Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Hummingbird Project (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
Contemporary technology drama comes to the silver screen in the form of The Hummingbird Project starring Jesse Eisenberg, Alexander Skarsgård, and Salma Hayek. The film’s premise is realistic enough: A pair of insiders at a big Wall Street company defect to start a project for a rival firm – to built a single fiber optic connection between a stock exchange in Kansas City and the New York Stock Exchange. This was realistic enough that my lack of knowledge on the history of Wall Street’s networking had me looking up later to see if there was any truth or basis to portions of the plot. Unfortunately, I can’t seem to find anything referencing a Kansas City Stock Exchange. Unless they were referring to livestock? Because there was a Kansas City Livestock Exchange. Anyway, my biases up front – despite my clear lacking of aforementioned knowledge, I am a tech geek with experience in networking and related technology fields. So, a premise like this has a lot to attract my attention. There is admittedly much to enjoy about dramas regarding our contemporary plights in the realm of technology, because that’s where a lot of work is centered. Gone are the days of building railroads. But our internet infrastructure…
The film does a fairly good job representing the intense difficulty of such a project: it’s something like one thousand miles of straight line to run one fiber optic connection without obstruction. Most people would not think about what goes into making that into reality, which is the draw for most of the film’s conflict. I do however recognize that centering the plot on a large scale construction job of an internet cable doesn’t exactly scream excitement for most people; and this is especially true when the end goal is to shave off one millisecond from their current transaction times. Yet, this arguably ironic dynamic actually ended up being somewhat of a draw for me. Halfway through the film the question arises, “All this for just a millisecond of increased speed?” That’s the point though, and I wish the film would have delved deeper into these kinds of themes. This represents my chief criticism: all of the elements are here for a truly stellar drama but everything is explored at only a shallow or moderate depth. The characters have decent arcs, thrown some difficult challenges and curveballs to overcome, but Jesse Eisenberg’s character only briefly touches on the back-story that truly drives him, and while Alexander Skarsgård‘s character is more fully fleshed out his arc is essentially basic. I do enjoy the role reversal as one would usually expect to see Jesse Eisenberg playing the socially awkward genius programmer and Alexander Skarsgård to play the ambitious go-getter who runs the project, but they take opposite roles to great effect. The actors all do great here for the most part, including the excellent Michael Mando in a supporting role. My only complaint here is the acting dips a bit into melodrama later in the film, but this is mostly attributed to subplots that edge into the unbelievable.
Ironically Hummingbird Project works best at representing its core premise of what most would consider a mundane construction project. The actors do well, and I especially enjoy Alexander Skarsgård‘s portrayal of the lonely genius, but their underlying drama and back-stories are a bit of a mixed bag. Some of it works decently well while other elements do not – particularly late in the film. Sadly the themes at play are a bit too obvious and underexplored, but it is an appreciated attempt to represent a seldom explored aspect of contemporary industry.
The film does a fairly good job representing the intense difficulty of such a project: it’s something like one thousand miles of straight line to run one fiber optic connection without obstruction. Most people would not think about what goes into making that into reality, which is the draw for most of the film’s conflict. I do however recognize that centering the plot on a large scale construction job of an internet cable doesn’t exactly scream excitement for most people; and this is especially true when the end goal is to shave off one millisecond from their current transaction times. Yet, this arguably ironic dynamic actually ended up being somewhat of a draw for me. Halfway through the film the question arises, “All this for just a millisecond of increased speed?” That’s the point though, and I wish the film would have delved deeper into these kinds of themes. This represents my chief criticism: all of the elements are here for a truly stellar drama but everything is explored at only a shallow or moderate depth. The characters have decent arcs, thrown some difficult challenges and curveballs to overcome, but Jesse Eisenberg’s character only briefly touches on the back-story that truly drives him, and while Alexander Skarsgård‘s character is more fully fleshed out his arc is essentially basic. I do enjoy the role reversal as one would usually expect to see Jesse Eisenberg playing the socially awkward genius programmer and Alexander Skarsgård to play the ambitious go-getter who runs the project, but they take opposite roles to great effect. The actors all do great here for the most part, including the excellent Michael Mando in a supporting role. My only complaint here is the acting dips a bit into melodrama later in the film, but this is mostly attributed to subplots that edge into the unbelievable.
