Search
Search results
Jamie (131 KP) rated Men Explain Things to Me: And Other Essays in Books
Jul 26, 2017
Poorly written (2 more)
Not intersectional
Lack of sources in the physical version
Mediocre essays, I wish I could've liked this more
Disappointment and shallow is probably the most apt descriptions I can think of when describing this book which is really sad because I usually enjoy feminist essays.
The titular essay, Men Explain Things to Me, discusses the author’s experiences with men explaining things with the assumption that she couldn’t possibly know due to her gender. While I was nodding my head that yes, I have experienced this as well, there was not much else. There was little to no research into the history of why this might be or any additional insight into the topic which was really a let down, I didn’t feel like I got much out of it. I should have known that the rest of the essays in this collection would be the same but I was optimistic.
One of the better essays was In Praise of the Threat: What Marriage Equality Really Means which discussed how the fight for marriage equality, or same-sex marriage, has been redefining the traditional gendered views of marriage and I thought that this was really great. However in a later essay Solnit goes on to claim that gay marriage would never have been possible if it weren’t for feminists redefining marriage as a union between equals, which is a statement I found both bold and mildly insulting.
I also need to address a specific statement that became the basis the essay, The Longest War, which was the following:
“Violence doesn’t have a race, a class, a religion,
or a nationality, but it does have a gender.”
It is very apparent that Solnit doesn’t know a thing about intersectionality because any minority can tell you that the statement above is laughably false. Is it true, statistically, that more reported violent crimes are perpetrated by men? Yes. Do people in many societies have an issue with toxic masculinity? Yes. Does this mean, then, that violence has a gender, that it is purely a male problem? No. To say that it doesn’t have a specific race, class, religion, or nationality despite evidence to the contrary throughout history is naïve.
Solnit continues on to rant about how men are the almost exclusive source of violence and assault and how everyone should acknowledge this so we can go about finding solutions. She doesn’t go into much more depth than that or offer up much in the way of solutions herself. A large portion of the essay is just her fluffing up the piece with a literal list of vague examples which might not mean much to folks less knowledgeable about violent crimes. There are also quite a few statistics thrown in with absolutely no sources to back up the claims.
Not that I doubt the information provided, but in times where people cherry pick the news to fit their own narrative books like this become questionable. After flipping through the back of the book I eventually found a note in the acknowledgements section that Solnit chose to edit out her sources for the book version, but that they could be found on the online versions of her essays. It’s careless and lazy for an author that wants to be taken seriously.
Solnit also postulates at several points that because she has published several books that she is an authority and I found that sort of attitude to be self defeating. She talks about another author that she argued with about Virginia Woolfe and claims that she had “won” which just makes the author sound childish, and I wondered what the point of the essay was to begin with. It felt out of place for the rest of the collection and any connections she attempted to make were shaky at best.
I think that Solnit had some good ideas but the execution was extremely poor. Because she spends so much time listing examples and being over dramatic in her descriptions the actual point of discussion in her essays becomes muddled and unclear. There are far better essays out there that address the exact same topics. Men Explain Things to Me just wasn’t worth the time.
The titular essay, Men Explain Things to Me, discusses the author’s experiences with men explaining things with the assumption that she couldn’t possibly know due to her gender. While I was nodding my head that yes, I have experienced this as well, there was not much else. There was little to no research into the history of why this might be or any additional insight into the topic which was really a let down, I didn’t feel like I got much out of it. I should have known that the rest of the essays in this collection would be the same but I was optimistic.
One of the better essays was In Praise of the Threat: What Marriage Equality Really Means which discussed how the fight for marriage equality, or same-sex marriage, has been redefining the traditional gendered views of marriage and I thought that this was really great. However in a later essay Solnit goes on to claim that gay marriage would never have been possible if it weren’t for feminists redefining marriage as a union between equals, which is a statement I found both bold and mildly insulting.
I also need to address a specific statement that became the basis the essay, The Longest War, which was the following:
“Violence doesn’t have a race, a class, a religion,
or a nationality, but it does have a gender.”
It is very apparent that Solnit doesn’t know a thing about intersectionality because any minority can tell you that the statement above is laughably false. Is it true, statistically, that more reported violent crimes are perpetrated by men? Yes. Do people in many societies have an issue with toxic masculinity? Yes. Does this mean, then, that violence has a gender, that it is purely a male problem? No. To say that it doesn’t have a specific race, class, religion, or nationality despite evidence to the contrary throughout history is naïve.
Solnit continues on to rant about how men are the almost exclusive source of violence and assault and how everyone should acknowledge this so we can go about finding solutions. She doesn’t go into much more depth than that or offer up much in the way of solutions herself. A large portion of the essay is just her fluffing up the piece with a literal list of vague examples which might not mean much to folks less knowledgeable about violent crimes. There are also quite a few statistics thrown in with absolutely no sources to back up the claims.
Not that I doubt the information provided, but in times where people cherry pick the news to fit their own narrative books like this become questionable. After flipping through the back of the book I eventually found a note in the acknowledgements section that Solnit chose to edit out her sources for the book version, but that they could be found on the online versions of her essays. It’s careless and lazy for an author that wants to be taken seriously.
Solnit also postulates at several points that because she has published several books that she is an authority and I found that sort of attitude to be self defeating. She talks about another author that she argued with about Virginia Woolfe and claims that she had “won” which just makes the author sound childish, and I wondered what the point of the essay was to begin with. It felt out of place for the rest of the collection and any connections she attempted to make were shaky at best.
I think that Solnit had some good ideas but the execution was extremely poor. Because she spends so much time listing examples and being over dramatic in her descriptions the actual point of discussion in her essays becomes muddled and unclear. There are far better essays out there that address the exact same topics. Men Explain Things to Me just wasn’t worth the time.
Bong Mines Entertainment (15 KP) rated Good Thing by Leon Bridges in Music
Jun 7, 2019
Leon Bridges is a talented R&B/soul singer outta Fort Worth, Texas. Not too long ago, he released his second studio album, entitled, “Good Thing”.
BET AIN’T WORTH THE HAND
The artist sings a beautiful ballad about leaving a rocky relationship. He doesn’t want to leave because he still sees hope in making it work.
The Natalie Rae-directed video begins with Bridges walking the street. He’s hurt. The following scenes show him relating to other people going through the same emotional pain he’s experiencing.
The artist knows that’s a risky move staying in a broken relationship. Also, he looks at the cards he’s dealt with and realizes his best is to move on.
BAD BAD NEWS
The artist switches speed and takes listeners on a funky ride. It’s disco time and he celebrates on the dancefloor. Also, being there isn’t easy. So, he has to fight his way through the crowd to make it to the front.
The Natalie Rae-directed video begins with a voluptuous woman walking inside a train station. She hears someone whistling so she heads in that direction, following the whistler.
Somehow, Bridges’ music overtakes her soul and she begins to follow its funky rhythm. In the end, it leads her to the guy who was whistling in the beginning.
The artist sings a triumphant song. He questions people trying to hold him in the back. But that’s not where he belongs. So, he moves up front and kills them with style and grace.
SHY
The artist addresses a shy woman that he’s in love with. Also, he assures her that it doesn’t matter if she’s shy. He doesn’t care about her shyness because he’s into her.
BEYOND
Bridges is deep in love with the shy woman. Everything is moving fast. Also, he wants to slow things down but he can’t. Because of that, he’s scared to death that she might be the one.
