Search
Louise (64 KP) rated The Wonder in Books
Jul 2, 2018
This is Emma Donoghue’s latest book on the market, prior to picking it up I had heard some mixed reviews but the synopsis is what really pulled me in and regardless of what other readers thought I was going to read it and form my own opinion.
Now I picked up ‘Room’ a few years back and read about half and put it down for some unknown reason. This book is not like ‘Room’ so try not go into it thinking it’s going to be.
This is a historical fiction novel set in rural Ireland just after the Crimean war. Our protagonist is an English nurse who served under Miss Nightingale and goes by the name of Lib Wright. Lib is sent over to Ireland to observe an 11-year-old girl, Anna, who has claimed to have not eaten anything over the last 2-3 months. Lib and a Catholic nun take it turns to watch over Anna, 24hrs a day to see if she really is a miracle as proclaimed by the locals.
I liked this book, I was enthralled by the mystery of a small girl claiming to not have eaten. I was hooked line and sinker wanting to find out what was really happening. How could a child not eat? Was it all just a ploy for fame and money?
This book has a lot with religion involved as all the community and the rest of Ireland are Catholics. I am not a religious person, so a lot of the verses and prayers that were being said went over my head. Religion is the essence of this book, it proves how devout and bordering fanatic people can become.
The Wonder is a very atmospheric book and has a lot of descriptive writing and you really get a feel for the village and the people.
I liked Lib our protagonist, she was determined to find out the truth, she was sceptical from the start and was convinced she would not be there for long. She got frustrated a lot of the time for multiple reasons. 1, The family were not very forthcoming and didn’t like having a stranger in their house (understandable). 2, Anna was very timid and would not open up to Lib. 3, The nun, wouldn’t confer with her as to what happened on her shifts as they were supposed to be forming their own opinions. 4, The doctor looked down on Lib as just ‘help’ and when she voiced her concerns about Anna, she was cut off and told to just do her job.
The couple of things that let the book down for me was the pace of the book. This is an incredibly slow paced book and may not be for everyone. I usually don’t mind slow paced books but it felt like there was a lot of repetition and at points I was thinking to myself that surely this couldn’t on like this for the next 200 odd pages but it did. I think this is for readers who like more atmosphere to their books.
I rated this 3 out of 5 stars
Now I picked up ‘Room’ a few years back and read about half and put it down for some unknown reason. This book is not like ‘Room’ so try not go into it thinking it’s going to be.
This is a historical fiction novel set in rural Ireland just after the Crimean war. Our protagonist is an English nurse who served under Miss Nightingale and goes by the name of Lib Wright. Lib is sent over to Ireland to observe an 11-year-old girl, Anna, who has claimed to have not eaten anything over the last 2-3 months. Lib and a Catholic nun take it turns to watch over Anna, 24hrs a day to see if she really is a miracle as proclaimed by the locals.
I liked this book, I was enthralled by the mystery of a small girl claiming to not have eaten. I was hooked line and sinker wanting to find out what was really happening. How could a child not eat? Was it all just a ploy for fame and money?
This book has a lot with religion involved as all the community and the rest of Ireland are Catholics. I am not a religious person, so a lot of the verses and prayers that were being said went over my head. Religion is the essence of this book, it proves how devout and bordering fanatic people can become.
The Wonder is a very atmospheric book and has a lot of descriptive writing and you really get a feel for the village and the people.
I liked Lib our protagonist, she was determined to find out the truth, she was sceptical from the start and was convinced she would not be there for long. She got frustrated a lot of the time for multiple reasons. 1, The family were not very forthcoming and didn’t like having a stranger in their house (understandable). 2, Anna was very timid and would not open up to Lib. 3, The nun, wouldn’t confer with her as to what happened on her shifts as they were supposed to be forming their own opinions. 4, The doctor looked down on Lib as just ‘help’ and when she voiced her concerns about Anna, she was cut off and told to just do her job.
The couple of things that let the book down for me was the pace of the book. This is an incredibly slow paced book and may not be for everyone. I usually don’t mind slow paced books but it felt like there was a lot of repetition and at points I was thinking to myself that surely this couldn’t on like this for the next 200 odd pages but it did. I think this is for readers who like more atmosphere to their books.
I rated this 3 out of 5 stars
EmersonRose (320 KP) rated The Haunting of Hill House in Books
Nov 20, 2019
The Haunting of Hill House was written by Shirley Jackson in 1959. Since then it has been heralded as a milestone in the horror genre. The book takes its reader on an unnerving adventure with four characters who chose to spend a summer in a haunted house.
Dr. Montague wishes to track the supernatural and write a factual paper on hauntings. He enlists the help of two women who he believes to have connections with the unnatural. The first is Theodora lighthearted and the center of attention, and Eleanor, quiet and fragile but ready for something in her life to change. Their party is completed by Luke, the charming heir to Hill House. The unnerving atmosphere of the house puts them all on edge from the moment they see it, but things only get stranger as the power of the house grows.
I was drawn to this book for several reasons. First, it was the week of Halloween, why not get into the spirit. But Hill House had begun to orbit in my life before this. I myself read The Lottery in my eighth-grade creative writing class. I also recently read a book called House of Leaves by Mark Z. Danielewski, which is also a haunted house story and Shirley Jackson’s book began getting recommended to me. As I started to read the book, I began to have this feeling best expressed through a quote from the book itself: “Am I walking toward something I should be running away from?”
When I started reading the story, I could not help but let my thoughts fly trying to solve 13388the mystery myself. The language of the book captured my attention completely. The descriptions built up the house so vividly in my imagination. The haunting Victorian atmosphere is both beautiful and disturbing. The unnerving and uncomfortable were created, kept up, and made the book hard to put down. I loved wondering about Mrs. Dudley, questioning the other characters, and imagining what could be knocking on the door.
Eleanor, as the point of view character, is the easiest to identify with. Her paranoia, fear, and anxiety are central parts to her identity, but she also seems to the most real in her reactions to both the house and the other characters. He relationships with each of the other four are almost dreamlike in the way level of closeness she has with them ebbs and flows. I could not help but feel for Eleanor, especially when it seems she is being targeted by the house.
