Search
Search results
I came away from Us with a number of very different feelings. It kept me seriously on edge for the majority of it, making me feel uncomfortable, and at times confused. It's taken me a while to try and digest it all though and to decide whether or not I actually enjoyed it. It managed to get under my skin and the tension it evoked, the nightmare scenario that plays on your mind afterwards, well I just love all of that! So, did I enjoy it and would I watch it again? Absolutely!
It's difficult to discuss the plot of Us very much without heading into spoiler territory, so I'll briefly recap what you'll already have seen in the trailer, along with a few details which hopefully don't give too much away. We kick things off in Santa Cruz, 1986. A young girl, Adelaide, is at the fair with her parents one evening when she meanders off on her own, heading down the boardwalk and onto the beach. She experiences a terrifying and life changing experience which clearly has had a lasting impact on her when we rejoin her as an adult in present day (now played by Lupita Nyong'O). She has a family of own - husband Gabe (Winston Duke) and two children Zora and Jason. The movie spends a lot of time introducing us to the family and their dynamic as they head out on a family vacation in Santa Cruz, a place which obviously stirs up some strong feelings within Adelaide.
One evening, as the family are preparing to go to bed, they spot four silhouettes out on the driveway. And when those silhouettes force their way into their home, the family realise that the four red-dungaree wearing, scissor-wielding people are actually their doppelgängers - "Us". At this point, the movie seriously switches up a gear, turns into a home invasion horror movie, with each family member trying to deal with their alternate self. And as if things weren't weird enough already, they soon get a hell of a lot weirder! It's a long time before we get any kind of explanation as to what's going on, which only adds to the tension/confusion in the meantime.
The cast are all fantastic, and if you've seen any other reviews of 'Us', you'll probably have seen them focusing their praise on Lupita Nyong'O. I wholeheartedly agree with that - the other version of her, Red, is seriously creepy. Zombie-like and with a chillingly hoarse, rasping voice. Add to that a great musical score, and a last minute twist that I really enjoyed, and overall I'd say I really liked this movie. There are clearly many themes open to interpretation - lots of layers and metaphors that I may pick up on with repeat viewings, or that may continue to go straight over my head! It's a bold film though, although not quite as enjoyable for me as Get Out, the first movie from writer/director/producer Jordan Peele (and also my favourite movie of 2017). The feelings and the way that it lingered in my head made it a very impressive movie and an interesting experience all the same.
It's difficult to discuss the plot of Us very much without heading into spoiler territory, so I'll briefly recap what you'll already have seen in the trailer, along with a few details which hopefully don't give too much away. We kick things off in Santa Cruz, 1986. A young girl, Adelaide, is at the fair with her parents one evening when she meanders off on her own, heading down the boardwalk and onto the beach. She experiences a terrifying and life changing experience which clearly has had a lasting impact on her when we rejoin her as an adult in present day (now played by Lupita Nyong'O). She has a family of own - husband Gabe (Winston Duke) and two children Zora and Jason. The movie spends a lot of time introducing us to the family and their dynamic as they head out on a family vacation in Santa Cruz, a place which obviously stirs up some strong feelings within Adelaide.
One evening, as the family are preparing to go to bed, they spot four silhouettes out on the driveway. And when those silhouettes force their way into their home, the family realise that the four red-dungaree wearing, scissor-wielding people are actually their doppelgängers - "Us". At this point, the movie seriously switches up a gear, turns into a home invasion horror movie, with each family member trying to deal with their alternate self. And as if things weren't weird enough already, they soon get a hell of a lot weirder! It's a long time before we get any kind of explanation as to what's going on, which only adds to the tension/confusion in the meantime.
The cast are all fantastic, and if you've seen any other reviews of 'Us', you'll probably have seen them focusing their praise on Lupita Nyong'O. I wholeheartedly agree with that - the other version of her, Red, is seriously creepy. Zombie-like and with a chillingly hoarse, rasping voice. Add to that a great musical score, and a last minute twist that I really enjoyed, and overall I'd say I really liked this movie. There are clearly many themes open to interpretation - lots of layers and metaphors that I may pick up on with repeat viewings, or that may continue to go straight over my head! It's a bold film though, although not quite as enjoyable for me as Get Out, the first movie from writer/director/producer Jordan Peele (and also my favourite movie of 2017). The feelings and the way that it lingered in my head made it a very impressive movie and an interesting experience all the same.
