Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Jobs (2013) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Whatever you may think of the Apple line of products, Apple as a company, or Steve Jobs himself; one cannot deny that Apple is an innovator and one of those companies that shape economies as well as how we see ourselves.
JOBS is the story of Steve Jobs who, after dropping out of college, created the billion-dollar company so many people buy phones from now. Ashton Kutcher portrays Jobs right down to his many behavioral quirks, and does a very good job; there were even times I forgot I was watching Kutcher. He even mimicked the set of Jobs’ mouth perfectly. I found myself wondering if the people who knew Jobs would feel like they were seeing a ghost.
The movie follows Jobs as he drops acid in the 60s, finds computers in the 70s, “grows up”, while growing his business, in the 80s, and then actually grows up in the early 90s (kind of). It is well known that Jobs was hard to with, but this film shows that he was a gigantic jerk at times. He cut people out of things others would think they deserved; he treated his friends and coworkers alike, and never batted an eyelash at the hurtful things he said to those people. That being said; he truly had a vision and knew what it would take to make that vision come to life. Most driven people tend to be selfish and Jobs was no exception to this; he actually took it to a whole new level at times. The movie doesn’t shy away from this side of his personality, but it does try to explain some of the ticks. This was an area that I thought could have been done a bit better; it would have been nice to see what about his childhood left such an impression that he felt it was ok to be so mean to people. At times I found the movie difficult to watch simply due to his treatment of others, and total lack of understanding how what he said and did affected them. “Oh, that’s just Steve” was an actual line said in the film.
Other than this I found JOBS to be a very interesting look into a modern day legend. One that doesn’t pull as many punches as I thought it would, but that also doesn’t make a villain of a man who, while having extraordinary vision, was nothing more than a man.
If you are a fan of Apple, Jobs, or are just looking for a break from the summer block buster movies, check out JOBS.
JOBS is the story of Steve Jobs who, after dropping out of college, created the billion-dollar company so many people buy phones from now. Ashton Kutcher portrays Jobs right down to his many behavioral quirks, and does a very good job; there were even times I forgot I was watching Kutcher. He even mimicked the set of Jobs’ mouth perfectly. I found myself wondering if the people who knew Jobs would feel like they were seeing a ghost.
The movie follows Jobs as he drops acid in the 60s, finds computers in the 70s, “grows up”, while growing his business, in the 80s, and then actually grows up in the early 90s (kind of). It is well known that Jobs was hard to with, but this film shows that he was a gigantic jerk at times. He cut people out of things others would think they deserved; he treated his friends and coworkers alike, and never batted an eyelash at the hurtful things he said to those people. That being said; he truly had a vision and knew what it would take to make that vision come to life. Most driven people tend to be selfish and Jobs was no exception to this; he actually took it to a whole new level at times. The movie doesn’t shy away from this side of his personality, but it does try to explain some of the ticks. This was an area that I thought could have been done a bit better; it would have been nice to see what about his childhood left such an impression that he felt it was ok to be so mean to people. At times I found the movie difficult to watch simply due to his treatment of others, and total lack of understanding how what he said and did affected them. “Oh, that’s just Steve” was an actual line said in the film.
Other than this I found JOBS to be a very interesting look into a modern day legend. One that doesn’t pull as many punches as I thought it would, but that also doesn’t make a villain of a man who, while having extraordinary vision, was nothing more than a man.
If you are a fan of Apple, Jobs, or are just looking for a break from the summer block buster movies, check out JOBS.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Pet Sematary (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020 (Updated Nov 1, 2020)
A Really Good Remake
Pet Semetary is a 2019 supernatural horror movie directed by Kevin Kolsch and Dennis Widmyer. The movie was written by Jeff Buhler with screen story by Matt Greenberg. It is a remake/reboot of the original 1989 film adaptation of the 1983 Stephen King novel. Starring Jason Clarke, Amy Seimetz, and John Lithgow.
Moving to the small town of Ludlow, Maine with his family: wife, Rachel (Amy Seimetz), children, Ellie (Jete Laurence) and Gage (Hugo & Lucas Lavoie), and Church, Ellie's cat, Louis Creed takes a job at the university's hospital. Ellie stumbles upon a procession of children, while exploring the nearby woods of their new home, who are taking a dead dog to a pet cemetery. Their neighbor, Jud Crandall (John Lithgow), finds Ellie climbing a large stack of branches forming a wall and warns Rachel and Ellie not to venture out alone as the woods can be dangerous.. The following day, Louis fails to save a student Victor Pascow (Obssa Ahmed) fatally injured from a car accident, and is left shaken. That night Louis meets Pascow in a vivid dream, where he is lead to the pet cemetery and warned not to "venture beyond". When Louis awakens he is disturbed to find his bed sheets and feet, muddy and dirty suggesting his "vision" could be more than just a bad dream.