I found this book to be enthralling. The horror genre is not my go-to read, but Shirley Jackson has a way with words and intimate feelings that makes me want to read through every book she has ever written. The psychological descent of the characters is natural and terrifying to behold. Now that I have read it, I cannot help but see Jackson’s influence on horror and psychological thriller. I am very pleased with having finally read this book and would highly recommend it as a must read. Only beware, the house as power and no one’s mind is safe.
Dr. Montague wishes to track the supernatural and write a factual paper on hauntings. He enlists the help of two women who he believes to have connections with the unnatural. The first is Theodora lighthearted and the center of attention, and Eleanor, quiet and fragile but ready for something in her life to change. Their party is completed by Luke, the charming heir to Hill House. The unnerving atmosphere of the house puts them all on edge from the moment they see it, but things only get stranger as the power of the house grows.
I was drawn to this book for several reasons. First, it was the week of Halloween, why not get into the spirit. But Hill House had begun to orbit in my life before this. I myself read The Lottery in my eighth-grade creative writing class. I also recently read a book called House of Leaves by Mark Z. Danielewski, which is also a haunted house story and Shirley Jackson’s book began getting recommended to me. As I started to read the book, I began to have this feeling best expressed through a quote from the book itself: “Am I walking toward something I should be running away from?”
When I started reading the story, I could not help but let my thoughts fly trying to solve 13388the mystery myself. The language of the book captured my attention completely. The descriptions built up the house so vividly in my imagination. The haunting Victorian atmosphere is both beautiful and disturbing. The unnerving and uncomfortable were created, kept up, and made the book hard to put down. I loved wondering about Mrs. Dudley, questioning the other characters, and imagining what could be knocking on the door.
Eleanor, as the point of view character, is the easiest to identify with. Her paranoia, fear, and anxiety are central parts to her identity, but she also seems to the most real in her reactions to both the house and the other characters. He relationships with each of the other four are almost dreamlike in the way level of closeness she has with them ebbs and flows. I could not help but feel for Eleanor, especially when it seems she is being targeted by the house.
I found this book to be enthralling. The horror genre is not my go-to read, but Shirley Jackson has a way with words and intimate feelings that makes me want to read through every book she has ever written. The psychological descent of the characters is natural and terrifying to behold. Now that I have read it, I cannot help but see Jackson’s influence on horror and psychological thriller. I am very pleased with having finally read this book and would highly recommend it as a must read. Only beware, the house as power and no one’s mind is safe.
U LIVE - video chat for adult
Social Networking and Entertainment
App
Are you ready to chat live with beautiful girls all over the world? Then U LIVE is exactly what...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Pride and Prejudice and Zombies (2016) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
A film for all those women who dream of chivalry, but want to kick some ass.
Contains spoilers, click to show
"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a zombie in possession of brains must be in want of more brains."
A mysterious plague has fallen across England. The countryside is a relative haven, where the city has become a playground for unmentionables. The oriental arts have become the fashion and a desirable young lady no longer needs to be the prim and proper wife, unless your name is Mr Collins.
The Bennet's lovely daughters, beautiful and strong of body and mind are accustomed to a regimented life of training, until the handsome stranger Mr Bingley comes to the country. A whirlwind of romance and the undead lead them into a battle for family and love.
Heaving bosoms, country estates. Brain eating corpses and assorted weaponry. Everything you'd expect when the undead meets Jane Austen. As if on cue my playlist has shuffled to Zombie by The Cranberries. I can't deny enjoying this film, I should point out that I was always going to enjoy it, be it Oscar or Razzie worthy. It definitely had the potential to be an epic re-watchable classic or the B-movie winner that shone from the book.
When it was first published I picked it up almost instantly and soon found Quirk Books and other crossover books developing a little shrine-like area. [Now given pride of place in my nerd room.] Having a dislike of classics embedded in me from school and enjoying the general kick-assery of action films, it was a great crossover to bring those classics back into my life.
Admission time, while I've read the book I can't actually remember when, it was dozens of books ago. I loved it but not everyone did. I'm going to make a big sweeping statement. [Sorry, not sorry] It's not a Jane Austen book people, get over it. "He's ruined Elizabeth Bennet!" No he's taken a strong minded female character and put her in a new fantasy setting. I'm sure there would have been less objections if all the names were different (and the title too) and it was just described as "loosely based on Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice". But swings and roundabouts, because it probably wouldn't have been as popular if it wasn't called Pride and Prejudice and Zombies.
Sam Riley's Mr Darcy was no Colin Firth, but it was still very good. It did kind of seem like they threw him in a lake because they felt they should pay homage to Firth's dunking.
Note to those who see the film, Liz Bennet's heaving bosom is seen on a regular basis and is entirely distracting. I'm not sure there's a plot line linked to them, they're just always there, they probably should have got their own credit for the part.
I think my favourite scene was where Darcy came to Elizabeth to proclaim his love... and then they proceed to beat each other with sticks, books, basically whatever is to hand. Heated and packed with sexual tension it made for entertaining viewing. It also reminded me of the scene in Buffy where the slayer and Spike fight in an abandoned building, and the amount of sexual tension between the pair results in breaking the building, amongst other things... but those other things probably wouldn't work so well in Austen's time.
Even with all the bits that brought a smile to my face and made for enjoyable watching, there were some things I couldn't help but be annoyed with.
Firstly, Matt Smith, my dear number 11... [insert long silence here] I know Mr Collins is there for the annoying comic relief and awkwardness but oh my god. It was too much and I was overcome with annoyance. The cast is made up of relatively unknown people, with the exceptions of Charles Dance, Sally Phillips and Matt Smith. I can't help but wonder if Mr Collins would have been easier to deal with if he was an unknown actor.
The camera work had its own peculiarities. Some shots were taken from the zombies point of view. They were blurred and frustrating to watch, I can't really tell what it added. I'm sure it would have added a bit more drama if you'd seen the potential victim being run at. Again, I'm not an expert in showbiz filming but I'm fairly certain that making your audience want to throw up is not the idea. Right near the end there is a shot that perfectly portrays the devastation of the situation...