FORGIVE YOU
The artist sings the blues. He admits he played the fool in the relationship where his girl took advantage of his kindness. But he forgives her even though it’s hard to. Also, his friends warned him not to be so gullible.
LIONS
The aftermath of experiencing bad love has Bridges feeling like a thirsty lion. But through his trials and tribulations, he remains true to himself. Also, he refuses to conform to who the woman wants him to be.
IF IT FEELS GOOD (THEN IT MUST BE)
The artist removes the bad love aura and freshens the air with truth and honesty. Also, he perfumes the dancefloor with a splash of funkiness and rhythm and blues.
He wants the mysterious lady bad. So, he tells her to let her guards down and enjoy herself. He doesn’t want her to act so seriously.
YOU DON’T KNOW
The artist continues dancing in the name of love. He’s head over heels for the woman in his life and he wants the world to know that. Also, he wants her to stop thinking because their loving might not go down if she continues to do so.
MRS.
The artist addresses his love and hate relationship with his girl. When they’re good they’re good, but when they’re bad they’re really bad. Also, whenever she shows him affection, he remembers that she still loves him.
GEORGIA TO TEXAS
The artist sings about his mother carrying him in her womb, while his father drove them from Atlanta to Texas. But years later, he admits that adapting to his surrounding wasn’t easy.
Apparently, the 504 black girl is Bridges’ mother, Lisa Sawyer. The number 504 is the area code where she’s from in New Orleans, Lousiana.
CONCLUSION
Leon Bridges’ “Good Thing” is a classic album perfumed with soul ballads, spicy topics, and danceable tunes. Its soulful sound is the perfect soundtrack for those who have loved and lost, and those who are in love for the very first time. It’s romantic, celebratory, with lush experiences. Also, it takes listeners on an emotional journey through the hills and valleys where love dwells.
https://www.bongminesentertainment.com/leon-bridges-good-thing/
BET AIN’T WORTH THE HAND
The artist sings a beautiful ballad about leaving a rocky relationship. He doesn’t want to leave because he still sees hope in making it work.
The Natalie Rae-directed video begins with Bridges walking the street. He’s hurt. The following scenes show him relating to other people going through the same emotional pain he’s experiencing.
The artist knows that’s a risky move staying in a broken relationship. Also, he looks at the cards he’s dealt with and realizes his best is to move on.
BAD BAD NEWS
The artist switches speed and takes listeners on a funky ride. It’s disco time and he celebrates on the dancefloor. Also, being there isn’t easy. So, he has to fight his way through the crowd to make it to the front.
The Natalie Rae-directed video begins with a voluptuous woman walking inside a train station. She hears someone whistling so she heads in that direction, following the whistler.
Somehow, Bridges’ music overtakes her soul and she begins to follow its funky rhythm. In the end, it leads her to the guy who was whistling in the beginning.
The artist sings a triumphant song. He questions people trying to hold him in the back. But that’s not where he belongs. So, he moves up front and kills them with style and grace.
SHY
The artist addresses a shy woman that he’s in love with. Also, he assures her that it doesn’t matter if she’s shy. He doesn’t care about her shyness because he’s into her.
BEYOND
Bridges is deep in love with the shy woman. Everything is moving fast. Also, he wants to slow things down but he can’t. Because of that, he’s scared to death that she might be the one.
FORGIVE YOU
The artist sings the blues. He admits he played the fool in the relationship where his girl took advantage of his kindness. But he forgives her even though it’s hard to. Also, his friends warned him not to be so gullible.
LIONS
The aftermath of experiencing bad love has Bridges feeling like a thirsty lion. But through his trials and tribulations, he remains true to himself. Also, he refuses to conform to who the woman wants him to be.
IF IT FEELS GOOD (THEN IT MUST BE)
The artist removes the bad love aura and freshens the air with truth and honesty. Also, he perfumes the dancefloor with a splash of funkiness and rhythm and blues.
He wants the mysterious lady bad. So, he tells her to let her guards down and enjoy herself. He doesn’t want her to act so seriously.
YOU DON’T KNOW
The artist continues dancing in the name of love. He’s head over heels for the woman in his life and he wants the world to know that. Also, he wants her to stop thinking because their loving might not go down if she continues to do so.
MRS.
The artist addresses his love and hate relationship with his girl. When they’re good they’re good, but when they’re bad they’re really bad. Also, whenever she shows him affection, he remembers that she still loves him.
GEORGIA TO TEXAS
The artist sings about his mother carrying him in her womb, while his father drove them from Atlanta to Texas. But years later, he admits that adapting to his surrounding wasn’t easy.
Apparently, the 504 black girl is Bridges’ mother, Lisa Sawyer. The number 504 is the area code where she’s from in New Orleans, Lousiana.
CONCLUSION
Leon Bridges’ “Good Thing” is a classic album perfumed with soul ballads, spicy topics, and danceable tunes. Its soulful sound is the perfect soundtrack for those who have loved and lost, and those who are in love for the very first time. It’s romantic, celebratory, with lush experiences. Also, it takes listeners on an emotional journey through the hills and valleys where love dwells.
https://www.bongminesentertainment.com/leon-bridges-good-thing/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters (2013) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
2013 is the year of the fairy-tale and the year of the witch, or so it looks that way from what seems to be a never-ending bombardment of films related to the two age-old topics. This year sees the release of Bryan Singer’s Jack the Giant Slayer as well as Sam Raimi’s Oz: The Great & the Powerful and whilst the latter has opened to mixed reviews, it is Bryan Singer’s effort which really looks like it’ll sparkle.
Sat between these two behemoths is the critical and somewhat commercial failure, Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters, but is it as bad as the reviews would have you believe? Let’s find out.
The fairy-tale of Hansel & Gretel is as well-known as Jack & the Beanstalk and to some extent the story in the Wizard of Oz, but films of this classic have been limited to low-budget television movies because finding the audience for such a difficult genre is not to be underestimated.
Here however, Tommy Wirkola directs his first English-language film with some degrees of success, though, a few niggling factors stop it from being the success it could’ve been. In a darker tale than perhaps we’re used to with a story such as this, Jeremy Renner and Gemma Arterton star as Hansel & Gretel respectively and for the most part, fulfil their roles well as they battle numerous dark witches in a plot which never really gets to grips with the genre it is trying to be.
Herein lays the problem, do you direct the fairy-tale genre as a family comedy or as something a little darker? Clearly director Wirkola has had his work cut out to find the balance between the two and the result is confusing, he has ended up with a 15 certificate which mixes comedy with a bloodbath that wouldn’t look out of place in a Quentin Tarantino picture; it really is that over-the-top. The use of swear-words also feels out of place, like they’re there just to shock rather than add anything to the film’s narrative.
Hansel & Gretel have grown up deciding to kill witches after they were left abandoned in the woods by their father. To cut a long story short, they are captured by a witch and forced to work for her; whilst doing this, Hansel develops ‘sugar sickness’ (diabetes) from all the candy he is forced to consume and must inject himself often. After killing said witch, they flee and the story begins; with them being hired to kill witches who have stolen children from a small town to allow them to become immune to fire; their major weakness.
