Search
Search results
The Treasure of Rigmore House (Betwixt the Sea and Shore #3)
8.0
Rate It
Book
An heiress forced to choose a husband by her next birthday. A former selkie bent on revenge. Can...
Historical Fantasy Romance
Storm and Shelter (Ebb & Flow #3)
6.0
Rate It
Book
A year ago, Quinn Boucher was in his third year of university. He had plans. A life. And then in one...
Fantasy MM Romance
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Black Widow (2021) in Movies
Sep 6, 2021
Good casting, Scarlett and Florence felt like actual sisters. (1 more)
Good chemistry and acting from David Harbour and Rachel Weisz.
Not much of a thriller or thinker for a spy movie. (1 more)
One actor was greatly wasted in their role.
Scarlett's Swan Song Had Plenty of Action With A Decent StoryNatasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson) and her sister Yelena (Florence Pugh) are living what seems like a normal life in 1995 Ohio, with their parents, mother, Melina Vostokoff (Rachel Weisz) and
Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson) and her sister Yelena (Florence Pugh) are living what seems like a normal life in 1995 Ohio, with their parents, mother, Melina Vostokoff (Rachel Weisz) and father, Alexei Shostakov (David Harbour) when suddenly they must leave the country. They are all Russian undercover agents and Alexei, the super-soldier known as Red Guardian, has stolen intel from S.H.I.E.L.D. They flee to Cuba where the sisters are forcibly taken to the "Red Room" for training after they've met General Dreykov (Ray Winstone), their boss. Now in 2016 after the events of Captain America: Civil War, Natasha finds herself a fugitive on the run from U.S. Secretary of State Thaddeus Ross (William Hurt) after violating the Sokovia Accords. She's attacked by an incredibly skilled assassin called the Taskmaster and finds that she's not his target but rather a package she had with her. After learning the package originated from Budapest she heads there where she finds her sister Yelena and learns of a plot that not only jeopardizes the safety of those trained in the "Red Room" but possibly the whole world.
This movie was really good and it was great to see a Marvel movie again. I didn't see this one in theaters but I still enjoyed watching it in the safety of my home with my family. So this movie came off like a really good spy/action movie but definitely had that Marvel feel to it. It really felt like watching something out of the Bourne or Bond series films but with admittedly less plot and gadgets, but the action was really spot on. There was awesome car chase scenes and expertly crafted fight choreography too. It was even reported that they went through 13 BMW X3's for the car chase scene with Scarlett and Florence so you can tell that they really wanted to get things right and had a vision of what they wanted the audience to see for that particular scene as well. I thought there was really great chemistry from all the actors together and that it was pretty good casting. Scarlett and Florence argue throughout the film just like real sisters, and the looks that David Harbour and Rachel Weisz exchange feel like they were genuinely together. The opening scene of the movie had great acting and was very emotional. I just feel like one role/actor was kind of a bad casting and/or was greatly underutilized. I think the biggest flaw of the move was that for being a spy movie, the plot never had any mystery to it and everything was kind of predictable or at least very easy to follow. Not much of a thriller or thinker where you had to put two and two together. The cinematography was spot on and felt like you were watching any big budget spy or action movie and on par with what you expect from Marvel Studios. The tone fit the film for the most part but kind of "see-saw"-ed from time to time as they mixed serious themes with comedic dialogue throughout. But that's to be expected from a PG-13 action/spy movie from Marvel and it was a little reminiscent of the film Captain America in that regard. The music was good and there were a couple of songs that stuck out in that regard American Pie by Don Mclean and a cover of Smells Like Teen Spirit by Think Up Anger; also Cheap Thrills by Sia. The musical score was also good and the Black Widow theme was pretty epic but also with hints of melancholy to it that seemed to underline both her tragic background as well as the tragedy of the events to come in her future. Altogether the movie was really good and I give it a 7/10. If you are big time into the MCU and Marvel franchise movies then this is a must see film but if not then it might come off as just a barely above average action/spy film so that's why it doesn't get my "Must See Seal of Approval"