Darren (1599 KP) rated A United Kingdom (2017) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: A Untied Kingdom starts in 1947 England where Prince Seretse Khama (Oyelowo) of Bechuanaland (known today as Botswana) is in England studying law, he meets file clerk Ruth Williams (Pike) and the two fall in love.
With tension between Bechuanaland and South Africa high the idea of the soon to be King marrying a white woman would be unheard off. The British government doesn’t want him to become king and Seretse own family don’t want him to become king if he stays with Ruth. With the racial divide still going strong, Seretse pushed for equality over anything else, so he can unite his kingdom when he becomes king.
Thoughts on A United Kingdom
Characters – Seretse Khama is the prince of Bechuanaland he has been studying law in England to prepare for his time as king, he falls in love a white woman in Ruth Williams which throws tensions from his family, government in the air and to prove his love is more important than his traditions and bring the equality between the races together. Ruth Williams is an English clerk whose family has been working to teach Christianity to Africans, she meets and falls in love with Seretse and goes against everyone else’s desires and marries him. Rufus Lancaster is the British liaison in Bechuanaland who leads the opposition from the land, which only shows us just how the English were over controlling.
Performances – David Oyelowo is wonderful in the leading role, showing us once again that he can lead any movie he wants too. Rosamund Pike shines to showing everyone that she can handle to calm roles after the psycho ones in Gone Girl. The rest of the cast are wonderful even if the British characters are as stuck up as you would imagine them to be.
Story – The story follows the lives of King Seretse who marries an English white woman which puts the balance between the racial tension in his home land and British rule. We learn a lot from this movie, because we see how the country was being controlled from outside forces that only saw them as a piece of land. There is a lot to take in and the history lesson about this union that created a chance in the land.
Biopic/Romance – What King Seretse and his wife Ruth achieved for Botswana was incredible and this shows us how their love drove them to achieve this change.
Settings – The settings show us the high society British look at an African country that was following its own traditions to become the independent from this style of rule.
Scene of the Movie – Speech to the ‘tribe’ as the British called them.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Knowing the English were this shallow.
Final Thoughts – This is a good look at how the world was once ruled by people who believe they are in the right to control countries affairs and how their union would change everything.
Overall: History is always worth learning.
https://moviesreview101.com/2019/05/21/abc-film-challenge-biopics-u-a-united-kingdom-2016/
With tension between Bechuanaland and South Africa high the idea of the soon to be King marrying a white woman would be unheard off. The British government doesn’t want him to become king and Seretse own family don’t want him to become king if he stays with Ruth. With the racial divide still going strong, Seretse pushed for equality over anything else, so he can unite his kingdom when he becomes king.
Thoughts on A United Kingdom
Characters – Seretse Khama is the prince of Bechuanaland he has been studying law in England to prepare for his time as king, he falls in love a white woman in Ruth Williams which throws tensions from his family, government in the air and to prove his love is more important than his traditions and bring the equality between the races together. Ruth Williams is an English clerk whose family has been working to teach Christianity to Africans, she meets and falls in love with Seretse and goes against everyone else’s desires and marries him. Rufus Lancaster is the British liaison in Bechuanaland who leads the opposition from the land, which only shows us just how the English were over controlling.
Performances – David Oyelowo is wonderful in the leading role, showing us once again that he can lead any movie he wants too. Rosamund Pike shines to showing everyone that she can handle to calm roles after the psycho ones in Gone Girl. The rest of the cast are wonderful even if the British characters are as stuck up as you would imagine them to be.
Story – The story follows the lives of King Seretse who marries an English white woman which puts the balance between the racial tension in his home land and British rule. We learn a lot from this movie, because we see how the country was being controlled from outside forces that only saw them as a piece of land. There is a lot to take in and the history lesson about this union that created a chance in the land.
Biopic/Romance – What King Seretse and his wife Ruth achieved for Botswana was incredible and this shows us how their love drove them to achieve this change.
Settings – The settings show us the high society British look at an African country that was following its own traditions to become the independent from this style of rule.
Scene of the Movie – Speech to the ‘tribe’ as the British called them.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Knowing the English were this shallow.
Final Thoughts – This is a good look at how the world was once ruled by people who believe they are in the right to control countries affairs and how their union would change everything.