Ironically Hummingbird Project works best at representing its core premise of what most would consider a mundane construction project. The actors do well, and I especially enjoy Alexander Skarsgård‘s portrayal of the lonely genius, but their underlying drama and back-stories are a bit of a mixed bag. Some of it works decently well while other elements do not – particularly late in the film. Sadly the themes at play are a bit too obvious and underexplored, but it is an appreciated attempt to represent a seldom explored aspect of contemporary industry.
ForeverMap 2 - Worldwide Offline Maps and Online Maps
Travel and Navigation
App
No Marketing gloss, just facts now. A map with global coverage (OSM). You choose: online maps or...
Rupert Falkes is a wealthy, (somewhat) self-made man. A British orphan, he came to America, charmed his way into Yale Law, and made a career as a successful lawyer. He also married well: the beautiful (and rich) Eleanor Phipps. Together, the pair had five sons (Harry, Will, Sam, Jack, and Tom) and a happy life. When Rupert dies of cancer, a woman comes forward, claiming to have had two sons with him as well. The revelation causes different reactions among Eleanor and all the Falkes boys (now men), setting off a chain of reactions throughout the privileged family.
I'll be honest; I requested this ARC solely because I enjoyed Reiger's previous novel, [b:The Divorce Papers|18142403|The Divorce Papers|Susan Rieger|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1378708022s/18142403.jpg|25489091], so much. I did not realize THE HEIRS was set in New York City and focused purely on a wealthy family--it seems like so many of these novels lately are tedious, and I can't find any connection to the characters.
And, truly, at first seemed it seemed like a boring look at a bunch of rich people. However, the novel becomes more interesting and nuanced as it progresses, with the viewpoints varying by chapter (and really within each chapter). The story is told by the people who were within Rupert Falkes' orbit. We hear from his wife, some of his sons, and past love interests of both Rupert and Eleanor. It turns out to be an effective way to tell the story, with bits and pieces of various stories coming out from the characters throughout the book, including about the possible illegitimate sons. (The focus is less on these two potential heirs than you would think, albeit their potential existence sort of kicks off the story.)
About halfway through, I found many of the characters to be petulant and annoying again--probably because we were in whiny middle son Sam's chapter. Truly, a lot of the people in this book are jerks. Sadly, Eleanor and Rupert's sons aren't always of the best character. Still, Eleanor is a fascinating person. She's strong, witty, and deep. She was definitely my favorite character in the novel, and any stories related to her were my favorite as well.
There is a lot of talk about money, class, and heritage in the novel. It's set in an earlier time period; it sometimes seems a bit much, but I suppose it's a realistic portrayal of wealthy New York in that era. Still, it is a lot of Jews versus Gentiles, rich versus poor, Yale versus Princeton.
I was a bit torn on this one for a bit, but I can't deny that I really enjoyed it, even if I didn't always like the characters. Besides, I was quite taken with Eleanor and even Anne (the wife of Eleanor's past love, Jim). Rieger is simply a good writer: her books are crisp and sharp. While on the surface the novel seems to be about a bunch of rich people, it also depicts the ties that bind us; there's meaning behind the sniping. There are touching moments in this novel, heartbreaking ones, and even funny ones. I didn't love it quite as much as THE DIVORCE PAPERS, and would probably rate as it 3.75 stars, but I'll round up to 4 stars here.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Librarything (thank you!) in return for an unbiased review; it is available everywhere as of 05/23/2017.
<center><a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">Blog</a>; ~ <a href="https://twitter.com/mwcmoto">Twitter</a>; ~ <a href="https://www.facebook.com/justacatandabook/">Facebook</a>; ~ <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/+KristyHamiltonbooks">Google+</a></center>;
I'll be honest; I requested this ARC solely because I enjoyed Reiger's previous novel, [b:The Divorce Papers|18142403|The Divorce Papers|Susan Rieger|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1378708022s/18142403.jpg|25489091], so much. I did not realize THE HEIRS was set in New York City and focused purely on a wealthy family--it seems like so many of these novels lately are tedious, and I can't find any connection to the characters.