This movie was really good and it was great to see a Marvel movie again. I didn't see this one in theaters but I still enjoyed watching it in the safety of my home with my family. So this movie came off like a really good spy/action movie but definitely had that Marvel feel to it. It really felt like watching something out of the Bourne or Bond series films but with admittedly less plot and gadgets, but the action was really spot on. There was awesome car chase scenes and expertly crafted fight choreography too. It was even reported that they went through 13 BMW X3's for the car chase scene with Scarlett and Florence so you can tell that they really wanted to get things right and had a vision of what they wanted the audience to see for that particular scene as well. I thought there was really great chemistry from all the actors together and that it was pretty good casting. Scarlett and Florence argue throughout the film just like real sisters, and the looks that David Harbour and Rachel Weisz exchange feel like they were genuinely together. The opening scene of the movie had great acting and was very emotional. I just feel like one role/actor was kind of a bad casting and/or was greatly underutilized. I think the biggest flaw of the move was that for being a spy movie, the plot never had any mystery to it and everything was kind of predictable or at least very easy to follow. Not much of a thriller or thinker where you had to put two and two together. The cinematography was spot on and felt like you were watching any big budget spy or action movie and on par with what you expect from Marvel Studios. The tone fit the film for the most part but kind of "see-saw"-ed from time to time as they mixed serious themes with comedic dialogue throughout. But that's to be expected from a PG-13 action/spy movie from Marvel and it was a little reminiscent of the film Captain America in that regard. The music was good and there were a couple of songs that stuck out in that regard American Pie by Don Mclean and a cover of Smells Like Teen Spirit by Think Up Anger; also Cheap Thrills by Sia. The musical score was also good and the Black Widow theme was pretty epic but also with hints of melancholy to it that seemed to underline both her tragic background as well as the tragedy of the events to come in her future. Altogether the movie was really good and I give it a 7/10. If you are big time into the MCU and Marvel franchise movies then this is a must see film but if not then it might come off as just a barely above average action/spy film so that's why it doesn't get my "Must See Seal of Approval"
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Sully (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
No, not “Monsters Inc 3”.
Chesley Sullenberger was just a very experienced US Airways pilot starting an everyday job flying from LaGuardia airport in New York to Charlotte when fate stepped in. Following an extensive bird strike and the loss of both engines, ‘Sully’ achieved worldwide fame by landing his aircraft and all 151 passengers and crew safely on the Hudson river. Sully is immediately acclaimed by the public as a hero; US Airways, and their insurers, however, are not necessarily as impressed given that their plane has got rather soggy when the flight data suggests it might have actually been able to make it to a landing at a number of nearby airports. So a National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) inquiry is called, where a decision against Sully could see him facing the fastest fall from grace since Icarus.
This film is obviously based on this real-life ‘Miracle on the Hudson’ and to a large extent the recreation of the crash…. sorry… “forced water landing” is both vivid and gripping. The film is certainly unlikely to make the regular list of in-flight movies for nervous passengers, but it does serve as a good training film for all of those regular airline passengers who don’t “put down their reading materials” to listen to the aircraft safety announcement.
Director Clint Eastwood has delivered a highly watchable action sequence showcasing the undisputed acting talents of Tom Hanks (playing Sully) and his Aaron Eckhard (“Olympus Has Fallen”, playing the co-pilot Jeff Skiles). This makes for a great 45 minute film. The problem is the other 51 minutes.
Where the film works well – aside from the actual recreation itself – is in representing the post-traumatic stress experienced by Sully, with his insomnia and regular flashbacks of ‘what might have happened’ (anyone still strongly affected by 9/11 will struggle with these scenes). The final NTSB hearing scenes are also well-done and suitably gripping: particularly for viewers outside of the UK where we wouldn’t have heard the outcome of the affair once the news cycle had moved on from the ‘gee-whizz’ headline event.
Where the film aquaplanes somewhat is in the padding achieved through multiple (MULTIPLE!) scenes of New Yorkers back-slapping Sully. Some of this is needed to establish the pedestal that Sully is set upon: the bar scene, for example, is well done. But all the rest of the references become just plain tiresome.
There is also a back-story focused on Sully’s financial problems and rather scratchy marriage (as portrayed) to Lorraine (Laura Linney). Linney is normally a highly-watchable actress, but here her character is just so irritating that the mood of the film plummets every time she reappears on screen.
