Search
Search results
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Dreamstrider in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<b><i>I received this book for free from Publisher in exchange for an honest review. This does not affect my opinion of the book or the content of my review.</i></b>
Every time the concept body invasion appears in a book, I regard it with absolute awe and creepiness (an odd combination, methinks).
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><img src="http://bookwyrmingthoughts.bookblog.io/wp-content/uploads/sites/317/2015/11/supernatural_dudeyes.gif"; width="320" height="179" border="0" /></div>
Have I mentioned I feel really disturbed over the idea of someone a dreamstrider having the ability to take control of your body and access to your thoughts while unconscious, even for a short period of time?
The concept, however, is uber-cool. Smith brings us to a fantasy world where using dreams in the form of espionage is completely acceptable as a dreamstrider, Livia works for the ministry, and she inhabits another persons body while they are asleep.
If I placed Livia in a character category, she would be right next to Alina Starkov from Leigh Bardugos <i>Grisha</i> trilogy. Over the course of the book, shes on the downside; on the plus side, it fits so well with Livias character and past. Livia lived her entire life as a tunneler, trying to survive day by day until she meets Professor Hesse, where she is introduced to her potential as a dreamstrider and the good she can do for the empire for her citizenship and freedom.
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><img src="http://bookwyrmingthoughts.bookblog.io/wp-content/uploads/sites/317/2015/11/freedom.gif"; width="320" height="128" border="0" /></div>
Unlike Alina Starkov (Alina is too mopey over Mal, okay?), Livias mope is more realistic. She has big dreams and strives to achieve them, crushes over her best friend (its harder for males to be one of my best friends that circle is <em>elite</em>), secretly sweet, and insecure/cautious about many things.
But enough about Livia and how shes secretly awesome even though she will never <i>ever</i> admit it. I didnt feel very into <em>Dreamstrider</em> the passphrases in the Land of the Iron Winds are written in a very rhythmic style, but I didnt care too much aside from the fact it sounds poetic. But poetry and I dont get along, and this is why I will never read Ellen Hopkins. I have nothing against the author, though.
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><img src="http://bookwyrmingthoughts.bookblog.io/wp-content/uploads/sites/317/2015/11/I-Know-Nothing-Apparently-On-Game-Of-Thrones.gif"; width="320" height="179" border="0" /></div>
Ellen Hopkins aside, dreaming is a big deal it plays a part in almost everything in the Barstadt Empire, but it felt more like a cultural thing (like Greek myths are to Greeks). Im taking it all in, but the whole dreaming thing? Its just there, and the only big deal seemed to be using dreaming in detective work and finding out information. The whole point of the book is really just Livia becoming more confident in not just herself, but her abilities. By the end of the book, I felt satisfied, but I just wanted more from the book.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/arc-review-dreamstrider-by-lindsay-smi/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Every time the concept body invasion appears in a book, I regard it with absolute awe and creepiness (an odd combination, methinks).
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><img src="http://bookwyrmingthoughts.bookblog.io/wp-content/uploads/sites/317/2015/11/supernatural_dudeyes.gif"; width="320" height="179" border="0" /></div>
Have I mentioned I feel really disturbed over the idea of someone a dreamstrider having the ability to take control of your body and access to your thoughts while unconscious, even for a short period of time?
The concept, however, is uber-cool. Smith brings us to a fantasy world where using dreams in the form of espionage is completely acceptable as a dreamstrider, Livia works for the ministry, and she inhabits another persons body while they are asleep.
If I placed Livia in a character category, she would be right next to Alina Starkov from Leigh Bardugos <i>Grisha</i> trilogy. Over the course of the book, shes on the downside; on the plus side, it fits so well with Livias character and past. Livia lived her entire life as a tunneler, trying to survive day by day until she meets Professor Hesse, where she is introduced to her potential as a dreamstrider and the good she can do for the empire for her citizenship and freedom.
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><img src="http://bookwyrmingthoughts.bookblog.io/wp-content/uploads/sites/317/2015/11/freedom.gif"; width="320" height="128" border="0" /></div>
Unlike Alina Starkov (Alina is too mopey over Mal, okay?), Livias mope is more realistic. She has big dreams and strives to achieve them, crushes over her best friend (its harder for males to be one of my best friends that circle is <em>elite</em>), secretly sweet, and insecure/cautious about many things.
But enough about Livia and how shes secretly awesome even though she will never <i>ever</i> admit it. I didnt feel very into <em>Dreamstrider</em> the passphrases in the Land of the Iron Winds are written in a very rhythmic style, but I didnt care too much aside from the fact it sounds poetic. But poetry and I dont get along, and this is why I will never read Ellen Hopkins. I have nothing against the author, though.
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><img src="http://bookwyrmingthoughts.bookblog.io/wp-content/uploads/sites/317/2015/11/I-Know-Nothing-Apparently-On-Game-Of-Thrones.gif"; width="320" height="179" border="0" /></div>
Ellen Hopkins aside, dreaming is a big deal it plays a part in almost everything in the Barstadt Empire, but it felt more like a cultural thing (like Greek myths are to Greeks). Im taking it all in, but the whole dreaming thing? Its just there, and the only big deal seemed to be using dreaming in detective work and finding out information. The whole point of the book is really just Livia becoming more confident in not just herself, but her abilities. By the end of the book, I felt satisfied, but I just wanted more from the book.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/arc-review-dreamstrider-by-lindsay-smi/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Joe Goodhart (27 KP) rated Wonder Woman & Justice League Dark: The Witching Hour in Books
Nov 30, 2020
Marvel continues to push me away, as the comics market is littered with bad editorial decisions and choices. With me, all it has succeeded in doing was alienating me and reminding me of how much I love DC (despite the trainwreck of lateness that is DOOMSDAY CLOCK)... especially the character of Superman!
That said, I have been playing catch-up with a number of titles, as I try to determine which ones I will specifically be subscribed to on Comixology. Besides the Bendis-helmed SUPERMAN books, I am also leaning toward JUSTICE LEAGUE DARK as the next one to add to the list. It was with the conclusion of WW & JLD: THE WITCHING HOUR that the decision to add JLD to my subscription list was cemented!
I knew of Tynion's name prior to undertake the reading of it. Not really familiar to his writing style, just that his name carries a lot of weight in the comic world. Having witnessed his writing here, I can see where that aforementioned "weight" comes from. Seriously, this was a solid read, from beginning to end!
I feel that Zatanna is a character that most people don't seem to get write, which seems odd unto itself. However, here, she was frikkin' brilliant! Strong-willed, with a good heart and moral compass. I wasn't sure how I would like her without her token "top hat, coattails and fishnets", but I did (partly due also to recent mental changes on my part, as I find myself looking at the female characters, in both the DC Universe as well as Marvel, as more than just "fanboy eye candy")! With Tynion's writing, as well as the uber-talents of Jesus Merino, Amanuela Lupachino, Alvaro Martinez Bueno, Fernando Blanco and Miguel Mendonca on art, Zee was truly in good hands!
Swamp Thing was another who I wasn't sure how he would be handled by someone other than Alan Moore (who, whether he's a kook now or not now, was still one of the best ST writers, outside of ST's creator, Len Wein). My fears and initial apprehension were quickly dispelled, as Tynion, along with the aforementioned artists on this story, turned out out one hell of a good Earth Elemental! I even found myself warming to the faux floral dreds that Swampy was sportin'!
Besides my excitement at how well Zee and ST were handled, the rest of the players, including Wonder Woman, were written well, with attention given to have them be more than just comic tropes. All the characters contributed to making this a tense, magic-heavy story, with ramifications carrying over into the JLD regular series.
And one last thing.. Circe. Not really a spoiler, just mentioning her. I always thought her character was kinda meh, especially the garb she had been given over the years. However, here, Tynion did awesome things with her, writing (and dressing) in a manner that would not be out of place in SANDMAN! Soooo COOL!!!
