Search
BookInspector (124 KP) rated The Art of Death in Books
Jul 1, 2021
The main character in this novel is DI Grace Archer, she is a leading investigator in a series of very bizarre and very cruel murders. There is a very wide variety of diverse and intriguing characters in this novel, and this book is told from multiple perspectives, including the victims and the killer as well. DI Archer is a very complex character, her childhood had its horrors, and she is an outsider in her new police station. But I really admired her strength, sharp mind and complexity. This book allows me to delve deeper into the characters, especially the victims, I think all the victims were suffering from one thing or another, and it was interesting to read about their lives.
The narrative of this book always changes, from the investigation it jumps to new abductions, to personal character’s lives. All these things made the book very fast-paced and enjoyable for me. Even though it is a debut novel, I felt like this book is a part of a series because of the way the author incorporated the details from DI Archer’s past. I felt like I missed the investigations that happened in the past. 😀 I found the plot very multi-dimensional, absorbing and creepy. The topics discussed in this book were grief and loss, traumatic experiences, workplace discrimination, many mental health issues, drug use, domestic and other violence and many many more.
The writing style is very easy to read and enjoyable, but at the same time, it felt unusual, different. (I can’t describe how though 😀 ) The author has experience in cybersecurity, and it was interesting to see, how he highlights the mistakes people do in their daily lives when it comes to our social media and online presence. There are a lot of gory murder scenes in this book, so it might not be suitable for sensitive readers. The atmosphere and the setting of the novel constantly change, depending on the perspective, and I really enjoyed it. The chapters are pretty short, and the whole novel was a page-turner for me. I really loved the ending, it left me very intrigued, and I can’t wait for another book. 🙂
So, to conclude, it is a very rich novel, full of layered and diverse characters as well as a plot that is fast-paced and always changing. I really enjoyed this book, it highlights so many various topics and social issues, you just need to find it.
The narrative of this book always changes, from the investigation it jumps to new abductions, to personal character’s lives. All these things made the book very fast-paced and enjoyable for me. Even though it is a debut novel, I felt like this book is a part of a series because of the way the author incorporated the details from DI Archer’s past. I felt like I missed the investigations that happened in the past. 😀 I found the plot very multi-dimensional, absorbing and creepy. The topics discussed in this book were grief and loss, traumatic experiences, workplace discrimination, many mental health issues, drug use, domestic and other violence and many many more.
The writing style is very easy to read and enjoyable, but at the same time, it felt unusual, different. (I can’t describe how though 😀 ) The author has experience in cybersecurity, and it was interesting to see, how he highlights the mistakes people do in their daily lives when it comes to our social media and online presence. There are a lot of gory murder scenes in this book, so it might not be suitable for sensitive readers. The atmosphere and the setting of the novel constantly change, depending on the perspective, and I really enjoyed it. The chapters are pretty short, and the whole novel was a page-turner for me. I really loved the ending, it left me very intrigued, and I can’t wait for another book. 🙂
So, to conclude, it is a very rich novel, full of layered and diverse characters as well as a plot that is fast-paced and always changing. I really enjoyed this book, it highlights so many various topics and social issues, you just need to find it.
BookInspector (124 KP) rated Big Sister in Books
Sep 24, 2020
More book reviews at https://bbookinspector.wordpress.com
This book was my first encounter with this author’s writing, but from what I have seen so far, I will be definitely checking out more of Gunnar’s work.
In the beginning, I was a little bit confused, because for some reason I thought Varg was a woman. 😀 (Have no idea why…) So, yes, Varg is the protagonist in this story, and a very complex one, to be honest. He is over sixty and still risking his life for his cases, that is pretty amusing to me. 🙂 I really liked him as a personality, and I think he got away with his nosiness pretty well. I liked that Varg is very realistic, he is very clever, but at the same time, he doesn’t try to pose as some kind of super detective. I really liked all the characters which the author chose for this story, they made the story really interesting and rich.
The narrative was told from a single perspective, but for me, it was enough. The author had my curiosity growing with every chapter, as he cleverly delivered the clues and completely unexpected twists and turns throughout the pages. Staalesen has a great eye for a detail, and the descriptions of the settings were very visual and well delivered. I really enjoyed the topics which author addressed, such as family relationships; divorce and it’s consequences; rape and how it affects people; depression and what it can lead to; and many more. Even though this book is not very big, it touches and addresses a lot of important topics.