The key problem that screenwriter Todd Komarnicki (“Elf”!!) had here is the obvious one: that as a real-event (based on Sullenberger’s own book “Highest Duty”) he would have had more scope to build tension if the flight had lasted more than 208 seconds! We end up with little visibility into the back-stories of the passengers. We get to see a father and two grown-up sons who – as fate would have it – just manage to catch the doomed plane: and we end up caring what happens to them. But this approach could have perhaps been usefully extended to feature more of the passenger back-stories (without getting the full “Airport” soap treatment).
Clint Eastwood is also clearly an All-American patriot, and in common with some of his other films he can’t help himself from putting up rather soupy statements about the self-sacrifice of New Yorkers (“the best of New York came together”): when actually the rescue teams did what they were paid to do and Ferry captains did what you or I would do if we stumbled on the scene! These sentiments might go down well in the States: in the cynical UK they tend to generate snorts of irritation.
What IS nice are a couple of “monkeys” (see Glossary) during the closing credits where the real Sully, Skiles, cabin-crew and passengers appear together in a celebration of continued life against all the odds. And just so you are aware, this is done as two separate segments during the titles, so if you don’t want to be one of those people standing in the aisles with your coat half on, then wait for the second one!
A curate’s egg of a film: great in places, but overall not as well executed as it could have been.
This film is obviously based on this real-life ‘Miracle on the Hudson’ and to a large extent the recreation of the crash…. sorry… “forced water landing” is both vivid and gripping. The film is certainly unlikely to make the regular list of in-flight movies for nervous passengers, but it does serve as a good training film for all of those regular airline passengers who don’t “put down their reading materials” to listen to the aircraft safety announcement.
Director Clint Eastwood has delivered a highly watchable action sequence showcasing the undisputed acting talents of Tom Hanks (playing Sully) and his Aaron Eckhard (“Olympus Has Fallen”, playing the co-pilot Jeff Skiles). This makes for a great 45 minute film. The problem is the other 51 minutes.
Where the film works well – aside from the actual recreation itself – is in representing the post-traumatic stress experienced by Sully, with his insomnia and regular flashbacks of ‘what might have happened’ (anyone still strongly affected by 9/11 will struggle with these scenes). The final NTSB hearing scenes are also well-done and suitably gripping: particularly for viewers outside of the UK where we wouldn’t have heard the outcome of the affair once the news cycle had moved on from the ‘gee-whizz’ headline event.
Where the film aquaplanes somewhat is in the padding achieved through multiple (MULTIPLE!) scenes of New Yorkers back-slapping Sully. Some of this is needed to establish the pedestal that Sully is set upon: the bar scene, for example, is well done. But all the rest of the references become just plain tiresome.
There is also a back-story focused on Sully’s financial problems and rather scratchy marriage (as portrayed) to Lorraine (Laura Linney). Linney is normally a highly-watchable actress, but here her character is just so irritating that the mood of the film plummets every time she reappears on screen.
The key problem that screenwriter Todd Komarnicki (“Elf”!!) had here is the obvious one: that as a real-event (based on Sullenberger’s own book “Highest Duty”) he would have had more scope to build tension if the flight had lasted more than 208 seconds! We end up with little visibility into the back-stories of the passengers. We get to see a father and two grown-up sons who – as fate would have it – just manage to catch the doomed plane: and we end up caring what happens to them. But this approach could have perhaps been usefully extended to feature more of the passenger back-stories (without getting the full “Airport” soap treatment).
Clint Eastwood is also clearly an All-American patriot, and in common with some of his other films he can’t help himself from putting up rather soupy statements about the self-sacrifice of New Yorkers (“the best of New York came together”): when actually the rescue teams did what they were paid to do and Ferry captains did what you or I would do if we stumbled on the scene! These sentiments might go down well in the States: in the cynical UK they tend to generate snorts of irritation.
What IS nice are a couple of “monkeys” (see Glossary) during the closing credits where the real Sully, Skiles, cabin-crew and passengers appear together in a celebration of continued life against all the odds. And just so you are aware, this is done as two separate segments during the titles, so if you don’t want to be one of those people standing in the aisles with your coat half on, then wait for the second one!