As far as remakes go this one was really good. Especially for the horror genre. I mean I can't tell you how many remakes/reboots I've seen that just bomb and don't do the original justice. This one however seemed to keep the original in mind, while still making changes to keep it fresh and relatively different. That being said I do feel it was a bit over-hyped and didn't live up to certain expectations. To me it was a very creepy movie and had me wanting to cover my eyes in one part as memories from the original played back in my head. The sounds of the character Rachel's sister calling out to her got goosebumps on my forearms. Those parts were very unsettling to me but I didn't feel enough was "scary". I really enjoyed the twists and changes or differences from the original. They were welcome and kept it from being an exact replica and a copy of the original. As another critic stated, Jeffrey M. Anderson-Common Sense Media, the film was "...effectively unsettling, focusing on the characters and their understandable emotions rather than on overt gore and FX." I give it a 7/10.
Moving to the small town of Ludlow, Maine with his family: wife, Rachel (Amy Seimetz), children, Ellie (Jete Laurence) and Gage (Hugo & Lucas Lavoie), and Church, Ellie's cat, Louis Creed takes a job at the university's hospital. Ellie stumbles upon a procession of children, while exploring the nearby woods of their new home, who are taking a dead dog to a pet cemetery. Their neighbor, Jud Crandall (John Lithgow), finds Ellie climbing a large stack of branches forming a wall and warns Rachel and Ellie not to venture out alone as the woods can be dangerous.. The following day, Louis fails to save a student Victor Pascow (Obssa Ahmed) fatally injured from a car accident, and is left shaken. That night Louis meets Pascow in a vivid dream, where he is lead to the pet cemetery and warned not to "venture beyond". When Louis awakens he is disturbed to find his bed sheets and feet, muddy and dirty suggesting his "vision" could be more than just a bad dream.
As far as remakes go this one was really good. Especially for the horror genre. I mean I can't tell you how many remakes/reboots I've seen that just bomb and don't do the original justice. This one however seemed to keep the original in mind, while still making changes to keep it fresh and relatively different. That being said I do feel it was a bit over-hyped and didn't live up to certain expectations. To me it was a very creepy movie and had me wanting to cover my eyes in one part as memories from the original played back in my head. The sounds of the character Rachel's sister calling out to her got goosebumps on my forearms. Those parts were very unsettling to me but I didn't feel enough was "scary". I really enjoyed the twists and changes or differences from the original. They were welcome and kept it from being an exact replica and a copy of the original. As another critic stated, Jeffrey M. Anderson-Common Sense Media, the film was "...effectively unsettling, focusing on the characters and their understandable emotions rather than on overt gore and FX." I give it a 7/10.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Hotel Artemis (2018) in Movies
Feb 10, 2019
Not as interesting as it wanted to be
On my airplane ride from Mpls to San Diego I was able to catch up with gritty, action-noir thriller BAD TIMES AT THE EL ROYALE and was really surprised by how much I enjoyed it. So, I was excited to see that another gritty,, action-noir film, HOTEL ARTEMIS was showing on the flight back.
Well...HOTEL ARTEMIS is no EL ROYALE and maybe that's not fair to Artemis, for I was constantly comparing the two films, so let me see if I can separate the 2 and hold HOTEL ARTEMIS up to it's own scrutiny.
Telling the tale of a JOHN WICK-type world where - instead of a safehouse Hotel for crooks, the HOTEL ARTEMIS is a safehouse HOSPITAL for crooks where the rules are that the crooks cannot hurt each other on the premises. When a riot breaks out in downtown Los Angeles, the rules go out the window and mayhem - and violence - ensue.
Well...this film is no JOHN WICK either. Oh shoot, I've done it again. I've compared this film to another film.
And that's the problem with HOTEL ARTEMIS, it treads ground that has been trod better - and with more style - before. So this film, no matter how well intention-ed, falls short in originality, style and substance. I was still entertained, but not as entertained as I was by JOHN WICK or EL ROYALE.
Jodie Foster (in her first acting role since 2013's ELYSIUM) stars as the person who runs the Artemis. She has a mysterious background (of course) and runs the Artemis with an emotional-less efficiency. Her performance is quirky and interesting and almost holds the film together - almost. She is joined by Sterling K. Brown, Charlie Day, Brian Tyree Henry and Sofia Boutella as patients in the Hotel - none of which were interesting or unusual. They all were playing variants of the characters they usually play, almost as if Director/Writer Drew Pearce said "Get my a Charlie Day-type and a Sterling K. Brown-type", and the Casting Director thought they "scored" by getting the original person - each of whom looks like they are coasting through this film at about 70% output.
Only Dave Bautista shines as the "Health Care Professional" who works with Foster. He brings an interesting charisma to his character and was almost the high point in the film.
