Search
Search results
I'm not one to give spoilers so I'll just give the overall impression the book made.
The book tells the story of Nick and Amy Dunne through a series of diary entries. Nick's entries chronicle the day his wife disappears, their fifth wedding anniversary, and all the events that follow. Amy's entries begin several years before and paint a picture of her and Nick's life together over the course of their five year marriage.
As I was reading, I could identify a bit with both Nick and Amy. Then things start to get a little dull and predictable. Still able to identify with both characters, I start to like one a little bit more than the other, because that's the opinion the author wants me to have and I fall into the trap of forming cliched opinions of these characters. I'm left with a sense of <i>yeah, we all know where this is going</i>.
But then, it dawns on me; I am only nearing the end of Book One, the halfway point of the book. Clearly, there is something I'm missing because you can't need half a book to detail the outcome of what has obviously happened. So I reach the end of Book One and feel a bit blasé about it. It's a story I've read so many times before, nothing new (same sh%t, different characters).
I start reading Book Two and everything I thought about this book was promptly turned on it's ear. Everything I thought I knew, I quickly learned was not at all what it seemed. I can't remember the last time a book has surprised me so you can imagine by joy at being proven wrong. It was like a slap in the face that made me sit up and pay attention.
The rest of the book takes you on a journey to find out the truth. The truth about who these two people really are and what <i>really</i> happened; not just on that fateful day of Amy's disappearance, but over the course of Amy's life. Everything that played a part in shaping their lives together.
If you are a fan of mystery/thriller, I would highly recommend this book. It is not a typical mystery/thriller that keeps you on the edge of your seat, biting your nails even though you know the outcome. What it is, is a good psychological mindf$%k that will prove you don't know as much as you might think you know.
The book tells the story of Nick and Amy Dunne through a series of diary entries. Nick's entries chronicle the day his wife disappears, their fifth wedding anniversary, and all the events that follow. Amy's entries begin several years before and paint a picture of her and Nick's life together over the course of their five year marriage.
As I was reading, I could identify a bit with both Nick and Amy. Then things start to get a little dull and predictable. Still able to identify with both characters, I start to like one a little bit more than the other, because that's the opinion the author wants me to have and I fall into the trap of forming cliched opinions of these characters. I'm left with a sense of <i>yeah, we all know where this is going</i>.
But then, it dawns on me; I am only nearing the end of Book One, the halfway point of the book. Clearly, there is something I'm missing because you can't need half a book to detail the outcome of what has obviously happened. So I reach the end of Book One and feel a bit blasé about it. It's a story I've read so many times before, nothing new (same sh%t, different characters).
I start reading Book Two and everything I thought about this book was promptly turned on it's ear. Everything I thought I knew, I quickly learned was not at all what it seemed. I can't remember the last time a book has surprised me so you can imagine by joy at being proven wrong. It was like a slap in the face that made me sit up and pay attention.
The rest of the book takes you on a journey to find out the truth. The truth about who these two people really are and what <i>really</i> happened; not just on that fateful day of Amy's disappearance, but over the course of Amy's life. Everything that played a part in shaping their lives together.
If you are a fan of mystery/thriller, I would highly recommend this book. It is not a typical mystery/thriller that keeps you on the edge of your seat, biting your nails even though you know the outcome. What it is, is a good psychological mindf$%k that will prove you don't know as much as you might think you know.
JT (287 KP) rated The Bourne Legacy (2012) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
When Matt Damon and Paul Greengrass distanced themselves from another trip into the Bourne-verse it was hard to see if any film would ever make it into production. Then, along came Tony Gilroy, writer of the first three films he seemed to be the logical choice to co-write and direct the fourth installment in this ever popular action franchise.
The Bourne Legacy runs almost parallel with the events of The Bourne Ultimatum, but in this film the only time we get to see Matt Damon’s Jason Bourne is from the odd photograph and his name etched into wood on the underside of a bunk bed.
It’s time for a stare off!
For this outing Renner plays Aaron Cross an ‘outcome’ agent who finds himself on the run when the powers that be realize that Bourne has broken through and passed vital information about Treadstone and Black Briar to Pam Landy, who in turn passes it onto the media. So Retired Col. Eric Byer, USAF ( Norton) part of the sinister hierarchy decides it’s time to shut down and eradicate all other ops, including Cross.
