Search
Search results
BookInspector (124 KP) rated The Marriage of Innis Wilkinson in Books
Nov 9, 2020
The protagonists of this story would be Margarette and Roy, but this novel is told from multiple perspectives, including Innis herself. Margarette and Roy belong to the families, that hate each other. Both of the families trying to outdo each other with better events and showing off, and Margarette has to endure all that competing behaviour. Innis is a character, who’s story is running in the background. Innis is an incredibly strange woman. Her story is revealed little by little, but it is very sweet and heartbreaking. I really liked all the main characters, they are very kind, sensitive and pleasant people. Margarette has patience made of steel, she does so much for both of the families, scared to offend them, I know I would have lost my patience in no time. 😀 😀
The book is set in a very small town called Coraloo, during a festival, and the whole vibe feels like Bruge (Belgium) for some reason. I imagine little shops down the little alleys, cobblestone everywhere… It just seems cosy, small and inviting. The narrative is quite slow and steady, the characters are sharing their thoughts about family, love, relationships, but it is quite funny at times when crazy family members join in. The topics discussed in this novel are family relationships, marriage preparations and stress, abandoned dreams, wish to be accepted and many more. This novel has some mystery elements, but the whole novel is more oriented towards romance and wedding.
I really liked the writing style of this book. It was very creative, and even though some of the things kept repeating, I could feel the love for everything through the characters. I am very happy that the author used her experience as a teacher in this novel, I think it was very well utilised. The chapters are medium length, and some of the information was a little repetitive, but I was quite curious to find out more about Innis, so the chapters didn’t feel draggy to me. The ending was very unexpected but left me very satisfied with the outcome.
So, to conclude, I really enjoyed this funny, heart-warming book, that is filled with unique and entertaining characters, as well as very soothing and “cuddly” plot. I think this book is perfect for these long and cold evenings, it feels like a hug.
The book is set in a very small town called Coraloo, during a festival, and the whole vibe feels like Bruge (Belgium) for some reason. I imagine little shops down the little alleys, cobblestone everywhere… It just seems cosy, small and inviting. The narrative is quite slow and steady, the characters are sharing their thoughts about family, love, relationships, but it is quite funny at times when crazy family members join in. The topics discussed in this novel are family relationships, marriage preparations and stress, abandoned dreams, wish to be accepted and many more. This novel has some mystery elements, but the whole novel is more oriented towards romance and wedding.
I really liked the writing style of this book. It was very creative, and even though some of the things kept repeating, I could feel the love for everything through the characters. I am very happy that the author used her experience as a teacher in this novel, I think it was very well utilised. The chapters are medium length, and some of the information was a little repetitive, but I was quite curious to find out more about Innis, so the chapters didn’t feel draggy to me. The ending was very unexpected but left me very satisfied with the outcome.
So, to conclude, I really enjoyed this funny, heart-warming book, that is filled with unique and entertaining characters, as well as very soothing and “cuddly” plot. I think this book is perfect for these long and cold evenings, it feels like a hug.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated The Thing (2011) in Movies
Jan 10, 2021
This one is pretty straightforward - The Thing (2011) is an ok film that is completely dwarfed by The Thing (1982) - honestly, fuck knows why it doesn't have a different title.
This prequel to the iconic John Carpenter movie does have some decent aspects to it - it has a mostly agreeable cast and a good screenplay that's engaging, although a vast majority of the characters are hugely forgettable, and not a patch on the crew of protagonists from the 82 film. Mary Elizabeth Winstead is a perfectly likable leading lady, but everyone else is just kind of there. Even Joel Edgerton blends in with the furniture.
I also think it has good pacing for the most part - the opening third builds things up nicely, and when things finally kick off, it feels earned.
The attention to detail is admirable as well, with various objects and hints of past chaos found by Kurt Russell and co in the 82 film being placed perfectly.
Unfortunately, the end project suffers from a couple of things. Most infamously, the CGI is ropey, and is an ill advised addition considering the 82 film boasts some of the best practical effects in cinema history. This is made even worse by the fact that practical effects and animatronics were initially used before being smothered in digital effects to the point where it actively makes the whole movie less enjoyable. The narrative also apes the Carpenter classic a little too often for my taste, and serves more of a reminder of that film, rather than feeling like a homage.
The final act is just silly as well. After a strong build up, the climax snowballs into uninteresting bad-Predator-sequel-esque nonsense, and even saves the most laughable digital effects for last, just for good measure.
I did like the very last scene though, which genuinely ties nicely into the start of the 82 film.