It’s an interesting take on the story and Famke Janssen plays the wicked grand witch brilliantly, she manages to be both endearing and rightly terrifying in the same scene, though this is helped with the prosthetics used to alter her face. The other actors, including the main two are a little uninspired, especially Arterton who looks positively bored with the work she’s been given. In saying that, Renner isn’t much better and the majority of the film suffers as a result. In fact, you’ll probably be rooting for Janssen’s Muriel to succeed in her evil plot.
Thankfully, the special effects are very good, although I was expecting a little more witch-on-witch action, a la Harry Potter. Atli Orvarsson’s score is excellent and a real highlight of the film. The music in the brilliant opening credits is fantastic.
Overall, Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters is a solid but uninspiring adaptation of a fairy-tale which was never meant for the big screen. Director Tommy Wirkola has obviously tried very hard to create a film which caters for most palates and whilst the score, special effects and acting from Famke Janssen are all top notch, the confusing mish-mash of genres and hammy acting from Jeremy Renner and Gemma Arterton stop it being anything more than a forgettable action flick. After all, when your lead characters look like they can’t be bothered, you’ve got a serious problem.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2013/03/02/hansel-gretel-witch-hunters-review-2013/
Sat between these two behemoths is the critical and somewhat commercial failure, Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters, but is it as bad as the reviews would have you believe? Let’s find out.
The fairy-tale of Hansel & Gretel is as well-known as Jack & the Beanstalk and to some extent the story in the Wizard of Oz, but films of this classic have been limited to low-budget television movies because finding the audience for such a difficult genre is not to be underestimated.
Here however, Tommy Wirkola directs his first English-language film with some degrees of success, though, a few niggling factors stop it from being the success it could’ve been. In a darker tale than perhaps we’re used to with a story such as this, Jeremy Renner and Gemma Arterton star as Hansel & Gretel respectively and for the most part, fulfil their roles well as they battle numerous dark witches in a plot which never really gets to grips with the genre it is trying to be.
Herein lays the problem, do you direct the fairy-tale genre as a family comedy or as something a little darker? Clearly director Wirkola has had his work cut out to find the balance between the two and the result is confusing, he has ended up with a 15 certificate which mixes comedy with a bloodbath that wouldn’t look out of place in a Quentin Tarantino picture; it really is that over-the-top. The use of swear-words also feels out of place, like they’re there just to shock rather than add anything to the film’s narrative.
Hansel & Gretel have grown up deciding to kill witches after they were left abandoned in the woods by their father. To cut a long story short, they are captured by a witch and forced to work for her; whilst doing this, Hansel develops ‘sugar sickness’ (diabetes) from all the candy he is forced to consume and must inject himself often. After killing said witch, they flee and the story begins; with them being hired to kill witches who have stolen children from a small town to allow them to become immune to fire; their major weakness.
It’s an interesting take on the story and Famke Janssen plays the wicked grand witch brilliantly, she manages to be both endearing and rightly terrifying in the same scene, though this is helped with the prosthetics used to alter her face. The other actors, including the main two are a little uninspired, especially Arterton who looks positively bored with the work she’s been given. In saying that, Renner isn’t much better and the majority of the film suffers as a result. In fact, you’ll probably be rooting for Janssen’s Muriel to succeed in her evil plot.
Thankfully, the special effects are very good, although I was expecting a little more witch-on-witch action, a la Harry Potter. Atli Orvarsson’s score is excellent and a real highlight of the film. The music in the brilliant opening credits is fantastic.
Overall, Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters is a solid but uninspiring adaptation of a fairy-tale which was never meant for the big screen. Director Tommy Wirkola has obviously tried very hard to create a film which caters for most palates and whilst the score, special effects and acting from Famke Janssen are all top notch, the confusing mish-mash of genres and hammy acting from Jeremy Renner and Gemma Arterton stop it being anything more than a forgettable action flick. After all, when your lead characters look like they can’t be bothered, you’ve got a serious problem.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2013/03/02/hansel-gretel-witch-hunters-review-2013/
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated I'll Be Your Blue Sky in Books
Feb 26, 2018
Revisits former characters (3 more)
Features unexpected twists and turns
Beautiful characters that fit together well
Funny and touching
Lovely look at some favorite characters
The weekend of her wedding, Clare Hobbes meets an elderly woman, Edith Herron, at the venue. While they only have a few brief conversations, they provide Clare with the insight and courage she so badly needs. So much that she finds the strength to call off her wedding and return home alone. A few weeks later, Clare receives some sad and surprising news: Edith has passed away and left Clare a seaside home in Delaware. Desperately seeking a place to reevaluate her life, Clare decamps to the "Blue Sky House" and there begins to learn more about Edith and the remarkable life she led. This includes the discovery of two ledgers--one depicting a list of the guests who stayed at Edith's home when it was a beach guesthouse and another, "shadow" ledger, with mysterious notations. With the help of her former boyfriend, now best friend Dev Tremain, Clare starts to unravel Edith's brave and fascinating past. Along the way, she starts to get closer to working out more about herself as well.
I absolutely adore Marisa de los Santos and was really excited to see she had written another book picking up on the characters first introduced in Love Walked In: A Novel and Belong to Me. Both still hold a place of honor on the bookshelves of my home. Still, Goodreads told me it was nearly ten years since I'd read those gems. Considering I can forget a lot of what I've read a few months ago, it took a little remembering and time to get back into the characters. There's a lot to keep track of in the beginning. Still, once I got into the groove, it was like being back with old friends.
Getting to know more about Clare--all grown up now--is lovely. You find yourself drawn to her immediately. Her finance, Zach, made me nervous from the start, and in many ways, the novel can be a little stressful, between Clare navigating Zach, learning about what Edith was up to, and just some of the general topics of the novel. I always know a book is well-written when I find myself getting nervous on the characters' behalf.
The book generally alternates chapters between Clare and the story of Edith, the woman she meets at her wedding venue. Edith's story mainly takes place in the 1940s and 1950s, and I found myself always wishing for more and more of her tale, as she's a fascinating character in her own right. As Clare moves into Edith's old home and starts to investigate the woman's past, we learn a little more about her through Clare and Dev's sleuthing. It's a very effective format, and I found the book surprisingly suspenseful, with several unexpected twists and turns thrown in along the way.
Indeed, I was never really sure where this one was going. It meanders a bit and kept surprising me as it did. There are points where the sadness can be really hard and heartbreaking (in a wow, this novel is incredibly well-written and I feel as if these characters are real way). All the characters fit together so well and come to life before you--no surprise to anyone who has read a Marisa de los Santos novel before. It's so easy to get lost in the world she creates for us. At other times, I just found myself laughing, as Clare and Dev, for instance, could just be so funny and real.
In the end, I just wound up really loving this one. I was along for the ride wherever Clare and her gang were going to take me. I loved her, I loved Edith, and now I'd wait ten years for another book without any issue whatsoever. It's a lovely book about connections and about the family we have and the family we make. It's about love (very appropriate that I finished it on Valentine's Day). Thanks for revisiting these characters, Ms. de los Santos. I didn't know I needed them again, but I'm glad you did. 4+ stars.
I I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Edelweiss in return for a honest review. More at http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/
I absolutely adore Marisa de los Santos and was really excited to see she had written another book picking up on the characters first introduced in Love Walked In: A Novel and Belong to Me. Both still hold a place of honor on the bookshelves of my home. Still, Goodreads told me it was nearly ten years since I'd read those gems. Considering I can forget a lot of what I've read a few months ago, it took a little remembering and time to get back into the characters. There's a lot to keep track of in the beginning. Still, once I got into the groove, it was like being back with old friends.
