Search
Search results
DaveySmithy (107 KP) rated Casablanca (1942) in Movies
Dec 3, 2024
A Timeless Classic: Casablanca - A 10/10 Masterpiece
Few films manage to withstand the test of time quite like Casablanca. Released in 1942, this cinematic gem not only defines its era but also transcends it, continuing to captivate audiences decades later. Directed by Michael Curtiz and featuring unforgettable performances by Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman, Casablanca is a rare film that combines stellar storytelling, iconic performances, and a profound emotional core into an unparalleled movie experience.
What makes Casablanca truly extraordinary is its perfect balance of intimate romance and global stakes. Set during World War II in the Moroccan city of Casablanca, the story revolves around Rick Blaine (Bogart), a cynical American expatriate who runs a nightclub, and Ilsa Lund (Bergman), the woman who once broke his heart. Their unexpected reunion is fraught with unresolved emotions and set against the backdrop of political intrigue, resistance efforts, and the shadow of Nazi oppression. It’s not just a love story—it’s a story of sacrifice, morality, and the search for meaning in chaotic times.
Humphrey Bogart, known for his tough-guy persona, delivers a nuanced and deeply human performance as Rick. His dry wit, vulnerability, and quiet heroism make Rick one of cinema’s most iconic characters. Bogart effortlessly conveys the tension between Rick’s outward indifference and his inner turmoil, making his journey from apathy to sacrifice profoundly moving. Opposite him, Ingrid Bergman is luminous as Ilsa. Her portrayal is layered with strength, grace, and a quiet sadness that makes her character unforgettable. The chemistry between Bogart and Bergman is electric, their unspoken longing resonating in every glance and line of dialogue.
The supporting cast is equally brilliant. Claude Rains as the charmingly corrupt Captain Renault steals nearly every scene he’s in with his biting humor and moral ambiguity. Paul Henreid’s portrayal of Victor Laszlo, the noble resistance leader, adds gravitas to the story, while Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre deliver memorable turns as colorful figures in Casablanca’s shadowy underworld. Every character, no matter how small their role, feels fully realized and essential to the tapestry of the story.
What elevates Casablanca to legendary status, however, is its script. Few films boast dialogue as sharp and iconic, with lines like “Here’s looking at you, kid,” and “We’ll always have Paris” becoming ingrained in pop culture. The screenplay, penned by Julius and Philip Epstein and Howard Koch, is a masterclass in storytelling, seamlessly blending romance, suspense, and humor. Each scene serves a purpose, driving the plot forward while deepening the emotional stakes.
Max Steiner’s score is another standout element, with the recurring use of “As Time Goes By” becoming as timeless as the film itself. The music weaves through the narrative, underscoring moments of joy, heartbreak, and tension with haunting beauty.
But perhaps the most remarkable aspect of Casablanca is its ability to resonate on multiple levels. It’s a sweeping romance, a gripping war drama, and a meditation on sacrifice and duty, all rolled into one. Its themes remain universal, its characters relatable, and its emotional impact undiminished by time.
In a world filled with good movies and great movies, Casablanca stands apart as a perfect one. It’s not just a film—it’s an experience, a masterpiece that speaks to the heart and soul. For that, it earns a well-deserved 10/10.
What makes Casablanca truly extraordinary is its perfect balance of intimate romance and global stakes. Set during World War II in the Moroccan city of Casablanca, the story revolves around Rick Blaine (Bogart), a cynical American expatriate who runs a nightclub, and Ilsa Lund (Bergman), the woman who once broke his heart. Their unexpected reunion is fraught with unresolved emotions and set against the backdrop of political intrigue, resistance efforts, and the shadow of Nazi oppression. It’s not just a love story—it’s a story of sacrifice, morality, and the search for meaning in chaotic times.
Humphrey Bogart, known for his tough-guy persona, delivers a nuanced and deeply human performance as Rick. His dry wit, vulnerability, and quiet heroism make Rick one of cinema’s most iconic characters. Bogart effortlessly conveys the tension between Rick’s outward indifference and his inner turmoil, making his journey from apathy to sacrifice profoundly moving. Opposite him, Ingrid Bergman is luminous as Ilsa. Her portrayal is layered with strength, grace, and a quiet sadness that makes her character unforgettable. The chemistry between Bogart and Bergman is electric, their unspoken longing resonating in every glance and line of dialogue.
The supporting cast is equally brilliant. Claude Rains as the charmingly corrupt Captain Renault steals nearly every scene he’s in with his biting humor and moral ambiguity. Paul Henreid’s portrayal of Victor Laszlo, the noble resistance leader, adds gravitas to the story, while Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre deliver memorable turns as colorful figures in Casablanca’s shadowy underworld. Every character, no matter how small their role, feels fully realized and essential to the tapestry of the story.
What elevates Casablanca to legendary status, however, is its script. Few films boast dialogue as sharp and iconic, with lines like “Here’s looking at you, kid,” and “We’ll always have Paris” becoming ingrained in pop culture. The screenplay, penned by Julius and Philip Epstein and Howard Koch, is a masterclass in storytelling, seamlessly blending romance, suspense, and humor. Each scene serves a purpose, driving the plot forward while deepening the emotional stakes.
Max Steiner’s score is another standout element, with the recurring use of “As Time Goes By” becoming as timeless as the film itself. The music weaves through the narrative, underscoring moments of joy, heartbreak, and tension with haunting beauty.
But perhaps the most remarkable aspect of Casablanca is its ability to resonate on multiple levels. It’s a sweeping romance, a gripping war drama, and a meditation on sacrifice and duty, all rolled into one. Its themes remain universal, its characters relatable, and its emotional impact undiminished by time.
