Search
Search results
The Disappointing Mr. Whicher...or is it the Wandering Ms. Summerscale? No, I've got it! The Bloated Book of Everything Victorian!
I was looking forward to reading, what I thought was, a true crime book with a bit of a look into Mr. Whicher's professional life too. What I got instead was four, possibly more, books in a 304 page book. These four parts consist of the murder of Saville Kent, Mr. Jonathan Whicher himself, an analysis of detective fiction (especially Poe, Dickens, and Collins), the origin of words and phrases in the detection field, many murder/crime stories of the day, other oddly inserted facts and history, etc., etc.
Now, Ms. Summerscale is a fine writer (and researcher for that matter), but it seems as if she wrote for herself instead of us, the readers. While her odd bits and pieces of history are interesting (usually), they are not essential to the plot (or what I thought was the main story), and I found myself glazing quite a bit. Whenever she rhapsodized poetic about Poe, Dickens or any of the other writers of the early detection mystery, it had the overall feel of a research paper and usually didn't have much to do with the murder in the least. The author wandered off way too many times to her own fancy and whenever she went back to the supposed case, it felt as if she had forgotten that she was supposed to be writing about the murder. This left the plotting of the book oddly pieced together and me discombobulated. Where was the editor? Out to lunch? Or did the author disregard what the editor(s) advised her to do? Who knows, but all this extraneous information was just filler and added nothing to the book. I cannot believe this actually won anything. Another quibble was that she also had a bit of a problem with her 'sensationalistic' chapter endings; they just didn't go (or flow) with the whole book.
My biggest problem with the whole book is there isn't much on the murder, which you would think there would be by the cover, synopsis, praise, and marketing. Only a little speculation is spared on a few other suspects; no why might they have done it, how the family may have felt - I wish there had been more focused on the murder and less on everything else. That's why I picked up the book, I wanted to know about the crime and consequences, not on the way of Victorian life or how it influenced writers, there are other books for that (which are listed in the notes and select bibliography in the back I might add). Now, don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the subject content, but the overall construction of the book with all the un-necessary passages left me dissatisfied and grumpy.
I was looking forward to reading, what I thought was, a true crime book with a bit of a look into Mr. Whicher's professional life too. What I got instead was four, possibly more, books in a 304 page book. These four parts consist of the murder of Saville Kent, Mr. Jonathan Whicher himself, an analysis of detective fiction (especially Poe, Dickens, and Collins), the origin of words and phrases in the detection field, many murder/crime stories of the day, other oddly inserted facts and history, etc., etc.
Now, Ms. Summerscale is a fine writer (and researcher for that matter), but it seems as if she wrote for herself instead of us, the readers. While her odd bits and pieces of history are interesting (usually), they are not essential to the plot (or what I thought was the main story), and I found myself glazing quite a bit. Whenever she rhapsodized poetic about Poe, Dickens or any of the other writers of the early detection mystery, it had the overall feel of a research paper and usually didn't have much to do with the murder in the least. The author wandered off way too many times to her own fancy and whenever she went back to the supposed case, it felt as if she had forgotten that she was supposed to be writing about the murder. This left the plotting of the book oddly pieced together and me discombobulated. Where was the editor? Out to lunch? Or did the author disregard what the editor(s) advised her to do? Who knows, but all this extraneous information was just filler and added nothing to the book. I cannot believe this actually won anything. Another quibble was that she also had a bit of a problem with her 'sensationalistic' chapter endings; they just didn't go (or flow) with the whole book.
My biggest problem with the whole book is there isn't much on the murder, which you would think there would be by the cover, synopsis, praise, and marketing. Only a little speculation is spared on a few other suspects; no why might they have done it, how the family may have felt - I wish there had been more focused on the murder and less on everything else. That's why I picked up the book, I wanted to know about the crime and consequences, not on the way of Victorian life or how it influenced writers, there are other books for that (which are listed in the notes and select bibliography in the back I might add). Now, don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the subject content, but the overall construction of the book with all the un-necessary passages left me dissatisfied and grumpy.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Last Summer of the Garrett Girls in Books
Mar 6, 2019
Delightful novel about sisterhood and growing up
The Garrett sisters are pretty used to the routine of their lives in their small town. Des, 19, is caretaker of her sisters and Arden, the bookstore left behind by their late parents. Their seventy-year-old Gram counts on her to take care of things--even more so since her knee surgery. Bea, 18, is smart, ambitious, and heading to Georgetown in the fall, along with her longtime boyfriend, Erik. Kat, 16, is their theatrical diva, whom no one really takes seriously; she recently broke up with her boyfriend, and she'd do just about anything to get him back. At fifteen, Vi is the "baby" of the family. She's quiet, sensitive, and gay. It's all worked pretty well for a while, but little do they all know: things are about to change for the Garrett girls this summer.
Jessica Spotswood said that she pitched this novel as "Little Women meets Gilmore Girls by way of Sarah Dessen," and I couldn't agree more. I didn't read this until her epilogue, and both the Little Women and Gilmore Girls pieces had already crossed my mind. This is such a lovely, charming, and touching book--I thoroughly enjoyed it. The Garrett sisters were so wonderful and engaging that as the book ended, I immediately found myself wishing there was a sequel, because I was completely immersed in their lives.
