Search

Search only in certain items:

A Beautiful Mind (2001)
A Beautiful Mind (2001)
2001 | Drama
Story: A Beautiful Mind starts as we see John Nash (Crowe) start his time at Princeton University where we meet fellow students Sol (Goldberg), Hansen (Lucas), Bender (Rapp), Ainsley (Gray-Stanford) and his roommate Charles (Bettany). Struggling to find his place in the University it takes an everyday occurrence for John to final start rolling on his theory.

After becoming the brightest student John moves onto becoming a teacher while secretly working for the government on code breaking reporting to Parcher (Harris). While teaching he meets the beautiful Alicia Nash (Connelly) and the two strike it off before starting their lives together.

When it becomes apparent John is struggling to manage both live the people that care about him with Charles returning to his life, Parcher pushing him too much and his wife wondering what he is up to, but this beautiful mind is about to be tested when Dr Rosen (Plummer) a psychologist enters his life.

A Beautiful Mind is a wonderfully drama showing us the story of one of the greatest minds of our generation. We see how difficult the life was for John before learning of his mind being damaged due to his schizophrenia. We follow from his time in school until his Noble Peace Prize. We see John deal and learn with his condition to still go on achieve greatness in his life. This is such a brilliant story that shows how success you can achieve your potential regardless.

 

Actor Review

 

Russell Crowe: John Nash is the brilliant mathematician that believes he has been working for the government cracking codes, but when we and he learns the truth we discover this beautiful mind is damaged in other ways. We see John’s life from early Princeton till his final acceptance in the scientific world. Russell gives the best performance of his career her where he shines in the drama.john

Ed Harris: Parcher is the man John believes works for the government as he lives the life of mystery and code breaking John believes he is part of. Ed is great in this supporting role.parcher

Jennifer Connelly: Alicia Nash starts off as a student of John’s before being the only person that sees there is something wrong with his mind, she supports him through every decision in their lives. Jennifer is brilliant in this role of the patience wife.

Paul Bettany: Charles is the roommate John has at Princeton that helps him break out of the problems he has been suffering through but we learn the truth about Charles once we learn John’s mental state. Paul put himself on the map with this great supporting role.charles

Support Cast: A Beautiful Mind has a brilliant supporting cast that all give performances worthy of this subject matter.

Director Review: Ron Howard – Ron shows that he can handle the serious films that are important to see the greatest people in human history.

 

Biographical: A Beautiful Mind shows the struggles John Nash had with his own sanity to achieve unlocking all of the potential inside his mind.

History: A Beautiful Mind is one film that shows the mind of someone so troubled achieving so much.

Settings: A Beautiful Mind uses the real life location re-created for the story to be unfolded in.
Suggestion: A Beautiful Mind is one for everyone to watch at least once. (Watch)

 

Best Part: The Pen scene.

Worst Part: Slightly too much time on the imagined side of John’s life.

Favourite Quote: Dr Rosen ‘Imagine if you suddenly learned that the people, the places, the moments most important to you were not gone, not dead, but worse, had never been. What kind of hell would that be?’

 

Believability: Based on the John Nash and his amazing story.

Chances of Tears: Maybe a few nearer the end.

Chances of Sequel: No

Post Credits Scene: No

 

Oscar Chances: Won 4 Oscars including Best Picture, Director and Supporting Actress with another 4 Nomination including Best Actor.

Budget: $60 Million

Runtime: 2 Hours 15 Minutes

Tagline: The Only Thing Greater Than the Power of the Mind is the Courage of the Heart

Trivia: John Nash is shown smoking in the film. In reality, he was a militant anti-smoker.

 

Overall: Brilliant Biographical film that is a must watch for all.

https://moviesreview101.com/2016/05/27/paul-bettany-weekend-a-beautiful-mind-2001/
  
Cruise the Storm (John McBride #2)
Cruise the Storm (John McBride #2)
David Chilcott | 2014 | Thriller
6
6.0 (1 Ratings)
Book Rating
A group of terrorist hijackers on board a cruise ship. An ex SAS soldier on board teaching watercolour painting. A huge storm bearing down on the ship.

