Search
Search results
Hadley (567 KP) rated The Turn of the Screw in Books
Mar 24, 2020 (Updated Mar 24, 2020)
Well written (1 more)
Ahead of its time
Overly descriptive (1 more)
Vague
The ghost stories of the Victorian era are full of scares and mysteries- - - from the karma-ridden future, past and present ghosts of Charles Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" to the comedic ghost story by Oscar Wilde called 'the Canterville Ghost." But among all of them, Henry James found another subject to add to the pot in the novella 'the Turn of the Screw.'
With only 93 pages and the viewpoint of a governess, the story is one that has been up for debate as to its meaning for over a century, a story that blends child abuse and ghostly possession way ahead of its time. But even with its great plot, the story falls short and becomes bland throughout most of its short pages.
So why is the meaning of the Turn of the Screw still being debated? There's only one thing that has caused that --- it's in the way that James wrote the story, nothing is explained and everything is vague, these being very important parts that can keep this book from being enjoyable to many readers. Here's a summary of the story: a woman becomes governess of two children, one of which is sent home from school (technically expelled, in today's terms), the entire book has this woman trying to figure out why the child was sent home, but with ghosts thrown into the mix.
The story starts off with a man telling this ghost story from letters he received from a woman (the governess). But, even at the end of the book, the story never turns back to the man finishing the letters, yet this was done so masterfully that when you are done with the book, you completely forget about the man at the beginning, something that isn't easily done today in most writing. The man is reading these letters to a small audience that is also never revealed why, something that will seem completely irrelevant for the reader.
Readers finally get their paranormal fix when our main character, the governess, sees her first ghost in the Turn of the Screw. Our governess goes on an isolated walk when she spots an older man staring at her from a tower on the estate. But not until after a second encounter with this man, she decides to tell a housemaid about it, who quickly knows whom she speaks of. The maid is very certain that the man the governess has spotted twice is a deceased man that used to work for the family, but the maid is terrified by this because this man seems to have been abusive towards the son of the family and now seems to be continuing to torment him even after death.
Our governess seems to go down a path of paranoia as she seems to believe that the children are seeing the ghosts, too, but refusing to tell her so, and she becomes convinced that the key to getting them to confess is to finding out why the boy was sent home from school in the first place. She tries many times to get him to tell her why, but lets him take control of the conversations where he is able to divert the attention to something else. When things seem to be too much for the governess and housemaid to handle, they decide to try to write the childrens' uncle, and ask him to visit - - - this being the uncle that hired the governess and asked to never be bothered by her again, and that he wants nothing to do with his niece and nephew ever again, and especially don't write to him about any problems.
James is considered one of the greatest authors of the English language, but although this novella did very well, he wasn't known for ghost stories. His most popular book is 'the Portrait of a Lady,' which is about a young woman who comes into a large amount of money only to have it stolen by two con-men. Being that he is a Victorian-era writer, you can expect the overly long paragraphs and descriptions that the time was known for in 'the Turn of the Screw.' I personally felt the story had too many interludes of the governess' thoughts and ideas, which border on rambling. There seemed no point in the governess obsessing over why the boy was sent home from school when there are ghosts tormenting them at home- - - how this mode was suppose to work has left me clueless.
It's a usual horror trope to have children being possessed as the core of a book because it's something that can shake adults to their core at the thought that their own children could be that vulnerable. But James was way ahead of his time in the Turn of the Screw. He was able to put together psychological standpoints that weren't even discussed in his time, bouncing between child abuse with those children acting out to the power that abusers can still hold over their victims, even after death.
I'm giving the story a high rating, although I really didn't enjoy it. Why? Because it was a great idea and it was well written. If James hadn't been so vague on key parts, and hadn't left readers with a shocking unexplained ending, then maybe I would have liked it more. I can only recommend this book to people who like Victorian ghost stories, but for paranormal lovers, I think it falls short.
With only 93 pages and the viewpoint of a governess, the story is one that has been up for debate as to its meaning for over a century, a story that blends child abuse and ghostly possession way ahead of its time. But even with its great plot, the story falls short and becomes bland throughout most of its short pages.