Spotswood creates some excellent, different, and completely captivating characters in these sisters. Each is unique in their own way--their own person. I loved the wonderful diverse representation in this one: "there aren't many YA books about girls falling in love," Vi says. It's so true, and how nice it is to have a well-written book where that storyline is just one of the many plots. There are some absolutely beautiful exchanges, as Vi has a crush on the girl who works at the restaurant next door, Cece. It was easily my favorite part of the book--I adored sweet Vi. I also loved how books played a such a strong role in the story--between the girls' family owning a bookstore and all of them loving books and stories in some way.
The novel itself is really about the universal themes of growing up, finding your way, and friendship and sisterhood. And love. It's so well-done and really sweet and fun. The girls seem so real, and it was quite easy to get caught up in their lives and problems. I found it quite enjoyable, even if I could guess how most things would resolve themselves.
Overall, this was a delightful novel about sisterhood and growing up. I truly wish I could have spent more time with the Garrett sisters. 4+ stars.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review (thank you!).
Jessica Spotswood said that she pitched this novel as "Little Women meets Gilmore Girls by way of Sarah Dessen," and I couldn't agree more. I didn't read this until her epilogue, and both the Little Women and Gilmore Girls pieces had already crossed my mind. This is such a lovely, charming, and touching book--I thoroughly enjoyed it. The Garrett sisters were so wonderful and engaging that as the book ended, I immediately found myself wishing there was a sequel, because I was completely immersed in their lives.
Spotswood creates some excellent, different, and completely captivating characters in these sisters. Each is unique in their own way--their own person. I loved the wonderful diverse representation in this one: "there aren't many YA books about girls falling in love," Vi says. It's so true, and how nice it is to have a well-written book where that storyline is just one of the many plots. There are some absolutely beautiful exchanges, as Vi has a crush on the girl who works at the restaurant next door, Cece. It was easily my favorite part of the book--I adored sweet Vi. I also loved how books played a such a strong role in the story--between the girls' family owning a bookstore and all of them loving books and stories in some way.
The novel itself is really about the universal themes of growing up, finding your way, and friendship and sisterhood. And love. It's so well-done and really sweet and fun. The girls seem so real, and it was quite easy to get caught up in their lives and problems. I found it quite enjoyable, even if I could guess how most things would resolve themselves.
Overall, this was a delightful novel about sisterhood and growing up. I truly wish I could have spent more time with the Garrett sisters. 4+ stars.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review (thank you!).
Kara Skinner (332 KP) rated Lady Danger in Books
Jun 12, 2019
Genre: Historical
Page Count: 368 pages
Average Goodreads Rating: 3.88/5 stars
My rating: 3.5/5 stars
When the Norman king gives Pagan the Rivenloch keep and a daughter of the current laird for a wife, he knows it’s too good to be true. Not only is Rivenloch’s laird suffering from dementia, but the two oldest daughters are not content to take on house-making duties like most women. Instead they are skilled fighters who command Rivenloch’s army. It isn’t long before Pagan realizes why the king chose him for Rivenloch. Only the strongest, most hardened men could conquer the Warrior Maids of Rivenloch.
Deidre isn’t about to give up her power to some Norman, even if he is supposed to be their ally. She’ll marry him to spare her sisters, but that doesn’t mean she’ll make it easy for him. She’ll conquer the Norman before he realizes it.
This book took awhile to get good, but I have to admit, both Pagan and Deidre have very realistic reactions and feelings considering the situation. Pagan comes from a very misogynistic society, so female warriors are unnatural to him. And Deidre sees Pagan as another enemy invading her territory and taking control. But their irrationality them makes them unlikeable at times.
I liked them, then I didn’t. Then I liked them again. Pagan’s devout honor and chivalry is admirable. Although he thinks in terms like “taming” and “conquering” Deidre, he would never actually force her or hurt her in any way. Nor does he want women to fear him. Seeing Miriel, the youngest sister, scared of him made him feel sick. Despite his flawed yet historically accurate upbringing, he does see the value in Deidre and Helena knowing how to fight after learning about the dangers they faced. But there’s so much misogyny in him. He actually thought Deidre would prefer having a man protect her than protecting herself, and he forbid her from sparring.
Of course, Deidre resents all the changes Pagan makes to Rivenloch, even though they were changes that desperately needed to be made. She also has deeply misguided views about sex and men. She planned to control Pagan through his lust by withholding sex, even denying her own desires. During this time, she considered him beating her and forcing her, but the idea that he would commit adultery never occurred to her, even though she repeatedly told him that she would never want him. However, I did enjoy watching Pagan’s massive ego get checked.
They drove me crazy, even though their emotions were realistic. However, after they put their absurdities aside and started working together, the story immediately improved. I loved them working in harmony and the fight scenes at the end were fantastic. Lady Danger is lame at first, but is worth the wait. Medieval romance fans will enjoy this book.
Page Count: 368 pages
Average Goodreads Rating: 3.88/5 stars
My rating: 3.5/5 stars
When the Norman king gives Pagan the Rivenloch keep and a daughter of the current laird for a wife, he knows it’s too good to be true. Not only is Rivenloch’s laird suffering from dementia, but the two oldest daughters are not content to take on house-making duties like most women. Instead they are skilled fighters who command Rivenloch’s army. It isn’t long before Pagan realizes why the king chose him for Rivenloch. Only the strongest, most hardened men could conquer the Warrior Maids of Rivenloch.