In a world filled with good movies and great movies, Casablanca stands apart as a perfect one. It’s not just a film—it’s an experience, a masterpiece that speaks to the heart and soul. For that, it earns a well-deserved 10/10.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated 1922 (2017) in Movies
Oct 24, 2017 (Updated Oct 24, 2017)
Solid Performances (1 more)
Believable Set Design
Sometimes Your Own Demons Are The Hardest To Escape
1922 is the second Stephen King story adapted for Netflix in the last two months and it is very different to the adaption of Gerald's Game we saw back in September. The movie is set up nicely, showing an older, shaken man writing out his confession in hopes of appeasing the guilt that has plagued him since he murdered his wife Arlette. We then see a younger version of the man, Wilfred and we learn that he is very protective of the three things that he feels, 'belong,' to him; his son, his wife and his land.
Arlette professes a desire to sell the farm and move to the city, an idea that he outright refuses to go along with. The land that the farm is on belonged to Arlette's father and so it is now in her name, meaning she has the final say officially on selling the land. Wlifred tries to bargain with her, saying that he will buy the land off of her in installments, but Arlette knows that she can get a better price elsewhere and won’t have to wait years to receive the payment. This leads Wilfred to start planning his wife’s murder. Wilfred knows that his son wants to stay on the farm as well and so he manipulates him into helping him carry out and cover up the murder.
From this point on we have our ghost story. I’m actually rather hesitant to call it a ghost story, even though strictly speaking, it is one. This is more a tale of how guilt haunts a man beyond carrying out the heinous deed and how no bad deed goes unpunished. I don’t want to spoil too much here for those who haven’t yet seen the film, but what follows is a relentless and depressing tale of regret and loss.
The cast in this film are great, Thomas Jane does a great job in the lead role of a man willing to go to any morbid lengths, in order to retain what he believes belongs to him. Molly Parker and Dylan Schmid also do well in their roles as Arlette and Henry, respectively. The supporting cast is also solid. The other stand out thing in the movie for me was the set design. I found the farmhouses and barns to be extremely believable and the sets really added to the overall tone that the movie was going for and sold the era effectively as well.
My main complaint of the movie is the lack of any significant scares. The movie sets up a fairly creepy atmosphere at times, but never capitalizes on it. A Stephen King ghost story released the week before Halloween should be way scarier than this. I thought I was getting a truly chilling movie to sink my teeth into and instead I got a movie showing a desperate man’s fractured psyche and the guilt he has to deal with in the aftermath of a despicable deed, which is an interesting idea, it’s just not what I wanted out of this movie.
Overall this is a well made movie and for what it is it’s great, it just didn’t meet the expectations that I had for it and maybe that’s my own fault more than the movie’s. As with any Stephen King story, it makes for an interesting adaption and takes you on a dark journey and leaves you wondering about you own moral decisions in life. The film is no doubt successful in what it sets out to do; I just wish that it had scared me a bit more.
Arlette professes a desire to sell the farm and move to the city, an idea that he outright refuses to go along with. The land that the farm is on belonged to Arlette's father and so it is now in her name, meaning she has the final say officially on selling the land. Wlifred tries to bargain with her, saying that he will buy the land off of her in installments, but Arlette knows that she can get a better price elsewhere and won’t have to wait years to receive the payment. This leads Wilfred to start planning his wife’s murder. Wilfred knows that his son wants to stay on the farm as well and so he manipulates him into helping him carry out and cover up the murder.
From this point on we have our ghost story. I’m actually rather hesitant to call it a ghost story, even though strictly speaking, it is one. This is more a tale of how guilt haunts a man beyond carrying out the heinous deed and how no bad deed goes unpunished. I don’t want to spoil too much here for those who haven’t yet seen the film, but what follows is a relentless and depressing tale of regret and loss.
The cast in this film are great, Thomas Jane does a great job in the lead role of a man willing to go to any morbid lengths, in order to retain what he believes belongs to him. Molly Parker and Dylan Schmid also do well in their roles as Arlette and Henry, respectively. The supporting cast is also solid. The other stand out thing in the movie for me was the set design. I found the farmhouses and barns to be extremely believable and the sets really added to the overall tone that the movie was going for and sold the era effectively as well.
My main complaint of the movie is the lack of any significant scares. The movie sets up a fairly creepy atmosphere at times, but never capitalizes on it. A Stephen King ghost story released the week before Halloween should be way scarier than this. I thought I was getting a truly chilling movie to sink my teeth into and instead I got a movie showing a desperate man’s fractured psyche and the guilt he has to deal with in the aftermath of a despicable deed, which is an interesting idea, it’s just not what I wanted out of this movie.
Overall this is a well made movie and for what it is it’s great, it just didn’t meet the expectations that I had for it and maybe that’s my own fault more than the movie’s. As with any Stephen King story, it makes for an interesting adaption and takes you on a dark journey and leaves you wondering about you own moral decisions in life. The film is no doubt successful in what it sets out to do; I just wish that it had scared me a bit more.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Gerald's Game (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Not a very fun game
The horror film market is huge. Hundreds, if not thousands, of horror films are made every year, with only few standing out of the blood-drenched crowd. Netflix, with a penchant for outstanding horrors and thrillers, decided to hop on the horror flick train, bringing about an adaptation of Stephen King’s terrifying novel ‘Gerald’s Game’.
The film follows Jessie (Carla Gugino) and her husband, Gerald (Bruce Greenwood), as they head to a remote lake house in order to spice up their marriage. One thing leads to another, and then Gerald has a heart attack and dies, leaving Jessie handcuffed to the bed with the keys out of reach. She must then fight to survive, whilst having a few disturbing flashbacks and encounters along the way.
This movie is really disturbing. Like, really, really disturbing. It’s not particularly scary, there’s the odd jump-scare or three, but its the imagery and the situation that really get your heart going.
Carla Gugino as the shackled wife is a stand-out in this film. She basically carries it, only with a few interruptions from inside her head, and this makes for very entertaining viewing. She’s amusing, in a way that you didn’t think anyone could be whilst fighting dehydration, a hungry dog at the end of her bed and death himself. In all honesty, it’s not a very fun game.