Look, if you like your brain to be crushed by angst and characters who keep getting rebooted what seems like every/every other year, then, by all means, continue to ride the Marvel Trainwreck. If you want a story you can sink your teeth into, then look no further. This truly one I can not recommend enought!
That said, I have been playing catch-up with a number of titles, as I try to determine which ones I will specifically be subscribed to on Comixology. Besides the Bendis-helmed SUPERMAN books, I am also leaning toward JUSTICE LEAGUE DARK as the next one to add to the list. It was with the conclusion of WW & JLD: THE WITCHING HOUR that the decision to add JLD to my subscription list was cemented!
I knew of Tynion's name prior to undertake the reading of it. Not really familiar to his writing style, just that his name carries a lot of weight in the comic world. Having witnessed his writing here, I can see where that aforementioned "weight" comes from. Seriously, this was a solid read, from beginning to end!
I feel that Zatanna is a character that most people don't seem to get write, which seems odd unto itself. However, here, she was frikkin' brilliant! Strong-willed, with a good heart and moral compass. I wasn't sure how I would like her without her token "top hat, coattails and fishnets", but I did (partly due also to recent mental changes on my part, as I find myself looking at the female characters, in both the DC Universe as well as Marvel, as more than just "fanboy eye candy")! With Tynion's writing, as well as the uber-talents of Jesus Merino, Amanuela Lupachino, Alvaro Martinez Bueno, Fernando Blanco and Miguel Mendonca on art, Zee was truly in good hands!
Swamp Thing was another who I wasn't sure how he would be handled by someone other than Alan Moore (who, whether he's a kook now or not now, was still one of the best ST writers, outside of ST's creator, Len Wein). My fears and initial apprehension were quickly dispelled, as Tynion, along with the aforementioned artists on this story, turned out out one hell of a good Earth Elemental! I even found myself warming to the faux floral dreds that Swampy was sportin'!
Besides my excitement at how well Zee and ST were handled, the rest of the players, including Wonder Woman, were written well, with attention given to have them be more than just comic tropes. All the characters contributed to making this a tense, magic-heavy story, with ramifications carrying over into the JLD regular series.
And one last thing.. Circe. Not really a spoiler, just mentioning her. I always thought her character was kinda meh, especially the garb she had been given over the years. However, here, Tynion did awesome things with her, writing (and dressing) in a manner that would not be out of place in SANDMAN! Soooo COOL!!!
Look, if you like your brain to be crushed by angst and characters who keep getting rebooted what seems like every/every other year, then, by all means, continue to ride the Marvel Trainwreck. If you want a story you can sink your teeth into, then look no further. This truly one I can not recommend enought!
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Stuber (2019) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
An action comedy that takes you for a ride.
Kumail Nanjiani hits my funny bone… again.
Like no other genre, comedy is highly personal and one person’s comedy gold is another person’s comedy nightmare (“Mrs Brown’s Boys” anyone?). Similarly there are some comedians that I really engage with and others that really irritate. For me, stand-up comedian Kumail Nanjiani falls into the former category. Although having had bit-part roles in many films over the last ten years, it was his starring role playing… well… basically, himself in “The Big Sick” that first caught my attention. Here he repeats that starring role and delivers a deft performance as the shy and ‘scaredy-cat’ driver making a pick-up he won’t forget in a hurry.
He’s paired here, in an unusual ‘buddy cop’/’not buddy cop’ manner, with “Spectre” bad-guy Dave Bautista, a giant of a man who displays a knack for comic delivery (albeit as the straight man) that I was not expecting.
The seeing-eye Uber man.
Bautista plays cop Vic Manning who is in an obsessive pursuit of bad-guy Oka Tedjo (Iko Uwais). Suffering from increasingly bad eyesight, Manning undergoes laser eye surgery on the very day that the “big tip-off” comes through. Being almost blind, Manning hires (read kidnaps) Stu to be his unwilling partner in a battle that puts Stu as well as Manning’s attractive artist daughter (Natalie Morales) in harm’s way.
There’s comedy to be mined in the blind cop set-up…. it’s similar in some ways to the Gene Wilder/Richard Pryor comedy “See No Evil, Hear No Evil”.
Surprisingly visceral action.
We all know that Bautista can do a good fight scene. That fight onboard a train in “Spectre“, with Daniel Craig‘s Bond, was almost on a par with the famous Connery/Shaw fight in “From Russia With Love”. Here, Bautista gets to brawl with gusto in a few scenes.
In general, the “action” in this “action-comedy” is pretty full-on and entertaining. The opening scenes in particular, with Manning and officer Sara Morris (the ever-watchable Karen Gillan) taking on Tedjo in an upper floor of a high-rise building are exciting and dramatic. This is due in no small part to the acrobatic capabilities of Iko Uwais. (Uwais is an Indonesian champion at the martial art Silat… and it shows).
Slick writing that delivers some great lines.
The script is by Tripper Clancy, with this being his first US film after penning two previous German films. And it really made me laugh a lot, both in terms of some of the set up scenes (one in an animal hospital is particularly funny) and in some of the dialogue. As an example, when pushed to the limit of his stress, Stu wails “So I’m gonna have to get cheap student therapists who quote white guys with Indian names and tell me that I should meditate. I…DO…MEDITATE!!!!”.
Also top-notch is the use of music in the film. A use of the Hollies classic “Air that I breathe” during the above mentioned Animal Hospital scene was brilliant.
Summary
Comedies need to make me laugh. This one did. Repeatedly. It even made the illustrious Mrs Movie Man laugh too. Repeatedly. As such “Stuber” comes with a “recommended” from me.
Like no other genre, comedy is highly personal and one person’s comedy gold is another person’s comedy nightmare (“Mrs Brown’s Boys” anyone?). Similarly there are some comedians that I really engage with and others that really irritate. For me, stand-up comedian Kumail Nanjiani falls into the former category. Although having had bit-part roles in many films over the last ten years, it was his starring role playing… well… basically, himself in “The Big Sick” that first caught my attention. Here he repeats that starring role and delivers a deft performance as the shy and ‘scaredy-cat’ driver making a pick-up he won’t forget in a hurry.
He’s paired here, in an unusual ‘buddy cop’/’not buddy cop’ manner, with “Spectre” bad-guy Dave Bautista, a giant of a man who displays a knack for comic delivery (albeit as the straight man) that I was not expecting.
The seeing-eye Uber man.
Bautista plays cop Vic Manning who is in an obsessive pursuit of bad-guy Oka Tedjo (Iko Uwais). Suffering from increasingly bad eyesight, Manning undergoes laser eye surgery on the very day that the “big tip-off” comes through. Being almost blind, Manning hires (read kidnaps) Stu to be his unwilling partner in a battle that puts Stu as well as Manning’s attractive artist daughter (Natalie Morales) in harm’s way.
There’s comedy to be mined in the blind cop set-up…. it’s similar in some ways to the Gene Wilder/Richard Pryor comedy “See No Evil, Hear No Evil”.
Surprisingly visceral action.
We all know that Bautista can do a good fight scene. That fight onboard a train in “Spectre“, with Daniel Craig‘s Bond, was almost on a par with the famous Connery/Shaw fight in “From Russia With Love”. Here, Bautista gets to brawl with gusto in a few scenes.
In general, the “action” in this “action-comedy” is pretty full-on and entertaining. The opening scenes in particular, with Manning and officer Sara Morris (the ever-watchable Karen Gillan) taking on Tedjo in an upper floor of a high-rise building are exciting and dramatic. This is due in no small part to the acrobatic capabilities of Iko Uwais. (Uwais is an Indonesian champion at the martial art Silat… and it shows).