Deidre isn’t about to give up her power to some Norman, even if he is supposed to be their ally. She’ll marry him to spare her sisters, but that doesn’t mean she’ll make it easy for him. She’ll conquer the Norman before he realizes it.
This book took awhile to get good, but I have to admit, both Pagan and Deidre have very realistic reactions and feelings considering the situation. Pagan comes from a very misogynistic society, so female warriors are unnatural to him. And Deidre sees Pagan as another enemy invading her territory and taking control. But their irrationality them makes them unlikeable at times.
I liked them, then I didn’t. Then I liked them again. Pagan’s devout honor and chivalry is admirable. Although he thinks in terms like “taming” and “conquering” Deidre, he would never actually force her or hurt her in any way. Nor does he want women to fear him. Seeing Miriel, the youngest sister, scared of him made him feel sick. Despite his flawed yet historically accurate upbringing, he does see the value in Deidre and Helena knowing how to fight after learning about the dangers they faced. But there’s so much misogyny in him. He actually thought Deidre would prefer having a man protect her than protecting herself, and he forbid her from sparring.
Of course, Deidre resents all the changes Pagan makes to Rivenloch, even though they were changes that desperately needed to be made. She also has deeply misguided views about sex and men. She planned to control Pagan through his lust by withholding sex, even denying her own desires. During this time, she considered him beating her and forcing her, but the idea that he would commit adultery never occurred to her, even though she repeatedly told him that she would never want him. However, I did enjoy watching Pagan’s massive ego get checked.
They drove me crazy, even though their emotions were realistic. However, after they put their absurdities aside and started working together, the story immediately improved. I loved them working in harmony and the fight scenes at the end were fantastic. Lady Danger is lame at first, but is worth the wait. Medieval romance fans will enjoy this book.
Maddi Zoe (6 KP) rated The Disaster Artist (2017) in Movies
Feb 8, 2018
Comedic value (1 more)
Acting
Not such a disaster
The Franco brothers star side-by-side in their first major collaboration, in this comedic drama, The Disaster Artist, based on the making of the cult classic 'The Room'.
The film follows Tommy Wiseau (James Franco) as he writes, directs, produces and stars in his first movie alongside best friend Greg Sestero (Dave Franco). It is almost unbelievable as a true story, it just seems like another mad Franco/Rogen movie. But it isn't, this actually happened.
'The Room' was released in 2003, and became a cult classic because of how hilariously awful it was. The storyline, writing, and acting are all very bizarre, and very bad.
But The Disaster Artist is a great movie, with an array of amazing actors, bringing to life the making of the movie, with hilarity.
Before going into this movie, I knew about The Room and had seen several scenes. But all I knew was that it was about the making of the movie, starring James and Dave Franco and also Seth Rogen. But there are many more actors in this that I did not know about which made for a great surprise. Josh Hutcherson, one of my personal favourites, appears as Philip Haldiman who plays 'Denny' in 'The Room', and also Zac Efron, as Dan Janjigian who plays 'Chris-R'.
The actors play excellently all the things that went wrong on the set, such as Wiseau forgetting one line for two hours for a 30-second scene, and his insistence on the cameras catching some great shots of him during the sex scenes.
The casting was great, although they did as expected and almost the whole cast are friends of James, Dave or Rogen. It works though, and they all have brilliant chemistry. It will seem obvious that James and Dave work well together, as they are brothers, but in this movie they play best friends. I think the fact that they are brothers perhaps helped them out as it is a very rocky friendship, and they could perhaps remember times they have had spats about various things.
I can not say too much about the movie without giving away spoilers. But at end of the movie they play some of the scenes side by side; the scene from the movie, alongside the scene that this cast re-enacted. They are pretty accurate, but very funny.
Tommy Wiseau himself also makes a cameo. Make sure you stay until after the credits.
Overall, it is a brilliantly made movie, with both funny and endearing moments. Part of me hopes that on special features on their DVD you can watch the entirety of 'The Room' re-enacted by these actors. The film has already received many nominations for prestigious awards, and I am not surprised.
I would definitely recommend going to see this movie, but at least watch a YouTube summary of 'The Room' first.
The film follows Tommy Wiseau (James Franco) as he writes, directs, produces and stars in his first movie alongside best friend Greg Sestero (Dave Franco). It is almost unbelievable as a true story, it just seems like another mad Franco/Rogen movie. But it isn't, this actually happened.
'The Room' was released in 2003, and became a cult classic because of how hilariously awful it was. The storyline, writing, and acting are all very bizarre, and very bad.
But The Disaster Artist is a great movie, with an array of amazing actors, bringing to life the making of the movie, with hilarity.
Before going into this movie, I knew about The Room and had seen several scenes. But all I knew was that it was about the making of the movie, starring James and Dave Franco and also Seth Rogen. But there are many more actors in this that I did not know about which made for a great surprise. Josh Hutcherson, one of my personal favourites, appears as Philip Haldiman who plays 'Denny' in 'The Room', and also Zac Efron, as Dan Janjigian who plays 'Chris-R'.
