Search
Search results
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated Flatland (Enhanced Illustrated Edition) in Books
Nov 13, 2019
I have wanted to read Flatland since I read the reference to it in Gödel Escher Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid which was a set text at university. As the book is out of copyright it was one of the first that I downloaded to my eReader.
The book (although really a novella rather than a full novel at only 88 pages) works on two levels; firstly the story revolves around A Square, an inhabitant of the two dimensional space that is Flatland. Most of the book describes the rigid social hierarchy of the regular polygons that make up the people - the more sides a person has the higher their social standing. Irregular shapes are despised and usually executed. The second half involves investigation into the nature of dimensions when A Square first of all dreams of a one dimensional land, then is shown three dimensions and zero dimensions by a spherical person from the three dimensional land.
The first half is a satire on the rigid class system of Victorian society - it is particularly disparaging of women, who being lines rather than shapes are very much second class citizens, even having their own doors into and out of houses. This half shows the book's age, it was written in a different time and looking at it from more than 100 years later a lot of the discussion is overlong and unengaging. This part has not aged at all well.
The book only comes into its own when A Square has a dream about a land of one dimension, populated by lines of varying length, the longest line being the King of Lineland. The two dimensional dreamer attempts to persuade the King that is he could step sideways he would be able to see that his land of a single line was limited. Of course the King can conceive of no such direction as 'sideways' and rejects the suggestion as ridiculous.
A sphere from the 3 dimensional land of Space then visits Flatland, appearing as a circle of varying size as he passes through the two dimensional space. He tries to persuade Square that if he could move 'up' or 'down' he would be able to move beyond the rigid plane of his existence. Obviously the square cannot understand a direction which doesn't fall into two dimensions, until the sphere pulls him up and then he can look down to see Flatland spread out below him. He has an epiphany and is determined to spread the word on three dimensional space. The sphere also visits a zero dimensional land. However when the square suggests that if the sphere could somehow move in a new direction he might be able to enter four dimensional space the sphere is very quick to say how ridiculous such a notion is.
In this way the ideas behind dimensions are communicated quite effectively, including being able to deduce the properties of a four dimensional regular shape by extrapolating the properties of lines, squares and cubes. It is then clear how properties of higher dimensions can be calculated without our poor three dimensional minds actually being able to perceive of it.
Flatland is regarded as one of the very first science fiction novels. So is Gulliver's Travels but that has very little science and to my mind is more of a fantasy book. Despite Flatland having very little in the way of story and plot (although there are twists in the story) and the first half isn't really story at all but social commentary, it definitely describes fantastic worlds and imagines what the results would be of living in such places. This seems to me to be the very concept behind science fiction.
In conclusion, I would not recommend this to everyone as I think its appeal is quite limited. But for anyone of a mathematical bent who likes science fiction, it's always good to see where it all started.
The book (although really a novella rather than a full novel at only 88 pages) works on two levels; firstly the story revolves around A Square, an inhabitant of the two dimensional space that is Flatland. Most of the book describes the rigid social hierarchy of the regular polygons that make up the people - the more sides a person has the higher their social standing. Irregular shapes are despised and usually executed. The second half involves investigation into the nature of dimensions when A Square first of all dreams of a one dimensional land, then is shown three dimensions and zero dimensions by a spherical person from the three dimensional land.
The first half is a satire on the rigid class system of Victorian society - it is particularly disparaging of women, who being lines rather than shapes are very much second class citizens, even having their own doors into and out of houses. This half shows the book's age, it was written in a different time and looking at it from more than 100 years later a lot of the discussion is overlong and unengaging. This part has not aged at all well.
The book only comes into its own when A Square has a dream about a land of one dimension, populated by lines of varying length, the longest line being the King of Lineland. The two dimensional dreamer attempts to persuade the King that is he could step sideways he would be able to see that his land of a single line was limited. Of course the King can conceive of no such direction as 'sideways' and rejects the suggestion as ridiculous.
