
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Frost in Books
Jan 23, 2020
Ah, my first Norse mythology book (okay, I have another one by another author, but I'm a little hesitant on reading another of their works...).
For a debut novelist who started the book on Wattpad, <i>Frost</i> isn't that bad of a book. Latimer does a great job with building the world of Jotunheim (there's another name, but that's the easiest I remember) it's an icy world with frost giants, and there's magic to keep the ice palace from falling apart, etc. I personally think the entire world is really cool, and I would totally hop on an airplane to visit the place if it were real and I wouldn't get hypothermia from the moment I actually step off the plane.
Regardless, though, <i>Frost</i> had a decent grasp on a lot of elements that didn't make too much of an impact on me, not to mention the fact there aren't much Norse mythology going on here. The author is really using Norse mythology as a base and using the usual tropes of young adult fiction to fluff it up.
The writing style? I feel like there's something missing, but maybe it's because there's this gap when it comes to my relationship with Wattpad works. I'm not exactly used to Wattpad works, so I'm a little lenient in this department.
The characters? Petty, petty, petty. Too much pettiness going on here. Too much flawlessness and perfection going on with the jotun. I swear there is so much perfection going on with them, the only flaw they probably have is they're assholes. It's enough that "jerk" is not simply not good enough of a word to describe those jotun.
Most, if not all, hate Megan simply because she is the queen's favorite. They strive to take her down and pretty much urge her to leave, and they do it through threats and attacks. Meanwhile, the queen is completely unbelievable for doting on Megan MEGAN IS A STRANGER, FOR GODS' SAKES. But Latimer establishes the fact her frosty majesty is perhaps a little cuckoo in the head you're forgiven, I suppose.
And then there's Megan and Amora where do the boundaries between them end? Megan is called Amora, Amora is Amora, Megan is Megan. With all of the characters calling Megan, "Amora," it took a long while to get used to the fact Megan's "given" name by her frosty majesty is "Amora." However, at no point in the book does Latimer mention why Megan was given the name of Amora. Thus, assumptions must be made, and I personally believe it's grief and guilt.
Megan, on the other hand, is not exactly as insecure as she thinks. She's secretly brave, and I like her. I would like to say, however, that she is quite naïve in the beginning when she is running from Loki. She makes poor decisions that are worth facepalming using a credit card, even if it is not her own? Bad idea. They can still track you. (Must be a media hermit.)
The plot and storyline? Weak, but not that weak. I personally think the jotun being vengeful for a good part of the book probably played a big role in the weak plot. In the long run, I think Latimer probably didn't go into much detail with the overall plot because there seems to be a sequel coming in the future.
If anything, <i>Frost</i> is really just a book where the main character learns something unusual about herself and discovers who, or what, she really is. As mentioned before, there really isn't much from Norse mythology coming from this one, but I sure hope if there is a sequel, there are a lot more mythological elements used.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/arc-review-frost-by-e-latimer/" target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>

Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Lucy in the Sky (2019) in Movies
Mar 9, 2020
She becomes desperate to be selected for the next program… to get that literal) ‘high’ all over again. So desperate that her mind and morals burn up on trying to re-enter.
You look at the career choices of Natalie Portman, and they have often revolved around cool and detached woman: “Black Swan” and “Jackie” for example. Here, looking incredibly fit and strong (as you would expect from an astronaut at the peak of her powers) , she again plays something of an ice queen. She is – of course – brilliant at it.
Starring with her here is the ever-watchable Jon Hamm as fellow astronaut Mark Goodwin, the omni-present – at the moment – Zazie Beetz as a fellow program competitor and Dan Stevens (from “Downton”) as her exasperated colleague and husband Drew. (Stevens was COMPLETELY UNRECOGNISABLE to me in this movie…. just like in “Beauty and the Beast“! To the extent that I had to wind back the film from the end-titles after seeing his name to check!).
This was always a film that was going to struggle to identify its audience. Yes, it starts in space, but it is in NO WAY a “Sci-Fi” movie (which is one of its tags on IMDB. Shameful!). This is a drama about a woman progressively losing her grip on reality: almost a PTSD movie, but without the “S” being “T” in the normal sense of things.
Lucy’s ‘other-worldliness’ is reflected in the aspect ratio of the movie, which varies from a claustrophobic ‘old-TV’ format 4:3 ratio to a ratio bordering on ‘Cinemascope’. (This makes for a very challenging watch on a small airline TV screen, as I was doing!). It’s a motif that’s obviously meant to reflect Lucy’s drifting grip on reality. But it eventually gets irritating…. I had the sense that first-time feature director Noah Hawley was ‘trying too hard’ for something quirky and different.
Far more successful is a ‘green-screened’ trippy sequence seeing Lucy being transported to a hospital bedside to the rendition of The Beatles iconic song, performed by Lucy Hannigan (listen here). It’s dreamlike and unsettling. In fact, one of the high-spots of the movie for me was Jeff Russo‘s score, which I have made a mental note to make sure to listen to again on Spotify. It’s more electronica than orchestral but matches the mood of the film really well.
But, here’s the thing. I didn’t enjoy it. The problem is (and no spoilers here) that Portman’s Lucy is such a downright BITCH that it is impossible to warm to her as the movie’s star. There is, in fact, only one of the characters that you really side with, and she’s the one doing the most damage to them.
This shouldn’t be a problem to the story, since the film is reflecting (loosely) true events: the astronauts in question were Lisa Nowak and William Oefelein. And there are lots of ‘feel-bad’ films about mental illness (“One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest”, for example) that stand on their own merits. But this one just seemed to be a fairly miserable and destructive story that didn’t have enough of a payoff – either positive or negative – to merit the journey.
This was disappointing, since after hearing the premise, I’d been looking forward to this one.
For those who love movies, and the way movies are structured, it is an interesting watch. But it is not by any stretch an entertaining mainstream movie. The director Noah Hawley will need to do better in the “commercially-appealing” stakes for his next film: since he’s been (rather surprisingly) given the helm for the sequel to “Star Trek: Beyond“.
(For the full graphical review, check out the review on One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/03/09/one-manns-movies-dvd-review-lucy-in-the-sky-2019/ ).