Almost. All of the performances pale in comparison to the Mob Boss who shows up about 2/3 of the way through the film. This character is talked about in reverential and scary terms throughout the film. The build-up was huge for this character and I was prepared for the inevitable let down when the mob boss finally shows up, but when the elevator door opens up and I saw that is was Jeff Goldblum in "full Goldblum" mode, I was thrilled and he did not disappoint. He commanded the screen at a time that the film was getting tiresome and he wound up the characters, the energy of the film and the action to help it ride to its inevitable, bloody conclusion.
Ultimately, Pearce delivered a solid B- film, one that has moments of quirk and interest, but set against a backdrop - and supporting actors - that are subdued and not memorable. This is a cardinal sin for this kind of film, instead of subduing those parts, Pearce needed to enhance those and he just plainly did not.
If you want to see a good, stylized, gritty action film, with interesting locales and supporting players, check out JOHN WICK or BAD TIMES AT THE EL ROYALE. If you've seen these, HOTEL ARTEMIS is fine, but the other two do it better.
Letter Grade: B-
6 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Well...HOTEL ARTEMIS is no EL ROYALE and maybe that's not fair to Artemis, for I was constantly comparing the two films, so let me see if I can separate the 2 and hold HOTEL ARTEMIS up to it's own scrutiny.
Telling the tale of a JOHN WICK-type world where - instead of a safehouse Hotel for crooks, the HOTEL ARTEMIS is a safehouse HOSPITAL for crooks where the rules are that the crooks cannot hurt each other on the premises. When a riot breaks out in downtown Los Angeles, the rules go out the window and mayhem - and violence - ensue.
Well...this film is no JOHN WICK either. Oh shoot, I've done it again. I've compared this film to another film.
And that's the problem with HOTEL ARTEMIS, it treads ground that has been trod better - and with more style - before. So this film, no matter how well intention-ed, falls short in originality, style and substance. I was still entertained, but not as entertained as I was by JOHN WICK or EL ROYALE.
Jodie Foster (in her first acting role since 2013's ELYSIUM) stars as the person who runs the Artemis. She has a mysterious background (of course) and runs the Artemis with an emotional-less efficiency. Her performance is quirky and interesting and almost holds the film together - almost. She is joined by Sterling K. Brown, Charlie Day, Brian Tyree Henry and Sofia Boutella as patients in the Hotel - none of which were interesting or unusual. They all were playing variants of the characters they usually play, almost as if Director/Writer Drew Pearce said "Get my a Charlie Day-type and a Sterling K. Brown-type", and the Casting Director thought they "scored" by getting the original person - each of whom looks like they are coasting through this film at about 70% output.
Only Dave Bautista shines as the "Health Care Professional" who works with Foster. He brings an interesting charisma to his character and was almost the high point in the film.
Almost. All of the performances pale in comparison to the Mob Boss who shows up about 2/3 of the way through the film. This character is talked about in reverential and scary terms throughout the film. The build-up was huge for this character and I was prepared for the inevitable let down when the mob boss finally shows up, but when the elevator door opens up and I saw that is was Jeff Goldblum in "full Goldblum" mode, I was thrilled and he did not disappoint. He commanded the screen at a time that the film was getting tiresome and he wound up the characters, the energy of the film and the action to help it ride to its inevitable, bloody conclusion.
Ultimately, Pearce delivered a solid B- film, one that has moments of quirk and interest, but set against a backdrop - and supporting actors - that are subdued and not memorable. This is a cardinal sin for this kind of film, instead of subduing those parts, Pearce needed to enhance those and he just plainly did not.
If you want to see a good, stylized, gritty action film, with interesting locales and supporting players, check out JOHN WICK or BAD TIMES AT THE EL ROYALE. If you've seen these, HOTEL ARTEMIS is fine, but the other two do it better.
Letter Grade: B-
6 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Darren (1599 KP) rated 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: You may spend most of this film scratching you head trying to figure out what the hell is going on, but once you get the reveal you will see how good the story is. Giving the audience plenty of questions makes this something many of the new modern film fail to do with all the spoon feed answers. (10/10)
Actor Review: Keir Dullea – Doctor Dave Bowman who has to react to stop H.A.L taking over the space shuttle and fulfil the mission. Top performance on how to convince with expression and body language. (10/10)
david
Actor Review: Gary Lockwood – Doctor Frank Poole who goes on the spacewalk mission before starting to question the methods of the computer H.A.L. Great performance using more action than words to signify his motives. (9/10)
Director Review: Stanley Kubrick – Brilliant piece of directing from a man who redefined a generation of film makers. (10/10)
Sci-Fi: wonderful creation of a space like atmosphere. (10/10)
Special Effects: Stunning special effects that have hardly aged a day. (10/10)
Music: Excellent use of music. (10/10)
Cinematography: Amazing usage of cinematography throughout the film. (10/10)
Believability: Space is still a wife unknown so this is down to what you believe is out there or could happen out there. (5/10)
Chances of Tears: (0/10)
Settings: Set mostly in the middle of space, with nowhere to turn for help perfectly for the creation of the edge of your seat atmosphere created. (10/10)
Oscar Chances: Won one Oscar for Special effects.