Her husband, however, is brilliant at being horrible. Greenwood really amps up the bad husband vibes in the 20 minutes he is alive, which then are exacerbated in Jessie’s head after he has died. He’s manipulative, seedy and slimy: something that Jessie realises at the end of the film.
It could be argued that this film isn’t really a horror film in the typical sense. It’s more a horror film about what has happened to Jessie, the main character, and how she comes to terms with her past and survives. She calls on past experiences to escape her confines on the bed, and her horrible history.
That’s not to say that it doesn’t have stereotypical horror movie attributes. The Moonlight Man is their contribution to the supernatural – or more the ‘is he actually there or am I insane?’ kind of gimmick that sometimes comes with this genre. The Moonlight Man is a shadowy figure, lurking in the shadows with his box of trinkets and bones. He’s absolutely terrifying.
He’s also real. In the film and book, he’s a necrophiliac who’s waiting for Jessie to die so he can add her wedding ring and one of her bones to his box. The Moonlight Man is the kind of horror movie villain that you have nightmares about. Which is why he is one of the highlights of Gerald’s Game.
The film isn’t exactly the most complex plot in the world. It plays a bit too much on the stereotypes in some cases and the ending, in true horror film fashion, is too happy, is too well put together after such a traumatic experience. It all ends a bit too neatly after such a messy first three-quarters.
Even though this isn’t the best horror film ever, it certainly is not the worst. It has it’s flaws, but the acting and the scriptwriting make up for the few it has. In an era of horror trying too hard, this film is simple and refreshing, bringing a new feeling to the horror industry as a whole.
So, the moral of the story is: don’t handcuff yourself to the bed because your husband will die on top of you and then a stray dog will eat him and a necrophiliac will come into your house at night. Quite an easy thing to remember, right?
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/12/06/geralds-game-review-not-a-very-fun-game/
The film follows Jessie (Carla Gugino) and her husband, Gerald (Bruce Greenwood), as they head to a remote lake house in order to spice up their marriage. One thing leads to another, and then Gerald has a heart attack and dies, leaving Jessie handcuffed to the bed with the keys out of reach. She must then fight to survive, whilst having a few disturbing flashbacks and encounters along the way.
This movie is really disturbing. Like, really, really disturbing. It’s not particularly scary, there’s the odd jump-scare or three, but its the imagery and the situation that really get your heart going.
Carla Gugino as the shackled wife is a stand-out in this film. She basically carries it, only with a few interruptions from inside her head, and this makes for very entertaining viewing. She’s amusing, in a way that you didn’t think anyone could be whilst fighting dehydration, a hungry dog at the end of her bed and death himself. In all honesty, it’s not a very fun game.
Her husband, however, is brilliant at being horrible. Greenwood really amps up the bad husband vibes in the 20 minutes he is alive, which then are exacerbated in Jessie’s head after he has died. He’s manipulative, seedy and slimy: something that Jessie realises at the end of the film.
It could be argued that this film isn’t really a horror film in the typical sense. It’s more a horror film about what has happened to Jessie, the main character, and how she comes to terms with her past and survives. She calls on past experiences to escape her confines on the bed, and her horrible history.
That’s not to say that it doesn’t have stereotypical horror movie attributes. The Moonlight Man is their contribution to the supernatural – or more the ‘is he actually there or am I insane?’ kind of gimmick that sometimes comes with this genre. The Moonlight Man is a shadowy figure, lurking in the shadows with his box of trinkets and bones. He’s absolutely terrifying.
He’s also real. In the film and book, he’s a necrophiliac who’s waiting for Jessie to die so he can add her wedding ring and one of her bones to his box. The Moonlight Man is the kind of horror movie villain that you have nightmares about. Which is why he is one of the highlights of Gerald’s Game.
The film isn’t exactly the most complex plot in the world. It plays a bit too much on the stereotypes in some cases and the ending, in true horror film fashion, is too happy, is too well put together after such a traumatic experience. It all ends a bit too neatly after such a messy first three-quarters.
Even though this isn’t the best horror film ever, it certainly is not the worst. It has it’s flaws, but the acting and the scriptwriting make up for the few it has. In an era of horror trying too hard, this film is simple and refreshing, bringing a new feeling to the horror industry as a whole.
So, the moral of the story is: don’t handcuff yourself to the bed because your husband will die on top of you and then a stray dog will eat him and a necrophiliac will come into your house at night. Quite an easy thing to remember, right?
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/12/06/geralds-game-review-not-a-very-fun-game/
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated The Catastrophic History of You and Me in Books
Jun 7, 2018
(This review will be available on my blog <a href="http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.com/">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Soemthing Year Old Girl</a> from the middle of August).
I'd been wanting to read The Catastrophic History of You and Me by Jess Rothenberg for awhile now. I had found it cheap on Amazon and decided to buy it. Although it was a kind of good book, I wish I had seen if my library had it to borrow.
I don't really need to explain the synopsis in my words because the official one seems to describe what the book is about quite well. If I explain it, I'd just be saying the same thing, but not as good.
The title is a mouthful, but I like it. It's one of the first things that made me want to pick up this book. I do believe that the title fits this book perfectly!
The cover is what caught my eye the most! It is absolutely gorgeous! It's also a scene that appears in the book a few times.
The world building was done quite well, and I loved the setting! I love how when Brie dies, she's transported by bus to a pizza place she frequented quite a bit. There's something about that that I just found funny! There's only one time that I felt confused, but I don't want to say anything due to spoilers. Oh, and one more thing. Brie says her family called her by cheese nicknames due to her name. However, Patrick as well as other people she sees in the afterlife due that as well. However, I just don't think everyone would associate her name with cheese, nor would they be so blatant to tease her about it. Other then that, the world building is easy to imagine.
