Search
Search results
Deborah (162 KP) rated The Madwoman Upstairs in Books
Dec 21, 2018
I thought this sounded a really interesting idea, modern day woman, descended from the Bronte family uncovers secrets from the history of her family. While I didn't dislike it, I didn't really love it either. For about the first half of the book I found it a bit of a struggle as I found the protagonist, Samantha Whipple, rather hard to like. I'm not even sure I liked her that much by the end of the book to be honest.
Samantha has had rather an odd upbringing, which would account for some of her strangeness. We see her early on arriving at a fictional Oxford college to study English Literature although she seems to hate practically all writers and seems incapable of constructing a reasonable critical argument! She is rather like a spoilt child, and as such I found her hard to like. I'm also pretty good at suspending my disbelief but it takes some stretch of the imagination to accept that someone like Samantha would have been able to gain a place on an English Literature course at an Oxford college! Or that she would be housed on the fifth floor of a tower with no windows in her room and apparently there is only a bathroom on the ground floor. Must have been a bit of an issue when she sprained her ankle, but this is glossed over.
Samantha's tutor is a young, handsome (naturally!) Englishman with the unlikely name of Dr James Timothy Orville III. For most of the book he is referred to simply as 'Orville'. If you are of my generation you might understand why this seemed a bit off-putting and why I've had 'I Wish I Could Fly....' in my head for the past few days!
In conclusion, it wasn't a bad book, the writing was OK (a few Americanisms slipping into the mouths of supposedly British characters....) but it just didn't work for me - there were too many things that were rather improbable and the protagonist was, at times, idiotic.
Samantha has had rather an odd upbringing, which would account for some of her strangeness. We see her early on arriving at a fictional Oxford college to study English Literature although she seems to hate practically all writers and seems incapable of constructing a reasonable critical argument! She is rather like a spoilt child, and as such I found her hard to like. I'm also pretty good at suspending my disbelief but it takes some stretch of the imagination to accept that someone like Samantha would have been able to gain a place on an English Literature course at an Oxford college! Or that she would be housed on the fifth floor of a tower with no windows in her room and apparently there is only a bathroom on the ground floor. Must have been a bit of an issue when she sprained her ankle, but this is glossed over.
Samantha's tutor is a young, handsome (naturally!) Englishman with the unlikely name of Dr James Timothy Orville III. For most of the book he is referred to simply as 'Orville'. If you are of my generation you might understand why this seemed a bit off-putting and why I've had 'I Wish I Could Fly....' in my head for the past few days!
In conclusion, it wasn't a bad book, the writing was OK (a few Americanisms slipping into the mouths of supposedly British characters....) but it just didn't work for me - there were too many things that were rather improbable and the protagonist was, at times, idiotic.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Sherlock Gnomes (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
The original "Gnomeo & Juliet" movie was a sweet spin on the Shakespeare
inspired story of Romeo and Juliet, but with two clans of gnomes at war
with the main destruction being to each other's gardens. Two star-crossed
lovers, Gnomeo & Juliet fall in love and after all the chaos, hate, and
near death experiences, both "gnomes houses" seek a truce and learn to
co-exist.
In the sequel, the gnomes move to London. Juliet (Emily Blunt) is so
preoccupied with rebuilding the garden, she fails to notice Gnomeo's (James
MacAvoy) needs and feelings. In other parts of London, Sherlock Gnomes
(Johnny Depp) and his faithful companion Watson (Chiwetel Eljiofor) are
investigating the disappearance of several gnomes throughout London. One
day, Gnomeo attempts at a romantic gesture goes awry when he tries to steal
an orchid for Juliet from a flower shop. Juliet ends up saving Gnomeo,
causing them to bicker and squabble and not realize all their gnome friends
and family were kidnapped. One thing leads to another and they find
themselves teaming up with Sherlock and Watson to track down all the clues
in hopes of saving their loved ones.