The actors play excellently all the things that went wrong on the set, such as Wiseau forgetting one line for two hours for a 30-second scene, and his insistence on the cameras catching some great shots of him during the sex scenes.
The casting was great, although they did as expected and almost the whole cast are friends of James, Dave or Rogen. It works though, and they all have brilliant chemistry. It will seem obvious that James and Dave work well together, as they are brothers, but in this movie they play best friends. I think the fact that they are brothers perhaps helped them out as it is a very rocky friendship, and they could perhaps remember times they have had spats about various things.
I can not say too much about the movie without giving away spoilers. But at end of the movie they play some of the scenes side by side; the scene from the movie, alongside the scene that this cast re-enacted. They are pretty accurate, but very funny.
Tommy Wiseau himself also makes a cameo. Make sure you stay until after the credits.
Overall, it is a brilliantly made movie, with both funny and endearing moments. Part of me hopes that on special features on their DVD you can watch the entirety of 'The Room' re-enacted by these actors. The film has already received many nominations for prestigious awards, and I am not surprised.
I would definitely recommend going to see this movie, but at least watch a YouTube summary of 'The Room' first.
Enjoyable return to some old friends
Louisa Clark is attempting to follow advice to live boldly and try new things, which leads her to New York City. There, she becomes enmeshed in the life of the wealthy Gopnik family, serving as Agnes Gopnik's personal assistant. As such, Lou has plenty of time to tend to Agnes' every whim, but it takes some time to realize she might not be spending quite so much time on finding herself. Lou is far away from her boyfriend, Sam, who is still serving as a paramedic in England, and they are finding that long-distance romance isn't so easy. Meanwhile, Lou meets a new friend in New York, Joshua Ryan, who causes her to question many of her feelings. Lou loves New York, its pace and fashion, and many of the people she meets. But she still feels torn between worlds and her quest to discover who she really is, for once and for all.
I had no idea that Moyes was writing a third book in this series until recently and also had no clue where the story would go, but I have come to really care for the character of Louisa and knew I'd read it. I have to say, this one really surprised me, and I ended up enjoying it far more than I thought I would. While pieces of it may be a bit predictable, other parts were a little surprising, and the cast of characters is just so enjoyable that you get sucked in immediately. I found myself looking forward to immersing myself in the novel after a long day. It was refreshing to see Lou start to look inward a bit more, maybe grow up a tad, and start looking after herself more. After all these novels, you feel responsible for her and also get frustrated with her decisions, as if she's a sister or friend of your own.
The novel does a strong job of showing how Lou is tugged between two places--America and England--and struggling to discover where she belongs. It also illustrates some surprising similarities between herself and her wealthy patron. Watching Lou deal with Agnes' secrets--and, as the younger wife of an older, wealthy man, she has many--you get to see her mettle and true character. There are also some lovely and funny appearances by Lou's family, whom I've come to quite adore. You'll fall for the Gopnik's eclectic neighbor, Margot, as well.
This novel is surprisingly touching at times and really I just enjoyed it. It's a typically well-written novel from Moyes, featuring well-loved characters and a cast of new, engaging ones that you can't help but fall for and love (or dislike, as required) as well. If you've enjoyed Lou before, I think you'll find this a nice addition. If you haven't read about her journey, I encourage you to go back and pick up the first book--she's a rewarding character to discover.
More at https://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/.
I had no idea that Moyes was writing a third book in this series until recently and also had no clue where the story would go, but I have come to really care for the character of Louisa and knew I'd read it. I have to say, this one really surprised me, and I ended up enjoying it far more than I thought I would. While pieces of it may be a bit predictable, other parts were a little surprising, and the cast of characters is just so enjoyable that you get sucked in immediately. I found myself looking forward to immersing myself in the novel after a long day. It was refreshing to see Lou start to look inward a bit more, maybe grow up a tad, and start looking after herself more. After all these novels, you feel responsible for her and also get frustrated with her decisions, as if she's a sister or friend of your own.
The novel does a strong job of showing how Lou is tugged between two places--America and England--and struggling to discover where she belongs. It also illustrates some surprising similarities between herself and her wealthy patron. Watching Lou deal with Agnes' secrets--and, as the younger wife of an older, wealthy man, she has many--you get to see her mettle and true character. There are also some lovely and funny appearances by Lou's family, whom I've come to quite adore. You'll fall for the Gopnik's eclectic neighbor, Margot, as well.
This novel is surprisingly touching at times and really I just enjoyed it. It's a typically well-written novel from Moyes, featuring well-loved characters and a cast of new, engaging ones that you can't help but fall for and love (or dislike, as required) as well. If you've enjoyed Lou before, I think you'll find this a nice addition. If you haven't read about her journey, I encourage you to go back and pick up the first book--she's a rewarding character to discover.
More at https://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated The Secret Diary of Hendrik Groen, 83 Years Old in Books
Dec 7, 2018
<i>This ARC was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review </i>
Think <i>Adrian Plass</i> but with octogenarians and this is the result. <i>The Secret Diary of Hendrik Groen, 83 ¼ Years Old</i> is a years long journal beginning on 1st January 2013. Hendrik hates old people, an unfortunate predicament as he live in a home for the elderly. He set himself the task of writing a daily account about the “life of the inmates of a care home in North Amsterdam,” with the purpose of it being read after his death by readers, or “inmates” who wish to know what to expect in their old age.