For about half of the book, the pacing seemed a bit slow to me. In fact, I was thinking about giving up on the book altogether. However, the second half picks up the pacing, and it becomes quite an enjoyable read from there on out..
I've always been interested in plots where someone dies and gets to look at their friends and family. Brie wants to get back at Jacob in the afterlife for breaking her heart. She sees the consequences, and we are left to wonder what Brie will do. We also find out Jacob's big secret which I didn't see coming. I also didn't see the other plot twist. I love being surprised!!
I started off liking Brie. She seemed like a really insecure but nice girl. However, I soon found her to be annoying and mean. I understand wanting revenge on someone who has hurt you, but what she did was really uncalled for. I also found her thought pattern to be really vicious and spiteful. I didn't like how she treated Patrick either. She tries to make amends, but it's just too little, too late for me. I did like Patrick and found him to be a rather sweet and friendly guy. The way he spoke sometimes annoyed me, but overall, he was very likable.
The dialogue was very easy to understand and flowed very well. Like I said, there were times I didn't like the way Patrick spoke, but that wasn't very often. I found it interesting to see how Brie's family and friends carried on without her. There's also some swearing in this book.
Overall, The Catastrophic History of You and Me started out a bit boring, but it got better. It turns out to be a sweet story with a moral to it, I believe.
I'd recommend this book to those age 14+ who are looking for a sweet read with a great message attached to it.
I'd give The Catastrophic History of You and Me by Jess Rothenberg a 3.5 out of 5.
I'd been wanting to read The Catastrophic History of You and Me by Jess Rothenberg for awhile now. I had found it cheap on Amazon and decided to buy it. Although it was a kind of good book, I wish I had seen if my library had it to borrow.
I don't really need to explain the synopsis in my words because the official one seems to describe what the book is about quite well. If I explain it, I'd just be saying the same thing, but not as good.
The title is a mouthful, but I like it. It's one of the first things that made me want to pick up this book. I do believe that the title fits this book perfectly!
The cover is what caught my eye the most! It is absolutely gorgeous! It's also a scene that appears in the book a few times.
The world building was done quite well, and I loved the setting! I love how when Brie dies, she's transported by bus to a pizza place she frequented quite a bit. There's something about that that I just found funny! There's only one time that I felt confused, but I don't want to say anything due to spoilers. Oh, and one more thing. Brie says her family called her by cheese nicknames due to her name. However, Patrick as well as other people she sees in the afterlife due that as well. However, I just don't think everyone would associate her name with cheese, nor would they be so blatant to tease her about it. Other then that, the world building is easy to imagine.
For about half of the book, the pacing seemed a bit slow to me. In fact, I was thinking about giving up on the book altogether. However, the second half picks up the pacing, and it becomes quite an enjoyable read from there on out..
I've always been interested in plots where someone dies and gets to look at their friends and family. Brie wants to get back at Jacob in the afterlife for breaking her heart. She sees the consequences, and we are left to wonder what Brie will do. We also find out Jacob's big secret which I didn't see coming. I also didn't see the other plot twist. I love being surprised!!
I started off liking Brie. She seemed like a really insecure but nice girl. However, I soon found her to be annoying and mean. I understand wanting revenge on someone who has hurt you, but what she did was really uncalled for. I also found her thought pattern to be really vicious and spiteful. I didn't like how she treated Patrick either. She tries to make amends, but it's just too little, too late for me. I did like Patrick and found him to be a rather sweet and friendly guy. The way he spoke sometimes annoyed me, but overall, he was very likable.
The dialogue was very easy to understand and flowed very well. Like I said, there were times I didn't like the way Patrick spoke, but that wasn't very often. I found it interesting to see how Brie's family and friends carried on without her. There's also some swearing in this book.
Overall, The Catastrophic History of You and Me started out a bit boring, but it got better. It turns out to be a sweet story with a moral to it, I believe.
I'd recommend this book to those age 14+ who are looking for a sweet read with a great message attached to it.
I'd give The Catastrophic History of You and Me by Jess Rothenberg a 3.5 out of 5.
Jordan Binkerd (567 KP) rated All Systems Red (The Murderbot Diaries, #1) in Books
Aug 8, 2019 (Updated Aug 9, 2019)
Hilariously cynical and sarcastic narrator (2 more)
Bleak and dystopian universe
Complex characters and worldbuilding
An excellent novella
Meet Murderbot. Nobody else calls it that, of course - to most of the stupid humans it has to interact with, it’s just the security unit that the company made them bring along as part of the contract to safeguard the investment. But whereas most SecUnits are slaves to the central AI running whatever shoddy equipment the company sent along, Murderbot (as it thinks of itself) has hacked its own governor unit and can ignore whatever orders it wants, freeing it to stand around listlessly guarding stupid humans from dangers that are mostly non-existant as long as nobody does anything too moronic, devoting most of its energy to watching the terrabytes of serials that it downloaded from the entertainment feed last time they made contact. When things start to go wrong, initially it seems like just business as usual - life is cheap, and the contract for this equipment all went to the lowest bidder. But as incidents start to pile up, even Murderbot has to admit someone is trying to kill its humans. Even worse? Murderbot seems to have accidentally started to care about them…. Crap. It’s going to have to actually put in some effort this time around, isn’t it?