From the director who brought us "Kung Fu Panda," this was a major misstep
for John Stevenson. The movie was fast paced, but the story line was very
disjointed. I understand what angle they were attempting to hit here:
Don't take your loved ones for granted, but I just could not connect with
the characters. In the first film, they really focused on the
relationships between Gnomeo and his mother, Juliet and her father, and both
Gnomeo and Juliet. Those relationships were lost in this film. From the
adult perspective, the movie lacked depth, but was still entertaining.
However, the kiddos on hand loved it. They enjoyed all the high flying
suspenseful moments, the potty humor, and over the top one liners.
inspired story of Romeo and Juliet, but with two clans of gnomes at war
with the main destruction being to each other's gardens. Two star-crossed
lovers, Gnomeo & Juliet fall in love and after all the chaos, hate, and
near death experiences, both "gnomes houses" seek a truce and learn to
co-exist.
In the sequel, the gnomes move to London. Juliet (Emily Blunt) is so
preoccupied with rebuilding the garden, she fails to notice Gnomeo's (James
MacAvoy) needs and feelings. In other parts of London, Sherlock Gnomes
(Johnny Depp) and his faithful companion Watson (Chiwetel Eljiofor) are
investigating the disappearance of several gnomes throughout London. One
day, Gnomeo attempts at a romantic gesture goes awry when he tries to steal
an orchid for Juliet from a flower shop. Juliet ends up saving Gnomeo,
causing them to bicker and squabble and not realize all their gnome friends
and family were kidnapped. One thing leads to another and they find
themselves teaming up with Sherlock and Watson to track down all the clues
in hopes of saving their loved ones.
From the director who brought us "Kung Fu Panda," this was a major misstep
for John Stevenson. The movie was fast paced, but the story line was very
disjointed. I understand what angle they were attempting to hit here:
Don't take your loved ones for granted, but I just could not connect with
the characters. In the first film, they really focused on the
relationships between Gnomeo and his mother, Juliet and her father, and both
Gnomeo and Juliet. Those relationships were lost in this film. From the
adult perspective, the movie lacked depth, but was still entertaining.
However, the kiddos on hand loved it. They enjoyed all the high flying
suspenseful moments, the potty humor, and over the top one liners.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Chloe (2010) in Movies
Dec 3, 2019
Decent Beginning Then All Downhill
A woman struggling in her marriage hires a call girl to come on to her husband to see if he will cheat. If Chloe sounds like a recipe for disaster in real life, just wait until I dive into the movie! It’s not a complete failure, but it fails enough for me to highly recommend avoiding it.
Acting: 9
Beginning: 7
All the players are introduced in the first ten minutes doing their respective jobs. You can tell the movie will be shrouded in a bit of mystery. I didn’t hate the way it started, but I was looking for a bit more originality.
Characters: 10
Chloe (Amanda Seyfried) is an intriguing character in and of herself. I was drawn to her and I couldn’t figure out why. Is she crazy? Misunderstood? Is she making everything up? What the hell is with this woman? The other characters are merely a moth to her flame. It’s not to say I didn’t like them, but they would fall flat without Chloe at the helm.
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
As you’re watching this movie, you definitely get the erotic thriller feel which I think is exactly what director Atom Egoyan is going for. There are certain scenes that seem to jump off the screen with sensuality and intrigue. It keeps your eyes rooted to the screen while little details are shot to keep you guessing.
Conflict: 7
Entertainment Value: 7
Memorability: 6
Pace: 6
Plot: 3
Remember my description in the opening paragraph? Yeah, it somehow manages to get even dumber than that. It’s a shame because I think the movie definitely could have been redeemed with a slightly better storyline.
Resolution: 5
Overall: 69
Going back over my notes for Chloe, I notice I have a lot of whats, whys, and hows. That’s usually not a good sign. Few loops were closed here which is a burden for a viewer already sitting through a wandering story. Close, but no cigar.
Acting: 9
Beginning: 7
All the players are introduced in the first ten minutes doing their respective jobs. You can tell the movie will be shrouded in a bit of mystery. I didn’t hate the way it started, but I was looking for a bit more originality.
Characters: 10
Chloe (Amanda Seyfried) is an intriguing character in and of herself. I was drawn to her and I couldn’t figure out why. Is she crazy? Misunderstood? Is she making everything up? What the hell is with this woman? The other characters are merely a moth to her flame. It’s not to say I didn’t like them, but they would fall flat without Chloe at the helm.
