Search
Search results
Merissa (12660 KP) rated Entangled Beta (Murder and Mayhem Omegaverse #2) in Books
Apr 24, 2025
ENTANGLED BETA is the second book in the Murder and Mayhem Omegaverse series. I haven't read the first, but would definitely recommend it as there were parts that I didn't fully understand. It didn't have a massive impact on my enjoyment of this story, but I think it would help if you knew more.
The first thing that I loved is that Sasha is a Beta. Too often, they're forgotten, or only mentioned as hard workers. Sasha is not someone to overlook, or if you do, it's at your own cost! She is multi-faceted, happy with stabbing the bad guys, or making sure her omega is safe. Whatever you need, Sasha will make sure you have it.
As for the guys, Levi is the one who was introduced first, followed by Stone, and then Flynn. Each of them brings a special something to the story, and it wouldn't be the same without them. Stone is my favourite and my heart broke for him over and over, while he also made me laugh.
The story was well-paced, being neither too fast nor too slow, and a mixture of character- and plot-led, and this is where I think that prior knowledge would have been handy to have. Saying that, I still thoroughly enjoyed this story and would continue with the series going forward. I want to read the first book in the series now! Definitely recommended by me.
** Same worded review will appear elsewhere. **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Apr 24, 2025
The first thing that I loved is that Sasha is a Beta. Too often, they're forgotten, or only mentioned as hard workers. Sasha is not someone to overlook, or if you do, it's at your own cost! She is multi-faceted, happy with stabbing the bad guys, or making sure her omega is safe. Whatever you need, Sasha will make sure you have it.
As for the guys, Levi is the one who was introduced first, followed by Stone, and then Flynn. Each of them brings a special something to the story, and it wouldn't be the same without them. Stone is my favourite and my heart broke for him over and over, while he also made me laugh.
The story was well-paced, being neither too fast nor too slow, and a mixture of character- and plot-led, and this is where I think that prior knowledge would have been handy to have. Saying that, I still thoroughly enjoyed this story and would continue with the series going forward. I want to read the first book in the series now! Definitely recommended by me.
** Same worded review will appear elsewhere. **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Apr 24, 2025
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Before I Let Go in Books
Jan 5, 2018
Easy to read (1 more)
Honest portrayal of mental illness
Lacks full character development (1 more)
Difficult to discern full point
Quick read that falls a little short
When Corey gets the call that her best friend, Kyra, has passed away--falling under the ice in their frigid hometown of Lost Creek, Alaska--she is devastated. Corey has been gone from Lost, as it's known, away at boarding school, corresponding with Kyra only via letters. She was due to visit in a few days and now her best friend is gone. Lost always shunned Kyra because she was bipolar and had maniac episodes. The small, insulated town couldn't understand Kyra's highs and lows. She stood out too much in a place where being different was wrong. But the seven months that Corey's been away has been long enough for the town of Lost to turn on her and now deem her an outsider. Since Corey's departure, Lost has suddenly embraced Kyra, though Corey isn't sure why. Even worse, they are calling Kyra's death meant to be, her time. They've rallied around in her death and they want nothing to do with Corey. Kyra always said she would wait for Corey to return: why didn't she?
I definitely have some mixed feelings about this one. It's billed as a YA mystery, and I can see its drama appealing more to teens, perhaps, but I could never really fully tell what the book was truly about or what it was trying to be. It has weird unexplained mystical elements thrown in--think Carol Goodman or Jennifer McMahon, but they aren't fully fleshed out or well-explained. I believe the intent is to slowly build up suspense and creep you out, but they don't slowly build up (they sort of start out full force and stay there, or almost trickle away... it's hard to explain) and they never really seem to have a purpose. So it's just one element of the book that leaves you hanging. The ending, too, leaves you with little closure.
The novel is told mainly from Corey's perspective, but we also get weird snippets told as if in a play format (like we're hearing from the town), but those aren't fully formed either. It's very strange. I liked Corey, but she comes in angry at her town and we don't get a lot of explanation into her character or real background into her friendship with Kyra, despite being assured that they were best friends up until Corey left.
It's sad, because I was really drawn to the character of Kyra (you get flashbacks to the girls' friendship and life before Kyra's death). I thought the book did a fairly good job of portraying mental illness and honestly Kyra--despite her death--seemed to be the most fully formed character in many ways. She implores Corey not to fix her, that she's not a puzzle to solve, and she discusses her manic spells in a very mature and very thoughtful way. It's one of the reasons that I'm keeping a three-star rating for this one; I'm hoping the portrayal of her illness can help and inform others.
There are also a variety of relationships portrayed in the novel--albeit, I thought, rather superficially--lesbian, pansexual, asexual, gay, etc. I wouldn't say any relationship is at all fully delved into, but I appreciate that Nijkamp at least wanted to try to be representative with her characters.
The other thing is that Nijkamp's books are just so darn easy to read. I remember that about This Is Where It Ends, too. I read almost this entire novel in one setting. Her writing draws you in so easily, even if you don't always agree with what you're reading, or if you wish for more character development. You could pick this up and fly through it in a day.
In the end, this certainly wasn't what I expected. The strange mystical elements seemed out of place and they, along with most of the characters, weren't really fleshed out. I was a fan of how easy the story was to read and the mental illness portrayal, though, as well as how easy the story was to read. I was drawn to the character of Kyra and wished I could have learned even more about her. The story was compelling and Nijkamp did an excellent job making you feel the cold of the Alaskan setting and the similar coldness of the townspeople. At the same time, while I could certainly see a small town being incredibly close-minded (and they were), some of the other plot points seemed a little overboard. A quick read, especially for teens.
I definitely have some mixed feelings about this one. It's billed as a YA mystery, and I can see its drama appealing more to teens, perhaps, but I could never really fully tell what the book was truly about or what it was trying to be. It has weird unexplained mystical elements thrown in--think Carol Goodman or Jennifer McMahon, but they aren't fully fleshed out or well-explained. I believe the intent is to slowly build up suspense and creep you out, but they don't slowly build up (they sort of start out full force and stay there, or almost trickle away... it's hard to explain) and they never really seem to have a purpose. So it's just one element of the book that leaves you hanging. The ending, too, leaves you with little closure.
The novel is told mainly from Corey's perspective, but we also get weird snippets told as if in a play format (like we're hearing from the town), but those aren't fully formed either. It's very strange. I liked Corey, but she comes in angry at her town and we don't get a lot of explanation into her character or real background into her friendship with Kyra, despite being assured that they were best friends up until Corey left.
It's sad, because I was really drawn to the character of Kyra (you get flashbacks to the girls' friendship and life before Kyra's death). I thought the book did a fairly good job of portraying mental illness and honestly Kyra--despite her death--seemed to be the most fully formed character in many ways. She implores Corey not to fix her, that she's not a puzzle to solve, and she discusses her manic spells in a very mature and very thoughtful way. It's one of the reasons that I'm keeping a three-star rating for this one; I'm hoping the portrayal of her illness can help and inform others.
There are also a variety of relationships portrayed in the novel--albeit, I thought, rather superficially--lesbian, pansexual, asexual, gay, etc. I wouldn't say any relationship is at all fully delved into, but I appreciate that Nijkamp at least wanted to try to be representative with her characters.