So why is the meaning of the Turn of the Screw still being debated? There's only one thing that has caused that --- it's in the way that James wrote the story, nothing is explained and everything is vague, these being very important parts that can keep this book from being enjoyable to many readers. Here's a summary of the story: a woman becomes governess of two children, one of which is sent home from school (technically expelled, in today's terms), the entire book has this woman trying to figure out why the child was sent home, but with ghosts thrown into the mix.
The story starts off with a man telling this ghost story from letters he received from a woman (the governess). But, even at the end of the book, the story never turns back to the man finishing the letters, yet this was done so masterfully that when you are done with the book, you completely forget about the man at the beginning, something that isn't easily done today in most writing. The man is reading these letters to a small audience that is also never revealed why, something that will seem completely irrelevant for the reader.
Readers finally get their paranormal fix when our main character, the governess, sees her first ghost in the Turn of the Screw. Our governess goes on an isolated walk when she spots an older man staring at her from a tower on the estate. But not until after a second encounter with this man, she decides to tell a housemaid about it, who quickly knows whom she speaks of. The maid is very certain that the man the governess has spotted twice is a deceased man that used to work for the family, but the maid is terrified by this because this man seems to have been abusive towards the son of the family and now seems to be continuing to torment him even after death.
Our governess seems to go down a path of paranoia as she seems to believe that the children are seeing the ghosts, too, but refusing to tell her so, and she becomes convinced that the key to getting them to confess is to finding out why the boy was sent home from school in the first place. She tries many times to get him to tell her why, but lets him take control of the conversations where he is able to divert the attention to something else. When things seem to be too much for the governess and housemaid to handle, they decide to try to write the childrens' uncle, and ask him to visit - - - this being the uncle that hired the governess and asked to never be bothered by her again, and that he wants nothing to do with his niece and nephew ever again, and especially don't write to him about any problems.
James is considered one of the greatest authors of the English language, but although this novella did very well, he wasn't known for ghost stories. His most popular book is 'the Portrait of a Lady,' which is about a young woman who comes into a large amount of money only to have it stolen by two con-men. Being that he is a Victorian-era writer, you can expect the overly long paragraphs and descriptions that the time was known for in 'the Turn of the Screw.' I personally felt the story had too many interludes of the governess' thoughts and ideas, which border on rambling. There seemed no point in the governess obsessing over why the boy was sent home from school when there are ghosts tormenting them at home- - - how this mode was suppose to work has left me clueless.
It's a usual horror trope to have children being possessed as the core of a book because it's something that can shake adults to their core at the thought that their own children could be that vulnerable. But James was way ahead of his time in the Turn of the Screw. He was able to put together psychological standpoints that weren't even discussed in his time, bouncing between child abuse with those children acting out to the power that abusers can still hold over their victims, even after death.
I'm giving the story a high rating, although I really didn't enjoy it. Why? Because it was a great idea and it was well written. If James hadn't been so vague on key parts, and hadn't left readers with a shocking unexplained ending, then maybe I would have liked it more. I can only recommend this book to people who like Victorian ghost stories, but for paranormal lovers, I think it falls short.
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated Snow like Ashes in Books
Oct 9, 2018
The world-building in this book is fascinating. At first, it seems like yet another YA novel about displaced royals trying to win back their kingdom, but this royal is in much more dire straits than most. Meira is a refugee living on the run with seven others, one of them her rightful King. All the rest of their people have been enslaved by the conquering country, and their kingdom's link to the magic inherent in the land has been broken.
A little backdrop is needed. In Meira's land, there are eight countries. The Rhythm countries, where seasons proceed as normal, and the Seasons - 4 countries locked in one season each. The rulers of each country have a magic conduit that lets them feed magic to their people - but the conduits are gender-locked. In four of the countries, only women can use the conduit; in the other four, only men. Meira and her little band are all that's left of the free people of Winter. Spring invaded sixteen years ago, killed Winter's queen, broke the locket that was their magic conduit (each ruler has one) and enslaved their people. Because the queen only had a son, he can't wield Winter's magic anyway. They're still trying to find the two pieces of the locket so when he has a daughter, she can wield it. You'd think at this point, since he's of age, he should be trying to get as many women pregnant as possible to up the odds of getting a royal heir who can wield the magic, but that...doesn't come up.