A curate’s egg of a film: great in places, but overall not as well executed as it could have been.
The original is better
I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.
Six bestselling authors have taken on the task of writing modern retellings of the complete works of Jane Austen. Alexander McCall Smith has successfully taken on the challenge of bringing Emma into the 21st century. Although the settings and characters remain the same the contemporary clothing, vehicles and ideas are something that the reader can relate to.
As fans of Jane Austen will already know, Emma is about rich, single Emma Woodhouse who, despite the disapproval of her good friend George Knightley, enjoys interfering in the lives of others, particularly where romance is concerned. Her meddling backfires when her plan to match her friend Harriet Smith with the boring Philip Elton has disastrous consequences.
Alexander McCall Smith’s version of Emma has more focus on the life of Mr. Woodhouse, Emma’s father, than the original did. He gives an account of Henry Woodhouse’s history and over emphasizes his anxieties about health and safety. Mr. Woodhouse’s concerns are constantly cropping up throughout the novel adding a little humour to the story.
One concern about this modern adaptation is that the writing style was overly formal. If it were not for the references to the current clothing fashions, motorcars and women attending university, the book could have been set during Jane Austen’s lifetime. Take, for example, the character Anne Taylor. Mr. Woodhouse hires Miss Taylor as a governess for his motherless daughters. Miss Taylor’s approach to the girls and her prim and proper use of language made her seem antiquated. She would not have looked out of place amongst other well-known governesses or nannies such as Mary Poppins or Nurse Matilda.
Occasionally it felt that Alexander McCall Smith was mocking the modern world, for example the activities of the younger generation or the way people speak. Whilst this may appeal to older readers who may disapprove of the recent developments and changes in the Western world; it alienates the teenagers and young adults who have grown up with modern technology.
There is no doubt that Alexander McCall Smith has done an excellent job at retelling such a famous novel, however to be a complete modern retelling I think everything needs to be brought into the 21st century. This would include all the characters and the style of language it is written in.
Six bestselling authors have taken on the task of writing modern retellings of the complete works of Jane Austen. Alexander McCall Smith has successfully taken on the challenge of bringing Emma into the 21st century. Although the settings and characters remain the same the contemporary clothing, vehicles and ideas are something that the reader can relate to.
As fans of Jane Austen will already know, Emma is about rich, single Emma Woodhouse who, despite the disapproval of her good friend George Knightley, enjoys interfering in the lives of others, particularly where romance is concerned. Her meddling backfires when her plan to match her friend Harriet Smith with the boring Philip Elton has disastrous consequences.
Alexander McCall Smith’s version of Emma has more focus on the life of Mr. Woodhouse, Emma’s father, than the original did. He gives an account of Henry Woodhouse’s history and over emphasizes his anxieties about health and safety. Mr. Woodhouse’s concerns are constantly cropping up throughout the novel adding a little humour to the story.
One concern about this modern adaptation is that the writing style was overly formal. If it were not for the references to the current clothing fashions, motorcars and women attending university, the book could have been set during Jane Austen’s lifetime. Take, for example, the character Anne Taylor. Mr. Woodhouse hires Miss Taylor as a governess for his motherless daughters. Miss Taylor’s approach to the girls and her prim and proper use of language made her seem antiquated. She would not have looked out of place amongst other well-known governesses or nannies such as Mary Poppins or Nurse Matilda.
Occasionally it felt that Alexander McCall Smith was mocking the modern world, for example the activities of the younger generation or the way people speak. Whilst this may appeal to older readers who may disapprove of the recent developments and changes in the Western world; it alienates the teenagers and young adults who have grown up with modern technology.
There is no doubt that Alexander McCall Smith has done an excellent job at retelling such a famous novel, however to be a complete modern retelling I think everything needs to be brought into the 21st century. This would include all the characters and the style of language it is written in.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Wonder Woman (2017) in Movies
Apr 1, 2019
Solid Bounceback for the DCEU
After the safety of her homeland Themyscira is threatened, Diana (Gal Gadot), strongest of the Amazon warriors, hurls herself into the middle of World War I to find the source of the threat.