Whether the contents of this diary are true or exaggerated does not matter, as what it produces is a laugh-out-loud story, a pleasure to read. From cake in the fish tank, to complaints about leaky nether regions, Hendrik provides a brutally honest account of the highs and lows of being an OAP.
<i>The Secret Diary of Hendrik Groen, 83 ¼ Years Old</i> encompasses a selection of unique and presumably real characters. Readers are bound to discover someone who reminds them of an elderly relative, or even themselves! There is the diabetic, rude, gin loving Evert – Henrdik’s best friend of many years – who is never without a witty comeback for the bossy, self-important director of the home. On the other hand, levelheaded Eefje, who Hendrik is rather fond of, shows a completely different view of elderly mentality. Despite the stereotypes associated with care home patients, Hendrik and friends still have as much fun as possible; after all, they may be Old but not Dead.
Speaking of dead, Hendrik makes a number of jokes and references to euthanasia, which may seem like poor taste to some readers. However, when all the friends around you are literally living the final years of their lives, why not joke about it instead of worry? Naturally there are sad diary entries about the inevitable deaths of his contemporaries throughout the year, but Hendrik does not let it get him down for long. Hendrik and his close friends make the most of the time they have left, and if that involves speeding along the roads of Amsterdam on their souped-up mobility scooters, then that is exactly what they will do.
<i>The Secret Diary of Hendrik Groen, 83 ¼ Years Old</i> is a gem of a book and comes highly recommended to readers of all ages. Hendrik ‘s effortlessly funny, sarcastic remarks stress what the average citizen is too polite to voice. Once you begin it is hard to put down. Unfortunately a year is not long enough and you will end up wanting more. Whatever the future holds for us, let’s hope we become someone like Hendrik Groen.
Think <i>Adrian Plass</i> but with octogenarians and this is the result. <i>The Secret Diary of Hendrik Groen, 83 ¼ Years Old</i> is a years long journal beginning on 1st January 2013. Hendrik hates old people, an unfortunate predicament as he live in a home for the elderly. He set himself the task of writing a daily account about the “life of the inmates of a care home in North Amsterdam,” with the purpose of it being read after his death by readers, or “inmates” who wish to know what to expect in their old age.
Whether the contents of this diary are true or exaggerated does not matter, as what it produces is a laugh-out-loud story, a pleasure to read. From cake in the fish tank, to complaints about leaky nether regions, Hendrik provides a brutally honest account of the highs and lows of being an OAP.
<i>The Secret Diary of Hendrik Groen, 83 ¼ Years Old</i> encompasses a selection of unique and presumably real characters. Readers are bound to discover someone who reminds them of an elderly relative, or even themselves! There is the diabetic, rude, gin loving Evert – Henrdik’s best friend of many years – who is never without a witty comeback for the bossy, self-important director of the home. On the other hand, levelheaded Eefje, who Hendrik is rather fond of, shows a completely different view of elderly mentality. Despite the stereotypes associated with care home patients, Hendrik and friends still have as much fun as possible; after all, they may be Old but not Dead.
Speaking of dead, Hendrik makes a number of jokes and references to euthanasia, which may seem like poor taste to some readers. However, when all the friends around you are literally living the final years of their lives, why not joke about it instead of worry? Naturally there are sad diary entries about the inevitable deaths of his contemporaries throughout the year, but Hendrik does not let it get him down for long. Hendrik and his close friends make the most of the time they have left, and if that involves speeding along the roads of Amsterdam on their souped-up mobility scooters, then that is exactly what they will do.
<i>The Secret Diary of Hendrik Groen, 83 ¼ Years Old</i> is a gem of a book and comes highly recommended to readers of all ages. Hendrik ‘s effortlessly funny, sarcastic remarks stress what the average citizen is too polite to voice. Once you begin it is hard to put down. Unfortunately a year is not long enough and you will end up wanting more. Whatever the future holds for us, let’s hope we become someone like Hendrik Groen.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Stargirl (Stargirl, #1) in Books
Dec 7, 2018
<i>This eBook was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review
Stargirl</i> is a popular young adult novel by Jerry Spinelli, originally published in 2000. But what is it that has kept it a favourite sixteen years later? The story is told by Leo Borlock, a student in the 11th grade at Mica Area High School. This year there is a new girl who calls herself Stargirl and, like her name, is completely different from everyone else. She has an outlandish dress sense, plays the ukele at lunchtimes, knows and celebrates everyone’s birthdays. The only word the school can think of to describe her is “HUH?”
Despite the weirdness surrounding her, Stargirl quickly becomes popular. People are entertained by her, want to be with her, want to be her. Leo is equally fascinated by her and is shocked when she begins to pay him attention. However, after a while the novelty of Stargirl wears off. Students begin to despise her and shun her. Stargirl does not care, but Leo does. He tries to change Stargirl, tries to make her act normal like everyone else.
<i>Stargirl</i>, like the titular character, is a breath of fresh air. It is quick and easy to read with the benefit of added humour. It also contains a powerful message. Although Stargirl is not affected by the behaviour of her fellow students, it is shocking the extent that the entire student body goes to in shunning her. This is a form of bullying, something that a child in the real world faces everyday. And that child will be bothered by it, will be hurt, and will be upset. It will probably affect their future.