This might sound like the plot of some Hollywood blockbuster full of explosions and witty one liners from the hero but Chilcott delivers something a lot more cerebral than that. The story and characters have a sense of reality and this is more like a game of chess between the chief hijacker and the crew, a game where the ship is the board and the pawns the passengers which the terrorists are only too willing to dispose of to meet their aims.

Keith Bourne is the founder and leader of the White Christian League, an extreme right wing terrorist organisation who specialise in violent demonstration and the odd mosque burning. Bourne wants cash to further his rather nasty aims and decides that hijacking a cruise liner will fit the bill nicely. MI5 have been watching him and manage to get one of their agents onto the boat in an attempt to thwart Bourne and his cronies.

John McBride is a watercolour artist of some renown who is drafted onto the cruise to teach any interested passengers how to paint in watercolours, the scenes in the various Mediterranean ports they will be visitng being ideal subjects. McBride also happens to be a former member of the elite SAS and when he is made aware of the plot to hijack the ship is able to advise the captain and MI5.

The tension cranks up nicely through the first half of the book, seen mostly from the point of view of Bourne and McBride as each becomes aware of each other and both their plans have to be changed by circumstance. Everything comes to a head on the night the storm hits the ship.

At this point, with everything poised on a knife edge of success or failure for both sides, Chilcott pulls a deft narrative twist and goes back and tells the story again from the point of view of the chairman of the cruise line and one of the passengers, once again building up to the crisis point. This has the nice effect of filling in details that were previously only mentioned but also did lose the momentum which took a while to get going again. It may have been better to tell the story purely sequentially but seeing events from different perspectives again was interesting.

The characters and situations are written with a real authenticity. There are no miraculous escapes, no amazing feats of marksmanship and this is a very real strength of Chilcott's writing. Everthing happens in a way that seems very authentic - and in the case of the actions of the hijackers, worryingly so. Every action and reaction of the characters is plausible and there are frequent points where the story could go one way or another just on a chance encounter or random event.

This realism also felt a little like a weakness to me. Some things happen which provide some dramatic tension at the time but ultimately don't really have a bearing on the eventual outcome. Although this is very much like real life, perhaps it is not what is expected in a thriller of this type. In particlar (and these aren't really spoilers) the ship is damaged in the storm but this doesn't really affect anything, and also what happens when events are told from the point of view of one of the passengers looks to be building to something interesting but ultimately fizzles away. I would have liked to see more of these sub plots carried forward to the end of the story.

Despite this, the book was a good and interesting read and I am looking forward to reading more of Chilcott's McBride novels. I would recommend this book to anyone who likes their thrillers character driven and cerebral rather than all action. Plus you will pick up some excellent tips on painting in watercolours as a bonus.

Rated: Some violence, language and sexual references
  
Parasite (2019)
Parasite (2019)
2019 | Drama
Verdict: Astonishing

Story: Parasite starts as we meet the Kim family, all unemployed, with father Ki-taek (Kang Ho), mother Chung-sook (Hye-jin) and adult children, former military service Ki-woo (Woo-sik) and genius computer wizard Ki-jung (So-dam), they take simple jobs like folding pizza boxes, until Ki-woo gets pushed into taking a tutoring job for the Park family, teaching Da-hye (Ji-so) English.
Soon after Ki-woo gets a job for the family, the Park family businessman Dong Ik (Sun-kyun) his wife Yeon-kyo (Yeo-Jeong) fill the roles of their trusted staff with Ki-woo’s family as they get themselves secure well paying jobs, but not everything is as it seems with the house.