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
As you’re watching this movie, you definitely get the erotic thriller feel which I think is exactly what director Atom Egoyan is going for. There are certain scenes that seem to jump off the screen with sensuality and intrigue. It keeps your eyes rooted to the screen while little details are shot to keep you guessing.
Conflict: 7
Entertainment Value: 7
Memorability: 6
Pace: 6
Plot: 3
Remember my description in the opening paragraph? Yeah, it somehow manages to get even dumber than that. It’s a shame because I think the movie definitely could have been redeemed with a slightly better storyline.
Resolution: 5
Overall: 69
Going back over my notes for Chloe, I notice I have a lot of whats, whys, and hows. That’s usually not a good sign. Few loops were closed here which is a burden for a viewer already sitting through a wandering story. Close, but no cigar.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) in Movies
Jan 21, 2020
From a Sci-Fi Lover, It's a No
During a space mission, a spaceship supercomputer malfunctions and tries to kill the ship’s inhabitants. That’s the best I got for 2001: A Space Odyssey. Some films don’t translate far past their creation date and a lot of times, people find it hard to admit that. Hate me now because I wasn’t a fan of this movie in the slightest.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 4
The first few minutes of the movie left me scratching my head. You can save the whole explanation of the artistic aspect of this part, I’m not buying it and I feel directors have hid over “abstract art” for far too long. If it’s not good, it’s not good, and this? It made no sense. I had no desire to watch the rest of the movie after the first ten minutes, but I kept pushing.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 8
Entertainment Value: 6
Memorability: 7
Pace: 4
I snapped my fingers quite a bit through the duration of this movie. I wanted so badly for things to move along, but I felt like the movie thought looking great was more important. While it is cinematically stunning (and well deserving of a perfect score in that category), the story moves at an extremely slow clip. For example, so much time was wasted with one particular landing, I wanted to poke my damn eyes out. Watching this movie was like being stuck in traffic during rush hour.
Plot: 2
Resolution: 1
Overall: 62
I recently stopped reading a book because it dragged on so badly and was so confusing, I just couldn’t enjoy it any longer. With 2001: A Space Odyssey, I’ll just say this: When the movie ends and I have to wiki your plot, it probably wasn’t a good movie. I won’t argue that it deserved recognition for pioneering a beautiful vision of space, but the rest can honestly stay in history.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 4
The first few minutes of the movie left me scratching my head. You can save the whole explanation of the artistic aspect of this part, I’m not buying it and I feel directors have hid over “abstract art” for far too long. If it’s not good, it’s not good, and this? It made no sense. I had no desire to watch the rest of the movie after the first ten minutes, but I kept pushing.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 8
Entertainment Value: 6
Memorability: 7
Pace: 4
I snapped my fingers quite a bit through the duration of this movie. I wanted so badly for things to move along, but I felt like the movie thought looking great was more important. While it is cinematically stunning (and well deserving of a perfect score in that category), the story moves at an extremely slow clip. For example, so much time was wasted with one particular landing, I wanted to poke my damn eyes out. Watching this movie was like being stuck in traffic during rush hour.
Plot: 2
Resolution: 1
Overall: 62
I recently stopped reading a book because it dragged on so badly and was so confusing, I just couldn’t enjoy it any longer. With 2001: A Space Odyssey, I’ll just say this: When the movie ends and I have to wiki your plot, it probably wasn’t a good movie. I won’t argue that it deserved recognition for pioneering a beautiful vision of space, but the rest can honestly stay in history.
Debbiereadsbook (1202 KP) rated Escape You (Cole Brothers #3) in Books
Jan 14, 2020
good but myabe not for me
Independent reviewer for Archaeolibrarian, I was gifted my copy of this book.
Tyler finds out his amazing one night stand is the mark for the next ATF raid. Then he finds himself on the opposite side of the fence, as her fiancee. Mia knows she has no choice to this union of Mafia branches, but she doesn't have to like it. Finding out there really IS a way out of it, is great, just not who Tyler really is. Can they really be together when it all goes down?
