Search
Search results
Scanner Radio - iPad Edition
News and Social Networking
App
★★★★ The best selling Scanner Radio for the iPhone comes to the iPad! ★★★★ Listen to...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Assistant (2020) in Movies
May 24, 2020
Julia Garner's performance (1 more)
The tension that manages to be created through a portrayal of the mundane
The movie seems to have a lot of haters on IMDB (a rating at the time of writing of 5.9)... but I refuse to follow "the pack" on this one... I thought it was great. It manages to make the mundane incredibly tense. This is this first (semi-)fictional feature from documentary-maker Kitty Green.... and in my book she does a knock-out job.
We first meet Jane (Julia Garner) at 'God-knows-what-o-clock' in the morning as she arrives at her workplace - a New York film-production company. First to arrive every morning, she turns on the lights, turns on the screens, makes the pot of coffee and cleans off stains from her boss's couch. The stain isn't coffee. A lost gold bracelet is recovered.
For we are in a truly toxic working environment here. 'The boss' - clearly modelled on Harvey Weinstein - is a bullying tyrant who can reduce Jane and her two male assistants (Jon Orsini and Noah Robbins) to quivering wrecks. "WHAT THE F*** DID YOU SAY TO HER" barks the boss down the phone at Jane, after she has had a perfectly reasonable phone conversation with the estranged Mrs Boss.
The toxicity is pervasive though throughout Miram..., sorry...., 'the company'. Jane is almost invisible to her other co-workers who don't give her eye-contact even when she's talking to them and barely register her presence when sharing a lift.
But bullying and workplace toxicity is just part of this story. A steady stream of starlets arrive in the office, like meat deliveries to a butcher. In a chilling sequence, the photocopier churns out photos of beautiful actresses.... a paper-based equivalent of swiping-left or -right in the selection process. None of the "if you... I will" discussions are shown, but they don't need to be: the inference is clear.
Jane is smart, slim and pretty... but not in an obvious 'Hollywood way'. "You'll be OK..." says a co-worker "you're not his type".
But someone who distinctly is "his type" is Sienna (Kristine Froseth), a "very very young" aspiring waitress-come-actress from Boise, who suddenly and unexpectedly arrives as a "new assistant"... to be promptly put up in a swanky hotel room. It's time to act... and Jane approaches the company HR manager (Matthew Macfadyen)....
An old Spielberg trick is to increase tension by keeping the "monster" hidden from view: cue the tanker driver from "Duel" and (for most of the film) the shark from "Jaws". Here, the boss is felt only as a malevolent force and never seen on screen. It's an approach that works brilliantly, focusing the emotion on the effect he has on those flamed.
There is also recognition that these powerful people are also hugely intelligent and manipulative. Seeing that Jane is a valuable asset, the public berating is sometimes followed up with a private email apology.... dripping a few words of encouragement and praise like a few drops of Methadone to a drug-addict.
This is an excellent movie and thoughtfully and elegantly directed. Following a normal day in Jane's work life.... albeit a day where perhaps the penny finally drops... is immersive and engaging. And at only 88 minutes long, the movie never outstays its welcome.
The performances are first rate. Julia Garner is magnificent, and in a year where the Oscars will be "interesting", here's a good candidate for Best Actress I would suggest if not Best Picture. Garner's an actress I'm unfamiliar with: the only one of her previous flicks I've seen was Sin City 2.
Also oily and impressive is Matthew Macfadyen as the HR manager. There's also a sparse but well-used score by Tamar-kali.
The one area I found poor was in the sound design. It's clearly filmed in an office environment, rather than on a sound stage, and unfortunately the combination of the acoustics and the New York accents makes some of the dialogue really difficult to hear. An example is a discussion between two co-workers in an office kitchen, which was completely indecipherable for me.
Should I watch this? In my view, definitely, yes. It's chilling and an insight into the terrible ordeal that many professional women in the film industry, and other industries, have had to put up with before the "Me Too" lid was blown off (and many probably still do). The most telling line in the film? At the end of the "Thanks" in the end-titles: "All those who shared their experiences".