It’s fraught with the occasional plot hole, (just how did Cross know where Shearing lived) here and there but that does little damage to the overall story which is actually quite good. Renner, who is already well equipped for these types of action films fills the void left by Damon very well. When he’s not battling wolves and shooting drones out of the sky he’s driving a motorbike through the streets of Manila, as well as running through every back street and staircase he can find. And he’s more than capable at hand to hand combat.
He’s joined on his adventure by Dr. Marta Shearing (Weisz) who worked with Cross in the beginning and was tasked with providing the agents with a specific set of medication to take, of which it seems Cross is no longer required but is desperately dependent on. Whereas Bourne tried to piece together parts of his life, Cross is like a crackhead desperate for the next fix and so his motives are different.
Gilroy manages the story well and there are some brief cameos from the likes of Scott Glenn, David Strathairn and Albert Finney to provide a reminder to us all about what has happened previously, just in case we are dealing with our own bout of memory loss. It’s disappointing not to see Damon reprise one of the best roles of his career but Renner does an admirable job and there is no question that there will be more life in him yet.
The Bourne Legacy runs almost parallel with the events of The Bourne Ultimatum, but in this film the only time we get to see Matt Damon’s Jason Bourne is from the odd photograph and his name etched into wood on the underside of a bunk bed.
It’s time for a stare off!
For this outing Renner plays Aaron Cross an ‘outcome’ agent who finds himself on the run when the powers that be realize that Bourne has broken through and passed vital information about Treadstone and Black Briar to Pam Landy, who in turn passes it onto the media. So Retired Col. Eric Byer, USAF ( Norton) part of the sinister hierarchy decides it’s time to shut down and eradicate all other ops, including Cross.
It’s fraught with the occasional plot hole, (just how did Cross know where Shearing lived) here and there but that does little damage to the overall story which is actually quite good. Renner, who is already well equipped for these types of action films fills the void left by Damon very well. When he’s not battling wolves and shooting drones out of the sky he’s driving a motorbike through the streets of Manila, as well as running through every back street and staircase he can find. And he’s more than capable at hand to hand combat.
He’s joined on his adventure by Dr. Marta Shearing (Weisz) who worked with Cross in the beginning and was tasked with providing the agents with a specific set of medication to take, of which it seems Cross is no longer required but is desperately dependent on. Whereas Bourne tried to piece together parts of his life, Cross is like a crackhead desperate for the next fix and so his motives are different.
Gilroy manages the story well and there are some brief cameos from the likes of Scott Glenn, David Strathairn and Albert Finney to provide a reminder to us all about what has happened previously, just in case we are dealing with our own bout of memory loss. It’s disappointing not to see Damon reprise one of the best roles of his career but Renner does an admirable job and there is no question that there will be more life in him yet.
TravelersWife4Life (31 KP) rated What Momma Left Behind in Books
Feb 24, 2021
<a href="https://travelingwife4life.wordpress.com/2020/06/24/what-momma-left-behind-lone-star-lit">Travelers Wife 4 Life</a>
A new to me author Cindy K. Sproles created a vivid view of life on the Appalachian Mountains. Her descriptions of the scenery, the mountains, and the geographical location of the characters were very engaging and interesting to read. I enjoyed Cindy K. Sproles's way of engaging my imagination with the world she created for her characters, it reminded me of Pepper D. Basham and Joanne Bischof’s style of writing. I truly loved the environment she created and was sorry to see the story come to an end.
The plot was very unexpected for me. Whether due to the synopsis not doing the story justice, or my preconceptions going into the book. Either way, it was a surprising storyline that turned out to be a sweet and encouraging read on how to find your place in this world, and where you should place your trust.
Favorite Quote:
“The mountain air brings newness, seeps down deep, and cleans out the things that weigh heavy on a body’s soul. Despite how hard things are, it’s like the mountain is forgivin’. It demands a man’s hard work to survive, but then it wraps its soul and spirit around you, claimin’ you as its own child.”