The other thing is that Nijkamp's books are just so darn easy to read. I remember that about This Is Where It Ends, too. I read almost this entire novel in one setting. Her writing draws you in so easily, even if you don't always agree with what you're reading, or if you wish for more character development. You could pick this up and fly through it in a day.
In the end, this certainly wasn't what I expected. The strange mystical elements seemed out of place and they, along with most of the characters, weren't really fleshed out. I was a fan of how easy the story was to read and the mental illness portrayal, though, as well as how easy the story was to read. I was drawn to the character of Kyra and wished I could have learned even more about her. The story was compelling and Nijkamp did an excellent job making you feel the cold of the Alaskan setting and the similar coldness of the townspeople. At the same time, while I could certainly see a small town being incredibly close-minded (and they were), some of the other plot points seemed a little overboard. A quick read, especially for teens.
Lee (2222 KP) rated The Hitman's Bodyguard (2017) in Movies
Aug 16, 2017
The double act bickering of Reynolds and Jackson (1 more)
Salma Hayek!
Surprisingly Good
I wasn't sure what to make of The Hitman's Bodyguard when I first saw the poster. Movies which try to squeeze some comedy out of two people being thrown together who don't really like each other generally tend to suck. But then I saw the trailer, which made it look entertaining and worth a watch. However, if it hadn't been for the fact that I was away on holiday last week I may well have read some of the early negative reviews and thought about giving it a miss. Luckily though, I was on holiday, I didn't read any reviews and I ended up watching one of the funniest action packed movies I've seen in a while.
Ryan Reynolds is Michael Bryce, a 'Triple-A' bodyguard with a hot girlfriend, nice house, nice car and a smart suit. He likes to make sure that the protection of his clients runs like clockwork (boring is best, as he likes to remind his team!). So when things go badly wrong on a job, Bryce suddenly finds himself way back down the ladder when it comes to landing quality bodyguard roles. Consequently, his expensive lifestyle takes a big hit and we join him 2 years down the line, unshaven and peeing into a bottle while sitting in his beat up car before heading into a job.
Meanwhile, Samuel L Jackson is Darius Kincaid, a hitman being escorted by Interpol from Manchester to testify in Holland at The Hague. The man he is testifying against is warlord Vladislav Dukhovich (Gary Oldman, suitably evil). A nasty piece of work determined to take out anyone with the potential to put him behind bars. So when the escort accompanying Kincaid takes a hit, it becomes clear that someone in Interpol has been leaking their route, and Bryce ends up landing the role of escorting Kincaid for the rest of his trip to The Netherlands. Turns out though that Bryce and Kincaid have history, with Kincaid nearly killing Bryce on 28 previous occasions, so their initial meeting doesn't go too well. Eventually the pair reach enough of an understanding so that they can head out on the road together, down through the English countryside. It's their constant bickering on this road trip that then provides a lot of the humour for the movie. Bryce is pretty particular when it comes to how smoothly these things should be handled, whereas Kincaid just likes to get things done and screw the consequences. The word 'motherfucker' gets used to great effect A LOT by Jackson (as Bryce puts it, “This guy single-handedly ruined the word ‘motherfucker’”) and Bryce continues to be frustrated and amazed at just how 'un-killable' Kincaid appears to be.
It's not very long before the bad guys are on their tail though, leading to a succession of more and more complex action sequences. These hit a real high when everyone reaches The Netherlands, with an exciting chase through the streets and canals of Amsterdam kicking things off nicely. The only complaint with this, and the rest of the action in the movie, is that there does appears to be a never ending supply of bad guys lining up to take them out. Just when you think we're down to the final few, another wave of vehicles appears, all full of weapon waving maniacs! I loved all of the action in the movie, but because of this it does constantly run the risk of seeming a little too dragged out. It's a very fine line.
Before I forget, a special mention to Salma Hayek who stars as the wife of Kincaid. Despite being locked in a cell for the entire movie, she gets more than her fair share of funny lines and action, mainly in flashbacks where we get to see just how much of a foul mouthed bad ass she really is. Taking no crap from anyone, she's brilliant.
Although there's nothing really here that hasn't been done before, it was the brilliant double act of Reynolds and Jackson that really made this worth seeing for me. That, along with the hugely entertaining action sequences. Judging by other reviews though, I think it's just my taste in these movies that's different from most others. I actually hated last years 'The Nice Guys', while everyone else seemed to love it so I guess I'm just going to be in the minority when it comes to this movie too!
Ryan Reynolds is Michael Bryce, a 'Triple-A' bodyguard with a hot girlfriend, nice house, nice car and a smart suit. He likes to make sure that the protection of his clients runs like clockwork (boring is best, as he likes to remind his team!). So when things go badly wrong on a job, Bryce suddenly finds himself way back down the ladder when it comes to landing quality bodyguard roles. Consequently, his expensive lifestyle takes a big hit and we join him 2 years down the line, unshaven and peeing into a bottle while sitting in his beat up car before heading into a job.
Meanwhile, Samuel L Jackson is Darius Kincaid, a hitman being escorted by Interpol from Manchester to testify in Holland at The Hague. The man he is testifying against is warlord Vladislav Dukhovich (Gary Oldman, suitably evil). A nasty piece of work determined to take out anyone with the potential to put him behind bars. So when the escort accompanying Kincaid takes a hit, it becomes clear that someone in Interpol has been leaking their route, and Bryce ends up landing the role of escorting Kincaid for the rest of his trip to The Netherlands. Turns out though that Bryce and Kincaid have history, with Kincaid nearly killing Bryce on 28 previous occasions, so their initial meeting doesn't go too well. Eventually the pair reach enough of an understanding so that they can head out on the road together, down through the English countryside. It's their constant bickering on this road trip that then provides a lot of the humour for the movie. Bryce is pretty particular when it comes to how smoothly these things should be handled, whereas Kincaid just likes to get things done and screw the consequences. The word 'motherfucker' gets used to great effect A LOT by Jackson (as Bryce puts it, “This guy single-handedly ruined the word ‘motherfucker’”) and Bryce continues to be frustrated and amazed at just how 'un-killable' Kincaid appears to be.
It's not very long before the bad guys are on their tail though, leading to a succession of more and more complex action sequences. These hit a real high when everyone reaches The Netherlands, with an exciting chase through the streets and canals of Amsterdam kicking things off nicely. The only complaint with this, and the rest of the action in the movie, is that there does appears to be a never ending supply of bad guys lining up to take them out. Just when you think we're down to the final few, another wave of vehicles appears, all full of weapon waving maniacs! I loved all of the action in the movie, but because of this it does constantly run the risk of seeming a little too dragged out. It's a very fine line.
Before I forget, a special mention to Salma Hayek who stars as the wife of Kincaid. Despite being locked in a cell for the entire movie, she gets more than her fair share of funny lines and action, mainly in flashbacks where we get to see just how much of a foul mouthed bad ass she really is. Taking no crap from anyone, she's brilliant.
Although there's nothing really here that hasn't been done before, it was the brilliant double act of Reynolds and Jackson that really made this worth seeing for me. That, along with the hugely entertaining action sequences. Judging by other reviews though, I think it's just my taste in these movies that's different from most others. I actually hated last years 'The Nice Guys', while everyone else seemed to love it so I guess I'm just going to be in the minority when it comes to this movie too!
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Commuter (2018) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Liam Neeson's special set of skills return
The Movie Metropolis Alternative Oscars have received over 650 votes so far and it’s proving to be the closest run awards ever. Make sure you cast your vote for the best films and performances from 2017 before March 6th.