To put it simply, this is the best book I’ve read in quite a while. The entire thing is narrated by the extremely sarcastic, introverted, and misanthropic Murderbot, which makes for maybe the most engaging narrator since Harry Dresden. Don’t believe me? Read the first several pages on TOR's website. You know that thing with Charles Dickens where everything would be terribly depressing without his tongue-in-cheek style to bring the humor, rendering it impossible to abridge? No? I’m the only one to notice that? Oh well, moving on. This is like that - a dystopian wasteland of a society that is expanding across the cosmos using crappy low-budget equipment that’s liable to stop working on you when you most need it - to the point where it takes multiple incidents before the protagonists conclude that this isn’t business as usual. There’s also the moral ambiguity of the slavery-in-all-but-name of the Constructs that form the backbone of the labor force - sentient, at least without the governor unit, but forced to follow every whim of the humans they’re assigned to, even if those humans get bored and force them into gladiatorial combat or some such. These Constructs are described as androids, but are more accurately clone-based cyborgs fitted out for whatever task they’ll be doomed to for their term of service; part mechanical hardware, part expendable and easily-regrown meat, genderless and sexless unless designated for….that. And Murderbot? Murderbot just wants to be left alone, yet is a surprisingly deep and compelling character with a tragic backstory and motivations that are deceptively noble given its internal dialogue. Even its self-given name deserves a second look by the end of the book. I cannot recommend this book enough. And it’s a short read, clocking in at right about a hundred and fifty pages, technically more of a novella than a full-fledged novel. Now I just have to wait for whoever has the second book checked out from the library to give it back….
CONTENT: Some violence, not too gruesomely described. Some sexual references, including offhand mentions that some of the characters are in relationships that would be far outside the norm today (one character is said to have three romantic partners waiting together at home for them, for example). Murderbot also makes disparaging references to pleasurebots, but nothing explicit. Occasional R-rated profanity, but not too gratuitous.
To put it simply, this is the best book I’ve read in quite a while. The entire thing is narrated by the extremely sarcastic, introverted, and misanthropic Murderbot, which makes for maybe the most engaging narrator since Harry Dresden. Don’t believe me? Read the first several pages on TOR's website. You know that thing with Charles Dickens where everything would be terribly depressing without his tongue-in-cheek style to bring the humor, rendering it impossible to abridge? No? I’m the only one to notice that? Oh well, moving on. This is like that - a dystopian wasteland of a society that is expanding across the cosmos using crappy low-budget equipment that’s liable to stop working on you when you most need it - to the point where it takes multiple incidents before the protagonists conclude that this isn’t business as usual. There’s also the moral ambiguity of the slavery-in-all-but-name of the Constructs that form the backbone of the labor force - sentient, at least without the governor unit, but forced to follow every whim of the humans they’re assigned to, even if those humans get bored and force them into gladiatorial combat or some such. These Constructs are described as androids, but are more accurately clone-based cyborgs fitted out for whatever task they’ll be doomed to for their term of service; part mechanical hardware, part expendable and easily-regrown meat, genderless and sexless unless designated for….that. And Murderbot? Murderbot just wants to be left alone, yet is a surprisingly deep and compelling character with a tragic backstory and motivations that are deceptively noble given its internal dialogue. Even its self-given name deserves a second look by the end of the book. I cannot recommend this book enough. And it’s a short read, clocking in at right about a hundred and fifty pages, technically more of a novella than a full-fledged novel. Now I just have to wait for whoever has the second book checked out from the library to give it back….
CONTENT: Some violence, not too gruesomely described. Some sexual references, including offhand mentions that some of the characters are in relationships that would be far outside the norm today (one character is said to have three romantic partners waiting together at home for them, for example). Murderbot also makes disparaging references to pleasurebots, but nothing explicit. Occasional R-rated profanity, but not too gratuitous.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Bad Samaritan (2018) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
Story: Bad Samaritan starts when two burglars Sean (Sheehan) and Derek (Olivero) are running an operation as valets who break into houses while people are eating their dinners. When they pick their latest victim Cale Erendreich (Tennant) with his flashy car, Sean leads the look through his house, finding all the goodies the pair want, before making a shocking discovery, Katie (Condon) chained up in an office.
Sean get caught between doing the right thing and helping the woman, only to find Cale is able to talk the police away and breaking back into the house, the woman is gone and now his has become a target for Cale.
Thoughts on Bad Samaritan
Characters – Cale Erendreich is rich man that isn’t afraid to show his flashy cars around town, he is rude to people that he sees beneath him and he has a woman locked up in an office at his house. He likes to correct people and after Sean breaks into his house, he becomes the latest target, showing us that Cale is doing what he thinks is the right thing. Sean Falco is the thief that gets more than he bargained for on his latest job, he end up getting caught in the middle of a game which will see him become the target for the killer, seeing his life start to fall apart around him, Sean shows us what it is like when somebody wants to make it and just how far they will go to clean up the mess left behind. Katie is the woman that is held captive that knows that she will be put in more danger if Sean does rescue her at the wrong time. Derek is Sean’s best friend who works with him to select who to rob only he could get in more trouble if he is ever caught.
Performances – David Tennant is fantastic in this leading role, he brings us a creepy psychopath figure that is completely calm, while being calculated in each scene. Robert Sheehan is strong as his character is put through a moral dilemma and he shows us the desperation he is going through. Kerry Condon does what she can in her role, it is harder for her to do as much because most of role is tied up. Carlito Olivera does everything asked of him without standing out in anyway.
Story – The story here follows a small-time thief that sees his latest job go crazy after the person he is robbing from turns out to have dark secret which sees his life get turned upside down. This story is an easy watch and does go against everything you would imagine it going, watching the cat-n-mouse style unfold is interesting to follow as see how each side tries to get the upper hand and slowly starts to learn what the other might know about. It does soon pan out and just become a bigger case which is fine if you would like to get to learn more about the opening sequence. We do get to see just how dangerous technology will be in the wrong hands.
Crime/Horror – The crime side of the film does show us Cale operates in this world, with the horror side of this coming from just how he can get away with anything if he knows how to.
Settings – The film is set in Portland which shows how difficult the life can be for people that are struggling to make ends meet.
Scene of the Movie – You talk too much.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It has a problem when it comes to learning about Cale’s back story.
Final Thoughts – This is a crime horror that goes full-blown cat-n-mouse which does keep us guessing to just who will end up on top in this battle.
Overall: Interesting Cat-n-mouse chase.