Thoughts on Parasite

Characters – Ki-taek Kim is the father of the unemployed family, he has always looked out for his family, while they search for their next meal, once the job opens up for him, he becomes the driver, proving to be a model employee. Ki-woo gets the first job as a tutor for the daughter in the family, he sees this as a chance to get to university, where he makes the plan for the family to get the extra jobs. Ki-jung is the daughter of the family that will become an art therapist for the family, while Chung-sook takes over the house as the maid. This family shows the poverty a family can be experiencing and just how far they would go to try and get out of it. The Park family has businessman Dong-ik who has always been patient with people, letting his wife do the hardest decisions in life, while supporting her always. Yeon-kyo is the wife that deals with the everyday routines in the house, she will do everything she needs to with the people she trusts, even if this does mean she can be taken advantage of.
Performances – We have incredible performances from the whole cast here Song Kang-ho in the leading role shines beyond belief in one of the performances of the year. Lee Sun-kyun and Jo Yeo-jeong give us wonderful supporting roles, with Choi Woo-sik, Park So-dam and Jang Hye-jin shining like the rest of the cast which is flawless throughout the film.
Story – The story here follows a poverty family that luck and con their way into secure jobs for one family, only to see everything spiral out of control in a story that highlights the lines between the rich and poor. This story is one of the most fascinating ones of the year, it does seem like it is going to be a simple enough story, but when everything goes out of control we get to see threads of the story unravel in every directions, see the highlights placed on the rich and poor divide, slowly chipping away at the poorer side of the family, as well as having the other incident going on (which does include too bigger spoilers). Much like ‘Shoplifters’ we see just how hopeless people can feel when they have no realistic future because money they can’t earn can’t give them an out. This is a perfect highlight of how to bring an original story to life, where the audience will be left to ponder what will happen next.
Comedy – The film is set up like a comedy which at times does work, with just how crazy certain moments are, though it doesn’t fall into a laugh out loud comedy.
Settings – The film uses the settings excellently, with the poverty sized house the family can barely not have some drunk piss on the window, to the wealthy businessman who has earnt his way to the top, the difference in lifestyle is drastic with the locations almost being a character of their own.

Scene of the Movie – Party time.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Nothing.
Final Thoughts – This is one of the most amazing films you will see this year, it will shock you and give us an important message about the clash system in the world.

Overall: Essential Movie.
  
Elementos
Elementos
2015 | Abstract Strategy
I am going to be honest. I am typically not a fan of abstract strategy games unless they have some kind of interesting theme on them: Azul (a Golden Feather Award winner), Patchwork, Reef, Onitama, Hive. These are all in my Top 100 of All Time, but they also have some sort of theme working for them to help me digest the immense calculating nature of most abstracts. So when I tell you that Elementos has also now breached my Top 100 with a very loose theme, I’m kinda shook myself.

So the winner of Elementos is the player that can get their wand (the wooden stick) to one of the three squares on the opponent’s side of the board (a la American football). This is accomplished by moving the element discs down the board and overtaking discs using the game’s elemental weakness wheel: fire burns trees, trees drink water, water douses fire. Movement can be made to any space obliquely, straight forward, or forward diagonally, unless the piece being moved is carrying the wand. Those wand-carrying pieces can only be moved straight forward.

Undoubtedly players will find themselves wanting to enter a space containing an opponent’s disc. Following the movement rules and elemental wheel described above, the attacking piece can overtake the opponent’s space and remove the opponent’s disc from the board. Easy, right? Let me explain the kicker here. The discs are double-sided and have different elements on the flip-side. So for an action (instead of moving) a player can simply flip any of their discs to the other side – perhaps to block movement, or setup a takeover on the next turn. As you only have one action to use on your turn you may not flip and move on the same turn. The other allowable action on a turn is to pass the wand to another friendly piece, observing movement rules for wand movement as well. The benefit with this is that the wand-carrying discs can neither attack nor BE attacked. Need to protect your tree from that fire ahead? Pass it the wand and be safe.

The rule sheet states that at any time you may peek at what element is on the flip-side of any piece at any time, but there is a variant described where you play the game without peeking, and we found that to be a more enjoyable way to play. You just never know if the other side of your tree is a fire or a water, and it sometimes results in turns where you effectively shoot yourself in the foot. Yes, it diminishes the tactics of the game, and if you would rather plan your moves well ahead of your turns like a Chess Grand Master, so be it. I kinda like the chaotic nature of not knowing what’s on the other side.