The book does delve into the country's people being oppressed, used as slaves, and being incredibly abused by the conquering country, and this is where I ran into a quandary. The Season's people reflect their countries: Autumn's people have copper skin, Spring's citizens are blond-haired and green-eyed - and Winter's people are white. Pale skin, snow-white hair, blue eyes. Writing white people as the oppressed people just rubs me the wrong way. (In that false "help I'm being oppressed because other people want equal rights!" kind of way.) Yes, this is fantasy, yes, it has nothing to do with our world's politics - but it bothers me. It's at least not white-savioring, as Meira's trying to save her own people, but I don't know. Is it better or worse to write white people as the oppressed protagonists?
That question aside, this was a well-written novel of fighting against an oppressor. There is definitely still work to be done at the end of the book, and there are two more books, as well as two short stories. While I am a little curious what ultimately happens, I don't know if the series has earned more time on my reading list.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.com
A little backdrop is needed. In Meira's land, there are eight countries. The Rhythm countries, where seasons proceed as normal, and the Seasons - 4 countries locked in one season each. The rulers of each country have a magic conduit that lets them feed magic to their people - but the conduits are gender-locked. In four of the countries, only women can use the conduit; in the other four, only men. Meira and her little band are all that's left of the free people of Winter. Spring invaded sixteen years ago, killed Winter's queen, broke the locket that was their magic conduit (each ruler has one) and enslaved their people. Because the queen only had a son, he can't wield Winter's magic anyway. They're still trying to find the two pieces of the locket so when he has a daughter, she can wield it. You'd think at this point, since he's of age, he should be trying to get as many women pregnant as possible to up the odds of getting a royal heir who can wield the magic, but that...doesn't come up.
The book does delve into the country's people being oppressed, used as slaves, and being incredibly abused by the conquering country, and this is where I ran into a quandary. The Season's people reflect their countries: Autumn's people have copper skin, Spring's citizens are blond-haired and green-eyed - and Winter's people are white. Pale skin, snow-white hair, blue eyes. Writing white people as the oppressed people just rubs me the wrong way. (In that false "help I'm being oppressed because other people want equal rights!" kind of way.) Yes, this is fantasy, yes, it has nothing to do with our world's politics - but it bothers me. It's at least not white-savioring, as Meira's trying to save her own people, but I don't know. Is it better or worse to write white people as the oppressed protagonists?
That question aside, this was a well-written novel of fighting against an oppressor. There is definitely still work to be done at the end of the book, and there are two more books, as well as two short stories. While I am a little curious what ultimately happens, I don't know if the series has earned more time on my reading list.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.com
Nikki G. (48 KP) rated Christine (2016) in Movies
Sep 2, 2017
Not an easy film to watch, but it should make you uncomfortable
Contains spoilers, click to show
Christine Chubbuck is a name that most people have never heard of, although her demise by her own hand was the supposed inspiration for the 1970s film Network, although that was a comedy. Anyway, she was a smart young journalist for a small local television station in Sarasota, Florida, in the early 1970s, struggling with trying to make a name for herself and the "if it bleeds, it leads" style of reportage that was starting to become de rigueur back then. She also struggled with depression and probably bipolar or borderline personality disorder, as well.
Christine tried to hang with the new style and offered to do a piece for the station on suicide. She spoke with police officers and interviewed them on what would be the best way. Ten days prior to her death, she purchased a gun. When asked why, she said to a co-worker, "Well, I had this wild idea that I would blow myself away on the air." Everyone thought she was making a crass joke, but about a week later, that is exactly what she did.
This movie details Christine's spiral downward into the morass of mental illness, exacerbated by the pressures of being female in a male-dominated world. It is fascinating and uncomfortable, not to mention heartbreaking. Rebecca Hall completely dissolves into the character of Christine and does a fantastic job of making you relate to this woman who just wanted people to like her and tell her that she was doing a good job.
Christine tried to hang with the new style and offered to do a piece for the station on suicide. She spoke with police officers and interviewed them on what would be the best way. Ten days prior to her death, she purchased a gun. When asked why, she said to a co-worker, "Well, I had this wild idea that I would blow myself away on the air." Everyone thought she was making a crass joke, but about a week later, that is exactly what she did.
This movie details Christine's spiral downward into the morass of mental illness, exacerbated by the pressures of being female in a male-dominated world. It is fascinating and uncomfortable, not to mention heartbreaking. Rebecca Hall completely dissolves into the character of Christine and does a fantastic job of making you relate to this woman who just wanted people to like her and tell her that she was doing a good job.