(See the full graphical review at One Mann's Movies here https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/05/24/one-manns-movies-film-review-the-assistant-2020/ . Thanks).
We first meet Jane (Julia Garner) at 'God-knows-what-o-clock' in the morning as she arrives at her workplace - a New York film-production company. First to arrive every morning, she turns on the lights, turns on the screens, makes the pot of coffee and cleans off stains from her boss's couch. The stain isn't coffee. A lost gold bracelet is recovered.
For we are in a truly toxic working environment here. 'The boss' - clearly modelled on Harvey Weinstein - is a bullying tyrant who can reduce Jane and her two male assistants (Jon Orsini and Noah Robbins) to quivering wrecks. "WHAT THE F*** DID YOU SAY TO HER" barks the boss down the phone at Jane, after she has had a perfectly reasonable phone conversation with the estranged Mrs Boss.
The toxicity is pervasive though throughout Miram..., sorry...., 'the company'. Jane is almost invisible to her other co-workers who don't give her eye-contact even when she's talking to them and barely register her presence when sharing a lift.
But bullying and workplace toxicity is just part of this story. A steady stream of starlets arrive in the office, like meat deliveries to a butcher. In a chilling sequence, the photocopier churns out photos of beautiful actresses.... a paper-based equivalent of swiping-left or -right in the selection process. None of the "if you... I will" discussions are shown, but they don't need to be: the inference is clear.
Jane is smart, slim and pretty... but not in an obvious 'Hollywood way'. "You'll be OK..." says a co-worker "you're not his type".
But someone who distinctly is "his type" is Sienna (Kristine Froseth), a "very very young" aspiring waitress-come-actress from Boise, who suddenly and unexpectedly arrives as a "new assistant"... to be promptly put up in a swanky hotel room. It's time to act... and Jane approaches the company HR manager (Matthew Macfadyen)....
An old Spielberg trick is to increase tension by keeping the "monster" hidden from view: cue the tanker driver from "Duel" and (for most of the film) the shark from "Jaws". Here, the boss is felt only as a malevolent force and never seen on screen. It's an approach that works brilliantly, focusing the emotion on the effect he has on those flamed.
There is also recognition that these powerful people are also hugely intelligent and manipulative. Seeing that Jane is a valuable asset, the public berating is sometimes followed up with a private email apology.... dripping a few words of encouragement and praise like a few drops of Methadone to a drug-addict.
This is an excellent movie and thoughtfully and elegantly directed. Following a normal day in Jane's work life.... albeit a day where perhaps the penny finally drops... is immersive and engaging. And at only 88 minutes long, the movie never outstays its welcome.
The performances are first rate. Julia Garner is magnificent, and in a year where the Oscars will be "interesting", here's a good candidate for Best Actress I would suggest if not Best Picture. Garner's an actress I'm unfamiliar with: the only one of her previous flicks I've seen was Sin City 2.
Also oily and impressive is Matthew Macfadyen as the HR manager. There's also a sparse but well-used score by Tamar-kali.
The one area I found poor was in the sound design. It's clearly filmed in an office environment, rather than on a sound stage, and unfortunately the combination of the acoustics and the New York accents makes some of the dialogue really difficult to hear. An example is a discussion between two co-workers in an office kitchen, which was completely indecipherable for me.
Should I watch this? In my view, definitely, yes. It's chilling and an insight into the terrible ordeal that many professional women in the film industry, and other industries, have had to put up with before the "Me Too" lid was blown off (and many probably still do). The most telling line in the film? At the end of the "Thanks" in the end-titles: "All those who shared their experiences".
(See the full graphical review at One Mann's Movies here https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/05/24/one-manns-movies-film-review-the-assistant-2020/ . Thanks).
Maribeth is an overworked mother of four-year-old twins: busy dividing her time as an editor of a magazine, mothering her twins, and taking care of her household. But Maribeth is so busy she doesn't even realize she's had a heart attack. Once out of the hospital, Maribeth is shocked to realize that her mother and husband seem clueless when it comes to taking care of her (and in many ways, the household). Maribeth feels overwhelmed and frustrated. Angry at her husband, Jason, she packs a bag and flees her husband and the twins, basically starting her life over in another city. Once there, Maribeth makes new friends and starts a search for her own birth mother. But obviously she has left behind unresolved issues in New York, such as her husband and family. (Minor issue, right?)