A sphere from the 3 dimensional land of Space then visits Flatland, appearing as a circle of varying size as he passes through the two dimensional space. He tries to persuade Square that if he could move 'up' or 'down' he would be able to move beyond the rigid plane of his existence. Obviously the square cannot understand a direction which doesn't fall into two dimensions, until the sphere pulls him up and then he can look down to see Flatland spread out below him. He has an epiphany and is determined to spread the word on three dimensional space. The sphere also visits a zero dimensional land. However when the square suggests that if the sphere could somehow move in a new direction he might be able to enter four dimensional space the sphere is very quick to say how ridiculous such a notion is.
In this way the ideas behind dimensions are communicated quite effectively, including being able to deduce the properties of a four dimensional regular shape by extrapolating the properties of lines, squares and cubes. It is then clear how properties of higher dimensions can be calculated without our poor three dimensional minds actually being able to perceive of it.
Flatland is regarded as one of the very first science fiction novels. So is Gulliver's Travels but that has very little science and to my mind is more of a fantasy book. Despite Flatland having very little in the way of story and plot (although there are twists in the story) and the first half isn't really story at all but social commentary, it definitely describes fantastic worlds and imagines what the results would be of living in such places. This seems to me to be the very concept behind science fiction.
In conclusion, I would not recommend this to everyone as I think its appeal is quite limited. But for anyone of a mathematical bent who likes science fiction, it's always good to see where it all started.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016) in Movies
Jan 23, 2020
In this day and age, where Star Wars is beloved by so many, and more recently met with sighs and trepidation by just as many, it's a franchise that easily faces scrutiny.
We can look at both the prequel and sequel trilogies to plainly see that it doesn't take much to piss off Star Wars fans in one way or another.
The announcement of Rogue One was met with said scrutiny, some saying it wasn't needed, some feeling fatigued by the sheer amount of Star Wars being thrown at us, sentiments that I can understand.
But I truly believe that Rogue One was a surprising win, and I left the cinema feeling that it belonged up there with the top tier SW films, and my opinion hasn't budged on repeat viewings.
The story revolves around a rag tag group of mercenaries, smugglers, and outcasts, and how they managed to secure the Death Star plans that set off the events of A New Hope back in 1977.
The cast of heroes aren't fleshed out a huge deal, but were given enough backstory to understand them adequately and back their campaign against the Empire.
Just like TFA, it's great to have another female lead in the SW universe. Felicity Jones is likable enough as Jyn Erso, even if her character is a little on the vanilla side.
The duo of Chirrut Imwe and Baze Malbus (Donnie Yen and Wen Jiang) work great next to one another, and provide a lot of the films humour and emotional impact.
The droid K2-SO (voiced by Alan Tudyk) is also a surprising highlight, his dry sense of humour works fantastically with the more serious tone of the movie.
We also have Cassian Andor (Diego Luna) which is the only character from the main group I struggled to like. He's written like a poor man's Han Solo, and I just didn't care about him at all, an aspect that can hopefully be rectified in the upcoming Disney+ series.
We also have Forest Whitaker as Saw Gerrera - a concrete connection to Star Wars: Rebels no less!, Mads Mikkelsen as Jyn's father Galen, and Ben Mendelsohn as this films villain, Orson Krennic.
It's a really strong cast if mostly enjoyable characters that earn their place in the SW pantheon.
In terms of cinematography, Star Wars has arguably never looked so good. Gorgeous and colourful locations like Scarif contrast against the classic Whit and greys of the original Empire design beautifully. All of the CG effects are more or less perfect, (with a huge exception that I'll get to in a second) and the action set pieces are thrilling. The whole final act is spectacular, and then just when it's seems like it's all over, we get THAT ending sequence - Gareth Edwards knows just the right amount of nostalgia to ensure the audience laps it up, and it's one of the best minutes of any Star Wars film ever.
The exception I mentioned above is of course going to be the subject of bringing back real actors from the dead. The inclusion of Grand Moff Tarkin makes sense in this particular narrative, but it does feel a bit odd seeing Peter Cushing, who died over 20 years ago, back on screen. Another cameo late on that includes a younger version of a legendary Star Wars character looks really off as well.
