Search
Search results
Darren (1599 KP) rated 8MM 2 (2005) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: 8MM 2 starts as we meet young lawyer David (Schaech and his future wife Tish (Heuring) in Budapest. While on their trip away the couple end up having a steamy threesome with Risa (Gorog) helping both of their needs in the bedroom. David finds himself having to impress Tish’s father Ambassador Harrington (Davison) while his other daughter Lynn (Benz) has already settled down.
When the couple receive photos of their threesome they try to figure out who took them leading them into the sexual underworld in Hungry. While trying to clean up the blackmailing the two find themselves being approached from all angles as they try to keep any political career undercover.
8MM 2 is a film with one of the most miss-leading titles in film history, it is advertised as a sequel to 8MM starring Nicolas Cage which is about going into the underworld of sex. This is a boring political drama cover up after a daughter and her fiancée end up in a sex tape and get blackmailed. Nothing about this makes any sense for it to be a sequel but only uses the name because of the standard below average story. to make matters worse this might as well just be a softcore film because you can pretty much guarantee there is more time when the women are naked more than actually clothed.
Actor Review
Johnathon Schaech: David is the young lawyer entering into a powerful family as he tries to rise up the ranks in the Hungarian Embassy. When he has a steamy threesome with his wife to be and a strange woman he finds himself having to go into the world of pornography to uncover the people trying to blackmail him. Johnathon is solid but basic in this role.
Lori Heuring: Tish is the wife to be for David, her father is the Ambassador making her have a high profile name in social circles. She ends up having to follow David into the underworld of the sex industry to find the tape from their night. Lori is solid in this role without being special.
Bruce Davison: Ambassador Harrington is the father of Tish he is highly respected and the night the two have together could find themselves being responsible for a problem in his career. Bruce gives us a very basic supporting performance that we just don’t see enough.
Julie Benz: Lynn is the sister of Tish that is the older one of the two who always wants to protect her younger sister. Julie is wasted in this supporting role.
Support Cast: 8MM 2 has a basic supporting cast where nearly all the female cast are naked with most not really having much going on.
Director Review: J.S. Cardone – J.S. really doesn’t give us a worthy sequel that lacks any of the important parts needed.
Mystery: 8MM 2 doesn’t really offer us a mystery because we don’t see what the big mystery is.
Thriller: 8MM 2 doesn’t keep us on edge at all.
Settings: 8MM 2 is set in Hungary without being anything special.
Special Effects: 8MM 2 has basic effects when needed but nothing fancy.
Suggestion: 8MM 2 is one just to avoid really because it is terrible. (Avoid)
Best Part: Final Twist.
Worst Part: Pointless amount of nudity.
Believability: No
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Runtime: 1 Hour 46 Minutes
Tagline: From The Last Kiss To The Last Breath… From The First Kiss To The Last Breath.
Trivia: Much of the sex depicted is actual not simulated.
Overall: Dreadful sequel that really doesn’t work.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/06/12/franchise-weekend-8mm-2-2005/
When the couple receive photos of their threesome they try to figure out who took them leading them into the sexual underworld in Hungry. While trying to clean up the blackmailing the two find themselves being approached from all angles as they try to keep any political career undercover.
8MM 2 is a film with one of the most miss-leading titles in film history, it is advertised as a sequel to 8MM starring Nicolas Cage which is about going into the underworld of sex. This is a boring political drama cover up after a daughter and her fiancée end up in a sex tape and get blackmailed. Nothing about this makes any sense for it to be a sequel but only uses the name because of the standard below average story. to make matters worse this might as well just be a softcore film because you can pretty much guarantee there is more time when the women are naked more than actually clothed.
Actor Review
Johnathon Schaech: David is the young lawyer entering into a powerful family as he tries to rise up the ranks in the Hungarian Embassy. When he has a steamy threesome with his wife to be and a strange woman he finds himself having to go into the world of pornography to uncover the people trying to blackmail him. Johnathon is solid but basic in this role.
Lori Heuring: Tish is the wife to be for David, her father is the Ambassador making her have a high profile name in social circles. She ends up having to follow David into the underworld of the sex industry to find the tape from their night. Lori is solid in this role without being special.
Bruce Davison: Ambassador Harrington is the father of Tish he is highly respected and the night the two have together could find themselves being responsible for a problem in his career. Bruce gives us a very basic supporting performance that we just don’t see enough.
Julie Benz: Lynn is the sister of Tish that is the older one of the two who always wants to protect her younger sister. Julie is wasted in this supporting role.
Support Cast: 8MM 2 has a basic supporting cast where nearly all the female cast are naked with most not really having much going on.
Director Review: J.S. Cardone – J.S. really doesn’t give us a worthy sequel that lacks any of the important parts needed.
Mystery: 8MM 2 doesn’t really offer us a mystery because we don’t see what the big mystery is.
Thriller: 8MM 2 doesn’t keep us on edge at all.
Settings: 8MM 2 is set in Hungary without being anything special.
Special Effects: 8MM 2 has basic effects when needed but nothing fancy.
Suggestion: 8MM 2 is one just to avoid really because it is terrible. (Avoid)
Best Part: Final Twist.
Worst Part: Pointless amount of nudity.
Believability: No
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Runtime: 1 Hour 46 Minutes
Tagline: From The Last Kiss To The Last Breath… From The First Kiss To The Last Breath.
Trivia: Much of the sex depicted is actual not simulated.
Overall: Dreadful sequel that really doesn’t work.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/06/12/franchise-weekend-8mm-2-2005/
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Biutiful (2010) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Jun 23, 2019)
At times, it's difficult to summarize your thoughts about a specific film. It isn't because the film is necessarily so good or bad that it's beyond words, but because you're unsure how to feel about said film until the credits finally roll. Biutiful is such a film.
The film revolves around Uxbal, portrayed by Javier Bardem (No Country For Old Men) sporting a mullet, so expectations are already high. Uxbal has just been diagnosed with terminal prostate cancer, but isn't ready to leave this world. His two children are still young and Uxbal feels that their mother, who's more interested in partaking in promiscuous behavior while dealing with a bipolar disorder, isn't fit to take care of their children. Meanwhile Uxbal supports his family by partnering with both the Chinese and African street merchants that are in the country illegally. Together they sell pirated movies and cheap knockoffs of clothing and accessories made by Chinese men, women, and children that live in a warehouse used as a sweatshop. To top it off, Uxbal has the ability to communicate with the dead and is called upon to help people who have recently passed to let go and move on to the other side. Although hesitant at first, Uxbal has every intention of getting his affairs in order, reconciling his marriage, and making sure his children have someone to take care of them after he's gone. Unfortunately, things don't always go as planned.