Art Of Brick Laying
Productivity and Reference
App
This is a series of 236 tuitional and informative videos all on the art of brick laying and more! ...

Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated The Midnight Sky (2020) in Movies
Jan 22, 2021
The Netflix original movie The Midnight Sky was never going to be met with very high expectations, therefore. Although, it is testament to gorgeous George’s allure that we are still curious to at least see for ourselves what all the poor reviews are about. It seemed to be unanimous around the big voices that the main issue is that “nothing happens”. This does not worry me normally, as it quite often demonstrates how a 2020s audience, especially a Netflix one, has the attention span of a hungry vole in search of a fast worm followed by a quick nap! Patient story building and minimalism are not well regarded any more in the main. And that is a big problem for this film in finding an appreciative audience.
Clooney himself pitched it as Gravity meets The Revenant. Now, what you have done there, George, is set yourself up to be compared to two works of relative genius, both with far bigger budgets and the actual big screen in mind, not the “yes, it’s still a movie, but it is made for TV and phones” phenomenon. So it is bound to suffer in any critique. It didn’t stand a chance.
OK, it is ponderously slow. Fact. And there are moments when staring at Clooney’s extremely compelling beard is the most interesting thing to do with your brain or eyes in that moment. But to say nothing happens is erroneously unfair – Augustine is dying, and alone, in a world that has destroyed itself in an unspecified way. As he navigates a nightmare landscape of ice and his own diminishing sanity his subconscious creates an ethereal presence to guide him to his “essential” purpose: getting a message to a distant space station not to return to Earth under any circumstances.
Whilst not remotely original, and borrowing from the previously specified references in big, obvious ways (as well as Solaris, which GC didn’t mention, but its influence is apparent, both the Soderburgh and Tarkovsky versions), the heart of the idea isn’t anywhere near as weak as the naysayers would have you believe. If, in fact, you tune in to Clooney’s fine, sensitive performance, whilst reading between the lines of emotion and meaning, it is quite a satisfying tale. Yes, with a lot of problems, not least of all in momentum and the excitement you might expect from a sci-fi. But it isn’t “bad”, per se. Merely ponderous.
As for those up in space, including the always watchable and wonderful Felicity Jones, David Oyelowo, and Kyle Chandler, their lot is much more difficult than the Earthbound sequences. Caught between budget CGI and sets, and trapped in recreations of better space films, they simply don’t have the script to create any atmosphere or chemistry between themselves. Including an excruciating sing-along sequence that serves no purpose other than to make you cringe! The shame then is that we never feel like they are worth saving, which makes Augustine’s efforts feel futile and hollow – maybe something Clooney as director wanted to convey… but he shouldn’t have done it by making us care absolutely zero about those being saved.
Ultimately, it is an admirable failure in many ways, and not worth an earnest recommendation. It is another flop for Clooney as director. But there is just enough beauty and fragility in what Clooney is doing as an actor to make it far from a complete waste of time. Yes, it is a further example of Netflix producing something that feels churned out and corner cutting, rather than a fully rounded work that has all the framework a big cinema release would receive. It just isn’t quite as bad as the reviews suggest.