And, truly, at first seemed it seemed like a boring look at a bunch of rich people. However, the novel becomes more interesting and nuanced as it progresses, with the viewpoints varying by chapter (and really within each chapter). The story is told by the people who were within Rupert Falkes' orbit. We hear from his wife, some of his sons, and past love interests of both Rupert and Eleanor. It turns out to be an effective way to tell the story, with bits and pieces of various stories coming out from the characters throughout the book, including about the possible illegitimate sons. (The focus is less on these two potential heirs than you would think, albeit their potential existence sort of kicks off the story.)
About halfway through, I found many of the characters to be petulant and annoying again--probably because we were in whiny middle son Sam's chapter. Truly, a lot of the people in this book are jerks. Sadly, Eleanor and Rupert's sons aren't always of the best character. Still, Eleanor is a fascinating person. She's strong, witty, and deep. She was definitely my favorite character in the novel, and any stories related to her were my favorite as well.
There is a lot of talk about money, class, and heritage in the novel. It's set in an earlier time period; it sometimes seems a bit much, but I suppose it's a realistic portrayal of wealthy New York in that era. Still, it is a lot of Jews versus Gentiles, rich versus poor, Yale versus Princeton.
I was a bit torn on this one for a bit, but I can't deny that I really enjoyed it, even if I didn't always like the characters. Besides, I was quite taken with Eleanor and even Anne (the wife of Eleanor's past love, Jim). Rieger is simply a good writer: her books are crisp and sharp. While on the surface the novel seems to be about a bunch of rich people, it also depicts the ties that bind us; there's meaning behind the sniping. There are touching moments in this novel, heartbreaking ones, and even funny ones. I didn't love it quite as much as THE DIVORCE PAPERS, and would probably rate as it 3.75 stars, but I'll round up to 4 stars here.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Librarything (thank you!) in return for an unbiased review; it is available everywhere as of 05/23/2017.
<center><a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">Blog</a>; ~ <a href="https://twitter.com/mwcmoto">Twitter</a>; ~ <a href="https://www.facebook.com/justacatandabook/">Facebook</a>; ~ <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/+KristyHamiltonbooks">Google+</a></center>;
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Life for Peter Parker, (Andrew Garfield), has become interesting to say the least. He is juggling the delicate and complex balance of being Spider-man as well as a high school senior and boyfriend to Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone).
His enthusiasm for his wall crawling alter ego is evident from the start as he still is as fast with a quip as he is with his webs and fists when taking down the bad guys of New York.
A chance encounter with an ultra nerdy yet brilliant Oscorp employee named Max (Jaime Foxx), puts a series of events into motion that will put the city and Spider-man on a collision with a severe danger.
When a freak accident transforms Max into a being capable of becoming and discharging pure electricity, the passive aggressive Max has an outlet for his pent up anger and hero worship and sets to make all those who ignored him pay.
At the same time, internal politics have left Oscorp in the hands of young Harry who learns he has limited time to solidify his position and legacy.
All of this would be enough for anyone to deal with but Peter is conflicted by his love for Gwen and his promise to her late father to stay away from her for her own safety.
Peter also has to content with his Aunt May (Sally Field) and unlocking the mystery of his parents who left him with his Aunt and Uncle years earlier never to return.
If this sounds a bit heady for a comic book based movie then you will not be surprised with the first ¾ of the film. It does contain some great 3D moments of Spider-man slinging his way around the city and some good moments of action but mostly the audience gets character introductions and plot expositions.
When it does get to the action, it does so in a very sleek and stylish way but one that is so obviously CGI created that it plays more like a video game.
For me the liberties taking with the characters and the history of the series were a bit much at first as what they came up with for Electro is not even close to the way he is portrayed in the comics.
Thankfully the final act of the film delivers and sets up future films in grand style even though the trailers tease content that is barely in the film and would have made for a great addition to the film.
Garfield and Stone have great chemistry with one another, and Foxx does his best despite in my opinion being very miscast for the role.
Director Marc Webb is clearly a fan of the source material and I am eager to see what he comes up with for future installments.
