Search
WolframAlpha
Reference and Education
App
Remember the Star Trek computer? It's finally happening--with Wolfram|Alpha. Building on 25 years of...
LifeShift
8.0
Rate It
Book
Was Zeus a Greek God or merely a space explorer? Following his mission to bring civilization to...
young-adult
Blood Rage
7.5
Rate It
Tabletop Game
"Life is Battle; Battle is Glory; Glory is ALL" In Blood Rage, each player controls their own...
Miniatures BoardGameGeekGreatness
Mythic Battles: Pantheon
8.0
Rate It
Tabletop Game
Hera, tired of Zeus' infidelity, decides to take her revenge and releases the Titans on Mount...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated John Wick. Chapter 4 (2023) in Movies
Mar 26, 2023
More of the Same - which is a GOOD thing
Once a series gets to it’s 4th installment - and that installment is NOT a reboot or “prequel” - the audience for said series is pretty much settled in. There is a rabid group of movie-going watchers that are looking for the intimate details and Easter Eggs to further their immersion into this world while the rest of the movie going public has probably moved on and, just might, check it out on a whim.
Such is the case with JOHN WICK: CHAPTER 4 - the 4th installment of the Keanu Reeves led/Chad Stahelski Directed series that is long on style, action, intrigue and mythology while being low on logical plot-lines and…well…daylight.
But this won’t matter to the John Wick movie-goer. They are getting more of the same - cartoon violence professionally created by Stahelski and Reeves with plenty of bad guys battling (and losing) to Wick while the mysterious, underground society that Wick has run afoul of tries to take him down.
This insider intrigue will be enriching for the true John Wick fan but will be inconsequential for the casual movie-goer as these plot machinations are just an excuse to line Reeves up against seemingly insurmountable obstacle after seemingly insurmountable obstacle.
And what a journey it is. Starting with a tussle at the Osaka Continental (featuring veteran Martial Artists Hiroki Sanada and Donnie Yen) to a battle in Germany to the final in Paris, JOHN WICK: CHAPTER 4 is just one, long stylized fight sequence with both Stahelski (the Director and Fight Choreographer) and Reeves (as Wick) showing off their talents in new and interesting ways.
There are way too many fight sequences to mention, but there is one sequence in a building that is shot from on high (reminiscent of watching video game play) that is the most interesting/effective - but they all are a ton of fun.
Bill Skarsgard (Pennywise the Clown in the IT movies) is along as the Marquis (cool name) who is in charge of bringing Wick down. He is joined by the always good Clancy Brown (the voice of Mr. Krabs on Spongebob) on the “bad guy” side while Wick regulars Ian McShane, Lawrence Fishburne and the late, great Lance Reddick line up on Wick’s side.
It is a fun roller-coaster ride - if a bit long at almost 3 hours (the middle sags a bit) - that will entertain casual fans of action flicks while satisfying the hard-core “Wick-aphiles” (if that is a term) with a further peeling back of a layer of this world.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Such is the case with JOHN WICK: CHAPTER 4 - the 4th installment of the Keanu Reeves led/Chad Stahelski Directed series that is long on style, action, intrigue and mythology while being low on logical plot-lines and…well…daylight.
But this won’t matter to the John Wick movie-goer. They are getting more of the same - cartoon violence professionally created by Stahelski and Reeves with plenty of bad guys battling (and losing) to Wick while the mysterious, underground society that Wick has run afoul of tries to take him down.
This insider intrigue will be enriching for the true John Wick fan but will be inconsequential for the casual movie-goer as these plot machinations are just an excuse to line Reeves up against seemingly insurmountable obstacle after seemingly insurmountable obstacle.
And what a journey it is. Starting with a tussle at the Osaka Continental (featuring veteran Martial Artists Hiroki Sanada and Donnie Yen) to a battle in Germany to the final in Paris, JOHN WICK: CHAPTER 4 is just one, long stylized fight sequence with both Stahelski (the Director and Fight Choreographer) and Reeves (as Wick) showing off their talents in new and interesting ways.
There are way too many fight sequences to mention, but there is one sequence in a building that is shot from on high (reminiscent of watching video game play) that is the most interesting/effective - but they all are a ton of fun.
Bill Skarsgard (Pennywise the Clown in the IT movies) is along as the Marquis (cool name) who is in charge of bringing Wick down. He is joined by the always good Clancy Brown (the voice of Mr. Krabs on Spongebob) on the “bad guy” side while Wick regulars Ian McShane, Lawrence Fishburne and the late, great Lance Reddick line up on Wick’s side.