Acting: 10
Beginning; 2
The movie starts off a bit slow, but does pick up rather quickly after the first ten minutes. I wasn’t in love in how they tried to establish the land of the Amazonians. Felt too factual and not very story driven. I know it’s one of those things that has to be done, but I’ve seen it done way better a number of times before so I can’t excuse it.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The beautiful shots of Themyscira and the Amazonian training rituals borders on poetic at times, something you might read about in a famous ballad. Director Patty Jenkins does an amazing job of capturing the sanctity of this place, a place you don’t want to see get violated. Themyscira is pictured perfectly, it’s not just a Hawaii with women warriors. You can feel the change when Diana hits the real world and things become darker.
I thought it might be hard to capture Wonder Woman’s true strength on the big screen, but it is done almost effortlessly here with gritty scenes and slow-motion shots on impact blows. While I thought BVS overdid things with its slow-motion efforts, Jenkins has a way of capturing the perfect mood when she slows the camera down rather than it being just a mere effect. She really captures the heart of the story in every shot.
Conflict: 10
Genre: 9
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Plot: 8
Story was great except…Did we really need that one scene between Diana and Steve (Chris Pine)? I thought, not only did it betray the overall message of the film, but it felt forced and unnecessary. I would much rather have watched Wonder Woman just kick ass and take names and remain true to who her character was.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 89
After a couple crappy movies, DC finally began to right the ship with Wonder Woman. I am hoping the future will bring more movies like this and less movies like Suicide Squad. Not only is it a great film for women superheroes, but it’s just a great film period.
Acting: 10
Beginning; 2
The movie starts off a bit slow, but does pick up rather quickly after the first ten minutes. I wasn’t in love in how they tried to establish the land of the Amazonians. Felt too factual and not very story driven. I know it’s one of those things that has to be done, but I’ve seen it done way better a number of times before so I can’t excuse it.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The beautiful shots of Themyscira and the Amazonian training rituals borders on poetic at times, something you might read about in a famous ballad. Director Patty Jenkins does an amazing job of capturing the sanctity of this place, a place you don’t want to see get violated. Themyscira is pictured perfectly, it’s not just a Hawaii with women warriors. You can feel the change when Diana hits the real world and things become darker.
I thought it might be hard to capture Wonder Woman’s true strength on the big screen, but it is done almost effortlessly here with gritty scenes and slow-motion shots on impact blows. While I thought BVS overdid things with its slow-motion efforts, Jenkins has a way of capturing the perfect mood when she slows the camera down rather than it being just a mere effect. She really captures the heart of the story in every shot.
Conflict: 10
Genre: 9
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Plot: 8
Story was great except…Did we really need that one scene between Diana and Steve (Chris Pine)? I thought, not only did it betray the overall message of the film, but it felt forced and unnecessary. I would much rather have watched Wonder Woman just kick ass and take names and remain true to who her character was.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 89
After a couple crappy movies, DC finally began to right the ship with Wonder Woman. I am hoping the future will bring more movies like this and less movies like Suicide Squad. Not only is it a great film for women superheroes, but it’s just a great film period.
BookwormMama14 (18 KP) rated Look to the East (The Great War, #1) in Books
Jan 2, 2019
Out of the east comes a terror that will attempt to destroy the world.
At the dawn of World War I, the village of Briecourt is nestled in relative safety. That all changes when the German Imperial Army marches in and takes over. Life will never be the same for the villagers, who have had a family dispute for generations. Will having a common enemy finally bring them together? Julitte Toussaint, the adoptive daughter of a seaman, has to withstand the scorn of the de Colvilles for the shadows of her past. When she finds an unexpected "visitor" hiding in the cellar of the church, she feels the pull of love for this man she hardly knows. Charles Lassone is a Belgian entrepreneur caught behind enemy lines. He longs for escape so that he can join the Allies cause and win the respect and love of Julitte. With a dispute running so rampant, who can be trusted? The difference between friends and foes could not become more complicated.