This is book 3 in the Cole Brothers series, and I have not read the others. I don't feel I missed out on anything by not doing, but this book gives me enough hints to THOSE books, that I would LIKE to go back and read them, because I want to, not because I need to.
And I really am NOT sure how I feel about THIS book! And ya'll know I'm ALL about my book feelings. Its just I don't seem to have any about this book and I cannot for the life of me, figure out what doesn't work for me.
I liked that both Mia and Tyler have a say, it is in the first person, but each change is headed as the chapter changes. I liked that Tyler's deception discovered late in the day, not by Mia, cos Tyler tells her, but by the other major players.
I liked that there is a much bigger picture here, with ALL the Cole brothers involved, and that picture is what makes me want to go back and read the other books. Maybe THIS one will fit in better then, I don't know.
A *for a Mafia book* Nice book, and as much I as hate using that word for a book, it's the ONLY one I can muster.
3 solid GOOD stars, just maybe not for me.
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Tyler finds out his amazing one night stand is the mark for the next ATF raid. Then he finds himself on the opposite side of the fence, as her fiancee. Mia knows she has no choice to this union of Mafia branches, but she doesn't have to like it. Finding out there really IS a way out of it, is great, just not who Tyler really is. Can they really be together when it all goes down?
This is book 3 in the Cole Brothers series, and I have not read the others. I don't feel I missed out on anything by not doing, but this book gives me enough hints to THOSE books, that I would LIKE to go back and read them, because I want to, not because I need to.
And I really am NOT sure how I feel about THIS book! And ya'll know I'm ALL about my book feelings. Its just I don't seem to have any about this book and I cannot for the life of me, figure out what doesn't work for me.
I liked that both Mia and Tyler have a say, it is in the first person, but each change is headed as the chapter changes. I liked that Tyler's deception discovered late in the day, not by Mia, cos Tyler tells her, but by the other major players.
I liked that there is a much bigger picture here, with ALL the Cole brothers involved, and that picture is what makes me want to go back and read the other books. Maybe THIS one will fit in better then, I don't know.
A *for a Mafia book* Nice book, and as much I as hate using that word for a book, it's the ONLY one I can muster.
3 solid GOOD stars, just maybe not for me.
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Leanne Crabtree (480 KP) rated Hearts on Air (Hearts, #6) in Books
Jan 9, 2020
This review and more can be found at my blog https://aromancereadersreviews.blogspot.com/
This has been borrowed from the Kindle Unlimited library.
Well, first things first. You DO NOT have to read book #5.5, One Epic Night, to understand this as it is included at the beginning of this book.
Then the story continues where that one left off. Trevor is now a TV star in a free-running show that follows him and a handful of other free runners as they do stunts around London and other big cities. One difference now is that Reya is not in his life. Chapters go back and forth a few times so we see what happened in the months following their "one epic night" and how things didn't end so well with them.
It's been about 2 years since then and Trevor suddenly turns up in Reya's life again wanting to be friends again and asking if she'll fill in for one of their pregnant PA's while she's off on maternity. Reya is wary of letting Trev back into her life but eventually agrees and they travel to several cities around Europe with the group doing stunts and free running in pretty parks and some well known places. As they spend time together, they grow closer once more and before long those feelings from two years ago are creeping back in.
One thing that was driving me a little mad was the Leanne and Callum thing. I know they get their own book in a different series but seeing their love/hate relationship and the arguments and tender moments and NOT KNOWING what was happening was driving me a little mad. I will definitely be getting their book at some point.
I also liked how we saw pretty much every other character from the series in this one towards the end. I had honestly forgot how they all connected but seeing them in those last few chapters was really nice.
Definitely should be read if you've enjoyed previous books in the series.
This has been borrowed from the Kindle Unlimited library.
Well, first things first. You DO NOT have to read book #5.5, One Epic Night, to understand this as it is included at the beginning of this book.
Then the story continues where that one left off. Trevor is now a TV star in a free-running show that follows him and a handful of other free runners as they do stunts around London and other big cities. One difference now is that Reya is not in his life. Chapters go back and forth a few times so we see what happened in the months following their "one epic night" and how things didn't end so well with them.