Wow, this is quite a book, and honestly, I'm still processing some of my feelings about it. I've previously read two of Forman's YA novels (both of which I enjoyed), but this was my first time reading her foray into general fiction. For me, this book really hit home, considering I am an overworked mother of four-year-old twins, who juggles work and motherhood much like Maribeth. Lucky for me, my spouse isn't clueless like Maribeth's husband (in fact: she's lovely). I also don't have a mother who is basically totally worthless; I mean, seriously, how pathetic is Maribeth's mom? Can these people not help the woman mere weeks after she's had a freaking heart attack? The whole episode where Meredith's kids have lice and her spouse and mother flake on her had me completely stressed out.
In fact, there were honestly times reading this book that I felt my own heart hurting, both from Forman's realistic description of Maribeth's cardiac attack, as well as from the stressful scenario she's in. Forman does an excellent job of conveying the pressure Maribeth is under and the frustration she feels in her life--overwhelmed, alone, trapped, desperate. What mother hasn't felt that way at some point, and truly, what mother hasn't wanted to run away at times?
My issue with this book is that Maribeth actually does run away. It's really hard to believe she'd actually leave her kids - not for a week or two - but for a good chunk of time (and taking a sizable chunk of her family's savings with her). But, while I really didn't agree with all of her choices (they didn't truly seem realistic), I have to admit, I found myself liking the book in spite of them. The life Maribeth creates for herself away from her family is unique and readable, and her world away is compelling. My only beef: should a woman really have to leave for her spouse to appreciate all she does? I am not totally sure I agree with the message.
Overall, this book is different. It's not your typical contemporary fiction, but it's certainly worth reading. 3.5 stars (and leaves you thinking).
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Edelweiss (thank you!); it is available everywhere as of 9/6.
<a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">My Blog</a> ~ <a href="https://www.facebook.com/justacatandabook/">Facebook</a>; ~ <a href="https://twitter.com/justacatandbook">Twitter</a>;
Wow, this is quite a book, and honestly, I'm still processing some of my feelings about it. I've previously read two of Forman's YA novels (both of which I enjoyed), but this was my first time reading her foray into general fiction. For me, this book really hit home, considering I am an overworked mother of four-year-old twins, who juggles work and motherhood much like Maribeth. Lucky for me, my spouse isn't clueless like Maribeth's husband (in fact: she's lovely). I also don't have a mother who is basically totally worthless; I mean, seriously, how pathetic is Maribeth's mom? Can these people not help the woman mere weeks after she's had a freaking heart attack? The whole episode where Meredith's kids have lice and her spouse and mother flake on her had me completely stressed out.
In fact, there were honestly times reading this book that I felt my own heart hurting, both from Forman's realistic description of Maribeth's cardiac attack, as well as from the stressful scenario she's in. Forman does an excellent job of conveying the pressure Maribeth is under and the frustration she feels in her life--overwhelmed, alone, trapped, desperate. What mother hasn't felt that way at some point, and truly, what mother hasn't wanted to run away at times?
My issue with this book is that Maribeth actually does run away. It's really hard to believe she'd actually leave her kids - not for a week or two - but for a good chunk of time (and taking a sizable chunk of her family's savings with her). But, while I really didn't agree with all of her choices (they didn't truly seem realistic), I have to admit, I found myself liking the book in spite of them. The life Maribeth creates for herself away from her family is unique and readable, and her world away is compelling. My only beef: should a woman really have to leave for her spouse to appreciate all she does? I am not totally sure I agree with the message.
Overall, this book is different. It's not your typical contemporary fiction, but it's certainly worth reading. 3.5 stars (and leaves you thinking).
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Edelweiss (thank you!); it is available everywhere as of 9/6.