"How should we get across the devastation of the city and cut out to the next scene?"
"Spin the camera round until people want to vomit?"
"GENIUS!"
I sat there feeling a bit woozy, trying to avoid looking at the screen for the whole thing. I'm not sure either of the fancy styles really improved anything.
My only other wonder about the film is whether it should have gone all out spoof. This was a sensible spoof [relatively speaking], in that it wasn't made specifically for laughs. It did have some, but there were also some moments of emotion too. Should they have played the film out for more comedy? Who knows, but I feel the scene where Darcy and Elizabeth are stabbing a field to kill zombies that are buried underneath was completely wasted in a sensible spoof!
All in all I did enjoy it, but for those of you looking to see it at the cinema I'm not sure it's worth a £10 ticket. Well worth it if you have an offer of some description though. Just remember going in to it that it isn't Jane Austen, it's just your run of the mill zombie period drama... wow, never thought I'd say that sentence.
A mysterious plague has fallen across England. The countryside is a relative haven, where the city has become a playground for unmentionables. The oriental arts have become the fashion and a desirable young lady no longer needs to be the prim and proper wife, unless your name is Mr Collins.
The Bennet's lovely daughters, beautiful and strong of body and mind are accustomed to a regimented life of training, until the handsome stranger Mr Bingley comes to the country. A whirlwind of romance and the undead lead them into a battle for family and love.
Heaving bosoms, country estates. Brain eating corpses and assorted weaponry. Everything you'd expect when the undead meets Jane Austen. As if on cue my playlist has shuffled to Zombie by The Cranberries. I can't deny enjoying this film, I should point out that I was always going to enjoy it, be it Oscar or Razzie worthy. It definitely had the potential to be an epic re-watchable classic or the B-movie winner that shone from the book.
When it was first published I picked it up almost instantly and soon found Quirk Books and other crossover books developing a little shrine-like area. [Now given pride of place in my nerd room.] Having a dislike of classics embedded in me from school and enjoying the general kick-assery of action films, it was a great crossover to bring those classics back into my life.
Admission time, while I've read the book I can't actually remember when, it was dozens of books ago. I loved it but not everyone did. I'm going to make a big sweeping statement. [Sorry, not sorry] It's not a Jane Austen book people, get over it. "He's ruined Elizabeth Bennet!" No he's taken a strong minded female character and put her in a new fantasy setting. I'm sure there would have been less objections if all the names were different (and the title too) and it was just described as "loosely based on Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice". But swings and roundabouts, because it probably wouldn't have been as popular if it wasn't called Pride and Prejudice and Zombies.
Sam Riley's Mr Darcy was no Colin Firth, but it was still very good. It did kind of seem like they threw him in a lake because they felt they should pay homage to Firth's dunking.
Note to those who see the film, Liz Bennet's heaving bosom is seen on a regular basis and is entirely distracting. I'm not sure there's a plot line linked to them, they're just always there, they probably should have got their own credit for the part.
I think my favourite scene was where Darcy came to Elizabeth to proclaim his love... and then they proceed to beat each other with sticks, books, basically whatever is to hand. Heated and packed with sexual tension it made for entertaining viewing. It also reminded me of the scene in Buffy where the slayer and Spike fight in an abandoned building, and the amount of sexual tension between the pair results in breaking the building, amongst other things... but those other things probably wouldn't work so well in Austen's time.
Even with all the bits that brought a smile to my face and made for enjoyable watching, there were some things I couldn't help but be annoyed with.
Firstly, Matt Smith, my dear number 11... [insert long silence here] I know Mr Collins is there for the annoying comic relief and awkwardness but oh my god. It was too much and I was overcome with annoyance. The cast is made up of relatively unknown people, with the exceptions of Charles Dance, Sally Phillips and Matt Smith. I can't help but wonder if Mr Collins would have been easier to deal with if he was an unknown actor.
The camera work had its own peculiarities. Some shots were taken from the zombies point of view. They were blurred and frustrating to watch, I can't really tell what it added. I'm sure it would have added a bit more drama if you'd seen the potential victim being run at. Again, I'm not an expert in showbiz filming but I'm fairly certain that making your audience want to throw up is not the idea. Right near the end there is a shot that perfectly portrays the devastation of the situation...
"How should we get across the devastation of the city and cut out to the next scene?"
"Spin the camera round until people want to vomit?"
"GENIUS!"
I sat there feeling a bit woozy, trying to avoid looking at the screen for the whole thing. I'm not sure either of the fancy styles really improved anything.
My only other wonder about the film is whether it should have gone all out spoof. This was a sensible spoof [relatively speaking], in that it wasn't made specifically for laughs. It did have some, but there were also some moments of emotion too. Should they have played the film out for more comedy? Who knows, but I feel the scene where Darcy and Elizabeth are stabbing a field to kill zombies that are buried underneath was completely wasted in a sensible spoof!
All in all I did enjoy it, but for those of you looking to see it at the cinema I'm not sure it's worth a £10 ticket. Well worth it if you have an offer of some description though. Just remember going in to it that it isn't Jane Austen, it's just your run of the mill zombie period drama... wow, never thought I'd say that sentence.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 10, 2019)
All hail the Titans
2014’s Godzilla was a thrilling and somewhat underrated return to form for the king of the kaiju. Directed by visionary film-maker Gareth Edwards, Godzilla’s return to the big screen was beautifully filmed with some of the best set pieces ever seen on celluloid. It certainly made up for the Roland Emmerich monstrosity that shall remain nameless here.
Little did we know 5 years ago that Edwards’ mega movie would be the start of a franchise culminating in a battle of the ages: Godzilla vs Kong. Follow-up film Kong: Skull Island was again, beautifully filmed, feeling like a movie from a completely different era. Now the follow-up to the follow-up is here. Still with us? Good.