Getting to know more about Clare--all grown up now--is lovely. You find yourself drawn to her immediately. Her finance, Zach, made me nervous from the start, and in many ways, the novel can be a little stressful, between Clare navigating Zach, learning about what Edith was up to, and just some of the general topics of the novel. I always know a book is well-written when I find myself getting nervous on the characters' behalf.
The book generally alternates chapters between Clare and the story of Edith, the woman she meets at her wedding venue. Edith's story mainly takes place in the 1940s and 1950s, and I found myself always wishing for more and more of her tale, as she's a fascinating character in her own right. As Clare moves into Edith's old home and starts to investigate the woman's past, we learn a little more about her through Clare and Dev's sleuthing. It's a very effective format, and I found the book surprisingly suspenseful, with several unexpected twists and turns thrown in along the way.
Indeed, I was never really sure where this one was going. It meanders a bit and kept surprising me as it did. There are points where the sadness can be really hard and heartbreaking (in a wow, this novel is incredibly well-written and I feel as if these characters are real way). All the characters fit together so well and come to life before you--no surprise to anyone who has read a Marisa de los Santos novel before. It's so easy to get lost in the world she creates for us. At other times, I just found myself laughing, as Clare and Dev, for instance, could just be so funny and real.
In the end, I just wound up really loving this one. I was along for the ride wherever Clare and her gang were going to take me. I loved her, I loved Edith, and now I'd wait ten years for another book without any issue whatsoever. It's a lovely book about connections and about the family we have and the family we make. It's about love (very appropriate that I finished it on Valentine's Day). Thanks for revisiting these characters, Ms. de los Santos. I didn't know I needed them again, but I'm glad you did. 4+ stars.
I I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Edelweiss in return for a honest review. More at http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Stand by Me (1986) in Movies
Jun 15, 2018
A Modern Classic
Remember the days of your youth, when Summer was just one long vacation - where you and your buddies would take off and let the day unfold as it presents itself - no schedules, no meetings and the only clock was the rising and setting of the sun?
Such, nostalgic, feelings and remembrances is at the heart of the 1986 Rob Reiner film, STAND BY ME, a "coming of age" tale of boys on the cusp of leaving boyhood behind.
Based on a Stephen King novella, STAND BY ME follows the adventures of Gordie LaChance and his pals Vern, Teddy and Chris as they set off to find the body of a young man who has been missing - and presumed dead.
But it is not the destination that is at the heart of this story, it is the journey - and what a journey, filled with heart, it is. We join in with these 4 boys as the walk towards the unknown - both physically and (more importantly) metaphorically, growing and developing in front of our eyes.
Credit for this film has to start with Director Rob Reiner - mainly known before this film as "Meathead" on the classic TV Series ALL IN THE FAMILY. This was Reiner's 5th film as a Director and, I believe, announced his "arrival" as a signature Director. Look at the run Reiner had. In order, he directed THIS IS SPINAL TAP, THE SURE THING, STAND BY ME, THE PRINCESS BRIDE, WHEN HARRY MET SALLY, MISERY and A FEW GOOD MEN. I would also include THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT and GHOSTS OF MISSISSIPPI in this list, but they come after the misfire NORTH. But, 9 out of 10 good films is quite the track record.
What struck me in this showing of the film (seen on the big screen for the first time by me since 1986) is the contrast between intimacy and enormity. When the boys are on their trek, Reiner shoots a good deal of these scenes from a distance - showing how small these boys are in comparison to the world around them. But, when the scene is an intimate, dialogue, character-driven scene, he tightens his shots right into the faces of the 4 leads, creating an intimacy that draws us into these characters.
The other credit has to go to whomever cast this film - for the 4 unknown boys that were cast in the leads were well cast, indeed.
Start with Wil Wheaton as Gordie. Gordie has spent his whole life in the shadow of his over-achieving "All American" brother, trying to be noticed for who - and what - he is, an author, not an athlete. Wheaton brings the right combination of determination, intelligence and vulnerability to Gordie, giving us a protagonist we can root for. Jerry O'Connell was funnier than I remembered as the "fat kid", Vern, who just wants to play by the rules, but always goes along with his friends, despite his better judgement. Corey Feldman has never been better than he is here as Teddy Duchamp - a young boy with a troubled home life - and a troubled life - that is trying to control, and understand, the rage inside of him.
But it is the work of the late River Phoenix as Chris Chambers, the "leader" of this group that really shines. He is the glue that keeps this foursome together, strong but showing a vulnerability and a "realistic" view of what it is to be a misunderstood youth - the hurt that comes with that and the walls that one puts up to combat that. Phoenix commands the screen in every scene that he is in and when the scene is just Phoenix and Wheaton, you are drawn into a real friendship.
I was surprised, at this viewing, at how serious this film is - and the topics that this film addresses - but those moments are wisely balanced by scenes of action/adventure (like the train tressel scene), comedy (like the the "lard-ass" pie eating scene) and "other" moments (the leaches!).
This is one of those films that is getting better with time - it is aging well - and, rightfully, fits in the category of "Modern Classic".
Letter Grade: A
Such, nostalgic, feelings and remembrances is at the heart of the 1986 Rob Reiner film, STAND BY ME, a "coming of age" tale of boys on the cusp of leaving boyhood behind.
Based on a Stephen King novella, STAND BY ME follows the adventures of Gordie LaChance and his pals Vern, Teddy and Chris as they set off to find the body of a young man who has been missing - and presumed dead.
But it is not the destination that is at the heart of this story, it is the journey - and what a journey, filled with heart, it is. We join in with these 4 boys as the walk towards the unknown - both physically and (more importantly) metaphorically, growing and developing in front of our eyes.
Credit for this film has to start with Director Rob Reiner - mainly known before this film as "Meathead" on the classic TV Series ALL IN THE FAMILY. This was Reiner's 5th film as a Director and, I believe, announced his "arrival" as a signature Director. Look at the run Reiner had. In order, he directed THIS IS SPINAL TAP, THE SURE THING, STAND BY ME, THE PRINCESS BRIDE, WHEN HARRY MET SALLY, MISERY and A FEW GOOD MEN. I would also include THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT and GHOSTS OF MISSISSIPPI in this list, but they come after the misfire NORTH. But, 9 out of 10 good films is quite the track record.
What struck me in this showing of the film (seen on the big screen for the first time by me since 1986) is the contrast between intimacy and enormity. When the boys are on their trek, Reiner shoots a good deal of these scenes from a distance - showing how small these boys are in comparison to the world around them. But, when the scene is an intimate, dialogue, character-driven scene, he tightens his shots right into the faces of the 4 leads, creating an intimacy that draws us into these characters.
The other credit has to go to whomever cast this film - for the 4 unknown boys that were cast in the leads were well cast, indeed.
Start with Wil Wheaton as Gordie. Gordie has spent his whole life in the shadow of his over-achieving "All American" brother, trying to be noticed for who - and what - he is, an author, not an athlete. Wheaton brings the right combination of determination, intelligence and vulnerability to Gordie, giving us a protagonist we can root for. Jerry O'Connell was funnier than I remembered as the "fat kid", Vern, who just wants to play by the rules, but always goes along with his friends, despite his better judgement. Corey Feldman has never been better than he is here as Teddy Duchamp - a young boy with a troubled home life - and a troubled life - that is trying to control, and understand, the rage inside of him.