The characters in this story were interesting and relatable. I enjoyed getting to read about Worie Dressar and loved seeing her growth progress throughout the story, I thought she was a unique character and I enjoyed her journey. Throughout the story, she overcomes much sorrow and pain, mixed in with some truly joyful moments. Worie learns who God wants her to be and the plans that He has for her and her family. The other secondary characters added some much-needed layers to this story, they were interesting, and I would love to read more about their personal stories as well (Hint, hint). Worie Dressar has some very thought-provoking thoughts in this book, and I have written down many of them as reminders for when I need God’s guidance in something. A good book overall.
I give this book 4 out of 5 stars for the deep thought-provoking lessons, the vivid descriptions of mountain hardships, and the moral of trusting God through it all. The only thing I would have like to see more of would have been a better developed secondary character for Worie Dressar.
*I volunteered to read this book in return for my honest feedback. The thoughts and opinions expressed within are my own.
A new to me author Cindy K. Sproles created a vivid view of life on the Appalachian Mountains. Her descriptions of the scenery, the mountains, and the geographical location of the characters were very engaging and interesting to read. I enjoyed Cindy K. Sproles's way of engaging my imagination with the world she created for her characters, it reminded me of Pepper D. Basham and Joanne Bischof’s style of writing. I truly loved the environment she created and was sorry to see the story come to an end.
The plot was very unexpected for me. Whether due to the synopsis not doing the story justice, or my preconceptions going into the book. Either way, it was a surprising storyline that turned out to be a sweet and encouraging read on how to find your place in this world, and where you should place your trust.
Favorite Quote:
“The mountain air brings newness, seeps down deep, and cleans out the things that weigh heavy on a body’s soul. Despite how hard things are, it’s like the mountain is forgivin’. It demands a man’s hard work to survive, but then it wraps its soul and spirit around you, claimin’ you as its own child.”
The characters in this story were interesting and relatable. I enjoyed getting to read about Worie Dressar and loved seeing her growth progress throughout the story, I thought she was a unique character and I enjoyed her journey. Throughout the story, she overcomes much sorrow and pain, mixed in with some truly joyful moments. Worie learns who God wants her to be and the plans that He has for her and her family. The other secondary characters added some much-needed layers to this story, they were interesting, and I would love to read more about their personal stories as well (Hint, hint). Worie Dressar has some very thought-provoking thoughts in this book, and I have written down many of them as reminders for when I need God’s guidance in something. A good book overall.
I give this book 4 out of 5 stars for the deep thought-provoking lessons, the vivid descriptions of mountain hardships, and the moral of trusting God through it all. The only thing I would have like to see more of would have been a better developed secondary character for Worie Dressar.
*I volunteered to read this book in return for my honest feedback. The thoughts and opinions expressed within are my own.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Irishman (2019) in Movies
Nov 30, 2019
Delivers What Is Expected
Like eating comfort food on a cold, wintery day, sitting down to catch the latest Scorsese/DeNiro mob movie filled me with a warmth that was satisfying for it's familiarity. It is a film landscape mined by professionals who know this genre of movie well.
There is a terrific film in this 3 1/2 hour epic - if only "Marty" would have trimmed the fat to find it.
Telling the real-life story (with some conjecture and fabrications), THE IRISHMAN tells the tale of...well...Irishman Frank Sheeran (Robert DeNiro) a working stiff who rises in the ranks of mobster Russell Buffalino (Joe Pesci) to be one of his chief enforcers and the personal bodyguard to Jimmy Hoffa (Al Paciino).
In the lead, DeNiro commands the screen like the DeNiro of old. His Frank Sheeran is menacing, razor-focused on his objectives. You never question Frank's loyalties and his ability to keep silent. DeNiro shows this by be being silent for a good part of this film, even though he is on screen for most of it. He is a commanding force that requires that we pay attention to him.
It was good to see Pesci back onscreen as Russell Buffalino. His mob boss is pragmatic, making decisions sternly and expecting his people to follow them, no questions asked. His presence on the screen is almost as commanding as DeNiro's and I wouldn't be surprised to see DeNiro (Best Actor) and Pesci (Best Supporting Actor) be in the mix come Oscar time.