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Our Planet in TV
Apr 14, 2019
Well done but isn't harsh enough
You've got to hand it to them, Netflix really know what they're doing. Everyone knows you can't go wrong with a David Attenborough documentary, so it's very smart of Netflix to get him to narrate their nature documentary.
Visually, this documentary is stunning and absolutely flawless. To the point where the picture quality in some scenes looks that sharp and defined that it almost looks fake. Having the episodes focus on specific areas of the planet is a good move although because of this it only touches briefly on certain species and circumstances without going into too much depth. And it wouldn't be a nature documentary without some truly heart wrenching scenes (the flamingos and walruses especially) and also some wonderfully adorable scenes too (the otters)..
This documentary series main aim is to highlight what we're doing to ruin our planet and how it's affecting the wildlife. It definitely does this, but I dont think it does it very well. It touches on these issues but even with David Attenborough's sombre narrative, it never comes across as harsh enough. Despite the message, the score and scenes used in the episodes come across as far too positive and upbeat and it comes across as a little confused. Yes there are some positives with some parts of the planet and wildlife recovering, but this is only the minority. This should have been a hard hitting bleak no holds barred documentary about the damage we're doing to our planet, and it just isn't. When it comes to the damage that's being done to nature, it shouldn't be sugar coated.
Visually, this documentary is stunning and absolutely flawless. To the point where the picture quality in some scenes looks that sharp and defined that it almost looks fake. Having the episodes focus on specific areas of the planet is a good move although because of this it only touches briefly on certain species and circumstances without going into too much depth. And it wouldn't be a nature documentary without some truly heart wrenching scenes (the flamingos and walruses especially) and also some wonderfully adorable scenes too (the otters)..
This documentary series main aim is to highlight what we're doing to ruin our planet and how it's affecting the wildlife. It definitely does this, but I dont think it does it very well. It touches on these issues but even with David Attenborough's sombre narrative, it never comes across as harsh enough. Despite the message, the score and scenes used in the episodes come across as far too positive and upbeat and it comes across as a little confused. Yes there are some positives with some parts of the planet and wildlife recovering, but this is only the minority. This should have been a hard hitting bleak no holds barred documentary about the damage we're doing to our planet, and it just isn't. When it comes to the damage that's being done to nature, it shouldn't be sugar coated.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Machete (2010) in Movies
Jan 19, 2018
Fun Watch
Machete was a bit of a miss for me. I understood the direction that directors Ethan Maniquis and Robert Rodriguez were heading for. I just didn't quite...get it. As a salesperson, I'm taught to push the "why", not the "how". For me, the "why" of this film left a lot to be desired.
It's not that I didn't like Machete, rather it didn't hook me. Half cheesy action film, half telenovela, it definitely has some shining moments. Danny Trejo (Machete) plays a tough badass as he does in most films. His hardcore attitude makes him instantly lovable and they give him more attitude than ever in this role. Not only does he destroy a lot of tough guys, he manages to find time to slay the ladies as well. Oh yes, the ladies love Machete and Machete loves the ladies.
Props to Robert De Niro as well in his role as The Senator. Hearing his country accent makes you almost forgot this was the same guy that said, "You talkin' to me?" (Taxi Driver is on my list for this October!). You're supposed to hate him as he plays a villain, but you can't help but love him at the same time.
A handful of action sequences left me with raised eyebrows. My favorite in particular was Cheech Marin in the church with the double shotgun action. Talk about money!
Fun movie and worth at least one watch. Seeing Machete seek revenge on The Senator after being double-crossed (the plot) managed to keep me entertained but not quite jumping-for-joy excited. I give it a solid 76.
It's not that I didn't like Machete, rather it didn't hook me. Half cheesy action film, half telenovela, it definitely has some shining moments. Danny Trejo (Machete) plays a tough badass as he does in most films. His hardcore attitude makes him instantly lovable and they give him more attitude than ever in this role. Not only does he destroy a lot of tough guys, he manages to find time to slay the ladies as well. Oh yes, the ladies love Machete and Machete loves the ladies.
Props to Robert De Niro as well in his role as The Senator. Hearing his country accent makes you almost forgot this was the same guy that said, "You talkin' to me?" (Taxi Driver is on my list for this October!). You're supposed to hate him as he plays a villain, but you can't help but love him at the same time.