It is a fun roller-coaster ride - if a bit long at almost 3 hours (the middle sags a bit) - that will entertain casual fans of action flicks while satisfying the hard-core “Wick-aphiles” (if that is a term) with a further peeling back of a layer of this world.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Matrix Resurrections (2021) in Movies
Dec 31, 2021
Unnecessary
And now from the unnecessary sequels department…
And, that, pretty much sums up THE MATRIX RESURRECTIONS - a title that is a confession of a studio and creator that is looking to milk a few more bucks out of a dormant franchise.
Written and Directed by Lana Wachowski (one of the creators/directors of the original Matrix trilogy), MATRIX RESURRECTIONS drops us back into the Matrix that is the same, yet different, and - intriguingly enough - brings us back to Neo and Trinity, 2 characters that died in the 3rd film.
Of course, this being Science Fiction/Fantasy, no one needs to stay dead, if another story can be built around them.
Keanu Reeves and Carrie-Anne Moss are back as Neo & Trinity (this film would not have happened if they didn’t say yes to this) - and they are the best thing in this film. Their chemistry is strong and any film that can bring back Carrie-Anne Moss as a lead in a film, is okay by me.
The best newcomer in this film is Jonathan Groff as “Agent Smith” (Hugo Weaving was set to reprise his role, but had to drop out due to Theater Commitments). Groff channels his inner “King George” (the character that he was Tony Nominated for in the Stage Musical Hamilton) and it works well in this film.
As for the other “character/actors” - like the characters that Jada Pinkett-Smith (the only other returning actor from the original trilogy), Yahya Abdbul-Mateen II (playing a version of Morpheus), Thelma Hopkins, Jessica Henwick and…yes that IS Cristina Ricci - they are all pretty generic and serve as plot machinations to get us from one action set piece to another.
And, of course, there is Neil Patrick Harris as “THE ANALYST”, it’s an interesting, pivotal, role in this film and would have been better served being played by someone less “well known”. All I kept thinking as I watched this performance was - “it’s evil Neil Patrick Harris”!
As for the special effects/set pieces, they are “fine” but nothing “special”. The first Matrix film was a brilliant, groundbreaking and mind-bending piece of filmmaking that introduced cinema (for good or ill) to “bullet time” - a Special F/X that has been en vogue ever since. But this film is just a mismash of CGI that is neither brilliant nor groundbreaking and the dense mythology plot of this film is not “mind-bending”, it is more like “headache-inducing”.
Do yourself a favor and skip the Resurrection of The Matrix and, instead, check out the brilliant 1999 original - it holds up well (and is the subject of my January podcast).
Letter Grade: B- (thanks to Reeves, Moss and Groff)
6 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And, that, pretty much sums up THE MATRIX RESURRECTIONS - a title that is a confession of a studio and creator that is looking to milk a few more bucks out of a dormant franchise.
Written and Directed by Lana Wachowski (one of the creators/directors of the original Matrix trilogy), MATRIX RESURRECTIONS drops us back into the Matrix that is the same, yet different, and - intriguingly enough - brings us back to Neo and Trinity, 2 characters that died in the 3rd film.
Of course, this being Science Fiction/Fantasy, no one needs to stay dead, if another story can be built around them.
Keanu Reeves and Carrie-Anne Moss are back as Neo & Trinity (this film would not have happened if they didn’t say yes to this) - and they are the best thing in this film. Their chemistry is strong and any film that can bring back Carrie-Anne Moss as a lead in a film, is okay by me.
The best newcomer in this film is Jonathan Groff as “Agent Smith” (Hugo Weaving was set to reprise his role, but had to drop out due to Theater Commitments). Groff channels his inner “King George” (the character that he was Tony Nominated for in the Stage Musical Hamilton) and it works well in this film.
As for the other “character/actors” - like the characters that Jada Pinkett-Smith (the only other returning actor from the original trilogy), Yahya Abdbul-Mateen II (playing a version of Morpheus), Thelma Hopkins, Jessica Henwick and…yes that IS Cristina Ricci - they are all pretty generic and serve as plot machinations to get us from one action set piece to another.
And, of course, there is Neil Patrick Harris as “THE ANALYST”, it’s an interesting, pivotal, role in this film and would have been better served being played by someone less “well known”. All I kept thinking as I watched this performance was - “it’s evil Neil Patrick Harris”!