Overall: History is always worth learning.
https://moviesreview101.com/2019/05/21/abc-film-challenge-biopics-u-a-united-kingdom-2016/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Firewall (2006) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
Following a three year absence from the big screen, box office megastar Harrison Ford returns in Firewall as Ford Jack Stanfield, a devoted family man who works designing and maintaining networks and security systems for a small chain of banks. Jack who along with his wife Beth (Virginia Madsen), and their two children live a comfortable life in a Seattle suburb in a luxurious home that Beth designed.
The twenty-four banks owned by Jack’s firm are in the process of being acquired by a large chain and the resulting windfall from this venture is making people on both sides tense and excited as the merger draws closure. Jack has some reservations about the new firm’s lack of customer service and acceptance of security losses which he believes will be passed on to their customers. This stance draws tension from a representative of the new partner (Robert Patrick), and has caused Jack to go to a meeting with a potential client who is looking to engage Jack’s services.
What begins as a promising business venture soon takes a dangerous turn as Jack is hijacked and learns that he and his family are being held hostage by a gang of thugs lead by the charismatic and dangerous Bill Cox (Paul Bettany), who wires Jack for sight and sound so they can monitor his every move at work. Jack is told that should he deviate from instructions or attempt to alert others to his situation, his family will be killed for his defiance.
In time, Jack is instructed to withdraw $10,000 from several of the banks top accounts and erase any history of the transactions or the resulting deposits in offshore accounts. The plan hits an unexpected snag when as a result of the pending merger, the hardware needed for Jack to input his requests has been moved to a remote locale out of state.
Undaunted Bill ups the stakes and forces Jack to find a way to get the money to him before time is up and his family is killed. Things go from bad to worse when complications arise forcing Jack to take desperate measures that soon has him fighting both his captors, his co-workers, and the law as he attempts to free his family and save them from their captors.
Firewall like last years Hostage suffers from a severe lack of urgency. We are told and shown just how evil the captors are yet, when people are told not do certain things and they continue to do so without repercussions, one would have to think that they would eventually cut their losses and start killing people off.
Ford does his best to make the by-the-numbers story work, but there are just not enough thrills and tension in the film to make it gripping. There is a heavy sense of “been there, seen that” to almost every portion of the film. What could have been a tight thriller is lost in clichés and gaps in logic that undermine the supposed seriousness of the situation.
The twenty-four banks owned by Jack’s firm are in the process of being acquired by a large chain and the resulting windfall from this venture is making people on both sides tense and excited as the merger draws closure. Jack has some reservations about the new firm’s lack of customer service and acceptance of security losses which he believes will be passed on to their customers. This stance draws tension from a representative of the new partner (Robert Patrick), and has caused Jack to go to a meeting with a potential client who is looking to engage Jack’s services.
What begins as a promising business venture soon takes a dangerous turn as Jack is hijacked and learns that he and his family are being held hostage by a gang of thugs lead by the charismatic and dangerous Bill Cox (Paul Bettany), who wires Jack for sight and sound so they can monitor his every move at work. Jack is told that should he deviate from instructions or attempt to alert others to his situation, his family will be killed for his defiance.
In time, Jack is instructed to withdraw $10,000 from several of the banks top accounts and erase any history of the transactions or the resulting deposits in offshore accounts. The plan hits an unexpected snag when as a result of the pending merger, the hardware needed for Jack to input his requests has been moved to a remote locale out of state.
Undaunted Bill ups the stakes and forces Jack to find a way to get the money to him before time is up and his family is killed. Things go from bad to worse when complications arise forcing Jack to take desperate measures that soon has him fighting both his captors, his co-workers, and the law as he attempts to free his family and save them from their captors.
Firewall like last years Hostage suffers from a severe lack of urgency. We are told and shown just how evil the captors are yet, when people are told not do certain things and they continue to do so without repercussions, one would have to think that they would eventually cut their losses and start killing people off.
Ford does his best to make the by-the-numbers story work, but there are just not enough thrills and tension in the film to make it gripping. There is a heavy sense of “been there, seen that” to almost every portion of the film. What could have been a tight thriller is lost in clichés and gaps in logic that undermine the supposed seriousness of the situation.
