Search
3D Classic Literature Collection
Book and Entertainment
App
• Featured by Apple in "Back to School" in the App Store (US/UK and many others...) • Featured...
Handy Photo
Photo & Video and Entertainment
App
***** “What does it do? Everything… quickly and easily. It’s really awesome!“ – Life In...
Rachel King (13 KP) rated A Short History of Myth in Books
Feb 11, 2019
For such a short book, I developed quite a strong opinion about the text while reading it. I have been curious about Armstrong's writings for a long time, but this is the first attempt I have made at actually reading anything by her. I have always been a fan of ancient mythology, such as Greek and Egyptian, so this seemed like an easy choice.
In seven chapters, Armstrong takes a simplified stroll through history, focusing on the concept of myth and its impact on civilization. All throughout the book, she attempts to support her claim that a person can believe in myths without believing that the myths are actually true, and that the failure of modern society is by not following her specific edict. While this notion strikes me as absurd, I keep reading because, hey, it's a short book.
While I know only bits and pieces about many of the world's religions, I do know both the history and the holy book of my religion, Christianity. It becomes apparent to me early in the text that she is masking her opinions and interpretations of this religion as actual fact, so I can only imagine how she misconstrues other religions.
Her citations were lacking to me, with many claims going unsupported, others only partially supported, such as citation #84 and #30, and some citations simply not even applying to the specified text, such as citation #87. In citation #55, she claims that the Bible contains a Creation myth in which God brings the world into being by killing a sea monster, but one of the four verses she cites make no reference to anything of the sort (Job 3:12), and the other three (Isaiah 27:1, Job 26:13, Psalm 74:14) that do mention a leviathan cannot be interpreted that way when read in context. Isaiah is describing the end of days, while Job merely says that God created the serpent, and the verse in Psalm is within the context of a song about God rescuing the Hebrews from Egyptian slavery -- no relevancy to Creation. She makes the claim that Paul "was not much interested in Jesus's teachings, which he rarely quotes, or in the events of his earthly life." This claim is easily disproved by examining how Paul's words line up with Jesus's in John 5:21 vs. 1 Corinthians 15:22, Matthew 6:25 vs. Philippians 4:6, and many other passages.
While going through the citations, I got the feeling that the author depended on secondary sources for her information without actually studying the original source of her information. The book struck me as highly opinionated, vague, and too general for the topic being addressed. I have no doubt that there are better and more thorough books available on the topic of myth. I do not believe that I will be reading any more of Armstrong's works in the future.
In seven chapters, Armstrong takes a simplified stroll through history, focusing on the concept of myth and its impact on civilization. All throughout the book, she attempts to support her claim that a person can believe in myths without believing that the myths are actually true, and that the failure of modern society is by not following her specific edict. While this notion strikes me as absurd, I keep reading because, hey, it's a short book.
While I know only bits and pieces about many of the world's religions, I do know both the history and the holy book of my religion, Christianity. It becomes apparent to me early in the text that she is masking her opinions and interpretations of this religion as actual fact, so I can only imagine how she misconstrues other religions.
Her citations were lacking to me, with many claims going unsupported, others only partially supported, such as citation #84 and #30, and some citations simply not even applying to the specified text, such as citation #87. In citation #55, she claims that the Bible contains a Creation myth in which God brings the world into being by killing a sea monster, but one of the four verses she cites make no reference to anything of the sort (Job 3:12), and the other three (Isaiah 27:1, Job 26:13, Psalm 74:14) that do mention a leviathan cannot be interpreted that way when read in context. Isaiah is describing the end of days, while Job merely says that God created the serpent, and the verse in Psalm is within the context of a song about God rescuing the Hebrews from Egyptian slavery -- no relevancy to Creation. She makes the claim that Paul "was not much interested in Jesus's teachings, which he rarely quotes, or in the events of his earthly life." This claim is easily disproved by examining how Paul's words line up with Jesus's in John 5:21 vs. 1 Corinthians 15:22, Matthew 6:25 vs. Philippians 4:6, and many other passages.