Slick writing that delivers some great lines.
The script is by Tripper Clancy, with this being his first US film after penning two previous German films. And it really made me laugh a lot, both in terms of some of the set up scenes (one in an animal hospital is particularly funny) and in some of the dialogue. As an example, when pushed to the limit of his stress, Stu wails “So I’m gonna have to get cheap student therapists who quote white guys with Indian names and tell me that I should meditate. I…DO…MEDITATE!!!!”.
Also top-notch is the use of music in the film. A use of the Hollies classic “Air that I breathe” during the above mentioned Animal Hospital scene was brilliant.
Summary
Comedies need to make me laugh. This one did. Repeatedly. It even made the illustrious Mrs Movie Man laugh too. Repeatedly. As such “Stuber” comes with a “recommended” from me.
AmyBee (4 KP) rated Encyclopedia of Unusual Sex Practices in Books
Sep 6, 2018
This is a well entertaining book, packed full of some of the most bonkers things that people apparently do to one another in the bedroom. And the garden, and at work etc etc.
Prior to being given this book (unironically, by the most sexually adventurous man I've ever had the pleasure of...ahem.. moving swiftly on.), anyway, before he gave it to me (fnar!!) I always thought that I was pretty clued-up and knowledgeable when it came to matters of the naughty bits, but committing ruderies isn't *just* all about getting your kit off and bumping uglies...oh no... there are acts described between these sheets (of the book!!) that will make your eyes pop out.
Other body parts may also begin to protrude, if your personal kink features here (and if it doesn't, then you must be into some UBER freaky deaky shizz! .. and I'd like to meet you! *winkyface*)
.
I was a tad shocked to find that I hadn't heard of one or two of the "entries" (fnar) which is something that I didn't think at all likely before I opened it up (fnarrr). I'm not claiming to be the goddess of sex by any means but I was thrown right off guard by concepts such as "Taphephilia" which refers to "those who are aroused by being buried alive" ...
erm, say what now??
Do these people actually exist because quite frankly, that sounds made up.
Who am I kidding, we all know full well that there are some strange, strange people out there and if you think about it, you can't deny the fact that there truly isn't one single thing in existence that *doesn't* sexually arouse somebody, somewhere.
As the saying goes "there's no accounting for taste" and that has never been truer, as you will learn by page 4 at the latest.
On the flip side of all the strange and sexy fun and games (and criminal offences), there are some totally mundane entries. Along with describing all the more familiar concepts such as "bisexualism" and sex organs and all our favourite hanky-panky positions, there is also a (somewhat outdated) list of contraceptive methods. Given that the book was first published in 1992 however, I think the archaic qualities of the publication can be forgiven.
The "150+ Original Illustrations" are referenced several times at the beginning, as well as in the sub-title, but honestly, don't get too excited about this.
A porno mag in disguise it definitely isn't.
If you don't go in expecting visual titillation then you shouldn't be *too* disappointed when your expectations are not only met, but exceeded. the sketches ('cos that's all they really are), are crude (but not at all in the fun sense of the word), bland and banal in the extreme. Calling them "original" was a nice bit of editorial sneakiness, that's for sure.
I see what you did there Brenda Love (if she's not a 70's porn star, then that name is TOTALLY wasted on her, amirite?
There are some bad drawings of penises, vaginas in various states of open-ness but there's an equal amount of "Bush" in all examples. This is an outstanding example of the book's old age as we all know, pubic hair was rendered extinct circa 2001AD, so a picture of it in 2018 outside of a museum is likely to cause widespread confusion.
Overall, this is a hugely entertaining and informative book for anyone interested in anything at all to do with sex, which realistically, is the majority of us to some extent (everyone else is probably lying through their teeth).
Also a good reference book for budding sexologists (such as me), wannabe sex therapists (although a degree is probably also required for this profession), or anyone working in any part of the sex industry. (experience equals qualifications).
Prior to being given this book (unironically, by the most sexually adventurous man I've ever had the pleasure of...ahem.. moving swiftly on.), anyway, before he gave it to me (fnar!!) I always thought that I was pretty clued-up and knowledgeable when it came to matters of the naughty bits, but committing ruderies isn't *just* all about getting your kit off and bumping uglies...oh no... there are acts described between these sheets (of the book!!) that will make your eyes pop out.
Other body parts may also begin to protrude, if your personal kink features here (and if it doesn't, then you must be into some UBER freaky deaky shizz! .. and I'd like to meet you! *winkyface*)
.
I was a tad shocked to find that I hadn't heard of one or two of the "entries" (fnar) which is something that I didn't think at all likely before I opened it up (fnarrr). I'm not claiming to be the goddess of sex by any means but I was thrown right off guard by concepts such as "Taphephilia" which refers to "those who are aroused by being buried alive" ...
erm, say what now??
Do these people actually exist because quite frankly, that sounds made up.
Who am I kidding, we all know full well that there are some strange, strange people out there and if you think about it, you can't deny the fact that there truly isn't one single thing in existence that *doesn't* sexually arouse somebody, somewhere.
As the saying goes "there's no accounting for taste" and that has never been truer, as you will learn by page 4 at the latest.
On the flip side of all the strange and sexy fun and games (and criminal offences), there are some totally mundane entries. Along with describing all the more familiar concepts such as "bisexualism" and sex organs and all our favourite hanky-panky positions, there is also a (somewhat outdated) list of contraceptive methods. Given that the book was first published in 1992 however, I think the archaic qualities of the publication can be forgiven.
The "150+ Original Illustrations" are referenced several times at the beginning, as well as in the sub-title, but honestly, don't get too excited about this.
A porno mag in disguise it definitely isn't.
If you don't go in expecting visual titillation then you shouldn't be *too* disappointed when your expectations are not only met, but exceeded. the sketches ('cos that's all they really are), are crude (but not at all in the fun sense of the word), bland and banal in the extreme. Calling them "original" was a nice bit of editorial sneakiness, that's for sure.
I see what you did there Brenda Love (if she's not a 70's porn star, then that name is TOTALLY wasted on her, amirite?
There are some bad drawings of penises, vaginas in various states of open-ness but there's an equal amount of "Bush" in all examples. This is an outstanding example of the book's old age as we all know, pubic hair was rendered extinct circa 2001AD, so a picture of it in 2018 outside of a museum is likely to cause widespread confusion.
Overall, this is a hugely entertaining and informative book for anyone interested in anything at all to do with sex, which realistically, is the majority of us to some extent (everyone else is probably lying through their teeth).
Also a good reference book for budding sexologists (such as me), wannabe sex therapists (although a degree is probably also required for this profession), or anyone working in any part of the sex industry. (experience equals qualifications).
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Equalizer 2 (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
A “Good Guy” meting out justice in a bad way.
There’s something really satisfying about seeing our ‘hero’ Robert McCall giving bad ‘uns a bloody nose (and far worse) as immediate punishment for a crime committed. My parent’s pre-war generation would wax lyrical about the days when police officers or teachers could give a kid a “good box around the ears” as a lesson for a minor infringement. (“Ah, the good old days…. That’ll learn ‘im”!). But equally there’s also the queasy feeling here that this is a vigilante being judge, jury and executioner. Thank GOODNESS then that it’s Denzel Washington and he’s OBVIOUSLY a good guy that will never get it wrong!
Washington returns here as the righter of wrongs, now working as a Lyft driver in Boston (clearly Uber either lost the bidding war or they were not considered to be as cool a brand anymore). Through his job he crosses paths with various troubled souls and is often able to help: sometimes with just an encouraging word; sometimes with more physical activity! By way of validating his good guy credentials, he also takes under his wing Miles (Ashton Sanders) – a local black kid at risk of being dragged into the Boston gang scene.