As it stands, “The Amazing Spider-man 2”, is an enjoyable summer film but not as good as the film that preceded it and could have been so much more.
http://sknr.net/2014/05/02/amazing-spider-man-2/
His enthusiasm for his wall crawling alter ego is evident from the start as he still is as fast with a quip as he is with his webs and fists when taking down the bad guys of New York.
A chance encounter with an ultra nerdy yet brilliant Oscorp employee named Max (Jaime Foxx), puts a series of events into motion that will put the city and Spider-man on a collision with a severe danger.
When a freak accident transforms Max into a being capable of becoming and discharging pure electricity, the passive aggressive Max has an outlet for his pent up anger and hero worship and sets to make all those who ignored him pay.
At the same time, internal politics have left Oscorp in the hands of young Harry who learns he has limited time to solidify his position and legacy.
All of this would be enough for anyone to deal with but Peter is conflicted by his love for Gwen and his promise to her late father to stay away from her for her own safety.
Peter also has to content with his Aunt May (Sally Field) and unlocking the mystery of his parents who left him with his Aunt and Uncle years earlier never to return.
If this sounds a bit heady for a comic book based movie then you will not be surprised with the first ¾ of the film. It does contain some great 3D moments of Spider-man slinging his way around the city and some good moments of action but mostly the audience gets character introductions and plot expositions.
When it does get to the action, it does so in a very sleek and stylish way but one that is so obviously CGI created that it plays more like a video game.
For me the liberties taking with the characters and the history of the series were a bit much at first as what they came up with for Electro is not even close to the way he is portrayed in the comics.
Thankfully the final act of the film delivers and sets up future films in grand style even though the trailers tease content that is barely in the film and would have made for a great addition to the film.
Garfield and Stone have great chemistry with one another, and Foxx does his best despite in my opinion being very miscast for the role.
Director Marc Webb is clearly a fan of the source material and I am eager to see what he comes up with for future installments.
As it stands, “The Amazing Spider-man 2”, is an enjoyable summer film but not as good as the film that preceded it and could have been so much more.
http://sknr.net/2014/05/02/amazing-spider-man-2/
Lonely Planet Oman, UAE & Arabian Peninsula
Lonely Planet, Stuart Butler, Anthony Ham and Jenny Walker
Book
Lonely Planet: The world's leading travel guide publisher Lonely Planet Oman, UAE & Arabian...
Eat24 Food Delivery
Food & Drink and Travel
App
Your iPhone can now feed you. No, your phone hasn’t learned to cook but you won’t have to...
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Fate of the Furious (2017) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Spectacularly Dumb
With box office takings of over $1.5billion, it was obvious that Universal Pictures would never let Furious 7 be the end of a multi-billion dollar franchise, no matter what many fans truly wanted.
The previous instalment was also, surprisingly, warmly received by critics who were impressed with how sensitively the naturally bombastic series handled the death of lead star Paul Walker. Two years on, the crew are back with Fast and Furious 8; does it do enough to keep the franchise on a high?
Now that Dom (Vin Diesel) and Letty (Michelle Rodriguez) are on their honeymoon, Brian and Mia have retired from the game, and the rest of the crew have been exonerated, the plucky team of globetrotters has found a normal life of sorts. But when a mysterious woman (Charlize Theron) seduces Dom back into a world of crime that he can’t seem to escape from, the rest of the gang will face things that will test them like never before.
Newcomer to the franchise, director F. Gary Gray (Law Abiding Citizen, The Italian Job) manages to craft what is perhaps the most ridiculous entry in the series to date, plagued with tonal imbalances and plot holes so big you could fit the QE2 into them with ease. But you know what? It’s probably the most fun you’ll have in the cinema all year.
The cast are all reunited, barring Paul Walker’s Brian and those publicised rifts between Vin Diesel and Dwayne Johnson are nowhere to be seen as everyone on screen appears to be having the time of their lives. New recruit Charlize Theron adds a level of class to proceedings as steely supervillain, Cipher. She’s a cracking addition to the series and her acting prowess oozes from every pore, despite the often clunky dialogue.
Of course, successful predecessors command bigger budgets for their follow-ups and Furious 8 is no exception. $250million was spent on creating this film and it shows. It’s a feast for the eyes with explosions, shiny cars, stunning locations and breath-taking special effects. The result is frankly exceptional. From Cuba to NYC and from Berlin to Russia (actually filmed in Iceland), the vistas are nicely filmed and beautifully executed.