I really enjoyed the writing style of this novel, Staalesen’s writing is very creative, detailed and compact. I admire, how he can put so much into his words. For me, this book was very pleasant to read, except for the names of characters and places. I had a bit of a difficulty sorting out the characters, because their names didn’t stay in my head, and I skipped most of the place’s names because it was difficult for me to pronounce them. I loved the short chapters, which this book had to offer, and the whole book was a pretty quick read. Even though the ending concluded the story very nicely and with another surprise, it still left some cliffhangers, which will be bothering me until the next book. 😀
So, to conclude, it is very fast paced and suspenseful novel, filled with very intriguing characters and very surprising twists and turns, and I do strongly recommend to give this book a try. Enjoy the sun and a good book! 😉
This book was my first encounter with this author’s writing, but from what I have seen so far, I will be definitely checking out more of Gunnar’s work.
In the beginning, I was a little bit confused, because for some reason I thought Varg was a woman. 😀 (Have no idea why…) So, yes, Varg is the protagonist in this story, and a very complex one, to be honest. He is over sixty and still risking his life for his cases, that is pretty amusing to me. 🙂 I really liked him as a personality, and I think he got away with his nosiness pretty well. I liked that Varg is very realistic, he is very clever, but at the same time, he doesn’t try to pose as some kind of super detective. I really liked all the characters which the author chose for this story, they made the story really interesting and rich.
The narrative was told from a single perspective, but for me, it was enough. The author had my curiosity growing with every chapter, as he cleverly delivered the clues and completely unexpected twists and turns throughout the pages. Staalesen has a great eye for a detail, and the descriptions of the settings were very visual and well delivered. I really enjoyed the topics which author addressed, such as family relationships; divorce and it’s consequences; rape and how it affects people; depression and what it can lead to; and many more. Even though this book is not very big, it touches and addresses a lot of important topics.
I really enjoyed the writing style of this novel, Staalesen’s writing is very creative, detailed and compact. I admire, how he can put so much into his words. For me, this book was very pleasant to read, except for the names of characters and places. I had a bit of a difficulty sorting out the characters, because their names didn’t stay in my head, and I skipped most of the place’s names because it was difficult for me to pronounce them. I loved the short chapters, which this book had to offer, and the whole book was a pretty quick read. Even though the ending concluded the story very nicely and with another surprise, it still left some cliffhangers, which will be bothering me until the next book. 😀
So, to conclude, it is very fast paced and suspenseful novel, filled with very intriguing characters and very surprising twists and turns, and I do strongly recommend to give this book a try. Enjoy the sun and a good book! 😉
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies
Oct 8, 2019 (Updated Oct 8, 2019)
Hmm...
A couple of years ago Joaquin Phoenix starred in a movie called You Were Never Really Here. It was directed by Lynne Ramsay and from the trailers looked like it could be something pretty great. Unfortunately when I saw the movie, I felt that it was nothing more than a poor man's Taxi Driver, with the same regurgitated ideas and not much more to say.
Then I saw 2019's Joker.
Let's forget about the incredibly engaging performances and solid technical filmmaking elements in this movie for a minute. And let's forget all of the baggage and background lore that comes with the huge pop culture characters of the Joker, the Wayne family and Gotham City.
Instead, ask yourself this; if this you removed all of the DC elements from this movie, for example Gotham is just NYC, Thomas Wayne is just a rich powerful man running for office and Arthur Fleck is just a random loner with a screw loose, would this movie be remarkable in any way?
Like, overall I enjoyed this movie, but I enjoyed it because it was a version of my favourite fictional character that I hadn't seen before, but it wasn't a story that I haven't seen before outside of a Joker story. I liked the movie because it reminded me HEAVILY of Taxi Driver, which is one of my favourite movies of all time, but I still prefer Taxi Driver.
I can't give the movie a bad review because it was clearly well made by a bunch of very talented people and I did enjoy my time with it, but after reading the intensely positive reviews this thing got at the film festivals I was looking for something more than a story I have seen before done better decades ago.
At the same time though, I am definitely going to need a second viewing. I have hardly stopped thinking and talking about the movie since I seen it and it has led to me writing my first review on this website in 5 months, so there is something to be said about that element of it.
My rating may change after a second viewing, but for now this is an enjoyable retread of a story we have seen before told several times over. Just because you throw a popular comic book character's name over the top of it, is that enough to make it more worthwhile than all of the other Taxi Driver homages we have gotten over the years?
Then I saw 2019's Joker.
Let's forget about the incredibly engaging performances and solid technical filmmaking elements in this movie for a minute. And let's forget all of the baggage and background lore that comes with the huge pop culture characters of the Joker, the Wayne family and Gotham City.