But it is the work of the late River Phoenix as Chris Chambers, the "leader" of this group that really shines. He is the glue that keeps this foursome together, strong but showing a vulnerability and a "realistic" view of what it is to be a misunderstood youth - the hurt that comes with that and the walls that one puts up to combat that. Phoenix commands the screen in every scene that he is in and when the scene is just Phoenix and Wheaton, you are drawn into a real friendship.
I was surprised, at this viewing, at how serious this film is - and the topics that this film addresses - but those moments are wisely balanced by scenes of action/adventure (like the train tressel scene), comedy (like the the "lard-ass" pie eating scene) and "other" moments (the leaches!).
This is one of those films that is getting better with time - it is aging well - and, rightfully, fits in the category of "Modern Classic".
Letter Grade: A
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated The Perks of Being a Wallflower in Books
Dec 17, 2018
Find my review on my blog: www.diaryofdifference.com
We all are, or have once been wallflowers. The shy creatures of the universe, strangled in a problematic world where everything is so confusing and hard. We have all once swam in those deep waters, where the finish line is the act of growing up, and we all coped with it in different ways.
Charlie is struggling with the same things we were, when in high school. The friendships, or lack of them, the crushes, the secret thoughts, the exams, the pressure, the misunderstandings with our parents, our goals, hopes and dreams, our visions of what we will become.
It is an emotional, but very realistic story, about one kid, and all the things he learns while growing up. By learning things the hard way, by listening, by watching things happen to his friends and family, by just being a wallflower.
The author has written this book in a way where Charlie is writing letters to his secret friend, telling him about his daily adventures. I loved this way, because the letters give a sense of confidentiality, of honesty, or pure thoughts with nothing to hide.
Charlie is a shy guy, who has trouble making friends, socialising, and lacks a lot of common sense. To me, this game me vibes of an autistic kid, or an anxious child suffering from PTSD, which hits all the marks, but I don’t know whether or not this was the author’s purpose. It was written in 1998, so I can assume these subjects might have been taboo, as people weren’t as open minded as today.
To me, Charlie was a relatable character. Even though clearly going through a lot more than just a normal kid, in this book, he copes with problems we have all coped. And the part I loved about Charlie the most is – he is honest, so brutally honest, and doesn’t try to hide things he understands or trying to understand. He sees things we don’t tend to see, and he feels things in a way I would want to feel them.
“So, this is my life. And I want you to know that I am both happy and sad and I’m still trying to figure out how that could be.”
He suddenly meets a group of friends, that accept him as he is, and he can be as weird and crazy as he wants, no one bothers. These friendships – my dear reader – are something we all wish for, and some of us are so lucky to have them.
I truly believe that this book is definitely something I would give to my kid to read, or to my small siblings. I wish I had read this 10 years ago, when I would relate more, and when all the high-school topics were relevant. But even now, I can still remember the exact way Charlie felt in some situations, and I wish I had read the book and acted differently on some of mine.
”Charlie, we accept the love we think we deserve.”
Charlie will teach us a lot about high school little traumas, high-school crushes and true love, friendships and betrayals, seeing the family in a different way, and acting on things instead of doing nothing. With Charlie, I went back to high-school, and remembered all the good things and the bad, and I ALMOST shed a few tears for all the memories and times I will never have. Now, I raise a glass, and say cheers for all the good memories and friendships made.
“And I thought about how many people have loved those songs. And how many people got through a lot of bad times because of those songs. And how many people enjoyed good times with those songs. And how much those songs really mean. I think it would be great to have written one of those songs. I bet if I wrote one of them, I would be very proud. I hope the people who wrote those songs are happy. I hope they feel it’s enough. I really do because they’ve made me happy. And I’m only one person.”
Spend a little time, and pick up this book. It is a short and sweet read, and it is a book that everyone should have on their shelves.
We all are, or have once been wallflowers. The shy creatures of the universe, strangled in a problematic world where everything is so confusing and hard. We have all once swam in those deep waters, where the finish line is the act of growing up, and we all coped with it in different ways.
Charlie is struggling with the same things we were, when in high school. The friendships, or lack of them, the crushes, the secret thoughts, the exams, the pressure, the misunderstandings with our parents, our goals, hopes and dreams, our visions of what we will become.
It is an emotional, but very realistic story, about one kid, and all the things he learns while growing up. By learning things the hard way, by listening, by watching things happen to his friends and family, by just being a wallflower.
The author has written this book in a way where Charlie is writing letters to his secret friend, telling him about his daily adventures. I loved this way, because the letters give a sense of confidentiality, of honesty, or pure thoughts with nothing to hide.
Charlie is a shy guy, who has trouble making friends, socialising, and lacks a lot of common sense. To me, this game me vibes of an autistic kid, or an anxious child suffering from PTSD, which hits all the marks, but I don’t know whether or not this was the author’s purpose. It was written in 1998, so I can assume these subjects might have been taboo, as people weren’t as open minded as today.
To me, Charlie was a relatable character. Even though clearly going through a lot more than just a normal kid, in this book, he copes with problems we have all coped. And the part I loved about Charlie the most is – he is honest, so brutally honest, and doesn’t try to hide things he understands or trying to understand. He sees things we don’t tend to see, and he feels things in a way I would want to feel them.
“So, this is my life. And I want you to know that I am both happy and sad and I’m still trying to figure out how that could be.”
He suddenly meets a group of friends, that accept him as he is, and he can be as weird and crazy as he wants, no one bothers. These friendships – my dear reader – are something we all wish for, and some of us are so lucky to have them.
I truly believe that this book is definitely something I would give to my kid to read, or to my small siblings. I wish I had read this 10 years ago, when I would relate more, and when all the high-school topics were relevant. But even now, I can still remember the exact way Charlie felt in some situations, and I wish I had read the book and acted differently on some of mine.
”Charlie, we accept the love we think we deserve.”
Charlie will teach us a lot about high school little traumas, high-school crushes and true love, friendships and betrayals, seeing the family in a different way, and acting on things instead of doing nothing. With Charlie, I went back to high-school, and remembered all the good things and the bad, and I ALMOST shed a few tears for all the memories and times I will never have. Now, I raise a glass, and say cheers for all the good memories and friendships made.
“And I thought about how many people have loved those songs. And how many people got through a lot of bad times because of those songs. And how many people enjoyed good times with those songs. And how much those songs really mean. I think it would be great to have written one of those songs. I bet if I wrote one of them, I would be very proud. I hope the people who wrote those songs are happy. I hope they feel it’s enough. I really do because they’ve made me happy. And I’m only one person.”
Spend a little time, and pick up this book. It is a short and sweet read, and it is a book that everyone should have on their shelves.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Wreck-It-Ralph (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
In this modern age of console, p.c., and mobile video games it’s easy to forget the days of my youth when the video arcade was king. This is not to say that we didn’t have gaming systems of our own but an Atari 2600 and PlayStation 3 are about as similar as one of Henry Ford’s model T’s to a fully loaded Mercedes.
Suffice it to say I remember very clearly when video games were only a quarter, and how timeless classics ranging from Space Invaders, Donkey Kong, and countless other arcade treasures became cultural icons as well as school yard conversation topics in the pre-Internet days.
