Search
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2200 KP) rated Murder Off the Books in Books
Sep 15, 2023 (Updated Sep 15, 2023)
Grand Opening, Book Launch, and Murder
After months of work, Tess Harrow is ready to open her new bookstore and celebrate the launch of her latest bestselling thriller. However, her plans are changed when her mother, Bee, shows up unexpected. Trailing Bee is her latest boyfriend, Levi, who is a suspected serial killer preying on older women. Naturally, Tess doesn’t react well to that, but the next morning, Levi has been murdered. With as close to home as this hit, Tess can’t help but put her plans aside and start investigating. Can she figure out what happened?
Those who have read the first two books in the series will know what to expect here. We get a plot with some wackiness that fits this story and these characters perfectly. I did find some of the humor fell flat for me (might just be me), but I still laughed plenty. Yet the story comes together for a logical climax. The characters are all strong and entertaining as well. I did find a handful of political comments, which were superfluous to the story, threw me out of the story. The author does a good job of skirting spoilers for the previous books, which fans will know is a pretty big task. If you want a mystery filled with humor, you’ll be glad you picked this one up.
Those who have read the first two books in the series will know what to expect here. We get a plot with some wackiness that fits this story and these characters perfectly. I did find some of the humor fell flat for me (might just be me), but I still laughed plenty. Yet the story comes together for a logical climax. The characters are all strong and entertaining as well. I did find a handful of political comments, which were superfluous to the story, threw me out of the story. The author does a good job of skirting spoilers for the previous books, which fans will know is a pretty big task. If you want a mystery filled with humor, you’ll be glad you picked this one up.
The Life of Thomas More
Book
Peter Ackroyd's The Life of Thomas More is a masterful reconstruction of the life and imagination of...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Dictator (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Sacha Baron Cohen is undoubtedly one of the most daring names in comedy recently. A Cambridge graduate, the comedian-actor who has starred in fairly controversial films “Bruno” and “Borat” returns with director Larry Charles in 2012’s “The Dictator”. What can be said about Cohen, over other contemporary comedians, is his absolutely excellent ability to inhabit a character role – both in and out of the film he is portrayed in. “The Dictator” is no exception to this, yet it might be the controversy regarding the Academy Awards snub that is remembered more than this film.
Cohen plays the hilariously named Admiral General Aladeen, a megalomaniacal dictator of a fictional oil-rich North African country named Waadeya. While on his trip to the UN to deliver a speech, he is thrown from his oppressive dictatorial role into that of a lost New Yorker, desperate to get back to his position as dictator. He meets others along the way to help him, namely Aasif Mandvi and Anna Farris.
The film’s plot is about as formulaic and basic as a comedy can get, simply serving as a vehicle to push from one joke to the next. If you were expecting any sort of compelling narrative, with jokes sprinkled throughout, then this movie will not be enjoyable. It completely rides upon its humor, which is both beneficial and detrimental. If the film at least attached you to particular characters other than Admiral General Aladeen then it might benefit more from its gags featuring multiple characters.
The real highlight of the film is Cohen’s consistent portrayal of this outrageous ruler. He is funny throughout; and even though he might be a horrible person with villainous qualities, he has a childish heart underneath. It is that mixture of qualities that makes for some very hilarious moments.
The actual jokes and gags themselves hold their own throughout. As mentioned, the film plods forward from one gag or joke to the next, with story simply setting up the scenes. Most of the jokes were grin worthy, and a handful of them were laugh-out-loud hilarious. Yet, overall I would not call it the funniest movie of the year. There’s a bit of everything in the movie. Sacha Baron Cohen’s trademark shocking and offensive humor will please the college moviegoers and his more clever witty humor will amuse older watchers. Yet, even the offensive humor appears to be more tame than his other movies’ most memorable moments. The whole film also deals heavily with contemporary political issues – specifically the power-obsessed dictators which have filled the news as of late. Cohen’s character pokes fun at both the absurdity of people like Colonel Ghadafi as well as the hangers-on who surround such people.
Overall, the movie maintains a consistent level of humor throughout. While that level of humor may remain at simply grin-level comedy, it still has a handful of laugh-out-loud moments. It might not be the funniest movie of the year, but it is by no means bad at what it does. A less formulaic plot would have benefited the movie’s gags by allowing other comedians in the movie to shine more. As it stands, it is a movie centered completely on Cohen’s comedy and held up by it as well. Not completely unlike the self-centered nature of his character, Admiral General Aladeen.
Cohen plays the hilariously named Admiral General Aladeen, a megalomaniacal dictator of a fictional oil-rich North African country named Waadeya. While on his trip to the UN to deliver a speech, he is thrown from his oppressive dictatorial role into that of a lost New Yorker, desperate to get back to his position as dictator. He meets others along the way to help him, namely Aasif Mandvi and Anna Farris.
The film’s plot is about as formulaic and basic as a comedy can get, simply serving as a vehicle to push from one joke to the next. If you were expecting any sort of compelling narrative, with jokes sprinkled throughout, then this movie will not be enjoyable. It completely rides upon its humor, which is both beneficial and detrimental. If the film at least attached you to particular characters other than Admiral General Aladeen then it might benefit more from its gags featuring multiple characters.
The real highlight of the film is Cohen’s consistent portrayal of this outrageous ruler. He is funny throughout; and even though he might be a horrible person with villainous qualities, he has a childish heart underneath. It is that mixture of qualities that makes for some very hilarious moments.