Biutiful, its spelling having a simple yet somewhat brilliant explanation, features a lot of symbolism that will go over viewers heads. It also is incredibly similar to Iñárritu's previous works such as 21 Grams and Babel in both style and tone, but is the director's first film to be presented in Spanish. The drama is beyond bleak and practically hopeless. The out of tune soundtrack, the rocks Uxbal gives to his children, and people clutching to the ceiling will leave many scratching their heads. Many ideas seem to be hinted at, but are never fully fleshed out like reflections and shadows moving out of sync from their source. However, the film is driven by Bardem's emotionally draining, physical, and all around powerful performance.
The scene that really makes the entire film worthwhile is the scene in the Chinese warehouse right before Uxbal visits his brother's strip club. It's the most effective, long-lasting, and memorable scene in the film. In the same breath though, what was up with the sound? It was like it was purposely terrible at certain points in the film. At times, it seemed significant to showcase the sound of the characters' heartbeats, but just felt sloppy the one or two other times it occurred. There were also quite a few memorable quotes in the film including, "It's dangerous to trust a man who's hungry."
Biutiful is an unusual drama that is both confusing at times and ridiculously intriguing at others. A vigorously passionate performance by Javier Bardem may not be enough to save what is otherwise a sometimes mindboggling and hellacious journey through the eyes of what seems like the most unlucky man in the world. Even in comparison to his other works, Biutiful seems even more bleak and dreary than Iñárritu's other works. What's bizarre is that the film does give you a strange sense of hope. No matter how bad you think your life currently is or was, this film proves that it can always be worse even if the presentation is more than a little mentally and emotionally exhausting. It's also interesting to note that even though the film leans more to the bizarre side while being downright depressing, it does make a long-lasting impression and sticks with you as you contemplate scenes and occurrences in the film days after you've seen it.
The film revolves around Uxbal, portrayed by Javier Bardem (No Country For Old Men) sporting a mullet, so expectations are already high. Uxbal has just been diagnosed with terminal prostate cancer, but isn't ready to leave this world. His two children are still young and Uxbal feels that their mother, who's more interested in partaking in promiscuous behavior while dealing with a bipolar disorder, isn't fit to take care of their children. Meanwhile Uxbal supports his family by partnering with both the Chinese and African street merchants that are in the country illegally. Together they sell pirated movies and cheap knockoffs of clothing and accessories made by Chinese men, women, and children that live in a warehouse used as a sweatshop. To top it off, Uxbal has the ability to communicate with the dead and is called upon to help people who have recently passed to let go and move on to the other side. Although hesitant at first, Uxbal has every intention of getting his affairs in order, reconciling his marriage, and making sure his children have someone to take care of them after he's gone. Unfortunately, things don't always go as planned.
Biutiful, its spelling having a simple yet somewhat brilliant explanation, features a lot of symbolism that will go over viewers heads. It also is incredibly similar to Iñárritu's previous works such as 21 Grams and Babel in both style and tone, but is the director's first film to be presented in Spanish. The drama is beyond bleak and practically hopeless. The out of tune soundtrack, the rocks Uxbal gives to his children, and people clutching to the ceiling will leave many scratching their heads. Many ideas seem to be hinted at, but are never fully fleshed out like reflections and shadows moving out of sync from their source. However, the film is driven by Bardem's emotionally draining, physical, and all around powerful performance.
The scene that really makes the entire film worthwhile is the scene in the Chinese warehouse right before Uxbal visits his brother's strip club. It's the most effective, long-lasting, and memorable scene in the film. In the same breath though, what was up with the sound? It was like it was purposely terrible at certain points in the film. At times, it seemed significant to showcase the sound of the characters' heartbeats, but just felt sloppy the one or two other times it occurred. There were also quite a few memorable quotes in the film including, "It's dangerous to trust a man who's hungry."
Biutiful is an unusual drama that is both confusing at times and ridiculously intriguing at others. A vigorously passionate performance by Javier Bardem may not be enough to save what is otherwise a sometimes mindboggling and hellacious journey through the eyes of what seems like the most unlucky man in the world. Even in comparison to his other works, Biutiful seems even more bleak and dreary than Iñárritu's other works. What's bizarre is that the film does give you a strange sense of hope. No matter how bad you think your life currently is or was, this film proves that it can always be worse even if the presentation is more than a little mentally and emotionally exhausting. It's also interesting to note that even though the film leans more to the bizarre side while being downright depressing, it does make a long-lasting impression and sticks with you as you contemplate scenes and occurrences in the film days after you've seen it.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Inferno (2016) in Movies
Jul 15, 2019
Inferno is the latest thriller based on the novels of Dan Brown that follow the fictional character of Robert Langdon who is a world renowned symbologist (study of symbols). Like The DaVinci Code and Angels & Demons before them, Inferno follows mostly the same story arch and structure.
Tom Hanks has reprised his role as Robert Langdon (this time with an appropriate haircut) and once again he travels around to beautiful locations of European art and architecture with a young woman by his side, trying to solve a series of clues in order to stop a billionaire madman who believes humanity is a parasite and his plague inferno is the cure. If this sounds like a film you have seen before, it is because you have. In the other two movies that have come before it
Once again, audiences will enjoy being whisked around to see beautiful cities, art, and architecture to solve historical literary clues as the film plays out like a late middle ages travel lesson. These are all good things.
The bad is that during the first half of the film, Robert Langdon has amnesia due to a blow to the head. He cannot remember much which of what he was doing, which makes him a less compelling character. Throughout the series of films, Langdon has used his “dizzying intellect” to solve clues the brightest minds could not solve. In Inferno, that “super power” is taken away and we are left with an average, middle aged man, who is somehow able to solve impossible puzzles and clues while being chased by seedy underground characters and the world health organization. Who for the purposes of this film, seem to have become the FBI/CIA in one. This setup does not work and makes for a boring first half of the film Eventually Langdon regains his memory and the film picks up a bit from there, but for some it might be too late.
As far as the performances go, Tom Hanks delivers a watchable, likable performance, much to his credit considering that the character of Robert Langdon is a relatively boring protagonist. Meanwhile Ben Foster plays the somewhat forgettable billionaire madman (Bertrand Zobrist) in a somewhat forgettable way. It is a shame because perhaps if we had a chance to understand the nuance of his character, like I assume can be done in the books, he would have felt like a more compelling character and caused us to think if he was to be on the right side of history. Unfortunately, any nuance from the book does not translate well to the film adaptation. But not all is lost. For me, the bright spot of the film was Felicity Jones who plays the gifted doctor Sienna Brooks. Brooks, who in helping Langdon with his injury, gets swept up into game for the fate of the world. In her performance, Felicity Jones shows a transition of her emotional resonance throughout the film as her character develops and we get to understand her more, for better or worse. I am excited to see Jones continue to grow in her career and look forward to seeing her this holiday’s Star Wars Story: Rouge One. She has the ability to carry a film, let’s hope she is given the opportunity to do so.