In lesser, (almost cameo), roles - but faring very well - is a "who's who" of character actors, Harvey Keitel (who I would have LOVED to have seen much, much more in this film), Ray Romano, Bobby Canavale, Jesse Pleimens and Anna Paquin, I'm sure all jumped at the chance to appear - however briefly - in a Scorsese mob epic.
Faring less well in this film is Al Pacio as Jimmy Hoffa. He is back to his "yelling Al Pacino" ways of films like SCENT OF A WOMAN. His Hoffa is pretty one note and, consequently, his scenes with DeNiro are ineffective mostly because Pacino is chewing up the scenery (and yelling) while DeNiro is sitting silent and staring and listening to Pacino. This was a major disappointment for me, but (fortunately), Hoffa is in only about 1/3 of this long film, so while it hampered my enjoyment of the film, it didn't ruin it.
Credit (and blame) for all of this goes to master Director Martin Scorsese who has mined these waters more successfully in CASINO, THE DEPARTED and GOODFELLAS (his best film, IMO). This film is a loving pastiche to these types of films and a bygone era - and he chose to make it for NETFLIX for he wanted to make a sprawling epic and take his time in telling the story he wanted to tell. This is evidenced in the 3 1/2 hour length of this film, which if filled with long tracking shots set to a backdrop of Italian crooners singing old standards. It's a throwback to a different time and place, one that these players know well.
Scorsese has stated the he only decided to make this film because the "de-aging" software the he used to make DeNiro and Pesci look 30 years younger was "good enough" to use. And I would agree with that statement. The de-aging of these 2 (and others) is "good enough", in some scenes I forgot I was watching a de-aged DeNiro and Pesci, while in some other scenes, I could spot the trick. Again, it was "good enough" and not distracting (unless you were looking to make it distracting, then you probably found what you were looking for).
But for me - a fan of these types of films, I was not disappointed. It was about what I expected it to be. If you were looking for something different and new, look elsewhere, you will be disappointed.
Letter Grade: B+
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
There is a terrific film in this 3 1/2 hour epic - if only "Marty" would have trimmed the fat to find it.
Telling the real-life story (with some conjecture and fabrications), THE IRISHMAN tells the tale of...well...Irishman Frank Sheeran (Robert DeNiro) a working stiff who rises in the ranks of mobster Russell Buffalino (Joe Pesci) to be one of his chief enforcers and the personal bodyguard to Jimmy Hoffa (Al Paciino).
In the lead, DeNiro commands the screen like the DeNiro of old. His Frank Sheeran is menacing, razor-focused on his objectives. You never question Frank's loyalties and his ability to keep silent. DeNiro shows this by be being silent for a good part of this film, even though he is on screen for most of it. He is a commanding force that requires that we pay attention to him.
It was good to see Pesci back onscreen as Russell Buffalino. His mob boss is pragmatic, making decisions sternly and expecting his people to follow them, no questions asked. His presence on the screen is almost as commanding as DeNiro's and I wouldn't be surprised to see DeNiro (Best Actor) and Pesci (Best Supporting Actor) be in the mix come Oscar time.
In lesser, (almost cameo), roles - but faring very well - is a "who's who" of character actors, Harvey Keitel (who I would have LOVED to have seen much, much more in this film), Ray Romano, Bobby Canavale, Jesse Pleimens and Anna Paquin, I'm sure all jumped at the chance to appear - however briefly - in a Scorsese mob epic.
Faring less well in this film is Al Pacio as Jimmy Hoffa. He is back to his "yelling Al Pacino" ways of films like SCENT OF A WOMAN. His Hoffa is pretty one note and, consequently, his scenes with DeNiro are ineffective mostly because Pacino is chewing up the scenery (and yelling) while DeNiro is sitting silent and staring and listening to Pacino. This was a major disappointment for me, but (fortunately), Hoffa is in only about 1/3 of this long film, so while it hampered my enjoyment of the film, it didn't ruin it.