Members of the crypto-zoological agency Monarch face off against a battery of god-sized monsters, including the mighty Godzilla, who collides with Mothra, Rodan, and his ultimate nemesis, the three-headed King Ghidorah. When these ancient super-species-thought to be mere myths-rise again, they all vie for supremacy, leaving humanity’s very existence hanging in the balance.
Taking over from Gareth Edwards after he chose not to return to the franchise is director Michael Dougherty. If the name rings a bell, it’s because he co-wrote X2 and directed the fantastic horror comedy, Krampus. Used to much-lower budgets than this $200million behemoth, Dougherty crafts a film that throws everything including the kitchen sink at the audience, but lacks the lightness of touch that made its predecessors such popcorn-munching fun.
With a cast that includes Stranger Things’ Millie Bobby Brown, Vera Farmiga, Sally Hawkins, Ken Watanabe, Charles Dance and Kyle Chandler, you’d be forgiven that everything from a characterisation point of view would be spot on. Unfortunately, that just isn’t the case. The story and screenplay, penned by Dougherty himself is really lacklustre with poor, cringeworthy dialogue and some wooden performances by actors who should really know better. The attempts at Marvel-esque humour fall completely flat and this is a real shame.
Making her feature film debut, Mille Bobby Brown salvages what she can from the script and performs very well but when the screenplay doesn’t know what to do with individual characters, they’re tossed aside as Ghidorah fodder and completely forgotten about. Not only is this frustrating for the audience, but it certainly isn’t script-writing best practice.
Thankfully, things start to turn around when it comes to the cinematography. Lawrence Sher, who has worked on Paul, The Hangover and the upcoming Joker movie picks some outstanding shots that make you feel very much part of this almost apocalyptic universe the Titans are roaming. While stopping short of beautiful, many of the sequences are too messy for that, Godzilla: King of the Monsters is a very attractive film indeed and the colours used are ethereal in their nature and require the biggest screen possible to get the most from them.
Godzilla is beautifully rendered and while the look is less successful on King Ghidorah, it’s not enough to detract from the exceptional visual effects work
The special effects too make a lasting impression. This was not a cheap film to make and thankfully this shows on screen. Whilst naturally heavy on CGI, Dougherty has stated that practical effects had been used wherever possible. Perhaps the biggest compliment here is that it’s impossible to tell where practical meets CG.
Godzilla is beautifully rendered and while the look is less successful on King Ghidorah, it’s not enough to detract from the exceptional visual effects work that has gone into making Godzilla 2. Mothra in particular is a sight to behold.
Bear McCreary’s score too is very good. After working on relatively low-budget films until now, his orchestral and vocal compositions work beautifully with what’s being shown on screen and the music has an operatic vibe that feels truly fitting of a film of this magnitude.
Nevertheless, Godzilla: King of the Monster’s downfall is in that shoddy script. None of the actors bring their a-game here and moments that should have emotional poignancy don’t hit home because they’re not allowed to. Within 10 minutes of the film’s opening, we’re smack bang in the middle of an action sequence with it rarely letting up until the thrilling finale 2 hours later.
Overall, Godzilla: King of the Monsters is a perfectly adequate outing for the king of the kaiju but one that comes with a dash of disappointment. The bar was set incredibly high by Gareth Edwards and while the special effects and action scenes are impressive, that’s not enough to mask poor storytelling and thinly drawn characters.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2019/05/29/godzilla-king-of-the-monsters-review-all-hail-the-titans/
Little did we know 5 years ago that Edwards’ mega movie would be the start of a franchise culminating in a battle of the ages: Godzilla vs Kong. Follow-up film Kong: Skull Island was again, beautifully filmed, feeling like a movie from a completely different era. Now the follow-up to the follow-up is here. Still with us? Good.
Members of the crypto-zoological agency Monarch face off against a battery of god-sized monsters, including the mighty Godzilla, who collides with Mothra, Rodan, and his ultimate nemesis, the three-headed King Ghidorah. When these ancient super-species-thought to be mere myths-rise again, they all vie for supremacy, leaving humanity’s very existence hanging in the balance.
Taking over from Gareth Edwards after he chose not to return to the franchise is director Michael Dougherty. If the name rings a bell, it’s because he co-wrote X2 and directed the fantastic horror comedy, Krampus. Used to much-lower budgets than this $200million behemoth, Dougherty crafts a film that throws everything including the kitchen sink at the audience, but lacks the lightness of touch that made its predecessors such popcorn-munching fun.
With a cast that includes Stranger Things’ Millie Bobby Brown, Vera Farmiga, Sally Hawkins, Ken Watanabe, Charles Dance and Kyle Chandler, you’d be forgiven that everything from a characterisation point of view would be spot on. Unfortunately, that just isn’t the case. The story and screenplay, penned by Dougherty himself is really lacklustre with poor, cringeworthy dialogue and some wooden performances by actors who should really know better. The attempts at Marvel-esque humour fall completely flat and this is a real shame.
Making her feature film debut, Mille Bobby Brown salvages what she can from the script and performs very well but when the screenplay doesn’t know what to do with individual characters, they’re tossed aside as Ghidorah fodder and completely forgotten about. Not only is this frustrating for the audience, but it certainly isn’t script-writing best practice.
Thankfully, things start to turn around when it comes to the cinematography. Lawrence Sher, who has worked on Paul, The Hangover and the upcoming Joker movie picks some outstanding shots that make you feel very much part of this almost apocalyptic universe the Titans are roaming. While stopping short of beautiful, many of the sequences are too messy for that, Godzilla: King of the Monsters is a very attractive film indeed and the colours used are ethereal in their nature and require the biggest screen possible to get the most from them.
Godzilla is beautifully rendered and while the look is less successful on King Ghidorah, it’s not enough to detract from the exceptional visual effects work
The special effects too make a lasting impression. This was not a cheap film to make and thankfully this shows on screen. Whilst naturally heavy on CGI, Dougherty has stated that practical effects had been used wherever possible. Perhaps the biggest compliment here is that it’s impossible to tell where practical meets CG.
Godzilla is beautifully rendered and while the look is less successful on King Ghidorah, it’s not enough to detract from the exceptional visual effects work that has gone into making Godzilla 2. Mothra in particular is a sight to behold.