Liam Neeson is this generation’s formidable action hero. From protecting his family in Taken and protecting his family in Run All Night, to protecting his family in Taken 2, and you know, protecting his family in Taken 3, Neeson is a family man if ever I’ve seen one.
Teaming up with director Jaume Collet-Serra for the fourth time, the rather excellent Non-Stop being their best work together, Neeson takes the action and moves it on-board, you guessed it, a commuter train. But does The Commuter work? Or are we starting to get derailed by these constant action roles?
Insurance salesman Michael (Neeson) is on his daily commute home, which quickly becomes anything but routine. After being contacted by a mysterious stranger (Vera Farmiga), Michael is forced to uncover the identity of a hidden passenger on the train before the last stop. As he works against the clock to solve the puzzle, he realizes a deadly plan is unfolding, and he is unwittingly caught up in a criminal conspiracy that carries life and death stakes for everyone on the train.
The premise is a borderline carbon copy of what we saw in Non-Stop, but with Neeson battling a series of bad guys on a train instead of in the air, and while it is at times, ridiculous, it’s directed with the usual Collet-Serra sense of style that would make even a dog food commercial look intriguing.
Where last year’s Murder on the Orient Express opted for opulence and fairly static camerawork, here The Commuter utilises every part of the train to its advantage. From underneath the carriages, to through the windows and even cleverly framed through a ticket stub, Collet-Serra’s direction is unique, if a little over-stylised at times.
Casting wise, Neeson is the perfect choice to play the world-weary protagonist with a very special set of skills, after all, it’s a role he has been playing for many years now. Some might say typecast, I prefer to think of it as knowing what he wants. Elsewhere, Vera Farmiga is a disappointingly underused presence and it would have been nice to see her a little more throughout the fairly taut 105-minute running time. It’s also nice to see Sam Neill back on the big screen and he remains dependable company.
It’s a shame that Collet-Serra wasn’t given slightly more to work with as his ingenious camera trickery is at odds with the poor CG
The action is choreographed well considering the limitations of the set and while it’s clear that the carriages have been manipulated during some of the fight scenes, it’s still impressive to think of all the camera equipment being squeezed into a fairly small space. There’s always been something oddly satisfying at seeing 65-year-old Neeson taking down a group of ruffians half his age and that shows no sign of dissipating any time soon.
Unfortunately, it appears that the limitations of the set also manifested themselves in limits to the script. There are numerous scenes of Neeson pacing up and down the carriages with very little dialogue and while this worked reasonably well in Non-Stop, the result is less successful here, probably due to a less engaging supporting cast.
And while the cinematography is very clever indeed, the low budget, less than $20million in fact, means some of the CGI and special effects leave a lot to be desired, especially towards the film’s climax. It’s a shame that Collet-Serra wasn’t given slightly more to work with as his ingenious camera trickery is at odds with the poor CG.
Overall, The Commuter is another thrilling slice of popcorn entertainment from Jaume Collet-Serra and Liam Neeson. At 65-years-old, you’d think everyone’s favourite Irish actor would want to be settling down into cosier rom-com territory and who could blame him? I’m just thankful he’s not. The Commuter may be utterly preposterous and completely unoriginal, but you’ll have a blast watching it.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/01/20/the-commuter-review-liam-neesons-special-set-of-skills-return/
Liam Neeson is this generation’s formidable action hero. From protecting his family in Taken and protecting his family in Run All Night, to protecting his family in Taken 2, and you know, protecting his family in Taken 3, Neeson is a family man if ever I’ve seen one.
Teaming up with director Jaume Collet-Serra for the fourth time, the rather excellent Non-Stop being their best work together, Neeson takes the action and moves it on-board, you guessed it, a commuter train. But does The Commuter work? Or are we starting to get derailed by these constant action roles?
Insurance salesman Michael (Neeson) is on his daily commute home, which quickly becomes anything but routine. After being contacted by a mysterious stranger (Vera Farmiga), Michael is forced to uncover the identity of a hidden passenger on the train before the last stop. As he works against the clock to solve the puzzle, he realizes a deadly plan is unfolding, and he is unwittingly caught up in a criminal conspiracy that carries life and death stakes for everyone on the train.
The premise is a borderline carbon copy of what we saw in Non-Stop, but with Neeson battling a series of bad guys on a train instead of in the air, and while it is at times, ridiculous, it’s directed with the usual Collet-Serra sense of style that would make even a dog food commercial look intriguing.
Where last year’s Murder on the Orient Express opted for opulence and fairly static camerawork, here The Commuter utilises every part of the train to its advantage. From underneath the carriages, to through the windows and even cleverly framed through a ticket stub, Collet-Serra’s direction is unique, if a little over-stylised at times.
Casting wise, Neeson is the perfect choice to play the world-weary protagonist with a very special set of skills, after all, it’s a role he has been playing for many years now. Some might say typecast, I prefer to think of it as knowing what he wants. Elsewhere, Vera Farmiga is a disappointingly underused presence and it would have been nice to see her a little more throughout the fairly taut 105-minute running time. It’s also nice to see Sam Neill back on the big screen and he remains dependable company.
It’s a shame that Collet-Serra wasn’t given slightly more to work with as his ingenious camera trickery is at odds with the poor CG
The action is choreographed well considering the limitations of the set and while it’s clear that the carriages have been manipulated during some of the fight scenes, it’s still impressive to think of all the camera equipment being squeezed into a fairly small space. There’s always been something oddly satisfying at seeing 65-year-old Neeson taking down a group of ruffians half his age and that shows no sign of dissipating any time soon.
Unfortunately, it appears that the limitations of the set also manifested themselves in limits to the script. There are numerous scenes of Neeson pacing up and down the carriages with very little dialogue and while this worked reasonably well in Non-Stop, the result is less successful here, probably due to a less engaging supporting cast.
And while the cinematography is very clever indeed, the low budget, less than $20million in fact, means some of the CGI and special effects leave a lot to be desired, especially towards the film’s climax. It’s a shame that Collet-Serra wasn’t given slightly more to work with as his ingenious camera trickery is at odds with the poor CG.
Overall, The Commuter is another thrilling slice of popcorn entertainment from Jaume Collet-Serra and Liam Neeson. At 65-years-old, you’d think everyone’s favourite Irish actor would want to be settling down into cosier rom-com territory and who could blame him? I’m just thankful he’s not. The Commuter may be utterly preposterous and completely unoriginal, but you’ll have a blast watching it.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/01/20/the-commuter-review-liam-neesons-special-set-of-skills-return/
Joe Julians (221 KP) rated Ready Player One (2018) in Movies
Mar 21, 2018
Full disclosure, I’m a fan of the book and it’s quite possible that it’s swayed my opinion somewhat on the movie. So, the movie then. How is it? It’s fine. I was worried going in. I just had a feeling that it would be one of those movies that winds up being disappointing. I know the trailers weren’t that well received, but I loved them. Hell, I even liked those posters they used for the advertising campaign that got a lot of people’s backs up. And yet, when it comes to the movie itself, I came out of it feeling a little underwhelmed. I enjoyed it and I’m definitely glad I saw it but on the whole, I found it to be oddly a little empty.