Credit (and blame) for all of this goes to master Director Martin Scorsese who has mined these waters more successfully in CASINO, THE DEPARTED and GOODFELLAS (his best film, IMO). This film is a loving pastiche to these types of films and a bygone era - and he chose to make it for NETFLIX for he wanted to make a sprawling epic and take his time in telling the story he wanted to tell. This is evidenced in the 3 1/2 hour length of this film, which if filled with long tracking shots set to a backdrop of Italian crooners singing old standards. It's a throwback to a different time and place, one that these players know well.
Scorsese has stated the he only decided to make this film because the "de-aging" software the he used to make DeNiro and Pesci look 30 years younger was "good enough" to use. And I would agree with that statement. The de-aging of these 2 (and others) is "good enough", in some scenes I forgot I was watching a de-aged DeNiro and Pesci, while in some other scenes, I could spot the trick. Again, it was "good enough" and not distracting (unless you were looking to make it distracting, then you probably found what you were looking for).
But for me - a fan of these types of films, I was not disappointed. It was about what I expected it to be. If you were looking for something different and new, look elsewhere, you will be disappointed.
Letter Grade: B+
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
Emotional Intelligence in a Week: Raise Your EQ in Seven Simple Steps
Book
Developing your emotional intelligence just got easier Experts are beginning to agree that types of...
Sygic Central & Western Africa: GPS Navigation
Navigation and Travel
App
THE MOST DOWNLOADED OFFLINE NAVIGATION APP IN THE WORLD! "Finally a navigation app for Kenya....
Merissa (13696 KP) rated Dark Siren (Dark Siren, #1) in Books
Apr 19, 2023
In a genre that is saturated with shifters and vampires (although that is slowly changing), it makes a refreshing change to read something different. And trust me, this is different. I have read the book, enjoyed the book, and know what Kali's title is but I don't actually know 'what' she is completely. You might think that this is a problem but it's not. If anything, it makes you connect with Kali all the more. After all, this book pretty much takes place over a couple of weeks time so Kali has gone from knowing that she is different to being in life-threatening situations and being sold!
Kali doesn't give the best first impression as she is making out with someone else's boyfriend and also doesn't seem too upset about that as she rationalises it to herself. The relationship between her and Cal was a bit strange too although, to be fair, I've seen stranger relationships in 'real' life. I was glad when they split up although I am interested to see where the story is going.
Rhane, ah, Rhane. What can I say about him apart from I want one! Tall, dark, handsome, protective, Alpha AND he has morals - what more could you want? Apart from loving every scene that he was in, I found myself getting more and more interested in his backstory as the current story moved along.
Although this is classed as Paranormal, I think I personally would add a touch, just a touch, of Sci-Fi to it too (Builders). This was very well-written with a fast pace, with characters that are both likeable and not! I honestly could not believe the ending and need to read the second book! Highly recommended.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Feb 3, 2015
Kali doesn't give the best first impression as she is making out with someone else's boyfriend and also doesn't seem too upset about that as she rationalises it to herself. The relationship between her and Cal was a bit strange too although, to be fair, I've seen stranger relationships in 'real' life. I was glad when they split up although I am interested to see where the story is going.
Rhane, ah, Rhane. What can I say about him apart from I want one! Tall, dark, handsome, protective, Alpha AND he has morals - what more could you want? Apart from loving every scene that he was in, I found myself getting more and more interested in his backstory as the current story moved along.
Although this is classed as Paranormal, I think I personally would add a touch, just a touch, of Sci-Fi to it too (Builders). This was very well-written with a fast pace, with characters that are both likeable and not! I honestly could not believe the ending and need to read the second book! Highly recommended.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Feb 3, 2015
Darren (1599 KP) rated Amadeus (1984) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: Amadeus starts as an elderly Antonio Salieri (Abraham) admitting that he killed Mozart, leading to him getting taken to the insane asylum. Salieri recounts his story of his small town beginnings dreaming of being a composer and after a moment of fate he ends up in a position where he can learn music leading to him job as head conductor to the king of Austria. Mozart (Hulce) is the world renowned composer that has taken the notice of all around him with Salieri dreaming of one day being as good as Mozart.