As for the special effects/set pieces, they are “fine” but nothing “special”. The first Matrix film was a brilliant, groundbreaking and mind-bending piece of filmmaking that introduced cinema (for good or ill) to “bullet time” - a Special F/X that has been en vogue ever since. But this film is just a mismash of CGI that is neither brilliant nor groundbreaking and the dense mythology plot of this film is not “mind-bending”, it is more like “headache-inducing”.
Do yourself a favor and skip the Resurrection of The Matrix and, instead, check out the brilliant 1999 original - it holds up well (and is the subject of my January podcast).
Letter Grade: B- (thanks to Reeves, Moss and Groff)
6 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Rachel King (13 KP) rated A Short History of Myth in Books
Feb 11, 2019
For such a short book, I developed quite a strong opinion about the text while reading it. I have been curious about Armstrong's writings for a long time, but this is the first attempt I have made at actually reading anything by her. I have always been a fan of ancient mythology, such as Greek and Egyptian, so this seemed like an easy choice.
In seven chapters, Armstrong takes a simplified stroll through history, focusing on the concept of myth and its impact on civilization. All throughout the book, she attempts to support her claim that a person can believe in myths without believing that the myths are actually true, and that the failure of modern society is by not following her specific edict. While this notion strikes me as absurd, I keep reading because, hey, it's a short book.
While I know only bits and pieces about many of the world's religions, I do know both the history and the holy book of my religion, Christianity. It becomes apparent to me early in the text that she is masking her opinions and interpretations of this religion as actual fact, so I can only imagine how she misconstrues other religions.
Her citations were lacking to me, with many claims going unsupported, others only partially supported, such as citation #84 and #30, and some citations simply not even applying to the specified text, such as citation #87. In citation #55, she claims that the Bible contains a Creation myth in which God brings the world into being by killing a sea monster, but one of the four verses she cites make no reference to anything of the sort (Job 3:12), and the other three (Isaiah 27:1, Job 26:13, Psalm 74:14) that do mention a leviathan cannot be interpreted that way when read in context. Isaiah is describing the end of days, while Job merely says that God created the serpent, and the verse in Psalm is within the context of a song about God rescuing the Hebrews from Egyptian slavery -- no relevancy to Creation. She makes the claim that Paul "was not much interested in Jesus's teachings, which he rarely quotes, or in the events of his earthly life." This claim is easily disproved by examining how Paul's words line up with Jesus's in John 5:21 vs. 1 Corinthians 15:22, Matthew 6:25 vs. Philippians 4:6, and many other passages.
While going through the citations, I got the feeling that the author depended on secondary sources for her information without actually studying the original source of her information. The book struck me as highly opinionated, vague, and too general for the topic being addressed. I have no doubt that there are better and more thorough books available on the topic of myth. I do not believe that I will be reading any more of Armstrong's works in the future.
In seven chapters, Armstrong takes a simplified stroll through history, focusing on the concept of myth and its impact on civilization. All throughout the book, she attempts to support her claim that a person can believe in myths without believing that the myths are actually true, and that the failure of modern society is by not following her specific edict. While this notion strikes me as absurd, I keep reading because, hey, it's a short book.
While I know only bits and pieces about many of the world's religions, I do know both the history and the holy book of my religion, Christianity. It becomes apparent to me early in the text that she is masking her opinions and interpretations of this religion as actual fact, so I can only imagine how she misconstrues other religions.
Her citations were lacking to me, with many claims going unsupported, others only partially supported, such as citation #84 and #30, and some citations simply not even applying to the specified text, such as citation #87. In citation #55, she claims that the Bible contains a Creation myth in which God brings the world into being by killing a sea monster, but one of the four verses she cites make no reference to anything of the sort (Job 3:12), and the other three (Isaiah 27:1, Job 26:13, Psalm 74:14) that do mention a leviathan cannot be interpreted that way when read in context. Isaiah is describing the end of days, while Job merely says that God created the serpent, and the verse in Psalm is within the context of a song about God rescuing the Hebrews from Egyptian slavery -- no relevancy to Creation. She makes the claim that Paul "was not much interested in Jesus's teachings, which he rarely quotes, or in the events of his earthly life." This claim is easily disproved by examining how Paul's words line up with Jesus's in John 5:21 vs. 1 Corinthians 15:22, Matthew 6:25 vs. Philippians 4:6, and many other passages.
While going through the citations, I got the feeling that the author depended on secondary sources for her information without actually studying the original source of her information. The book struck me as highly opinionated, vague, and too general for the topic being addressed. I have no doubt that there are better and more thorough books available on the topic of myth. I do not believe that I will be reading any more of Armstrong's works in the future.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Spelled (The Storymakers, #1) in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<b><i>I received this book for free from Publisher in exchange for an honest review. This does not affect my opinion of the book or the content of my review.</i></b>
Pun intended in that post title.