The action sequences are also choreographed very well, but from a franchise built on these foundations, I’d expect nothing less. In particular, a street chase through New York City is edge of your seat stuff as literally hundreds of vehicles worm their way through its congested streets.
Negatives? Well, the story is awkward despite some decent twists, the aforementioned plot holes cause a few headaches for a series that prides itself on continuity and some of the comedic elements are poorly placed, but in this eighth outing, much of that can be forgiven. After all, what other franchise could survive eight films and still prove as exciting as its first?
Overall, Fast and Furious 8 is unashamedly ridiculous but who cares? With exceptional special effects and a great new adversary in Charlize Theron, the series once again manages to surpass expectation. Each film tries its best to outdo its predecessor and before long, we’ll no doubt be heading to Mars with the gang. I’m up for that. Are you?
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/04/13/spectacularly-dumb-fast-furious-8-review/
The previous instalment was also, surprisingly, warmly received by critics who were impressed with how sensitively the naturally bombastic series handled the death of lead star Paul Walker. Two years on, the crew are back with Fast and Furious 8; does it do enough to keep the franchise on a high?
Now that Dom (Vin Diesel) and Letty (Michelle Rodriguez) are on their honeymoon, Brian and Mia have retired from the game, and the rest of the crew have been exonerated, the plucky team of globetrotters has found a normal life of sorts. But when a mysterious woman (Charlize Theron) seduces Dom back into a world of crime that he can’t seem to escape from, the rest of the gang will face things that will test them like never before.
Newcomer to the franchise, director F. Gary Gray (Law Abiding Citizen, The Italian Job) manages to craft what is perhaps the most ridiculous entry in the series to date, plagued with tonal imbalances and plot holes so big you could fit the QE2 into them with ease. But you know what? It’s probably the most fun you’ll have in the cinema all year.
The cast are all reunited, barring Paul Walker’s Brian and those publicised rifts between Vin Diesel and Dwayne Johnson are nowhere to be seen as everyone on screen appears to be having the time of their lives. New recruit Charlize Theron adds a level of class to proceedings as steely supervillain, Cipher. She’s a cracking addition to the series and her acting prowess oozes from every pore, despite the often clunky dialogue.
Of course, successful predecessors command bigger budgets for their follow-ups and Furious 8 is no exception. $250million was spent on creating this film and it shows. It’s a feast for the eyes with explosions, shiny cars, stunning locations and breath-taking special effects. The result is frankly exceptional. From Cuba to NYC and from Berlin to Russia (actually filmed in Iceland), the vistas are nicely filmed and beautifully executed.
The action sequences are also choreographed very well, but from a franchise built on these foundations, I’d expect nothing less. In particular, a street chase through New York City is edge of your seat stuff as literally hundreds of vehicles worm their way through its congested streets.
Negatives? Well, the story is awkward despite some decent twists, the aforementioned plot holes cause a few headaches for a series that prides itself on continuity and some of the comedic elements are poorly placed, but in this eighth outing, much of that can be forgiven. After all, what other franchise could survive eight films and still prove as exciting as its first?
Overall, Fast and Furious 8 is unashamedly ridiculous but who cares? With exceptional special effects and a great new adversary in Charlize Theron, the series once again manages to surpass expectation. Each film tries its best to outdo its predecessor and before long, we’ll no doubt be heading to Mars with the gang. I’m up for that. Are you?
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/04/13/spectacularly-dumb-fast-furious-8-review/
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated Russian Doll in TV
Jun 20, 2019
After the success of both Parks and Recreation and Orange is the New Black, I was intrigued by a new Netflix series created by Amy Poehler and Natasha Lyonne. Many fans know them as Leslie Knope and Nicky Nichols, and I’m sure we can all agree they’d make a very interesting duo.
Immediately after seeing the promos for Russian Doll, it was clear that this was going to be a very different tone to their previous work, and felt incredibly offbeat and quirky in nature. The series follows a woman named Nadia Vulvokov (Natasha Lyonne) as she finds herself in a time-loop after she is hit by a taxi and dies. Unfortunately for Nadia, she has to relive her 36th birthday party over and over again. It’s Groundhog Day on speed, which is an utterly delightful concept.