We see how Mozart constantly ends up out shinning Salieri with his music leading to the rivalry between the two, with Salieri serious look on life and Mozart’s flamboyant style of just getting through each moment. Salieri moves into the position of being the connection to the Emperor to get his unique work out there but he is really just building him up for failure trying to break him down with criticize of his work.
REPORT THIS AD
Amadeus gives us a brilliant look at one of the greatest musical minds in the history of man. We know the basic idea of what happened to him but now we get to see it through the eyes of one of his closest friends even if he is filled with envy for him. What starts as envy is filled with respect and seeing how a talented person can get used by all the people close to him which will drive him into his bad ways. Overall this really is a brilliant drama that is told in a way we can just enjoy.
Actor Review
F Murray Abraham: Antonio Salieri admits that he killed Mozart, but now he is confessing to how he believes he was responsible for the death from inside an insane asylum. We watch how he got his dreams of working with music and constantly found himself lacking the complete flair and natural ability of Mozart leading to jealous and planning to bring him down slowly. F Murray gives us a brilliant and well deserved Oscar winning performance in this role.seleir
Tom Hulce: Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart is the flamboyant and brilliant composer who lives life on the edge spending every penny he ever received for his work, he pushes the boundaries to what is accepted even if his work is loved. He gains inspiration from his personal stories which will gain him enemies from his own confident in the government. Tom gives a performance that could easily have won him an Oscar too.morzart
Elizabeth Berridge: Constanze Mozart is the wife of Wolfgang, she supports him in all the work he does but just wants him to actually get paid for the work so they can look after the family, even after she lives him she feels guilty. Elizabeth does a good job in this role.
Roy Dotrice: Leopold Mozart is the overbearing father who pushed Amadeus into this career path making him the puppet when he was younger as he was leading him to become the biggest name in music of his time. After his death we learn about the control he had over Amadeus. Roy is good in this supporting role.
Support Cast: Amadeus has a well performed supporting cast that each hold their own in the characters they are playing.
Director Review: Milos Forman – Milos gives us one of the best biographical films of all time.
Biographical: Amadeus shows the troubles of the great man and how it was his eventual downfall.
Music: Amadeus uses all the music of the great man and how it would have look on stage for the fans witnessing it all.
Settings: Amadeus recreates all the settings that would have been used during the time the film is set.
Suggestion: Amadeus is one that could have been watched by anyone to learn about a part of history. (Watch)
Best Part: The performances are brilliant.
Worst Part: If you are not a fan of classical music you will struggle.
Believability: Yes
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: Won 8 Oscars including Best Picture, Best Actor, Director and Writing also nominated for a further 3.
Box Office: $51 Million
Budget: $18 Million
Runtime: 2 Hours 40 Minutes
Tagline: Everything you’ve heard is true.
Trivia: When the movie won Best Picture at The 57th Annual Academy Awards (1985), Sir Laurence Olivier was presenting the award. He went up to the podium, opened the envelope and said “Amadeus.” The problem was he forgot to read the nominees first.
Overall: Brilliant drama about one of the greatest musicians of all time
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/01/06/amadeus-1984/
We see how Mozart constantly ends up out shinning Salieri with his music leading to the rivalry between the two, with Salieri serious look on life and Mozart’s flamboyant style of just getting through each moment. Salieri moves into the position of being the connection to the Emperor to get his unique work out there but he is really just building him up for failure trying to break him down with criticize of his work.
REPORT THIS AD
Amadeus gives us a brilliant look at one of the greatest musical minds in the history of man. We know the basic idea of what happened to him but now we get to see it through the eyes of one of his closest friends even if he is filled with envy for him. What starts as envy is filled with respect and seeing how a talented person can get used by all the people close to him which will drive him into his bad ways. Overall this really is a brilliant drama that is told in a way we can just enjoy.