Messing with such an iconic horror heavyweight comes with huge risks, and ultimately, The Thing (still really hate that they didn't use a different title) isn't the car crash that it easily could have been, but it does fall flat on really important aspects, resulting in a film that is average to the casual movie goer, and is thoroughly underwhelming for fans of its far superior predecessor.
This prequel to the iconic John Carpenter movie does have some decent aspects to it - it has a mostly agreeable cast and a good screenplay that's engaging, although a vast majority of the characters are hugely forgettable, and not a patch on the crew of protagonists from the 82 film. Mary Elizabeth Winstead is a perfectly likable leading lady, but everyone else is just kind of there. Even Joel Edgerton blends in with the furniture.
I also think it has good pacing for the most part - the opening third builds things up nicely, and when things finally kick off, it feels earned.
The attention to detail is admirable as well, with various objects and hints of past chaos found by Kurt Russell and co in the 82 film being placed perfectly.
Unfortunately, the end project suffers from a couple of things. Most infamously, the CGI is ropey, and is an ill advised addition considering the 82 film boasts some of the best practical effects in cinema history. This is made even worse by the fact that practical effects and animatronics were initially used before being smothered in digital effects to the point where it actively makes the whole movie less enjoyable. The narrative also apes the Carpenter classic a little too often for my taste, and serves more of a reminder of that film, rather than feeling like a homage.
The final act is just silly as well. After a strong build up, the climax snowballs into uninteresting bad-Predator-sequel-esque nonsense, and even saves the most laughable digital effects for last, just for good measure.
I did like the very last scene though, which genuinely ties nicely into the start of the 82 film.
Messing with such an iconic horror heavyweight comes with huge risks, and ultimately, The Thing (still really hate that they didn't use a different title) isn't the car crash that it easily could have been, but it does fall flat on really important aspects, resulting in a film that is average to the casual movie goer, and is thoroughly underwhelming for fans of its far superior predecessor.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle (2017) in Movies
Jan 22, 2021
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, I do not know what The Rock is for? He’s certainly not for me! I’m sure he is a lovely man in real life, but how…? Why…? is he a movie star? It baffles me. Look, there is some fun to be had with this remake, and the themes it raises are actually reasonably smart and relevant to the world of teenagers in 2020, but it is just so second rate and lazy in so many ways. I am also not a fan of Kevin Hart’s schtick. I mean, he has made me laugh maybe twice in everything I’ve ever seen him do in the last ten years. Irritating sums it up better for me. Jack Black isn’t a whole lot better; his best films are good despite him, not because of him, in the main, and when he is bad he is very very poor indeed. That leaves Karen Gillan, and yes, she saves the show here, leaving the boys look awkward, forced and quite a bit dated.
It’s basically a body swap movie, a tried and tested recipe for Japes and easy gags in a kids movie. And as so it shamelessly borrows, adapts and full on steals every previous joke, observation and trick used in every body swap film ever made. Does it do anything new? Or better? Not as far as I could see. But, then again, I am no longer ten years old, and that is very much where this is pitched. Except it annoyed me most in the patronising choices it made for the ten year old of 2020 – are they all really that dumb? Because I remember the original Jumanji managing to be fun and intelligent at the same time. It’s very possible I have it wrong because it’s me that is getting further away from what kids identify with and enjoy these days, however.
Basically, I allowed it to wash over me whilst pining for the screen presence, comedic skill and empathy of Robin Williams. Therefore I was bound to hate it. Maybe one day I’ll see it in a better mood and accept that it is perfectly fine family fare. I have certainly witnessed worse over the years – at least the sense of adventure is mostly there, the production design is competent and it is ultimately harmless. It’s just not my bag.
It’s basically a body swap movie, a tried and tested recipe for Japes and easy gags in a kids movie. And as so it shamelessly borrows, adapts and full on steals every previous joke, observation and trick used in every body swap film ever made. Does it do anything new? Or better? Not as far as I could see. But, then again, I am no longer ten years old, and that is very much where this is pitched. Except it annoyed me most in the patronising choices it made for the ten year old of 2020 – are they all really that dumb? Because I remember the original Jumanji managing to be fun and intelligent at the same time. It’s very possible I have it wrong because it’s me that is getting further away from what kids identify with and enjoy these days, however.
Basically, I allowed it to wash over me whilst pining for the screen presence, comedic skill and empathy of Robin Williams. Therefore I was bound to hate it. Maybe one day I’ll see it in a better mood and accept that it is perfectly fine family fare. I have certainly witnessed worse over the years – at least the sense of adventure is mostly there, the production design is competent and it is ultimately harmless. It’s just not my bag.
Sophie Wink (11 KP) rated Granite Grit (Fighting's in the Blood #1) in Books
Jun 26, 2019
"When your toughest opponent is you."