Let’s start with what worked then. This is a gorgeous looking film and there were many moments that blew me away in terms of pure spectacle. This is an easy day one purchase on UHD just so I can pause it at various moments to see all the Easter eggs that were impossible to catch the first time around. It’s got a great score too. It very much plays on nostalgia as much as the visuals do and almost every song choice works perfectly.
Then there’s the cast. The main roles here are cast well enough. Tye Sheridan is a likeable lead who’s quest is one that’s easy to get behind. I always love Mark Rylance and Ready Player One does nothing to change that. His Halliday is a nervous man with a clear lack of social skills and he’s played here in a way that makes him seem extremely endearing. Simon Pegg is fun too in a much more understated role than I’m used to seeing him. Perhaps the standout for me though is Olivia Cooke. She really impressed me in The Limehouse Golem (do check that film out) and she does again here. It’s nice to see that her star is rising. It’s only really Ben Mendelsohn that doesn’t come out of this brilliantly, but that’s not really his fault. Sorrento is a bit of a nothing villain on the whole and as such, he isn’t really given anything decent to work with. I understand his goals and desires, but there’s nothing about him that elevates him beyond being just a generic villain.
As for the plot itself, it’s a bit of a cookie-cutter version of the source material in a lot of ways. Take the first key for example (mild spoilers for this bit). In the book, it’s a brilliant moment when Wade works out where it is and the challenge to obtain is fun and wonderfully nerdy. Here, it’s just a race. I mean sure, it’s a race that includes a T-Rex and Kong, but by going for spectacle it loses a lot of the charm. It's like that throughout really. The actual game itself doesn’t seem all that hard and as a result, it’s not all that impactful when players progress to the next stage. Finding Halliday’s easter egg is supposed to be the biggest game the world has ever seen and yet, aside from a climactic final act, it doesn’t feel like it.
A lot of that is down to world building. There’s not much in the way of showing us how the world is reacting to someone finally getting onto the leaderboard, or how the general population is following what Parzival and co are doing. Ready Player One needed that to really enforce what a huge deal it is and how much is at stake. At times, it comes across as if Spielberg is more interested in showing us what is cool in The Oasis rather than how important it is to the people that are so absorbed by it.
That being said, there are moments when the film just comes to life. The second key, for example, features a trip into something that I didn’t see coming and it’s one of the best parts of the movie. There are actually a few moments that made me laugh that I won’t mention for fear of spoilers. One, in particular, comes right around the time the film drops its only F-bomb. On the whole, Ready Player One isn’t a classic, but it is a fun adventure movie that is certainly worth checking out.
Let’s start with what worked then. This is a gorgeous looking film and there were many moments that blew me away in terms of pure spectacle. This is an easy day one purchase on UHD just so I can pause it at various moments to see all the Easter eggs that were impossible to catch the first time around. It’s got a great score too. It very much plays on nostalgia as much as the visuals do and almost every song choice works perfectly.
Then there’s the cast. The main roles here are cast well enough. Tye Sheridan is a likeable lead who’s quest is one that’s easy to get behind. I always love Mark Rylance and Ready Player One does nothing to change that. His Halliday is a nervous man with a clear lack of social skills and he’s played here in a way that makes him seem extremely endearing. Simon Pegg is fun too in a much more understated role than I’m used to seeing him. Perhaps the standout for me though is Olivia Cooke. She really impressed me in The Limehouse Golem (do check that film out) and she does again here. It’s nice to see that her star is rising. It’s only really Ben Mendelsohn that doesn’t come out of this brilliantly, but that’s not really his fault. Sorrento is a bit of a nothing villain on the whole and as such, he isn’t really given anything decent to work with. I understand his goals and desires, but there’s nothing about him that elevates him beyond being just a generic villain.
As for the plot itself, it’s a bit of a cookie-cutter version of the source material in a lot of ways. Take the first key for example (mild spoilers for this bit). In the book, it’s a brilliant moment when Wade works out where it is and the challenge to obtain is fun and wonderfully nerdy. Here, it’s just a race. I mean sure, it’s a race that includes a T-Rex and Kong, but by going for spectacle it loses a lot of the charm. It's like that throughout really. The actual game itself doesn’t seem all that hard and as a result, it’s not all that impactful when players progress to the next stage. Finding Halliday’s easter egg is supposed to be the biggest game the world has ever seen and yet, aside from a climactic final act, it doesn’t feel like it.
A lot of that is down to world building. There’s not much in the way of showing us how the world is reacting to someone finally getting onto the leaderboard, or how the general population is following what Parzival and co are doing. Ready Player One needed that to really enforce what a huge deal it is and how much is at stake. At times, it comes across as if Spielberg is more interested in showing us what is cool in The Oasis rather than how important it is to the people that are so absorbed by it.
That being said, there are moments when the film just comes to life. The second key, for example, features a trip into something that I didn’t see coming and it’s one of the best parts of the movie. There are actually a few moments that made me laugh that I won’t mention for fear of spoilers. One, in particular, comes right around the time the film drops its only F-bomb. On the whole, Ready Player One isn’t a classic, but it is a fun adventure movie that is certainly worth checking out.
Dana (24 KP) rated Reign of Shadows (Reign of Shadows, #1) in Books
Mar 23, 2018
Okay, so in this review, there will be some pretty general spoilers in the character descriptions, one that isn't really revealed until about thirty pages in. I will put SPOILER right in front of that one, then you can skip to where I put the asterisk to continue the paragraph if you want.
I am not overly sure on where I stand with this book. While the story itself wasn't bad, it also was not my favorite. There were some issues with me in the pacing of the story itself because a lot of the moments felt like they dragged on for a long time or that they they were repetitive.
Quite a few of the descriptions of the dwellers and other landscapes and characters were also not well described. I want to know more about what they look like, but we were not given those things.
Okay, now onto specifics. In this instance, the characters.
The guardians were very over-protective of Luna. I totally get why, but it got annoying after a while. But the bread Pearla makes sounds so freaking delicious.
Luna is a cool character. Her identity being what it is seemed like it was just pushed in the story.I know it is important later in the novel and will be coming up again in the later book(s) but it could have been mentioned or explored a little more for me. SPOILER: I did not see her being blind coming. No, that was not supposed to be a pun, but it just happened like that. I always enjoy having characters who are not perfect, especially ones who are living, surviving, and overcoming disabilities. Much of the time in books, characters often have a mental disability, if any, so it is awesome to read one where she is blind. I thought it was an awesome parallel that when she came into the world, the rest of the world went "blind" as well. That was really cool and I commend Sophie Jordan on that idea. * Okay, so as a female character, yes, she was strong and stubborn, but I didn't feel any attachment to her or her story line, which was unfortunate. I wanted to feel some sort of connection, but got nothing. I hope we get to know Luna more in the next book.
Now onto Fowler. (Note, I keep wanting to write Flower, but I think he would be pissed if he knew that and that kinda makes me want to do it even more.) Okay. So, he's kind of an ass. He wants survival and to get to this magical island where nothing bad ever happens, but he could be nicer about it. We do get some of his backstory and are able to understand part of the reason he is the way he is, but still, he's an ass. I don't like how he treats everyone, as if he's better than them, or as if they are just pawns to get rid of at the first moment he can. I hope he becomes a more likable character in the next book because I am not a fan.