Instead, ask yourself this; if this you removed all of the DC elements from this movie, for example Gotham is just NYC, Thomas Wayne is just a rich powerful man running for office and Arthur Fleck is just a random loner with a screw loose, would this movie be remarkable in any way?
Like, overall I enjoyed this movie, but I enjoyed it because it was a version of my favourite fictional character that I hadn't seen before, but it wasn't a story that I haven't seen before outside of a Joker story. I liked the movie because it reminded me HEAVILY of Taxi Driver, which is one of my favourite movies of all time, but I still prefer Taxi Driver.
I can't give the movie a bad review because it was clearly well made by a bunch of very talented people and I did enjoy my time with it, but after reading the intensely positive reviews this thing got at the film festivals I was looking for something more than a story I have seen before done better decades ago.
At the same time though, I am definitely going to need a second viewing. I have hardly stopped thinking and talking about the movie since I seen it and it has led to me writing my first review on this website in 5 months, so there is something to be said about that element of it.
My rating may change after a second viewing, but for now this is an enjoyable retread of a story we have seen before told several times over. Just because you throw a popular comic book character's name over the top of it, is that enough to make it more worthwhile than all of the other Taxi Driver homages we have gotten over the years?
American Star. Jackie Collins
6.0
Rate It
Book
Featuring a brand new introduction from bestselling author, Isabelle Broom, talking about what...
Mothergamer (1546 KP) rated The Green Hornet (2011) in Movies
Apr 3, 2019
I don't even have the words for how infuriated I am right now with The Green Hornet film. There's a small part of me that wishes I could just throw a brick at Seth Rogen's crotch right now, because he absolutely deserves it along with director Michael Gondry. That's right, the director of the film Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind which to me was a good movie is responsible for this equally terrible movie.
I do feel much of the blame lies with the fact that Seth Rogen co-wrote this screenplay and he claimed that he was so glad he didn't screw up one of his favorite childhood heroes. Seth, Seth, Seth....tsk tsk, someone's a dirty rotten liar Seth. Why must you constantly lie to us Seth? The truth is you messed up completely! In the original radio show, comics, and T.V. Show Britt Reid wasn't a moron. He was a smart successful newspaper publisher, he was confident, and he could fight well alongside his equally confident sidekick Kato. I loved the T.V. show and I loved the comic. I loved watching The Green Hornet on Kung Fu Saturday when I was a kid. That was the highlight of my Saturday. I would watch a couple of episodes of The Green Hornet and then watch the featured kung fu film. That's a sacred childhood memory and you, Seth Rogen along with your director have pissed all over it.
Not only did you make Britt Reid a total jerk, you made him stupid too! He loosely based Britt Reid on Paris Hilton? Are you kidding me with this nonsense?
Seth Rogen's Britt Reid is a spoiled rich brat who shows no interest in running the newspaper, but he instead becomes buddies with Kato his mechanic and coffee maker. I felt bad for Jay Chou because he's no Bruce Lee, but he did alright in spite of Seth Rogen constantly hyperventilating and shouting in every scene. He tried, he really did. Cameron Diaz's role as Reid's secretary Lenore Case is completely useless. She's basically camera filler with a great smile.
Of course, The Green Hornet has to have a villain and that is Christoph Waltz (Oscar winner from Inglorious Basterds) as Chudnofsky, but there is no depth to the character which proves bad writing is bad writing. Now I like action scenes as much as the next person, but it's as if Seth Rogen got bored and just added as much action as possible as filler rather than having an actual plot that tells the story. There's also so much pointless dialogue, watching this train wreck of a film is like being stuck in a dentist's chair having a root canal with no anesthesia. Yes, it's that damn bad. Not even the overpriced 3-D could save this film. That is just a gimmick to get more money out of people and this film proved that point real quick.
There is so much that could have been done to make this film version of the T.V. show great, but none of it was done. Instead, we get a film that is so terrible with no plot at all, a fake Britt Reid (I don't care what you say Rogen, that character you played was NOT Britt Reid! You are a liar sir!), a subdued Kato that got overshadowed by the crazy rich brat, a useless vapid secretary, and a villain that's about as threatening as a labradoodle. Seth Rogen and Michale Gondry you should be ashamed and embarrassed that your names are on this piece of trash.
Don't waste your money on this folks and certainly don't waste it on 3-D. The original is better and I'm sure that Mr. Rogen's going to have several bricks thrown at his crotch for even writing this awful screenplay. Just please, do us a favor and go sit in the corner with M. Night Shyamalan and quit making movies, because you really screwed the pooch on this one pal.