While going through the citations, I got the feeling that the author depended on secondary sources for her information without actually studying the original source of her information. The book struck me as highly opinionated, vague, and too general for the topic being addressed. I have no doubt that there are better and more thorough books available on the topic of myth. I do not believe that I will be reading any more of Armstrong's works in the future.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Fisherman's Friends (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
I'm a sucker for this sort of film. There's a soothing consistency to them that makes for an entertaining and wholesome watch.
Daniel Mays as Danny us just adorable, he's always good for an amusing role. If you haven't caught Swimming With Men then you probably should. Danny isn't quite the same as his music exec counterparts, while he has the bullshitting down to a t he also cares much more for others than he does himself. I absolutely love the way he is with Alwyn and her daughter.
One thing that concerns me about this film is that it made me aware that James Purefoy is now old enough to be cast as someone's grandad. When did that happen? Purefoy along with all the other actors in the gang are a vision of camaraderie. There's a great scene where they head out to London, it's funny from start to finish and filled with toe-tapping enjoyment.
As much as I loved Noel Clarke when he was in Doctor Who it can't rescue him from the stereotypical American exec role. That accent was like a punch in the face every time I heard it. Has any American ever genuinely sounded like that or is it just reserved for British actors putting on American accents?
Obviously a lot of this film is dedicated to music, the sea shanties have me goosebumps as soon as they all started singing. It doesn't necessarily matter what they're singing about, the crescendos of it are just so beautiful. I will admit that generally I wouldn't be able to tell you if films had music in the background, unless it's bad or amazing it will largely pass me by, but Fisherman's Friends had one of those rare occasions where I noticed.
There are a lot of things happening in the film, several of the main characters have something going on around them but at no point did it feel like anything was surplus to requirements. In films with a larger cast it can often end up missing or skipping over a storyline but all of them seemed to be tied up neatly at the end of this.
The ending has a very emotional sequence in it, I spent a significant amount of it crying into my cuffs. James Purefoy and Daniel Mays manage to have an incredibly powerful moment together. There was so much emotion in it that just recalling it now is making me well up as I write.
While I might not buy this one I would certainly watch it again. It's a film that I'm certain almost anyone would enjoy, you'll certainly learn a few life lessons while you watch it.
What you should do
Definitely one to see, I know not everyone is a fan of musical numbers but there's plenty to go on to keep you amused.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Where do I get myself a group to sing with? I miss a good old fashioned singalong.
Daniel Mays as Danny us just adorable, he's always good for an amusing role. If you haven't caught Swimming With Men then you probably should. Danny isn't quite the same as his music exec counterparts, while he has the bullshitting down to a t he also cares much more for others than he does himself. I absolutely love the way he is with Alwyn and her daughter.
One thing that concerns me about this film is that it made me aware that James Purefoy is now old enough to be cast as someone's grandad. When did that happen? Purefoy along with all the other actors in the gang are a vision of camaraderie. There's a great scene where they head out to London, it's funny from start to finish and filled with toe-tapping enjoyment.
As much as I loved Noel Clarke when he was in Doctor Who it can't rescue him from the stereotypical American exec role. That accent was like a punch in the face every time I heard it. Has any American ever genuinely sounded like that or is it just reserved for British actors putting on American accents?
Obviously a lot of this film is dedicated to music, the sea shanties have me goosebumps as soon as they all started singing. It doesn't necessarily matter what they're singing about, the crescendos of it are just so beautiful. I will admit that generally I wouldn't be able to tell you if films had music in the background, unless it's bad or amazing it will largely pass me by, but Fisherman's Friends had one of those rare occasions where I noticed.
There are a lot of things happening in the film, several of the main characters have something going on around them but at no point did it feel like anything was surplus to requirements. In films with a larger cast it can often end up missing or skipping over a storyline but all of them seemed to be tied up neatly at the end of this.
The ending has a very emotional sequence in it, I spent a significant amount of it crying into my cuffs. James Purefoy and Daniel Mays manage to have an incredibly powerful moment together. There was so much emotion in it that just recalling it now is making me well up as I write.
While I might not buy this one I would certainly watch it again. It's a film that I'm certain almost anyone would enjoy, you'll certainly learn a few life lessons while you watch it.