Bear McCreary’s score too is very good. After working on relatively low-budget films until now, his orchestral and vocal compositions work beautifully with what’s being shown on screen and the music has an operatic vibe that feels truly fitting of a film of this magnitude.
Nevertheless, Godzilla: King of the Monster’s downfall is in that shoddy script. None of the actors bring their a-game here and moments that should have emotional poignancy don’t hit home because they’re not allowed to. Within 10 minutes of the film’s opening, we’re smack bang in the middle of an action sequence with it rarely letting up until the thrilling finale 2 hours later.
Overall, Godzilla: King of the Monsters is a perfectly adequate outing for the king of the kaiju but one that comes with a dash of disappointment. The bar was set incredibly high by Gareth Edwards and while the special effects and action scenes are impressive, that’s not enough to mask poor storytelling and thinly drawn characters.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2019/05/29/godzilla-king-of-the-monsters-review-all-hail-the-titans/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Pain & Gain (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Michael Bay’s latest film Pain and Gain suffers from a bit of performance anxiety. It starts hot and flashy, becomes humorous and then starts to drag as it realizes it needs to actually deliver. This is unfortunate because if Bay focused on delivering an entertaining movie from start to finish he may have succeeded. Instead we are constantly reminded by expository text on screen and one of the five unnecessary voiceovers that “sometimes the facts are stranger than fiction.” And the facts are that we get a film here that starts out as a comedy, evolves into a kidnapping/extortion story with a few more jokes only to end with minimal action and no redeeming opportunities for our protagonists. Plus the final jokes or shock opportunities are lost in the fact that our main characters become less and less likeable as the story evolves.
Mark Wahlberg plays body-builder and trainer Daniel Lugo, a self-described “doer” who is tired of working hard only to never reach the level of success that many of his rich clients have achieved. Fed up with his everyday life of being broke, Logo decides it is time to take what he thinks should be his. Together with the help of his roided-out, impotent employee Adrian (Anthony Mackie) and ex-con who found Jesus Paul (Dwayne Johnson), the trio decide to kidnap and extort the jerk off wealthy client Victor (Tony Shalhoub) for everything thing he has. The hilarity ensues while it’s obvious that these muscle heads do not have to smarts to pull off this elaborate plan other than what they have seen in the movies.
It should be noted here that Wahlberg is once again great as a character that does not possess a lot of smarts. Mackie delivers another solid character performance to add to his resume but it is Johnson who steals the show. In a movie where at first glance his physique fits right in, it is his softer more emotional side that shows some range that we have never seen from him before. He plays an ex-con who is determined to change his life only to be slowly sucked back into the lifestyle that put him in jail in the first place. Johnson’s emotional range has him delivering perhaps his best performance ever.
Eventually these three break Victor and take everything he has and they start to live out their dreams. But like all things that take no skill or real effort to earn, the three squander their new found wealth and go looking for another target. All while Victor hires a private detective (Ed Harris) to help bust the trio as the local cops do not believe that some muscle heads could pull off the elaborate heist.
And here is where the film starts to fall apart. The three main characters start to change from fun loving hard working characters to bad guys. The things they do to gain their wealth are repulsive and it stops being funny. Victor is a terrible character that is hard to like in the first place, so you do not really feel bad for him when he loses everything. It is just that you do not really feel happy for our anti-heroes either. And when the story enters its third act after dragging through the second, it feels rushed to close out the film as the gang decides to make a run at another wealthy target.
Furthermore, every character get his/hers own voice over. Seriously, what is the point? It is one thing for Wahlberg to have his own narration as he is the main character, however even Harris gets his own character development through dialogue. It makes the story disjointed and made me feel unsure about who or what I should be rooting for.
In the end I walked out of the theater feeling like we watched two different movies. A rags-to-riches comedy in the beginning that morphs into an unfunny crime drama by the end that has to remind you again and again that you are watching something that is based on a true story. It is a shame because I enjoyed the beginning of this film. I wish that Bay would have taken even additional liberties to make a more consistent film from start to finish on what was already a loosely based true story in the first place.
Mark Wahlberg plays body-builder and trainer Daniel Lugo, a self-described “doer” who is tired of working hard only to never reach the level of success that many of his rich clients have achieved. Fed up with his everyday life of being broke, Logo decides it is time to take what he thinks should be his. Together with the help of his roided-out, impotent employee Adrian (Anthony Mackie) and ex-con who found Jesus Paul (Dwayne Johnson), the trio decide to kidnap and extort the jerk off wealthy client Victor (Tony Shalhoub) for everything thing he has. The hilarity ensues while it’s obvious that these muscle heads do not have to smarts to pull off this elaborate plan other than what they have seen in the movies.
It should be noted here that Wahlberg is once again great as a character that does not possess a lot of smarts. Mackie delivers another solid character performance to add to his resume but it is Johnson who steals the show. In a movie where at first glance his physique fits right in, it is his softer more emotional side that shows some range that we have never seen from him before. He plays an ex-con who is determined to change his life only to be slowly sucked back into the lifestyle that put him in jail in the first place. Johnson’s emotional range has him delivering perhaps his best performance ever.
Eventually these three break Victor and take everything he has and they start to live out their dreams. But like all things that take no skill or real effort to earn, the three squander their new found wealth and go looking for another target. All while Victor hires a private detective (Ed Harris) to help bust the trio as the local cops do not believe that some muscle heads could pull off the elaborate heist.
And here is where the film starts to fall apart. The three main characters start to change from fun loving hard working characters to bad guys. The things they do to gain their wealth are repulsive and it stops being funny. Victor is a terrible character that is hard to like in the first place, so you do not really feel bad for him when he loses everything. It is just that you do not really feel happy for our anti-heroes either. And when the story enters its third act after dragging through the second, it feels rushed to close out the film as the gang decides to make a run at another wealthy target.
Furthermore, every character get his/hers own voice over. Seriously, what is the point? It is one thing for Wahlberg to have his own narration as he is the main character, however even Harris gets his own character development through dialogue. It makes the story disjointed and made me feel unsure about who or what I should be rooting for.