This is both the first book that I have read by Maureen Lang and my first book set during World War I. Unfortunately, The Great War is not always as popular of a topic as its "sequel" is. Labor camps were in full effect during this period and the Germans were just as ruthless. The difference in time period wouldn't seem so drastic, but, I learned that they didn't believe it was safe to drop soldiers from planes during 1916. The tactics and methods were much more advanced come time for World War II. I became very emotionally attached to the characters. Their fight for freedom had me cheering them on with every turn of the page. Something that Julitte learns is that God sometimes uses us in ways that we can't explain, to ourselves or to others. He will work everything out, even if it's not how we had it planned. There is still evil in the world because God gave us a free will. But He will not abandon us. We must keep our eyes on Him and our hope in His promises.
I received a free copy of Look to the East from Tyndale House Publishers through their Tyndale Rewards Program. I was not required write a review. All opinions expressed are my own.
At the dawn of World War I, the village of Briecourt is nestled in relative safety. That all changes when the German Imperial Army marches in and takes over. Life will never be the same for the villagers, who have had a family dispute for generations. Will having a common enemy finally bring them together? Julitte Toussaint, the adoptive daughter of a seaman, has to withstand the scorn of the de Colvilles for the shadows of her past. When she finds an unexpected "visitor" hiding in the cellar of the church, she feels the pull of love for this man she hardly knows. Charles Lassone is a Belgian entrepreneur caught behind enemy lines. He longs for escape so that he can join the Allies cause and win the respect and love of Julitte. With a dispute running so rampant, who can be trusted? The difference between friends and foes could not become more complicated.
This is both the first book that I have read by Maureen Lang and my first book set during World War I. Unfortunately, The Great War is not always as popular of a topic as its "sequel" is. Labor camps were in full effect during this period and the Germans were just as ruthless. The difference in time period wouldn't seem so drastic, but, I learned that they didn't believe it was safe to drop soldiers from planes during 1916. The tactics and methods were much more advanced come time for World War II. I became very emotionally attached to the characters. Their fight for freedom had me cheering them on with every turn of the page. Something that Julitte learns is that God sometimes uses us in ways that we can't explain, to ourselves or to others. He will work everything out, even if it's not how we had it planned. There is still evil in the world because God gave us a free will. But He will not abandon us. We must keep our eyes on Him and our hope in His promises.
I received a free copy of Look to the East from Tyndale House Publishers through their Tyndale Rewards Program. I was not required write a review. All opinions expressed are my own.
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</i>
Six bestselling authors have taken on the task of writing modern retellings of the complete works of Jane Austen. Alexander McCall Smith has successfully taken on the challenge of bringing <i>Emma</i> into the 21st century. Although the settings and characters remain the same the contemporary clothing, vehicles and ideas are something that the reader can relate to.
As fans of Jane Austen will already know, <i>Emma</i> is about rich, single Emma Woodhouse who, despite the disapproval of her good friend George Knightley, enjoys interfering in the lives of others, particularly where romance is concerned. Her meddling backfires when her plan to match her friend Harriet Smith with the boring Philip Elton has disastrous consequences.
Alexander McCall Smith’s version of <i>Emma</i> has more focus on the life of Mr. Woodhouse, Emma’s father, than the original did. He gives an account of Henry Woodhouse’s history and over emphasizes his anxieties about health and safety. Mr. Woodhouse’s concerns are constantly cropping up throughout the novel adding a little humour to the story.
One concern about this modern adaptation is that the writing style was overly formal. If it were not for the references to the current clothing fashions, motorcars and women attending university, the book could have been set during Jane Austen’s lifetime. Take, for example, the character Anne Taylor. Mr. Woodhouse hires Miss Taylor as a governess for his motherless daughters. Miss Taylor’s approach to the girls and her prim and proper use of language made her seem antiquated. She would not have looked out of place amongst other well-known governesses or nannies such as <i>Mary Poppins</i> or <i>Nurse Matilda</i>.
Occasionally it felt that Alexander McCall Smith was mocking the modern world, for example the activities of the younger generation or the way people speak. Whilst this may appeal to older readers who may disapprove of the recent developments and changes in the Western world; it alienates the teenagers and young adults who have grown up with modern technology.