365Flicks (235 KP) rated Never Let Go (2017) in Movies
Nov 20, 2019
In truth, In my humble opinion this movie is actually way better than those Taken movies, I know I know I liked them when they first came out aswell, but this movie Never Let Go completely took me by surprise… In the best possible way. Ladies and Gents, Angela Bloody Dixon. This leading lady is fantastic, she grips the viewer by the balls and takes you on a Thrilling, Tour De Force leaving you wondering exactly how far would you go for your kids.
So I guess I should give the Pitch:
Lisa Brennan (Dixon) is a struggling single mother, her child is to a married man who is playing silly buggers with her. Lisa is having a pretty hard time of it all so decides to take a break to herself in Morroco (I know I could think of safer places too). From the outset in this country things seem a bit shady but this is due to some pretty fine camera work and we already know she is being medicated, so is this all just paranoia. It turns out not really because while relaxing on the beach Lisa is distracted for literally a minute by a looky looky man and **BOOM** her baby has been kidnapped. What follows is roughly 85 minutes of a mother who will do anything to get her daughter back in the harshest conditions. Add to this the local law enforcement are after her, The big bad is a massive sinister shit and the married man is a massive douche… However “she has a particular set of skills”.
Director Howard J Ford absolutely knocks this out of the park, by using the narrow streets and alleys of Morroco he really builds the tension with a deeper sense of paranoia and having this viewer feel a bit closed in. The camera work screams all the best action movements from the Bourne Saga. My only gripe about this is that it could at moments feel slightly disjointed in the way the Run Lola Run made me feel at times, you could say this was adding to the tension of the chase but it didnt always land with me.
Now there are 2 scenes in this movie that sold everything for me and I dont wanna do spoilers but I feel they deserve a quick mention. 1) Is the Kidnap of the child, my christ the erratic way this is shot (From the school of Tony Scott) and her instant reaction to chase them down and become a bad ass is visceral as hell. 2) There is a woman who try’s to help the child and pays the price for this, we get a 5 minute section of the movie where she is stumbling home and Lisa is stumbling through the desert and they end up meeting, this whole section is beautifully shot and the emotion of the two women hits you hard.
No surprises here, for me this is a solid recommend, you could do a hell of a lot worse for your money and for something that hasn’t had a lot of play this is most definitely a rare gem of a movie.
So I guess I should give the Pitch:
Lisa Brennan (Dixon) is a struggling single mother, her child is to a married man who is playing silly buggers with her. Lisa is having a pretty hard time of it all so decides to take a break to herself in Morroco (I know I could think of safer places too). From the outset in this country things seem a bit shady but this is due to some pretty fine camera work and we already know she is being medicated, so is this all just paranoia. It turns out not really because while relaxing on the beach Lisa is distracted for literally a minute by a looky looky man and **BOOM** her baby has been kidnapped. What follows is roughly 85 minutes of a mother who will do anything to get her daughter back in the harshest conditions. Add to this the local law enforcement are after her, The big bad is a massive sinister shit and the married man is a massive douche… However “she has a particular set of skills”.
Director Howard J Ford absolutely knocks this out of the park, by using the narrow streets and alleys of Morroco he really builds the tension with a deeper sense of paranoia and having this viewer feel a bit closed in. The camera work screams all the best action movements from the Bourne Saga. My only gripe about this is that it could at moments feel slightly disjointed in the way the Run Lola Run made me feel at times, you could say this was adding to the tension of the chase but it didnt always land with me.
Now there are 2 scenes in this movie that sold everything for me and I dont wanna do spoilers but I feel they deserve a quick mention. 1) Is the Kidnap of the child, my christ the erratic way this is shot (From the school of Tony Scott) and her instant reaction to chase them down and become a bad ass is visceral as hell. 2) There is a woman who try’s to help the child and pays the price for this, we get a 5 minute section of the movie where she is stumbling home and Lisa is stumbling through the desert and they end up meeting, this whole section is beautifully shot and the emotion of the two women hits you hard.
No surprises here, for me this is a solid recommend, you could do a hell of a lot worse for your money and for something that hasn’t had a lot of play this is most definitely a rare gem of a movie.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Hitman's Wife's Bodyguard (2021) in Movies
Jun 22, 2021
No tension in the thriller elements (1 more)
Some shoddy special effects.
A movie that’s a pain in the A-double-dollar sign.