In the end I walked out of the theater feeling like we watched two different movies. A rags-to-riches comedy in the beginning that morphs into an unfunny crime drama by the end that has to remind you again and again that you are watching something that is based on a true story. It is a shame because I enjoyed the beginning of this film. I wish that Bay would have taken even additional liberties to make a more consistent film from start to finish on what was already a loosely based true story in the first place.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated I Found You in Books
Feb 13, 2018
Alice Lake is a frazzled single mother of three children. One day she spots a man on the beach; he is alone and getting drenched in the rain. Despite her better judgement, Alice goes to talk to him. He has no memory of who he is or where he came from. Alice is drawn to him, and she invites him to stay in the shed on her property. Her young daughter dubs him "Frank." Meanwhile, in Surrey, Lily reports her husband missing. Married for less than a month, Lily cannot believe that her husband would simply abandon her: they are madly in love. She hasn't been in the country for long, though, and soon Lily learns that the name on her husband's passport was fake: he never truly existed. Cut to more than twenty years ago: teenagers Gray and Kirsty are (reluctantly) on vacation with their parents. While on the beach, they meet a young man who clearly has eyes for fifteen-year-old Kirsty. He charms their parents, but quickly rubs Gray the wrong way. Together, these characters combine for Jewell's latest.
<i>This was a rather spellbinding novel for me, even if it requires you to sort of check your rational thought at the front door when beginning it.</i> Alice is a bit of an odd duck--a loner mom with three children by three different fathers who doesn't really play by the rules. The fact that she so easily invites a complete stranger, with no history or backstory, to stay with her family is rather bizarre. As is everyone's reluctance to not just report Frank missing (found?), to say, the police. But we're led to believe that this is rather par for the course for the eccentric Alice and if you can just go along with that, the story falls into place fairly easily. This novel probably came along at a good point for me: I'd just finished a big project at work and needed something for a quick escape. I FOUND YOU is perfect for that: I blew through it in about 24 hours and while I basically had things figured out, it kept me guessing the entire time, wondering if I was right.
I was never truly attached to any of Jewell's characters - Alice is a bit flighty, Lily a tad remote, and Gray and Kirsty a little young. If anything, I was almost more drawn to "Frank" and his predicament. Still, I enjoyed how the story unfolded in bits and pieces, slowly letting the reader in on the past, while still giving us points of view from Lily, Alice, and Frank in the present. As I said, I was never quite sure if I was on the right track with the story, which kept me compulsively reading. Many of the characters' decisions are a bit bizarre, but I still found this to be a fun, quick read for a bit of an escape. Overall, 3.5+ stars. Great for a vacation or an airplane ride.
You can read my reviews of two of Jewell's previous novels here: <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/27276357-the-girls-in-the-garden">THE GIRLS IN THE GARDEN</a> and <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/22430311-the-third-wife">THE THIRD WIFE</a>.
<center><a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">Blog</a>; ~ <a href="https://twitter.com/mwcmoto">Twitter</a>; ~ <a href="https://www.facebook.com/justacatandabook/">Facebook</a>; ~ <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/+KristyHamiltonbooks">Google+</a></center>;
<i>This was a rather spellbinding novel for me, even if it requires you to sort of check your rational thought at the front door when beginning it.</i> Alice is a bit of an odd duck--a loner mom with three children by three different fathers who doesn't really play by the rules. The fact that she so easily invites a complete stranger, with no history or backstory, to stay with her family is rather bizarre. As is everyone's reluctance to not just report Frank missing (found?), to say, the police. But we're led to believe that this is rather par for the course for the eccentric Alice and if you can just go along with that, the story falls into place fairly easily. This novel probably came along at a good point for me: I'd just finished a big project at work and needed something for a quick escape. I FOUND YOU is perfect for that: I blew through it in about 24 hours and while I basically had things figured out, it kept me guessing the entire time, wondering if I was right.
I was never truly attached to any of Jewell's characters - Alice is a bit flighty, Lily a tad remote, and Gray and Kirsty a little young. If anything, I was almost more drawn to "Frank" and his predicament. Still, I enjoyed how the story unfolded in bits and pieces, slowly letting the reader in on the past, while still giving us points of view from Lily, Alice, and Frank in the present. As I said, I was never quite sure if I was on the right track with the story, which kept me compulsively reading. Many of the characters' decisions are a bit bizarre, but I still found this to be a fun, quick read for a bit of an escape. Overall, 3.5+ stars. Great for a vacation or an airplane ride.
You can read my reviews of two of Jewell's previous novels here: <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/27276357-the-girls-in-the-garden">THE GIRLS IN THE GARDEN</a> and <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/22430311-the-third-wife">THE THIRD WIFE</a>.
<center><a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">Blog</a>; ~ <a href="https://twitter.com/mwcmoto">Twitter</a>; ~ <a href="https://www.facebook.com/justacatandabook/">Facebook</a>; ~ <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/+KristyHamiltonbooks">Google+</a></center>;
Darren (1599 KP) rated A History of Violence (2005) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: A History of Violence starts as we meet mild-mannered Tom Stall (Mortensen) working in his local diner with his own family, wide Edie (Bello) and child Jack (Holmes) and Sarah. One evening two men arrive in his diner trying to rob and kill the people inside, Tom’s quick thinking kills the criminals making him a local hero.
The act of heroism brings gangster Carl Fogarty (Harris) to town who claims Tom is from the criminal underworld hiding out with his older brother Richie (Hurt) waiting for him to return back to the criminal world.
Thoughts on A History of Violence
Characters – Tom Stall is a quiet man, running a diner having a loving family, he steps up to protect his customers and friends makes him a local hero. Now he has drawn a target on his chest with his past coming back to haunt him. Edie is the wife of Tom, she works in law bring home the bigger pay checks, she supports Tom, until she learns the truth and must decide where she stands with him. Carl Fogarty is the mysterious stranger that arrives in town claiming to know Tom from a previous life, he brings the danger back into Tom’s life with the past he wanted to run away from. Richie is the crime boss and brother to Tom, he has been searching for his brother for years and now sees the chance for the connection.