<a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">My Blog</a> ~ <a href="https://www.facebook.com/justacatandabook/">Facebook</a>; ~ <a href="https://twitter.com/justacatandbook">Twitter</a>;
Emma Montague is an Englishwoman living in the U.S. She left behind her parents as soon as she could: feeling trapped by her mother's snobbery and outgoing personality, so different from Emma's quiet and introverted self. But life in the high-powered banking world in New York City isn't exactly for Emma either. She finds everyone so false: women who only care about clothes and finding a man, too many nights at bars, and pressure to use dating apps. Her one long-term relationship winds up nowhere, and so Emma finds herself on the move again: this time to the beach town of Westport, CT. She takes a break from banking and finds herself renting a house in this seaside town. Emma quickly finds herself falling for landlord, Dominic, a bartender in Westport. A father to six-year-old Jesse, Dominic seems to be the opposite of Emma in every way. Emma isn't sure that the two could ever really be together, but she can't seem to stop her heart from falling for Dominic. Are they meant to be?
Ugh, this book. Some of it was enjoyable, and yet so much of it was just so damn frustrating. First of all, the entire thing seemed like it was based on just a mountain of stereotypes and tropes. Emma has built-in stereotypes and preconceived notions about Dominic (a bartender can't be anything like a banker, apparently, or share any of the same interests). Every woman in the banking world is a vapid idiot except Emma. All New Yorkers just want to get married and move to the suburbs. And so on and so on. It gets really old after a while.
Then, the whole different worlds thing: Emma versus Dom style. As a moving forward plot device, it just seemed incredibly forced. I understand that the "we're from two different worlds" idea still exists today, but really? It's that hard to overcome that a woman considers just dropping the only guy who has ever made her happy, because he seems beneath her? It would be different if the book put forth some real reasons that their class differences threatened their relationship, but it really doesn't. It's all half developed and mostly based on Emma's speculation.
That brings me to Emma. I wanted to like Emma. I could see a lot of Emma in myself - a quiet introvert who doesn't take well to people, who needs time to warm up. I understand that. But oh my gosh, she drove me crazy. So wishy washy! So indecisive! So unable to just follow her *own* thoughts and feelings. She drove me insane. It's very hard to fully enjoy a novel where you often want to wring the neck of the main character.
All of that, truly, I could have probably forgiven if Green hadn't taken the plot off the deep end near the end of the novel. I was so irritated and so upset: I went through all of the above for THIS? I won't spoil it, but let's just say I didn't sign up for a Nicholas Sparks novel. Any of the novel's redeeming qualities (a cute cat, a somewhat cute kid, Emma's dad) went out the window.
Overall, I just didn't enjoy this one. Too much of the plot devices irritated me, and then-BOOM-the actual plot drove me over the edge.
Ugh, this book. Some of it was enjoyable, and yet so much of it was just so damn frustrating. First of all, the entire thing seemed like it was based on just a mountain of stereotypes and tropes. Emma has built-in stereotypes and preconceived notions about Dominic (a bartender can't be anything like a banker, apparently, or share any of the same interests). Every woman in the banking world is a vapid idiot except Emma. All New Yorkers just want to get married and move to the suburbs. And so on and so on. It gets really old after a while.
Then, the whole different worlds thing: Emma versus Dom style. As a moving forward plot device, it just seemed incredibly forced. I understand that the "we're from two different worlds" idea still exists today, but really? It's that hard to overcome that a woman considers just dropping the only guy who has ever made her happy, because he seems beneath her? It would be different if the book put forth some real reasons that their class differences threatened their relationship, but it really doesn't. It's all half developed and mostly based on Emma's speculation.
That brings me to Emma. I wanted to like Emma. I could see a lot of Emma in myself - a quiet introvert who doesn't take well to people, who needs time to warm up. I understand that. But oh my gosh, she drove me crazy. So wishy washy! So indecisive! So unable to just follow her *own* thoughts and feelings. She drove me insane. It's very hard to fully enjoy a novel where you often want to wring the neck of the main character.
All of that, truly, I could have probably forgiven if Green hadn't taken the plot off the deep end near the end of the novel. I was so irritated and so upset: I went through all of the above for THIS? I won't spoil it, but let's just say I didn't sign up for a Nicholas Sparks novel. Any of the novel's redeeming qualities (a cute cat, a somewhat cute kid, Emma's dad) went out the window.