But this is all window-dressing for the main plot, involving bad guys (for reasons that escaped me) tidying up a lot of CIA loose ends in Brussels in a very brutal way. In charge of the investigation is Robert’s ex-boss Susan Plummer (Melissa Leo) and to help out further Robert has to ‘reappear’ to his ex-partner Dave York (Pedro Pascal). As in the first film, events lead to an explosive western-style showdown.
Directed again by Antoine Fuqua, the film oozes style from the impressive opening shots of a Turkish train, where the cinematography by Bourne-regular Oliver Wood is exceptional. The action scenes are well-executed, and includes a superb science experiment that will puzzle any viewer who thinks “hang on a minute – flour doesn’t burn”!
Reading again my review of the original film, I went off on a rant about extreme screen violence in sub-18 certificate films. There is certainly – as the British film censors (the BBFC) describe it – “strong violence” in this film, with some pretty brutal murder scenes. If anything though I thought the violence was a little less gratuitous this time around, which I welcome.
Denzel is the greatest asset of this film though. He acts up a hurricane (literally), and without his calm and powerful presence at the heart of the film, this would just be A.N.Other generic thriller. It’s also great that this time around the excellent Melissa Leo gets more screen time, as does her husband played by Bill “Independence Day” Pullman. (Is it just me that gets Mr Pullman confused with the late Mr Paxton? I spent all of this film thinking “Oh how sad” though all his scenes before I realised I was grieving for the wrong guy!). In terms of mistaken identity, this film has another in that a key villain Resnik looks far too much like Mark Wahlberg, but is actually Canadian actor Jonathan Scarfe.
Where the film stumbled for me was in having too many parallel “good deed” sub-plots. One in particular – you’ll know the one – feels completely superfluous, beggars belief and could have been excised completely for the DVD deleted scenes.
Do you need to have seen the first film? No, not really. There is exposition about McCall’s back-story, but if this was covered in the first film then I had completely forgotten it. It certainly didn’t detract from this as a stand-alone film.
A cut-above the norm, Washington’s solid performance makes this an entertaining night out at the flicks.
Washington returns here as the righter of wrongs, now working as a Lyft driver in Boston (clearly Uber either lost the bidding war or they were not considered to be as cool a brand anymore). Through his job he crosses paths with various troubled souls and is often able to help: sometimes with just an encouraging word; sometimes with more physical activity! By way of validating his good guy credentials, he also takes under his wing Miles (Ashton Sanders) – a local black kid at risk of being dragged into the Boston gang scene.
But this is all window-dressing for the main plot, involving bad guys (for reasons that escaped me) tidying up a lot of CIA loose ends in Brussels in a very brutal way. In charge of the investigation is Robert’s ex-boss Susan Plummer (Melissa Leo) and to help out further Robert has to ‘reappear’ to his ex-partner Dave York (Pedro Pascal). As in the first film, events lead to an explosive western-style showdown.
Directed again by Antoine Fuqua, the film oozes style from the impressive opening shots of a Turkish train, where the cinematography by Bourne-regular Oliver Wood is exceptional. The action scenes are well-executed, and includes a superb science experiment that will puzzle any viewer who thinks “hang on a minute – flour doesn’t burn”!
Reading again my review of the original film, I went off on a rant about extreme screen violence in sub-18 certificate films. There is certainly – as the British film censors (the BBFC) describe it – “strong violence” in this film, with some pretty brutal murder scenes. If anything though I thought the violence was a little less gratuitous this time around, which I welcome.
Denzel is the greatest asset of this film though. He acts up a hurricane (literally), and without his calm and powerful presence at the heart of the film, this would just be A.N.Other generic thriller. It’s also great that this time around the excellent Melissa Leo gets more screen time, as does her husband played by Bill “Independence Day” Pullman. (Is it just me that gets Mr Pullman confused with the late Mr Paxton? I spent all of this film thinking “Oh how sad” though all his scenes before I realised I was grieving for the wrong guy!). In terms of mistaken identity, this film has another in that a key villain Resnik looks far too much like Mark Wahlberg, but is actually Canadian actor Jonathan Scarfe.
Where the film stumbled for me was in having too many parallel “good deed” sub-plots. One in particular – you’ll know the one – feels completely superfluous, beggars belief and could have been excised completely for the DVD deleted scenes.
Do you need to have seen the first film? No, not really. There is exposition about McCall’s back-story, but if this was covered in the first film then I had completely forgotten it. It certainly didn’t detract from this as a stand-alone film.
A cut-above the norm, Washington’s solid performance makes this an entertaining night out at the flicks.
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Prodigal in Books
Jun 7, 2018
(This review can be found on my blog <a href="http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.com/">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a>).
Wow...just wow! The feels in this book were just wow! Prodigal by Rektok Ross has definitely become my favorite book this year. In fact, it may've become my favorite book ever, seriously. I had my reservations about this book being as it is Christian fiction. Although I am Christian, I don't like books that are too preachy because it's like they are preachy to the choir. However, this book was not preachy but helped get the message across. It is just amazing!
The title didn't really give me much to go on. In fact, if I'm being honest, when I first heard of the book, the title didn't catch my attention at all.
The cover is definitely original; I'll give it that that. However, like the title it's a bit plain. However, the sheep can be a symbolism in Christianity. Prodigal also touches on the story of the Prodigal Son which is another reason I believe the sheep is on the cover.
The world building was fantastically done! Ross does a great job of portraying a non-believing teen. Ross also portrays the high school relationship drama very well. I actually felt like I was back in high school while reading this book.
The pacing was set superbly! This was one of those books that I didn't want to put down because I had to know what would happen next. Unfortunately, life got in the way sometimes, and I did have to put the book down, but I would pick it up as soon as I got a chance.
The plot was so sweet! Lexy moves to a new state which means a new school her senior year, meets the uber hot quarterback, and they fall in love. However, there's some problems which means their relationship does suffer. Along the way, Lexy finds God. As I've said before, this book isn't over the top preachy. It's not subtle when it comes to God, but it's not in your face either. Oh, there weren't any plot twists that I noticed, but that didn't affect the book.
The characters all felt very realistic to me. I started out not liking Lexy because I didn't like the way she treated and spoke to her mother. However, Lexy began to grow on me, and I soon felt what Lexy felt when it came to what all was going on around her. I also liked Ash. I like how Ross portrayed him as a typical Christian teen and not one who was overly religious. Ash also had his demons so to speak. I even liked Blythe even though she was the resident mean girl. There's no excuse as to why Blythe behaved the way she did, but towards the ending of the book, it's easier to understand why she's the way she is.
I enjoyed the dialogue and the writing in this book. Again, I want to stress that this book doesn't just focus on God and Christianity. If anything, that's more of a minor subplot. There's no real violence in this book and only one swear word (the word ass).
If there's only one book you'll ever pick up, I'd highly suggest Prodigal by Rektok Ross. This book was so much more than I was expecting and left me with so many feels! If I had enough money, I'd buy this book for friends, family, strangers, readers of my blog, and well, everyone really! This book has it all - a great cast of characters, a world that pulls the reader right in, a fantastic story line, and a great message!
I'd recommend this book to those aged 14+ who are believers of God, non-believers, those struggling with their faith, those that are new believers, and just everyone in general.
(I received a free paperback copy from the author in exchange for a fair and honest review).
Wow...just wow! The feels in this book were just wow! Prodigal by Rektok Ross has definitely become my favorite book this year. In fact, it may've become my favorite book ever, seriously. I had my reservations about this book being as it is Christian fiction. Although I am Christian, I don't like books that are too preachy because it's like they are preachy to the choir. However, this book was not preachy but helped get the message across. It is just amazing!
The title didn't really give me much to go on. In fact, if I'm being honest, when I first heard of the book, the title didn't catch my attention at all.