Walt Disney Studios have crafted an amazing visual spectacle that combines numerous references to gaming greats old and new with their new movie “Wreck-it Ralph”. The film stars John C. Reilly as Ralph, the villain of a very popular arcade game called Fix it Felix. When the arcade closes for the evening Felix Jr. (Jack McBrayer), and the other residents the game enjoy carefree life of companionship and socialization while Ralph is relegated to a pile of bricks in the town dump and forced to watch the frivolity enjoyed by his workmates from a distance.
His only relief comes when he travels to a central gaming hub and enjoys the company of other gaming villains in a support group. During one such group, Ralph drops the shocking revelation that he wishes to become a hero. Not only does this disclosure shock his fellow gaming villains but the cast of his game, one of whom taunts Ralph to go off and win a hero’s medal elsewhere.
Undaunted, Ralph sets off and finds himself in a brand-new 3-D shooter called Heroes Duty. It is here that Jack meets Sgt. Calhoun (Jane Lynch), a grizzled and bitter veteran who’s been programmed to have the most tragic back story ever developed for gaming persona. Despite his bumbling actions, Ralph achieves his medal and plans to returns to his own game in triumph. Unfortunately in the time that he is been away, the arcade owner believes that his game is defective since Ralph is missing from it and labels the game out of order.
This is a terrible situation especially for older game, as once a game is un-plugged, all of the characters contained within are lost forever. On his way back to his game, Ralph finds himself in a colorfully festooned sugar and treat filled racing game as he attempts to retrieve his medal and set things right unaware that an even bigger threat is looming that threatens all the game characters in the arcade.
Assisting Ralph is Vanellope von Schweetz, (Sarah Silverman), who is an impish glitch that Ralph views as a kindred spirit as she is also ostracized by her fellow game cast. With the gigantic race looming, and the loony King Candy (Alan Tudyk), making things difficult Ralph must rise up and become more than he ever thought he could be to save the day.
The 3-D animation the film the spectacular but what really makes the movie is fine performances by Riley, Lynch, and Silverman, as well as the amazing supporting work by Tudyk, McBrayer, and the rest of the cast. The jokes are extremely clever and come at you at a fairly steady pace. The film was nearly 2 hours in length so parents be warned that this and the PG rating might make things a little harder than usual for extremely young viewers.
There were several fantastic jokes that clearly went over the heads of many of the younger viewers during our test screening as they were geared at those who grew up with arcades and the original Nintendo console.
The film did have a few pacing issues but they were minor and did not as a whole take away from my overall enjoyment of the film. While it falls just short of being considered a modern classic, the movie is definitely one of the more enjoyable films of the year and one that I hope spawns several follow-ups as it was pure Disney magic and gaming nostalgia blended to perfection.
Suffice it to say I remember very clearly when video games were only a quarter, and how timeless classics ranging from Space Invaders, Donkey Kong, and countless other arcade treasures became cultural icons as well as school yard conversation topics in the pre-Internet days.
Walt Disney Studios have crafted an amazing visual spectacle that combines numerous references to gaming greats old and new with their new movie “Wreck-it Ralph”. The film stars John C. Reilly as Ralph, the villain of a very popular arcade game called Fix it Felix. When the arcade closes for the evening Felix Jr. (Jack McBrayer), and the other residents the game enjoy carefree life of companionship and socialization while Ralph is relegated to a pile of bricks in the town dump and forced to watch the frivolity enjoyed by his workmates from a distance.
His only relief comes when he travels to a central gaming hub and enjoys the company of other gaming villains in a support group. During one such group, Ralph drops the shocking revelation that he wishes to become a hero. Not only does this disclosure shock his fellow gaming villains but the cast of his game, one of whom taunts Ralph to go off and win a hero’s medal elsewhere.
Undaunted, Ralph sets off and finds himself in a brand-new 3-D shooter called Heroes Duty. It is here that Jack meets Sgt. Calhoun (Jane Lynch), a grizzled and bitter veteran who’s been programmed to have the most tragic back story ever developed for gaming persona. Despite his bumbling actions, Ralph achieves his medal and plans to returns to his own game in triumph. Unfortunately in the time that he is been away, the arcade owner believes that his game is defective since Ralph is missing from it and labels the game out of order.
This is a terrible situation especially for older game, as once a game is un-plugged, all of the characters contained within are lost forever. On his way back to his game, Ralph finds himself in a colorfully festooned sugar and treat filled racing game as he attempts to retrieve his medal and set things right unaware that an even bigger threat is looming that threatens all the game characters in the arcade.
Assisting Ralph is Vanellope von Schweetz, (Sarah Silverman), who is an impish glitch that Ralph views as a kindred spirit as she is also ostracized by her fellow game cast. With the gigantic race looming, and the loony King Candy (Alan Tudyk), making things difficult Ralph must rise up and become more than he ever thought he could be to save the day.
The 3-D animation the film the spectacular but what really makes the movie is fine performances by Riley, Lynch, and Silverman, as well as the amazing supporting work by Tudyk, McBrayer, and the rest of the cast. The jokes are extremely clever and come at you at a fairly steady pace. The film was nearly 2 hours in length so parents be warned that this and the PG rating might make things a little harder than usual for extremely young viewers.
There were several fantastic jokes that clearly went over the heads of many of the younger viewers during our test screening as they were geared at those who grew up with arcades and the original Nintendo console.
The film did have a few pacing issues but they were minor and did not as a whole take away from my overall enjoyment of the film. While it falls just short of being considered a modern classic, the movie is definitely one of the more enjoyable films of the year and one that I hope spawns several follow-ups as it was pure Disney magic and gaming nostalgia blended to perfection.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Borat: Subsequent Moviefilm (2020) in Movies
Feb 25, 2021
There was some genuine surprise when I saw this had been made as an Amazon Original. I thought the character of Borat was old news, there certainly couldn’t be anyone left, in America or otherwise, that wasn’t wise to the joke by now, and aware of Sasha Baron Cohen’s desire to satirise the hell out of everything dumb folk may stand for. For it to work people have to believe 100% that he is a real person, this is what made the first film so incredible to watch – the opened mouthed awe at the pure audacity of the performer and the pure stupidity of the “victims”. But, I guess he figured a way around it, and also realised that no one but Borat could better lampoon the very worst aspects of the America the Trump era has created.
The point of difference and main gimmick here is introducing his daughter, played with wonderful awareness by Maria Bakalova, using her as a tentative hook for a story and also a sneaky way to fool those who would recognise Borat himself, but not his offspring. Just witness the most excruciating set piece of the film where ex mayor of New York and avid Trump supporting buffoon Rudy Giuliani all but incriminates himself as a rapist. A scene that matches anything the first film offered for maximum can’t-believe-what-I’m-seeing cringe value.
There are those that say they don’t like Borat or find him funny. I have never been sure that is the point, because everytime we do laugh, we immediately have to ask ourselves what we just laughed at and why we did? It is our own prejudices and preconceptions that are been highlighted – this is the “joke”, and it doesn’t require you to like the character or laugh at the more puerile moments – it is asking you to assess the judgements we all make on the values we live with in the world we have created. Liking it or finding it amusing is only necessary when looking at it as an entertainment, but its best aspects are so much more than that.