In the end, Inferno is not a terrible film, but it is not very memorable either. Unlike the two films before it, Robert Langdon is handcuffed by an injury that doesn’t allow him to use his intellect that made him compelling before Couple that with what seems like an inspector gadget plot, where the bad guy leave a series of clues to foil his own master plan, and you end up with a “Meh” film.
Tom Hanks has reprised his role as Robert Langdon (this time with an appropriate haircut) and once again he travels around to beautiful locations of European art and architecture with a young woman by his side, trying to solve a series of clues in order to stop a billionaire madman who believes humanity is a parasite and his plague inferno is the cure. If this sounds like a film you have seen before, it is because you have. In the other two movies that have come before it
Once again, audiences will enjoy being whisked around to see beautiful cities, art, and architecture to solve historical literary clues as the film plays out like a late middle ages travel lesson. These are all good things.
The bad is that during the first half of the film, Robert Langdon has amnesia due to a blow to the head. He cannot remember much which of what he was doing, which makes him a less compelling character. Throughout the series of films, Langdon has used his “dizzying intellect” to solve clues the brightest minds could not solve. In Inferno, that “super power” is taken away and we are left with an average, middle aged man, who is somehow able to solve impossible puzzles and clues while being chased by seedy underground characters and the world health organization. Who for the purposes of this film, seem to have become the FBI/CIA in one. This setup does not work and makes for a boring first half of the film Eventually Langdon regains his memory and the film picks up a bit from there, but for some it might be too late.
As far as the performances go, Tom Hanks delivers a watchable, likable performance, much to his credit considering that the character of Robert Langdon is a relatively boring protagonist. Meanwhile Ben Foster plays the somewhat forgettable billionaire madman (Bertrand Zobrist) in a somewhat forgettable way. It is a shame because perhaps if we had a chance to understand the nuance of his character, like I assume can be done in the books, he would have felt like a more compelling character and caused us to think if he was to be on the right side of history. Unfortunately, any nuance from the book does not translate well to the film adaptation. But not all is lost. For me, the bright spot of the film was Felicity Jones who plays the gifted doctor Sienna Brooks. Brooks, who in helping Langdon with his injury, gets swept up into game for the fate of the world. In her performance, Felicity Jones shows a transition of her emotional resonance throughout the film as her character develops and we get to understand her more, for better or worse. I am excited to see Jones continue to grow in her career and look forward to seeing her this holiday’s Star Wars Story: Rouge One. She has the ability to carry a film, let’s hope she is given the opportunity to do so.
In the end, Inferno is not a terrible film, but it is not very memorable either. Unlike the two films before it, Robert Langdon is handcuffed by an injury that doesn’t allow him to use his intellect that made him compelling before Couple that with what seems like an inspector gadget plot, where the bad guy leave a series of clues to foil his own master plan, and you end up with a “Meh” film.
Natacha (374 KP) rated The Name of the Wind in Books
Jan 19, 2019 (Updated Jun 23, 2019)
Unfortunately, it seems that I have a very unpopular opinion about this book.
Contains spoilers, click to show
This was the first book I decided to read when I got back into reading 1.5years ago, and it took me around 2 months to actually finish it and throughout it made me wonder if maybe reading wasn't my thing any more. But after reading other books that I really enjoyed I realized that it's not that I don't like reading, I just didn't enjoy that book.
Yes, it looks like I have an unpopular opinion on this one...
Things I like:
-The way the story is told: I like that the main character is retelling his adventure.
-”Old” Kvothe: He is mysterious, broken and flawed. I wish the whole book was about him and not about his younger self.
-Auri: She is also a very interesting character and through the book I wanted to learn more about her. She actually got her own novella and I’m planning on reading it.
Things I didn’t like:
-Young Kvothe: Unfortunately he was my main issue and what made me dislike this book. To me, he was a Gary-Sue. Flawless. He was the best musician, the best craftsman, the best at using magic and even when he didn’t know something he would learn it half the time than other (he would also mention it, saying things like: “I learn this skill in a month while it takes a year for other students to learn it”). All girl will fall in love with him of course. And his biggest flaw? Being naive… This is what gets him in trouble or his eagerness to learn. Which in my opinion this is not a flaw and even if we want to consider it a flaw it doesn’t balance all his perfectness in everything else.
- Nothing really happens: In the first part of the book we what happened to him and his family and also we get a glimpse of how his life is now… and the rest of the book is about how he always manages to find the money to pay his university fees and how he is the best at everything and how he learns all the needed skills in a week while it takes months for the other students to learn.
We had some action happened towards the end but right when you think that a big bad lizard is going to destroy everything it turns out it is just drunk/high…
-Convenience. Kvothe fees are exactly the amount of money that he has right now and he will have a little remaining to pay for a room. Kvothe need a huge amount of money to buy a horse he meets an old lady that fancies young underage boy and gives him all the money he needs. Kvothe need to be in 3 days somewhere but it normally takes a week to get there? He buys a horse that is capable of running days without stopping or die. And then he needs to get rid of the horse to get his money back? Oh here is a merchant lets sell the horse just as easily as that. Something terrible happened in a village everybody is dead but the love interest of Kvothe how by the way he didn't know was there but went looking for her just because he thought she might be there. grr!
-We see nothing that’s mention in the synopsis: the stole princesses, the burned town, the night with Felurian etc. Maybe it's for the next book but don't put it in the synopsis if it's not in this book! I was so anticipating to see at least some of those mentions but no. Nothing. Just the school days and finding the money.
Yes, it looks like I have an unpopular opinion on this one...
Things I like:
-The way the story is told: I like that the main character is retelling his adventure.
-”Old” Kvothe: He is mysterious, broken and flawed. I wish the whole book was about him and not about his younger self.
-Auri: She is also a very interesting character and through the book I wanted to learn more about her. She actually got her own novella and I’m planning on reading it.
Things I didn’t like:
-Young Kvothe: Unfortunately he was my main issue and what made me dislike this book. To me, he was a Gary-Sue. Flawless. He was the best musician, the best craftsman, the best at using magic and even when he didn’t know something he would learn it half the time than other (he would also mention it, saying things like: “I learn this skill in a month while it takes a year for other students to learn it”). All girl will fall in love with him of course. And his biggest flaw? Being naive… This is what gets him in trouble or his eagerness to learn. Which in my opinion this is not a flaw and even if we want to consider it a flaw it doesn’t balance all his perfectness in everything else.