Chances of Sequel: Nope
Suggestion: All film fans should watch this as it really is a masterpiece. The casual film fan will struggle to get into the film with the drawn out opening 25 minutes of no dialogue and strong use of music. If you were to look back and see where some of the best films come from this is where it is, this is a true history lesson in film watching this. (Watch)
Best Part: The mystery of what is going on.
Worst Part: May be hard to grab the attention of a casual film fan.
Trivia: There is 88minutes with no dialogue.
Overall: A masterpiece that stands the test of time
https://moviesreview101.com/2013/12/18/2001-a-space-odyssey-1968/
Actor Review: Keir Dullea – Doctor Dave Bowman who has to react to stop H.A.L taking over the space shuttle and fulfil the mission. Top performance on how to convince with expression and body language. (10/10)
david
Actor Review: Gary Lockwood – Doctor Frank Poole who goes on the spacewalk mission before starting to question the methods of the computer H.A.L. Great performance using more action than words to signify his motives. (9/10)
Director Review: Stanley Kubrick – Brilliant piece of directing from a man who redefined a generation of film makers. (10/10)
Sci-Fi: wonderful creation of a space like atmosphere. (10/10)
Special Effects: Stunning special effects that have hardly aged a day. (10/10)
Music: Excellent use of music. (10/10)
Cinematography: Amazing usage of cinematography throughout the film. (10/10)
Believability: Space is still a wife unknown so this is down to what you believe is out there or could happen out there. (5/10)
Chances of Tears: (0/10)
Settings: Set mostly in the middle of space, with nowhere to turn for help perfectly for the creation of the edge of your seat atmosphere created. (10/10)
Oscar Chances: Won one Oscar for Special effects.
Chances of Sequel: Nope
Suggestion: All film fans should watch this as it really is a masterpiece. The casual film fan will struggle to get into the film with the drawn out opening 25 minutes of no dialogue and strong use of music. If you were to look back and see where some of the best films come from this is where it is, this is a true history lesson in film watching this. (Watch)
Best Part: The mystery of what is going on.
Worst Part: May be hard to grab the attention of a casual film fan.
Trivia: There is 88minutes with no dialogue.
Overall: A masterpiece that stands the test of time
https://moviesreview101.com/2013/12/18/2001-a-space-odyssey-1968/
Bong Mines Entertainment (15 KP) rated T.I.M.E by Kelvyn Boy in Music
Aug 8, 2019
Kelvyn Boy is a fast-rising artist from Accra, Ghana. Not too long ago, he released a music video for his “Mea” single featuring Joey B.
Kelvyn Boy – “Mea” featuring Joey B
“‘Mea’ is a big tune for me and one of the EP’s highlights I’d say. It has a Highlife flair which I love. It came together really quickly in the studio. When I heard my producer playing something he’d been working on, I was like, ‘I love that beat, let’s put some guitar on this and start working on it’. So we put some guitar lines down and I just started to freestyle over the beat. My producer said, ‘Yo we need to record this now!’ So we put down the vocal there and then. I just needed someone who can rap and sing at the same to finish it off, so I had Joey B in mind. We sent him the song and he linked us and the next day we finished it in the studio.” – Kelvyn Boy
‘Mea’ contains a relatable storyline, harmonious vocals, and melodic instrumentation flavored with tropical, afrobeat, and afro-dance elements.
The likable tune tells an interesting tale of a young guy who adores a special woman in his life. Apparently, she’s a boss in the bedroom and she possesses a Coca-Cola shaped body.
‘Mea’ is featured on Kelvyn Boy’s debut EP, entitled, “T.I.M.E”.
Kelvyn – “T.I.M.E” EP
“‘T.I.M.E’, my debut EP, is an abbreviation for The Inspirational Moment Ever. From the production to lyrics, it’s strictly Afro-beats. I wanted to represent this sound and Ghana’s sound to a global market.” – Kelvyn Boy
The 8-track project features Medikal, Joey B, and Stonebwoy. Also, it incorporates other musical genres such as reggae, dancehall, and highlife.
Kelvyn Boy
Kelvyn Boy award photo
In the Summer of 2018, Kelvyn Boy accompanied his mentor Stonebwoy on a 9-city European Tour. They graced stages at Reggae Geel (Belgium), Summer Jam (Germany), Enter The Dancehall (Switzerland) and many more.
Later that year, Kelvyn won the Unsung Artiste of the Year and was later nominated as Best New Artiste of the Year at the Vodafone Ghana Music Awards (2019).
This summer, he will embark on a European tour which includes Bomboclat Festival in Belgium (other dates tbc).