It's been about 2 years since then and Trevor suddenly turns up in Reya's life again wanting to be friends again and asking if she'll fill in for one of their pregnant PA's while she's off on maternity. Reya is wary of letting Trev back into her life but eventually agrees and they travel to several cities around Europe with the group doing stunts and free running in pretty parks and some well known places. As they spend time together, they grow closer once more and before long those feelings from two years ago are creeping back in.
One thing that was driving me a little mad was the Leanne and Callum thing. I know they get their own book in a different series but seeing their love/hate relationship and the arguments and tender moments and NOT KNOWING what was happening was driving me a little mad. I will definitely be getting their book at some point.
I also liked how we saw pretty much every other character from the series in this one towards the end. I had honestly forgot how they all connected but seeing them in those last few chapters was really nice.
Definitely should be read if you've enjoyed previous books in the series.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated The Dead Don't Die (2019) in Movies
Jan 7, 2020 (Updated Jan 29, 2020)
Several Wild Animals
The Dead Don't Die is truly a bizarre experience.
Jim Jarmusch has crafted a gratuitously deadpan and self aware zombie film that tackles tired genre tropes in unique and confusing ways.
Truth be told, I was ready to hate it. I knew that it wasn't the same style of zombie-comedy as Zombieland, or Shaun of the Dead, and I expected to be bogged down in pretentiousness - I'm happy to admit that I was wrong in this case.
A lot of the complaints I've seen about TDDD is precisely that. That, and the fourth wall breaking, but those are two aspects that I actually really liked.
The humour is really subtle for the most part. The dead pan delivery of a lot of the script was quite jarring at first, but it didn't take long for it settle, and I actually ended up finding it pretty funny, just not in-your-face funny (which is a good thing).
The fourth wall stuff verges on being too-clever-for-its-own-good but it just about pulls it off, and gives an interesting alternate thought process to the general narrative.
The cast is brimming with people that I like and love - Bill Murray, Adam Driver (surely a full blown man crush by this point), Chloë Sevigny, Steve Buscemi, Danny Glover, Tilda Swinton... God damn I even love Iggy Pop. It's a great cast list for sure, and the charming and witty script gives them all a lot to do, even if some of the many characters feel under developed at times.
The zombie aspect is a bit if a back seat for me. I was certainly more invested in the aforementioned cast, than any actual zombie action, but I enjoyed the 'classic' shuffling zombies in a small town setting for what it's worth.
I'm not sure what I expected from The Dead Don't Die, but it certainly wasn't what I got, and that precisely why it stands out.
Jim Jarmusch has crafted a gratuitously deadpan and self aware zombie film that tackles tired genre tropes in unique and confusing ways.
Truth be told, I was ready to hate it. I knew that it wasn't the same style of zombie-comedy as Zombieland, or Shaun of the Dead, and I expected to be bogged down in pretentiousness - I'm happy to admit that I was wrong in this case.
A lot of the complaints I've seen about TDDD is precisely that. That, and the fourth wall breaking, but those are two aspects that I actually really liked.
The humour is really subtle for the most part. The dead pan delivery of a lot of the script was quite jarring at first, but it didn't take long for it settle, and I actually ended up finding it pretty funny, just not in-your-face funny (which is a good thing).
The fourth wall stuff verges on being too-clever-for-its-own-good but it just about pulls it off, and gives an interesting alternate thought process to the general narrative.
The cast is brimming with people that I like and love - Bill Murray, Adam Driver (surely a full blown man crush by this point), Chloë Sevigny, Steve Buscemi, Danny Glover, Tilda Swinton... God damn I even love Iggy Pop. It's a great cast list for sure, and the charming and witty script gives them all a lot to do, even if some of the many characters feel under developed at times.
The zombie aspect is a bit if a back seat for me. I was certainly more invested in the aforementioned cast, than any actual zombie action, but I enjoyed the 'classic' shuffling zombies in a small town setting for what it's worth.
I'm not sure what I expected from The Dead Don't Die, but it certainly wasn't what I got, and that precisely why it stands out.
