Search
Search results
Ross (3284 KP) rated Bird Box (2018) in Movies
Jan 14, 2019 (Updated Jan 14, 2019)
Slightly flawed premise for a film
Contains spoilers, click to show
The premise of the film, that there are mysterious beings that, once seen, will drive sane people to suicide and insane people to do their bidding is intriguing. That is, until you realise that this means a film where people are either stuck inside, afraid of those mad "helpers" knocking on their door, or people wandering blindfolded around looking for food, water and shelter. Neither of these for me make for a particularly compelling watch. This film is split between the two.
The former aspects of the film are by far the best, people locked in a house together, running out of food (but somehow with plenty of electricity and running water) and considering venturing outside. However, with only those insane helpers likely to come to the door, we don't have the same level of jeopardy as your normal zombie/apocalypse film.
The latter aspects, people wandering around blindfolder, are just a nonsense. People driving in a car with blacked out windows and barely bumping into anything and sat-nav somehow getting them right to the front door (and the people know they are at the front door) was just totally unbelievable. Sat-nav frequently tells me I am in the sea when driving anywhere near the coast, so the chances of it accurately delivering me to the front door of a shop I programmed it for are minimal. Similarly when people are wandering around, they rarely bump into anything at all, and when they do it is always a trip (which would be easily avoided).
And finally the premise - the mysterious beings were not explored at all. While I am happy to have some mystery around the likes of this and actually hate it when they attempt to explain circumstances and fail, I felt this was just omitted completely. There is no real rhyme or reason for what happens in the film and I didn't like that. Its really just 2 hours of people afraid of some leaves.
The rating of this was for the suspense of the film and the acting within the house section, and for the epic opening sequences where the cataclysm unfolds, despite the glaring flaws in the premise and people miraculously getting around without concussion.
The former aspects of the film are by far the best, people locked in a house together, running out of food (but somehow with plenty of electricity and running water) and considering venturing outside. However, with only those insane helpers likely to come to the door, we don't have the same level of jeopardy as your normal zombie/apocalypse film.
The latter aspects, people wandering around blindfolder, are just a nonsense. People driving in a car with blacked out windows and barely bumping into anything and sat-nav somehow getting them right to the front door (and the people know they are at the front door) was just totally unbelievable. Sat-nav frequently tells me I am in the sea when driving anywhere near the coast, so the chances of it accurately delivering me to the front door of a shop I programmed it for are minimal. Similarly when people are wandering around, they rarely bump into anything at all, and when they do it is always a trip (which would be easily avoided).
And finally the premise - the mysterious beings were not explored at all. While I am happy to have some mystery around the likes of this and actually hate it when they attempt to explain circumstances and fail, I felt this was just omitted completely. There is no real rhyme or reason for what happens in the film and I didn't like that. Its really just 2 hours of people afraid of some leaves.
The rating of this was for the suspense of the film and the acting within the house section, and for the epic opening sequences where the cataclysm unfolds, despite the glaring flaws in the premise and people miraculously getting around without concussion.
Kelly (279 KP) rated Spartacus - Season 1 in TV
Dec 21, 2018
Gladiators (1 more)
Great fighting scenes
Much better than the 1960 film
Who would have thought that the story of Spartacus could have been made raunchy for a modern audience, but Starz did this really well. The general facts around the slave rebellion against the Romans, led by the former gladiator Spartacus are limited, however Starz used what information there was and filled in the rest to create a believable version of the tale.
I know that around the release of the series, there was a lot of talk about the use of CGI in the show, mainly during the battle scenes, with the appearance of animated blood splatters/slashes, similar to that shown in the film 300. This use seemed to have divided the audience into either ‘love it’ or ‘hate it’. Personally, I feel that this was the unique selling point of the show- something different that we are not used to on the TV screen, I felt it helped made the show more watchable.
For me Andy Whitfield made Spartacus (and his loss was noticed in the later series of the show). His love towards wife Sura is clear throughout series one, and gave us a believable reason as to why he allowed himself to be manipulated by Batiatus. He was also supported by a number of well cast actors including Manu Bennett (Crixus) and Peter Mensah (Oenomaus), by the end of the series, we find that we really care about these characters.
The reason that I have not rated the show higher, is the casting of John Hannah as Batiatus. John Hannah is a good actor, but I felt the role was not suited to him. To me, Batiatus needed to be a little crueler and more angry, at the end of the day, he was profit and power hungry, and willing to give the lives of men in order to pay the cost of his personal success. There were times, when I did not believe that this was what John Hannah was portrayed, and there was an awkwardness around some of his scenes (particularly those where there were a lot of swearing).