Myself, I agree, it often isn’t funny, and relies too often on crass elements such as bodily functions and teenage sexual innuendo. In many ways it is awful, but I also see that all of this is part of the cleverness. As a movie it has no peer to compare it to. Nothing else tries to do what these films attempt, so it is difficult to assess it as a work of entertainment or of… art (is it art?). Did I “enjoy” it? I mean, no not really, did I think it had artistic elements worthy of comment? I mean, no. But is it one of the most intelligent and genius commentaries on life in 2020? God damn right it is! There is so much relevance to worthy topics of social and political conversation here that you could spent 3 times the running time of the film talking about it. And more than being funny, that is the point of satire.
Both Baron Cohen and Bakalova are already doing well into award season with it, and good luck to them! They certainly deserve the triple nods they got from the Golden Globes, which is the biggest awards event to recognise comedy as a separate entity. I agree with some critics I have read that speculate this film is so of now that it won’t age well, and in fact come to make less and less sense as we move on and forget what the Trump era was like to live through. Longevity is something I know I look for when awarding high praise, so for that alone I have to knock it down a few points. In conclusion, I admire this acheivement more than I liked or enjoyed it. But I do recommend you see it as soon as possible if you haven’t already, because it is going to get wrinkly very quickly – just like Rudy G.
The point of difference and main gimmick here is introducing his daughter, played with wonderful awareness by Maria Bakalova, using her as a tentative hook for a story and also a sneaky way to fool those who would recognise Borat himself, but not his offspring. Just witness the most excruciating set piece of the film where ex mayor of New York and avid Trump supporting buffoon Rudy Giuliani all but incriminates himself as a rapist. A scene that matches anything the first film offered for maximum can’t-believe-what-I’m-seeing cringe value.
There are those that say they don’t like Borat or find him funny. I have never been sure that is the point, because everytime we do laugh, we immediately have to ask ourselves what we just laughed at and why we did? It is our own prejudices and preconceptions that are been highlighted – this is the “joke”, and it doesn’t require you to like the character or laugh at the more puerile moments – it is asking you to assess the judgements we all make on the values we live with in the world we have created. Liking it or finding it amusing is only necessary when looking at it as an entertainment, but its best aspects are so much more than that.
Myself, I agree, it often isn’t funny, and relies too often on crass elements such as bodily functions and teenage sexual innuendo. In many ways it is awful, but I also see that all of this is part of the cleverness. As a movie it has no peer to compare it to. Nothing else tries to do what these films attempt, so it is difficult to assess it as a work of entertainment or of… art (is it art?). Did I “enjoy” it? I mean, no not really, did I think it had artistic elements worthy of comment? I mean, no. But is it one of the most intelligent and genius commentaries on life in 2020? God damn right it is! There is so much relevance to worthy topics of social and political conversation here that you could spent 3 times the running time of the film talking about it. And more than being funny, that is the point of satire.
Both Baron Cohen and Bakalova are already doing well into award season with it, and good luck to them! They certainly deserve the triple nods they got from the Golden Globes, which is the biggest awards event to recognise comedy as a separate entity. I agree with some critics I have read that speculate this film is so of now that it won’t age well, and in fact come to make less and less sense as we move on and forget what the Trump era was like to live through. Longevity is something I know I look for when awarding high praise, so for that alone I have to knock it down a few points. In conclusion, I admire this acheivement more than I liked or enjoyed it. But I do recommend you see it as soon as possible if you haven’t already, because it is going to get wrinkly very quickly – just like Rudy G.
Eleanor Luhar (47 KP) rated Nothing Tastes as Good in Books
Jun 24, 2019
I happened to see this book by chance, in my local library. I was drawn to it because it's cover, it's title - I'm anorexic, and I happen to be drawn to things relating to mental health. It doesn't expressly say on it that it's about anorexia, but the cover made it pretty obvious to me. A warning to anyone that wants to read it: it's hard. If you suffer from something like this, like me, then you will probably have difficulty reading something so close to home. Especially if you're recovering. But it gets better. (I mean the book; I'm not using that "life gets better" crap.)
So Annabel is dead. I'm studying The Lovely Bones at school so the whole beyond-death narration isn't that special to me now. But Hennessy does it pretty differently to Sebold.
We don't know much about Annabel, not at first. But we begin to learn about her while she helps her assigned "soul-in-need" - The Boss (definitely not God) has promised her a final communication with her family if she helps Julia. And this looks easy, at first - Julia is from Annabel's old school, with a loving family and good grades. Everything is fine, except she's fat. Annabel thinks this should be easy - after all, she's an expert in weight loss. She lost weight until she died.
But Annabel soon finds out that Julia's issues are a whole lot more complex than her weight. At first, losing weight helps. But then her old scars come back to haunt her, and Annabel realises that maybe losing weight isn't going to fix all her problems.
Aside from the obvious issue, this book does talk about a lot of important topics. It covers friendships and relationships, like most YA novels do, but it also combats ideas on feminism, affairs with older men, and people all having their own hidden demons.
At first, I wasn't keen on Annabel. I wanted to like her - I felt I should, because I could relate to her story so much. But she was a bitch. She wanted other people to be like her, and rather than encouraging recovery and health and happiness, she shared tipped on weight loss. It really did hurt to read. Her ideas on "perfection" and being weak for eating just really hit a nerve for me. Not because it was wrong (though I'd never encourage an eating disorder in someone else), but because it's exactly how I'd think about myself. Her behaviours, her worries, her anger - they were so real.
But Annabel, despite being dead, grows alongside Julia. Yes, she tells Julia to starve herself and run on an empty stomach and hate herself, but eventually she starts to feel for her. She wants Julia to combat her issues, to actually be happy. And she realises, despite having been so upset with her old friends for recovering, that maybe she wasted her life. Maybe she could have been something more, rather than striving to be less.
I found this really emotional. Annabel's love for her sister, the sister she neglected for years while she was focused on her goals, and the future she cut short. The way Julia's life changed when her passion for writing and journalism was overtaken by her obsession with food, calories, exercise. It's so real and so sad. And the ending isn't "happily ever after" - Annabel's still dead, Julia's in counselling - but it's real. It gives hope that things can change, that Julia can really achieve happiness.
At first, I didn't like this that much. I know Annabel is just a character, but I just didn't like her. She was one of those girls that makes anorexia sound like a choice, a lifestyle, and I hated that. But later she realises she is sick, and I actually felt sorry for her. I was sorry that she had been brainwashed by her illness into believing she was doing what was right.
The only reason I'm giving just 4.5 stars to this book is because Annabel was a bitch. Yes, she is a character, and yes, she grows considerably throughout the novel, but her encouragement of EDs just drove me insane. Personal pet peeve, I guess.
So Annabel is dead. I'm studying The Lovely Bones at school so the whole beyond-death narration isn't that special to me now. But Hennessy does it pretty differently to Sebold.
We don't know much about Annabel, not at first. But we begin to learn about her while she helps her assigned "soul-in-need" - The Boss (definitely not God) has promised her a final communication with her family if she helps Julia. And this looks easy, at first - Julia is from Annabel's old school, with a loving family and good grades. Everything is fine, except she's fat. Annabel thinks this should be easy - after all, she's an expert in weight loss. She lost weight until she died.
But Annabel soon finds out that Julia's issues are a whole lot more complex than her weight. At first, losing weight helps. But then her old scars come back to haunt her, and Annabel realises that maybe losing weight isn't going to fix all her problems.