Overall though, these are just nit picks at an otherwise terrific sci-fi adventure.
Rogue One is bonafide great entry into the Star Wars canon, and its my personal favourite of the Disney era so far. Top stuff.
We can look at both the prequel and sequel trilogies to plainly see that it doesn't take much to piss off Star Wars fans in one way or another.
The announcement of Rogue One was met with said scrutiny, some saying it wasn't needed, some feeling fatigued by the sheer amount of Star Wars being thrown at us, sentiments that I can understand.
But I truly believe that Rogue One was a surprising win, and I left the cinema feeling that it belonged up there with the top tier SW films, and my opinion hasn't budged on repeat viewings.
The story revolves around a rag tag group of mercenaries, smugglers, and outcasts, and how they managed to secure the Death Star plans that set off the events of A New Hope back in 1977.
The cast of heroes aren't fleshed out a huge deal, but were given enough backstory to understand them adequately and back their campaign against the Empire.
Just like TFA, it's great to have another female lead in the SW universe. Felicity Jones is likable enough as Jyn Erso, even if her character is a little on the vanilla side.
The duo of Chirrut Imwe and Baze Malbus (Donnie Yen and Wen Jiang) work great next to one another, and provide a lot of the films humour and emotional impact.
The droid K2-SO (voiced by Alan Tudyk) is also a surprising highlight, his dry sense of humour works fantastically with the more serious tone of the movie.
We also have Cassian Andor (Diego Luna) which is the only character from the main group I struggled to like. He's written like a poor man's Han Solo, and I just didn't care about him at all, an aspect that can hopefully be rectified in the upcoming Disney+ series.
We also have Forest Whitaker as Saw Gerrera - a concrete connection to Star Wars: Rebels no less!, Mads Mikkelsen as Jyn's father Galen, and Ben Mendelsohn as this films villain, Orson Krennic.
It's a really strong cast if mostly enjoyable characters that earn their place in the SW pantheon.
In terms of cinematography, Star Wars has arguably never looked so good. Gorgeous and colourful locations like Scarif contrast against the classic Whit and greys of the original Empire design beautifully. All of the CG effects are more or less perfect, (with a huge exception that I'll get to in a second) and the action set pieces are thrilling. The whole final act is spectacular, and then just when it's seems like it's all over, we get THAT ending sequence - Gareth Edwards knows just the right amount of nostalgia to ensure the audience laps it up, and it's one of the best minutes of any Star Wars film ever.
The exception I mentioned above is of course going to be the subject of bringing back real actors from the dead. The inclusion of Grand Moff Tarkin makes sense in this particular narrative, but it does feel a bit odd seeing Peter Cushing, who died over 20 years ago, back on screen. Another cameo late on that includes a younger version of a legendary Star Wars character looks really off as well.
Overall though, these are just nit picks at an otherwise terrific sci-fi adventure.
Rogue One is bonafide great entry into the Star Wars canon, and its my personal favourite of the Disney era so far. Top stuff.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Two Popes (2019) in Movies
Jan 26, 2020 (Updated Jan 26, 2020)
Fantastic performances from two old acting pros.
Being inaugurated as a new pope in the last century must have been a source of enormous pride. But there must also have been a nagging thought... at some point you are going to be paraded, stiff as a board, around your work courtyard before being taken back inside to your place of work and buried there!
All that changed in 2013 when Pope Benedict XVI resigned, the first pope to voluntarily do so since Pope Celestine V in 1294. (Pope Gregory XII also resigned in 1415, but he was effectively forced to).
This movie tells the story of that curious situation, when Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio (played by Jonathan Pryce) ended up as Pope Francis while Benedict (Anthony Hopkins) was still alive. The official reason for the pope's resignation appears to have been his advanced age. But the film paints a rather different picture.
