5 stars but after reflecting on this I have lowered it to 1.5-2 stars and one of those stars is for the cover.
Gareth von Kallenbach (977 KP) rated Warcraft (2016) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Back in 1994, I fondly remember playing Warcraft on my PC as well as the fun of connecting with a friend over a dial up modem for hours of fun. Blizzard’s online matchmaking portal also served as a source of countless chatrooms in the pre-internet days and through the two sequels and add on packs that followed as well as the huge success of World of Warcraft, the name Warcraft came to symbolize quality and fun to millions of fans the world over.
The feature film is directed by Duncan Jones who replaced Sam Raimi in pre-production years ago, and follows the arrival or the Orcs into Azeroth and the battle that erupts as the humans try to stop this invading force. An evil energy source is compelling the actions of a power obsessed Orc and he is obsessed with destroying the humans to find a new home for his people which is no longer inhabitable thanks to said dark magic.
There are the usual collection of wizards, warriors, love interest, heroes, and villains that one would expect in a fantasy adventure but there are many elements that simply do not work. From poor casting choices to a story that is weak even by video game standards the movie just does not live up to what one expects form a summer blockbuster especially one with a name associated with quality. It is shocking to me that the studio thought the casting choices were appropriate for the film as there is no star power at all and no chemistry at all between any of the performers. It is almost as if some executives figured since their kids play Warcraft and they know people who play Warcraft, then this will be a huge hit as everyone will flock to it. Yes, but the salad days of the franchise are behind it as World of Warcraft does not have the subscriber bases it once had. Three to Five years ago would have been a great time for the film but for now it is too late and far to lacking. I am sure fans will see it for curiosity sake and it may open well, but I do not see it having much staying power and as what is supposed to be the first film in a planned series, I am not sure that I want to see much more of it which is sad as I am a fan of the games and I liked that the visuals of the film matched much of the quality artwork of the games.
The action scenes for the film are entertaining enough and they do have a good degree of visual appeal but they just do not have any intensity or compulsion to them and with the disjointed plot and sub par acting, it really makes it hard to get caught up in the outcome. One segment was indicating an epic battle was to come and it was resolved in seconds which really invalidated much of the events leading up to it.
Sadly the first cinematic offering for the franchise is not going to be the landmark event that the arrival of the previous games have been as it plays out like a big budget fan film with solid special effects but a plodding and stale story, bad acting, and a no-name cast who cannot even decide what accent they are using from scene to scene. I half expected Crow and Tom Servo to pop up in the corner and add their commentary especially during the ridiculous “Moses Scene” which was so indicative of the slapdash nature of the film.
http://sknr.net/2016/06/08/warcraft/
The feature film is directed by Duncan Jones who replaced Sam Raimi in pre-production years ago, and follows the arrival or the Orcs into Azeroth and the battle that erupts as the humans try to stop this invading force. An evil energy source is compelling the actions of a power obsessed Orc and he is obsessed with destroying the humans to find a new home for his people which is no longer inhabitable thanks to said dark magic.
There are the usual collection of wizards, warriors, love interest, heroes, and villains that one would expect in a fantasy adventure but there are many elements that simply do not work. From poor casting choices to a story that is weak even by video game standards the movie just does not live up to what one expects form a summer blockbuster especially one with a name associated with quality. It is shocking to me that the studio thought the casting choices were appropriate for the film as there is no star power at all and no chemistry at all between any of the performers. It is almost as if some executives figured since their kids play Warcraft and they know people who play Warcraft, then this will be a huge hit as everyone will flock to it. Yes, but the salad days of the franchise are behind it as World of Warcraft does not have the subscriber bases it once had. Three to Five years ago would have been a great time for the film but for now it is too late and far to lacking. I am sure fans will see it for curiosity sake and it may open well, but I do not see it having much staying power and as what is supposed to be the first film in a planned series, I am not sure that I want to see much more of it which is sad as I am a fan of the games and I liked that the visuals of the film matched much of the quality artwork of the games.
The action scenes for the film are entertaining enough and they do have a good degree of visual appeal but they just do not have any intensity or compulsion to them and with the disjointed plot and sub par acting, it really makes it hard to get caught up in the outcome. One segment was indicating an epic battle was to come and it was resolved in seconds which really invalidated much of the events leading up to it.
Sadly the first cinematic offering for the franchise is not going to be the landmark event that the arrival of the previous games have been as it plays out like a big budget fan film with solid special effects but a plodding and stale story, bad acting, and a no-name cast who cannot even decide what accent they are using from scene to scene. I half expected Crow and Tom Servo to pop up in the corner and add their commentary especially during the ridiculous “Moses Scene” which was so indicative of the slapdash nature of the film.
http://sknr.net/2016/06/08/warcraft/
Gareth von Kallenbach (977 KP) rated Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
When I first heard that Warner Bros. was planning a series of films based on the classic DC Comics characters akin to what Marvel has successfully done, I was intrigued with the possibilities. With the release of Batman Vs Superman: Dawn of Justice, we get the first look into that universe and I have to say it is one that has more than a few stumbles.