Aside from the obvious issue, this book does talk about a lot of important topics. It covers friendships and relationships, like most YA novels do, but it also combats ideas on feminism, affairs with older men, and people all having their own hidden demons.
At first, I wasn't keen on Annabel. I wanted to like her - I felt I should, because I could relate to her story so much. But she was a bitch. She wanted other people to be like her, and rather than encouraging recovery and health and happiness, she shared tipped on weight loss. It really did hurt to read. Her ideas on "perfection" and being weak for eating just really hit a nerve for me. Not because it was wrong (though I'd never encourage an eating disorder in someone else), but because it's exactly how I'd think about myself. Her behaviours, her worries, her anger - they were so real.
But Annabel, despite being dead, grows alongside Julia. Yes, she tells Julia to starve herself and run on an empty stomach and hate herself, but eventually she starts to feel for her. She wants Julia to combat her issues, to actually be happy. And she realises, despite having been so upset with her old friends for recovering, that maybe she wasted her life. Maybe she could have been something more, rather than striving to be less.
I found this really emotional. Annabel's love for her sister, the sister she neglected for years while she was focused on her goals, and the future she cut short. The way Julia's life changed when her passion for writing and journalism was overtaken by her obsession with food, calories, exercise. It's so real and so sad. And the ending isn't "happily ever after" - Annabel's still dead, Julia's in counselling - but it's real. It gives hope that things can change, that Julia can really achieve happiness.
At first, I didn't like this that much. I know Annabel is just a character, but I just didn't like her. She was one of those girls that makes anorexia sound like a choice, a lifestyle, and I hated that. But later she realises she is sick, and I actually felt sorry for her. I was sorry that she had been brainwashed by her illness into believing she was doing what was right.
The only reason I'm giving just 4.5 stars to this book is because Annabel was a bitch. Yes, she is a character, and yes, she grows considerably throughout the novel, but her encouragement of EDs just drove me insane. Personal pet peeve, I guess.
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated Chat Love in Books
Oct 2, 2020
I wanted to read this book immediately after reading the synopsis, and I was honoured when the author, Justine Faeth, approached me and sent me an ebook copy in exchange for an honest review.
The book synopsis is a very promising one. Lucia is having trouble finding a man. After a few disastrous dates, she chooses to follow her friend’s advice and tries Chat Love, an online dating service.
As promising as the synopsis sounds, this book didn’t quite deliver. With Chat Love, I found the whole setting of the book unrealistic. There is a nice background story and a great idea, but it hasn’t been properly executed.
Lucia is an Italian lady. She is a city girl and a business woman. She is searching for love. See, Lucia is under pressure by her Italian family to get married. And I can completely understand that pressure, being born in a country where I have met people with similar beliefs. Lucia’s family thinks that a woman is made to be a mother, and not have a career. They think that if you are thirty and you haven’t got a boyfriend yet, you are useless and unworthy.
And I completely agree with Lucia when she tries to stand up to them and tell them how it’s important for her to find a man she will really love, not just marry in order to please her family. In some scenes though, it appears as if she hates her family, and has very bad attitude towards them. I understand completely where her frustration comes from.
But then, on the other hand, we have a Lucia that is being a hypocrite.
And while this whole book seems like she is searching for her true love, when someone appears and cares about her, she is acting as if she’s not interested. Woman, WHAT DO YOU WANT? She wants true love, and she doesn’t want to be used as a one-night stand, which is completely acceptable. But going on a date with a man for the first time, and telling him you want to get serious is creepy. Even if that is your long-term goal, you DO NOT say it on the first date. It scares people away. It makes people think you are a creep.
Also, given the fact that the synopsis promises an online app, this left me disappointed. During this book, we don’t get to really see a single chat happen through this app. Apart from a few letters from Jake. Honestly, I expected a back and forth conversations with men before a date happens. In the book, we get to see Lucia dating a lot of men. I didn’t stop to count them, but there must’ve been around twenty dates. And all these men had something wrong with them. But she never screwed up.
I will be honest with you now, and you people need to be honest with yourselves. In your life, you will meet people, and some people will make you giggle. Others might make you gag. But sometimes, the reason for a bad date is you. I am only trying to be honest here. I have screwed up a few dates myself, and you must have done the same thing too. That’s life though. We have to move on and try not to blame others for our mistakes. I wish this been represented in this book.
I really wish I loved this book.
I have mixed feelings, because despite all, this book did make me think and bring up discussions with people around the various topics, from family beliefs, to being creepy on first dates, to finding out what you really like. In a summary, as much as I didn’t enjoy it, I also am grateful for this book, for bringing out a lot of things to think about.
If you love chick-lit and short romance funny novels, you might enjoy it. If you think any of this discussion points is intriguing, you might enjoy it. I would love to have a chat and see what you think of this book.
The book synopsis is a very promising one. Lucia is having trouble finding a man. After a few disastrous dates, she chooses to follow her friend’s advice and tries Chat Love, an online dating service.
As promising as the synopsis sounds, this book didn’t quite deliver. With Chat Love, I found the whole setting of the book unrealistic. There is a nice background story and a great idea, but it hasn’t been properly executed.
Lucia is an Italian lady. She is a city girl and a business woman. She is searching for love. See, Lucia is under pressure by her Italian family to get married. And I can completely understand that pressure, being born in a country where I have met people with similar beliefs. Lucia’s family thinks that a woman is made to be a mother, and not have a career. They think that if you are thirty and you haven’t got a boyfriend yet, you are useless and unworthy.
And I completely agree with Lucia when she tries to stand up to them and tell them how it’s important for her to find a man she will really love, not just marry in order to please her family. In some scenes though, it appears as if she hates her family, and has very bad attitude towards them. I understand completely where her frustration comes from.
But then, on the other hand, we have a Lucia that is being a hypocrite.
And while this whole book seems like she is searching for her true love, when someone appears and cares about her, she is acting as if she’s not interested. Woman, WHAT DO YOU WANT? She wants true love, and she doesn’t want to be used as a one-night stand, which is completely acceptable. But going on a date with a man for the first time, and telling him you want to get serious is creepy. Even if that is your long-term goal, you DO NOT say it on the first date. It scares people away. It makes people think you are a creep.
Also, given the fact that the synopsis promises an online app, this left me disappointed. During this book, we don’t get to really see a single chat happen through this app. Apart from a few letters from Jake. Honestly, I expected a back and forth conversations with men before a date happens. In the book, we get to see Lucia dating a lot of men. I didn’t stop to count them, but there must’ve been around twenty dates. And all these men had something wrong with them. But she never screwed up.
I will be honest with you now, and you people need to be honest with yourselves. In your life, you will meet people, and some people will make you giggle. Others might make you gag. But sometimes, the reason for a bad date is you. I am only trying to be honest here. I have screwed up a few dates myself, and you must have done the same thing too. That’s life though. We have to move on and try not to blame others for our mistakes. I wish this been represented in this book.
I really wish I loved this book.
I have mixed feelings, because despite all, this book did make me think and bring up discussions with people around the various topics, from family beliefs, to being creepy on first dates, to finding out what you really like. In a summary, as much as I didn’t enjoy it, I also am grateful for this book, for bringing out a lot of things to think about.
If you love chick-lit and short romance funny novels, you might enjoy it. If you think any of this discussion points is intriguing, you might enjoy it. I would love to have a chat and see what you think of this book.