There is no doubt that Alexander McCall Smith has done an excellent job at retelling such a famous novel, however to be a complete modern retelling I think everything needs to be brought into the 21st century. This would include all the characters and the style of language it is written in.
Six bestselling authors have taken on the task of writing modern retellings of the complete works of Jane Austen. Alexander McCall Smith has successfully taken on the challenge of bringing <i>Emma</i> into the 21st century. Although the settings and characters remain the same the contemporary clothing, vehicles and ideas are something that the reader can relate to.
As fans of Jane Austen will already know, <i>Emma</i> is about rich, single Emma Woodhouse who, despite the disapproval of her good friend George Knightley, enjoys interfering in the lives of others, particularly where romance is concerned. Her meddling backfires when her plan to match her friend Harriet Smith with the boring Philip Elton has disastrous consequences.
Alexander McCall Smith’s version of <i>Emma</i> has more focus on the life of Mr. Woodhouse, Emma’s father, than the original did. He gives an account of Henry Woodhouse’s history and over emphasizes his anxieties about health and safety. Mr. Woodhouse’s concerns are constantly cropping up throughout the novel adding a little humour to the story.
One concern about this modern adaptation is that the writing style was overly formal. If it were not for the references to the current clothing fashions, motorcars and women attending university, the book could have been set during Jane Austen’s lifetime. Take, for example, the character Anne Taylor. Mr. Woodhouse hires Miss Taylor as a governess for his motherless daughters. Miss Taylor’s approach to the girls and her prim and proper use of language made her seem antiquated. She would not have looked out of place amongst other well-known governesses or nannies such as <i>Mary Poppins</i> or <i>Nurse Matilda</i>.
Occasionally it felt that Alexander McCall Smith was mocking the modern world, for example the activities of the younger generation or the way people speak. Whilst this may appeal to older readers who may disapprove of the recent developments and changes in the Western world; it alienates the teenagers and young adults who have grown up with modern technology.
There is no doubt that Alexander McCall Smith has done an excellent job at retelling such a famous novel, however to be a complete modern retelling I think everything needs to be brought into the 21st century. This would include all the characters and the style of language it is written in.
Andy K (10823 KP) rated The Host (Gwoemul) (2007) in Movies
Oct 23, 2019
Darn formaldehyde!
Guess what happens when a scientist orders a large amount of formaldehyde dumped down the drain? It makes its way through the sewer system and into the Han River in Korea. Several years later, it is revealed the substance has caused the mutated formation of a large sea monster creature which reveals itself when it emerges and begins an onslaught of carnage.
A local family which runs a food stand near the location of the attack races to get to safety, but, unfortunately a man grabs the hand of the wrong child instead of his daughter by mistake. The creature procures the young child and escapes with her back into the water. Further chaos ensues when it is revealed the creature is not only a menace, but also the source of a horrible infectious disease now rampant among the population.
Somehow, the child survives her journey back in the sewers with the creature who deposits her in a secluded location. Her father now has to get past government quarantine and survive battling the creature in order to try and save his child.
Director Bong Joon-ho, who has also given us the fantastic Snowpiercer and the current critic favorite Parasite, crafts a well made film which has many exciting elements.
For a movie like this it is only as good as its creature and this one does the job. Despite having a modest budget, the sea creature is well developed, has an interesting personality and does not look like bad CGI. As the audience, you are trying to figure out what the creature wants, what it is doing with the children it kidnaps and stores away while also rooting for the title family to not only survive the disease and run ins with the police to eventually attempt a rescue.
There is a good amount of action including a few intense scenes with the creature and also with one of the family members who also happens to be a famed archer. There is some comedy as well which rounds out the action and provides some down time between scenes.
I really enjoyed The Host much more than I thought I would since I hadn't heard much about it beforehand. Please check it out.
A local family which runs a food stand near the location of the attack races to get to safety, but, unfortunately a man grabs the hand of the wrong child instead of his daughter by mistake. The creature procures the young child and escapes with her back into the water. Further chaos ensues when it is revealed the creature is not only a menace, but also the source of a horrible infectious disease now rampant among the population.
Somehow, the child survives her journey back in the sewers with the creature who deposits her in a secluded location. Her father now has to get past government quarantine and survive battling the creature in order to try and save his child.