I do feel much of the blame lies with the fact that Seth Rogen co-wrote this screenplay and he claimed that he was so glad he didn't screw up one of his favorite childhood heroes. Seth, Seth, Seth....tsk tsk, someone's a dirty rotten liar Seth. Why must you constantly lie to us Seth? The truth is you messed up completely! In the original radio show, comics, and T.V. Show Britt Reid wasn't a moron. He was a smart successful newspaper publisher, he was confident, and he could fight well alongside his equally confident sidekick Kato. I loved the T.V. show and I loved the comic. I loved watching The Green Hornet on Kung Fu Saturday when I was a kid. That was the highlight of my Saturday. I would watch a couple of episodes of The Green Hornet and then watch the featured kung fu film. That's a sacred childhood memory and you, Seth Rogen along with your director have pissed all over it.
Not only did you make Britt Reid a total jerk, you made him stupid too! He loosely based Britt Reid on Paris Hilton? Are you kidding me with this nonsense?
Seth Rogen's Britt Reid is a spoiled rich brat who shows no interest in running the newspaper, but he instead becomes buddies with Kato his mechanic and coffee maker. I felt bad for Jay Chou because he's no Bruce Lee, but he did alright in spite of Seth Rogen constantly hyperventilating and shouting in every scene. He tried, he really did. Cameron Diaz's role as Reid's secretary Lenore Case is completely useless. She's basically camera filler with a great smile.
Of course, The Green Hornet has to have a villain and that is Christoph Waltz (Oscar winner from Inglorious Basterds) as Chudnofsky, but there is no depth to the character which proves bad writing is bad writing. Now I like action scenes as much as the next person, but it's as if Seth Rogen got bored and just added as much action as possible as filler rather than having an actual plot that tells the story. There's also so much pointless dialogue, watching this train wreck of a film is like being stuck in a dentist's chair having a root canal with no anesthesia. Yes, it's that damn bad. Not even the overpriced 3-D could save this film. That is just a gimmick to get more money out of people and this film proved that point real quick.
There is so much that could have been done to make this film version of the T.V. show great, but none of it was done. Instead, we get a film that is so terrible with no plot at all, a fake Britt Reid (I don't care what you say Rogen, that character you played was NOT Britt Reid! You are a liar sir!), a subdued Kato that got overshadowed by the crazy rich brat, a useless vapid secretary, and a villain that's about as threatening as a labradoodle. Seth Rogen and Michale Gondry you should be ashamed and embarrassed that your names are on this piece of trash.
Don't waste your money on this folks and certainly don't waste it on 3-D. The original is better and I'm sure that Mr. Rogen's going to have several bricks thrown at his crotch for even writing this awful screenplay. Just please, do us a favor and go sit in the corner with M. Night Shyamalan and quit making movies, because you really screwed the pooch on this one pal.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Gran Torino (2009) in Movies
Mar 25, 2018
Original
A racist Korean War veteran has to deal with his own prejudice when a Hmong teenager tries to steal his car.
Acting: 8
Clint Eastwood comes out of the gates swinging in playing racist Walt Kowalski. I thought it was a daring role seeing as, even though the character had a strong prejudices, you were still supposed to somehow like and respect him. Clint walks that line finely and pulls the role off with that smooth ease I've seen in a number of his previous roles.
Special love to a strong supporting role from Chee Thao who plays the angry Grandma of the Hmong family. She hates Clint as much as he hates her and their chemistry makes for some hilarious scenes. She captures the role perfectly.
Beginning: 1
Characters: 10
Gran Torino features a rich array of characters with meaning and depth. Walt is a man set in his ways after the war hardened him, but you find his walls slowly tearing down as the movie progresses. He reluctantly lets in the people that he wouldn't normally and finds himself becoming closer to them than his own family. While his heart may have changed, I appreciated the fact that his mouth didn't. Walt, with his brutal honesty, always spoke what was on his mind at all times which was funny and refreshing at the same time.
Thao (Bee Vang) has his own internal struggle as he deals with getting his education while trying to take care of his family and still fit in with the men in his family. He wants to be different than his thug cousins but he's too much of a softy to stand up for himself. Thao and Walt end up on a collision course towards each other surrounded by a number of characters that have their own stories worth paying attention to.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
A lot of scenes stuck out in my head when considering Gran Torino. From family dinners to one-off scenes with Walt and Thao, the film provides believable insight into Walt becoming closer to his "enemies" than his own family. The dinners were shot in a claustrophobic type of way. Thao's house was littered with people and you find a surrounded Walt trying to navigate his way through while steering clear of being social. The film as a whole was shot in a dark style indicative of looming danger. It's unnerving in a way, but effective at the same time.