- Nothing really happens: In the first part of the book we what happened to him and his family and also we get a glimpse of how his life is now… and the rest of the book is about how he always manages to find the money to pay his university fees and how he is the best at everything and how he learns all the needed skills in a week while it takes months for the other students to learn.
We had some action happened towards the end but right when you think that a big bad lizard is going to destroy everything it turns out it is just drunk/high…
-Convenience. Kvothe fees are exactly the amount of money that he has right now and he will have a little remaining to pay for a room. Kvothe need a huge amount of money to buy a horse he meets an old lady that fancies young underage boy and gives him all the money he needs. Kvothe need to be in 3 days somewhere but it normally takes a week to get there? He buys a horse that is capable of running days without stopping or die. And then he needs to get rid of the horse to get his money back? Oh here is a merchant lets sell the horse just as easily as that. Something terrible happened in a village everybody is dead but the love interest of Kvothe how by the way he didn't know was there but went looking for her just because he thought she might be there. grr!
-We see nothing that’s mention in the synopsis: the stole princesses, the burned town, the night with Felurian etc. Maybe it's for the next book but don't put it in the synopsis if it's not in this book! I was so anticipating to see at least some of those mentions but no. Nothing. Just the school days and finding the money.
Amanda (96 KP) rated Five Feet Apart in Books
Jul 7, 2019
I FINALLY finished this book and it took forever to do so. I remember starting this book a while back and I just had a difficult time getting through this story. I couldn't pin point as to why it was difficult to finish, and to this day, I really still can't.
This book had/has so much hype and more so when the movie was released. I almost skipped the book and watched the movie because of who was playing the Will character, but I decided against it and went for the book first.
First and foremost, the cover is absolutely gorgeous! I wanted to get the book with the original cover and I sometimes just stare at it. I understand why there is a re-release of the book with the movie poster on the covers, but to me, it takes away from the author and the publisher. I try my best NOT to buy the books with the movie posters.
So we have two teenagers, Stella and Will, whom both have Cystic Fibrosis. In a nutshell, this disease affects the lungs and digestive system. The lungs fill rapidly with mucus and makes it difficult to breathe. The highly big part, and the main story of this novel, is that two people with the SAME disease have to stay a minimum of six feet apart. That is because one of them could get worse, or die, just from the others contamination.
Stella is optimistic and uploads YouTube videos and tries to keep her parents notified and tries to not think about her older sister being gone.
Will has not so much as given up, but more like kind of goes with the flow of his condition. So much so that he lets his friends use his hospital room as a 'hook up' area. Such a nice guy, don't you think?
Anyway, so these two don't really like each other at first but feelings are developed over bonding of memories and Stella getting Will to get back to doing his treatments on a regular basis. The story starts that they have to be six feet apart, but Stella pushes the boundary and keeps it at five feet apart - hence the title.
I hate to say this, but I had a hard time connecting with either one of these characters. The only one I really somewhat liked was Poe.
I can see the whole similarity with this book and The Fault in Our Stars, but I can't compare the two. Because, in TFIOS, they had cancer and didn't have to stay away from each other. And to me, those characters were easier to connect with than Will and Stella. I'm not saying I didn't like them, but I just couldn't connect.
Stella basically lives so her parents don't fall a part and Will is just kind of 'whatever' about the whole thing because he sees no future for himself, or a treatment that will help him.
I don't really see the hype in this story. It felt rushed to me as well. I'm not sure if it's because the story was kind of short for the plot. Maybe it's because we didn't get a lot of story. I'm not fond of how it was written. It was almost written like it was going to be a movie so it was scripted.
I'm not saying it was a bad story. It really wasn't. I just feel like there was something missing and I couldn't really feel much for these two characters. I couldn't fathom some of the decisions and through process that Stella has done.
All in all, not a terrible story, but I don't see what the hype was about and I don't think I'll be watching the movie.
This book had/has so much hype and more so when the movie was released. I almost skipped the book and watched the movie because of who was playing the Will character, but I decided against it and went for the book first.
First and foremost, the cover is absolutely gorgeous! I wanted to get the book with the original cover and I sometimes just stare at it. I understand why there is a re-release of the book with the movie poster on the covers, but to me, it takes away from the author and the publisher. I try my best NOT to buy the books with the movie posters.
So we have two teenagers, Stella and Will, whom both have Cystic Fibrosis. In a nutshell, this disease affects the lungs and digestive system. The lungs fill rapidly with mucus and makes it difficult to breathe. The highly big part, and the main story of this novel, is that two people with the SAME disease have to stay a minimum of six feet apart. That is because one of them could get worse, or die, just from the others contamination.
Stella is optimistic and uploads YouTube videos and tries to keep her parents notified and tries to not think about her older sister being gone.
Will has not so much as given up, but more like kind of goes with the flow of his condition. So much so that he lets his friends use his hospital room as a 'hook up' area. Such a nice guy, don't you think?
Anyway, so these two don't really like each other at first but feelings are developed over bonding of memories and Stella getting Will to get back to doing his treatments on a regular basis. The story starts that they have to be six feet apart, but Stella pushes the boundary and keeps it at five feet apart - hence the title.
I hate to say this, but I had a hard time connecting with either one of these characters. The only one I really somewhat liked was Poe.
I can see the whole similarity with this book and The Fault in Our Stars, but I can't compare the two. Because, in TFIOS, they had cancer and didn't have to stay away from each other. And to me, those characters were easier to connect with than Will and Stella. I'm not saying I didn't like them, but I just couldn't connect.
Stella basically lives so her parents don't fall a part and Will is just kind of 'whatever' about the whole thing because he sees no future for himself, or a treatment that will help him.
I don't really see the hype in this story. It felt rushed to me as well. I'm not sure if it's because the story was kind of short for the plot. Maybe it's because we didn't get a lot of story. I'm not fond of how it was written. It was almost written like it was going to be a movie so it was scripted.
I'm not saying it was a bad story. It really wasn't. I just feel like there was something missing and I couldn't really feel much for these two characters. I couldn't fathom some of the decisions and through process that Stella has done.
All in all, not a terrible story, but I don't see what the hype was about and I don't think I'll be watching the movie.
Andy K (10823 KP) rated The House That Jack Built (2018) in Movies
Nov 15, 2019
Into the disturbing mind of a serial killer..
The human mind is still one of those ultimate enigmas of life. How does it work exactly? Nature vs. nurture? What causes some of us to devote their lives to philanthropy and helping others whilst others of us are deeply disturbed devoting their existence to the destruction of life for their twisted, demented pleasure?