What you should do
Definitely one to see, I know not everyone is a fan of musical numbers but there's plenty to go on to keep you amused.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Where do I get myself a group to sing with? I miss a good old fashioned singalong.
Hurricane HD
Weather and News
App
Hurricane HD™ - The Proven Hurricane Tracking Experience, keeping you safe and informed for over 8...
Shadows and Reflections by Marc Almond
Album Watch
‘Shadows And Reflections’ features sumptuous arrangements of iconic torch songs and 60’s...
pop
Cooking Games Chef Restaurant
Games
7.0
Rate It
App
Cooking Games Chef Restaurant is a New Free game for kids, mothers and entire families that love...
Garmin BlueChart® Mobile
Navigation and Weather
App
Plan & view routes on your iPad® or iPhone® with BlueChart® Mobile. Easily and wirelessly...
A film with dodgy voices.
Catching up here with a review of a film I saw a couple of weeks ago.
What a great film “Get Out” was. Jordan Peele’s classic which unpeeled (sic) race relations in a wholly novel and horrifying way. Yes, the story was a bit ‘out there’ and unbelievable, but he pulled it off with great chutzpah.
With his follow-up film – “Us”…. sorry but, for me, it just didn’t work.
From great beginnings
It all starts so promisingly. Young Adelaide Wilson (a fine debut performance by Madison Curry) is on a seaside holiday with her mother and careless father when she wanders onto the deserted Santa Cruz beach at night. There sits, like some gothic horror ghost train, the Hall of Mirrors. “Find Yourself” it taunts. She makes the mistake of entering and changes her life forever.
Spin forwards 30 years and Adelaide, now a married mother of two, is back in Santa Cruz with a terrifying feeling that things are about to go pear-shaped. And of course they do!
Why oh why oh why those voices?
This film had me gripped until a particular point. Having people stand still and silent at the end of your drive is an incredibly spooky thing to show. But then, for me, the wheels came off big time. The “reveal” of who these people were I could take. But the manner of their behaviour and – particularly – how they talked was horrifying; and not in a good way. When “Red” started speaking I couldn’t believe my ears: Joe Pasquale after swallowing Donald Duck.
From there, the film became farcical for me, descending in progressive stages to a tunnel-based apocalypse: a plot element that was just so paper thin it bore no scrutiny at all.
This was, no doubt, an attempt at a satirical dig at the class structure of America (“We are Americans” adding a double meaning to the name of the film). If it had been played as a deliberate comedy farce it might have worked. But otherwise no.
Flashes of Peele brilliance
This is not to say that there are not positives in the film. The excellent Lupita Nyong’o gives the whacky material her all, and the other adult female lead – Elisabeth Moss (from TV’s “The Handmaid’s Tale”) – is good value as Kitty Tyler: a diabolical incarnation in either form!
Peele also delivers flashes of directorial brilliance. The “hands across America”, disappearing into the sea, is a sight that stays with you. I also liked the twist at the end, although in retrospect it’s difficult to relate it to the rest of the story and strikes of desperation in the storytelling.
Overall, a big disappointment
I know there are some who really like this movie. Each to their own, but I was not one of them. After “Get Out” I was hoping for something much better. I hope that was just Jordan Peele’s “difficult second album”.
What a great film “Get Out” was. Jordan Peele’s classic which unpeeled (sic) race relations in a wholly novel and horrifying way. Yes, the story was a bit ‘out there’ and unbelievable, but he pulled it off with great chutzpah.
With his follow-up film – “Us”…. sorry but, for me, it just didn’t work.
From great beginnings
It all starts so promisingly. Young Adelaide Wilson (a fine debut performance by Madison Curry) is on a seaside holiday with her mother and careless father when she wanders onto the deserted Santa Cruz beach at night. There sits, like some gothic horror ghost train, the Hall of Mirrors. “Find Yourself” it taunts. She makes the mistake of entering and changes her life forever.
Spin forwards 30 years and Adelaide, now a married mother of two, is back in Santa Cruz with a terrifying feeling that things are about to go pear-shaped. And of course they do!
Why oh why oh why those voices?