Struck-off bodyguard Michael Bryce (Ryan Reynolds) is plagued with nightmares about his failures, brought about by his nemesis Darius Kincaid (Samuel L Jackson) and his potty-mouthed wife Sonia (Salma Hayek). On doctor’s orders, he ‘retires’ from the business. But when Europe’s infrastructure is threatened by Greek megalomaniac Aristotle Papdopolous (Antonio Banderas) he is rudely dragged away from his briefly peaceful life and pitched back into utter mayhem.
Positives:
- As a comedy thriller, it does pass the '6 laughs test' in terms of the 'comedy' element. Some of these are minor chuckles. A few are really good belly laughs.
- Among these are some of the outrageous tirades of Salma Hayek: her accent makes some of the dialogue unintelligible, but given its X-rated nature, that's not necessarily a bad thing! As a mid-50's actress (Oh God - - don't tell her I mentioned her age!), Ms Hayek indeed has an arrestingly attractive form.
- Seeing Antonio Banderas and Morgan Freeman on the screen is never anything other than a positive. (Although Banderas is like Sean Connery in failing to tailor his natural accent to any role he's ever in!)
Negatives:
- A general problem I have with 'comedy thrillers' is that the comedy nearly always negates any of the thrills. Ryan Reynolds is not playing Deadpool in this one, although he might as well be doing so based on the number of times he is hit by cars and other solid objects. The result is that although it has the trappings of a Bond or a Bourne - exotic locations (here, mostly Italian ones) ; exotic woman; car chases; heavily-armed henchmen; huge explosions - it delivers none of the tension or excitement. When matched with some rather dodgy post-shoot special effects, the effect is generally underwhelming.
- If there was an award for the clumsiest movie title of 2021, we may already have a winner.
Summary Thoughts on "The Hitman's Wife's Bodyguard": Sequels are very occasionally better. Often they are much worse. This one, I have to say, delivers very much "more of the same". Given that the writer/director team of Tom O'Connor and Patrick Hughes are in the driving seat, that's not much of a surprise. The shtick is mildly diverting, occasionally downright funny, but quickly outstays its welcome. The 100 minute run time felt, for me, much longer.
Looking back at my 2017 review of the first film, I think I was being over-kind giving it 6/10. I think this is neither better nor worse. So if you want to average the two and give each 5/10, I wouldn't object! But, again, it's one I will struggle to remember much about in a few month's time.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/06/22/the-hitmans-wifes-bodyguard-a-movie-thats-a-pain-in-the-a-double-dollar-sign/. Thanks).
Positives:
- As a comedy thriller, it does pass the '6 laughs test' in terms of the 'comedy' element. Some of these are minor chuckles. A few are really good belly laughs.
- Among these are some of the outrageous tirades of Salma Hayek: her accent makes some of the dialogue unintelligible, but given its X-rated nature, that's not necessarily a bad thing! As a mid-50's actress (Oh God - - don't tell her I mentioned her age!), Ms Hayek indeed has an arrestingly attractive form.
- Seeing Antonio Banderas and Morgan Freeman on the screen is never anything other than a positive. (Although Banderas is like Sean Connery in failing to tailor his natural accent to any role he's ever in!)
Negatives:
- A general problem I have with 'comedy thrillers' is that the comedy nearly always negates any of the thrills. Ryan Reynolds is not playing Deadpool in this one, although he might as well be doing so based on the number of times he is hit by cars and other solid objects. The result is that although it has the trappings of a Bond or a Bourne - exotic locations (here, mostly Italian ones) ; exotic woman; car chases; heavily-armed henchmen; huge explosions - it delivers none of the tension or excitement. When matched with some rather dodgy post-shoot special effects, the effect is generally underwhelming.
- If there was an award for the clumsiest movie title of 2021, we may already have a winner.
Summary Thoughts on "The Hitman's Wife's Bodyguard": Sequels are very occasionally better. Often they are much worse. This one, I have to say, delivers very much "more of the same". Given that the writer/director team of Tom O'Connor and Patrick Hughes are in the driving seat, that's not much of a surprise. The shtick is mildly diverting, occasionally downright funny, but quickly outstays its welcome. The 100 minute run time felt, for me, much longer.
Looking back at my 2017 review of the first film, I think I was being over-kind giving it 6/10. I think this is neither better nor worse. So if you want to average the two and give each 5/10, I wouldn't object! But, again, it's one I will struggle to remember much about in a few month's time.