The cover is definitely original; I'll give it that that. However, like the title it's a bit plain. However, the sheep can be a symbolism in Christianity. Prodigal also touches on the story of the Prodigal Son which is another reason I believe the sheep is on the cover.
The world building was fantastically done! Ross does a great job of portraying a non-believing teen. Ross also portrays the high school relationship drama very well. I actually felt like I was back in high school while reading this book.
The pacing was set superbly! This was one of those books that I didn't want to put down because I had to know what would happen next. Unfortunately, life got in the way sometimes, and I did have to put the book down, but I would pick it up as soon as I got a chance.
The plot was so sweet! Lexy moves to a new state which means a new school her senior year, meets the uber hot quarterback, and they fall in love. However, there's some problems which means their relationship does suffer. Along the way, Lexy finds God. As I've said before, this book isn't over the top preachy. It's not subtle when it comes to God, but it's not in your face either. Oh, there weren't any plot twists that I noticed, but that didn't affect the book.
The characters all felt very realistic to me. I started out not liking Lexy because I didn't like the way she treated and spoke to her mother. However, Lexy began to grow on me, and I soon felt what Lexy felt when it came to what all was going on around her. I also liked Ash. I like how Ross portrayed him as a typical Christian teen and not one who was overly religious. Ash also had his demons so to speak. I even liked Blythe even though she was the resident mean girl. There's no excuse as to why Blythe behaved the way she did, but towards the ending of the book, it's easier to understand why she's the way she is.
I enjoyed the dialogue and the writing in this book. Again, I want to stress that this book doesn't just focus on God and Christianity. If anything, that's more of a minor subplot. There's no real violence in this book and only one swear word (the word ass).
If there's only one book you'll ever pick up, I'd highly suggest Prodigal by Rektok Ross. This book was so much more than I was expecting and left me with so many feels! If I had enough money, I'd buy this book for friends, family, strangers, readers of my blog, and well, everyone really! This book has it all - a great cast of characters, a world that pulls the reader right in, a fantastic story line, and a great message!
I'd recommend this book to those aged 14+ who are believers of God, non-believers, those struggling with their faith, those that are new believers, and just everyone in general.
(I received a free paperback copy from the author in exchange for a fair and honest review).
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Hustlers (2019) in Movies
Sep 19, 2019
Bland and boring DESPITE J-Lo's performance
When I first saw the trailer for the Jennifer Lopez "strippers get back at scummy Wall Street-types" film, HUSTLERS, I wasn't at all interested in seeing it But then I got wind of strong early reviews with some (very faint) Oscar talk about J-Lo's performance in this film, so I thought I'd check it out.
I should have trusted my instincts.
What a lame disappointment this film is. It starts out flat and then flattens out even further to produce a movie that starts at one (fairly low) level and then stays there the entire time.
HUSTLERS stars Constance Wu (CRAZY, RICH ASIANS) as a a young stripper who is taught the ropes of the stripping game by uber-stripper Jennifer Lopez (if you don't know who this is, then go ahead and skip to the rating of this film at the bottom of this review and move on). When J-Lo's character, Ramona, comes up with an idea to get back at the scummy Wall Street types AND make some money along the way, Wu's character, Destiny (of course) is a reluctant participant becoming - over time - the leader.
A potentially interesting, "based on True Events" story (this film is based on the real life exploits of Ramona as described in a New York Magazine story), this film just falls flat and I put the blame for this in 2 places.
Lets start with Director and Writer of the screenplay, Lorene Scafaria (SEEKING A FRIEND AT THE END OF THE WORLD). She wrote - and directed - this film like it is a modest-scaled, low-key independent film (much like the very good SEEKING A FRIEND...), but the second that this film cast Jennifer Lopez as the flashy leader Ramona, words like modest and low-key should have been thrown out the window but Scafaria chose not to do this, she downplays the best asset in her movie and plunks most of her effort on a lead who could not match Lopez star power wattage.
And that lead is Constance Wu - the other weak link in this chain. I thought she was "just fine" in CRAZY RICH ASIANS, blending into the scenery when more flamboyant personalities were on the screen (in CRA it was Michelle Yeoh's "tiger mom") and she blends into the scenery whenever J-Lo is on the screen in this film - and that just doesn't work here. She needed to step up and step out and match J-Lo blow for blow, but she backs up and backs away in these crucial moments, so when her character is on the screen alone - trying to get the audience's sympathies - I just didn't care.
What I did care about is Jennifer Lopez's performance as Ramona. She is the brightest spot in this film and brings her star power and natural charisma to the screen. The ultimate problem with this performance (and NO, it is NOT Oscar-worthy) is it feels that she is fighting the "low-key" headwinds of writer/director Scafaria the entire time.
Former Disney star Keke Palmer and current RIVERDALE star Lili Reinhart bring some fun and energy to the screen as the 3rd and 4th partners in this quartet of stripper Robin Hoods, but they are all too often sentenced to strut around in the background in tight outfits. I would have loved to see a movie with Lopez, Palmer and Reinhart that was more "out there" and less restrained.
Finally, two very good actresses - Julia Styles and Mercedes Ruehl - are in this film in "what-the-heck-are they-doing-in-this-film" roles that are underwritten and underutilized the talents of these actresses - another missed opportunity by Writer/Director Scafaria.
I've heard this film called a "female empowerment" film or "the stripper version of Goodfellas" and I couldn't disagree more. The only "empowering" part of this film is when the credits rolled and I could leave.
Letter Grade: C
4 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
I should have trusted my instincts.
What a lame disappointment this film is. It starts out flat and then flattens out even further to produce a movie that starts at one (fairly low) level and then stays there the entire time.
HUSTLERS stars Constance Wu (CRAZY, RICH ASIANS) as a a young stripper who is taught the ropes of the stripping game by uber-stripper Jennifer Lopez (if you don't know who this is, then go ahead and skip to the rating of this film at the bottom of this review and move on). When J-Lo's character, Ramona, comes up with an idea to get back at the scummy Wall Street types AND make some money along the way, Wu's character, Destiny (of course) is a reluctant participant becoming - over time - the leader.
A potentially interesting, "based on True Events" story (this film is based on the real life exploits of Ramona as described in a New York Magazine story), this film just falls flat and I put the blame for this in 2 places.
Lets start with Director and Writer of the screenplay, Lorene Scafaria (SEEKING A FRIEND AT THE END OF THE WORLD). She wrote - and directed - this film like it is a modest-scaled, low-key independent film (much like the very good SEEKING A FRIEND...), but the second that this film cast Jennifer Lopez as the flashy leader Ramona, words like modest and low-key should have been thrown out the window but Scafaria chose not to do this, she downplays the best asset in her movie and plunks most of her effort on a lead who could not match Lopez star power wattage.
And that lead is Constance Wu - the other weak link in this chain. I thought she was "just fine" in CRAZY RICH ASIANS, blending into the scenery when more flamboyant personalities were on the screen (in CRA it was Michelle Yeoh's "tiger mom") and she blends into the scenery whenever J-Lo is on the screen in this film - and that just doesn't work here. She needed to step up and step out and match J-Lo blow for blow, but she backs up and backs away in these crucial moments, so when her character is on the screen alone - trying to get the audience's sympathies - I just didn't care.
What I did care about is Jennifer Lopez's performance as Ramona. She is the brightest spot in this film and brings her star power and natural charisma to the screen. The ultimate problem with this performance (and NO, it is NOT Oscar-worthy) is it feels that she is fighting the "low-key" headwinds of writer/director Scafaria the entire time.
Former Disney star Keke Palmer and current RIVERDALE star Lili Reinhart bring some fun and energy to the screen as the 3rd and 4th partners in this quartet of stripper Robin Hoods, but they are all too often sentenced to strut around in the background in tight outfits. I would have loved to see a movie with Lopez, Palmer and Reinhart that was more "out there" and less restrained.