Director Bong Joon-ho, who has also given us the fantastic Snowpiercer and the current critic favorite Parasite, crafts a well made film which has many exciting elements.
For a movie like this it is only as good as its creature and this one does the job. Despite having a modest budget, the sea creature is well developed, has an interesting personality and does not look like bad CGI. As the audience, you are trying to figure out what the creature wants, what it is doing with the children it kidnaps and stores away while also rooting for the title family to not only survive the disease and run ins with the police to eventually attempt a rescue.
There is a good amount of action including a few intense scenes with the creature and also with one of the family members who also happens to be a famed archer. There is some comedy as well which rounds out the action and provides some down time between scenes.
I really enjoyed The Host much more than I thought I would since I hadn't heard much about it beforehand. Please check it out.
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated The Noah's Ark Quest (Tyler Locke, #1) in Books
Nov 8, 2019
When engineer Tyler Locke rescues archaeologist Dilara Kenner from a helicopter crash he doesn't know whether to believe her story. She tells hum that a friend of hers was murdered by poison in front of her and that he sent her to find Locke. Since then she has been involved in accidents that she suspects are attempts to kill her too.
Initially skeptical, events (not to mention a bizarre plane crash) soon prove she is indeed correct. And that means that Locke and his friend and colleague Grant Westfield only have a few days to save the human race from destruction.
Positioned firmly in the adventure thriller mould this book is both a terrific example of the type and also refreshingly different. Locke makes a terrific heroic lead, using his engineering and scientific knowledge to gradually work out what is going on and how to stop it. He can handle himself in a fight as well, but the muscle is provided by ex-special forces Westfield. Between them they make a formiddable team - and the banter and wit between them and Kenner is so well written and natural.
The villain of the piece is suitably nasty, a sociopath masquerading as the leader of a religious cult. He shows a worrying tendency to be one step ahead of the heroes at every turn and his motives seem worryingly plausible.
The writing is taut and moves at a considerable pace. There are a number of action sequences - fights, battles, escapes and chases of all sorts - but each is written with an eye to detail and with minimal suspension of belief lending a sense of realism that keeps the whole story grounded.
The British title that I read - The Noah's Ark Quest - is I think a little misleading in that Noah's Ark itself is only of peripheral interest for the bulk of the story. The title of The Ark seems to fit a lot better, resonating as it does with both large ships and places of safety, both themes of note in the book.
This is a very impressive book and one that I thoroughly recommend to anyone who likes their thrillers fast and loud but with an undercurrent of intelligence. Morrison has a real talent for writing which deserves a much wider audience.
Rating: Some violence and some bad language but nothing gratuitous.
Initially skeptical, events (not to mention a bizarre plane crash) soon prove she is indeed correct. And that means that Locke and his friend and colleague Grant Westfield only have a few days to save the human race from destruction.
Positioned firmly in the adventure thriller mould this book is both a terrific example of the type and also refreshingly different. Locke makes a terrific heroic lead, using his engineering and scientific knowledge to gradually work out what is going on and how to stop it. He can handle himself in a fight as well, but the muscle is provided by ex-special forces Westfield. Between them they make a formiddable team - and the banter and wit between them and Kenner is so well written and natural.
The villain of the piece is suitably nasty, a sociopath masquerading as the leader of a religious cult. He shows a worrying tendency to be one step ahead of the heroes at every turn and his motives seem worryingly plausible.
The writing is taut and moves at a considerable pace. There are a number of action sequences - fights, battles, escapes and chases of all sorts - but each is written with an eye to detail and with minimal suspension of belief lending a sense of realism that keeps the whole story grounded.
The British title that I read - The Noah's Ark Quest - is I think a little misleading in that Noah's Ark itself is only of peripheral interest for the bulk of the story. The title of The Ark seems to fit a lot better, resonating as it does with both large ships and places of safety, both themes of note in the book.
This is a very impressive book and one that I thoroughly recommend to anyone who likes their thrillers fast and loud but with an undercurrent of intelligence. Morrison has a real talent for writing which deserves a much wider audience.
Rating: Some violence and some bad language but nothing gratuitous.