(For the full graphical review, please check out the One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/06/22/the-hitmans-wifes-bodyguard-a-movie-thats-a-pain-in-the-a-double-dollar-sign/. Thanks).
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated The Quatermass Experiment (2005) in Movies
Sep 14, 2020
The first U.K. Maned mission to space vanishes off course only to return with two two of it's three crew missing and the third unable to communicate. As Professor Quatermass and his team try to find out what happened they discover that they come to realise that the rocket may have returned with more than they first thought.
As remakes go This one is quite good, it follows the same basic script as the original and the modernisation (mostly) works. The film doesn't go for much in the way of monster effects, relying instead on building atmosphere and tension which helps it keep the feel of the original 1955 version. It also helps that the original writer, Nigel Kneale, was also consulted on this remake.
This version of the film does have a very (modern) British feel to it which is mostly from the fact that is was made by the BBC so has actors that have appeared in other BBC sic Fi shows, most noticeably David Tennant and Mark Gatiss.
I do have a couple of problems with this film though, firstly the main set, used though tout the first half of the film does look to much like a,well film set. The hospital ward, MoD offices and press conference room all appear to be in the same building and, in fact in one scene, the camera pans from one room to the next making the whole thing look as if it was set up in a warehouse or large stage, which it probability was for filming but you shouldn't realy notice that in the finished film.
The other issue was some of the costumes. The film seems to be set in time it was filmed (2007) but some of the costumes don't seem to fit. One reporter looks like a 'teddy boy' whilst one looks like she's from the 20's and there's a scene with 80's/90's looking goths (Yes I know there are still goths but the look has changed a bit through the decades, as with most looks).
I can't quite work out if the remake looses anything from the original, in some ways the threat seems bigger but the ending seems less climatic. The final scene takes place in an art gallery instead of a church but this is due to a slight change in some of the symbology in the film (and probably because the BBC have had complainants when they have blown up churches in the past).
The original had scenes that stuck with me ( I was quite young when i first saw it) and I feel that the remake doesn't have this effect, although that could just be my age now. However the remake does up the tension and it does feel that there is more riding on Quatermass' success
Apart from those points the film is good. Fans of the original will recognise it for what it is but new views won't need any knowledge of the original to watch it.
As remakes go This one is quite good, it follows the same basic script as the original and the modernisation (mostly) works. The film doesn't go for much in the way of monster effects, relying instead on building atmosphere and tension which helps it keep the feel of the original 1955 version. It also helps that the original writer, Nigel Kneale, was also consulted on this remake.
This version of the film does have a very (modern) British feel to it which is mostly from the fact that is was made by the BBC so has actors that have appeared in other BBC sic Fi shows, most noticeably David Tennant and Mark Gatiss.
I do have a couple of problems with this film though, firstly the main set, used though tout the first half of the film does look to much like a,well film set. The hospital ward, MoD offices and press conference room all appear to be in the same building and, in fact in one scene, the camera pans from one room to the next making the whole thing look as if it was set up in a warehouse or large stage, which it probability was for filming but you shouldn't realy notice that in the finished film.
The other issue was some of the costumes. The film seems to be set in time it was filmed (2007) but some of the costumes don't seem to fit. One reporter looks like a 'teddy boy' whilst one looks like she's from the 20's and there's a scene with 80's/90's looking goths (Yes I know there are still goths but the look has changed a bit through the decades, as with most looks).
I can't quite work out if the remake looses anything from the original, in some ways the threat seems bigger but the ending seems less climatic. The final scene takes place in an art gallery instead of a church but this is due to a slight change in some of the symbology in the film (and probably because the BBC have had complainants when they have blown up churches in the past).
The original had scenes that stuck with me ( I was quite young when i first saw it) and I feel that the remake doesn't have this effect, although that could just be my age now. However the remake does up the tension and it does feel that there is more riding on Quatermass' success
Apart from those points the film is good. Fans of the original will recognise it for what it is but new views won't need any knowledge of the original to watch it.
Sarah (7800 KP) rated The Snowman (2017) in Movies
Oct 18, 2017
How could this go so wrong?