As the crown princess of Emerald who may be cursed to set the world on fire, Dorthea has been locked in the Emerald Palace since she was born and kept away from anything that could potentially catch fire. When she gets a wishing star, she decides to use it, only to have it completely backfire on her.
<i>Spelled</i> is filled with bits of humor throughout, particularly from the side characters who have quickly become my favorite characters. The main character, on the other hand...
<blockquote>But I really, <i>really</i> don't want to.</blockquote>
Dorthea pretty much annoyed me for a good part of the book. She's snotty, stuck-up, spoiled – gosh, I'm turning that into a tongue twister with so many s-words. She's also whiny – Dorthea spends her time whining and complaining for quite literally a quarter of the book before someone snarks at her and tells her to shut up, grow up, and act like a proper princess (she even had the nerve to say no one else had manners – manners? *flips hair* Ha! Nope!) She's funny at some points, but the majority of her sarcasm seemed more like an attempt at sounding funny rather than actually being as funny as Rexi's use of sarcasm and snark.
<blockquote><b>Bob:</b> No, Priestess. When all his nails are broken, he will die.
<b>Rexi:</b> You can't get a haircut, and he can't get a manicure. Death by salon visit.</blockquote>
I even started wondering if <i>Spelled,</i> as pretty as the cover the book and premise is, would even last. The book isn't strictly a retelling of <i>The Wizard of Oz</i> – there are other fairy tale characters as well. Throwing in other fairy tale characters aren't exactly bothersome in my case, but Schow throws in King Midas and chimeras – both of whom are from <i>Greek mythology</i>, NOT from a fairy tale. Someone please tell me I'm wrong and those two actually appear in a fairy tale, because if they do appear in one, I obviously haven't read enough of the non-gruesome original fairy tales. Or do they actually appear in the gruesome ones? I would love to know.
<i>Spelled</i> could be considered a fun read, if you put aside all of the problems – there's humor, a good premise, and an amazing cast of side characters. But if you don't have the patience to handle a spoiled and stuck-up princess who whines a lot for approximately a quarter of the book, <i>Spelled</i> might not be a book on your radar.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/arc-review-spelled-by-betsy-schow/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Pun intended in that post title.
As the crown princess of Emerald who may be cursed to set the world on fire, Dorthea has been locked in the Emerald Palace since she was born and kept away from anything that could potentially catch fire. When she gets a wishing star, she decides to use it, only to have it completely backfire on her.
<i>Spelled</i> is filled with bits of humor throughout, particularly from the side characters who have quickly become my favorite characters. The main character, on the other hand...
<blockquote>But I really, <i>really</i> don't want to.</blockquote>
Dorthea pretty much annoyed me for a good part of the book. She's snotty, stuck-up, spoiled – gosh, I'm turning that into a tongue twister with so many s-words. She's also whiny – Dorthea spends her time whining and complaining for quite literally a quarter of the book before someone snarks at her and tells her to shut up, grow up, and act like a proper princess (she even had the nerve to say no one else had manners – manners? *flips hair* Ha! Nope!) She's funny at some points, but the majority of her sarcasm seemed more like an attempt at sounding funny rather than actually being as funny as Rexi's use of sarcasm and snark.
<blockquote><b>Bob:</b> No, Priestess. When all his nails are broken, he will die.
<b>Rexi:</b> You can't get a haircut, and he can't get a manicure. Death by salon visit.</blockquote>
I even started wondering if <i>Spelled,</i> as pretty as the cover the book and premise is, would even last. The book isn't strictly a retelling of <i>The Wizard of Oz</i> – there are other fairy tale characters as well. Throwing in other fairy tale characters aren't exactly bothersome in my case, but Schow throws in King Midas and chimeras – both of whom are from <i>Greek mythology</i>, NOT from a fairy tale. Someone please tell me I'm wrong and those two actually appear in a fairy tale, because if they do appear in one, I obviously haven't read enough of the non-gruesome original fairy tales. Or do they actually appear in the gruesome ones? I would love to know.
<i>Spelled</i> could be considered a fun read, if you put aside all of the problems – there's humor, a good premise, and an amazing cast of side characters. But if you don't have the patience to handle a spoiled and stuck-up princess who whines a lot for approximately a quarter of the book, <i>Spelled</i> might not be a book on your radar.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/arc-review-spelled-by-betsy-schow/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Night of the Dragon (Shadow of the Fox #3) in Books
Apr 10, 2020 (Updated Apr 10, 2020)
ARC copy provided by Inkyard Press.