Your not kidding! A very true statement in more ways than one throughout the novel, for the main character Joe and the reader's themselves. What a fantastic debut novel.
The storyline is brilliant, easy to follow and written in quite a unique style jumping from past to present in the space of a couple lines with ease. It is truly fascinating, coming from someone who is clueless when it comes to boxing of any kind I managed to understand everything, it all made sense. I loved the twists and turns the story itself took, unwinding the spiral of destruction the main character created for himself, it's powerful yet sad and overall really moving creating the important hook.
The themes of the story are simple and conveyed with the utmost professionalism, the love between man and women, between parents and children, between man and the art of boxing. The relationships between the characters throughout the novel are wonderfully portrayed whether they come to a complete halt or blossom in times of tragedy. I think the theme of abuse is conveyed beautifully considering the sensitive, powerful and hard-hitting nature of the theme as a whole tying in well with a further theme of family which seems to be one of Joe's fatal flaws. Which leads me on to the character Joe whom I love, hate and support, the character development of Joe is remarkably controlled and really well done. At first, I really loved and sympathised with the man trying to keep his family afloat, then his downwards spiral left me hating him yet supporting him, wanting him to do well and wanting him to win the fight with not only himself but his opponents.
Personally, the fight scenes were my favourite due to the descriptive manner of which they were told, I felt like I was in the crowd onlooking the entire scene feeling the tension and fear in the atmosphere. Although it may not seem like it due to the boxing element the novel is very relatable considering family loyalty, the struggle for money and even the determination Joe has to prove himself. I even found myself laughing out loud at some of the comments Joe made.
Overall, this is truly an amazing book and I couldn't recommend it more.
Your not kidding! A very true statement in more ways than one throughout the novel, for the main character Joe and the reader's themselves. What a fantastic debut novel.
The storyline is brilliant, easy to follow and written in quite a unique style jumping from past to present in the space of a couple lines with ease. It is truly fascinating, coming from someone who is clueless when it comes to boxing of any kind I managed to understand everything, it all made sense. I loved the twists and turns the story itself took, unwinding the spiral of destruction the main character created for himself, it's powerful yet sad and overall really moving creating the important hook.
The themes of the story are simple and conveyed with the utmost professionalism, the love between man and women, between parents and children, between man and the art of boxing. The relationships between the characters throughout the novel are wonderfully portrayed whether they come to a complete halt or blossom in times of tragedy. I think the theme of abuse is conveyed beautifully considering the sensitive, powerful and hard-hitting nature of the theme as a whole tying in well with a further theme of family which seems to be one of Joe's fatal flaws. Which leads me on to the character Joe whom I love, hate and support, the character development of Joe is remarkably controlled and really well done. At first, I really loved and sympathised with the man trying to keep his family afloat, then his downwards spiral left me hating him yet supporting him, wanting him to do well and wanting him to win the fight with not only himself but his opponents.
Personally, the fight scenes were my favourite due to the descriptive manner of which they were told, I felt like I was in the crowd onlooking the entire scene feeling the tension and fear in the atmosphere. Although it may not seem like it due to the boxing element the novel is very relatable considering family loyalty, the struggle for money and even the determination Joe has to prove himself. I even found myself laughing out loud at some of the comments Joe made.
Overall, this is truly an amazing book and I couldn't recommend it more.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Citizen Kane (1941) in Movies
Sep 30, 2019
Beautiful Cinematic Treat
Citizen Kane follows the life of a newspaper tycoon. I saw this movie months ago, but have been dreading the review due to my scoring. Granted, I LOVED this movie, I just know there will be those that say I should have scored the movie higher and I’m ok with that. Here goes nothing…
Acting: 10
Orson Welles delivers a powerful performance as Charles Foster Kane. In my eyes, I see him as the original Tony Stark: Powerful, suave, and undeniably lovable. His presence takes over making it hard for me to remember the impact of other performances. There is no doubt that this is a classic, iconic role.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Again, I could watch a movie made up of just Charles Foster Kane and no one else and still enjoy it. Yes, there were other characters that contributed to the film’s overall impactfulness, but the character of Kane is one you remember for a long time. He is a well-layered powerful man that has a lot brewing beneath the surface. He is compensating for something missing in his life and it doesn’t take us long to see this. His journey is definitely one worth watching.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 8
Entertainment Value: 10
The entire movie revolves around a mystery: What exactly is rosebud? It takes us all the way to the end to truly find out what that means. I don’t know about you, but I spent much of my time while watching the film trying to find hints to what the mystery could mean. This made the movie all the more interesting and it was a clever way to keep me engaged. This movie doesn’t need a full two hours to pack a powerful punch.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 8
Plot: 10
Resolution: 6
Here’s where i get crucified: I think the ending to Citizen Kane is a bit overrated. When I found out what it all meant, I kind of rolled my eyes a bit. I didn’t hate it, but also didn’t see what the big deal was.