I've finally come to the realisation that, apart from a few rare exceptions, filmmakers really have no clue what they're doing with book adaptations. I appreciate you cant include absolutely everything from a book, but it should still be fairly easy to adapt an already well received novel into a film. Well apparently with The Snowman it isn't.
They appear to have picked out some of the very basic plot points and loose character identities from the book, and decided to completely rewrite the rest of the story. This'd be fine if it works,but it really doesn't - the book is barely recognisable within this mess.
The characters are underdeveloped and completely changed. Harry, despite being an alcoholic and a bit of an ass, is meant to still be loveable. In this, you couldn't care less about him. Oleg is portrayed as a petulant teenager, Rakel is sidelined and the rest appear to be similar to their book counterparts in name only.
They've missed so many key plot lines out that I could barely understand what was going on, and due to this, there was no intrigue, no tension or suspense. Even a very good cast are given nothing to work with here.
It's unusual for me to be able to find nothing good to say about a film. And it's even rarer for me to want to walk out of a film less than an hour in. The trailer made this film look very good, but it failed miserably.
They appear to have picked out some of the very basic plot points and loose character identities from the book, and decided to completely rewrite the rest of the story. This'd be fine if it works,but it really doesn't - the book is barely recognisable within this mess.
The characters are underdeveloped and completely changed. Harry, despite being an alcoholic and a bit of an ass, is meant to still be loveable. In this, you couldn't care less about him. Oleg is portrayed as a petulant teenager, Rakel is sidelined and the rest appear to be similar to their book counterparts in name only.
They've missed so many key plot lines out that I could barely understand what was going on, and due to this, there was no intrigue, no tension or suspense. Even a very good cast are given nothing to work with here.
It's unusual for me to be able to find nothing good to say about a film. And it's even rarer for me to want to walk out of a film less than an hour in. The trailer made this film look very good, but it failed miserably.
Christine A. (965 KP) rated Press Here! Massage for Beginners: A Simple Route to Relaxation and Releasing Tension in Books
Mar 13, 2019 (Updated Mar 13, 2019)
Colorful illustrations (1 more)
Shows proper technique
Informative book on how to give a massage to others and to yourself
I was provided with a complimentary copy of this book so I could give an honest review.
Press Here! Massage for Beginners: A Simple Route to Relaxation and Releasing Tension by Rachel Beider is an informative book on how to give a massage to others and to yourself. It provides clear instructions on how to massage different parts of the body. It also includes sections for specific issues that may need special attention. Also shown are the proper techniques and strokes to use. It is full of colorful and detailed illustrations that show the basics of a massage.
I found the book informative and well written but two sections stand out to me. The first is on how to give yourself a massage. Beider shows how to use either your hand or a tennis ball to self massage. The other is a section on how to treat headaches and sinus congestion. As a sufferer of chronic sinus problems this was the most useful.
One thing I had never considered was you need to take care and look after your own body before you massage someone. Stretches are shown on how to prepare your hands so you do not damage them.
The book is easily labeled to find the exact section on which you want to focus.
Review published on Philomathinphila.com, Smashbomb, Goodreads, Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, and Barnes and Noble on 3/13/19.
Press Here! Massage for Beginners: A Simple Route to Relaxation and Releasing Tension by Rachel Beider is an informative book on how to give a massage to others and to yourself. It provides clear instructions on how to massage different parts of the body. It also includes sections for specific issues that may need special attention. Also shown are the proper techniques and strokes to use. It is full of colorful and detailed illustrations that show the basics of a massage.
I found the book informative and well written but two sections stand out to me. The first is on how to give yourself a massage. Beider shows how to use either your hand or a tennis ball to self massage. The other is a section on how to treat headaches and sinus congestion. As a sufferer of chronic sinus problems this was the most useful.
One thing I had never considered was you need to take care and look after your own body before you massage someone. Stretches are shown on how to prepare your hands so you do not damage them.
The book is easily labeled to find the exact section on which you want to focus.
Review published on Philomathinphila.com, Smashbomb, Goodreads, Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, and Barnes and Noble on 3/13/19.
Billie Wichkan (118 KP) rated The Missing Sister in Books
May 22, 2019
Belle Hatton has embarked upon an exciting new life far from home: a glamorous job as a nightclub singer in 1930s Burma, with a host of sophisticated new friends and admirers. But Belle is haunted by a mystery from the past - a 25 year old newspaper clipping found in her parents' belongings after their death, saying that the Hattons were leaving Rangoon after the disappearance of their baby daughter, Elvira.