This review and other musings can be found at Bookwyrming Thoughts.
I think I’ve been completely ruined once again by Julie Kagawa, so I had to nurse my soul for about a week before I could muster up the courage to write a review.* With Night of the Dragon, the third and final book of her Shadow of the Fox trilogy, Kagawa has taken my heart and chucked it straight into another galaxy. I don’t know the rest of my current reads; what are they?
I’m… not sure when my heart will return this time.
Night of the Dragon is a continuation of Soul of the Sword.
We continue to follow Yumeko and her friends as they race against time to stop Genno from summoning the Kami Dragon and destroying Iwagoto. Safe to assume eventually it will be the world. And not just the short time they have: they have a challenging journey ahead because Genno will stop at nothing to prevent them from ruining his plans. Like the first two books, Kagawa introduces us to new yokai from Japanese mythology: each of them just as cruel, vicious and caring for nothing but spilling the blood of anything that stands in their way.
Tatsumi has a bit of an identity crisis here.
He’s not sure if he’s Haikaimono now that they’ve merged their souls or if he’s still Tatsumi. But over the course of his journey from Shadow of the Fox when he first meets Yumeko through the third book, he’s changed drastically. He’s not the only one who’s changed either; his literal resident demon inside of him has changed too, but he’s still the same badass Kage from the first book. He’s just more bloodthirsty.
I’m here for all the slow burns!
My heart is all mushy with the ships being sailed. Finally! Inside my heart cried because, at this point in the series, I’m cheering the group on to success. All the odds are against them, but I want my favorite cinnamons to conquer.
My heart still cries from wherever it landed.
I’m not surprised by the ending, but it doesn’t mean it didn’t hurt any less than it did. Either way, it was beautiful and perfect, and I couldn’t ask for anything less. (But I mean, it’s Julie Kagawa! I should know at reading 90% of her works that endings to a series are going to be *chef’s kiss*.)
Soul of the Sword was a struggle for me to get through, but it is so worth going through for Night of the Dragon. All the questions I had from the very beginning of the series get answered as everything comes together for an ending that made me want to cry and question my life choices.
*How do I bring justice to such perfection?! All the words have flown out the window. What even is a review?
This review and other musings can be found at Bookwyrming Thoughts.
I think I’ve been completely ruined once again by Julie Kagawa, so I had to nurse my soul for about a week before I could muster up the courage to write a review.* With Night of the Dragon, the third and final book of her Shadow of the Fox trilogy, Kagawa has taken my heart and chucked it straight into another galaxy. I don’t know the rest of my current reads; what are they?
I’m… not sure when my heart will return this time.
Night of the Dragon is a continuation of Soul of the Sword.
We continue to follow Yumeko and her friends as they race against time to stop Genno from summoning the Kami Dragon and destroying Iwagoto. Safe to assume eventually it will be the world. And not just the short time they have: they have a challenging journey ahead because Genno will stop at nothing to prevent them from ruining his plans. Like the first two books, Kagawa introduces us to new yokai from Japanese mythology: each of them just as cruel, vicious and caring for nothing but spilling the blood of anything that stands in their way.
Tatsumi has a bit of an identity crisis here.
He’s not sure if he’s Haikaimono now that they’ve merged their souls or if he’s still Tatsumi. But over the course of his journey from Shadow of the Fox when he first meets Yumeko through the third book, he’s changed drastically. He’s not the only one who’s changed either; his literal resident demon inside of him has changed too, but he’s still the same badass Kage from the first book. He’s just more bloodthirsty.
I’m here for all the slow burns!
My heart is all mushy with the ships being sailed. Finally! Inside my heart cried because, at this point in the series, I’m cheering the group on to success. All the odds are against them, but I want my favorite cinnamons to conquer.
My heart still cries from wherever it landed.
I’m not surprised by the ending, but it doesn’t mean it didn’t hurt any less than it did. Either way, it was beautiful and perfect, and I couldn’t ask for anything less. (But I mean, it’s Julie Kagawa! I should know at reading 90% of her works that endings to a series are going to be *chef’s kiss*.)
Soul of the Sword was a struggle for me to get through, but it is so worth going through for Night of the Dragon. All the questions I had from the very beginning of the series get answered as everything comes together for an ending that made me want to cry and question my life choices.
*How do I bring justice to such perfection?! All the words have flown out the window. What even is a review?