Performances – Viggo Mortensen is outstanding in this leading role we see how he keeps his character perfectly calm in everyday life and how the switch can make him a deadly killer, this is an ability that not everyone can achieve. Maria Bello is strong in her role as a woman unsure who her husband really is. Ed Harris and William Hurt in the supporting role are fantastic both take over the screen with their presence adding much needed tension to everything.
Story – The story here follows a mild-mannered man whose past comes back to haunt him after protect people he loves and cares about. This is almost like the story that follows up one of the gangster films where we see someone leave the life only to get drawn back years later against his will. The film like to use the idea of violence being the breaking point for relationships between husband & wife, father & son and two brothers which gets played out perfectly. There is an air of tension from start to finish in the film which leaves us only wanting to see where things would go next.
Thriller – The film uses the tension to keep us feeling uneasy through nearly each moment in the film never knowing what would happen next.
Settings – The film is set in a small town which Tom makes safe and happy, if would make sense for his character to be there too, it shows how media can expose anybody’s secret.
Scene of the Movie – The first crime rescue.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The bullying side which isn’t the most important thing we see.
Final Thoughts – This is one of the best modern thrillers you will see, you have four stunning performances and shocks around each corner.
Overall: Stunning thriller
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/10/21/viggo-mortensen-weekend-a-history-of-violence-2005/
The act of heroism brings gangster Carl Fogarty (Harris) to town who claims Tom is from the criminal underworld hiding out with his older brother Richie (Hurt) waiting for him to return back to the criminal world.
Thoughts on A History of Violence
Characters – Tom Stall is a quiet man, running a diner having a loving family, he steps up to protect his customers and friends makes him a local hero. Now he has drawn a target on his chest with his past coming back to haunt him. Edie is the wife of Tom, she works in law bring home the bigger pay checks, she supports Tom, until she learns the truth and must decide where she stands with him. Carl Fogarty is the mysterious stranger that arrives in town claiming to know Tom from a previous life, he brings the danger back into Tom’s life with the past he wanted to run away from. Richie is the crime boss and brother to Tom, he has been searching for his brother for years and now sees the chance for the connection.
Performances – Viggo Mortensen is outstanding in this leading role we see how he keeps his character perfectly calm in everyday life and how the switch can make him a deadly killer, this is an ability that not everyone can achieve. Maria Bello is strong in her role as a woman unsure who her husband really is. Ed Harris and William Hurt in the supporting role are fantastic both take over the screen with their presence adding much needed tension to everything.
Story – The story here follows a mild-mannered man whose past comes back to haunt him after protect people he loves and cares about. This is almost like the story that follows up one of the gangster films where we see someone leave the life only to get drawn back years later against his will. The film like to use the idea of violence being the breaking point for relationships between husband & wife, father & son and two brothers which gets played out perfectly. There is an air of tension from start to finish in the film which leaves us only wanting to see where things would go next.
Thriller – The film uses the tension to keep us feeling uneasy through nearly each moment in the film never knowing what would happen next.
Settings – The film is set in a small town which Tom makes safe and happy, if would make sense for his character to be there too, it shows how media can expose anybody’s secret.
Scene of the Movie – The first crime rescue.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The bullying side which isn’t the most important thing we see.
Final Thoughts – This is one of the best modern thrillers you will see, you have four stunning performances and shocks around each corner.
Overall: Stunning thriller
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/10/21/viggo-mortensen-weekend-a-history-of-violence-2005/
Lee (2222 KP) rated The Invisible Man (2020) in Movies
Mar 2, 2020
Right off the bat, this latest remake of the classic H.G. Wells story shows us just how suspenseful it can be. It’s the middle of the night and a wide-awake Cecilia (Elizabeth Moss) quietly climbs out of bed so as not to disturb her sleeping partner Adrian (Oliver Jackson-Cohen). It quickly becomes apparent that she has been waiting and planning for this moment to leave him for some time now, and she is absolutely terrified of waking him up. She creeps through their spacious modern glass home, gathering some of her belongings and occasionally checking a mobile feed of the CCTV camera that she has re-positioned in order to see Adrian asleep in bed. Already the tension is unbearable, and we’re only a few minutes into the movie!
A few weeks after her dramatic escape from Adrian and Cecilia is now in the safety of a friends house, police detective James (Aldis Hodge) and his teenage daughter Sydney (Storm Reid). It’s clear that the years of living with an abusive and controlling partner have taken their toll on Cecilia and she can barely even bring herself to leave the house, fearful of every stranger that passes her by. We don’t get to see any of what went on in her relationship with Adrian, and we barely know anything of him either, other than he is a tech billionaire and an expert in the field of ‘optics’. So, when word reaches Cecilia that Adrian has committed suicide, we’re even more in the dark about him. He becomes more of an unknown to us, making him all the more mysterious, and the events that consequently unfold throughout the movie all the more terrifying.
As Cecilia begins to settle back into some kind of normality, she slowly lets her guard down, which as we all know is a big mistake! While Cecilia is alone, we start to get different points of view of her, as if someone is watching her. We focus on areas of the house where nobody is in shot, before panning around to reveal…. nothing. Cecilia is not aware of anything, and we haven’t seen anything either, but you’re left on the edge of your seat, straining your eyes to desperately try and pick out some kind of evidence that someone or something is there with her. And then we begin to get confirmation that an invisible something is actually there – a falling knife, a kitchen fire and things being tampered with all start to put Cecilia back on edge, leading her to suspect that Adrian has found some way to continue making her life a misery. These events start off very subtle, but soon become more horrific and intense, clearly intended to gaslight Cecilia and portray her as crazy to everyone around her.
The traditional route for a movie like this would be to focus on our title character – in this case the invisible man. We might see a brilliant or tortured scientist, succeeding or failing with whatever they’re experimenting with, before following them and the consequences of their actions. By giving us very little backstory to our title character, writer and director Leigh Whannell has chosen instead to focus primarily on Cecilia and the psychological horror she endures. Elizabeth Moss gives us the full range of emotions as she endures her terrible ordeal, and you really do share in her isolation and terror throughout. She completely and brilliantly carries the movie – progressing from the lowest of lows to finally, and brilliantly, deciding it’s time to fight back!