The story of Jack is a exercise in the extreme. From the opening moments of THTJB, the audience is quickly brought into Jack's world and not released for 2 1/2 hours of brutality.
Jack finds himself in his bright red rape van when he passes a damsel in distress in the form of a woman with a flat tire. He stops and reluctantly agrees to drive her to the nearest auto repair place for assistance. When the plight becomes more complicated, Jack reluctantly agrees to further drive the woman around. Growing impatient with her constant blather and insults at Jack's personality, Jack quickly reaches his limit and destroys the woman quickly using her broken car jack which happens to be lying right next to him in the front seat.
That is just the beginning.
The film is set to 5 "incidents" and an "epilogue" which chronicle several years in Jack's life, including other relationships with woman, his family and random encounters he has all used to fuel his addiction with death. Without detailing them all here, his journey for carnage includes extreme actions including multiple murders, corpse manipulation and even human trophies.
If you are a fan of writer/director Lars von Trier, this will be nothing new to you if you have seen some of his other films including Antichrist, Nymphomaniac or Dogville. His films usually require a strong stomach, but do not shock for shock's sake alone. The vivid imagery in all his films is used not only to proper the narrative, to show the audience something they have not seen before and cross the lines between art and film. His films will repulse some. I won't squabble with those who cannot handle his type of film-making; however, maybe my inner film snob relishes those who give me something different, something to think about after I have finished watching and thought out interesting characters you almost never see any more.
With THTJB, he delves into the human mind well providing voice-over to let us in to what Jack is thinking and maybe helps us include a glimmer of understanding with it. Jack's acts are loathsome, morbid, violent, criminal and terrible, but somehow I was still fascinated by him which comes with good writing. In an interview I watched after viewing the film, von Trier explained he loved writing for Jack because you never knew quite what he was going to say. Several times within the film he is "caught" in an awkward situation and is able to talk himself out of it with absurd, yet believable rhetoric. You certainly don't root for him since his actions are reprehensible, but you are interested in what happens next.
Matt Dillon was overlooked during awards season of 2018. The Academy should've looked his way as they did for Sir Anthony Hopkins in 1991. His performance is gritty, deeply disturbing and very believable. He made Jack seem sympathetic at times even through his extreme violent nature. Sometimes subtle, sometimes over the top. I can't remember a performance of his which was more striking.
A film by Lars von Trier will always propel your intellect after your viewing is complete and this film is no exception. Some of the images the movie provides (not just the kill scenes) are unforgettable, some beautiful, but all very thought out and aligned with precision. He is undoubtedly one of the most unique directors working in film today and I continually look forward to his subsequent offerings!
The story of Jack is a exercise in the extreme. From the opening moments of THTJB, the audience is quickly brought into Jack's world and not released for 2 1/2 hours of brutality.
Jack finds himself in his bright red rape van when he passes a damsel in distress in the form of a woman with a flat tire. He stops and reluctantly agrees to drive her to the nearest auto repair place for assistance. When the plight becomes more complicated, Jack reluctantly agrees to further drive the woman around. Growing impatient with her constant blather and insults at Jack's personality, Jack quickly reaches his limit and destroys the woman quickly using her broken car jack which happens to be lying right next to him in the front seat.
That is just the beginning.
The film is set to 5 "incidents" and an "epilogue" which chronicle several years in Jack's life, including other relationships with woman, his family and random encounters he has all used to fuel his addiction with death. Without detailing them all here, his journey for carnage includes extreme actions including multiple murders, corpse manipulation and even human trophies.
If you are a fan of writer/director Lars von Trier, this will be nothing new to you if you have seen some of his other films including Antichrist, Nymphomaniac or Dogville. His films usually require a strong stomach, but do not shock for shock's sake alone. The vivid imagery in all his films is used not only to proper the narrative, to show the audience something they have not seen before and cross the lines between art and film. His films will repulse some. I won't squabble with those who cannot handle his type of film-making; however, maybe my inner film snob relishes those who give me something different, something to think about after I have finished watching and thought out interesting characters you almost never see any more.
With THTJB, he delves into the human mind well providing voice-over to let us in to what Jack is thinking and maybe helps us include a glimmer of understanding with it. Jack's acts are loathsome, morbid, violent, criminal and terrible, but somehow I was still fascinated by him which comes with good writing. In an interview I watched after viewing the film, von Trier explained he loved writing for Jack because you never knew quite what he was going to say. Several times within the film he is "caught" in an awkward situation and is able to talk himself out of it with absurd, yet believable rhetoric. You certainly don't root for him since his actions are reprehensible, but you are interested in what happens next.
Matt Dillon was overlooked during awards season of 2018. The Academy should've looked his way as they did for Sir Anthony Hopkins in 1991. His performance is gritty, deeply disturbing and very believable. He made Jack seem sympathetic at times even through his extreme violent nature. Sometimes subtle, sometimes over the top. I can't remember a performance of his which was more striking.
A film by Lars von Trier will always propel your intellect after your viewing is complete and this film is no exception. Some of the images the movie provides (not just the kill scenes) are unforgettable, some beautiful, but all very thought out and aligned with precision. He is undoubtedly one of the most unique directors working in film today and I continually look forward to his subsequent offerings!
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Frozen II (2019) in Movies
Nov 30, 2019
Anna's character development (1 more)
Reindeer
Songs (1 more)
Olaf
Having arrived at the cinema on Saturday afternoon I was very glad I changed my plans to see this after work on Friday. The foyer was packed with children and it looked like a costume shop had a Disney special running. My 3D screening the day before had been a much more pleasant affair.
Arendelle is thriving and its people have never been happier, but Queen Elsa is feeling an emptiness that no amount of family and friends can seem to solve. When she starts to hear a song on the wind she knows she must follow its calling.
The song leads them to a place that Elsa and Anna have only ever heard about from their parents, a forest shrouded in impenetrable mist, a place that holds more questions as well as answers.
Firstly, 3D... big thumbs down. I certainly wouldn't be paying extra to see it, it's hardly ever worth it but it was the easiest way to have a screening that wasn't rammed with munchkins in cheap shiny costumes singing Let It Go.
There's always a certain amount of enjoyment to be had from a Disney film, I would say that automatically most are looking at 2.5/5 rating regardless... but coming out of Frozen II I was concerned that this one had dropped the ball.
The characters, our favourite things next to the songs... well mine at least, were hollow representations of what we saw in the first film. The peripheral characters were great so that thankfully helped everything move along well. Sadly Olaf thoroughly annoyed me with his existential crisis but while there were some heartfelt moments they didn't make up for that.
Out of the other main characters it was only Anna that had made any improvement from the original. (Sven of course is comedy gold, that's never in question.) She was stronger and more impressive, she seemed to have a lot more "role model" this time around. It also felt like there was a lot more Kristen Bell in her this time like she was allowed to have more input into Anna, she seems a lot funnier.