Overall, I just didn't enjoy this one. Too much of the plot devices irritated me, and then-BOOM-the actual plot drove me over the edge.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated An Anonymous Girl in Books
Mar 20, 2019
Fun, twisty thriller
Jessica Farris, age twenty-eight, is a makeup artist for Beauty Buzz. She lugs her giant makeup kit all around New York City doing makeup for other people who are living their dreams. As for Jess, she's heavily focused on money, as her parents are stressed trying to provide all the medical support they can for her disabled sister, Becky. Even worse, her Dad is about to lose his job. So when she sees one of her clients get a text where she could enroll in a psychology study, answer a few questions, and make some quick bucks, it sounds ideal. But the questions rapidly grow more intense and soon Jess is asked back for further questions and extra sessions. She then meets the doctor behind the study, Dr. Shields, and becomes caught her manipulative web of experimentation--and obsession.
So I liked THE WIFE BETWEEN US but didn't *love* it like so many people did, and hence I wasn't entirely sure about reading this one. I definitely enjoyed AN ANONYMOUS GIRL more. This author duo is certainly adept at writing very readable, very wild books that are hard to put down. I found myself stealing away during the chaos of Christmas Eve to finish this book.
The chapters alternate between Jess and Dr. Shields. Overall, Jess is just your average likeable gal who gets in over her head. I didn't adore her or anything; sometimes she irritated me a bit, but she was fine. My biggest pet peeve with this entire book was the fact that Dr. Shields chapters were written almost entirely in passive voice. This was obviously done as a literary device and part of her character, but ugh! After a while, I could barely take it. I felt like I was at work, reading all of my colleague's proposal sections, and I felt as if I was mentally correcting each sentence as I read it. Not fun.
But, I digress. It quickly becomes apparent that we cannot really trust anything that's happening in this one, which is fun. You know there has to be more to everyone's stories, and the book constantly had me guessing. There are a lot of nice twists thrown in, and unlike the authors' previous book, I didn't guess the main one right away, so I really enjoyed reading the story. It did stress me out a bit, though - sheesh! It's very crazy, very unbelievable (but in a good way), often quite creepy, but an enjoyable ride.
Overall, this is a fun, twisty thriller that lets you just suspend disbelief and enjoy the ride. It's different, a bit spooky, and interesting.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review (thank you!).
So I liked THE WIFE BETWEEN US but didn't *love* it like so many people did, and hence I wasn't entirely sure about reading this one. I definitely enjoyed AN ANONYMOUS GIRL more. This author duo is certainly adept at writing very readable, very wild books that are hard to put down. I found myself stealing away during the chaos of Christmas Eve to finish this book.
The chapters alternate between Jess and Dr. Shields. Overall, Jess is just your average likeable gal who gets in over her head. I didn't adore her or anything; sometimes she irritated me a bit, but she was fine. My biggest pet peeve with this entire book was the fact that Dr. Shields chapters were written almost entirely in passive voice. This was obviously done as a literary device and part of her character, but ugh! After a while, I could barely take it. I felt like I was at work, reading all of my colleague's proposal sections, and I felt as if I was mentally correcting each sentence as I read it. Not fun.
But, I digress. It quickly becomes apparent that we cannot really trust anything that's happening in this one, which is fun. You know there has to be more to everyone's stories, and the book constantly had me guessing. There are a lot of nice twists thrown in, and unlike the authors' previous book, I didn't guess the main one right away, so I really enjoyed reading the story. It did stress me out a bit, though - sheesh! It's very crazy, very unbelievable (but in a good way), often quite creepy, but an enjoyable ride.
Overall, this is a fun, twisty thriller that lets you just suspend disbelief and enjoy the ride. It's different, a bit spooky, and interesting.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review (thank you!).
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Tower Heist (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
In the movie Tower Heist, the employees of The Tower, a ritzy high-rise condominium in New York City, fall victim to a Ponzi scheme and lose their 401(k). Now normally there wouldn’t be anything they could do about it but Arthur Shaw (Alan Alda), the one behind the Ponzi scheme, is one of the residents at The Tower.