Ali A (82 KP) rated When We Were Vikings in Books
Mar 4, 2020
When We Were Vikings is about Zelda, a high functioning 21 year old diagnosed with fetal alcohol syndrome, who is a Viking enthusiast trying to figure out her life quest. Zelda lives with her brother Gert after both of their parents died when they were young. Gert and his on again/off again girlfriend Annie, whom Zelda calls AK47, make up Zelda's main tribe. Together, they try to figure out their legacies.
Andrew David MacDonald delivered an amazing story. I absolutely adored the character of Zelda. The way she loved Vikings and applied the Viking culture to make it through life's difficulties was endearing. I loved Zelda and I just wanted her to succeed. Her blunt, unembellished language was easy to read and refreshing. Whether it's telling off thugs or talking about sex and periods, Zelda says what she thinks.
Her brother Gert also tried to figure out how to not only live his life and figure the world out, but also tried to help Zelda figure hers out. He attempted to work with the cards he'd been dealt, but in all honesty, he seemed to constantly grab from the pile ones that just made life harder - he was always making messes that others were cleaning up after, even Zelda herself. I just wanted to sit him down and tell him to get it together and keep it together.
This book had a lot of concepts in it that worked for me. The characters are both quirky and realistic. It's endearing and heartwarming; it's full of love and hate. Some portions of the book made me laugh out loud while others made me want to slam the book shut out of frustration. It had some light themes but also some pretty dark themes. When We Were Vikings earned a spot on my Recommended Fiction List.
"...The point is you're willing to give it a try. That's what makes someone a legend."
Andrew David MacDonald delivered an amazing story. I absolutely adored the character of Zelda. The way she loved Vikings and applied the Viking culture to make it through life's difficulties was endearing. I loved Zelda and I just wanted her to succeed. Her blunt, unembellished language was easy to read and refreshing. Whether it's telling off thugs or talking about sex and periods, Zelda says what she thinks.
Her brother Gert also tried to figure out how to not only live his life and figure the world out, but also tried to help Zelda figure hers out. He attempted to work with the cards he'd been dealt, but in all honesty, he seemed to constantly grab from the pile ones that just made life harder - he was always making messes that others were cleaning up after, even Zelda herself. I just wanted to sit him down and tell him to get it together and keep it together.
This book had a lot of concepts in it that worked for me. The characters are both quirky and realistic. It's endearing and heartwarming; it's full of love and hate. Some portions of the book made me laugh out loud while others made me want to slam the book shut out of frustration. It had some light themes but also some pretty dark themes. When We Were Vikings earned a spot on my Recommended Fiction List.
"...The point is you're willing to give it a try. That's what makes someone a legend."
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated The Grinch (2018) in Movies
Apr 13, 2020
A Quick Story That Doesn't Linger
A retelling of an old classic, The Grinch is the story of a cranky green curmudgeon hell bent on destroying Christmas.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
What’s a great Grinch movie without the star of the show being an awesome character you love to hate? I loved his story that touched a bit on his history and what made him the character he became. The supporting cast adds more excellence to the movie, but it would be nothing overall without the green guy. The movie captures exactly how mean he is like when he knocks down a kid’s snowman or puts something out of reach for a group of old ladies.
The side characters were something to love which added to the film’s originality. I loved the goat and the reindeer as well as his trusted dog Max. Cindy Lou was just the cutest.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 6
The conflict is there, but there is a bit of detraction having heard and seen this tale before. You kind of know what’s going to happen and would be very surprised if the Grinch didn’t end up turning over a new leaf by the end of it. The Who’s aren’t going to lose Christmas and we know it’s only a matter of time before everyone is happy again. Still, it was fun watching everything unfold again.
Entertainment Value: 6
The Grinch does have its merits of originality, but you can’t help but feel like you’ve seen this all before just in a different packaging. It is still funny, endearing, and touching even though it can be a bit repetitive at times.