Whilst it may sound similar to Groundhog Day, it’s actually a very unique story. At first it’s easy to worry about the repetitive nature of the series, considering Nadia spends most of her time dying and reliving the same moment. Somehow it manages to stay funny, fresh and watchable throughout all eight episodes. The pacing is spot-on and keeps you guessing, as you follow Nadia’s journey into discovering why she’s found herself in this loop. On this journey, she’s joined by a number of characters including her ex-boyfriend John (Yul Vazquez), close family friend Ruth (Elizabeth Ashley) and a stranger named Alan (Charlie Barnett) who is closer to this situation than he originally realizes.
As the series progresses, we begin to delve into some pretty heavy stuff. Without giving away spoilers, the episodes start to question morality, ethics, the past, and the future. Each character is so well fleshed out and we want to know more about them. It’s easy to become sucked into the world of Russian Doll, and trust me when I say it’s a binge worthy series. You won’t want to stop until you have answers. It’s a show that knows how to balance comedy and drama effectively, delivering laugh out loud then heart-wrenching moments in quick succession. You feel sorry for various characters and loathe others, and it’s an incredibly well fleshed out series.
In terms of its visuals, Russian Doll is a gritty, psychedelic glimpse into the lives of various New York City residents. We see rich and poor, confident and timid, good and bad characters as they go about their daily lives. It’s fascinating to watch and each location has been crafted to give you more insight into the characters in this world. From quirky high-rise apartments to homeless shelters, this series shows it all. It’s the Big Apple in all its glory, whether that’s good or bad.
My advice would be to walk into Russian Doll knowing as little as possible, allowing yourself to approach the situation in a similar way to Nadia. It’s a comedy, thriller and mystery all rolled into one, with each genre complementing the other superbly. As far as Netflix Originals go, this is one of the strongest ones I’ve seen so far. Eight episodes is just enough to keep you entertained, whilst still giving enough backstory to make it a compelling tale. Just when you think you know a character, the tables are turned and your jaw is on the floor.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2019/03/07/tv-review-my-thoughts-on-russian-doll/
Immediately after seeing the promos for Russian Doll, it was clear that this was going to be a very different tone to their previous work, and felt incredibly offbeat and quirky in nature. The series follows a woman named Nadia Vulvokov (Natasha Lyonne) as she finds herself in a time-loop after she is hit by a taxi and dies. Unfortunately for Nadia, she has to relive her 36th birthday party over and over again. It’s Groundhog Day on speed, which is an utterly delightful concept.
Whilst it may sound similar to Groundhog Day, it’s actually a very unique story. At first it’s easy to worry about the repetitive nature of the series, considering Nadia spends most of her time dying and reliving the same moment. Somehow it manages to stay funny, fresh and watchable throughout all eight episodes. The pacing is spot-on and keeps you guessing, as you follow Nadia’s journey into discovering why she’s found herself in this loop. On this journey, she’s joined by a number of characters including her ex-boyfriend John (Yul Vazquez), close family friend Ruth (Elizabeth Ashley) and a stranger named Alan (Charlie Barnett) who is closer to this situation than he originally realizes.
As the series progresses, we begin to delve into some pretty heavy stuff. Without giving away spoilers, the episodes start to question morality, ethics, the past, and the future. Each character is so well fleshed out and we want to know more about them. It’s easy to become sucked into the world of Russian Doll, and trust me when I say it’s a binge worthy series. You won’t want to stop until you have answers. It’s a show that knows how to balance comedy and drama effectively, delivering laugh out loud then heart-wrenching moments in quick succession. You feel sorry for various characters and loathe others, and it’s an incredibly well fleshed out series.
In terms of its visuals, Russian Doll is a gritty, psychedelic glimpse into the lives of various New York City residents. We see rich and poor, confident and timid, good and bad characters as they go about their daily lives. It’s fascinating to watch and each location has been crafted to give you more insight into the characters in this world. From quirky high-rise apartments to homeless shelters, this series shows it all. It’s the Big Apple in all its glory, whether that’s good or bad.