It is amazing just how much of an impact Disney songs can have, going in and out of the cinema at the moment you'll generally hear someone singing Let It Go or making some kind of pun, and here's where we come to my second major problem... the songs of Frozen II. There's not a single catchy tune. Much like Mary Poppins Returns I came out with original songs in my head and not the new ones. Possibly the worst thing of all is that they seemingly splice a boyband video for Kristoff right into the middle of the film. The only thing to take away from it is that reindeer are very talented.
Next, don't worry, this is the last one... probably. While the animation is the usual Disney quality there are a couple of moments (one of which is in the trailer) that when I saw them on the big screen looked terrible. Elsa fills the sky with ice crystals and they hand there and visually it's really not very good. For spoilery reasons I understand why they did it but it wasn't in keeping with the rest of the style enough to make it fit in.
The story itself was quite a nice one, it gives background context and opens up the Frozen universe for what I imagine will be a third film somewhere along the line. It covers the usual collection of things, betrayal, love, redemption, plenty of the usual Disney fodder.
Ultimately there's still a lot of good stuff in this and of course it's going to be entertaining. I don't think you could find a Disney film that wasn't, but for me the fact that Olaf and the songs were poor tarnished this one for me.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/11/frozen-ii-movie-review.html
Arendelle is thriving and its people have never been happier, but Queen Elsa is feeling an emptiness that no amount of family and friends can seem to solve. When she starts to hear a song on the wind she knows she must follow its calling.
The song leads them to a place that Elsa and Anna have only ever heard about from their parents, a forest shrouded in impenetrable mist, a place that holds more questions as well as answers.
Firstly, 3D... big thumbs down. I certainly wouldn't be paying extra to see it, it's hardly ever worth it but it was the easiest way to have a screening that wasn't rammed with munchkins in cheap shiny costumes singing Let It Go.
There's always a certain amount of enjoyment to be had from a Disney film, I would say that automatically most are looking at 2.5/5 rating regardless... but coming out of Frozen II I was concerned that this one had dropped the ball.
The characters, our favourite things next to the songs... well mine at least, were hollow representations of what we saw in the first film. The peripheral characters were great so that thankfully helped everything move along well. Sadly Olaf thoroughly annoyed me with his existential crisis but while there were some heartfelt moments they didn't make up for that.
Out of the other main characters it was only Anna that had made any improvement from the original. (Sven of course is comedy gold, that's never in question.) She was stronger and more impressive, she seemed to have a lot more "role model" this time around. It also felt like there was a lot more Kristen Bell in her this time like she was allowed to have more input into Anna, she seems a lot funnier.
It is amazing just how much of an impact Disney songs can have, going in and out of the cinema at the moment you'll generally hear someone singing Let It Go or making some kind of pun, and here's where we come to my second major problem... the songs of Frozen II. There's not a single catchy tune. Much like Mary Poppins Returns I came out with original songs in my head and not the new ones. Possibly the worst thing of all is that they seemingly splice a boyband video for Kristoff right into the middle of the film. The only thing to take away from it is that reindeer are very talented.
Next, don't worry, this is the last one... probably. While the animation is the usual Disney quality there are a couple of moments (one of which is in the trailer) that when I saw them on the big screen looked terrible. Elsa fills the sky with ice crystals and they hand there and visually it's really not very good. For spoilery reasons I understand why they did it but it wasn't in keeping with the rest of the style enough to make it fit in.
The story itself was quite a nice one, it gives background context and opens up the Frozen universe for what I imagine will be a third film somewhere along the line. It covers the usual collection of things, betrayal, love, redemption, plenty of the usual Disney fodder.
Ultimately there's still a lot of good stuff in this and of course it's going to be entertaining. I don't think you could find a Disney film that wasn't, but for me the fact that Olaf and the songs were poor tarnished this one for me.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/11/frozen-ii-movie-review.html
A Bibliophagist (113 KP) rated You in Books
Jan 27, 2020 (Updated Jan 27, 2020)
Unique (3 more)
Well thought out
Fast paced
Creepy
Sometimes loses focus (1 more)
Character feels inconsistant
Unique, interesting and stands on it's own
As a book nerd, and fan of crime podcasts and shows, I had to read this book after loving the show version of it.
Honestly, this is one of the better adaptations (as far as book to screen goes). The show stays true enough to the book, but the book retains enough to be worth the read, even if you've watched the show.
The book is presented completely as the internal monologue of Joe Goldburg, a bookstore employee who is unstable, obsessive and violent. It follows his narration(and therefore unreliable account) of meeting Beck, a girl he becomes obsessed with, stalks and eventually forms a relationship with. The book handles this extremely well, presenting Joe ample opportunity to believably narrate every aspect of the story. He manipulates Beck's life, interfering with a current, bad, boyfriend, toxic friendships and Beck herself, to pave way for what he considers the inevitable, Beck and him living happily ever after. However, obviously, when you are a murderous, psycho, stalker, things never go as you imagine.
Unlike the show, the book never lets you forget that Joe is a monster, having it delivered 100% from his perspective lets us see all the questionable interworkings of his mind. Kepnes obviously referenced incel forums while researching, because a lot of what he says is copy pasta incel rhetoric. He is a bad guy. I think where I struggled with this book is that Beck, in her own way, is a terrible, narcissistic, whiney piece of work. She treats everyone terribly and is very "woe is me". Leaving me to not care about her fate. I watched her fall into his grasp and almost rooted for her demise because she was just the worst. I feel the author needed to deliver something redeeming about her to make me care about what he was doing to her. But up until the end, I hated Beck. But, unlike the show, unlike the masses of Joe fans onlines, I hated Joe too in this book. It was scary how so much he did was so easy, and with the incel like thoughts it reminds you that this would be so easy to happen in real life. At times however, his character felt inconsistent, making dumb descisions or having severe thoughts that didn't feel like his mental instability, just inconsistent story telling. So I would argue that the show was smart in removing all the incel thoughts, all the oversexualized, suddenly very agressive thoughts. Because of course someone who thinks like that could do these things. It's almost scarier that the show version doesn't think this way, just fully 100% believes he is doing the right thing. That's scary. I wish the author had employed that more in her book, something to prove to the reader that Joe fully was convinced he was good. But for every time she attempted to write this she undermined it with some obviously bad thought, that never made the reader doubt for a moment. This isn't bad persay, but I think it took a little creepiness from the book and traded it for shock value. The equivalent of showing the monster in a creepy monster flick. Overall it kept my attention, and I immediately ordered the next book (this one ended very different from the show, and ancillary names were used for different character in season 2) so I'm excited to see what she did in book two, as I won't have something to compare it to.