Josh Kovacs (Ben Stiller), former general anager of The Tower, has an idea to steal the defrauded employees’ money back, but he needs help with his grand scheme. Josh brings in his brother-in-law Cole Howard (Casey Affleck) and Rick Malloy (Michael Pena). Both are former employees and as such have a score to settle. Josh also enlists the help of Odessa Montero (Gabourey Sidibe) who is currently a maid at the Tower and Chase Fitzhugh (Matthew Broderick), a former resident.
While eager to do what they believe is right, the group does not have a background in crime, so Josh brings in Slide (Eddie Murphy), a thief from his neighborhood that he has known since childhood. Will this band of merry men and woman be successful and save the day Robin Hood-style or will they run afoul of FBI Agent Claire Denham (Tea Leoni)?
The film has a very entertaining story that unfolds beautifully and a better cast would be impossible to find. Now with that said, there were some parts in the movie that were distracting to me because I could not suspend my disbelief that far, however, I can’t say what they are due to the fact that I do not want to spoil any scenes for you.
Eddie Murphy did an amazing job of keeping his character realistic and at the same time unbelievably funny. Without a doubt every scene Murphy is in is golden. Not only did Alan Alda’s character get arrested for stealing people’s money but he almost stole the show. And even though every fiber of my being wanted to dislike his character, who is an arrogant, self-righteous, demeaning jerk; Alda portrayed him in such a way that I was actually sort of hoping that the character would get away with it. Now I know all you Benheads out there are asking “What about Ben Stiller?” You all will be happy to know that he was great, he was definitely the humorous glue that held the movie together. Matthew Broderick, Michael Pena and Casey Affleck were all very entertaining though at times Casey gets drowned out by the others. Last but certainly not least Gabourey Sidibe and Tea Leoni were both great and incredibly funny however they did not get anywhere near as much screen time as I would have liked.
Josh Kovacs (Ben Stiller), former general anager of The Tower, has an idea to steal the defrauded employees’ money back, but he needs help with his grand scheme. Josh brings in his brother-in-law Cole Howard (Casey Affleck) and Rick Malloy (Michael Pena). Both are former employees and as such have a score to settle. Josh also enlists the help of Odessa Montero (Gabourey Sidibe) who is currently a maid at the Tower and Chase Fitzhugh (Matthew Broderick), a former resident.
While eager to do what they believe is right, the group does not have a background in crime, so Josh brings in Slide (Eddie Murphy), a thief from his neighborhood that he has known since childhood. Will this band of merry men and woman be successful and save the day Robin Hood-style or will they run afoul of FBI Agent Claire Denham (Tea Leoni)?
The film has a very entertaining story that unfolds beautifully and a better cast would be impossible to find. Now with that said, there were some parts in the movie that were distracting to me because I could not suspend my disbelief that far, however, I can’t say what they are due to the fact that I do not want to spoil any scenes for you.
Eddie Murphy did an amazing job of keeping his character realistic and at the same time unbelievably funny. Without a doubt every scene Murphy is in is golden. Not only did Alan Alda’s character get arrested for stealing people’s money but he almost stole the show. And even though every fiber of my being wanted to dislike his character, who is an arrogant, self-righteous, demeaning jerk; Alda portrayed him in such a way that I was actually sort of hoping that the character would get away with it. Now I know all you Benheads out there are asking “What about Ben Stiller?” You all will be happy to know that he was great, he was definitely the humorous glue that held the movie together. Matthew Broderick, Michael Pena and Casey Affleck were all very entertaining though at times Casey gets drowned out by the others. Last but certainly not least Gabourey Sidibe and Tea Leoni were both great and incredibly funny however they did not get anywhere near as much screen time as I would have liked.
CHOMP by Christoph Niemann
Book and Education
App
"Editor´s Choice Award" by Children´s Technology Review for Excellence in Design! wired.com:...