A handful of action sequences left me with raised eyebrows. My favorite in particular was Cheech Marin in the church with the double shotgun action. Talk about money!
Fun movie and worth at least one watch. Seeing Machete seek revenge on The Senator after being double-crossed (the plot) managed to keep me entertained but not quite jumping-for-joy excited. I give it a solid 76.
Dana (24 KP) rated The Graveyard Book in Books
Mar 23, 2018
This was my second book to read by Neil Gaiman and I wish I would have started with this one! It was so well written and the world was so well thought out that I felt I was in there with Bod on his adventures!
I think what I loved most about this is the fact that while each chapter can connect to one another, they are written in a way that can have them separate in a way. It's almost like they are a series of the children's picture books all put together. And that is amazing. If I was a parent reading this to my child, I wouldn't feel bad reading only one chapter a night to them because I feel that is one of the ways it is intended to be read. Who know, I could be completely wrong on that train of thought.
Bod and Silas are so great. I love their family dynamic without it being too over the top.
Each time Bod gets himself into a spot of trouble, I expect him to get out of it, but there is that lingering feeling of fear for him, especially with what happened to his family when he was a baby. There's nothing like starting off a book with a recently orphaned child, now is there? (Ahem, Harry Potter)
The story did feel a bit slow at some points for me, but I do understand that books cannot be ON at all times.
Overall, I very much enjoyed reading this book and cannot wait to read another of Gaiman's books soon.
I think what I loved most about this is the fact that while each chapter can connect to one another, they are written in a way that can have them separate in a way. It's almost like they are a series of the children's picture books all put together. And that is amazing. If I was a parent reading this to my child, I wouldn't feel bad reading only one chapter a night to them because I feel that is one of the ways it is intended to be read. Who know, I could be completely wrong on that train of thought.
Bod and Silas are so great. I love their family dynamic without it being too over the top.
Each time Bod gets himself into a spot of trouble, I expect him to get out of it, but there is that lingering feeling of fear for him, especially with what happened to his family when he was a baby. There's nothing like starting off a book with a recently orphaned child, now is there? (Ahem, Harry Potter)
The story did feel a bit slow at some points for me, but I do understand that books cannot be ON at all times.
Overall, I very much enjoyed reading this book and cannot wait to read another of Gaiman's books soon.
Debbiereadsbook (1454 KP) rated The Earth Bleeds Red in Books
Apr 3, 2018
a good book, just not one for me!
Independent reviewer for Archaeolibrarian, I was gifted my copy of this book.
Scott and Jessie, and their 17 year old daughter Ashley, live a good life, a happy life. Til one day, it all goes terribly wrong and Ashley is kidnapped, possibly dead. Scott and Jessie need to keep it together long enough for Ashley to be found alive, or not.
Sometimes, stepping out of your comfort zone is a really good thing but, while a well told story, this one just didn't quite hit the spot. And I don't really know why!
Told mostly from Scott's point of view, in the first, it deals with how a family copes when tragedy strikes.
We do get some other people, in the third person, but they felt more of a narration of their voice, rather than THEM speaking, if that makes any sense?? I didn't connect to them in any way, not even when the bad guy has his five minutes, and you know how much I LOVE getting into the mind of the bad guy! I just felt, apart from Scott, totally disconnected from everyone else.
It is well written, and I saw no editing or spelling errors. It does get a little graphic in places, when being told what was done to Ashley when she was kidnapped, but it is not in any way romantic. Not even before Ashley was kidnapped, did I feel the romance between Scott and Jessie.
A good book, just not one for me and I'm sorry for that!
3 stars
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Scott and Jessie, and their 17 year old daughter Ashley, live a good life, a happy life. Til one day, it all goes terribly wrong and Ashley is kidnapped, possibly dead. Scott and Jessie need to keep it together long enough for Ashley to be found alive, or not.
Sometimes, stepping out of your comfort zone is a really good thing but, while a well told story, this one just didn't quite hit the spot. And I don't really know why!
Told mostly from Scott's point of view, in the first, it deals with how a family copes when tragedy strikes.
We do get some other people, in the third person, but they felt more of a narration of their voice, rather than THEM speaking, if that makes any sense?? I didn't connect to them in any way, not even when the bad guy has his five minutes, and you know how much I LOVE getting into the mind of the bad guy! I just felt, apart from Scott, totally disconnected from everyone else.