Kelvyn Boy – “Mea” featuring Joey B
“‘Mea’ is a big tune for me and one of the EP’s highlights I’d say. It has a Highlife flair which I love. It came together really quickly in the studio. When I heard my producer playing something he’d been working on, I was like, ‘I love that beat, let’s put some guitar on this and start working on it’. So we put some guitar lines down and I just started to freestyle over the beat. My producer said, ‘Yo we need to record this now!’ So we put down the vocal there and then. I just needed someone who can rap and sing at the same to finish it off, so I had Joey B in mind. We sent him the song and he linked us and the next day we finished it in the studio.” – Kelvyn Boy
‘Mea’ contains a relatable storyline, harmonious vocals, and melodic instrumentation flavored with tropical, afrobeat, and afro-dance elements.
The likable tune tells an interesting tale of a young guy who adores a special woman in his life. Apparently, she’s a boss in the bedroom and she possesses a Coca-Cola shaped body.
‘Mea’ is featured on Kelvyn Boy’s debut EP, entitled, “T.I.M.E”.
Kelvyn – “T.I.M.E” EP
“‘T.I.M.E’, my debut EP, is an abbreviation for The Inspirational Moment Ever. From the production to lyrics, it’s strictly Afro-beats. I wanted to represent this sound and Ghana’s sound to a global market.” – Kelvyn Boy
The 8-track project features Medikal, Joey B, and Stonebwoy. Also, it incorporates other musical genres such as reggae, dancehall, and highlife.
Kelvyn Boy
Kelvyn Boy award photo
In the Summer of 2018, Kelvyn Boy accompanied his mentor Stonebwoy on a 9-city European Tour. They graced stages at Reggae Geel (Belgium), Summer Jam (Germany), Enter The Dancehall (Switzerland) and many more.
Later that year, Kelvyn won the Unsung Artiste of the Year and was later nominated as Best New Artiste of the Year at the Vodafone Ghana Music Awards (2019).
This summer, he will embark on a European tour which includes Bomboclat Festival in Belgium (other dates tbc).
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood (2019) in Movies
Nov 28, 2019
When I first heard that Tom Hanks was playing Fred Rogers in a biopic, I was all on board. Who wouldn’t be? When I finally saw the film about a year and a half later, it was not the movie I was expecting. In such a fantastically good way.
A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood tells the story of the real life friendship between Fred Rogers (Tom Hanks) and journalist Lloyd Vogel (Matthew Rhys, character based on real life journalist Tom Junod). Vogel is an investigative reporter for Esquire magazine in the late nineties and he is assigned a “puff” piece. The magazine was doing an issue on heroes, and Vogel was assigned Mr. Rogers, and would be a story unlike any other that he has written. After meeting and talking to Mr. Rogers for the first time, he couldn’t believe that this person was… well, perfect. Let’s be clear, Mr. Rogers is not perfect, but probably as close to perfect as many can imagine. So Vogel did what he does best. He started investigating. And during the course of his discoveries, he started to make discoveries about himself, and the relationships in his life, specifically with that of his father, Jerry Vogel (Chris Cooper).
This movie was so much more than I expected going in. I expected to tear up, I didn’t expect it to hit home the way show used to as I was growing up and watch the show well into my twenties. The cinematography was excellent. Many times it felt like I was watching the show as the movie essentially played out like an episode. The transitions were amazing, and the music was fantastic as well. They didn’t try to do anything artsy or new age with anything. All of the original themes and music was there. It was one of the most nostalgic movie going experiences I have ever had.
This is definitely a great movie to see, but do not mistake it for a children’s film, please. There are some very mature themes, language, and concepts. This is definitely meant to shine some light on the nature of human character versus the lessons taught by the legendary Mr. Rogers. That being said, go see it. It absolutely will not ruin your childhood.
A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood tells the story of the real life friendship between Fred Rogers (Tom Hanks) and journalist Lloyd Vogel (Matthew Rhys, character based on real life journalist Tom Junod). Vogel is an investigative reporter for Esquire magazine in the late nineties and he is assigned a “puff” piece. The magazine was doing an issue on heroes, and Vogel was assigned Mr. Rogers, and would be a story unlike any other that he has written. After meeting and talking to Mr. Rogers for the first time, he couldn’t believe that this person was… well, perfect. Let’s be clear, Mr. Rogers is not perfect, but probably as close to perfect as many can imagine. So Vogel did what he does best. He started investigating. And during the course of his discoveries, he started to make discoveries about himself, and the relationships in his life, specifically with that of his father, Jerry Vogel (Chris Cooper).
This movie was so much more than I expected going in. I expected to tear up, I didn’t expect it to hit home the way show used to as I was growing up and watch the show well into my twenties. The cinematography was excellent. Many times it felt like I was watching the show as the movie essentially played out like an episode. The transitions were amazing, and the music was fantastic as well. They didn’t try to do anything artsy or new age with anything. All of the original themes and music was there. It was one of the most nostalgic movie going experiences I have ever had.