Lonely Planet Ethiopia, Djibouti & Somaliland
Lonely Planet, Stuart Butler, Tim Bewer and Jean-Bernard Carillet
Book
Lonely Planet: The world's leading travel guide publisher Lonely Planet Ethiopia, Djibouti &...
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Valley of the Dolls in Books
May 13, 2021
A classic that doesn't stand the test of time
This is the twenty-second book in my #atozchallenge! I'm challenging myself to read a book from my shelves that starts with each letter of the alphabet. Let's clear those shelves and delve into that backlist!
This classic novel had been sitting on my shelves for a while, so I decided to tackle it as a part of my challenge. I still have mixed feelings about it, even writing this review a month or so later. Honestly, this book is really depressing. The beginning was interesting, and I thought I would find it very engaging, but eventually the women became reduced to annoying drug addicts whose lives revolved around their looks and men. I wasn't sure what the message was, but it wasn't one I cared for.
VALLEY OF THE DOLLS centers on three women: Anne, a young woman from a tiny town who escapes and comes to New York City; Jennifer, a beautiful woman who parlays that beauty into an acting career; and Neely, a young woman with a lovely voice who dreams of an acting and singing career. Anne finds work at a talent agency, working for Henry Bellamy, which is how she meets Jennifer. Neely is her young neighbor. At first, all three women are poor and dreaming of a better life. Over the course of the book, their fortunes change, but they do not necessarily become happier.
I was sort of horrified if this was what life was like for the rich and famous in the 40s to the 60s. So much drinking, drugs, and partying. There was such intense focus on looks--if this book was supposed to be advanced for the era, it's certainly not now! The men came across terribly, but the women were not much better. Even if they were using their bodies for power, everything just felt icky. Anne is supposed to be the model of an independent woman, as she has her own money, but she's not... I wanted to like her, but it was hard.
Overall, while I certainly found parts of this book fascinating, I cannot say I always enjoyed it. It definitely provides great historical insight into a particular era, though. I'm glad I read it--it's always interesting to see what was a classic and why at certain times. But did I like the characters and plot? Not really. 2 stars for plot, rounded to 3 stars for historical significance. (Oh and major trigger warning for the use of the "f" word in relation to queer people. Part of the times, I realize, but it became very disconcerting after a while for me.)
This classic novel had been sitting on my shelves for a while, so I decided to tackle it as a part of my challenge. I still have mixed feelings about it, even writing this review a month or so later. Honestly, this book is really depressing. The beginning was interesting, and I thought I would find it very engaging, but eventually the women became reduced to annoying drug addicts whose lives revolved around their looks and men. I wasn't sure what the message was, but it wasn't one I cared for.
VALLEY OF THE DOLLS centers on three women: Anne, a young woman from a tiny town who escapes and comes to New York City; Jennifer, a beautiful woman who parlays that beauty into an acting career; and Neely, a young woman with a lovely voice who dreams of an acting and singing career. Anne finds work at a talent agency, working for Henry Bellamy, which is how she meets Jennifer. Neely is her young neighbor. At first, all three women are poor and dreaming of a better life. Over the course of the book, their fortunes change, but they do not necessarily become happier.
I was sort of horrified if this was what life was like for the rich and famous in the 40s to the 60s. So much drinking, drugs, and partying. There was such intense focus on looks--if this book was supposed to be advanced for the era, it's certainly not now! The men came across terribly, but the women were not much better. Even if they were using their bodies for power, everything just felt icky. Anne is supposed to be the model of an independent woman, as she has her own money, but she's not... I wanted to like her, but it was hard.
Overall, while I certainly found parts of this book fascinating, I cannot say I always enjoyed it. It definitely provides great historical insight into a particular era, though. I'm glad I read it--it's always interesting to see what was a classic and why at certain times. But did I like the characters and plot? Not really. 2 stars for plot, rounded to 3 stars for historical significance. (Oh and major trigger warning for the use of the "f" word in relation to queer people. Part of the times, I realize, but it became very disconcerting after a while for me.)
Skyscanner: Uçak bileti, otel
Travel
App
Skyscanner is an all-in-one travel app with flights, hotels and car rentals, all in one place....