Components. So this is a clam shell wooden box that pulls double duty as the game board and storage for the other components. It is of good quality, and is reminiscent of the keepsake boxes one might find at Hobby Lobby or the like. The discs are painted and silk-screened plywood discs with a hole in the middle to accept the wand. The wand itself is a length of wooden dowel. All of these components are of good quality, but I wish a different finish was applied to the wood. The finish on the copy I was sent for review isn’t really conducive to sliding pieces on, so I suggest you pick up the pieces (any Average White Band fans here?) and place them where they need to go. Do as I say, not as I do.

Overall this is a really great game that I know will see lots of play in my house. My wife likes abstracts a lot and I predict she will enjoy this one as much as she adores Blokus (which she adores a TON). For the ease of teaching, play, and that itch to play just one more time, we at Purple Phoenix Games give this one a no-peek 9 / 12. If you are a fan of Chess, Checkers, or any of the other abstract strategy games I listed earlier, you should really check this one out. It’s a little different and a lot fun.
  
    Home yoga practice

    Home yoga practice

    Health & Fitness and Lifestyle

    (0 Ratings) Rate It

    App

    What is preventing you from living your life to the fullest TODAY? Body aches? Stress? Your mood? ...

Rob Bell's book wins on pathos and good intentions, but not on solid argumentation or exegesis. He has a heart for the lost and the suffering, which is admirable. But he has to turn the Bible into theological silly putty to make his case.

There are a few major errors in Love Wins, which leads to his making other more minor mistakes. The first error is giving precedence to certain biblical themes (to the exclusion of others) over clear and specific biblical teaching. Bell makes much of themes like restoration in Scripture, but ignores themes of final punishment. By dwelling on those themes, he can transition to reading them into texts where they don't belong without being found out by biblical illiterates, such as Jesus' claim that Sodom and Gomorrah will fare better on the day of judgement than cities which rejected the direct revelation of God in Jesus Christ. Instead of reading this in its obvious sense-- that there are degrees of punishment on the final day and those who reject direct revelation of Jesus will suffer most-- he understands Jesus to be saying that there is a great deal of hope for Sodom and Gomorrah's salvation-- that their punishment was corrective instead of destructive. Even though he doesn't get anywhere close to proving his case (certainly only God knows whether or not some in Sodom will be saved, but the story of Abraham bargaining would suggest otherwise), he seems to fall back on the emotionally-driven claim that God saving everyone is a "better story" than damning some and saving others.

On his overuse of the word "story," it is one example where Bell is obnoxiously post-modern and emergent. He uses the word "story/stories" in his short book 138 times. For a book of around 200 pages, large font, and constantly skipped lines/single words on their own lines*, that's an impressive display of post-modernism.

Another major error is that he conflates a strong exclusivism with eternal conscious punishment which has the effect that when he attacks one, he is in effect attacking the other, making his job easier. In addition, he ignores annihilationism as an alternative to eternal conscious torment, which also strengthens the emotional pull of his position, since it is contrasted with an eternal conscious punishment where God damns people for never being able to hear the name of Jesus. (note: while I am annoyed at Bell's misrepresentations of eternal conscious torment, I am myself an annihilationist)

Bell explains that God will eventually win everyone over, but it must be of their accord. However, he doesn't explain how it is that everyone will be saved of their own free will. For emotional effect, Bell criticizes the eternal conscious hell camp with having a God that would turn his back on people in hell who are repenting and turning to God. Of course, this assumes that sinners turn to God on their own instead of by His grace. Bell here appears to be a Pelagian, or else doesn't know enough about soteriology to make such distinctions (a terrifying prospect for a Pastor). In any case, this is another example where he is misrepresenting eternal conscious hell proponents (the first I mentioned was when he claimed they were all strict exclusivists), which makes his book far harder to take seriously.