Minor plot SPOILER that happens within the first fifty pages. I hate how Luna falls in love with Fowler almost instantaneously. I get that he is the first boy she meets, but geez, why? I really wanted them to become besties, not love interests. It would have made for a much more interesting story (in my opinion). CAN WE HAVE A STORY WHERE THERE IS NO LOVE INTEREST FOR THE MAIN FEMALE CHARACTER???? PLEASE? THANK YOU! *
Okay, now onto plot points. We have no idea what really happened on the night Luna was born, only what her guardians told her. Also, we know nothing of the new king and why he's such a skeevy ass. Or how and why the world turned to such crap. I just want to know all of these things! There was a lot introduced, but not explained. I get that it is because this the first book in a series, but I want info to keep me intrigued instead of just being annoyed by the withholding of it.
Overall, it was a pretty interesting read. Yes, it had issues, but a lot of books do nowadays. I will most likely be picking up the next book, if only to see what happens next!
I am not overly sure on where I stand with this book. While the story itself wasn't bad, it also was not my favorite. There were some issues with me in the pacing of the story itself because a lot of the moments felt like they dragged on for a long time or that they they were repetitive.
Quite a few of the descriptions of the dwellers and other landscapes and characters were also not well described. I want to know more about what they look like, but we were not given those things.
Okay, now onto specifics. In this instance, the characters.
The guardians were very over-protective of Luna. I totally get why, but it got annoying after a while. But the bread Pearla makes sounds so freaking delicious.
Luna is a cool character. Her identity being what it is seemed like it was just pushed in the story.I know it is important later in the novel and will be coming up again in the later book(s) but it could have been mentioned or explored a little more for me. SPOILER: I did not see her being blind coming. No, that was not supposed to be a pun, but it just happened like that. I always enjoy having characters who are not perfect, especially ones who are living, surviving, and overcoming disabilities. Much of the time in books, characters often have a mental disability, if any, so it is awesome to read one where she is blind. I thought it was an awesome parallel that when she came into the world, the rest of the world went "blind" as well. That was really cool and I commend Sophie Jordan on that idea. * Okay, so as a female character, yes, she was strong and stubborn, but I didn't feel any attachment to her or her story line, which was unfortunate. I wanted to feel some sort of connection, but got nothing. I hope we get to know Luna more in the next book.
Now onto Fowler. (Note, I keep wanting to write Flower, but I think he would be pissed if he knew that and that kinda makes me want to do it even more.) Okay. So, he's kind of an ass. He wants survival and to get to this magical island where nothing bad ever happens, but he could be nicer about it. We do get some of his backstory and are able to understand part of the reason he is the way he is, but still, he's an ass. I don't like how he treats everyone, as if he's better than them, or as if they are just pawns to get rid of at the first moment he can. I hope he becomes a more likable character in the next book because I am not a fan.
Minor plot SPOILER that happens within the first fifty pages. I hate how Luna falls in love with Fowler almost instantaneously. I get that he is the first boy she meets, but geez, why? I really wanted them to become besties, not love interests. It would have made for a much more interesting story (in my opinion). CAN WE HAVE A STORY WHERE THERE IS NO LOVE INTEREST FOR THE MAIN FEMALE CHARACTER???? PLEASE? THANK YOU! *
Okay, now onto plot points. We have no idea what really happened on the night Luna was born, only what her guardians told her. Also, we know nothing of the new king and why he's such a skeevy ass. Or how and why the world turned to such crap. I just want to know all of these things! There was a lot introduced, but not explained. I get that it is because this the first book in a series, but I want info to keep me intrigued instead of just being annoyed by the withholding of it.
Overall, it was a pretty interesting read. Yes, it had issues, but a lot of books do nowadays. I will most likely be picking up the next book, if only to see what happens next!
Ross (3284 KP) rated Perfect Death in Books
Sep 28, 2018
Contains spoilers, click to show
I have debated with myself over a rating for this, the third in the "DI Luc Callanach" series of Edinburgh police procedurals. While the overall story is definitely a 4 star, verging on 5, certain aspects of the dialogue in this one were a little jarring at times, and the plot hinged on a couple of very out of character decisions on the part of the murderer.
As with the previous two books, we join the story at the start of two independent investigations, which inevitably expand and take up the whole team's efforts (it's almost as if there was no crime in the city before these came along as no other cases seem to be mentioned or worked on!). We have the apparent death by misadventure of a young girl on the hills around Arthur's Seat, and the apparent suicide of former DCI Begbie.
Both cases are interesting and very different, the former being a more typical murder investigation, the latter being more focused on police corruption and the Glasgow gangland (I do enjoy the fact that any nasty gangsters in these Edinburgh-based stories have to be based in Glasgow, almost like they are sponsored by the Edinburgh tourist board, or someone with an anti-East Coast agenda).
While the murder investigation is decent, a number of clangers really spoiled it for me. We have a young man who appears to be poisoning people after having ingratiated themselves into their lives and the lives of their loved ones under different false names. However, as is so often the case in these stories, the killer is made too clever to be caught (at least too clever to be caught in under 300 pages!), and so the slightest mistake or piece of luck is what the investigation hinges on. Here it transpires that, while the killer has used false names in every interaction, in one of them he seems to have for some reason used the name of someone who leads the police directly to his backstory and hence uncovering his real identity. This piece of Batman vs Superman ("Your Mom was called Martha?!") level plot pivot was just so jarring and so out of character for this supposedly clever murderer. And yet without it there was pretty much no way of the murderer being found. For a secret poisoner to then start waving a gun around was also a bit hard to accept.
And also, all characters seem to be very well spoken. We have a young man who grew up in care homes from the age of 5, a Glasgow gangster and his henchmen and numerous bad sorts along the way and all are very well spoken, to the point that none of them have a voice and are just ... there. And, of course everyone refers to the police in the same way as the police refer to themselves - I cannot imagine anyone referring to a policeman as "DI something" or ""your DCI said this". It just totally jars and again comes across as the author simply inserting their voice into the mouths of characters that they could not be bothered to properly consider.
This brings me on to the dialogue gripe. I have always struggled to accept the formality in the way fictional detectives speak to members of the public. I get that interviews etc have to be carried out in a certain way, but at one point DCI Turner is speaking to a 17 year old boy about the death of his mother and she says "I cannot leave someone who might be a danger to themselves without establishing first-hand contact". This just struck me as the author inserting a piece of research into dialogue rather than considering how that point would be addressed in a human conversation. Similarly, at one point a DC refers to one of the victims as "she" and Callanach snapped at her "We use victims' names not pronouns", which just struck me as an odd thing to say, and at several times throughout the book he himself refers to victims with pronouns.
And finally, while there was never a great deal of swearing in the first two books, it was believable swearing. Here we have the occasional use of "frigging" instead of the other "f" word, which I cannot think I have ever heard a Scottish person say, unless singing along to the Sex Pistols sea shanty.
Overall, I give this book 4 stars for the plot, 3 stars for the writing, then averaged out and rounded down for the annoying little things.
A definite step down from the second book, and a more slapdash feel to it.
As with the previous two books, we join the story at the start of two independent investigations, which inevitably expand and take up the whole team's efforts (it's almost as if there was no crime in the city before these came along as no other cases seem to be mentioned or worked on!). We have the apparent death by misadventure of a young girl on the hills around Arthur's Seat, and the apparent suicide of former DCI Begbie.