Belle is desperate to find out what happened to the sister she never knew she had - but when she starts asking questions, she is confronted with unsettling rumours, malicious gossip, and outright threats. Oliver, an attractive, easy-going American journalist, promises to help her, but an anonymous note tells her not to trust those closest to her. . .
Belle survives riots, intruders, and bomb attacks - but nothing will stop her in her mission to uncover the truth. Can she trust her growing feelings for Oliver? Is her sister really dead? And could there be a chance Belle might find her?
This book is an interesting mix of mystery and romance set in 1930s Burma, and swaps between the stories of Belle, a nightclub singer and Diana, her mother. This novel has mystery, tension, violence and romance.
The setting in colonial Burma was beautifully written. It was an easy read and I enjoyed this story and would recommend.
I received a copy of The missing sister by Dinah Jefferies from the publisher via NetGalley, the review is my own opinion.
Belle is desperate to find out what happened to the sister she never knew she had - but when she starts asking questions, she is confronted with unsettling rumours, malicious gossip, and outright threats. Oliver, an attractive, easy-going American journalist, promises to help her, but an anonymous note tells her not to trust those closest to her. . .
Belle survives riots, intruders, and bomb attacks - but nothing will stop her in her mission to uncover the truth. Can she trust her growing feelings for Oliver? Is her sister really dead? And could there be a chance Belle might find her?
This book is an interesting mix of mystery and romance set in 1930s Burma, and swaps between the stories of Belle, a nightclub singer and Diana, her mother. This novel has mystery, tension, violence and romance.
The setting in colonial Burma was beautifully written. It was an easy read and I enjoyed this story and would recommend.
I received a copy of The missing sister by Dinah Jefferies from the publisher via NetGalley, the review is my own opinion.
Billie Wichkan (118 KP) rated The Stalker in Books
May 22, 2019
A murder on their doorstep
A case that's too close to home . . .
The body of a young woman has been discovered in Bellahouston park, the second in a matter of months. It's clear to Detective Superintendent William Lorimer of Police Scotland that they have a repeat killer on their hands, who is sure to strike again.
Lucky for DSI Lorimer that his wife, Maggie, is miles away from potential danger, touring Scotland to promote her first book. Faced with strangers at every event, Maggie doesn't notice the quiet, non-de script man sitting in the back row.
But he has noticed Maggie Lorimer. And soon his will be a face she never forgets.
Wow... what a great crime thriller this was. I didn't realize this was part of a series but it didn't impact on reading this one at all. It was very easy to follow the main characters and was easily read as a stand-alone.
I loved the complexity of the plot and it flowed very well.
There is plenty of tension and suspense throughout. The writing here is very atmospheric and draws you in.
The pace is just right as it helps the suspense level and atmosphere.
Very good characters and very relatable. I think the writing is superb and very well written.
The author has done a superb job of putting you in the shoes of the victim and how the range of emotions happens.
This is a wonderfully chilling crime read and I highly recommend!!
Thanks to Net Galley and Little, Brown for an ARC.
A case that's too close to home . . .
The body of a young woman has been discovered in Bellahouston park, the second in a matter of months. It's clear to Detective Superintendent William Lorimer of Police Scotland that they have a repeat killer on their hands, who is sure to strike again.
Lucky for DSI Lorimer that his wife, Maggie, is miles away from potential danger, touring Scotland to promote her first book. Faced with strangers at every event, Maggie doesn't notice the quiet, non-de script man sitting in the back row.
But he has noticed Maggie Lorimer. And soon his will be a face she never forgets.
Wow... what a great crime thriller this was. I didn't realize this was part of a series but it didn't impact on reading this one at all. It was very easy to follow the main characters and was easily read as a stand-alone.
I loved the complexity of the plot and it flowed very well.
There is plenty of tension and suspense throughout. The writing here is very atmospheric and draws you in.
The pace is just right as it helps the suspense level and atmosphere.
Very good characters and very relatable. I think the writing is superb and very well written.
The author has done a superb job of putting you in the shoes of the victim and how the range of emotions happens.
This is a wonderfully chilling crime read and I highly recommend!!
Thanks to Net Galley and Little, Brown for an ARC.