This is definitely a great movie to see, but do not mistake it for a children’s film, please. There are some very mature themes, language, and concepts. This is definitely meant to shine some light on the nature of human character versus the lessons taught by the legendary Mr. Rogers. That being said, go see it. It absolutely will not ruin your childhood.
Super Phantom Cat - Be a jumping bro.
Games, Entertainment and Stickers
App
App Store Best of 2016! Have fun! - - - - - - - - - - - - Super Phantom Cat is awarded the App Store...
Lindsay (1818 KP) rated On the Edge of the Dark Sea of Darkness in Books
Mar 2, 2026
We get introduced to the world, and how Fangs of Dangs are wondering about Skee?
Why are they picking up children and then never returning them? We meet the Isby family.
There are Janner, Tink [Kalmar], Lelli, their grandfather, and their mother, Nia. Where is their father? Who is their father? What adventure will they have?
We hear more snow children as they get ready for the Dragon Day festival.
Janner feels like he always has to keep looking out for his brother and sister. However, he does get to do what he wants.
His grandfather wants to tell him, but his mother doesn't want him to say anything or bring up memories. Why secrets and no truth? Though Janner knows his father's name is Esben.
Will the children enjoy the festival together? Janner is trying to keep his siblings nearby. Will it work?
Leeli has gone missing. This happened between sad songs and before dragons came up to start dancing.
But before Tink and Janner can watch the dragons. They had to find their sister Leeli.
Their dog Nugget seems to give a clue with his barking. Once they find Leeli and Nugget, they are in a fight with two Fangs of Dangs.
Someone may have helped the children with the two stones thrown at them.
Janner and Tink help their sister. Tanner thinks they should head for home. When they get close, they see that it's dark. Podo seems to have gone to see the dragons. They go, they take Glipper Trail.
Will they find Podo (grandfather)? Where did Podo go?
Will they find their moma with Podo? Did they go to see the dragons? Why was everything dark and no smoke, as if no one was home?
We get a dragon dance and a song that Leeli sings. But where did it come from, and how did she know it?
Fangs have caught them. March them to a jail. But what will happen to them? Will they be tortured or sent away?
Will their mother or grandfather find them? We see that the adventures are starting.
What will Igiby's children do and what adventures will they get into? Who is this mysterious stone thrower?
There seem to be secrets, and they don't seem to know why. Why is Nia not really telling the children about their father? Especially Janner.
What is their family history? What adventures will all three children have?
Why are they picking up children and then never returning them? We meet the Isby family.
There are Janner, Tink [Kalmar], Lelli, their grandfather, and their mother, Nia. Where is their father? Who is their father? What adventure will they have?
We hear more snow children as they get ready for the Dragon Day festival.
Janner feels like he always has to keep looking out for his brother and sister. However, he does get to do what he wants.
His grandfather wants to tell him, but his mother doesn't want him to say anything or bring up memories. Why secrets and no truth? Though Janner knows his father's name is Esben.
Will the children enjoy the festival together? Janner is trying to keep his siblings nearby. Will it work?
Leeli has gone missing. This happened between sad songs and before dragons came up to start dancing.
But before Tink and Janner can watch the dragons. They had to find their sister Leeli.
Their dog Nugget seems to give a clue with his barking. Once they find Leeli and Nugget, they are in a fight with two Fangs of Dangs.
Someone may have helped the children with the two stones thrown at them.
Janner and Tink help their sister. Tanner thinks they should head for home. When they get close, they see that it's dark. Podo seems to have gone to see the dragons. They go, they take Glipper Trail.
Will they find Podo (grandfather)? Where did Podo go?
Will they find their moma with Podo? Did they go to see the dragons? Why was everything dark and no smoke, as if no one was home?
We get a dragon dance and a song that Leeli sings. But where did it come from, and how did she know it?
Fangs have caught them. March them to a jail. But what will happen to them? Will they be tortured or sent away?
Will their mother or grandfather find them? We see that the adventures are starting.
What will Igiby's children do and what adventures will they get into? Who is this mysterious stone thrower?
There seem to be secrets, and they don't seem to know why. Why is Nia not really telling the children about their father? Especially Janner.
What is their family history? What adventures will all three children have?
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Widows (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
Before I'd even seen anything beyond the plot and a poster I was confused. It really just felt like the poster was designed to catch people. "Look, we've got these big names! Come and watch it!" I know that's what posters are meant to do, but considering the movie is about these women taking up the reins of their dearly departed I'd have had more respect for a poster that focused on them.
Widows has every chance to be great. Based on Lynda La Plante's Widows, with the screenplay written by Gillian Flynn and Steve McQueen, as well as being directed by the latter. Those three names should guarantee a success, and while it seems to be very popular among viewers it has left me some what cold.