The movie starts back in 2005 as we enter the papal conclave. Benedict (Cardinal Ratzinger, as was) is the highly-political German cardinal who desperately wants the papacy; Bergoglio is the highly respected Argentinian cardinal who doesn't seek the office but might have it thrust upon him. (Clearly, when the white smoke clears, history has dictated the outcome).
But flash forward to 2013 and Bergoglio will get another bite of the cherry. Is he worthy of the role? Through flashbacks we return to Perón's unsettling rule over Argentina and the events that made the man.
The two stars are simply outstanding together, and it's no surprise at all that both have been nominated in the Oscar acting categories. They are almost joint leads. But - perhaps to give the film its best awards-season shot - Pryce is down for Best Actor and Hopkins is down for Best Supporting Actor.
Anthony Hopkins in particular for me shone with the brilliant quietness and subtle facial movements that are the mark of a truly confident actor. Less is more.
I was enjoying this movie enormously up until we flashed back to the Argentinian sub-plot. Set in the time of Perón's "Dirty War" when a huge number of people - estimates range from 9,000 to 30,000 - simply went "missing". There's nothing wrong with this sequence of the film. For example, a reunion of Bergoglio with a persecuted priest, Father Jalics (Lisandro Fiks) - is brilliantly and movingly done. It's just that for me it seemed so disjointed. It was jarring to switch from this Evita-era drama to the gentle drama of the papal plot.
If the movie had been 30 minutes shorter and focused on the mental struggles of Benedict I would have preferred it. Curiously - we don't really get to fully understand his divergence from the faith. Bergoglio gets no end of back-story. But Ratzinger's is probably just as interesting, but not explored.
This is still a really fine movie and will appeal to older folks who like a story rich with character acting and not heavy on the action or special effects. The director is Fernando Meirelles (who interestingly directed the Rio Olympics opening ceremony!) and it's written by Anthony McCarten, the man behind the screenplays for "The Theory of Everything", "Darkest Hour" and "Bohemian Rhapsody".
You may still be able to find this in selected cinemas (e.g. Curzon) but it is also streaming on Netflix, which is where I had to watch it.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies at https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/01/26/one-manns-movies-film-review-the-two-popes-2019/ ).
All that changed in 2013 when Pope Benedict XVI resigned, the first pope to voluntarily do so since Pope Celestine V in 1294. (Pope Gregory XII also resigned in 1415, but he was effectively forced to).
This movie tells the story of that curious situation, when Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio (played by Jonathan Pryce) ended up as Pope Francis while Benedict (Anthony Hopkins) was still alive. The official reason for the pope's resignation appears to have been his advanced age. But the film paints a rather different picture.
The movie starts back in 2005 as we enter the papal conclave. Benedict (Cardinal Ratzinger, as was) is the highly-political German cardinal who desperately wants the papacy; Bergoglio is the highly respected Argentinian cardinal who doesn't seek the office but might have it thrust upon him. (Clearly, when the white smoke clears, history has dictated the outcome).
But flash forward to 2013 and Bergoglio will get another bite of the cherry. Is he worthy of the role? Through flashbacks we return to Perón's unsettling rule over Argentina and the events that made the man.
The two stars are simply outstanding together, and it's no surprise at all that both have been nominated in the Oscar acting categories. They are almost joint leads. But - perhaps to give the film its best awards-season shot - Pryce is down for Best Actor and Hopkins is down for Best Supporting Actor.
Anthony Hopkins in particular for me shone with the brilliant quietness and subtle facial movements that are the mark of a truly confident actor. Less is more.
I was enjoying this movie enormously up until we flashed back to the Argentinian sub-plot. Set in the time of Perón's "Dirty War" when a huge number of people - estimates range from 9,000 to 30,000 - simply went "missing". There's nothing wrong with this sequence of the film. For example, a reunion of Bergoglio with a persecuted priest, Father Jalics (Lisandro Fiks) - is brilliantly and movingly done. It's just that for me it seemed so disjointed. It was jarring to switch from this Evita-era drama to the gentle drama of the papal plot.