Overall, despite the odd flaw, I really enjoyed watching Spartacus (and have happily purchased the complete box set for re-watching in future) .
I know that around the release of the series, there was a lot of talk about the use of CGI in the show, mainly during the battle scenes, with the appearance of animated blood splatters/slashes, similar to that shown in the film 300. This use seemed to have divided the audience into either ‘love it’ or ‘hate it’. Personally, I feel that this was the unique selling point of the show- something different that we are not used to on the TV screen, I felt it helped made the show more watchable.
For me Andy Whitfield made Spartacus (and his loss was noticed in the later series of the show). His love towards wife Sura is clear throughout series one, and gave us a believable reason as to why he allowed himself to be manipulated by Batiatus. He was also supported by a number of well cast actors including Manu Bennett (Crixus) and Peter Mensah (Oenomaus), by the end of the series, we find that we really care about these characters.
The reason that I have not rated the show higher, is the casting of John Hannah as Batiatus. John Hannah is a good actor, but I felt the role was not suited to him. To me, Batiatus needed to be a little crueler and more angry, at the end of the day, he was profit and power hungry, and willing to give the lives of men in order to pay the cost of his personal success. There were times, when I did not believe that this was what John Hannah was portrayed, and there was an awkwardness around some of his scenes (particularly those where there were a lot of swearing).
Overall, despite the odd flaw, I really enjoyed watching Spartacus (and have happily purchased the complete box set for re-watching in future) .
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated A Blade So Black in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<b><i>I received this book for free from Publisher in exchange for an honest review. This does not affect my opinion of the book or the content of my review.</i></b>
<h2><strong>When I first heard of <em>A Blade So Black</em>, I got excited.</strong></h2>
And I mean super excited! Here we have a book that features a black protagonist (we need more POC retellings!) who kicks butt like Buffy the vampire slayer and a retelling of <em>Alice in Wonderland</em> (which I should I get to one day but probably won't happen).
<h2><strong>But L.L. McKinney's debut novel turned out to be a big bummer.</strong></h2>
I didn't hate it, but I very much could not get past 40% of the book - in fact, I suffered more than I should because I <em>hoped</em> the book would get a lot better later. But it didn't get any better.
<h3>The writing style didn't suit me.</h3>
I think this is another "it's not you, it's me," but omg the writing made me want to sleep more than continuing the book. I found watching the 2018 reboot of "Meteor Garden" more interesting and probably watched an episode or two for every chapter that bored me to tears.
<h3>The concept is amazing.</h3>
Buffy the Vampire Slayer meets in Alice in Wonderland in a modern day setting? Hellooooo, please sign me up. This book spells dark and ominous and I definitely got that vibe while reading what I did.
<h3>But it was just <em>sooo</em> boring.</h3>
I checked out of the book by Chapter Four (but I <em>tried</em> to stay with the rest of the book, I swear!). Wonderland is full of action, but it was the same thing over and over again and got repetitive. Alice is juggling being a Dreamwalker, who can destroy the Nightmares that come from Wonderland, while being an ordinary student with a life, but it was all the same thing over and over again. It never really picked up.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/a-blade-so-black-by-l-l-mckinney-the-disappointment-is-so-real/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<h2><strong>When I first heard of <em>A Blade So Black</em>, I got excited.</strong></h2>
And I mean super excited! Here we have a book that features a black protagonist (we need more POC retellings!) who kicks butt like Buffy the vampire slayer and a retelling of <em>Alice in Wonderland</em> (which I should I get to one day but probably won't happen).
<h2><strong>But L.L. McKinney's debut novel turned out to be a big bummer.</strong></h2>
I didn't hate it, but I very much could not get past 40% of the book - in fact, I suffered more than I should because I <em>hoped</em> the book would get a lot better later. But it didn't get any better.
<h3>The writing style didn't suit me.</h3>
I think this is another "it's not you, it's me," but omg the writing made me want to sleep more than continuing the book. I found watching the 2018 reboot of "Meteor Garden" more interesting and probably watched an episode or two for every chapter that bored me to tears.
<h3>The concept is amazing.</h3>
Buffy the Vampire Slayer meets in Alice in Wonderland in a modern day setting? Hellooooo, please sign me up. This book spells dark and ominous and I definitely got that vibe while reading what I did.