The actual jokes and gags themselves hold their own throughout. As mentioned, the film plods forward from one gag or joke to the next, with story simply setting up the scenes. Most of the jokes were grin worthy, and a handful of them were laugh-out-loud hilarious. Yet, overall I would not call it the funniest movie of the year. There’s a bit of everything in the movie. Sacha Baron Cohen’s trademark shocking and offensive humor will please the college moviegoers and his more clever witty humor will amuse older watchers. Yet, even the offensive humor appears to be more tame than his other movies’ most memorable moments. The whole film also deals heavily with contemporary political issues – specifically the power-obsessed dictators which have filled the news as of late. Cohen’s character pokes fun at both the absurdity of people like Colonel Ghadafi as well as the hangers-on who surround such people.
Overall, the movie maintains a consistent level of humor throughout. While that level of humor may remain at simply grin-level comedy, it still has a handful of laugh-out-loud moments. It might not be the funniest movie of the year, but it is by no means bad at what it does. A less formulaic plot would have benefited the movie’s gags by allowing other comedians in the movie to shine more. As it stands, it is a movie centered completely on Cohen’s comedy and held up by it as well. Not completely unlike the self-centered nature of his character, Admiral General Aladeen.
SP
Solar Poems
Homero Aridjis and George McWhirter
Book
A book of cosmological surrealism in the tradition of Octavio Paz, Solar Poems is the first English...
Comics Art in China
John A. Lent and Ying Xu
Book
In the most comprehensive and authoritative source on this subject, Comics Art in China covers...
Citizen Radio
Podcast
Citizen Radio is hosted by Allison Kilkenny and Jamie Kilstein and is dedicated to covering the...
The Magic Christian
Book
As the novelist of Flash and Filigree and The Magic Christian and cowriter of Dr. Strangelove and...
The Awkward Thoughts of W. Kamau Bell
5.0
Rate It
Book
You may know W. Kamau Bell from his new, Emmy-nominated hit show on CNN, United Shades of America....
Essays Politics Humour Social Issues
TacoDave (3643 KP) rated Avengers: Endgame (2019) in Movies
Apr 26, 2019
Cast (3 more)
Humor
Story
Epic Scale
Almost a perfect movie
Contains spoilers, click to show
I just got out of Avengers: Endgame. This will have minor spoilers, but nothing related to the plot.
If you read my review of Captain Marvel, you'll see that I was underwhelmed because they didn't really explain her powers or weaknesses. Avengers: Endgame is exciting, funny, rich, and fantastic, full of great callbacks to earlier MCU movies and references to things we hadn't heard about it a while.
And yet... Here comes Captain Marvel. Again, her powers aren't explained. She doesn't help much until the last 20 minutes, and in those minutes she is seemingly invincible. Because we don't know what can hurt her, the stakes are minimal. It's an invincible woman punching an invincible man and there isn't really an expectation of anything.
But then she gets hit. And someone says "She has backup" or "She has friends" or something similar, and then we see almost every female character from the MCU come behind her to help.
I literally don't care if a superhero is male or female. It doesn't matter. But by forcing scene into the film, it is a reminder that Captain Marvel = Girl Power!!! and it pulled me right out of the film. It was an unnecessary political statement in the midst of a galatic battle. And I hated it.
I'm pro-woman. I'm pro-man. I think both sexes have unique attributes and abilities and features. But trying to say "The women have her back!" was, again, like I felt the directors sitting next to me in the theater, poking me in the ribs, saying "Look at the woke subtext!!!"
It isn't necessary. It is dumb. Let the heroes - all of them - have moments of strength and weakness. Imagine if there was a hero who suddenly called on the name of God and a big cross appeared behind them and the hand of God came down and helped them. That's the kind of heavy-handedness (pun intended) it felt like.
Go see the movie. It's great. But that one bit really soured the end of the movie for me, reminding me that it was a fictional story set in modern times. Why?
If you read my review of Captain Marvel, you'll see that I was underwhelmed because they didn't really explain her powers or weaknesses. Avengers: Endgame is exciting, funny, rich, and fantastic, full of great callbacks to earlier MCU movies and references to things we hadn't heard about it a while.
And yet... Here comes Captain Marvel. Again, her powers aren't explained. She doesn't help much until the last 20 minutes, and in those minutes she is seemingly invincible. Because we don't know what can hurt her, the stakes are minimal. It's an invincible woman punching an invincible man and there isn't really an expectation of anything.
But then she gets hit. And someone says "She has backup" or "She has friends" or something similar, and then we see almost every female character from the MCU come behind her to help.
I literally don't care if a superhero is male or female. It doesn't matter. But by forcing scene into the film, it is a reminder that Captain Marvel = Girl Power!!! and it pulled me right out of the film. It was an unnecessary political statement in the midst of a galatic battle. And I hated it.
I'm pro-woman. I'm pro-man. I think both sexes have unique attributes and abilities and features. But trying to say "The women have her back!" was, again, like I felt the directors sitting next to me in the theater, poking me in the ribs, saying "Look at the woke subtext!!!"
It isn't necessary. It is dumb. Let the heroes - all of them - have moments of strength and weakness. Imagine if there was a hero who suddenly called on the name of God and a big cross appeared behind them and the hand of God came down and helped them. That's the kind of heavy-handedness (pun intended) it felt like.
Go see the movie. It's great. But that one bit really soured the end of the movie for me, reminding me that it was a fictional story set in modern times. Why?