My advice would be to walk into Russian Doll knowing as little as possible, allowing yourself to approach the situation in a similar way to Nadia. It’s a comedy, thriller and mystery all rolled into one, with each genre complementing the other superbly. As far as Netflix Originals go, this is one of the strongest ones I’ve seen so far. Eight episodes is just enough to keep you entertained, whilst still giving enough backstory to make it a compelling tale. Just when you think you know a character, the tables are turned and your jaw is on the floor.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2019/03/07/tv-review-my-thoughts-on-russian-doll/
Rachel King (13 KP) rated Sweet Chic: Stylish Treats to Dress Up for Any Occasion in Books
Feb 11, 2019
There are few pastimes that can compete with my love of books, but baking is one of them. The premise of this cookbook seemed rather unique, as it attempted to combine baking with fashion. There is even a delightful foreword by Isaac Mizrahi to further the theme. The author, Rachel Schifter Thebault, runs her own bakery, Tribeca Treats, out of New York City, and this is her debut cookbook.
The book opens with an explanation of Rachel's philosophy of baking. In the same way that a woman uses a little black dress as the foundation of her wardrobe, using accessories to dress it up or down, so too can a baker take a basic recipe for the base of a dessert and use simple alterations to create a complete "wardrobe" of desserts for any occasion. Chocolate chip cookie dough becomes white chocolate coconut cookies, oatmeal raisin cookies, snickerdoodles, or anything else a cook can dream up with a change in mix-ins. I used the oatmeal raisin cookie recipe and substituted in chocolate chips, cinnamon, and nutmeg, and they came out perfect!
The book is divided into three sections: Cookies, Cakes, and Confections. Each chapter in the three sections feature a basic recipe to build on, with names such as "The Crisp Oxford Shirt," "The A-Line Skirt," and "The Leather Jacket." Following the basic recipe of each chapter are several more example recipes of how to alter the base recipe to fit your needs. Vanilla Cake becomes Peanut Butter and Jelly Cupcakes, and Basic Tempered Chocolate becomes Cranberry Almond Bark.
The detail that Rachel goes into is also quite impressive. The beginning of the book teaches the basics of baked goods by reviewing all of the major ingredients used in baking - things like eggs, cocoa powder, and extracts - as well as essential equipment used, like a cake turntable. She then goes into the basic techniques of baking, simplifying them for even the most amateur of novices, and provides a pictorial guide for icing a cake and dipping things in chocolate. Each recipe is provided with very specific details on how to perform each step, as well as ideas at the end on how to dress it up further.
I loved this cookbook, and I would highly recommend it to anyone interested in baking, from the amateur to the experienced baker.
The book opens with an explanation of Rachel's philosophy of baking. In the same way that a woman uses a little black dress as the foundation of her wardrobe, using accessories to dress it up or down, so too can a baker take a basic recipe for the base of a dessert and use simple alterations to create a complete "wardrobe" of desserts for any occasion. Chocolate chip cookie dough becomes white chocolate coconut cookies, oatmeal raisin cookies, snickerdoodles, or anything else a cook can dream up with a change in mix-ins. I used the oatmeal raisin cookie recipe and substituted in chocolate chips, cinnamon, and nutmeg, and they came out perfect!
The book is divided into three sections: Cookies, Cakes, and Confections. Each chapter in the three sections feature a basic recipe to build on, with names such as "The Crisp Oxford Shirt," "The A-Line Skirt," and "The Leather Jacket." Following the basic recipe of each chapter are several more example recipes of how to alter the base recipe to fit your needs. Vanilla Cake becomes Peanut Butter and Jelly Cupcakes, and Basic Tempered Chocolate becomes Cranberry Almond Bark.
The detail that Rachel goes into is also quite impressive. The beginning of the book teaches the basics of baked goods by reviewing all of the major ingredients used in baking - things like eggs, cocoa powder, and extracts - as well as essential equipment used, like a cake turntable. She then goes into the basic techniques of baking, simplifying them for even the most amateur of novices, and provides a pictorial guide for icing a cake and dipping things in chocolate. Each recipe is provided with very specific details on how to perform each step, as well as ideas at the end on how to dress it up further.
I loved this cookbook, and I would highly recommend it to anyone interested in baking, from the amateur to the experienced baker.