Sign up
Search
Advanced search settings

Search only in certain items:

Search results
All (1890)
Content
People
Apps
Books
Orbs
Movies
Music
Podcasts
Shows
Tabletop Games
Tech
TV
Video Games
YouTube Channels
Videos
    The Witcher: Old World

    The Witcher: Old World

    (0 Ratings) Rate It

    Tabletop Game

    In The Witcher: Old World, you become a witcher — a professional monster slayer — and immerse...

40x40

Eilidh G Clark (177 KP) rated The Portrait of Mr W.H. in Books

May 14, 2017  
The Portrait of Mr W.H.
The Portrait of Mr W.H.
Oscar Wilde | 2014 | Fiction & Poetry
8
8.0 (1 Ratings)
Book Rating
Quick read. Great insight into the Victorian fin de siecle . Great suspence. (0 more)
Too quick. I wanted more. (0 more)
. As a paradox to the realism and ethics of the period, decadent writers, artists, and poets challenged a society that strove for a standard in public discourse.
First published in 1889, Oscar Wilde’s The Portrait of Mr W.H., is a short story about the efforts of three characters trying to discover the identity of Shakespeare’s Mr W.H. ; the dedicatee of his many sonnets. Wilde’s novel is a prime example of decadent literature and aestheticism, which, as a result, challenges the Victorian ideals of moral decency and public rectitude. The author uses paradox in the novel to present a theory that contradicts the conservative critics of Shakespeare’s sonnets.

Wilde presents a subjective interpretation of Shakespeare’s sonnets that portrays homoerotic sexual desire as the force for creative inspiration. Foremost, through the character Cyril Graham, the author demonstrates that art is ‘an attempt to realise one’s own personality on some imaginative plane out of reach of the trammelling accidents and limitations of real life’, (Wilde, p.111).
Taking from a hypothesis in the previous century by Edmund Malone and Thomas Tyrwhitt, the character of Cyril forms a theory in which Mr W.H. is a young actor named Willie Hughes, employed by Shakespeare and who is the muse to which the sonnets are devoted. Cyril investigates each poem and pieces together a theory he believes to be true.

On the surface, Cyril’s theory derives from feeling and beauty rather than logic and instruction.
The withholding of facts in Shakespeare’s sonnets energises Cyril. He scours the poems to find a clue that harmonise with his own feelings. Cyril believes that Shakespeare influences his readers by guiding them to Willie Hughes.

Cyril, spurned by the moralistic interpretations of previous critics, becomes enthralled by Shakespeare’s muse.
  
40x40

Uptown Oracle (24 KP) rated No Ordinary Star in Books

Jun 30, 2017  
No Ordinary Star
No Ordinary Star
M.C. Frank | 2015 | Science Fiction/Fantasy
6
6.0 (1 Ratings)
Book Rating
Decent book - but too short and lacks action
I first wanted to read No Ordinary Star because I was promised a big library within its pages. I wasn't disappointed. Although, it took a while to get to the Library. In 2524, books are 'weapons' due to the ideas that can be got from them. The new world has no need for new ideas. Plus,women and children aren't allowed to learn how to read or write. There's strict governance on who is in charge and superior within this world.

Although the book was short, it was packed full of information about this new future world. The new world was so strange yet extensive. There were so many advancements in medicine and lifestyle. You don't need to drink, eat or sleep because you can live off small tablets. Scientists create and genetically modify children. The government has removed music, art and love from humanity. There was the issue that no action was taken within the book - it will probably be within the next book that the pace is picked up.

This future brings up so many discussion points and thoughts when reading. Are all these advancements moral? Is this the right thing to do? There's separation of men and women, as men treat women as an inferior species. This book just makes you think so much about what you actually want for the future.

This book also brings up so many questions plot wise. Some questions were answered by the end, such as who is the 'fairy girl' in the first chapters? Other questions, such as why is the Clock so important will hopefully be answered in future installments? I'm excited to read the next book to see how it evolves!
  
40x40

Awix (3310 KP) rated Geostorm (2017) in Movies

Feb 7, 2018 (Updated Feb 7, 2018)  
Geostorm (2017)
Geostorm (2017)
2017 | Action, Mystery, Sci-Fi
5
6.4 (29 Ratings)
Movie Rating Watch
Gerard Butles With The Elements
It's a movie directed by the producer of The Day After Tomorrow and 2012, in which Gerard Butler is shot into space to have a fight with bad weather. If the description alone does not make you engage in fairly serious expectation-management, you must be new to this whole going-to-the-movies business.

Um, yeah: Gerard Butler plays a brilliant but maverick meteorologist (stay with me) who invents a global weather control system codenamed 'Dutch Boy' (possibly because the satellites are really high all the time), then gets sacked for being a pain in the neck. Years later, the system starts to go wrong (unimportant people like Afghans and Chinese meet spectacular weather-related deaths) and Butler is recruited by his brother (don't ask) to figure out the problem.

There is a lot of chasing about and a conspiracy and the world's most oddly designed self-destruct system, and the villain turns out to be the person you thought it was all the time. Butler spends most of the movie in space, which at least means Abbie Cornish can do more as a member of the Secret Service who ends up kidnapping the President (it's that kind of movie). Geostorm hasn't quite figured out how to handle having the President as a character in a movie in the current situation: Andy Garcia plays him in a very sensible, nondescript manner, quite divorced from reality.

I have to say a friend of mine said Geostorm was so bad it made London Has Fallen look like a Christopher Nolan movie, but it's not so much flat-out awful as simply very silly, obvious, and predictable, not to mention very much like all the other movies Dean Devlin produced for Roland Emmerich. I suppose the moral should be 'stick to what you're (reasonably) good at'.