If the movie had been 30 minutes shorter and focused on the mental struggles of Benedict I would have preferred it. Curiously - we don't really get to fully understand his divergence from the faith. Bergoglio gets no end of back-story. But Ratzinger's is probably just as interesting, but not explored.
This is still a really fine movie and will appeal to older folks who like a story rich with character acting and not heavy on the action or special effects. The director is Fernando Meirelles (who interestingly directed the Rio Olympics opening ceremony!) and it's written by Anthony McCarten, the man behind the screenplays for "The Theory of Everything", "Darkest Hour" and "Bohemian Rhapsody".
You may still be able to find this in selected cinemas (e.g. Curzon) but it is also streaming on Netflix, which is where I had to watch it.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies at https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/01/26/one-manns-movies-film-review-the-two-popes-2019/ ).
Night Reader Reviews (683 KP) rated Very Practical Magic: Modern Magic for Everyday Use in Books
Jan 9, 2020
Honest Review for Free Copy of Book
Very Practical Magic: Modern Magic for Everyday Use by Nicola Kelleher is an interesting spellbook, to say the least. People interested in all different kinds of magic will be able to find something useful in this book. I just urge people to be sure of their intent before attempting any of these. Also, some of the spells suggest or even require the use of feathers and it may be important to note that the possession of specific feather in the US is not legal (something that I just learned recently) so users might just want to be aware of it.
This short book of practical spells starts out with a small preface about the author and some basic information about when it is best to perform magic. The book explains what powers are strongest on each day of the week and by each phase of the moon. It then moves on to love spells but explains that even with these spells the caster can not force anyone to love them and should not attempt to do so. The spells for the home go over every subject from protection and cleaning to even selling and finding your dream home.
No starter spellbook (and that is exactly what this is) would be complete without a section on bringing more wealth toward the user so long as it is not for greed. It contains spells to help bring new friends to you and cultivate current friendships. There is even a version of the Witch’s Ladder toward the back of the book as well. For all the pet lovers there are spells to protect or heal a pet who is sick, yet it encourages readers not to forgo proper medical care. No matter what the reader classifies themselves as or who their patron god/goddess (if applicable) is this book contains a spell for everyone.
What I liked best is that the spells are simple and could easily be adapted for a specific use. I also really liked the list of crystals, herbs, oils, and candles at the back of the book. These lists are a great reference for anyone who wants to create their own spells or needs substitutions for an unavailable item. There was just one thing that I did not like at all, a spell I did not agree with. The spell titled Nail Yourself a Lover encourages filing your nails into a tea that you will serve someone else. This just feels completely wrong to me and gross, not to mention I am not even sure if it is legal.
While I can not suggest an age range for this but there is a clear group of people this book is meant for. The main requirement is that the reader must believe in Magic (not the slight-of-hand type) but real magic. I give this book a rating of 3 out of 4. The title is correct in saying that this is a book of very practical magic. Most of the spells have very few ingredients or requirements and do not take long to perform. I would have liked to see pictures of the crystals along with their descriptions in the back of the book to make it better and less likely for errors to occur.
https://www.facebook.com/nightreaderreviews
This short book of practical spells starts out with a small preface about the author and some basic information about when it is best to perform magic. The book explains what powers are strongest on each day of the week and by each phase of the moon. It then moves on to love spells but explains that even with these spells the caster can not force anyone to love them and should not attempt to do so. The spells for the home go over every subject from protection and cleaning to even selling and finding your dream home.
No starter spellbook (and that is exactly what this is) would be complete without a section on bringing more wealth toward the user so long as it is not for greed. It contains spells to help bring new friends to you and cultivate current friendships. There is even a version of the Witch’s Ladder toward the back of the book as well. For all the pet lovers there are spells to protect or heal a pet who is sick, yet it encourages readers not to forgo proper medical care. No matter what the reader classifies themselves as or who their patron god/goddess (if applicable) is this book contains a spell for everyone.