<h3>But it was just <em>sooo</em> boring.</h3>
I checked out of the book by Chapter Four (but I <em>tried</em> to stay with the rest of the book, I swear!). Wonderland is full of action, but it was the same thing over and over again and got repetitive. Alice is juggling being a Dreamwalker, who can destroy the Nightmares that come from Wonderland, while being an ordinary student with a life, but it was all the same thing over and over again. It never really picked up.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/a-blade-so-black-by-l-l-mckinney-the-disappointment-is-so-real/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated Jojo Rabbit (2019) in Movies
Jan 6, 2020 (Updated Jan 6, 2020)
F*ck Off Hittler!
Jo Jo Rabbit while by no means a bad movie its just one that I think would of worked better as a short instead. Think Son Of Rambow meets Wes Anderson and Jo Jo sits somewhere in between, its not bad but its also not greatness either. Containing way more serious drama and a much darker tone than the trailer has you believe what I found most interesting of all were the bleakest parts of the story which hit home way more than the comedy side. I just felt the humour took away from the films more serious messages of manipulation and the mind poluting of the naive. A good job is done of showing how fragile, young and inocent minds are easily lead astray/influenced by propaganda, stories, lies, the spread of hatred and how the excitement of holding a weapon, fighting in a war or wearing a uniform almost takes away from the overall bigger picture for them as children. Most of these kids see probably grew up without a dad as a role model so seeing hittler praised by all, hearing cool fables about him and seeing him on tv/posters to them at that age is almost like how kids are today with superheros, then to think thats actually what probably happened sends chills up your spine in horror. Sadly these scenes are always dampened with comedy killing the impact of them for me and while I do get what type of film its going for I think id rather of just seen a movie on the darker stuff. Acting is great especially by the boy playing Jo Jo however accents do slip constantly all round again breaking the illusion. Couple this with a middle act that I really struggled with losing intrest frequently and looking at my watch. While it does have the heart and certainly the depth in places I cant help but feel really let down by this movie and sadly I left wanting more. Far too serious for teens and not serious enough for adults Jo Jo Rabbit is an alright watch with definitely a few good messages at its muddled heart 'love will always defeat hate' and 'even if you are ugly on skin you still can be lovely from within' so I guess its not all bad.
Veronica Pena (690 KP) rated Thirteen Reasons Why in Books
Jan 6, 2020 (Updated Jan 31, 2020)
I first read this novel almost 7 years ago, I think. Maybe 8. Either way, it's been a decent amount of time since I last read this book and to be honest, I've been really nervous to revisit it. I know that there is a lot of controversy about it, and even more when it comes to the show, and ever since I first read the book, I've always been very protective of this story, these characters, this novel, all of it.
I find it incredibly amusing to read reviews of the show and the book of people that hate it and don't understand Hannah and think she just blamed everyone else and never took responsibility for her actions, and I partially understand. I can see why they think that but I think what makes this book so special and this story so special is how relatable it is. I think that unless you've been in Hannah's shoes, in her mindset, in that place than you can't understand. I think what people are most afraid to admit is that when someone dies by suicide, they do it for a culmination of reasons, and a lot of them are because of people - what they said, what they did or didn't do, what they say behind another person's back, etc. You hear stories in the news all the time about kids dying by suicide because they were bullied or because a bunch of people told them too, over and over and over again. People are mean and cruel and they do things that affect other people and it resonates. Each of the 13 people on her tapes all played a part. You can say she was blaming them or whatever you so please, but each of their actions created the circumstances for her to feel like she had nowhere else to go.
Again, I love this book. I love these characters, I love this plot, I love how real it is. I love the show, I love everything about it. I'm sure there are people who disagree with me. I'm sure there are people who vehemently protest this novel and its corresponding series, but I think this is a book that I will forever love, reread, and protect.
In a lot of ways, I am Hannah Baker. I think everyone is a little bit.
I find it incredibly amusing to read reviews of the show and the book of people that hate it and don't understand Hannah and think she just blamed everyone else and never took responsibility for her actions, and I partially understand. I can see why they think that but I think what makes this book so special and this story so special is how relatable it is. I think that unless you've been in Hannah's shoes, in her mindset, in that place than you can't understand. I think what people are most afraid to admit is that when someone dies by suicide, they do it for a culmination of reasons, and a lot of them are because of people - what they said, what they did or didn't do, what they say behind another person's back, etc. You hear stories in the news all the time about kids dying by suicide because they were bullied or because a bunch of people told them too, over and over and over again. People are mean and cruel and they do things that affect other people and it resonates. Each of the 13 people on her tapes all played a part. You can say she was blaming them or whatever you so please, but each of their actions created the circumstances for her to feel like she had nowhere else to go.