Worth the read, whether you've seen the show or not. Dark, real, and very creepy. It'll make you look at strangers a little differently.
Honestly, this is one of the better adaptations (as far as book to screen goes). The show stays true enough to the book, but the book retains enough to be worth the read, even if you've watched the show.
The book is presented completely as the internal monologue of Joe Goldburg, a bookstore employee who is unstable, obsessive and violent. It follows his narration(and therefore unreliable account) of meeting Beck, a girl he becomes obsessed with, stalks and eventually forms a relationship with. The book handles this extremely well, presenting Joe ample opportunity to believably narrate every aspect of the story. He manipulates Beck's life, interfering with a current, bad, boyfriend, toxic friendships and Beck herself, to pave way for what he considers the inevitable, Beck and him living happily ever after. However, obviously, when you are a murderous, psycho, stalker, things never go as you imagine.
Unlike the show, the book never lets you forget that Joe is a monster, having it delivered 100% from his perspective lets us see all the questionable interworkings of his mind. Kepnes obviously referenced incel forums while researching, because a lot of what he says is copy pasta incel rhetoric. He is a bad guy. I think where I struggled with this book is that Beck, in her own way, is a terrible, narcissistic, whiney piece of work. She treats everyone terribly and is very "woe is me". Leaving me to not care about her fate. I watched her fall into his grasp and almost rooted for her demise because she was just the worst. I feel the author needed to deliver something redeeming about her to make me care about what he was doing to her. But up until the end, I hated Beck. But, unlike the show, unlike the masses of Joe fans onlines, I hated Joe too in this book. It was scary how so much he did was so easy, and with the incel like thoughts it reminds you that this would be so easy to happen in real life. At times however, his character felt inconsistent, making dumb descisions or having severe thoughts that didn't feel like his mental instability, just inconsistent story telling. So I would argue that the show was smart in removing all the incel thoughts, all the oversexualized, suddenly very agressive thoughts. Because of course someone who thinks like that could do these things. It's almost scarier that the show version doesn't think this way, just fully 100% believes he is doing the right thing. That's scary. I wish the author had employed that more in her book, something to prove to the reader that Joe fully was convinced he was good. But for every time she attempted to write this she undermined it with some obviously bad thought, that never made the reader doubt for a moment. This isn't bad persay, but I think it took a little creepiness from the book and traded it for shock value. The equivalent of showing the monster in a creepy monster flick. Overall it kept my attention, and I immediately ordered the next book (this one ended very different from the show, and ancillary names were used for different character in season 2) so I'm excited to see what she did in book two, as I won't have something to compare it to.
Worth the read, whether you've seen the show or not. Dark, real, and very creepy. It'll make you look at strangers a little differently.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Beasts of No Nation (2015) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020 (Updated Jul 9, 2020)
As I may have mentioned, a lot of my film viewing over the last wee while has been part of a project that hopes to be called 21st Century Cinema: 200 Essential films of the new millennium – which utilises the Decinemal system you will see at the bottom of each of my reviews. It aims to judge each film objectively with a score out of 10 over 10 categories, to give an overall rating out of 100.
Cary Joyi Fukunaga’s personal opus Beasts of no Nation, made for Netflix but good enough for a cinema release, falls into the category of films that have garnered enough critical acclaim to demand consideration for the top 200. It is the kind of film that you would always recommend, but may choose to overlook in search of a more basically entertaining watch.
Fukunaga has a fine pedigree already in his career, with credits on True Detective and the under-rated Sin Nombre from 2009. He has also been tasked with directing duties on the delayed Bond No Time To Die, which we hope to see before the new year now. He is a hands on, no messing about kind of guy, seemingly, taking on writing and cinematography duties also for this sad tale of child exploitation in an unnamed African war.
At times, it borders on documentary style, with an eye for strong visual images and extended silences, favoured over extraneous exposition and needless dialogue. A technique that makes the subject matter all the more uncomfortable to watch. Idris Elba adds big name weight in a fine supporting role, but the lion’s share of acting responsibility falls to young Abraham Attah, who is nothing short of astonishing in the most harrowing moments of this stark and sincere story.
I have to confess, this was another pre-lockdown watch for me, and as much as I can recall the feel and impact of it as a whole, I would struggle to talk about it in any detail after one viewing three months ago. And that is partly the reason it won’t quite make the lower benchmark of a strong 73 Decinemal score; for all its power it just isn’t quite memorable enough on every level, in the way something like City Of God, or even Beasts of the Southern Wild most definitely are.
Perhaps those are unfair comparisons, but it strives for the impact of the former without the flair, and has an independant feel without the charm of the latter. Not that flair or charm are priorities here. It simply wants to show you an issue you may not have been overly aware of, and demands that you empathise both with the complexity of the problem and with the tragic journey of Agu – a child robbed of all innocence by a terrible world.
The photography sits with the strong performances as a notable highlight; giving contrast to the devastation, depredation and desperation under the skin, and showing an angry beauty that dances beside it, showing brief moments of hope when we need them most, and therefore avoiding the trap of being too brutal to enjoy on any level. Which is a mistake similar films can fall prey too.
Violence and war are not light subjects. When the focus is also the lost soul of a child, the tightrope of melodrama and sentimentality is very fine. All involved here walk that line expertly, never once resorting to having to buy your care with familiar Hollywood tricks. In fact it couldn’t be further from Hollywood if it tried. And the drama is all the better for that.
A solid, fine movie, that is narrowly short of being truly great. But you should most definitely see it at some point if you haven’t already.
Cary Joyi Fukunaga’s personal opus Beasts of no Nation, made for Netflix but good enough for a cinema release, falls into the category of films that have garnered enough critical acclaim to demand consideration for the top 200. It is the kind of film that you would always recommend, but may choose to overlook in search of a more basically entertaining watch.
Fukunaga has a fine pedigree already in his career, with credits on True Detective and the under-rated Sin Nombre from 2009. He has also been tasked with directing duties on the delayed Bond No Time To Die, which we hope to see before the new year now. He is a hands on, no messing about kind of guy, seemingly, taking on writing and cinematography duties also for this sad tale of child exploitation in an unnamed African war.
At times, it borders on documentary style, with an eye for strong visual images and extended silences, favoured over extraneous exposition and needless dialogue. A technique that makes the subject matter all the more uncomfortable to watch. Idris Elba adds big name weight in a fine supporting role, but the lion’s share of acting responsibility falls to young Abraham Attah, who is nothing short of astonishing in the most harrowing moments of this stark and sincere story.