Sean get caught between doing the right thing and helping the woman, only to find Cale is able to talk the police away and breaking back into the house, the woman is gone and now his has become a target for Cale.
Thoughts on Bad Samaritan
Characters – Cale Erendreich is rich man that isn’t afraid to show his flashy cars around town, he is rude to people that he sees beneath him and he has a woman locked up in an office at his house. He likes to correct people and after Sean breaks into his house, he becomes the latest target, showing us that Cale is doing what he thinks is the right thing. Sean Falco is the thief that gets more than he bargained for on his latest job, he end up getting caught in the middle of a game which will see him become the target for the killer, seeing his life start to fall apart around him, Sean shows us what it is like when somebody wants to make it and just how far they will go to clean up the mess left behind. Katie is the woman that is held captive that knows that she will be put in more danger if Sean does rescue her at the wrong time. Derek is Sean’s best friend who works with him to select who to rob only he could get in more trouble if he is ever caught.
Performances – David Tennant is fantastic in this leading role, he brings us a creepy psychopath figure that is completely calm, while being calculated in each scene. Robert Sheehan is strong as his character is put through a moral dilemma and he shows us the desperation he is going through. Kerry Condon does what she can in her role, it is harder for her to do as much because most of role is tied up. Carlito Olivera does everything asked of him without standing out in anyway.
Story – The story here follows a small-time thief that sees his latest job go crazy after the person he is robbing from turns out to have dark secret which sees his life get turned upside down. This story is an easy watch and does go against everything you would imagine it going, watching the cat-n-mouse style unfold is interesting to follow as see how each side tries to get the upper hand and slowly starts to learn what the other might know about. It does soon pan out and just become a bigger case which is fine if you would like to get to learn more about the opening sequence. We do get to see just how dangerous technology will be in the wrong hands.
Crime/Horror – The crime side of the film does show us Cale operates in this world, with the horror side of this coming from just how he can get away with anything if he knows how to.
Settings – The film is set in Portland which shows how difficult the life can be for people that are struggling to make ends meet.
Scene of the Movie – You talk too much.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It has a problem when it comes to learning about Cale’s back story.
Final Thoughts – This is a crime horror that goes full-blown cat-n-mouse which does keep us guessing to just who will end up on top in this battle.
Overall: Interesting Cat-n-mouse chase.
Night Reader Reviews (683 KP) rated Voice of the Elders in Books
Jan 9, 2020
Honest Review for Free Copy of Book
Contains spoilers, click to show
The Voice of the Elders by Greg Ripley is a very well written book that anyone who has a strong connection with earth and nature would be drawn to right away. This is well received as the book puts a lot of focus on the harder topics of what we face with global warming and as a race if we do not start thinking about sustainability as a complete way of life. It also brings to light the idea that even if sustainability is the best for the planet as whole companies such as big oil and nuclear power may not be all that interested because it takes profit away from them, showing just how harmful human greed can be.
The book also mentions many aspects from different religions and cultures, along with their moral views. Christian theology is even mentioned in the same paragraph as the threefold version of the Golden Rule which many would attribute to the Pagans or more specifically the religion of Wicca. However, a lot of talk in the book revolves around Chinese Daoism and somewhat in-depth at that. This lost me at a few different places but not for long as the ideas were also explained fairly well. I believe the average reader should be able to at least the get gist of what is being said during the conversations.
The basic idea of the book is that the Earth is in major trouble. As humans, our greed and lack of concern for our environment is killing our planet as it is already too late to reverse these effects unless we do something big really quick. A meeting is being held at the United Nations to address these concerns and that is where the reader first meets the main character Rohini. It is also where the Elders are first introduced into the story. Without giving too much away to the interested reader I feel like I can safely say that the Elders tell the World Leaders about what can be done to save the Earth and propose a plan where the Earth will send ambassadors to the world of the Elders.
Rohini is chosen to be one of these ambassadors and is brought before the world on TV when all of those selected to be ambassadors are introduced. This is when trouble starts, those against the Elders and the sustainability programs launch their first direct attack and kill most of the ambassadors and the President forcing Rohini, her trainer Jane, and Jane’s friend Guangming into hiding as suspects while waiting for their names to be cleared.
Overall the book is very well written and I failed to find any major editorial flaws in it. Still, I rate this book to be 2 out of 4 stars. This is because while I loved seeing Rohini grow spiritually and increase her personal connection with the Earth I found the book lacking. The last five-chapter or so felt rushed like Greg Ripley got bored or wasn’t sure how to pull everything together. I guess more of what I am trying to say is with how amazingly detailed the rest of the book was the end felt haphazardly thrown together. Now if this were the first in a series I would change my rating to a 3 providing that a few things got explained better such as who exactly the “Others” are (not going to say anything more about them without risking a spoiler) and what happens with the Earth and the Elders.
The book also mentions many aspects from different religions and cultures, along with their moral views. Christian theology is even mentioned in the same paragraph as the threefold version of the Golden Rule which many would attribute to the Pagans or more specifically the religion of Wicca. However, a lot of talk in the book revolves around Chinese Daoism and somewhat in-depth at that. This lost me at a few different places but not for long as the ideas were also explained fairly well. I believe the average reader should be able to at least the get gist of what is being said during the conversations.
The basic idea of the book is that the Earth is in major trouble. As humans, our greed and lack of concern for our environment is killing our planet as it is already too late to reverse these effects unless we do something big really quick. A meeting is being held at the United Nations to address these concerns and that is where the reader first meets the main character Rohini. It is also where the Elders are first introduced into the story. Without giving too much away to the interested reader I feel like I can safely say that the Elders tell the World Leaders about what can be done to save the Earth and propose a plan where the Earth will send ambassadors to the world of the Elders.