Conflict: 10
Genre: 7
Memorability: 10
The hard dramatic shift in the film is like a gut punch, both jarring and unexpected. I appreciate when a film can change tones and still be effective. I also appreciate when films show racism from both sides of the fence. There's a refreshing sense of realism you get with Gran Torino that may be sacrificed in other films for the sake of getting a point across. In Torino, no one is innocent. No one is exempt.
I can't even count the number of one-liners that Walt provides throughout the span of the movie. My personal favorite: "Good day, puss cake." I have often considered how hilarious it would be to randomly say that to someone. There's still time...
Pace: 6
Definitely could have been improvement in the pacing department. The beginning starts off extremely slow before moving at a shaky pace. It finally levels out at about the half hour mark, but the damage had already been done for me at this point.
Plot: 10
Solid storyline from beginning to end that is both intriguing and unique. We are provided with an insight into a different culture in an endearing way that makes you smile.
Resolution: 5
Overall: 77
Gran Torino is an original film that succeeds with gritty realism and strong characters. A few tweaks, particularly a stronger ending, would have put the movie into a higher tier for me. Still a solid watch.
Acting: 8
Clint Eastwood comes out of the gates swinging in playing racist Walt Kowalski. I thought it was a daring role seeing as, even though the character had a strong prejudices, you were still supposed to somehow like and respect him. Clint walks that line finely and pulls the role off with that smooth ease I've seen in a number of his previous roles.
Special love to a strong supporting role from Chee Thao who plays the angry Grandma of the Hmong family. She hates Clint as much as he hates her and their chemistry makes for some hilarious scenes. She captures the role perfectly.
Beginning: 1
Characters: 10
Gran Torino features a rich array of characters with meaning and depth. Walt is a man set in his ways after the war hardened him, but you find his walls slowly tearing down as the movie progresses. He reluctantly lets in the people that he wouldn't normally and finds himself becoming closer to them than his own family. While his heart may have changed, I appreciated the fact that his mouth didn't. Walt, with his brutal honesty, always spoke what was on his mind at all times which was funny and refreshing at the same time.
Thao (Bee Vang) has his own internal struggle as he deals with getting his education while trying to take care of his family and still fit in with the men in his family. He wants to be different than his thug cousins but he's too much of a softy to stand up for himself. Thao and Walt end up on a collision course towards each other surrounded by a number of characters that have their own stories worth paying attention to.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
A lot of scenes stuck out in my head when considering Gran Torino. From family dinners to one-off scenes with Walt and Thao, the film provides believable insight into Walt becoming closer to his "enemies" than his own family. The dinners were shot in a claustrophobic type of way. Thao's house was littered with people and you find a surrounded Walt trying to navigate his way through while steering clear of being social. The film as a whole was shot in a dark style indicative of looming danger. It's unnerving in a way, but effective at the same time.
Conflict: 10
Genre: 7
Memorability: 10
The hard dramatic shift in the film is like a gut punch, both jarring and unexpected. I appreciate when a film can change tones and still be effective. I also appreciate when films show racism from both sides of the fence. There's a refreshing sense of realism you get with Gran Torino that may be sacrificed in other films for the sake of getting a point across. In Torino, no one is innocent. No one is exempt.
I can't even count the number of one-liners that Walt provides throughout the span of the movie. My personal favorite: "Good day, puss cake." I have often considered how hilarious it would be to randomly say that to someone. There's still time...
Pace: 6
Definitely could have been improvement in the pacing department. The beginning starts off extremely slow before moving at a shaky pace. It finally levels out at about the half hour mark, but the damage had already been done for me at this point.
Plot: 10
Solid storyline from beginning to end that is both intriguing and unique. We are provided with an insight into a different culture in an endearing way that makes you smile.
Resolution: 5
Overall: 77
Gran Torino is an original film that succeeds with gritty realism and strong characters. A few tweaks, particularly a stronger ending, would have put the movie into a higher tier for me. Still a solid watch.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Dumbo (2019) in Movies
Nov 30, 2019
Verdict: Charming
Story: Dumbo starts when Holt Farrier (Farrell) returns from war, to re-join the circus run by Max Medici (DeVito) where his kids Milly (Parker) and Joe (Hobbins) have been living and working for years, Holt has come back injured, with the only job offered to him, being cleaning up after the elephants, one of which is pregnant giving birth to an elephant with giant ears, which only causes chaos on his debut in the circus.
After Dumbo’s mother is taken away, he is left alone, while the children learn about his flying skills, which turns Max’s circus into the talk of the country, attracting V. A. Vandevere (Keaton) who wants to offer Max the world for Dumbo.