Memorability: 9
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Resolution: 6
Overall: 87
Yes The Grinch is a borrowed story, but I loved what Universal Pictures did with this movie. With beautiful animations and sweet story, this movie is definitely worth incorporating into the rotation. I highly recommend it.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
What’s a great Grinch movie without the star of the show being an awesome character you love to hate? I loved his story that touched a bit on his history and what made him the character he became. The supporting cast adds more excellence to the movie, but it would be nothing overall without the green guy. The movie captures exactly how mean he is like when he knocks down a kid’s snowman or puts something out of reach for a group of old ladies.
The side characters were something to love which added to the film’s originality. I loved the goat and the reindeer as well as his trusted dog Max. Cindy Lou was just the cutest.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 6
The conflict is there, but there is a bit of detraction having heard and seen this tale before. You kind of know what’s going to happen and would be very surprised if the Grinch didn’t end up turning over a new leaf by the end of it. The Who’s aren’t going to lose Christmas and we know it’s only a matter of time before everyone is happy again. Still, it was fun watching everything unfold again.
Entertainment Value: 6
The Grinch does have its merits of originality, but you can’t help but feel like you’ve seen this all before just in a different packaging. It is still funny, endearing, and touching even though it can be a bit repetitive at times.
Memorability: 9
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Resolution: 6
Overall: 87
Yes The Grinch is a borrowed story, but I loved what Universal Pictures did with this movie. With beautiful animations and sweet story, this movie is definitely worth incorporating into the rotation. I highly recommend it.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated The Lion King (2019) in Movies
Jul 31, 2019
Lacking in heart
The Lion King is one of my all time favourite Disney films, so I approached this 'live action' remake with a lot of trepidation, and I'm afraid to say I was right to be worried.
Visually it looks stunning, which shouldn't really be a surprise as it has been brought to us by the same guys that did The Jungle Book. However I'm afraid the visuals are pretty much all this film has going for it. This film is virtually a carbon copy of the original animation but with all of the heart, soul and humour taken out of it. The problem with these Disney live action remakes is they're unnecessary and stuck in a difficult position - differ too much from the original and people hate it, but sticking too close to the original and it begs the question as to why not just watch the original? It's more difficult for The Lion King as it's gone from being cartoon animation to CGI animation and apart from looking more natural, that's the only real difference.
They've lost virtually all of the magic that made the original great in the first place. The humour either falls flat due to the poor execution, or has been removed and replaced with something much less witty and funny. I mean, where was dress in drag & do the hula?! I dont think the voice cast helps. Other than Chiwetel Ejiofor and of course James Earl Jones, the rest of the voice cast just seemed ridiculously out of place and ill fitting with the film. I cringed every time I heard Zazu as Jon Oliver is definitely no Rowan Atkinson! And dont even get me started on Beyonce. We really didnt need her horrific versions of songs thrown in too. Although the rest of the songs did at least make the rest of the film more bearable.
Altogether despite the stunning CGI, this is a very poor copy of the original and definitely one I wont be watching again - just stick to the original.
Visually it looks stunning, which shouldn't really be a surprise as it has been brought to us by the same guys that did The Jungle Book. However I'm afraid the visuals are pretty much all this film has going for it. This film is virtually a carbon copy of the original animation but with all of the heart, soul and humour taken out of it. The problem with these Disney live action remakes is they're unnecessary and stuck in a difficult position - differ too much from the original and people hate it, but sticking too close to the original and it begs the question as to why not just watch the original? It's more difficult for The Lion King as it's gone from being cartoon animation to CGI animation and apart from looking more natural, that's the only real difference.
They've lost virtually all of the magic that made the original great in the first place. The humour either falls flat due to the poor execution, or has been removed and replaced with something much less witty and funny. I mean, where was dress in drag & do the hula?! I dont think the voice cast helps. Other than Chiwetel Ejiofor and of course James Earl Jones, the rest of the voice cast just seemed ridiculously out of place and ill fitting with the film. I cringed every time I heard Zazu as Jon Oliver is definitely no Rowan Atkinson! And dont even get me started on Beyonce. We really didnt need her horrific versions of songs thrown in too. Although the rest of the songs did at least make the rest of the film more bearable.
Altogether despite the stunning CGI, this is a very poor copy of the original and definitely one I wont be watching again - just stick to the original.