Overall: 92
Citizen Kane definitely deserves its classic status and I agree that, even to this day, it is still one of the best movies ever made. I won’t go as far as to say the greatest movie of all time (as of today it sits at 87 on my list), but it is truly a movie to remember.
Acting: 10
Orson Welles delivers a powerful performance as Charles Foster Kane. In my eyes, I see him as the original Tony Stark: Powerful, suave, and undeniably lovable. His presence takes over making it hard for me to remember the impact of other performances. There is no doubt that this is a classic, iconic role.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Again, I could watch a movie made up of just Charles Foster Kane and no one else and still enjoy it. Yes, there were other characters that contributed to the film’s overall impactfulness, but the character of Kane is one you remember for a long time. He is a well-layered powerful man that has a lot brewing beneath the surface. He is compensating for something missing in his life and it doesn’t take us long to see this. His journey is definitely one worth watching.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 8
Entertainment Value: 10
The entire movie revolves around a mystery: What exactly is rosebud? It takes us all the way to the end to truly find out what that means. I don’t know about you, but I spent much of my time while watching the film trying to find hints to what the mystery could mean. This made the movie all the more interesting and it was a clever way to keep me engaged. This movie doesn’t need a full two hours to pack a powerful punch.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 8
Plot: 10
Resolution: 6
Here’s where i get crucified: I think the ending to Citizen Kane is a bit overrated. When I found out what it all meant, I kind of rolled my eyes a bit. I didn’t hate it, but also didn’t see what the big deal was.
Overall: 92
Citizen Kane definitely deserves its classic status and I agree that, even to this day, it is still one of the best movies ever made. I won’t go as far as to say the greatest movie of all time (as of today it sits at 87 on my list), but it is truly a movie to remember.
Ab Workout X FREE+ Six-Pack Core Abdomen Exercises
Health & Fitness and Sports
App
◆Over 1,000,000 downloads worldwide and counting. Join the ab revolution and download today◆ ...
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated Multiverse in Books
Aug 3, 2020
<a href="https://amzn.to/2Wi7amb">Wishlist</a>; | <a
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Book-Review-Banner-38.png"/>;
Multiverse is a collection of poems as well as short paragraphs that take on interesting topics and thought-provoking scenarios of our life.
After reading Multiverse, I cannot say for certain whether he is being arrogant or brave. I am still undecided as to whether I love or hate his style of writing. There is something very intriguing about his writing; sometimes he makes me smirk, and sometimes his words trigger me.
<b><i>"In a democracy, shouldn't there be room for those who don't want a fair society?"</i></b>
Even though I appreciate the style this book was written in, and the way the topics are being expressed, I am not in awe of how bombshells are dropped and then he proceeds to move on to a different subject.
Following up on this, I would also like to note the poem "Forsaking the Poppy", where the author opens us the suggestion of declining to wear a poppy. The thought process behind it is that this could be seen as synonymous with racism and chauvinism.
<b><i>One thing is certain though. </i></b>
This book will definitely leave an impact on you, whether good or bad. And it will prompt a discussion, or at least spark a bit of curiosity on various topics that are relevant in today's world.
I recommend it to all curious minds out there. It may not be your cup of tea, but you never know. As for me, I like books that either make me feel good or learn something, so i will end this review with something I learnt from this book:
<b><i>"According to ancient Japanese culture, the Sakura tree represents the beauty and fragility of life, reminding us that things in life are incredibly precious but also tragically ephemeral." </i></b>
<a href="https://amzn.to/2Wi7amb">Wishlist</a>; | <a
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Book-Review-Banner-38.png"/>;
Multiverse is a collection of poems as well as short paragraphs that take on interesting topics and thought-provoking scenarios of our life.
After reading Multiverse, I cannot say for certain whether he is being arrogant or brave. I am still undecided as to whether I love or hate his style of writing. There is something very intriguing about his writing; sometimes he makes me smirk, and sometimes his words trigger me.
<b><i>"In a democracy, shouldn't there be room for those who don't want a fair society?"</i></b>
Even though I appreciate the style this book was written in, and the way the topics are being expressed, I am not in awe of how bombshells are dropped and then he proceeds to move on to a different subject.
Following up on this, I would also like to note the poem "Forsaking the Poppy", where the author opens us the suggestion of declining to wear a poppy. The thought process behind it is that this could be seen as synonymous with racism and chauvinism.