This film had me gripped until a particular point. Having people stand still and silent at the end of your drive is an incredibly spooky thing to show. But then, for me, the wheels came off big time. The “reveal” of who these people were I could take. But the manner of their behaviour and – particularly – how they talked was horrifying; and not in a good way. When “Red” started speaking I couldn’t believe my ears: Joe Pasquale after swallowing Donald Duck.
From there, the film became farcical for me, descending in progressive stages to a tunnel-based apocalypse: a plot element that was just so paper thin it bore no scrutiny at all.
This was, no doubt, an attempt at a satirical dig at the class structure of America (“We are Americans” adding a double meaning to the name of the film). If it had been played as a deliberate comedy farce it might have worked. But otherwise no.
Flashes of Peele brilliance
This is not to say that there are not positives in the film. The excellent Lupita Nyong’o gives the whacky material her all, and the other adult female lead – Elisabeth Moss (from TV’s “The Handmaid’s Tale”) – is good value as Kitty Tyler: a diabolical incarnation in either form!
Peele also delivers flashes of directorial brilliance. The “hands across America”, disappearing into the sea, is a sight that stays with you. I also liked the twist at the end, although in retrospect it’s difficult to relate it to the rest of the story and strikes of desperation in the storytelling.
Overall, a big disappointment
I know there are some who really like this movie. Each to their own, but I was not one of them. After “Get Out” I was hoping for something much better. I hope that was just Jordan Peele’s “difficult second album”.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Aquaman (2018) in Movies
Dec 14, 2018
A very enjoyable DCEU movie!
Before I begin, I just wanted to describe my feelings on the state of the DCEU up until now and hopefully this will be a good indication as to whether or not you're going to agree with me when it comes to Aquaman. So, as I'm sure most people will agree, so far the whole thing has been a bit of a disaster. A rush to try and bottle what Marvel have spent the last 10 years crafting and achieving, with just a handful of below average and inconsistently toned movies. I liked Man of Steel, and I didn't mind Batman V Superman, although I do understand why many people were disappointed. I really enjoyed Wonder Woman, and I found a lot to like within Justice League too. But as for Suicide Squad, well that one was just a ridiculous mess. And with all the uncertainty around the future of Henry Cavill and Ben Affleck in their roles as Superman and Batman, it seems DC still have a long way to go in terms of laying solid foundations for some decent universe building to rival Marvel.
So that brings us to Aquaman, probably the only other character of interest from Justice League who has yet to get his own origin/standalone movie. We got glimpses in Justice League, tastes of the underwater water world, and brief appearances from Amber Heards character Mera, so it's good to be able to expand on what has the potential to be a really strong, interesting character. And under the direction of James Wan, hopefully another welcome deviation from the dark, dull earlier DC movies that received so much criticism.
As far as origin stories go, things get off to a strong start. Lighthouse keeper Thomas Curry finds Atlantean queen Atlanna (Nicole Kidman) washed up on the rocks one day and takes her in to care for her. They fall in love, eventually giving birth to Arthur. A few years later and it's clear that Atlanna cannot stay. She returns to Atlantis, promising that she'll return to him one day, leaving Thomas to raise Arthur. When we join Arthur again, it's one year following the events of the Justice League and the defeat of Steppenwolf. Taking care of a bunch of hi-tech pirates who have boarded a submarine, but still finding time to return home to dad for a few beers and a laugh with the locals. He's left the world of Atlantis behind him, having been banished for being a half breed, and feeling anger at the treatment his mother received for giving birth to him. It's not long though before things all start kicking off and he had to return to life under the sea. Half brother Orm (Patrick Wilson) is looking to wage war on the surface world in retaliation for all the destruction and pollution within the seas, and begins trying to gain support from the seven kingdoms. Meanwhile, one of the pirates Aquaman encountered earlier has got his hands on some Atlantean technology, becoming Black Manta and vowing to get his revenge. During an undersea meeting with Vulko, aid to Atlanna and the man responsible for training Arthur as a child, Arthur is urged to find the lost Trident of Atlan, a magic artifact that once belonged to Atlantis’ first ruler. By wielding the trident, Arthur can reclaim his rightful place as king, hopefully uniting the worlds of land and sea.