Thoughts on Dumbo
Characters – Holt Farrier is a war veteran widow that has returned to his children in a circus. He has been suffering with his time away, this has seen him not show as much affection as his wife would have, he takes the only job he can get which sees him training and cleaning up the elephants, his time back in the circus does bring him back to his kids, where he learns how important life still can be. V. A. Vandevere is the operator of Dreamland, he sales the idea of a better life for the whole troop, even if he has his own ideas to just make himself rich. Max Medici runs the small circus that discovers Dumbo’s talent, he has always been in the game for the money and can’t resist the idea of money when Vandevere arrives but must learn there is more to his life than money. Colette Marchant is the star performer in Vandevere show, she has been for years though she is just the hottest thing he has going for a while, she doe solve to perform. Dumbo is the baby elephant with giant eyes, who loses his mother, but has the incredible ability to fly, drawing crowds from miles.
Performances – Colin Farrell gives us a wonderful performance as the caring veteran who has been struggling with his own problems once returning from war. Michael Keaton enjoy the villainous role, while Danny DeVito is shows the desperation while still bringing the heart needing for the role, Eva Green shines to as the beautiful performer too.
Story – The story here shows how a small circus that finds themselves with a star attraction in Dumbo, which sees them become a success that the whole country wants to see. The story might focus on Dumbo being forced into performing after having his mother taken away, while deeper down we get to see a family that has been broken from death and war, needing to come back together. We see themes of greed with the circus masters at times, but all together the ideas behind everything all shine through to show that people who do good will get what they deserve in life.
Adventure/Fantasy – The adventure shows the how Dumbo comes into the world and put through traumas at a young age before finding his feet and learn that some people are good in life, with the fantasy of an elephant that can fly being the highlight of what makes Dumbo so special.
Settings – The film uses the settings to show the different sizes of circus that we see Dumbo being part of.
Special Effects – The effects in the film are brilliant bringing Dumbo to life like nothing we could have imagined.
Scene of the Movie – The Dumbo flight.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It does spend too much time telling Milly she can’t follow her scientist dreams.
Final Thoughts – This is the best live action Disney film of 2019, it brings the scale of the idea to life, which looks wonderful and has great performances too.
Overall: Beautiful Fantasy Film.
Story: Dumbo starts when Holt Farrier (Farrell) returns from war, to re-join the circus run by Max Medici (DeVito) where his kids Milly (Parker) and Joe (Hobbins) have been living and working for years, Holt has come back injured, with the only job offered to him, being cleaning up after the elephants, one of which is pregnant giving birth to an elephant with giant ears, which only causes chaos on his debut in the circus.
After Dumbo’s mother is taken away, he is left alone, while the children learn about his flying skills, which turns Max’s circus into the talk of the country, attracting V. A. Vandevere (Keaton) who wants to offer Max the world for Dumbo.
Thoughts on Dumbo
Characters – Holt Farrier is a war veteran widow that has returned to his children in a circus. He has been suffering with his time away, this has seen him not show as much affection as his wife would have, he takes the only job he can get which sees him training and cleaning up the elephants, his time back in the circus does bring him back to his kids, where he learns how important life still can be. V. A. Vandevere is the operator of Dreamland, he sales the idea of a better life for the whole troop, even if he has his own ideas to just make himself rich. Max Medici runs the small circus that discovers Dumbo’s talent, he has always been in the game for the money and can’t resist the idea of money when Vandevere arrives but must learn there is more to his life than money. Colette Marchant is the star performer in Vandevere show, she has been for years though she is just the hottest thing he has going for a while, she doe solve to perform. Dumbo is the baby elephant with giant eyes, who loses his mother, but has the incredible ability to fly, drawing crowds from miles.
Performances – Colin Farrell gives us a wonderful performance as the caring veteran who has been struggling with his own problems once returning from war. Michael Keaton enjoy the villainous role, while Danny DeVito is shows the desperation while still bringing the heart needing for the role, Eva Green shines to as the beautiful performer too.
Story – The story here shows how a small circus that finds themselves with a star attraction in Dumbo, which sees them become a success that the whole country wants to see. The story might focus on Dumbo being forced into performing after having his mother taken away, while deeper down we get to see a family that has been broken from death and war, needing to come back together. We see themes of greed with the circus masters at times, but all together the ideas behind everything all shine through to show that people who do good will get what they deserve in life.