What I liked best is that the spells are simple and could easily be adapted for a specific use. I also really liked the list of crystals, herbs, oils, and candles at the back of the book. These lists are a great reference for anyone who wants to create their own spells or needs substitutions for an unavailable item. There was just one thing that I did not like at all, a spell I did not agree with. The spell titled Nail Yourself a Lover encourages filing your nails into a tea that you will serve someone else. This just feels completely wrong to me and gross, not to mention I am not even sure if it is legal.
While I can not suggest an age range for this but there is a clear group of people this book is meant for. The main requirement is that the reader must believe in Magic (not the slight-of-hand type) but real magic. I give this book a rating of 3 out of 4. The title is correct in saying that this is a book of very practical magic. Most of the spells have very few ingredients or requirements and do not take long to perform. I would have liked to see pictures of the crystals along with their descriptions in the back of the book to make it better and less likely for errors to occur.
https://www.facebook.com/nightreaderreviews
Bubble Puppy - Play and Learn HD
Education and Games
App
It’s a personal play date with Bubble Puppy! Send your child swimming into a fin-tastic play date...
Shoppers Stop: Online Fashion Shopping App India
Shopping and Lifestyle
App
Shopping made easy with the Shopper’s Stop mobile app! Now shop latest offers in fashion and...
Puppies, Whopping Puppies - furry fun for kids!
Book and Entertainment
App
Whopping Puppies is a very simple book & game application for small kids and toddlers, containing...
Capital First - Instant Loans
Business and Finance
App
Dear User, to retrieve your username & password to log into the app, please send the below SMS to...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Dora and the Lost City of Gold (2019) in Movies
Jun 20, 2020
The trailer for Dora looked like fun but I went in cautious, luckily I came out having really enjoyed myself. Dora is the step before the new Jumanji films, it's packed with fun daft stuff and it's difficult to hold anything against it.
Dora and her parents live in the jungle where they can explore and learn about everything around them. When her best friend Diego leaves for the city she's left with only Boots, a cheeky monkey, to go on a daily adventure with.
Years later after a breakthrough with their research Dora's parents send her to stay with Diego and his family in the city as they go off looking for their lost Inca civilisation. High school is a bit like a jungle, but not like the one Dora is used to, she muddles through the best she can trying to stay positive.
When the school goes on a field trip to the museum Dora and her friends get cornered by a strange group of people and trapped in a packing crate headed back to the jungle. Dora isn't the only one wanting to know where her parents are, this group of mercenaries are after them too, and the treasure.
Something great about Dora And The Lost City Of Gold is that it doesn't take itself too seriously. The TV series was after my time but it's one of those things you still know about. I was pre-worried about the terrible animation on Boots, it didn't exactly look ground-breaking in the trailer, but once the cute little thing got going I didn't really care. Obviously there are lots of things that happen in the cartoon that don't really lend themselves to the big screen. Possibly the most amusing one is Dora breaking the fourth wall to ask if we can say "delicioso", the reaction from everyone in the scene is hilarious and I'm impressed they decided to do it that way.
Isabela Moner made an excellent impression earlier this year in Instant Family and seeing her name on this was brilliant. The age difference to the show makes sense and I love the way they handled it. There's infectious enthusiasm that it was difficult not to succumb to. Having to act with things that aren't there is incredibly difficult to do realistically but you wouldn't know it to watch her in this.
Dora's parents are played by Michael Peña and Eva Longoria, it seems like an odd pairing but they were really fun together. You know I love Michael Peña, and he's so goofy and fun in this that it made me very happy. His extended rave music piece was thankfully better than the short clip in the trailer. Eva Longoria was much more down to earth and sensible and the dynamic between them worked really well.
The film managed to incorporate the cartoon in quite a fun way. I'm not sure how they expect parents to explain what happened but that's not my problem so I'm purely entertained by it all. I briefly mentioned the animation of Boots, it's not good but the character is amusing, Swiper the fox has a similar animation issue. He's more annoying to watch and see other characters interact with him, but a fox that talks and walks on his hind legs isn't going to be great in this style of film whatever way you try.