There is a LOT going on here, and luckily for the most part, it all works relatively well. The quest for the trident is a bit like an Indiana Jones quest - Arthur and Mera have to undertake a trek across, and below, the Sahara desert, a trip to Sicily, a perilous boat trip and a journey to a hidden world deep within the ocean. The Black Manta storyline seems a bit unnecessary and annoying at times, although does provide some great action (and a setup for a sequel). The underwater scenes involving Atlantis and the other kingdoms are absolutely beautiful to look at, very detailed and imaginative, but these are the areas that unfortunately begin to let the movie down. Culminating in an epic underwater battle involving thousands of different creatures and weapons, the movie ends up as just another DCEU CGI overload.
Despite that, I actually had a lot of fun with this movie, and I particularly loved the action. Fluid, balletic fight scenes, with the viewpoint flowing above and around those involved, we follow a character as he powers through walls and roofs, pulling out to reveal and follow other characters in action, the direction of these scenes is extremely effective. Overall, this is definitely a strong step up for the DCEU and a worthy standalone movie. I just hope they can now keep this momentum going.
So that brings us to Aquaman, probably the only other character of interest from Justice League who has yet to get his own origin/standalone movie. We got glimpses in Justice League, tastes of the underwater water world, and brief appearances from Amber Heards character Mera, so it's good to be able to expand on what has the potential to be a really strong, interesting character. And under the direction of James Wan, hopefully another welcome deviation from the dark, dull earlier DC movies that received so much criticism.
As far as origin stories go, things get off to a strong start. Lighthouse keeper Thomas Curry finds Atlantean queen Atlanna (Nicole Kidman) washed up on the rocks one day and takes her in to care for her. They fall in love, eventually giving birth to Arthur. A few years later and it's clear that Atlanna cannot stay. She returns to Atlantis, promising that she'll return to him one day, leaving Thomas to raise Arthur. When we join Arthur again, it's one year following the events of the Justice League and the defeat of Steppenwolf. Taking care of a bunch of hi-tech pirates who have boarded a submarine, but still finding time to return home to dad for a few beers and a laugh with the locals. He's left the world of Atlantis behind him, having been banished for being a half breed, and feeling anger at the treatment his mother received for giving birth to him. It's not long though before things all start kicking off and he had to return to life under the sea. Half brother Orm (Patrick Wilson) is looking to wage war on the surface world in retaliation for all the destruction and pollution within the seas, and begins trying to gain support from the seven kingdoms. Meanwhile, one of the pirates Aquaman encountered earlier has got his hands on some Atlantean technology, becoming Black Manta and vowing to get his revenge. During an undersea meeting with Vulko, aid to Atlanna and the man responsible for training Arthur as a child, Arthur is urged to find the lost Trident of Atlan, a magic artifact that once belonged to Atlantis’ first ruler. By wielding the trident, Arthur can reclaim his rightful place as king, hopefully uniting the worlds of land and sea.
There is a LOT going on here, and luckily for the most part, it all works relatively well. The quest for the trident is a bit like an Indiana Jones quest - Arthur and Mera have to undertake a trek across, and below, the Sahara desert, a trip to Sicily, a perilous boat trip and a journey to a hidden world deep within the ocean. The Black Manta storyline seems a bit unnecessary and annoying at times, although does provide some great action (and a setup for a sequel). The underwater scenes involving Atlantis and the other kingdoms are absolutely beautiful to look at, very detailed and imaginative, but these are the areas that unfortunately begin to let the movie down. Culminating in an epic underwater battle involving thousands of different creatures and weapons, the movie ends up as just another DCEU CGI overload.
Despite that, I actually had a lot of fun with this movie, and I particularly loved the action. Fluid, balletic fight scenes, with the viewpoint flowing above and around those involved, we follow a character as he powers through walls and roofs, pulling out to reveal and follow other characters in action, the direction of these scenes is extremely effective. Overall, this is definitely a strong step up for the DCEU and a worthy standalone movie. I just hope they can now keep this momentum going.