Actor Review
F Murray Abraham: Antonio Salieri admits that he killed Mozart, but now he is confessing to how he believes he was responsible for the death from inside an insane asylum. We watch how he got his dreams of working with music and constantly found himself lacking the complete flair and natural ability of Mozart leading to jealous and planning to bring him down slowly. F Murray gives us a brilliant and well deserved Oscar winning performance in this role.seleir
Tom Hulce: Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart is the flamboyant and brilliant composer who lives life on the edge spending every penny he ever received for his work, he pushes the boundaries to what is accepted even if his work is loved. He gains inspiration from his personal stories which will gain him enemies from his own confident in the government. Tom gives a performance that could easily have won him an Oscar too.morzart
Elizabeth Berridge: Constanze Mozart is the wife of Wolfgang, she supports him in all the work he does but just wants him to actually get paid for the work so they can look after the family, even after she lives him she feels guilty. Elizabeth does a good job in this role.
Roy Dotrice: Leopold Mozart is the overbearing father who pushed Amadeus into this career path making him the puppet when he was younger as he was leading him to become the biggest name in music of his time. After his death we learn about the control he had over Amadeus. Roy is good in this supporting role.
Support Cast: Amadeus has a well performed supporting cast that each hold their own in the characters they are playing.
Director Review: Milos Forman – Milos gives us one of the best biographical films of all time.
Biographical: Amadeus shows the troubles of the great man and how it was his eventual downfall.
Music: Amadeus uses all the music of the great man and how it would have look on stage for the fans witnessing it all.
Settings: Amadeus recreates all the settings that would have been used during the time the film is set.
Suggestion: Amadeus is one that could have been watched by anyone to learn about a part of history. (Watch)
Best Part: The performances are brilliant.
Worst Part: If you are not a fan of classical music you will struggle.
Believability: Yes
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: Won 8 Oscars including Best Picture, Best Actor, Director and Writing also nominated for a further 3.
Box Office: $51 Million
Budget: $18 Million
Runtime: 2 Hours 40 Minutes
Tagline: Everything you’ve heard is true.
Trivia: When the movie won Best Picture at The 57th Annual Academy Awards (1985), Sir Laurence Olivier was presenting the award. He went up to the podium, opened the envelope and said “Amadeus.” The problem was he forgot to read the nominees first.
Overall: Brilliant drama about one of the greatest musicians of all time
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/01/06/amadeus-1984/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Bohemian Rhapsody (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
How many of these reviews are going to start with “Is this the real life? Is this just fantasy?” A lot I am willing to bet. The thing is, it’s a good way to start. Bohemian Rhapsody has been a highly anticipated film for many years. I remember back when they were considering Johnny Depp for Freddie Mercury. Then it was Sasha Baren Cohen. And then they announced Rami Malek, and a majority of the country went, “Who?” Rami Malek is mostly known for his work as the lead in the USA Network series Mr. Robot. He got his start in the Night at the Museum series, and has scene big screen time in Need for Speed and, most recently, Papillion alongside Charlie Hunnam. I think it’s safe to say that after November 2, 2018, people will definitely know who he is.
Named for Queen’s most successful song in their portfolio, Bohemian Rhapsody tells the story of Freddie Mercury and how he rose from being a baggage boy at Heathrow, to a literal rock legend. We see how the band Queen was formed, how they got their name, how they made it big, and what made Queen… well Queen. Rami Malek delivers a powerful performance as the front man of the legendary band. For me, it started off a little shaky at first (coming from someone who is fan of Malek), but he quickly made the role his own and personified the late Mercury like no other can. Even Mercury’s own sister saw Malek in full costume and said, “There’s my Freddie.”
Not to downplay the rest of the cast. Rounding at the rest of the band is Joseph Mazzello as John Deacon, Ben Hardy as Roger Taylor, and Gwilym Lee as Brian May. All delivered powerful performances in their own right, and the chemistry between the 4 actors is undeniable. Veterans Aidan Gillen (as John Reid) and Tom Hollander (Jim Beach) deliver in their supporting roles, as does Lucy Boynton, who played Mary Austin. If some of these names do not seem familiar, get ready to learn a lot of the background of Queen in their rise, fall, and then rise again. Also, Mike Myers makes an appearance for a fun cameo as Ray Foster.
Clearly a majority of the film’s score revolves around the band’s expansive portfolio. But it wasn’t just the in your face, obvious music that was there. They did a great job with subtle melodies or bars from the band’s repertoire hanging in the background of impactful scenes throughout the film. Sometimes you’ll miss it, sometimes it’s obvious, and sometimes it might just make you cry.