The film follows Superman (Henry Cavill), as he deals with a plot that is set to discredit him and make the people of the world fearful of him and his abilities.
One person affected by this is Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck), who has seen firsthand the devastation that Superman is capable of after seeing the city practically destroyed in the events that culminated in “Superman: Man of Steel”.
Wayne has devised a plan for his alter-ego Batman to put a stop to Superman before he can become an even greater threat to the public and despite the urgings of his butler Alfred (Jeremy Irons), Batman continues with his plan.
As if this was not enough for Superman to contend with, neurotic tech giant Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg), has decided to manipulate events into a larger and even more dangerous game as he has set his sights clearly on Superman but would also love to see Batman removed in the process.
One would think that with a premise such as this it would be a non-stop action fest that would thrill fans from start to finish. Sadly this is not the case. The first hour and change of the film plods along with little action and we get a cast, some of whom I believe are badly miscast, plodding along and blandly brooding. The characters are so unlikeable that I found myself not caring for them or their fates and was shocked how a film with so much potential and a reported $250 million budget could be so under-whelming.
The final part of the film is non-stop action but Director Zack Snyder allows his film to become awash in all the Hollywood action film stereotypes. I thought I was watching an over-the-top special effects reel as all of the action unfolded, it was very hard to get overly thrilled about it despite the skill that went into crafting it.
Affleck does a passable job in the role and hopefully as he has more outings he will grow on me, but I just never really embraced him in the part. His Batman acts out of character in many sequences as he jumps to an extreme conclusion without taking the steps in between. Eisenberg is so neurotic and annoying that you just want to slap him. He is so difficult to watch. The biggest issue I have is with Cavill. He is just so bland and uninteresting to me as Superman. Yes, I know it is unfair to compare him to Christopher Reeves, but even Brandon Routh did a more acceptable portrayal of Superman. He just is not very interesting to watch in the role, with his monotone delivery and lack of facial expressions. I want heroes that I can get behind and care about, not one-dimensional characters that do little to generate my interest and sympathy.
The most telling thing for me was for an audience that was so keyed up at the start of the film, they were pretty silent for most of it, save for when a certain character appeared and even at the end of the film, offered only a small round of applause.
The film did try to be epic in scale and it is clear that this is just the opening round of a much larger series, but for now, I could not help but feel disappointed with the result and I would be shocked if the next offerings from Marvel are not considerably better than this film.
http://sknr.net/2016/03/23/81808/
The film follows Superman (Henry Cavill), as he deals with a plot that is set to discredit him and make the people of the world fearful of him and his abilities.
One person affected by this is Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck), who has seen firsthand the devastation that Superman is capable of after seeing the city practically destroyed in the events that culminated in “Superman: Man of Steel”.
Wayne has devised a plan for his alter-ego Batman to put a stop to Superman before he can become an even greater threat to the public and despite the urgings of his butler Alfred (Jeremy Irons), Batman continues with his plan.
As if this was not enough for Superman to contend with, neurotic tech giant Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg), has decided to manipulate events into a larger and even more dangerous game as he has set his sights clearly on Superman but would also love to see Batman removed in the process.
One would think that with a premise such as this it would be a non-stop action fest that would thrill fans from start to finish. Sadly this is not the case. The first hour and change of the film plods along with little action and we get a cast, some of whom I believe are badly miscast, plodding along and blandly brooding. The characters are so unlikeable that I found myself not caring for them or their fates and was shocked how a film with so much potential and a reported $250 million budget could be so under-whelming.
The final part of the film is non-stop action but Director Zack Snyder allows his film to become awash in all the Hollywood action film stereotypes. I thought I was watching an over-the-top special effects reel as all of the action unfolded, it was very hard to get overly thrilled about it despite the skill that went into crafting it.
Affleck does a passable job in the role and hopefully as he has more outings he will grow on me, but I just never really embraced him in the part. His Batman acts out of character in many sequences as he jumps to an extreme conclusion without taking the steps in between. Eisenberg is so neurotic and annoying that you just want to slap him. He is so difficult to watch. The biggest issue I have is with Cavill. He is just so bland and uninteresting to me as Superman. Yes, I know it is unfair to compare him to Christopher Reeves, but even Brandon Routh did a more acceptable portrayal of Superman. He just is not very interesting to watch in the role, with his monotone delivery and lack of facial expressions. I want heroes that I can get behind and care about, not one-dimensional characters that do little to generate my interest and sympathy.
The most telling thing for me was for an audience that was so keyed up at the start of the film, they were pretty silent for most of it, save for when a certain character appeared and even at the end of the film, offered only a small round of applause.