A few weeks after her dramatic escape from Adrian and Cecilia is now in the safety of a friends house, police detective James (Aldis Hodge) and his teenage daughter Sydney (Storm Reid). It’s clear that the years of living with an abusive and controlling partner have taken their toll on Cecilia and she can barely even bring herself to leave the house, fearful of every stranger that passes her by. We don’t get to see any of what went on in her relationship with Adrian, and we barely know anything of him either, other than he is a tech billionaire and an expert in the field of ‘optics’. So, when word reaches Cecilia that Adrian has committed suicide, we’re even more in the dark about him. He becomes more of an unknown to us, making him all the more mysterious, and the events that consequently unfold throughout the movie all the more terrifying.
As Cecilia begins to settle back into some kind of normality, she slowly lets her guard down, which as we all know is a big mistake! While Cecilia is alone, we start to get different points of view of her, as if someone is watching her. We focus on areas of the house where nobody is in shot, before panning around to reveal…. nothing. Cecilia is not aware of anything, and we haven’t seen anything either, but you’re left on the edge of your seat, straining your eyes to desperately try and pick out some kind of evidence that someone or something is there with her. And then we begin to get confirmation that an invisible something is actually there – a falling knife, a kitchen fire and things being tampered with all start to put Cecilia back on edge, leading her to suspect that Adrian has found some way to continue making her life a misery. These events start off very subtle, but soon become more horrific and intense, clearly intended to gaslight Cecilia and portray her as crazy to everyone around her.
The traditional route for a movie like this would be to focus on our title character – in this case the invisible man. We might see a brilliant or tortured scientist, succeeding or failing with whatever they’re experimenting with, before following them and the consequences of their actions. By giving us very little backstory to our title character, writer and director Leigh Whannell has chosen instead to focus primarily on Cecilia and the psychological horror she endures. Elizabeth Moss gives us the full range of emotions as she endures her terrible ordeal, and you really do share in her isolation and terror throughout. She completely and brilliantly carries the movie – progressing from the lowest of lows to finally, and brilliantly, deciding it’s time to fight back!
Darren (1599 KP) rated Wildling (2018) in Movies
Oct 14, 2019
Characters – Anna was raised by a man in the middle of the woods, she has been drugged to stop her going through her womanhood until she is rescued. Taken in by the local sheriff, she learns about the world for the first time, only she isn’t prepared for everything, finding it hard to adjust to everything. Daddy is the man that has raised Anna, he did educate her, while warning her about the outdoors, while he does drug her, the mystery is around why he kept her isolated. Ellen is the local sheriff that takes Anna in, she does her best to teach her about being a woman, while others just want to lock her away. Ray is the sister of Ellen that is still in high school, he tries to help her on a social standpoint, while being one of the only people left for her to trust.
Performances – Bel Powley is great in this leading role, she must go through a transformation and play the fish out of water figure too. Brad Dourif is just as creepy and you need him to be, always going to work in this type of role, with Liv Tyler being the cop that believes they know what will be right for victim, trying to be the role model figure.
Story – The story here follows a young girl that is raised in the woods, only to be released to discover who she really is and what she is capable off. This story does follow the traditions of seeing a young girl taken and raised in secret, before something happens to bring her into the real world, this side of things has been done before, it works and is an effective way to bring a stranger into a modern world. Where this story takes an interesting turn comes from the reason behind why she was being kept, we do get to see what she really is, but we don’t get to see if she is a threat to everybody else, we do get a couple of message in this film too that want to point out certain motives in hunting, but overall the story keeps us guessing and surprised by the truth.
Fantasy/Horror – This film does dive into fantasy when it comes to learn what Anna really is, we have ideas early on, but we are never truly sure what she will become, this does help with the horror side of the film because it keeps us waiting to see if there will be more bloodshed.
Settings – The film is set in a town surrounded by woodlands, this shows first where she was raised and where the people will welcome her, right back to where she feels more comfortable.
Special Effects – The effects are used to show the wounds and the look of the Wildling figure, there give us a creepy but natural looking creature and the blood isn’t afraid to be splashed about here.
Scene of the Movie – Home from the party.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We could spend more time learn the normal human life.
Final Thoughts – This is a fun fantasy horror, it doesn’t hide the blood and is happy to give us a twist on the traditional storytelling.
Overall: Fantasy Horror 101
Performances – Bel Powley is great in this leading role, she must go through a transformation and play the fish out of water figure too. Brad Dourif is just as creepy and you need him to be, always going to work in this type of role, with Liv Tyler being the cop that believes they know what will be right for victim, trying to be the role model figure.
Story – The story here follows a young girl that is raised in the woods, only to be released to discover who she really is and what she is capable off. This story does follow the traditions of seeing a young girl taken and raised in secret, before something happens to bring her into the real world, this side of things has been done before, it works and is an effective way to bring a stranger into a modern world. Where this story takes an interesting turn comes from the reason behind why she was being kept, we do get to see what she really is, but we don’t get to see if she is a threat to everybody else, we do get a couple of message in this film too that want to point out certain motives in hunting, but overall the story keeps us guessing and surprised by the truth.
Fantasy/Horror – This film does dive into fantasy when it comes to learn what Anna really is, we have ideas early on, but we are never truly sure what she will become, this does help with the horror side of the film because it keeps us waiting to see if there will be more bloodshed.
Settings – The film is set in a town surrounded by woodlands, this shows first where she was raised and where the people will welcome her, right back to where she feels more comfortable.
Special Effects – The effects are used to show the wounds and the look of the Wildling figure, there give us a creepy but natural looking creature and the blood isn’t afraid to be splashed about here.
Scene of the Movie – Home from the party.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We could spend more time learn the normal human life.
Final Thoughts – This is a fun fantasy horror, it doesn’t hide the blood and is happy to give us a twist on the traditional storytelling.
Overall: Fantasy Horror 101