Both cases are interesting and very different, the former being a more typical murder investigation, the latter being more focused on police corruption and the Glasgow gangland (I do enjoy the fact that any nasty gangsters in these Edinburgh-based stories have to be based in Glasgow, almost like they are sponsored by the Edinburgh tourist board, or someone with an anti-East Coast agenda).
While the murder investigation is decent, a number of clangers really spoiled it for me. We have a young man who appears to be poisoning people after having ingratiated themselves into their lives and the lives of their loved ones under different false names. However, as is so often the case in these stories, the killer is made too clever to be caught (at least too clever to be caught in under 300 pages!), and so the slightest mistake or piece of luck is what the investigation hinges on. Here it transpires that, while the killer has used false names in every interaction, in one of them he seems to have for some reason used the name of someone who leads the police directly to his backstory and hence uncovering his real identity. This piece of Batman vs Superman ("Your Mom was called Martha?!") level plot pivot was just so jarring and so out of character for this supposedly clever murderer. And yet without it there was pretty much no way of the murderer being found. For a secret poisoner to then start waving a gun around was also a bit hard to accept.
And also, all characters seem to be very well spoken. We have a young man who grew up in care homes from the age of 5, a Glasgow gangster and his henchmen and numerous bad sorts along the way and all are very well spoken, to the point that none of them have a voice and are just ... there. And, of course everyone refers to the police in the same way as the police refer to themselves - I cannot imagine anyone referring to a policeman as "DI something" or ""your DCI said this". It just totally jars and again comes across as the author simply inserting their voice into the mouths of characters that they could not be bothered to properly consider.
This brings me on to the dialogue gripe. I have always struggled to accept the formality in the way fictional detectives speak to members of the public. I get that interviews etc have to be carried out in a certain way, but at one point DCI Turner is speaking to a 17 year old boy about the death of his mother and she says "I cannot leave someone who might be a danger to themselves without establishing first-hand contact". This just struck me as the author inserting a piece of research into dialogue rather than considering how that point would be addressed in a human conversation. Similarly, at one point a DC refers to one of the victims as "she" and Callanach snapped at her "We use victims' names not pronouns", which just struck me as an odd thing to say, and at several times throughout the book he himself refers to victims with pronouns.
And finally, while there was never a great deal of swearing in the first two books, it was believable swearing. Here we have the occasional use of "frigging" instead of the other "f" word, which I cannot think I have ever heard a Scottish person say, unless singing along to the Sex Pistols sea shanty.
Overall, I give this book 4 stars for the plot, 3 stars for the writing, then averaged out and rounded down for the annoying little things.
A definite step down from the second book, and a more slapdash feel to it.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Air Force One (1997) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: Air Force One starts as we see President James Marshall (Ford) having a proud moment after capturing a terrorist leader and coming out with how he wants to take on Congress. Returning home on Air Force One President Marshall finds his plane hijacked by Ivan Korshunov (Oldman) who wants the recently captured terrorist released.
Once in control of Air Force One Ivan uses the President’s wife Grace (Crewson) and daughter Alice (Matthews) as leverage to push the President into breaking his no negotiations with terrorist’s stance, as he uses his combat skills to take out the terrorists himself from on board. The Vice President Kathryn Bennett (Close) has to control things from the ground potentially having to make the biggest decisions.
Air Force One gave us an action film unlike anything we had seen before because this time the action hero was none other than the President himself and yes I know we did get a strong leader in Independence Day but this time he was the star of the show. We get to see how the President will handle the action pressure as well as the big decisions. Another great part of this film is that we get to see the traitor from the start and always wonder what their next move will be. When we see action films we like to cheer for the guy who is against the odds and this gives us that and plenty more as we watch a nation wait for the news of his safety.
Actor Review
Harrison Ford: President James Marshall is a medal of honour winning soldier who has bought in a new no negotiation with terrorist stance. He finds his Air Force One under hijack where instead of escaping like procedure he takes a stand as he tries to take out the men taking over the plane. James is one of the best action Presidents in film history instead of being just a by the book nice guy. Harrison is brilliant in this role where he gets to show a new line of stunt work to go with a strong leader and action star.president
Gary Oldman: Ivan Korshunov is the extremist terrorist who has taken over Air Force One, he will kill any hostages to get what he wants which is one extremist leader to be released from prison. Ivan is one of the most memorable villains of the 90s because he is ruthless to the core. Gary is brilliant in this role showing he can play any character.ivan
Glenn Close: Vice President Kathryn Bennett has to make the decisions back in America as she is left helpless with the hijack of Air Force One. She must deal with all the diplomatic decisions as well as helping her President and innocent people on board the plane. Glenn is great in this role showing how difficult the side of this story is away from the action.vice
Wendy Crewson: Grace Marshall is the wife of the President who is on Air Force One, she becomes the leverage for Ivan to get what he wants. Wendy is good even if the character isn’t given the true screen time needed.
Support Cast: Air Force One has a big supporting cast that is filled with known names in the business who all help the story unfold with their different acts of bravery and betray.
Director Review: Wolfgang Petersen – Wolfgang gives us one of the best action films from the 90s that also gives us glimpses of political decision being made.
Action: Air Force One has plenty of action being most of the President taking on the terrorists.
Adventure: Air Force One works for the adventure side of story trying to save the day.
Thriller: Air Force One keeps us on the edge from the moment that Air Force One is hijack until the end credits.
Settings: Air Force One keeps the settings on both Air Force One and White House as the decisions get made for the good of the country.
Special Effects: Air Force One has good effects for the time but have started to date now.
Suggestion: Air Force One is one for all the action junkies to enjoy. (Action Fans Watch)
Best Part: Parachute escape.
Worst Part: Political side gets slightly annoying.
Believability: No
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Similar Too: Con Air, The Rock
Oscar Chances: Nominated for Best Sound and Film Editing
Box Office: $172 Million
Budget: $85 Million
Runtime: 2 Hours 4 Minutes
Tagline: Harrison Ford is the President of the United States.
Overall: Brilliant action film that keeps us on edge from start to finish.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/05/11/air-force-one-1997/
Once in control of Air Force One Ivan uses the President’s wife Grace (Crewson) and daughter Alice (Matthews) as leverage to push the President into breaking his no negotiations with terrorist’s stance, as he uses his combat skills to take out the terrorists himself from on board. The Vice President Kathryn Bennett (Close) has to control things from the ground potentially having to make the biggest decisions.
Air Force One gave us an action film unlike anything we had seen before because this time the action hero was none other than the President himself and yes I know we did get a strong leader in Independence Day but this time he was the star of the show. We get to see how the President will handle the action pressure as well as the big decisions. Another great part of this film is that we get to see the traitor from the start and always wonder what their next move will be. When we see action films we like to cheer for the guy who is against the odds and this gives us that and plenty more as we watch a nation wait for the news of his safety.
Actor Review
Harrison Ford: President James Marshall is a medal of honour winning soldier who has bought in a new no negotiation with terrorist stance. He finds his Air Force One under hijack where instead of escaping like procedure he takes a stand as he tries to take out the men taking over the plane. James is one of the best action Presidents in film history instead of being just a by the book nice guy. Harrison is brilliant in this role where he gets to show a new line of stunt work to go with a strong leader and action star.president
Gary Oldman: Ivan Korshunov is the extremist terrorist who has taken over Air Force One, he will kill any hostages to get what he wants which is one extremist leader to be released from prison. Ivan is one of the most memorable villains of the 90s because he is ruthless to the core. Gary is brilliant in this role showing he can play any character.ivan
Glenn Close: Vice President Kathryn Bennett has to make the decisions back in America as she is left helpless with the hijack of Air Force One. She must deal with all the diplomatic decisions as well as helping her President and innocent people on board the plane. Glenn is great in this role showing how difficult the side of this story is away from the action.vice
Wendy Crewson: Grace Marshall is the wife of the President who is on Air Force One, she becomes the leverage for Ivan to get what he wants. Wendy is good even if the character isn’t given the true screen time needed.