Dora And The Lost City Of Gold really feels like it brings together all the values that the show tries to put across, friendship, learning and good behaviour. It has captured it all in a bright and engaging format while keeping the content amusing and suitable for everyone. I'm very pleased I got to see this it's one of the more amusing releases this year.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/08/dora-and-lost-city-of-gold-movie-review.html
Dora and her parents live in the jungle where they can explore and learn about everything around them. When her best friend Diego leaves for the city she's left with only Boots, a cheeky monkey, to go on a daily adventure with.
Years later after a breakthrough with their research Dora's parents send her to stay with Diego and his family in the city as they go off looking for their lost Inca civilisation. High school is a bit like a jungle, but not like the one Dora is used to, she muddles through the best she can trying to stay positive.
When the school goes on a field trip to the museum Dora and her friends get cornered by a strange group of people and trapped in a packing crate headed back to the jungle. Dora isn't the only one wanting to know where her parents are, this group of mercenaries are after them too, and the treasure.
Something great about Dora And The Lost City Of Gold is that it doesn't take itself too seriously. The TV series was after my time but it's one of those things you still know about. I was pre-worried about the terrible animation on Boots, it didn't exactly look ground-breaking in the trailer, but once the cute little thing got going I didn't really care. Obviously there are lots of things that happen in the cartoon that don't really lend themselves to the big screen. Possibly the most amusing one is Dora breaking the fourth wall to ask if we can say "delicioso", the reaction from everyone in the scene is hilarious and I'm impressed they decided to do it that way.
Isabela Moner made an excellent impression earlier this year in Instant Family and seeing her name on this was brilliant. The age difference to the show makes sense and I love the way they handled it. There's infectious enthusiasm that it was difficult not to succumb to. Having to act with things that aren't there is incredibly difficult to do realistically but you wouldn't know it to watch her in this.
Dora's parents are played by Michael Peña and Eva Longoria, it seems like an odd pairing but they were really fun together. You know I love Michael Peña, and he's so goofy and fun in this that it made me very happy. His extended rave music piece was thankfully better than the short clip in the trailer. Eva Longoria was much more down to earth and sensible and the dynamic between them worked really well.
The film managed to incorporate the cartoon in quite a fun way. I'm not sure how they expect parents to explain what happened but that's not my problem so I'm purely entertained by it all. I briefly mentioned the animation of Boots, it's not good but the character is amusing, Swiper the fox has a similar animation issue. He's more annoying to watch and see other characters interact with him, but a fox that talks and walks on his hind legs isn't going to be great in this style of film whatever way you try.
Dora And The Lost City Of Gold really feels like it brings together all the values that the show tries to put across, friendship, learning and good behaviour. It has captured it all in a bright and engaging format while keeping the content amusing and suitable for everyone. I'm very pleased I got to see this it's one of the more amusing releases this year.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/08/dora-and-lost-city-of-gold-movie-review.html
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Cool for the Summer in Books
May 13, 2021
A simply wonderful book about finding yourself and love
Larissa "Lara" Bogdan has had a crush on one person for her entirety of high school: Chase Harding, the handsome, beloved football quarterback. But it's not until she comes back from a summer at the Outer Banks that he seems to take real notice of Lara. Like, flirting, asking her out notice. Now, she suddenly has everything she's ever wanted. But Lara can't seem to shake her memories of that Outer Banks summer and the girl she spent it with: Jasmine. Those memories come back in full force when Jasmine unexpectedly shows up at Lara's school on the first day and sees Chase flirting with Lara. Lara finally has Chase now. So why can't she stop thinking about Jasmine?
"How do you tell people who've listened to you babble about your crush on a guy for a thousand years that whoops, you spent the summer fooling around with a girl?"