FirstMet Dating: Meet Singles
Dating, Lifestyle and Social Networking
App
MEETING REAL PEOPLE HAS NEVER BEEN EASIER! FirstMet Dating (formerly AYI) is packed with great...

Hungarian & Hungary Radio Stations Online
Music and Entertainment
App
*** TOP Hungarian Radios App *** Listen to Hungary radios for Free on your mobile device.This Radio...

Stratego® Single Player
Games and Entertainment
App
Play the best Strategy game ever! Stratego® Official Single Player from Jumbo is all about good...

Pocket Universe - 3D Gravity Sandbox
Games and Education
App
If you had the power, how would you create the solar system? What would be the size of each planet...

Siren's Call (Dark Tides #1)
Book
Between desire and love there are some things that can’t stay buried, even in the deep of the...

Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Long Shot (2019) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
#Punching refers to an in-family joke….. my WhatsApp reply to my son when he sent me a picture of his new “Brazilian supermodel girlfriend” (she’s not). Bronwyn is now my daughter-in-law!
Similarly, the ‘out-there’ journalist Fred Flarsky (Seth Rogan) has been holding a candle for the glacial ice-queen Charlotte Field (Charlize Theron) for nearly twenty years. At the age of 16 she was his babysitter. Always with an interest in school issues, she has now risen to the dizzy heights of secretary (“of State”) to the President of the United States (Bob Odenkirk). With Charlotte getting the opportunity to run for President, fate arranges for Fred to get hired as a speechwriter on the team to help inject some necessary humour into Charlotte’s icy public persona. But in terms of romantic options, the shell-suited Fred is surely #punching isn’t he?
A rare thing.
Getting the balance right for a “romantic comedy” is a tricky job, but “Long Shot” just about gets it spot on. The comedy is sharp with a whole heap of great lines, some of which will need a second watch to catch. It’s also pleasingly politically incorrect, with US news anchors in particular being lampooned for their appallingly sexist language.
Just occasionally, the humour flips into Farrelly-levels of dubious taste (one “Mary-style” incident in particular was, for me, very funny but might test some viewer’s “ugh” button). The film also earns its UK15 certificate from the extensive array of “F” words utilized, and for some casual drug use.
Romantically, the film harks back to a classic blockbuster of 1990, but is well done and touching.
Writing and Directing
The sharp and tight screenplay was written by Dan Sterling, who wrote the internationally controversial Seth Rogen/James Franco comedy “The Interview” from 2014, and Liz Hannah, whose movie screenplay debut was the Spielberg drama “The Post“.
Behind the camera is Jonathan Levine, who previously directed the pretty awful “Snatched” from 2017 (a film I have started watching on a plane but never finished) but on the flip side he has on his bio the interesting rom-com-zombie film “Warm Bodies” and the moving cancer comedy “50:50”, also with Rogan, from 2011.
Also worthy of note in the technical department is the cinematography by Yves Bélanger (“The Mule“, “Brooklyn“, “Dallas Buyers Club“) with some lovely angles and tracking shots (a kitchen dance scene has an impressively leisurely track-away).
The Cast
Seth Rogen is a bit of an acquired taste: he’s like the US version of Johnny Vegas. Here he is suitably geeky when he needs to be, but has the range to make some of the pathos work in the inevitable “downer” scenes. Theron is absolutely gorgeous on-screen (although unlike the US anchors I OBVIOUSLY also appreciate her style and acting ability!). She really is the Grace Kelly of the modern age. She’s no stranger to comedy, having been in the other Seth (Macfarlane)’s “A Million Ways to Die in the West“. But she seems to be more comfortable with this material, and again gets the mix of comedy, romance and drama spot-on.
The strong supporting cast includes the unknown (to me) June Diane Raphael who is very effective at the cock-blocking Maggie, Charlotte’s aide; O’Shea Jackson Jr. as Fred’s buddy Lance; and Ravi Patel as the staffer Tom.
But winning the prize for the most unrecognizable cast member was Andy Serkis as the wizened old Rupert Murdoch-style media tycoon Parker Wembley: I genuinely got a shock as the titles rolled that this was him.
Final thoughts.
Although possibly causing offence to some, this is a fine example of a US comedy that delivers consistent laughs. Most of the audience chatter coming out of the screening was positive. At just over 2 hours, it breaks my “90 minute comedy” rule, but just about gets away with it. It’s not quite for me at the bar of “Game Night“, but it’s pretty close. Recommended.