It is well written, and I saw no editing or spelling errors. It does get a little graphic in places, when being told what was done to Ashley when she was kidnapped, but it is not in any way romantic. Not even before Ashley was kidnapped, did I feel the romance between Scott and Jessie.
A good book, just not one for me and I'm sorry for that!
3 stars
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Fun and great for trivia
I won an IOS App Store Voucher on a Smashbomb giveaway and I purchased the ultimate version of this app using this voucher. I also bought the extra question packs to make it a little more challenging.
I’m a sucker for quizzes and trivia. I love being able to prove my knowledge on topics (or for the most part proving how bad my general knowledge is!) and I can spend hours playing standard and app trivia games. The Chase is one of the better quiz shows on tv at the moment, and my family have quite a soft spot for it. Whenever I go round to my mums, we always have to take time out to watch it and usually end up shouting at the contestants for taking the lower offer...
The app does well to recreate the show. It’s always going to be difficult to exactly copy a quiz show that’s reliant on contestants knowing the answers in some of the rounds, but the app recreates these by giving you multiple choice. Whilst this should make it slightly easier, this isn’t always the case. The chase portion of the show itself is identical to the tv version and is done very well. It’s a very fun game to play, the only downside is that if you play it quite often or a lot, it doesn’t take long for some of the questions to seem familiar and repeat themselves, and it becomes less of a test of what you know, more what you can remember when you’ve answered the question before! But this is a fairly standard problem with all sorts of trivia games.
I’m a sucker for quizzes and trivia. I love being able to prove my knowledge on topics (or for the most part proving how bad my general knowledge is!) and I can spend hours playing standard and app trivia games. The Chase is one of the better quiz shows on tv at the moment, and my family have quite a soft spot for it. Whenever I go round to my mums, we always have to take time out to watch it and usually end up shouting at the contestants for taking the lower offer...
The app does well to recreate the show. It’s always going to be difficult to exactly copy a quiz show that’s reliant on contestants knowing the answers in some of the rounds, but the app recreates these by giving you multiple choice. Whilst this should make it slightly easier, this isn’t always the case. The chase portion of the show itself is identical to the tv version and is done very well. It’s a very fun game to play, the only downside is that if you play it quite often or a lot, it doesn’t take long for some of the questions to seem familiar and repeat themselves, and it becomes less of a test of what you know, more what you can remember when you’ve answered the question before! But this is a fairly standard problem with all sorts of trivia games.
MelanieTheresa (997 KP) rated First Man (2018) in Movies
Oct 3, 2018
POV launch sequences (1 more)
Claire Foy
A bit slow (2 more)
A little long
Terrible sound mixing
I love a good space movie.
Everyone knows the story of the first moon landing - who, what, where, when, how - but this movie goes a bit deeper than the history books you've read. I'm not spoiling the ending by telling you they land on the moon; you already know this. What you may not know is what led up to that historical moment: the tests, the failures, the losses, the toll taken on the astronauts and their families during NASA's race to the moon. This movie does well in that respect. Claire Foy does an amazing job of making you feel with her and for her. The POV in the launch sequences is terrific. You almost feel like you're in the cockpit with Armstrong as he's launching into space. Really well done.
Now, the bad.
- It was slow, and probably too long.
- Ryan Gosling has exactly one facial expression throughout the entire movie. He goes through the proper emotions, but his face does not. Even when he's crying over the death of his daughter, the only thing that changes about his face is the added tears.
- The sound mixing was terrible. The effects were turned up far too high and the voices far too low, to the point where I sometimes couldn't hear what was being said, and as a result I definitely missed some partial conversations. This is one of my biggest movie pet peeves.
Overall, I enjoyed the movie, but it's not one I'd need to watch again down the road.
Now, the bad.
- It was slow, and probably too long.
- Ryan Gosling has exactly one facial expression throughout the entire movie. He goes through the proper emotions, but his face does not. Even when he's crying over the death of his daughter, the only thing that changes about his face is the added tears.
- The sound mixing was terrible. The effects were turned up far too high and the voices far too low, to the point where I sometimes couldn't hear what was being said, and as a result I definitely missed some partial conversations. This is one of my biggest movie pet peeves.
Overall, I enjoyed the movie, but it's not one I'd need to watch again down the road.