The idea is a solid one that you would expect from La Plante's repertoire, and it's worked before. Unfortunately that could not bring it back from the brink for me.
I can't think of another film that has given me such an instant feeling of dislike. The opening scene made me cringe, and having it quickly change pace into a violently loud action scene and back again was jarring to watch.
The first inkling that something is awry comes fairly early on and even without much more you can see where the plot is going. I'm impressed that the trailers managed to stay away from anything obvious.
We have an interesting assortment of baddies and there are two perfectly contrasting ones in Jamal (Brian Tyree Henry) and Jatemme (Daniel Kaluuya) Manning. The former is charismatic and subtly scary, whereas the latter has no likable qualities (apart from a clear love of reading) and is extremely vicious. The other difference is that Jamal in enjoyable to watch and Jatemme isn't. Usually even the most loathed of villains is good to watch on screen, not in this case. Jamal comes out on top in the villain stakes even with the dog incident.
Normally I wouldn't think much beyond what you're presented with in each scene of the movie, but I quickly found myself wondering about a lot of things. Linda's interaction with Delia's husband was strange and one of many things that felt unnecessary. And while I'll happily believe that women could successfully execute a heist, I'm not really sure I can believe that THESE women could do it, I don't care how well documented his notebook was.
Something that seems to a popular device in this is "the flashback". At the beginning it lays up the backstory of the two crews quickly and gives you a good sense of the people, even though I feel the way it was executed on screen wasn't so hot. When the film starts to round up and these scenes give you the missing story at just the right point. The one's I didn't like were between Veronica and Harry. Not all of them were flashbacks, some were Veronica dealing with Harry's death. They seemed more on the dramatic side and didn't feel in-keeping with the rest of the film. (I will say that this film is listed on IMDb as "crime, drama, romance"... Romance seems like a bit of a stretch, and crime and drama as two separate things are very different to a "crime drama". I'll admit that it's a very slight difference, but I think it's still there.)
I'm not sure how the characters worked in the book, but I would assume that some liberties had to be taken to change the setting, and obviously when you're turning a book into a film then you're going to have to tie up some loopholes with jiggery-pokery. What was left were some characters with potential that never seemed to be filled and others that were so throwaway I had already forgotten about them when I read through the cast list after I'd seen it.
What you should do
I'd wait until this one is streaming. It doesn't require a big screen and I always think films like this are better if you can talk to the screen while you're watching them. "Why are you doing that?!" "Yeah, let's see how far that gets you!" and the like. It's got enough reasonable moments to watch it at least once.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Obviously the giant piles of money are always appealing, but I'm very tempted to go for Linda's store. I'd love to work all day in a shop selling fantastical dresses and tiaras watching people's faces light up when they found the right one. It's like the Disney Princess dream come to life!
Widows has every chance to be great. Based on Lynda La Plante's Widows, with the screenplay written by Gillian Flynn and Steve McQueen, as well as being directed by the latter. Those three names should guarantee a success, and while it seems to be very popular among viewers it has left me some what cold.
The idea is a solid one that you would expect from La Plante's repertoire, and it's worked before. Unfortunately that could not bring it back from the brink for me.
I can't think of another film that has given me such an instant feeling of dislike. The opening scene made me cringe, and having it quickly change pace into a violently loud action scene and back again was jarring to watch.
The first inkling that something is awry comes fairly early on and even without much more you can see where the plot is going. I'm impressed that the trailers managed to stay away from anything obvious.
We have an interesting assortment of baddies and there are two perfectly contrasting ones in Jamal (Brian Tyree Henry) and Jatemme (Daniel Kaluuya) Manning. The former is charismatic and subtly scary, whereas the latter has no likable qualities (apart from a clear love of reading) and is extremely vicious. The other difference is that Jamal in enjoyable to watch and Jatemme isn't. Usually even the most loathed of villains is good to watch on screen, not in this case. Jamal comes out on top in the villain stakes even with the dog incident.
Normally I wouldn't think much beyond what you're presented with in each scene of the movie, but I quickly found myself wondering about a lot of things. Linda's interaction with Delia's husband was strange and one of many things that felt unnecessary. And while I'll happily believe that women could successfully execute a heist, I'm not really sure I can believe that THESE women could do it, I don't care how well documented his notebook was.
Something that seems to a popular device in this is "the flashback". At the beginning it lays up the backstory of the two crews quickly and gives you a good sense of the people, even though I feel the way it was executed on screen wasn't so hot. When the film starts to round up and these scenes give you the missing story at just the right point. The one's I didn't like were between Veronica and Harry. Not all of them were flashbacks, some were Veronica dealing with Harry's death. They seemed more on the dramatic side and didn't feel in-keeping with the rest of the film. (I will say that this film is listed on IMDb as "crime, drama, romance"... Romance seems like a bit of a stretch, and crime and drama as two separate things are very different to a "crime drama". I'll admit that it's a very slight difference, but I think it's still there.)