Finally, two very good actresses - Julia Styles and Mercedes Ruehl - are in this film in "what-the-heck-are they-doing-in-this-film" roles that are underwritten and underutilized the talents of these actresses - another missed opportunity by Writer/Director Scafaria.
I've heard this film called a "female empowerment" film or "the stripper version of Goodfellas" and I couldn't disagree more. The only "empowering" part of this film is when the credits rolled and I could leave.
Letter Grade: C
4 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Django Unchained (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Writer-director Quentin Tarantino has returned in a big way with “Django Unchained” his homage to spaghetti Westerns. The film stars Jamie Foxx as a slave named Django who is part of a convoy of slaves being transported through Texas two years before the start of the Civil War. Django is unaware that his life is about to take a monumental turn when his caravan encounters Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz) one dark evening. Schultz wishes to purchase Django, and when his current owners make the mistake of threatening the good doctor, he quickly turns the table on them and sets Django and his fellow slaves free. Schultz reveals to Django that he is in fact a bounty hunter and needs him to help identify three potential targets. Since Django last lived at the plantation where the three targets worked as overseers, he is essential to Schultz’s hunt. Schultz offers to free Django and pay him $75.00 for his assistance and the duo set off on their mission.
Some truly action-packed and hysterical scenes later, Schultz realizes that Django is an absolute natural for the business and decides to take him on for the winter as an assistant, even going so far as to offer to share one third of his bounties with them. In return, Schultz also offers to help Django reclaim his wife who was sold to a plantation somewhere in Tennessee. Schultz rationalizes that to show up now would be extremely dangerous, therefore the duo must wait out the winter earning money before embarking on their rescue mission.
The hard work of the team pays off and they learn that Django’s wife has been sold to one of the largest plantations under the ownership of Calvin Candie (Leonardo di Caprio), a despotic plantation owner who is as greedy as he is cruel. Despite having more money than he could ever use, Calvin likes to force certain members of his slaves to fight to the death. Schultz and Django decide to use this angle as their chance to get close to Calvin so they can verify that Django’s wife is indeed at the plantation and determine what it will take to buy or obtain her freedom. This proves to be no easy task as not only is Calvin surrounded by an army hired guns, but he also has a very surly and suspicious head of a household named Stephen (Samuel L. Jackson), eyeing every move that the strangers make and questioning their actions.
What follows is a hyperkinetic storm of violence, fury, music, and color in the true Tarantino style. The director is never one to shy away from blood and violence and there are tons of it in the film. The amazing thing about it is despite being graphic and, in some cases, borderline gratuitous, it does not distract from the enjoyment of the film and its characters. The performances were absolutely amazing, especially the work of Waltz, Foxx, and diCaprio. Jackson also does very solid supporting work as does Don Johnson in his appearance as an uber-racist plantation owner. Waltz worked previously with Tarantino on “Inglorious Bastards”, and this is where the Austrian actor really gained notice by Hollywood. This time out he gives a captivating performance as the complex killer with a heart of gold.
While I understand Tarantino’s style is not for everybody, it’s hard not to be impressed with the way he is able to paint a picture, fill it with interesting and quirky characters, and quickly tear it all apart as things descend into utter chaos and destruction. You alternate between laughing, cheering, and being shocked all the way through the film’s nearly three-hour runtime. Yet rarely did the film ever seem to drag on unnecessarily. There was some loss of pacing as the characters converged on Calvin’s plantation, and some may question some of the character changes or gaps in logic in the film’s finale.
I believe this film is one of the best films of the year. It captured so much of what an action film and drama should have: interesting, complex and well-acted characters, a good story, and plenty of action. Those who are easily offended will want to take note that the language in the film is extremely rough and there is frequent uses of racials lurs, as well is derogatory comments made about the black characters in the film. While this is intended to show the mindset and lifestyle of the 1860s in which the film is set, some may find it unsettling if they go in unprepared.
That being said I can honestly say that this was the most enjoyable Tarantino film I have ever seen and could be his best work to date.
Some truly action-packed and hysterical scenes later, Schultz realizes that Django is an absolute natural for the business and decides to take him on for the winter as an assistant, even going so far as to offer to share one third of his bounties with them. In return, Schultz also offers to help Django reclaim his wife who was sold to a plantation somewhere in Tennessee. Schultz rationalizes that to show up now would be extremely dangerous, therefore the duo must wait out the winter earning money before embarking on their rescue mission.
The hard work of the team pays off and they learn that Django’s wife has been sold to one of the largest plantations under the ownership of Calvin Candie (Leonardo di Caprio), a despotic plantation owner who is as greedy as he is cruel. Despite having more money than he could ever use, Calvin likes to force certain members of his slaves to fight to the death. Schultz and Django decide to use this angle as their chance to get close to Calvin so they can verify that Django’s wife is indeed at the plantation and determine what it will take to buy or obtain her freedom. This proves to be no easy task as not only is Calvin surrounded by an army hired guns, but he also has a very surly and suspicious head of a household named Stephen (Samuel L. Jackson), eyeing every move that the strangers make and questioning their actions.
What follows is a hyperkinetic storm of violence, fury, music, and color in the true Tarantino style. The director is never one to shy away from blood and violence and there are tons of it in the film. The amazing thing about it is despite being graphic and, in some cases, borderline gratuitous, it does not distract from the enjoyment of the film and its characters. The performances were absolutely amazing, especially the work of Waltz, Foxx, and diCaprio. Jackson also does very solid supporting work as does Don Johnson in his appearance as an uber-racist plantation owner. Waltz worked previously with Tarantino on “Inglorious Bastards”, and this is where the Austrian actor really gained notice by Hollywood. This time out he gives a captivating performance as the complex killer with a heart of gold.
While I understand Tarantino’s style is not for everybody, it’s hard not to be impressed with the way he is able to paint a picture, fill it with interesting and quirky characters, and quickly tear it all apart as things descend into utter chaos and destruction. You alternate between laughing, cheering, and being shocked all the way through the film’s nearly three-hour runtime. Yet rarely did the film ever seem to drag on unnecessarily. There was some loss of pacing as the characters converged on Calvin’s plantation, and some may question some of the character changes or gaps in logic in the film’s finale.
I believe this film is one of the best films of the year. It captured so much of what an action film and drama should have: interesting, complex and well-acted characters, a good story, and plenty of action. Those who are easily offended will want to take note that the language in the film is extremely rough and there is frequent uses of racials lurs, as well is derogatory comments made about the black characters in the film. While this is intended to show the mindset and lifestyle of the 1860s in which the film is set, some may find it unsettling if they go in unprepared.
That being said I can honestly say that this was the most enjoyable Tarantino film I have ever seen and could be his best work to date.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
When I heard the news last year that Spider-Man was going to be rebooted yet again, I was like “are you freaking serious”? After the successful Toby Maguire trilogy (though the less said about “Spider-Man 3” the better) and the mildly successful “Amazing Spider-Man” duo with Andrew Garfield only finishing in 2014, did we REALLY need another reboot? More dramatic spider biting? More Uncle Ben spouting then dying? The same old – same old, rewarmed in a pan with a bit of red wine added just to stop it feeling so dry and tasteless.
And I still feel the same way. I understand that its more to do with rights ownership between Sony, Marvel and Disney that this got made so quickly…. but in the words of Ian Malcolm “they didn’t stop to think if they should”.
But actually, although I still don’t really approve of it, they’ve done a pretty good job in rebooting in a different manner. I commented in my review for “The Amazing Spider-Man 2” that that first reboot was “much less earnest and quirkier than the original Tobey Maguire series, and reveling more in the fun to be had around a superhero’s schooldays.” This latest reboot moves even further along that scale, being very much more of a high-school comedy that a pure superhero flick.