Leo’s behaviour is something that everyone will be able to recognize in themself. Conforming to the norm. Leo wanted Stargirl to change, to go by her real name, Susan. To stop wearing eccentric clothing. To stop drawing attention to herself. Ultimately, what Leo was asking was for Stargirl to stop being herself. And that is really sad. I have lost count of the times people have said to me “Just be yourself,” but do they mean that? Perhaps they are really saying, “behave like everyone else, and you’ll fit in”?
Spinelli’s most important message in <i>Stargirl</i> is that we should not be afraid to be ourselves. It is unlikely that anyone is as bizarre as Stargirl, yet if everyone stopped being so scared to reveal their true feelings, likes and dislikes etc, perhaps schools would become less intimidating places?
<i>Stargirl</i> is suitable for teenage and adult readers who want something quick to devour. It will entertain, and, although it has a rather ambiguous ending, nothing disastrous happens in the book. It will hopefully leave you feeling as care free as its main character.
Stargirl</i> is a popular young adult novel by Jerry Spinelli, originally published in 2000. But what is it that has kept it a favourite sixteen years later? The story is told by Leo Borlock, a student in the 11th grade at Mica Area High School. This year there is a new girl who calls herself Stargirl and, like her name, is completely different from everyone else. She has an outlandish dress sense, plays the ukele at lunchtimes, knows and celebrates everyone’s birthdays. The only word the school can think of to describe her is “HUH?”
Despite the weirdness surrounding her, Stargirl quickly becomes popular. People are entertained by her, want to be with her, want to be her. Leo is equally fascinated by her and is shocked when she begins to pay him attention. However, after a while the novelty of Stargirl wears off. Students begin to despise her and shun her. Stargirl does not care, but Leo does. He tries to change Stargirl, tries to make her act normal like everyone else.
<i>Stargirl</i>, like the titular character, is a breath of fresh air. It is quick and easy to read with the benefit of added humour. It also contains a powerful message. Although Stargirl is not affected by the behaviour of her fellow students, it is shocking the extent that the entire student body goes to in shunning her. This is a form of bullying, something that a child in the real world faces everyday. And that child will be bothered by it, will be hurt, and will be upset. It will probably affect their future.
Leo’s behaviour is something that everyone will be able to recognize in themself. Conforming to the norm. Leo wanted Stargirl to change, to go by her real name, Susan. To stop wearing eccentric clothing. To stop drawing attention to herself. Ultimately, what Leo was asking was for Stargirl to stop being herself. And that is really sad. I have lost count of the times people have said to me “Just be yourself,” but do they mean that? Perhaps they are really saying, “behave like everyone else, and you’ll fit in”?
Spinelli’s most important message in <i>Stargirl</i> is that we should not be afraid to be ourselves. It is unlikely that anyone is as bizarre as Stargirl, yet if everyone stopped being so scared to reveal their true feelings, likes and dislikes etc, perhaps schools would become less intimidating places?
<i>Stargirl</i> is suitable for teenage and adult readers who want something quick to devour. It will entertain, and, although it has a rather ambiguous ending, nothing disastrous happens in the book. It will hopefully leave you feeling as care free as its main character.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated BlacKkKlansman (2018) in Movies
Aug 20, 2018
The first real Oscar contender of 2018
The first shot of the 2018 Oscar race has been fired and it is Spike Lee's BLACKkKLANSMAN. If you are an "Oscar completest" I highly recommend you check this film out as you will be hearing it's name called (probably many times) when the Oscar nominations are revealed.
But...is it a good film?
For the most part, yes.
Based on the incredible true story of Colorado Springs undercover office, Ron Stallworth, an African-American, who was able to infiltrate the KKK via the phone. He then needs a surrogate to keep the subterfuge up in face to face meetings.
In playing Stallworth, relative newcomer John David Washington (son of Denzel) shows that he has inherited at least some of his famous father's acting chops. His portrayal of Washington shows a conflicted man, determined to do his job while juggling his feelings and responsibilities of being a black man in early 1970's America.
Laura Harrier (Liz in SPIDERMAN: HOMECOMING) matches Washington beat for beat as Black activist - and potential love interest - Patrice Dumas who has razor-sharp focus on changing the plight of African Americans and drives Stallworth to thinking about more than just his job.
Other strong performances comes from Topher Grace (as KKK Head David Duke), Robert John Burke as Chief Bridges and Corey Hawkins in an extended cameo as Kwame Ture (aka 1960's Black Activist Stokely Carmichael). I really liked the passion and furvor Hawkins brought to this part.
But...the standout performance in this film comes from Adam Driver as the "white face" of Ron Stallworth to the KKK. He portrays Flip Zimmerman who has been constantly denying his Jewish heritage to pass as a WASP in this world and when he comes face to face with race hatred, he must confront his own inner feelings towards his own past. This is another strong performance by Driver (who is much, much more than just Kylo Ren) and I expect to hear his name called when Oscar nominations are announced.
But...good acting aside...this is a Spike Lee "joint" in all the ways (good and bad) that Spike Lee directs his films. There is a cleanliness in the way he drives the narrative never losing focus on what the main theme of the proceedings needs to be. He paints interesting pictures on the screen and crafts a strong, message picture that should be seen by all.