Support Cast: Air Force One has a big supporting cast that is filled with known names in the business who all help the story unfold with their different acts of bravery and betray.
Director Review: Wolfgang Petersen – Wolfgang gives us one of the best action films from the 90s that also gives us glimpses of political decision being made.
Action: Air Force One has plenty of action being most of the President taking on the terrorists.
Adventure: Air Force One works for the adventure side of story trying to save the day.
Thriller: Air Force One keeps us on the edge from the moment that Air Force One is hijack until the end credits.
Settings: Air Force One keeps the settings on both Air Force One and White House as the decisions get made for the good of the country.
Special Effects: Air Force One has good effects for the time but have started to date now.
Suggestion: Air Force One is one for all the action junkies to enjoy. (Action Fans Watch)
Best Part: Parachute escape.
Worst Part: Political side gets slightly annoying.
Believability: No
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Similar Too: Con Air, The Rock
Oscar Chances: Nominated for Best Sound and Film Editing
Box Office: $172 Million
Budget: $85 Million
Runtime: 2 Hours 4 Minutes
Tagline: Harrison Ford is the President of the United States.
Overall: Brilliant action film that keeps us on edge from start to finish.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/05/11/air-force-one-1997/
Darren (1599 KP) rated Amadeus (1984) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: Amadeus starts as an elderly Antonio Salieri (Abraham) admitting that he killed Mozart, leading to him getting taken to the insane asylum. Salieri recounts his story of his small town beginnings dreaming of being a composer and after a moment of fate he ends up in a position where he can learn music leading to him job as head conductor to the king of Austria. Mozart (Hulce) is the world renowned composer that has taken the notice of all around him with Salieri dreaming of one day being as good as Mozart.
We see how Mozart constantly ends up out shinning Salieri with his music leading to the rivalry between the two, with Salieri serious look on life and Mozart’s flamboyant style of just getting through each moment. Salieri moves into the position of being the connection to the Emperor to get his unique work out there but he is really just building him up for failure trying to break him down with criticize of his work.
REPORT THIS AD
Amadeus gives us a brilliant look at one of the greatest musical minds in the history of man. We know the basic idea of what happened to him but now we get to see it through the eyes of one of his closest friends even if he is filled with envy for him. What starts as envy is filled with respect and seeing how a talented person can get used by all the people close to him which will drive him into his bad ways. Overall this really is a brilliant drama that is told in a way we can just enjoy.
Actor Review
F Murray Abraham: Antonio Salieri admits that he killed Mozart, but now he is confessing to how he believes he was responsible for the death from inside an insane asylum. We watch how he got his dreams of working with music and constantly found himself lacking the complete flair and natural ability of Mozart leading to jealous and planning to bring him down slowly. F Murray gives us a brilliant and well deserved Oscar winning performance in this role.seleir
Tom Hulce: Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart is the flamboyant and brilliant composer who lives life on the edge spending every penny he ever received for his work, he pushes the boundaries to what is accepted even if his work is loved. He gains inspiration from his personal stories which will gain him enemies from his own confident in the government. Tom gives a performance that could easily have won him an Oscar too.morzart
Elizabeth Berridge: Constanze Mozart is the wife of Wolfgang, she supports him in all the work he does but just wants him to actually get paid for the work so they can look after the family, even after she lives him she feels guilty. Elizabeth does a good job in this role.
Roy Dotrice: Leopold Mozart is the overbearing father who pushed Amadeus into this career path making him the puppet when he was younger as he was leading him to become the biggest name in music of his time. After his death we learn about the control he had over Amadeus. Roy is good in this supporting role.
Support Cast: Amadeus has a well performed supporting cast that each hold their own in the characters they are playing.
Director Review: Milos Forman – Milos gives us one of the best biographical films of all time.
Biographical: Amadeus shows the troubles of the great man and how it was his eventual downfall.
Music: Amadeus uses all the music of the great man and how it would have look on stage for the fans witnessing it all.
Settings: Amadeus recreates all the settings that would have been used during the time the film is set.
Suggestion: Amadeus is one that could have been watched by anyone to learn about a part of history. (Watch)
Best Part: The performances are brilliant.
Worst Part: If you are not a fan of classical music you will struggle.
Believability: Yes
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: Won 8 Oscars including Best Picture, Best Actor, Director and Writing also nominated for a further 3.
Box Office: $51 Million
Budget: $18 Million
Runtime: 2 Hours 40 Minutes
Tagline: Everything you’ve heard is true.
Trivia: When the movie won Best Picture at The 57th Annual Academy Awards (1985), Sir Laurence Olivier was presenting the award. He went up to the podium, opened the envelope and said “Amadeus.” The problem was he forgot to read the nominees first.
Overall: Brilliant drama about one of the greatest musicians of all time
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/01/06/amadeus-1984/
We see how Mozart constantly ends up out shinning Salieri with his music leading to the rivalry between the two, with Salieri serious look on life and Mozart’s flamboyant style of just getting through each moment. Salieri moves into the position of being the connection to the Emperor to get his unique work out there but he is really just building him up for failure trying to break him down with criticize of his work.
REPORT THIS AD
Amadeus gives us a brilliant look at one of the greatest musical minds in the history of man. We know the basic idea of what happened to him but now we get to see it through the eyes of one of his closest friends even if he is filled with envy for him. What starts as envy is filled with respect and seeing how a talented person can get used by all the people close to him which will drive him into his bad ways. Overall this really is a brilliant drama that is told in a way we can just enjoy.
Actor Review
F Murray Abraham: Antonio Salieri admits that he killed Mozart, but now he is confessing to how he believes he was responsible for the death from inside an insane asylum. We watch how he got his dreams of working with music and constantly found himself lacking the complete flair and natural ability of Mozart leading to jealous and planning to bring him down slowly. F Murray gives us a brilliant and well deserved Oscar winning performance in this role.seleir
Tom Hulce: Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart is the flamboyant and brilliant composer who lives life on the edge spending every penny he ever received for his work, he pushes the boundaries to what is accepted even if his work is loved. He gains inspiration from his personal stories which will gain him enemies from his own confident in the government. Tom gives a performance that could easily have won him an Oscar too.morzart
Elizabeth Berridge: Constanze Mozart is the wife of Wolfgang, she supports him in all the work he does but just wants him to actually get paid for the work so they can look after the family, even after she lives him she feels guilty. Elizabeth does a good job in this role.
Roy Dotrice: Leopold Mozart is the overbearing father who pushed Amadeus into this career path making him the puppet when he was younger as he was leading him to become the biggest name in music of his time. After his death we learn about the control he had over Amadeus. Roy is good in this supporting role.
Support Cast: Amadeus has a well performed supporting cast that each hold their own in the characters they are playing.
Director Review: Milos Forman – Milos gives us one of the best biographical films of all time.
Biographical: Amadeus shows the troubles of the great man and how it was his eventual downfall.