One strange and interesting point that Rob Bell makes comes from making the afterlife analogous to the parable of the prodigal son. He claims that hell is not being cast out of "the party," (despite Jesus' parable about the marriage supper being like a party where people are cast out of) but being at the party but not enjoying it. "Hell is being at the party," Bell claims. The message to take from that is never go to one of Rob Bell's parties.



*Bell's book is filled with skipped lines and one word sentences sitting on their own lines. I suppose this is done for dramatic effect-- indicating places where Bell would pause if this were one of his Nooma videos. However, it tends to just look irritating and faux artsy. I mostly listened to the book on Kindle's text-to-speech feature, and I could still tell when he was doing it. Like,

You put a series of short sentences on their own lines to make a point?

Really?

You do that?

And it's repetitive?

Extremely?

And annoying?
  
Yesterday (2019)
Yesterday (2019)
2019 | Comedy, Fantasy, Music
Verdict: Enjoyable Throughout

Story: Yesterday starts as we meet musician Jack Malik (Patel) who when he isn’t performing, works a dead-end job in a cash-n-carry. Jack gets his first festival in Latitude Festival thanks to his manager Ellie Appleton (James), which makes Jack realise he might walk away from music, until on his way home a shocking event around the world sees all power down for 12 seconds and Jack gets hit by a bus, waking up in a world where The Beatles never existed.
Jack uses the ideas that The Beatles never existed to start singing the songs, which sudden thrusts the spotlight onto the young singer, who sudden burst into international stardom, only can he live with the knowledge of the music he is singing is from the most famous band in the world.

Thoughts on Yesterday

Characters – Jack Malik is a small-time musician who only performs in his own free time, while trying to balance a part-time job in a warehouse. He does have talent, only he hasn’t been discovered yet, he is about to give up when he gets hit by a bus in a freak event around the world. He wakes up to discover he is the only person to have heard of The Beatles and decides to use this knowledge to give music on more crack, where his rise to super stardom is sudden and he must learn to adapt to this new career. Ellie Appleton has been the best friend, manager, rodeo and driver for his music career, secretly in love with him, unable to give up her teaching career to follow his new success. Rocky has been involved in music only he tends to let people down, he is however the only person that Jack can turn to for help for his new stardom. We get to meet Jack’s parents who have always supported him, Ed Sheeran playing himself discovering the new talent in Jack and the manager who takes Jack to the next level with his debut album.
Performances – Himesh Patel is brilliant in the leading role where he handles the singing with ease as well as the troubles that his character goes through in his sudden rise to fame. Lily James as the girl next door figure is wonderful to watch to, never looking out of place in the manager role. The rest of the cast do nothing wrong, you might see a couple of weakness in some of the performances in the film though.
Story – The story follows a musician that is involved in an accident only to discover that when he wakes up, The Beatles don’t exist, using this knowledge to make himself a mega star, while dealing with his own love problems. This is a story that does work if things are kept just around the idea of The Beatles not being around, where the story does seem to use as a little joke, other major products or bands also haven’t existed either, they are only used for jokes rather than being proper points in the story. Away from that weak point we do get to see the struggling to deal with sudden fame and the guilt for using the songs of somebody he idolises. This story is one that can be enjoyed even if you are not a Beatles fan too.
Comedy/Musical/Romance – The comedy in the film will get laughs where it needs to, we aren’t given constant jokes either, with the music side of the film playing into the strengths of all Beatles fans who will get to enjoy their favourites. The romance in the film does take centre stage, with how the two are left to wonder what if through their lives, showing how people are tempted to let people go or not for stardom.
Settings – The film uses the small town where Jack is from, which shows the struggle of a small town musician, LA where things move so fast and Liverpool where the inspiration can be found.

Scene of the Movie – Wembley.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The other random disappearing products, just being a joke, rather than a point in the story.
Final Thoughts – This is an enjoyable comedy musical, that will show the importance of love in the world, how music can make people famous and just how far people will go for a chance of stardom.

Overall: Enjoyable