But...he does have a tendency to overplay his hand, hitting the audience over the head over and over again with his themes to the point of me wanting to say to the screen "all right already, I get it!". This knocks the film down just a hair.
But...that is the price of admission for a very good Spike Lee film, one that I highly recommend you see.
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
But...is it a good film?
For the most part, yes.
Based on the incredible true story of Colorado Springs undercover office, Ron Stallworth, an African-American, who was able to infiltrate the KKK via the phone. He then needs a surrogate to keep the subterfuge up in face to face meetings.
In playing Stallworth, relative newcomer John David Washington (son of Denzel) shows that he has inherited at least some of his famous father's acting chops. His portrayal of Washington shows a conflicted man, determined to do his job while juggling his feelings and responsibilities of being a black man in early 1970's America.
Laura Harrier (Liz in SPIDERMAN: HOMECOMING) matches Washington beat for beat as Black activist - and potential love interest - Patrice Dumas who has razor-sharp focus on changing the plight of African Americans and drives Stallworth to thinking about more than just his job.
Other strong performances comes from Topher Grace (as KKK Head David Duke), Robert John Burke as Chief Bridges and Corey Hawkins in an extended cameo as Kwame Ture (aka 1960's Black Activist Stokely Carmichael). I really liked the passion and furvor Hawkins brought to this part.
But...the standout performance in this film comes from Adam Driver as the "white face" of Ron Stallworth to the KKK. He portrays Flip Zimmerman who has been constantly denying his Jewish heritage to pass as a WASP in this world and when he comes face to face with race hatred, he must confront his own inner feelings towards his own past. This is another strong performance by Driver (who is much, much more than just Kylo Ren) and I expect to hear his name called when Oscar nominations are announced.
But...good acting aside...this is a Spike Lee "joint" in all the ways (good and bad) that Spike Lee directs his films. There is a cleanliness in the way he drives the narrative never losing focus on what the main theme of the proceedings needs to be. He paints interesting pictures on the screen and crafts a strong, message picture that should be seen by all.
But...he does have a tendency to overplay his hand, hitting the audience over the head over and over again with his themes to the point of me wanting to say to the screen "all right already, I get it!". This knocks the film down just a hair.
But...that is the price of admission for a very good Spike Lee film, one that I highly recommend you see.
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Can You Ever Forgive Me? (2018) in Movies
Nov 11, 2018
Strong performances eleveates this "Art House" film.
With not a whole lot of interest filling out the screens at the multi-plexes at this time, I thought I'd head to the "Art House" to check out Melissa McCarthy in CAN YOU EVER FORGIVE ME? This film is garnering strong Oscar buzz for McCarthy's performance and I figured I'd see for myself.
And...darn it all...after a slow start, it does turn into an Oscar worthy performance, after all.
Telling the true tale of writer Lee Israel (based on her memoir), CYEFM tells the story of Israel's descent into criminal behavior to make ends meet by forging literary documents from the past and selling them as the real deal.
Starring as Israel, McCarthy drops all the artifice and bluster that she usually brings to her comedic characters to bring us a "non-people" person (Israel's own words) who is down on her luck. I was a bit skeptical of this performance in the first half of the film for I thought she had fallen victim to the "comedian trying their hands at a serious role" syndrome, being WAY too serious and glum, without a hint of humor. But, in the 2nd half of the film, McCarthy really finds this character and we begin to see a fully formed 3 dimensional person emerging on the screen - warts and all. And, when Israel/McCarthy gives the speech that will be shown at her Oscar nomination, she shows that she is fully deserving of any accolades that might come her way. It is a strong, humanistic portrayal of a person trying to figure it out - and learning that the shortcut probably isn't the best way to go.
Aiding her in her journey - and in this film - is Richard E. Grant as Jack Hock, another lost soul trying to make it in this world while having a good time doing it. Grant has the "showier" of the 2 roles and he revels in his moments. I would be fine with Grant being nominated as well - it is that strong of a performance and balances McCarthy's character wonderfully.
I did have a problem with the first 1/2 of this film, mainly for I disliked the 2 main characters being portrayed, they are certainly NOT 2 people to root for and I felt the film was only showing 1 dimensional stereotypes, but once McCarthy and Grant devise the forgery scheme, the film - and the performances - get very interesting, and multi-layered, indeed.
Keep in mind that this is an "Art House" film, by that I mean "talky". There isn't a whole lot of action and a TON of atmosphere and dialogue, not the type of film for everyone, but for those of you who like this sort of thing, you'll be rewarded by strong performances that lifts this film to a higher level.
Letter Grade: B+
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And...darn it all...after a slow start, it does turn into an Oscar worthy performance, after all.
Telling the true tale of writer Lee Israel (based on her memoir), CYEFM tells the story of Israel's descent into criminal behavior to make ends meet by forging literary documents from the past and selling them as the real deal.