Oh goodness, this was a great book. I'm so jealous there are so many wonderful YA LGTBQIA books out there now, which I would have devoured as a teen, yet incredibly happy too. I absolutely loved Lara as a character. She's sweet and bookish (addicted to romances) and in that stage where she's finding herself and coming out. It's hard not to relate to that. Adler's characters pop onto the pages--Lara, her mother, Jasmine, and Lara's cast of funny, overbearing, and loving friends. And even Chase, who is truly a good guy. (I appreciated that it wasn't "bad guy" versus "good girl" but two good kids, with their own personalities and flaws, whom Lara had to choose from.)
The book is told in a then and now format, starting out with Lara in high school and then flashing back to her summer in the Outer Banks with Jasmine. As someone who has spent some time in the Outer Banks, I loved the beachy setting, and the book just felt fun, summery, and exciting. You could feel the thrill of Lara and Jasmine falling for each other. It's so rare that we get this in our literature, and it brought back memories of my own first love and that fun, scared, happy feeling, along with all that uncertainly of realizing you were feeling these things for another girl. Adler captures it all so perfectly.
"If I somehow got Jasmine back--if I even wanted her back--what would it mean losing when everyone else found out the truth?"
The premise for this book is fascinating and lovely. Lara suddenly has everything she wants: she has pined after Chase for THREE YEARS. She comes back from vacation with a tan, a new haircut, and a newfound confidence (which no one knows the source of) and he suddenly takes notice of her. She should be in heaven--her friends certainly think so. Faced with having to make all these monumental life decisions, to realize whom she loves, and what she is--it's a lot. The book does such an excellent job of portraying bisexuality and the journey of figuring out who who you are. It's very well done, but also funny and witty. All the characters seem real and, for the most part, true to their age.
Overall, I loved this one. It portrays the queer community very well and does an excellent job capturing teens. The story is fun, sweet, and captivating. I feel like it would speak well to teens and adults who remember that spark of falling in love. I have to go read everything else by Adler now... 4.5 stars.
"How do you tell people who've listened to you babble about your crush on a guy for a thousand years that whoops, you spent the summer fooling around with a girl?"
Oh goodness, this was a great book. I'm so jealous there are so many wonderful YA LGTBQIA books out there now, which I would have devoured as a teen, yet incredibly happy too. I absolutely loved Lara as a character. She's sweet and bookish (addicted to romances) and in that stage where she's finding herself and coming out. It's hard not to relate to that. Adler's characters pop onto the pages--Lara, her mother, Jasmine, and Lara's cast of funny, overbearing, and loving friends. And even Chase, who is truly a good guy. (I appreciated that it wasn't "bad guy" versus "good girl" but two good kids, with their own personalities and flaws, whom Lara had to choose from.)
The book is told in a then and now format, starting out with Lara in high school and then flashing back to her summer in the Outer Banks with Jasmine. As someone who has spent some time in the Outer Banks, I loved the beachy setting, and the book just felt fun, summery, and exciting. You could feel the thrill of Lara and Jasmine falling for each other. It's so rare that we get this in our literature, and it brought back memories of my own first love and that fun, scared, happy feeling, along with all that uncertainly of realizing you were feeling these things for another girl. Adler captures it all so perfectly.
"If I somehow got Jasmine back--if I even wanted her back--what would it mean losing when everyone else found out the truth?"
The premise for this book is fascinating and lovely. Lara suddenly has everything she wants: she has pined after Chase for THREE YEARS. She comes back from vacation with a tan, a new haircut, and a newfound confidence (which no one knows the source of) and he suddenly takes notice of her. She should be in heaven--her friends certainly think so. Faced with having to make all these monumental life decisions, to realize whom she loves, and what she is--it's a lot. The book does such an excellent job of portraying bisexuality and the journey of figuring out who who you are. It's very well done, but also funny and witty. All the characters seem real and, for the most part, true to their age.
Overall, I loved this one. It portrays the queer community very well and does an excellent job capturing teens. The story is fun, sweet, and captivating. I feel like it would speak well to teens and adults who remember that spark of falling in love. I have to go read everything else by Adler now... 4.5 stars.