The film did try to be epic in scale and it is clear that this is just the opening round of a much larger series, but for now, I could not help but feel disappointed with the result and I would be shocked if the next offerings from Marvel are not considerably better than this film.
http://sknr.net/2016/03/23/81808/
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Shazam! (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019
"i'd like to purchase some of your finest beer please"
Shout "Shazam!" into the sky and you're struck by a bolt of lightning from the heavens; blessed with the wisdom of Solomon, the strength of Hercules, the stamina of Atlas, the power of Zeus, the courage of Achilles and the speed of Mercury. Instantly elevated from whatever you were into your peak self; reborn with a crack of thunder, a flash of light and a cloud of smoke. It's a wonderfully novel and simple idea for a comic book character. Something that allows for a spectacular hero moment right before each conflict or feat; an epic bit of imagery to light up the night sky and electrify the frame. This transformation also perfectly captures the spirit of both this film and it's hero; a belief in the idea that even the most forgotten, marginalized and seemingly powerless person can change the world.
Shazam! distinguishes itself as DC's first true crack at a comedy; also it's lightest and most modest effort yet. There's a really nice commitment to the lofty, somewhat ridiculously mythological source material here. There's little liberty taken with Shazam's campy world of wizards, demons and magic; the attitude towards these elements can best be described as self-aware without being self-conscious. The jokes almost all land and there's charm oozing out of every frame. Loads of heart, tons of humor and a true fidelity to childhood joy make this such a uniquely enjoyable flick; and an impressively confident approach to a hero that soars due to it's big personality and earnest attitude.
Our hero's journey here boils down to a kid learning to care about a world that has never bothered to care about him. Abandoned as a child and shuttled through the foster system; the explanation and depiction of Billy Batson's unenviable situation is irreverent and laced with sarcasm, true to how teens often confront traumas that imply vulnerability. The film allows these kids to be kids; meaning they're impulsive and ill-equipped for the situation they're in; and often crude and frustratingly ignorant to a seemingly obvious truth. The premise lends itself to a close look at responsibility and purpose; basically a feature length look at a lost kid reclaiming his identity and finding a family. The point at which Billy truly becomes a hero with something to fight for is powerful; a simple but big-hearted affirmation of the importance of connection and love, especially to a kid who's never allowed himself to know either.
Superhero stories can impart lessons in a variety of ways. Both on the page and on the screen; there's a wide array of films that all excel in their own specific way; shaping themselves in the image of their hero, and what he/she means to readers around the world. Shazam! distinguishes itself spectacularly as a film about what constitutes a family, and how that family reflects who we are. There's a powerful yearning in Billy for a connection; someone or something to fight for. A desperate desire for love and support; to feel like a part of something in some way. There's a meaningful, deeply human core to that concept; something universal and immediately affecting. Shazam! understands this from the start; setting aside the punchsplosians and skybeams for a moment, to remind us that sometimes a kid looking for his mom can be as compelling than the threat of planetary destruction. So bring on Joker, Birds of Prey, Wonder Woman 1984 and whatever else DC has in it's chaotic, ever-changing slate of planned superhero flicks; they're on a roll right now.
Shazam! distinguishes itself as DC's first true crack at a comedy; also it's lightest and most modest effort yet. There's a really nice commitment to the lofty, somewhat ridiculously mythological source material here. There's little liberty taken with Shazam's campy world of wizards, demons and magic; the attitude towards these elements can best be described as self-aware without being self-conscious. The jokes almost all land and there's charm oozing out of every frame. Loads of heart, tons of humor and a true fidelity to childhood joy make this such a uniquely enjoyable flick; and an impressively confident approach to a hero that soars due to it's big personality and earnest attitude.
Our hero's journey here boils down to a kid learning to care about a world that has never bothered to care about him. Abandoned as a child and shuttled through the foster system; the explanation and depiction of Billy Batson's unenviable situation is irreverent and laced with sarcasm, true to how teens often confront traumas that imply vulnerability. The film allows these kids to be kids; meaning they're impulsive and ill-equipped for the situation they're in; and often crude and frustratingly ignorant to a seemingly obvious truth. The premise lends itself to a close look at responsibility and purpose; basically a feature length look at a lost kid reclaiming his identity and finding a family. The point at which Billy truly becomes a hero with something to fight for is powerful; a simple but big-hearted affirmation of the importance of connection and love, especially to a kid who's never allowed himself to know either.
Superhero stories can impart lessons in a variety of ways. Both on the page and on the screen; there's a wide array of films that all excel in their own specific way; shaping themselves in the image of their hero, and what he/she means to readers around the world. Shazam! distinguishes itself spectacularly as a film about what constitutes a family, and how that family reflects who we are. There's a powerful yearning in Billy for a connection; someone or something to fight for. A desperate desire for love and support; to feel like a part of something in some way. There's a meaningful, deeply human core to that concept; something universal and immediately affecting. Shazam! understands this from the start; setting aside the punchsplosians and skybeams for a moment, to remind us that sometimes a kid looking for his mom can be as compelling than the threat of planetary destruction. So bring on Joker, Birds of Prey, Wonder Woman 1984 and whatever else DC has in it's chaotic, ever-changing slate of planned superhero flicks; they're on a roll right now.