The story begins with Mercury meeting Taylor and May, and ends with the ever-famous Live-Aid in 1985. While the film is essentially a love-story dedicated to Mercury, I feel it may have left out the rest of the members of the band. We see May, Taylor and Deacon, but we know little about their outside lives other than fleeting statements about their wives and kids, and what they were studying in university prior to Queen taking off. It’s a shame because Queen was not just about Mercury. The film did a really good job stating this, showing how they all contribute, all support each other, and how they are all different. But the focus is still on one man. Queen, the rock band, is an entity. Not an individual. But, I understand the decision behind the path that was chosen. Mercury, to many, was the embodiment of Queen. I am just glad the movie did put out there that he didn’t feel that way.
All of that aside, this film was fantastic. I have been a fan of Queen since I was in diapers, despite a majority of the band’s career having taken place before I was born. It was good to see this story told on screen, though slightly dramatized at points. It was an excellent telling of the story, and people may learn a lot about Freddie Mercury, like his love of cats, and who the love of his life is. Unless you’re absolutely cold-hearted, expect to get goosebumps as you progress through the band’s rise to the top, and to laugh as you how they interacted and developed their music. The movie is not without flaws, but they are so minor that looking past them is easy. Enjoy the film. Enjoy the music. Rock on.
Named for Queen’s most successful song in their portfolio, Bohemian Rhapsody tells the story of Freddie Mercury and how he rose from being a baggage boy at Heathrow, to a literal rock legend. We see how the band Queen was formed, how they got their name, how they made it big, and what made Queen… well Queen. Rami Malek delivers a powerful performance as the front man of the legendary band. For me, it started off a little shaky at first (coming from someone who is fan of Malek), but he quickly made the role his own and personified the late Mercury like no other can. Even Mercury’s own sister saw Malek in full costume and said, “There’s my Freddie.”
Not to downplay the rest of the cast. Rounding at the rest of the band is Joseph Mazzello as John Deacon, Ben Hardy as Roger Taylor, and Gwilym Lee as Brian May. All delivered powerful performances in their own right, and the chemistry between the 4 actors is undeniable. Veterans Aidan Gillen (as John Reid) and Tom Hollander (Jim Beach) deliver in their supporting roles, as does Lucy Boynton, who played Mary Austin. If some of these names do not seem familiar, get ready to learn a lot of the background of Queen in their rise, fall, and then rise again. Also, Mike Myers makes an appearance for a fun cameo as Ray Foster.
Clearly a majority of the film’s score revolves around the band’s expansive portfolio. But it wasn’t just the in your face, obvious music that was there. They did a great job with subtle melodies or bars from the band’s repertoire hanging in the background of impactful scenes throughout the film. Sometimes you’ll miss it, sometimes it’s obvious, and sometimes it might just make you cry.
The story begins with Mercury meeting Taylor and May, and ends with the ever-famous Live-Aid in 1985. While the film is essentially a love-story dedicated to Mercury, I feel it may have left out the rest of the members of the band. We see May, Taylor and Deacon, but we know little about their outside lives other than fleeting statements about their wives and kids, and what they were studying in university prior to Queen taking off. It’s a shame because Queen was not just about Mercury. The film did a really good job stating this, showing how they all contribute, all support each other, and how they are all different. But the focus is still on one man. Queen, the rock band, is an entity. Not an individual. But, I understand the decision behind the path that was chosen. Mercury, to many, was the embodiment of Queen. I am just glad the movie did put out there that he didn’t feel that way.
All of that aside, this film was fantastic. I have been a fan of Queen since I was in diapers, despite a majority of the band’s career having taken place before I was born. It was good to see this story told on screen, though slightly dramatized at points. It was an excellent telling of the story, and people may learn a lot about Freddie Mercury, like his love of cats, and who the love of his life is. Unless you’re absolutely cold-hearted, expect to get goosebumps as you progress through the band’s rise to the top, and to laugh as you how they interacted and developed their music. The movie is not without flaws, but they are so minor that looking past them is easy. Enjoy the film. Enjoy the music. Rock on.