Rohini is chosen to be one of these ambassadors and is brought before the world on TV when all of those selected to be ambassadors are introduced. This is when trouble starts, those against the Elders and the sustainability programs launch their first direct attack and kill most of the ambassadors and the President forcing Rohini, her trainer Jane, and Jane’s friend Guangming into hiding as suspects while waiting for their names to be cleared.
Overall the book is very well written and I failed to find any major editorial flaws in it. Still, I rate this book to be 2 out of 4 stars. This is because while I loved seeing Rohini grow spiritually and increase her personal connection with the Earth I found the book lacking. The last five-chapter or so felt rushed like Greg Ripley got bored or wasn’t sure how to pull everything together. I guess more of what I am trying to say is with how amazingly detailed the rest of the book was the end felt haphazardly thrown together. Now if this were the first in a series I would change my rating to a 3 providing that a few things got explained better such as who exactly the “Others” are (not going to say anything more about them without risking a spoiler) and what happens with the Earth and the Elders.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Black Mirror - Season 2 in TV
Mar 3, 2020
Be Right Back - 8
Hayley Atwell, best known as Captain America’s squeeze in the MCU, Carries the emotional weight of this episode in beguiling style. Not for the last time Black Mirror enters the territory of death, grief, loneliness and questions of a tech-aided afterlife. If it were possible to bring a loved one back in physical form, even though we knew it wasn’t really them, would we be tempted to do it? Entirely believable as a concept, considering the amount of data we are storing about ourselves on social media and in other digital ways. Although any kind of clone as good as Domhnall Gleason is a bit far fetched for now. What works here is realising that no matter how good a facsimile is, it is the myriad of tiny details that make a person that we miss the most, even the imperfections. Genuinely moving in its best moments, and a strong start to season 2 in 2013.
White Bear - 7.5
White Bear, the first of the “blind” episodes, where we as viewer are thrown into a situation with no explanation or context, was the first Black Mirror episode I ever watched. I remember being blown away by the dark concept, compelling nature of the minimal narrative, the cunning twist, and the boldness of the statement seemingly being made. So many themes are going on at the same time here: true crime as voyeuristic entertainment; the moral idea of an eye for an eye, brainwashing, and whether torture under any circumstance can be justified, for starters. Looking back, it isn’t the most rounded tale in the canon, or the best acted, but it is certainly very memorable. It also saw the birth of the White Bear symbol, which pops up in other episodes regularly, if paying attention. What is its meaning? The jury is still out!
The Waldo Moment - 6
The political apathy of a nation, and hatred of the personality flaws of our politicians could lead to a figurehead without real policies being elected and revered – it isn’t a very strange idea in 2020 at all. Many younger voters have been incited to demand change, without any idea of what that change should entail. So, in concept, this episode is right on the money. Trouble is it isn’t well written enough to sustain the drama or intrigue in the way the best of the canon do. The shock value is low, and therefore the reaction is “meh, fair enough”. For me, the first real blip in quality control for the series.
White Christmas - 8.5
This was the transition episode that saw Black Mirror make the big money move from Channel 4 to Netflix. Although now bundled into series two, it was a 21 month wait after The Waldo Moment before over 2 million of us settled down to this Christmas gift in 2014. It comes over as an anthology within an anthology, with John Hamm and Rafe Spall telling tales in front of the fire whilst on a “job” together in the cold wilderness of an unknown location. It is laden with ideas of technology back-firing, and is very satisfying in how quickly it moves through the plot points. The chemistry of the two lead men is great; the arrogance of one and the nervousness of the other allowing for some beautiful twists and turns. Essentially, the whole thing is either a re-working of ideas already used, or a precursor to future ideas that will be more fleshed out. Not that it really matters. This is the highest rated individual episode on IMDb, and the reason for that has to be its accessibility. The balance between being creeped out and entertained is just about perfect.
Hayley Atwell, best known as Captain America’s squeeze in the MCU, Carries the emotional weight of this episode in beguiling style. Not for the last time Black Mirror enters the territory of death, grief, loneliness and questions of a tech-aided afterlife. If it were possible to bring a loved one back in physical form, even though we knew it wasn’t really them, would we be tempted to do it? Entirely believable as a concept, considering the amount of data we are storing about ourselves on social media and in other digital ways. Although any kind of clone as good as Domhnall Gleason is a bit far fetched for now. What works here is realising that no matter how good a facsimile is, it is the myriad of tiny details that make a person that we miss the most, even the imperfections. Genuinely moving in its best moments, and a strong start to season 2 in 2013.
White Bear - 7.5
White Bear, the first of the “blind” episodes, where we as viewer are thrown into a situation with no explanation or context, was the first Black Mirror episode I ever watched. I remember being blown away by the dark concept, compelling nature of the minimal narrative, the cunning twist, and the boldness of the statement seemingly being made. So many themes are going on at the same time here: true crime as voyeuristic entertainment; the moral idea of an eye for an eye, brainwashing, and whether torture under any circumstance can be justified, for starters. Looking back, it isn’t the most rounded tale in the canon, or the best acted, but it is certainly very memorable. It also saw the birth of the White Bear symbol, which pops up in other episodes regularly, if paying attention. What is its meaning? The jury is still out!
The Waldo Moment - 6
The political apathy of a nation, and hatred of the personality flaws of our politicians could lead to a figurehead without real policies being elected and revered – it isn’t a very strange idea in 2020 at all. Many younger voters have been incited to demand change, without any idea of what that change should entail. So, in concept, this episode is right on the money. Trouble is it isn’t well written enough to sustain the drama or intrigue in the way the best of the canon do. The shock value is low, and therefore the reaction is “meh, fair enough”. For me, the first real blip in quality control for the series.