I'm not sure how the characters worked in the book, but I would assume that some liberties had to be taken to change the setting, and obviously when you're turning a book into a film then you're going to have to tie up some loopholes with jiggery-pokery. What was left were some characters with potential that never seemed to be filled and others that were so throwaway I had already forgotten about them when I read through the cast list after I'd seen it.
What you should do
I'd wait until this one is streaming. It doesn't require a big screen and I always think films like this are better if you can talk to the screen while you're watching them. "Why are you doing that?!" "Yeah, let's see how far that gets you!" and the like. It's got enough reasonable moments to watch it at least once.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Obviously the giant piles of money are always appealing, but I'm very tempted to go for Linda's store. I'd love to work all day in a shop selling fantastical dresses and tiaras watching people's faces light up when they found the right one. It's like the Disney Princess dream come to life!
Seriously Messed Up
“Thriller of the year” according to Observer; it makes you wonder what all the other thrillers were like. Gone Girl is a contemporary crime thriller by American author Gillian Flynn. Likable “Cool Girl” Amy Dunne is missing; the police think her husband has something to do with it, but what really happened?
Flynn begins the novel with an epigraph: “Love is the world’s infinite mutability; lies, hatred, murder even, are all knit up in it; it is the inevitable blossoming of its opposites, a magnificent rose smelling faintly of blood.” – Tony Kushner, The Illusion. This implies that love and hate, and perhaps murder, will be the main issues within the novel. It hints that relationships may not be all that they first appear, which becomes evident as you read deeper into the book.
Split into three parts, the first section alternates between a first person account from Nick Dunne, the husband, of what is occurring on the day in which Amy disappears and the following days when both he and the police are attempting to determine the truth about what has happened and trying to find out where Amy is; and diary entries from Amy dating as far back as 2005.
To begin with I did not think much of the story and did not particularly like Amy, despite her being portrayed as a likable character; however I soon got into the story siding with Nick and wanting him to be innocent even though evidence and suspicion were mounting against him.
Initially I assumed that the truth would not be revealed until the end of the story rather than on the first page of part two. For the remainder of the book Nick’s narrative remains the same, progressing from where it left off at the end of part one; whereas Amy, instead of diary entries, she is telling the reader the truth about what happened on the 5th July – the day she went missing – and the subsequent days and weeks. At this point I became a bit bored with the story; as the reader we know the truth and it is frustrating that the police are getting it wrong. However part three contained more suspense than the rest of the novel.
So, why only three stars? As I already mentioned it did not seem that great at the beginning and to be honest I did not feel satisfied with the ending either. One of the main things that bothered me was the use of swear words. I understand that many people swear and so it is inevitable that these words would end up in novels; however in my opinion there is swearing and then there is swearing. This was beginning to border on the latter. Yes some of the characters were angry but I thought the use of expletives was slightly overdone.
Despite these misgivings it was a well-written piece of fiction that I think others may enjoy – the ratings on Goodreads certainly suggest that; but for me it was not anything special.
Flynn begins the novel with an epigraph: “Love is the world’s infinite mutability; lies, hatred, murder even, are all knit up in it; it is the inevitable blossoming of its opposites, a magnificent rose smelling faintly of blood.” – Tony Kushner, The Illusion. This implies that love and hate, and perhaps murder, will be the main issues within the novel. It hints that relationships may not be all that they first appear, which becomes evident as you read deeper into the book.
Split into three parts, the first section alternates between a first person account from Nick Dunne, the husband, of what is occurring on the day in which Amy disappears and the following days when both he and the police are attempting to determine the truth about what has happened and trying to find out where Amy is; and diary entries from Amy dating as far back as 2005.
To begin with I did not think much of the story and did not particularly like Amy, despite her being portrayed as a likable character; however I soon got into the story siding with Nick and wanting him to be innocent even though evidence and suspicion were mounting against him.
Initially I assumed that the truth would not be revealed until the end of the story rather than on the first page of part two. For the remainder of the book Nick’s narrative remains the same, progressing from where it left off at the end of part one; whereas Amy, instead of diary entries, she is telling the reader the truth about what happened on the 5th July – the day she went missing – and the subsequent days and weeks. At this point I became a bit bored with the story; as the reader we know the truth and it is frustrating that the police are getting it wrong. However part three contained more suspense than the rest of the novel.
So, why only three stars? As I already mentioned it did not seem that great at the beginning and to be honest I did not feel satisfied with the ending either. One of the main things that bothered me was the use of swear words. I understand that many people swear and so it is inevitable that these words would end up in novels; however in my opinion there is swearing and then there is swearing. This was beginning to border on the latter. Yes some of the characters were angry but I thought the use of expletives was slightly overdone.
Despite these misgivings it was a well-written piece of fiction that I think others may enjoy – the ratings on Goodreads certainly suggest that; but for me it was not anything special.