Wearing the suit this time is a far more age-appropriate Tom Holland, winner of last year’s BAFTA Rising Star award. And very personable he is too. The suit in question has been jizzed up by Iron Man (Robert Downey Jnr) – perhaps I could have rephrased that better! Because here the Spider-Man story carries on from the brief cameo in “Captain America: Civil War” that crossed Spidey into the mainstream Marvel timeline.
Within the high-school setting, Peter Parker’s geeky, and almost too deliberately multi-racial, gang includes his pal Ned (Jacob Batalon), very funny with a “chair guy” sequence, the unattainable Liz (Laura Harrier) as the love-interest, Betty (the excellent Angourie Rice who made such a great impression in “The Nice Guys” but didn’t really move the meter for me here I’m afraid), Flash (Tony Revolori) and best of all for me the almost horizontally laconic Michelle (Zendaya, of Shoshone heritage) – uber-cool but harbouring a secret crush on Peter.
Chris Evans pops up for comic relief as Captain America doing motivational high-school videos. And older viewers might want to have fun watching out for Tyne Daly: Lacey in the old cop show “Cagney and Lacey”.
But stealing the show in the acting stakes is Michael Keaton as Adrian Toomes (aka “The Vulture”) who could for all the world be auditioning for “Birdman 2”. The well-judged thing about this villain is that he is no hyper-galactic being with superpowers, or a typical “rule the world” Bond villain, but just an ordinary Joe in search of financial profit to keep his family in the manner to which they are accustomed. I really liked that. The script (an army of people, but led by Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley, who also wrote the story) also nicely counterpoints the thin-line between the “good arms dealer” (Tony Stark) and the “bad arms dealer” (Toomes).
The script also very wisely leaps several months into where the reboot could have started. None of the tedious spider biting. No Uncle Ben – just a sly reference to “what Aunt May’s been through”. Now this might confuse anyone not familiar with the Spider-Man story, but the percentage of people in the Western world in that segment must be less than 2%.
There are however also significant character changes that may annoy Spider-Man devotees. Aunt May herself is no longer the frail old lady of previous depictions, but a hot and attractive middle-aged woman (AILF?) played by Marisa Tomei (who does indeed look ‘Mila Kunis‘).
Many of the action scenes are well done, with a scene at the Washington Monument being particularly exciting. It all gets rather overblown though with a later scene aboard the Avenger’s plane. And this scene sums up my problem with many of these films: the superhero characters are pretty well indestructible. You know they are. So the scenes of peril, that might thrill in an Indiana Jones, an M.I. or a Bond film, lack any sort of tension. Even when the protagonist does have a superhero on the ropes, they don’t carry on kicking the proverbial c**p out of them until they are “dead”…. they lay off so the superhero can recover and kick their ass in a few minutes time!
The director is Jon Watts in only his third directorial outing (with only the much praised “Cop Car” to pretty up his CV). With such a lot on his shoulders he does a good job.
At 133 minutes its a tad over-long (I watched this in a double bill with “War for the Planet of the Apes” so my eyes afterwards were 16:9!). But it’s a fun summer flick that both amuses and entertains. If you have the choice between this and Planet of the Apes though for your Saturday night at the movies, I would personally choose the latter.
By the way, in terms of “monkeys” – yep, it’s a Marvel film, of course there are monkeys! One early on in the credits and another one at the end… which is actually very funny indeed.
And I still feel the same way. I understand that its more to do with rights ownership between Sony, Marvel and Disney that this got made so quickly…. but in the words of Ian Malcolm “they didn’t stop to think if they should”.
But actually, although I still don’t really approve of it, they’ve done a pretty good job in rebooting in a different manner. I commented in my review for “The Amazing Spider-Man 2” that that first reboot was “much less earnest and quirkier than the original Tobey Maguire series, and reveling more in the fun to be had around a superhero’s schooldays.” This latest reboot moves even further along that scale, being very much more of a high-school comedy that a pure superhero flick.
Wearing the suit this time is a far more age-appropriate Tom Holland, winner of last year’s BAFTA Rising Star award. And very personable he is too. The suit in question has been jizzed up by Iron Man (Robert Downey Jnr) – perhaps I could have rephrased that better! Because here the Spider-Man story carries on from the brief cameo in “Captain America: Civil War” that crossed Spidey into the mainstream Marvel timeline.
Within the high-school setting, Peter Parker’s geeky, and almost too deliberately multi-racial, gang includes his pal Ned (Jacob Batalon), very funny with a “chair guy” sequence, the unattainable Liz (Laura Harrier) as the love-interest, Betty (the excellent Angourie Rice who made such a great impression in “The Nice Guys” but didn’t really move the meter for me here I’m afraid), Flash (Tony Revolori) and best of all for me the almost horizontally laconic Michelle (Zendaya, of Shoshone heritage) – uber-cool but harbouring a secret crush on Peter.
Chris Evans pops up for comic relief as Captain America doing motivational high-school videos. And older viewers might want to have fun watching out for Tyne Daly: Lacey in the old cop show “Cagney and Lacey”.
But stealing the show in the acting stakes is Michael Keaton as Adrian Toomes (aka “The Vulture”) who could for all the world be auditioning for “Birdman 2”. The well-judged thing about this villain is that he is no hyper-galactic being with superpowers, or a typical “rule the world” Bond villain, but just an ordinary Joe in search of financial profit to keep his family in the manner to which they are accustomed. I really liked that. The script (an army of people, but led by Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley, who also wrote the story) also nicely counterpoints the thin-line between the “good arms dealer” (Tony Stark) and the “bad arms dealer” (Toomes).
The script also very wisely leaps several months into where the reboot could have started. None of the tedious spider biting. No Uncle Ben – just a sly reference to “what Aunt May’s been through”. Now this might confuse anyone not familiar with the Spider-Man story, but the percentage of people in the Western world in that segment must be less than 2%.
There are however also significant character changes that may annoy Spider-Man devotees. Aunt May herself is no longer the frail old lady of previous depictions, but a hot and attractive middle-aged woman (AILF?) played by Marisa Tomei (who does indeed look ‘Mila Kunis‘).
Many of the action scenes are well done, with a scene at the Washington Monument being particularly exciting. It all gets rather overblown though with a later scene aboard the Avenger’s plane. And this scene sums up my problem with many of these films: the superhero characters are pretty well indestructible. You know they are. So the scenes of peril, that might thrill in an Indiana Jones, an M.I. or a Bond film, lack any sort of tension. Even when the protagonist does have a superhero on the ropes, they don’t carry on kicking the proverbial c**p out of them until they are “dead”…. they lay off so the superhero can recover and kick their ass in a few minutes time!
The director is Jon Watts in only his third directorial outing (with only the much praised “Cop Car” to pretty up his CV). With such a lot on his shoulders he does a good job.
At 133 minutes its a tad over-long (I watched this in a double bill with “War for the Planet of the Apes” so my eyes afterwards were 16:9!). But it’s a fun summer flick that both amuses and entertains. If you have the choice between this and Planet of the Apes though for your Saturday night at the movies, I would personally choose the latter.
By the way, in terms of “monkeys” – yep, it’s a Marvel film, of course there are monkeys! One early on in the credits and another one at the end… which is actually very funny indeed.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Star Wars: Episode IX - The Rise of Skywalker (2019) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020
It took me over a month to get around to seeing this last night at the cinema. Not because I didn’t want to see the end of the new trilogy and say goodbye to it in style, but because I feared it just wouldn’t be very good. Put simply, it isn’t very good. Some parts, in fact, are downright awful. But it isn’t terrible either. I can’t say I hated it – I had fun; I enjoyed it for what it was, and some small moments in isolation were very well done indeed. However…
The first thing that struck me was the pace and editing style, which seemed at last to fully embrace a Disney theme park ethos of let’s get to it and keep it moving. No notion of setting mood and re-establishing character, but rather a sense of we have a lot to fit in here so let’s get it out of the way as quickly as possible. It didn’t feel to me like it was allowed to sit at any point and just be brooding, or meaningful in any way. Which may work for the short attention spans of your average 9 year old, but for older fans who have literally waited 42 years to see an ending, it felt rushed, trivial and far too flippant.