Music: Amadeus uses all the music of the great man and how it would have look on stage for the fans witnessing it all.
Settings: Amadeus recreates all the settings that would have been used during the time the film is set.
Suggestion: Amadeus is one that could have been watched by anyone to learn about a part of history. (Watch)
Best Part: The performances are brilliant.
Worst Part: If you are not a fan of classical music you will struggle.
Believability: Yes
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: Won 8 Oscars including Best Picture, Best Actor, Director and Writing also nominated for a further 3.
Box Office: $51 Million
Budget: $18 Million
Runtime: 2 Hours 40 Minutes
Tagline: Everything you’ve heard is true.
Trivia: When the movie won Best Picture at The 57th Annual Academy Awards (1985), Sir Laurence Olivier was presenting the award. He went up to the podium, opened the envelope and said “Amadeus.” The problem was he forgot to read the nominees first.
Overall: Brilliant drama about one of the greatest musicians of all time
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/01/06/amadeus-1984/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Watchmen (2009) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
In an alternate 1985, where Nixon is president, The U.S. won the Vietnam War, and costumed heroes have been banned by an act of the Senate, a superhero is killed. The death of the mercurial entity known as The Comedian (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) sets a string of events into motion that will soon see the world poised on the edge of nuclear annihilation, and the few remaining heroes locked in a life or death race against time to save the world. In the gritty and compelling new movie “Watchmen” by Director Zack Snyder, a clever blend of film noir and gumshoe style films of old combined with action and adventure as well as a deep examination of human frailties to create a film like no other.
No sooner has the death of the Comedian hit the streets (literally), when the edgy vigilante Rorschach (Jackie Earle Haley), begins to suspect that there is a larger and far more sinister plot in effect, one that has targeted the few remaining costumed avengers of New York City. Rorschach’s theory is disbelieved by his former associate Dan (Patrick Wilson), who prowled the streets as Night Owl and is now content to keep to himself, with his days of costumed glory behind him. He keeps his social circle limited to the first Night Owl and visiting with Laurie Jupiter ( Malin Akerman), and her husband, Dr. Manhattan (Billy Crudup).
With his concerns being dismissed, Rorschach is left to do the legwork on the mystery which soon shifts into high gear when he is framed for a murder he actually did not commit and an attempt is made on the life of the other former Watchmen, Ozymandias (Matthew Goode). With Rorschach in prison and surrounded by enemies, Dr. Manhattan, the all powerful and blue skinned being, is forced to take refuge on Mars after Laurie leaves him and a series of accusations are levied against him at a press conference .
It soon becomes clear to all that the death of The Comedian was not a random act of violence or a simple act of revenge, but rather the first salvo in a war against costumed heroes. With the former team in chaos, Laurie to take up residence with Dan, who has long held a torch for her, to defy the government order and suit up again. After saving a group of people from a fire, Laurie and Dan find the passion and purpose that has been missing from their post-hero lives and passionately unite and set out to free Rorschach and get to the bottom of the conspiracy before it is to late.
The film is an amazing mix of comic book action and mystery that includes a suprising amount of mature material that examines everything from humanity’s ultimate destiny to the inner psyche of tortured and flawed individuals. The characters all have their flaws and traumas and compensate by donning masks and taking on new personas. The deeply troubled Rorschach is filled in by some horrific and disturbing flashbacks that show how he became the disturbed and deeply dangerous crusader for justice that he is, so extreme in his measures that he is wanted by the police for his actions. Dan and Laurie try to move on from their past, but find that they are more comfortable in their costumed personas than they are in their day-to-day lives. Dr. Manhattan is perhaps the most dysfunctional of all as he has shut himself off from his wife, humanity, and joy. He has evolved beyond caring for anything but his experiments.
Snyder keeps the nearly three hour film moving at a brisk pace and deftly captures the look and tone of the graphic novel on which the film is based. The opening segment that shows alternate versions of great moments in history is amazing, as is the well choreographed action sequences. Despite being a superhero film, “Watchmen” is a superb mystery and drama that is loaded with interesting characters and clever social commentary. The cast is very strong, and Haley is remarkable as Rorschach. He is utterly captivating whenever he is on the screen and has crafted a true modern anti-hero for the masses.
Some may find the graphic violence and sex in the film a bit extreme, but in order to fully capture the duality of the characters and the dark world that they dwell in, it was in many ways restrained from what is actually implied by the source material. “Watchmen”, is a true marvel and is one of the most entertaining, diverse, and original action films in memory.
No sooner has the death of the Comedian hit the streets (literally), when the edgy vigilante Rorschach (Jackie Earle Haley), begins to suspect that there is a larger and far more sinister plot in effect, one that has targeted the few remaining costumed avengers of New York City. Rorschach’s theory is disbelieved by his former associate Dan (Patrick Wilson), who prowled the streets as Night Owl and is now content to keep to himself, with his days of costumed glory behind him. He keeps his social circle limited to the first Night Owl and visiting with Laurie Jupiter ( Malin Akerman), and her husband, Dr. Manhattan (Billy Crudup).
With his concerns being dismissed, Rorschach is left to do the legwork on the mystery which soon shifts into high gear when he is framed for a murder he actually did not commit and an attempt is made on the life of the other former Watchmen, Ozymandias (Matthew Goode). With Rorschach in prison and surrounded by enemies, Dr. Manhattan, the all powerful and blue skinned being, is forced to take refuge on Mars after Laurie leaves him and a series of accusations are levied against him at a press conference .
It soon becomes clear to all that the death of The Comedian was not a random act of violence or a simple act of revenge, but rather the first salvo in a war against costumed heroes. With the former team in chaos, Laurie to take up residence with Dan, who has long held a torch for her, to defy the government order and suit up again. After saving a group of people from a fire, Laurie and Dan find the passion and purpose that has been missing from their post-hero lives and passionately unite and set out to free Rorschach and get to the bottom of the conspiracy before it is to late.
The film is an amazing mix of comic book action and mystery that includes a suprising amount of mature material that examines everything from humanity’s ultimate destiny to the inner psyche of tortured and flawed individuals. The characters all have their flaws and traumas and compensate by donning masks and taking on new personas. The deeply troubled Rorschach is filled in by some horrific and disturbing flashbacks that show how he became the disturbed and deeply dangerous crusader for justice that he is, so extreme in his measures that he is wanted by the police for his actions. Dan and Laurie try to move on from their past, but find that they are more comfortable in their costumed personas than they are in their day-to-day lives. Dr. Manhattan is perhaps the most dysfunctional of all as he has shut himself off from his wife, humanity, and joy. He has evolved beyond caring for anything but his experiments.
Snyder keeps the nearly three hour film moving at a brisk pace and deftly captures the look and tone of the graphic novel on which the film is based. The opening segment that shows alternate versions of great moments in history is amazing, as is the well choreographed action sequences. Despite being a superhero film, “Watchmen” is a superb mystery and drama that is loaded with interesting characters and clever social commentary. The cast is very strong, and Haley is remarkable as Rorschach. He is utterly captivating whenever he is on the screen and has crafted a true modern anti-hero for the masses.
Some may find the graphic violence and sex in the film a bit extreme, but in order to fully capture the duality of the characters and the dark world that they dwell in, it was in many ways restrained from what is actually implied by the source material. “Watchmen”, is a true marvel and is one of the most entertaining, diverse, and original action films in memory.