Adventure/Fantasy – The adventure shows the how Dumbo comes into the world and put through traumas at a young age before finding his feet and learn that some people are good in life, with the fantasy of an elephant that can fly being the highlight of what makes Dumbo so special.
Settings – The film uses the settings to show the different sizes of circus that we see Dumbo being part of.
Special Effects – The effects in the film are brilliant bringing Dumbo to life like nothing we could have imagined.
Scene of the Movie – The Dumbo flight.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It does spend too much time telling Milly she can’t follow her scientist dreams.
Final Thoughts – This is the best live action Disney film of 2019, it brings the scale of the idea to life, which looks wonderful and has great performances too.
Overall: Beautiful Fantasy Film.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated The Irishman (2019) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020
If anyone tells me they didn’t enjoy The Irishman, I would have to say, fair enough. There are reasons not to. As an entertainment it isn’t Goodfellas, as a thriller it isn’t The Departed, and as a classic gangster tale it isn’t anywhere near The Godfather, of course. It sags in the middle, ends morbidly, and, at three and a half hours, even in its brightest moments, you can find yourself waiting for it to finish. But, anyone who tells me The Irishman isn’t a great film is blind to the artistry at work here from a gang of septegenarians with a mighty track record. If it is one thing, it is Epic!
Also in the negative column is the ageing and de-ageing technology, which whilst pretty damn good is noticable and sometimes distracting. Myself, I was willing to forgive these faults, just for the privilege of being swept away once more by Scorsese’s eye for a shot and moments of pure mood, of which there are too many to count.
De Niro hasn’t been this good for years, that seems to be accepted knowledge. Pacino is Pacino, what else would you want him to be? But, it is the return from retirement of Joe Pesci that really impressed me. Almost certainly a career best performance at the age of 77 – always underplayed and menacing, there were times he acted the big two under the table. Of the 10 nominations at the 92nd Oscars, this is the one I hope lands.
If Scorsese also wins for best director, I wouldn’t complain either. Looking at his body of work, I count this as the 20th film I would class as very good or better. And although less “fun” it is certainly a better, classier film than The Departed, his only win to date. Other gongs I would give serious weight to are Thelma Schoonmaker for editing, and production design, which is as rich and detailed as it could possibly be, at times breath-takingly so.
There has been much made of the idea that this is Scorsese atoning for his sins in using violence as entertainment. And it is true that this film seems to meditate more or regret and loneliness as a side effect of a violent life. There is blood, people die violently, but these moments are often brief and unshowey, keeping the focus on the men (and it is always the men) who choose to live this way. In the end, we all age and grow weak; time advances and we are left with nothing but memories, surrounded by people who can’t remember who we are and what we did in our Golden days.
I found the last half hour very moving and somewhat depressing. I think we are meant to. No big climax, just a fading away. It felt like the hours after a party, full of joy and noise, when you are finally left alone with only yourself for company. More than any other emotion, this is what I have taken from this experience; and it’s a good trick, fully intended, that I applaud. And it is what ultimately makes the film feel mature and meaningful.
However, for all the praise it deserves, this isn’t a film I will choose to watch again in a hurry. And I think that will be common. It lacks the tension of a tighter, shorter film, and emotionally it is often difficult to connect to these men and their brutal deeds. If that is the point, then I get it… but there are plenty of films to go to, as already mentioned that have a more satisfying and rounded feel. Recommended highly, but with reservations.
Also in the negative column is the ageing and de-ageing technology, which whilst pretty damn good is noticable and sometimes distracting. Myself, I was willing to forgive these faults, just for the privilege of being swept away once more by Scorsese’s eye for a shot and moments of pure mood, of which there are too many to count.
De Niro hasn’t been this good for years, that seems to be accepted knowledge. Pacino is Pacino, what else would you want him to be? But, it is the return from retirement of Joe Pesci that really impressed me. Almost certainly a career best performance at the age of 77 – always underplayed and menacing, there were times he acted the big two under the table. Of the 10 nominations at the 92nd Oscars, this is the one I hope lands.
If Scorsese also wins for best director, I wouldn’t complain either. Looking at his body of work, I count this as the 20th film I would class as very good or better. And although less “fun” it is certainly a better, classier film than The Departed, his only win to date. Other gongs I would give serious weight to are Thelma Schoonmaker for editing, and production design, which is as rich and detailed as it could possibly be, at times breath-takingly so.
There has been much made of the idea that this is Scorsese atoning for his sins in using violence as entertainment. And it is true that this film seems to meditate more or regret and loneliness as a side effect of a violent life. There is blood, people die violently, but these moments are often brief and unshowey, keeping the focus on the men (and it is always the men) who choose to live this way. In the end, we all age and grow weak; time advances and we are left with nothing but memories, surrounded by people who can’t remember who we are and what we did in our Golden days.