I have to confess, this was another pre-lockdown watch for me, and as much as I can recall the feel and impact of it as a whole, I would struggle to talk about it in any detail after one viewing three months ago. And that is partly the reason it won’t quite make the lower benchmark of a strong 73 Decinemal score; for all its power it just isn’t quite memorable enough on every level, in the way something like City Of God, or even Beasts of the Southern Wild most definitely are.
Perhaps those are unfair comparisons, but it strives for the impact of the former without the flair, and has an independant feel without the charm of the latter. Not that flair or charm are priorities here. It simply wants to show you an issue you may not have been overly aware of, and demands that you empathise both with the complexity of the problem and with the tragic journey of Agu – a child robbed of all innocence by a terrible world.
The photography sits with the strong performances as a notable highlight; giving contrast to the devastation, depredation and desperation under the skin, and showing an angry beauty that dances beside it, showing brief moments of hope when we need them most, and therefore avoiding the trap of being too brutal to enjoy on any level. Which is a mistake similar films can fall prey too.
Violence and war are not light subjects. When the focus is also the lost soul of a child, the tightrope of melodrama and sentimentality is very fine. All involved here walk that line expertly, never once resorting to having to buy your care with familiar Hollywood tricks. In fact it couldn’t be further from Hollywood if it tried. And the drama is all the better for that.
A solid, fine movie, that is narrowly short of being truly great. But you should most definitely see it at some point if you haven’t already.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated No Time To Die by Billie Eilish in Music
Mar 3, 2020 (Updated Aug 6, 2020)
Congratulations to The Wasteland’s favourite new artist for sweeping 5 awards at yesterday’s Grammy’s. I hate to say I told you so, but I kinda did, a long way out. It just makes sense to me, that if you have a musical ear, this is the best pop music that has been made for 20 years.
Best new artist, best song (Bad Guy), record of the year, best pop vocal album of the year, and the cherry, best album of the year, for the extraordinary When We All Fall Asleep Where Do We Go. Oh, and her brother won one for best producer… so, not a terrible night out!
Not only is she now the youngest person ever to win a Grammy, beating Taylor Swift to that, mostly meaningless, accolade, but more significantly she is the the first artist to sweep the big 4 awards since Christopher Cross in 1981. That is 39 years ago!
From the few acceptance clips I have seen, you can see how genuinely stunned and thrilled she is to win, which is refreshing after a generation of too cool for school egos that were more persona than person, often holding their emotions in check for the sake of image.
I think there is a long, long way to go before talking about Billie Eilish as a great artist – she has to keep it up! But, for sure the music industry wants to make a point that this is the real deal, and have paved the path for an unlimited potential. What these awards do, is create the stamp on her being a superstar. What she and Finneas do with that now is up to them. I have a feeling they are not going to blow it; it just doesn’t feel like this story ends badly.
Billie’s Bond Theme
In the interest of this blog not turning into the Billie Eilish appreciation society, I am adding on my thoughts about the new release of her theme tune for the new 007 movie, No Time To Die. We all have a favourite Bond song from the years past, so how does this one size up?
Working in conjunction with Oscar winning composer, Hans Zimmer can’t be all bad when you just turned 18, and it certainly helps with this sombre, slow building song, utilising full orchestra and a bundle of small motifs that make it seem 100% Bond. Make no mistake, it is a Billie Eilish song, her moody vibe is all over it, but I love how faithful to the brand she has been, avoiding the temptation to do something too weird with the gig.
The first time I heard it was enough for me to be able to say “cast-iron hit!” And I haven’t changed my mind 20 listens later. It is just mind-blowing how the ball of success keeps rolling for her and Finneas. Having the honour of singing the in memoriam song at the Academy awards, with an emotional rendition of the Beatles’ Yesterday would be enough attention for one week for any ordinary superstar, but no, here’s the best Bond theme for 20 years for you too! Astonishing.
It even has folk that were a bit cautious at first saying, actually that is a great tune. Just yesterday I was listening to a radio interview where Billie talked about how she gets fan mail from all demographics, including 80 year old grandfathers! I find that not only reassuring, but apt. This is an artist of universal appeal wrapped up in the media hype of a teenage pop-idol, but doing a great job of denying that narrow image and idea.
What can I say? Just carry on, Billie. It’s going quite well!
Best new artist, best song (Bad Guy), record of the year, best pop vocal album of the year, and the cherry, best album of the year, for the extraordinary When We All Fall Asleep Where Do We Go. Oh, and her brother won one for best producer… so, not a terrible night out!
Not only is she now the youngest person ever to win a Grammy, beating Taylor Swift to that, mostly meaningless, accolade, but more significantly she is the the first artist to sweep the big 4 awards since Christopher Cross in 1981. That is 39 years ago!
From the few acceptance clips I have seen, you can see how genuinely stunned and thrilled she is to win, which is refreshing after a generation of too cool for school egos that were more persona than person, often holding their emotions in check for the sake of image.
I think there is a long, long way to go before talking about Billie Eilish as a great artist – she has to keep it up! But, for sure the music industry wants to make a point that this is the real deal, and have paved the path for an unlimited potential. What these awards do, is create the stamp on her being a superstar. What she and Finneas do with that now is up to them. I have a feeling they are not going to blow it; it just doesn’t feel like this story ends badly.
Billie’s Bond Theme
In the interest of this blog not turning into the Billie Eilish appreciation society, I am adding on my thoughts about the new release of her theme tune for the new 007 movie, No Time To Die. We all have a favourite Bond song from the years past, so how does this one size up?
Working in conjunction with Oscar winning composer, Hans Zimmer can’t be all bad when you just turned 18, and it certainly helps with this sombre, slow building song, utilising full orchestra and a bundle of small motifs that make it seem 100% Bond. Make no mistake, it is a Billie Eilish song, her moody vibe is all over it, but I love how faithful to the brand she has been, avoiding the temptation to do something too weird with the gig.
The first time I heard it was enough for me to be able to say “cast-iron hit!” And I haven’t changed my mind 20 listens later. It is just mind-blowing how the ball of success keeps rolling for her and Finneas. Having the honour of singing the in memoriam song at the Academy awards, with an emotional rendition of the Beatles’ Yesterday would be enough attention for one week for any ordinary superstar, but no, here’s the best Bond theme for 20 years for you too! Astonishing.
It even has folk that were a bit cautious at first saying, actually that is a great tune. Just yesterday I was listening to a radio interview where Billie talked about how she gets fan mail from all demographics, including 80 year old grandfathers! I find that not only reassuring, but apt. This is an artist of universal appeal wrapped up in the media hype of a teenage pop-idol, but doing a great job of denying that narrow image and idea.
What can I say? Just carry on, Billie. It’s going quite well!