The spectacle was very much there still. The landscape of alien worlds, creatures, droids and other necessary weirdness is all there in spades! It just feels like you would need to go back and press the pause button to see it all. And before we know what is happening (or why), Palpatine is back in business and everyone is looking for some lame GPS green triangle thingy. Forget almost everything in the story that has led to this point, this is an adventure that exists in a vacuum of space, and you either shrug and go with it, or get very annoyed. I chose the shrug.
Before we really settle into what is going on, we start to see the power of The Force flowing through Rey in ways it has never done before… she can heal, she virtually flies, and she can even teleport objects to a different physical place at will. She has become more like Neo from The Matrix than anything Skywalker. More like a Marvel superhero than anything grounded in an ancient mysticism that acts subtly at moments of great need. What that does is immediately lower the stakes, because if anything is possible, and therefore probable, there is no threat of failure. And if this movie lacks anything essential it is threat.
That said, the reanimation of Emperor Palpatine was nicely creepy, at least in a visual and vocal sense. And the journey of the excellent Adam Driver as Ben Solo / Kylo Ren remained the most interesting and satisfying thing about the whole reboot. I found myself just wanting to focus on him more and more, and felt frustrated when, typically, his key progression moments were over too soon or given away too cheaply from a dramatic context.
I have mixed feelings also about the level of mirroring and call-backs to moments from previous films. Some really worked, but many fell flat. It began to feel like a greatest hits checklist, which, of course, was a criticism of JJ Abrams’ directing style in The Force Awakens, too. He has been so much more concerned with giving fans sugary little treats, as opposed to cooking up a satisfying meal that nourishes in it’s own right – indicative of a 21st century audience that often demands its pudding before it has finished its greens.
Look, I enjoy a nostalgia trip as much as the next uber-geek, but I do also like my fantasy sci-fi to be based on an idea of weight and gravitas. Eschew that aspect and the climax is going to fall a little flat… which, I think it did. Our empathy for Rey, and in fact all of the new gang, is simply not as strong as it should have been. Daisy Ridley does a decent job, and I don’t blame her at all – I have no problem with any of the supporting cast either, but what a shame too many of them almost fade away into mere scene dressing by the end.
Very telling then, that my favourite bit by far was a 15 minute giggling fit brought on by that one, already infamous detail, when tiny weirdo Babu Frik completely misses the mood of the room and screeches his “Hey Heeeeeey!” Only to pop up again later with an equally hilarious repeat. Probably the funniest moment in any Star Wars film, bar none. Worth the ticket price alone, and I am still having regular flashbacks that leave me in fits of laughter!
So, that’s it is it? Over and done with? Well, they certainly wrapped it up in a bow, coming full circle in fairly satisfying style. With just a cheeky hint that the roots of a continuation at some point are buried within shallow reach. No doubt, amateur writers everywhere have already had a pop at what happens next. The Force is balanced, the prophecy fulfilled, but it wouldn’t take much to tip the galaxy back into turmoil, as soon as Disney fancies another few billion in ticket sales.
Personally, I don’t want to be cynical about a franchise that has been a part of me since I was 3 years old, and been such a good friend. However, I am perfectly fine with having it remain as a source for backstories and origin tales. The main saga is over, so let’s leave it alone. Episodes IV – VI will always remain the best; they won’t go anywhere. So any shortcomings can be easily solved… just watch The Empire Strikes Back again, not worrying about anything else, but revelling in just how perfect it is, and how lucky we are that it is there for us.
The first thing that struck me was the pace and editing style, which seemed at last to fully embrace a Disney theme park ethos of let’s get to it and keep it moving. No notion of setting mood and re-establishing character, but rather a sense of we have a lot to fit in here so let’s get it out of the way as quickly as possible. It didn’t feel to me like it was allowed to sit at any point and just be brooding, or meaningful in any way. Which may work for the short attention spans of your average 9 year old, but for older fans who have literally waited 42 years to see an ending, it felt rushed, trivial and far too flippant.
The spectacle was very much there still. The landscape of alien worlds, creatures, droids and other necessary weirdness is all there in spades! It just feels like you would need to go back and press the pause button to see it all. And before we know what is happening (or why), Palpatine is back in business and everyone is looking for some lame GPS green triangle thingy. Forget almost everything in the story that has led to this point, this is an adventure that exists in a vacuum of space, and you either shrug and go with it, or get very annoyed. I chose the shrug.
Before we really settle into what is going on, we start to see the power of The Force flowing through Rey in ways it has never done before… she can heal, she virtually flies, and she can even teleport objects to a different physical place at will. She has become more like Neo from The Matrix than anything Skywalker. More like a Marvel superhero than anything grounded in an ancient mysticism that acts subtly at moments of great need. What that does is immediately lower the stakes, because if anything is possible, and therefore probable, there is no threat of failure. And if this movie lacks anything essential it is threat.
That said, the reanimation of Emperor Palpatine was nicely creepy, at least in a visual and vocal sense. And the journey of the excellent Adam Driver as Ben Solo / Kylo Ren remained the most interesting and satisfying thing about the whole reboot. I found myself just wanting to focus on him more and more, and felt frustrated when, typically, his key progression moments were over too soon or given away too cheaply from a dramatic context.
I have mixed feelings also about the level of mirroring and call-backs to moments from previous films. Some really worked, but many fell flat. It began to feel like a greatest hits checklist, which, of course, was a criticism of JJ Abrams’ directing style in The Force Awakens, too. He has been so much more concerned with giving fans sugary little treats, as opposed to cooking up a satisfying meal that nourishes in it’s own right – indicative of a 21st century audience that often demands its pudding before it has finished its greens.
Look, I enjoy a nostalgia trip as much as the next uber-geek, but I do also like my fantasy sci-fi to be based on an idea of weight and gravitas. Eschew that aspect and the climax is going to fall a little flat… which, I think it did. Our empathy for Rey, and in fact all of the new gang, is simply not as strong as it should have been. Daisy Ridley does a decent job, and I don’t blame her at all – I have no problem with any of the supporting cast either, but what a shame too many of them almost fade away into mere scene dressing by the end.
Very telling then, that my favourite bit by far was a 15 minute giggling fit brought on by that one, already infamous detail, when tiny weirdo Babu Frik completely misses the mood of the room and screeches his “Hey Heeeeeey!” Only to pop up again later with an equally hilarious repeat. Probably the funniest moment in any Star Wars film, bar none. Worth the ticket price alone, and I am still having regular flashbacks that leave me in fits of laughter!
So, that’s it is it? Over and done with? Well, they certainly wrapped it up in a bow, coming full circle in fairly satisfying style. With just a cheeky hint that the roots of a continuation at some point are buried within shallow reach. No doubt, amateur writers everywhere have already had a pop at what happens next. The Force is balanced, the prophecy fulfilled, but it wouldn’t take much to tip the galaxy back into turmoil, as soon as Disney fancies another few billion in ticket sales.
Personally, I don’t want to be cynical about a franchise that has been a part of me since I was 3 years old, and been such a good friend. However, I am perfectly fine with having it remain as a source for backstories and origin tales. The main saga is over, so let’s leave it alone. Episodes IV – VI will always remain the best; they won’t go anywhere. So any shortcomings can be easily solved… just watch The Empire Strikes Back again, not worrying about anything else, but revelling in just how perfect it is, and how lucky we are that it is there for us.