I found the last half hour very moving and somewhat depressing. I think we are meant to. No big climax, just a fading away. It felt like the hours after a party, full of joy and noise, when you are finally left alone with only yourself for company. More than any other emotion, this is what I have taken from this experience; and it’s a good trick, fully intended, that I applaud. And it is what ultimately makes the film feel mature and meaningful.
However, for all the praise it deserves, this isn’t a film I will choose to watch again in a hurry. And I think that will be common. It lacks the tension of a tighter, shorter film, and emotionally it is often difficult to connect to these men and their brutal deeds. If that is the point, then I get it… but there are plenty of films to go to, as already mentioned that have a more satisfying and rounded feel. Recommended highly, but with reservations.
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated Autonomous: A Novel in Books
Dec 22, 2018
Autonomous is an interesting story that poses a lot of moral questions. It doesn't really take sides; both the pharmaceutical pirate and the agents tracking her down are painted in sympathetic ways, as if we're meant to like them all. We see why Jack is a pharmaceutical pirate; medicine is only available to those rich enough to pay for it, so the poor stay poor and sick and short-lived. She wants to change that. She reverse-engineers drugs, manufactures them, and distributes them to the needy through her associates.
Meanwhile, Eliasz is a conflicted military agent who is sexually attracted to robots. Or at least to his partner, Paladin, though a flashback shows what might have been the start of his attraction to robots. Paladin is probably the single most interesting character in the entire book, as she muses on the nature of being indentured, and searches through her memories and the internet for information about her situation.
The book does have LGBT content - Jack is bisexual, and Eliasz is - robosexual? Is that a thing? Paladin could be called nonbinary or trans; she repeatedly mentions that gender isn't a thing to robots, but because she's a military robot, most people call her a he at the beginning of the book. She learns the brain inside her is female, and to make Eliasz more comfortable with his attraction, she decides to use female pronouns. Eliasz does use the F word to refer to himself being attracted to the robot at the beginning, when they were using male pronouns. This puzzles Paladin for a while, causing her to search the term and figure out what Eliasz meant by its use.
There's a lot of complex world-building in this book that is barely brushed past. From the corporations who own patents covering everything, to the system of indenture that covers humans as well as robots, to the bio-domes that cover cities (but it's livable outside the biodomes, so why are they needed?), to the new federations that cover continents that used to be divided into several countries - there's a LOT going on. And there's not just robots, but also some pretty advanced cybernetics implanted in humans as well as an everpresent network of data that can be tapped into with implants that everyone has.
Ultimately, for as complex as the world is, and cohesive as the plot is, I'm left wondering who, if anyone, was in the right in this story. I'm not sure if we're supposed to be happy with the ending or not. I've seen other reviews saying Neuromancer was a way better book in a similar vein, and I actually have copy of that waiting to be read. So we'll see.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.com
Meanwhile, Eliasz is a conflicted military agent who is sexually attracted to robots. Or at least to his partner, Paladin, though a flashback shows what might have been the start of his attraction to robots. Paladin is probably the single most interesting character in the entire book, as she muses on the nature of being indentured, and searches through her memories and the internet for information about her situation.
The book does have LGBT content - Jack is bisexual, and Eliasz is - robosexual? Is that a thing? Paladin could be called nonbinary or trans; she repeatedly mentions that gender isn't a thing to robots, but because she's a military robot, most people call her a he at the beginning of the book. She learns the brain inside her is female, and to make Eliasz more comfortable with his attraction, she decides to use female pronouns. Eliasz does use the F word to refer to himself being attracted to the robot at the beginning, when they were using male pronouns. This puzzles Paladin for a while, causing her to search the term and figure out what Eliasz meant by its use.
There's a lot of complex world-building in this book that is barely brushed past. From the corporations who own patents covering everything, to the system of indenture that covers humans as well as robots, to the bio-domes that cover cities (but it's livable outside the biodomes, so why are they needed?), to the new federations that cover continents that used to be divided into several countries - there's a LOT going on. And there's not just robots, but also some pretty advanced cybernetics implanted in humans as well as an everpresent network of data that can be tapped into with implants that everyone has.
Ultimately, for as complex as the world is, and cohesive as the plot is, I'm left wondering who, if anyone, was in the right in this story. I'm not sure if we're supposed to be happy with the ending or not. I've seen other reviews saying Neuromancer was a way better book in a similar vein, and I actually have copy of that waiting to be read. So we'll see.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.com