<b><i>One thing is certain though. </i></b>
This book will definitely leave an impact on you, whether good or bad. And it will prompt a discussion, or at least spark a bit of curiosity on various topics that are relevant in today's world.
I recommend it to all curious minds out there. It may not be your cup of tea, but you never know. As for me, I like books that either make me feel good or learn something, so i will end this review with something I learnt from this book:
<b><i>"According to ancient Japanese culture, the Sakura tree represents the beauty and fragility of life, reminding us that things in life are incredibly precious but also tragically ephemeral." </i></b>
<a href="https://amzn.to/2Wi7amb">Wishlist</a>; | <a
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Barbarella (1968) in Movies
Aug 10, 2020
Vaguely Memorable
An outer space agent travels to another galaxy in search of a missing inventor.
Acting: 2
Good cast, none of whom are swinging for the fences in Barbarella. Honestly, I can compare the acting chops in this movie to the likes of a softcore porn. Science fiction or not, there is absolutely nothing believable about this movie in the slightest. The acting made the rest of the movie hard to watch.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Despite the terrible acting, I didn’t hate the characters, namely the woman of the hour Barbarella (Jane Fonda). She’s quirky and I loved all of her inuendo references to sex. The movie is very sex-oriented and it succeeds, albeit minutely, in Barbarella’s experience and everyone else’s lack thereof. If they had given the movie more of a solid story, the characters would have had a fighting chance at being a part of a solid movie.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Not terrible in the way of sci-fi. They tried a number of cool things that really are fairly impressive for a 1968 movie. From the weapons to the numerous space settings, I wasn’t disappointed by what was showing up on screen.
Conflict: 6
I think Barbarella cared more about being trippy than having a true conflict to drive the story. There are points where I cared about the outcome, but it seems more often than not that the movie is satisfied with being light-hearted and slowly paced. There was not enough going on for me to overly care.
Entertainment Value: 9
Memorability: 6
There are a handful of moments that stand out, but there isn’t a lot of replay value here. Even as I rewatch it as we speak, there are some spots that I forgot even happened. Definitely not a movie I need to see twice.
Pace: 5
Plot: 1
Never a good sign when I have to look the story up on Rotten Tomatoes. It was honestly that forgettable. I think the 800 screenwriters on this movie cared more about being funny than they did writing a good movie. Not impressed.
Resolution: 2
Overall: 61
I wanted to like Barbarella, but they gave me nothing to work with unfortunately. I wouldn’t even advise the Amazon Prime users (where the movie is available) to give it a shot. Steer clear.
Acting: 2
Good cast, none of whom are swinging for the fences in Barbarella. Honestly, I can compare the acting chops in this movie to the likes of a softcore porn. Science fiction or not, there is absolutely nothing believable about this movie in the slightest. The acting made the rest of the movie hard to watch.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Despite the terrible acting, I didn’t hate the characters, namely the woman of the hour Barbarella (Jane Fonda). She’s quirky and I loved all of her inuendo references to sex. The movie is very sex-oriented and it succeeds, albeit minutely, in Barbarella’s experience and everyone else’s lack thereof. If they had given the movie more of a solid story, the characters would have had a fighting chance at being a part of a solid movie.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Not terrible in the way of sci-fi. They tried a number of cool things that really are fairly impressive for a 1968 movie. From the weapons to the numerous space settings, I wasn’t disappointed by what was showing up on screen.
Conflict: 6
I think Barbarella cared more about being trippy than having a true conflict to drive the story. There are points where I cared about the outcome, but it seems more often than not that the movie is satisfied with being light-hearted and slowly paced. There was not enough going on for me to overly care.
Entertainment Value: 9
Memorability: 6
There are a handful of moments that stand out, but there isn’t a lot of replay value here. Even as I rewatch it as we speak, there are some spots that I forgot even happened. Definitely not a movie I need to see twice.
Pace: 5
Plot: 1
Never a good sign when I have to look the story up on Rotten Tomatoes. It was honestly that forgettable. I think the 800 screenwriters on this movie cared more about being funny than they did writing a good movie. Not impressed.
Resolution: 2
Overall: 61
I wanted to like Barbarella, but they gave me nothing to work with unfortunately. I wouldn’t even advise the Amazon Prime users (where the movie is available) to give it a shot. Steer clear.
The Beast Side: Living (and Dying) While Black in America
9.0
Rate It
Book
A New York Times Best Seller! To many, the past 8 years under President Obama were meant to...
politics social issues
SkipCast: Podcast Player
News and Entertainment
App
The search is over; SkipCast is your perfect Podcast app! SkipCast streams audio and video from...