Starring as Israel, McCarthy drops all the artifice and bluster that she usually brings to her comedic characters to bring us a "non-people" person (Israel's own words) who is down on her luck. I was a bit skeptical of this performance in the first half of the film for I thought she had fallen victim to the "comedian trying their hands at a serious role" syndrome, being WAY too serious and glum, without a hint of humor. But, in the 2nd half of the film, McCarthy really finds this character and we begin to see a fully formed 3 dimensional person emerging on the screen - warts and all. And, when Israel/McCarthy gives the speech that will be shown at her Oscar nomination, she shows that she is fully deserving of any accolades that might come her way. It is a strong, humanistic portrayal of a person trying to figure it out - and learning that the shortcut probably isn't the best way to go.
Aiding her in her journey - and in this film - is Richard E. Grant as Jack Hock, another lost soul trying to make it in this world while having a good time doing it. Grant has the "showier" of the 2 roles and he revels in his moments. I would be fine with Grant being nominated as well - it is that strong of a performance and balances McCarthy's character wonderfully.
I did have a problem with the first 1/2 of this film, mainly for I disliked the 2 main characters being portrayed, they are certainly NOT 2 people to root for and I felt the film was only showing 1 dimensional stereotypes, but once McCarthy and Grant devise the forgery scheme, the film - and the performances - get very interesting, and multi-layered, indeed.
Keep in mind that this is an "Art House" film, by that I mean "talky". There isn't a whole lot of action and a TON of atmosphere and dialogue, not the type of film for everyone, but for those of you who like this sort of thing, you'll be rewarded by strong performances that lifts this film to a higher level.
Letter Grade: B+
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Halloween (2018) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
“Halloween” has long been considered by many to have been the film that started the “Slasher” subculture. The independent movie became a box office smash and made Michael Myers a cultural icon ever since its debut in 1978.
Although multiple sequels and a reboot followed over the years; they did not match the intensity of the original as they opted for higher body counts and gore versus suspense and story and in many ways became almost a parody of themselves as Michael would cut down cast after cast of teens and anyone else in his way.
The new film takes the approach that none of the films after the first ever happened so instead of Michael stalking Lorrie in a hospital in “Halloween 2”; he was captured and incarcerated in an mental institute for the last forty years where he has remained silent despite his Doctor (Haluk Bilginer) best efforts to get him to speak as he attempts to understand what motivates a person described as pure evil.
The forty years since “The Night He Came Home” has not been kind to Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis); as since her encounter with Michael: she has become a hard drinking isolationist who suffers from severe Post Traumatic Syndrome. Laurie has become obsessed with guns, weapons, and protection to the point that it has cost her two marriages and even had her only child Karen (Judy Greer) taken from her by the state which has resulted in her having a fractured relationship with her and her granddaughter Allyson (Andi Matichak).
When a pair of journalists attempt to interview Laurie to try to get her to agree to a face to face with Michael; it sets a chain of events into motion which leads to Michael escaping during a prison transfer.
Michael wastes no time in returning home leaving a trail of death in his path and sets him on a collision course with Laurie who has spent the last forty years preparing for his return.
The film is a true sequel to the original as aside from the second film; it is the closest in tone and theme to the original. While it does have more gore and a higher body count in keeping with the modern expectations of a film of this type, writers David Gordon Green and Danny McBride clearly understand the source material and have crafted an extension of the original versus a continuation refurbished. The fact that John Carpenter has returned as an Executive Producer also helps.
The film wisely sets the focus on the characters which makes the horror aspects more compelling as this is not a bunch of anonymous victims we are watching.
A sequel is reportedly in development and I hope this creative team returns as this was a truly worthy sequel to the classic original that was long overdue.
http://sknr.net/2018/10/17/halloween/
Although multiple sequels and a reboot followed over the years; they did not match the intensity of the original as they opted for higher body counts and gore versus suspense and story and in many ways became almost a parody of themselves as Michael would cut down cast after cast of teens and anyone else in his way.
The new film takes the approach that none of the films after the first ever happened so instead of Michael stalking Lorrie in a hospital in “Halloween 2”; he was captured and incarcerated in an mental institute for the last forty years where he has remained silent despite his Doctor (Haluk Bilginer) best efforts to get him to speak as he attempts to understand what motivates a person described as pure evil.
The forty years since “The Night He Came Home” has not been kind to Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis); as since her encounter with Michael: she has become a hard drinking isolationist who suffers from severe Post Traumatic Syndrome. Laurie has become obsessed with guns, weapons, and protection to the point that it has cost her two marriages and even had her only child Karen (Judy Greer) taken from her by the state which has resulted in her having a fractured relationship with her and her granddaughter Allyson (Andi Matichak).
When a pair of journalists attempt to interview Laurie to try to get her to agree to a face to face with Michael; it sets a chain of events into motion which leads to Michael escaping during a prison transfer.
Michael wastes no time in returning home leaving a trail of death in his path and sets him on a collision course with Laurie who has spent the last forty years preparing for his return.
The film is a true sequel to the original as aside from the second film; it is the closest in tone and theme to the original. While it does have more gore and a higher body count in keeping with the modern expectations of a film of this type, writers David Gordon Green and Danny McBride clearly understand the source material and have crafted an extension of the original versus a continuation refurbished. The fact that John Carpenter has returned as an Executive Producer also helps.
The film wisely sets the focus on the characters which makes the horror aspects more compelling as this is not a bunch of anonymous victims we are watching.
A sequel is reportedly in development and I hope this creative team returns as this was a truly worthy sequel to the classic original that was long overdue.
http://sknr.net/2018/10/17/halloween/