Again, I love this book. I love these characters, I love this plot, I love how real it is. I love the show, I love everything about it. I'm sure there are people who disagree with me. I'm sure there are people who vehemently protest this novel and its corresponding series, but I think this is a book that I will forever love, reread, and protect.
In a lot of ways, I am Hannah Baker. I think everyone is a little bit.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated The Year of Living Dangerously (1983) in Movies
Mar 9, 2020
A Story That Falls Short
The Year of Living Dangerously follows the story of reporter Guy Hamilton (Mel Gibson) during a tumultuous time of civil unrest in Indonesia.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 1
I won’t lie, I restarted this movie probably three times before I finally committed. It’s hard for a movie to bounce back for me when it gets off to such a sluggish start. The setup borders on painful in spots and it sets the tone for what is to come.
Characters: 6
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
One of the shining moments of the movie as it captures 60’s Indonesia beautifully. I was easily transported into the time period and the culture feeling right at home. I also appreciate how the romance between Hamilton and Jill Bryant (Sigourney Weaver) was captured by director Peter Weir. It felt both endearing and sincere.
Conflict: 6
Entertainment Value: 4
The movie was painfully dry. Outside of the romance, it was hard for anything else to really capture my attention. There were times where I thought things would pick up only to be let down again. Unfortunate as I was hoping for more.
Memorability: 4
It’s a struggle trying to remember anything that stood out in the film. While there were one or two things that got my attention, things were pretty drab for the most part. Sitting through this again would almost be like a brand new boring experience.
Pace: 3
Slower than a turtle, there were times where I begged for this movie to end. I kept holding out hope that things would take a turn. Alas…You can’t take too long to get to the point and be disinteresting. That’s a recipe for disaster.
Plot: 7
The story itself wasn’t bad at all, I just wish they could have found a way to make things more interesting. The lack of layers really made things fall short for me. A lot of unrealized potential here just left on the table.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 61
For more reasons than one, I just couldn’t get into The Year of Living Dangerously. “Hate” would be a strong word as there were glimpses of a solid movie…but I can’t say I liked it. Nor can I recommend it. There are a number of better 80’s classics out there.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 1
I won’t lie, I restarted this movie probably three times before I finally committed. It’s hard for a movie to bounce back for me when it gets off to such a sluggish start. The setup borders on painful in spots and it sets the tone for what is to come.
Characters: 6
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
One of the shining moments of the movie as it captures 60’s Indonesia beautifully. I was easily transported into the time period and the culture feeling right at home. I also appreciate how the romance between Hamilton and Jill Bryant (Sigourney Weaver) was captured by director Peter Weir. It felt both endearing and sincere.
Conflict: 6
Entertainment Value: 4
The movie was painfully dry. Outside of the romance, it was hard for anything else to really capture my attention. There were times where I thought things would pick up only to be let down again. Unfortunate as I was hoping for more.
Memorability: 4
It’s a struggle trying to remember anything that stood out in the film. While there were one or two things that got my attention, things were pretty drab for the most part. Sitting through this again would almost be like a brand new boring experience.
Pace: 3
Slower than a turtle, there were times where I begged for this movie to end. I kept holding out hope that things would take a turn. Alas…You can’t take too long to get to the point and be disinteresting. That’s a recipe for disaster.
Plot: 7
The story itself wasn’t bad at all, I just wish they could have found a way to make things more interesting. The lack of layers really made things fall short for me. A lot of unrealized potential here just left on the table.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 61
For more reasons than one, I just couldn’t get into The Year of Living Dangerously. “Hate” would be a strong word as there were glimpses of a solid movie…but I can’t say I liked it. Nor can I recommend it. There are a number of better 80’s classics out there.
Bread Beauty Revolution: Khwaja Ahmad Abbas 1914-1987
Khwaja Ahmad Abbas, Iffat Fatima and Syeda Hameed
Book
Khwaja Ahmad Abbas distinguished himself by his ceaseless passion for revolutionary politics, which...
Keith and The Girl comedy talk show
Podcast
If you're easily offended, this podcast is not for you. Keith and The Girl (KATG) is a fast-paced...
Emoji Keyboard -Gif Color Text Font for Messenger
Reference and Utilities
App
Do you tired of boring text SMS or email? And want to impress your friends? Just download this app!...
Chinese 5000+
Reference and Education
App
Chinese 5000+, is a most popular open-Chinese learning platform, It support voice and text...