White Christmas - 8.5
This was the transition episode that saw Black Mirror make the big money move from Channel 4 to Netflix. Although now bundled into series two, it was a 21 month wait after The Waldo Moment before over 2 million of us settled down to this Christmas gift in 2014. It comes over as an anthology within an anthology, with John Hamm and Rafe Spall telling tales in front of the fire whilst on a “job” together in the cold wilderness of an unknown location. It is laden with ideas of technology back-firing, and is very satisfying in how quickly it moves through the plot points. The chemistry of the two lead men is great; the arrogance of one and the nervousness of the other allowing for some beautiful twists and turns. Essentially, the whole thing is either a re-working of ideas already used, or a precursor to future ideas that will be more fleshed out. Not that it really matters. This is the highest rated individual episode on IMDb, and the reason for that has to be its accessibility. The balance between being creeped out and entertained is just about perfect.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Triple 9 (2016) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
A crew of bank robbers is strong-armed by the Russian mob to pull off a near impossible heist due the response time of the police. In order to create a larger window, the dirty cops of this crew suggest creating a 999 (police code for “officer down.”) on the other side of town. That is the basic plot of Triple 9. Yet, the tagline for this film is, “The Code on the street is never black and white.” Seems like a different movie which is part of the letdown of Triple 9. It doesn’t know what it wants to be. Is it a heist movie like Heat or The Town? Or is it trying to be a movie about the cops and the rules of the streets like Training Day?
In the beginning, the film sets its self-up to be a smart and stylistic heist film. However shortly after it begins to feel disjointed as it attempts to develop everyone in its ensemble cast to the point where it hurts the story and some excellent performances become forgettable. It’s a shame because somewhere in this film is potentially two excellent separate films. One film about a crew having to complete a heist for the mob to save their lives and loved ones, and another about dirty cops, their partners and the moral ambiguity of the code on the streets. In Triple 9, these two premises never really get developed on one side or the other and thus everything is just left there.
On the heist side, Chiwetel Ejiofor plays ex-mercenary Michael Atwood. Michael is the careful and calculating leader of the crew, but is tied to the Russian mafia through the mother of his son. Michael is constantly being coerced by the Russian Mob Boss, played by Kate Winslet. The two give stellar performances, most notably Winslet who is cold and ruthless in wielding her power, speaking her mind and not caring how the job gets done as long as it gets done.
On the cop side, Anthony Mackie plays dirty police detective Marcus Belmont who becomes partnered with the ex-marine turned rookie detective Chris Allen (Casey Affleck). Belmont feels that the rookie doesn’t respect the streets and his “Do-gooder” “make a difference” attitude is going to get him killed. When Belmont’s heist crewmate Jorge Rodriguez (Clifton Collins Jr.) learns Chris is also the nephew of the Sergeant Detective (Woody Harrelson) investigating the heist crew, Chris becomes the clear candidate to be set up for the Triple 9. (Convenient huh)
Ultimately, as the story plays out it feels we are always arriving at the end of the meeting to plan the coming events. From the planning of the heist, to the set up murder, and to the exit plan, we are just carried through the motions without much motivation of how or why things have to play out the way they do. As a result, I didn’t really care for any of the characters good or bad, unlike other films of this nature. Even Ejiofor’s character Michael, who has his child involved, doesn’t get the opportunity to really show why the rest of the crew respects him and follows him, or why he needs to stay alive for his son, who basically seems better off being taken care of by the Russian mob.
In the end Triple 9 is not a bad movie, it just isn’t really a great one either. It has strong performances by the entire cast and has the makings of something great, but fails to deliver on that opportunity with a disjointed story trying to focus on too many characters. This makes it ultimately forgettable compared to other heist films of similar nature.
In the beginning, the film sets its self-up to be a smart and stylistic heist film. However shortly after it begins to feel disjointed as it attempts to develop everyone in its ensemble cast to the point where it hurts the story and some excellent performances become forgettable. It’s a shame because somewhere in this film is potentially two excellent separate films. One film about a crew having to complete a heist for the mob to save their lives and loved ones, and another about dirty cops, their partners and the moral ambiguity of the code on the streets. In Triple 9, these two premises never really get developed on one side or the other and thus everything is just left there.
On the heist side, Chiwetel Ejiofor plays ex-mercenary Michael Atwood. Michael is the careful and calculating leader of the crew, but is tied to the Russian mafia through the mother of his son. Michael is constantly being coerced by the Russian Mob Boss, played by Kate Winslet. The two give stellar performances, most notably Winslet who is cold and ruthless in wielding her power, speaking her mind and not caring how the job gets done as long as it gets done.
On the cop side, Anthony Mackie plays dirty police detective Marcus Belmont who becomes partnered with the ex-marine turned rookie detective Chris Allen (Casey Affleck). Belmont feels that the rookie doesn’t respect the streets and his “Do-gooder” “make a difference” attitude is going to get him killed. When Belmont’s heist crewmate Jorge Rodriguez (Clifton Collins Jr.) learns Chris is also the nephew of the Sergeant Detective (Woody Harrelson) investigating the heist crew, Chris becomes the clear candidate to be set up for the Triple 9. (Convenient huh)
Ultimately, as the story plays out it feels we are always arriving at the end of the meeting to plan the coming events. From the planning of the heist, to the set up murder, and to the exit plan, we are just carried through the motions without much motivation of how or why things have to play out the way they do. As a result, I didn’t really care for any of the characters good or bad, unlike other films of this nature. Even Ejiofor’s character Michael, who has his child involved, doesn’t get the opportunity to really show why the rest of the crew respects him and follows him, or why he needs to stay alive for his son, who basically seems better off being taken care of by the Russian mob.
In the end Triple 9 is not a bad movie, it just isn’t really a great one either. It has strong performances by the entire cast and has the makings of something great, but fails to deliver on that opportunity with a disjointed story trying to focus on too many characters. This makes it ultimately forgettable compared to other heist films of similar nature.
QSeer Coupon Reader
Shopping and Lifestyle
App
*YOU MUST GIVE GIVE QSEER PERMISSION TO ACCESS THE CAMERA IN ORDER TO USE THIS APP* Wonder what’s...