Search
Search results
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated The Wicker Man (1973) in Movies
Feb 18, 2019
Come. It is time to keep your appointment with the Wicker Man.
Though we never even lay eyes on it until the final few moments of the film, the Wicker Man, both as pagan image and classic horror flick, has become an icon of the genre.
But if you are expecting some dimly lit, slow burn slasher movie, then you will be sorely disappointed. The Wicker Man spends most of its runtime, which varies from its various versions, Theatrical, Director’s and Final Cuts, providing us with a pretty decent, if not disturbing insight into paganism.
Or more over, Paganism verses Christianity. Both spiritual, both magical, yet one is fun and the other is boring. The virgin sacrifice by the sexually liberated heathens is played out brilliantly.
The beauty here is that the final twist is so well conceived and executed throughout the entire film that even though most of us know the ending whether we have seen the film or not, it is not spoiled by that foreknowledge.
It is a kin to the previously released Planet Of The Apes (1968) or the much later Sixth Sense (1999). Both spin out complex genre tales which culminate in “that ending”. But in this case, Edward Woodward delivers a chilling performance in the finale, as he is taken to his death, locked inside the burning Wicker Man to be sacrificed in order to restore the poor harvest of the previous year.
“Don’t you see that killing me is not going to bring back your apples?”
But Woodward’s character is a devout Christian and he has only his faith and a dogged view of the world to aide him. Unable to accept the seemingly free spirited community in which his finds himself, one where sex is commonplace as he himself is still a virgin.
On the other hand there is Lord Summerisle, Christopher Lee, who steals the show as per usual as the charismatic leader of the this pagan community and the descendant of a lord who routed Christianity from the Highland Island a century before.
But whilst on the surface it may seem like a rather academic subject, the film is a trippy 1970’s sexploitation movie in many ways. Some of the sex and violence fits in well with plot but other moments, such as the nude dance by Britt Ekland, though actually doubled by Lorraine Peters is a prime example of a needless, if not memorable sequence.
Overall, The Wicker Man is low budget British movie of the 1970’s and one which has endured to earn it’s classic status, by meeting the main criteria of being smart, engaging and visually compelling, along with several standout performances throughout.
But if you are expecting some dimly lit, slow burn slasher movie, then you will be sorely disappointed. The Wicker Man spends most of its runtime, which varies from its various versions, Theatrical, Director’s and Final Cuts, providing us with a pretty decent, if not disturbing insight into paganism.
Or more over, Paganism verses Christianity. Both spiritual, both magical, yet one is fun and the other is boring. The virgin sacrifice by the sexually liberated heathens is played out brilliantly.
The beauty here is that the final twist is so well conceived and executed throughout the entire film that even though most of us know the ending whether we have seen the film or not, it is not spoiled by that foreknowledge.
It is a kin to the previously released Planet Of The Apes (1968) or the much later Sixth Sense (1999). Both spin out complex genre tales which culminate in “that ending”. But in this case, Edward Woodward delivers a chilling performance in the finale, as he is taken to his death, locked inside the burning Wicker Man to be sacrificed in order to restore the poor harvest of the previous year.
“Don’t you see that killing me is not going to bring back your apples?”
But Woodward’s character is a devout Christian and he has only his faith and a dogged view of the world to aide him. Unable to accept the seemingly free spirited community in which his finds himself, one where sex is commonplace as he himself is still a virgin.
On the other hand there is Lord Summerisle, Christopher Lee, who steals the show as per usual as the charismatic leader of the this pagan community and the descendant of a lord who routed Christianity from the Highland Island a century before.
But whilst on the surface it may seem like a rather academic subject, the film is a trippy 1970’s sexploitation movie in many ways. Some of the sex and violence fits in well with plot but other moments, such as the nude dance by Britt Ekland, though actually doubled by Lorraine Peters is a prime example of a needless, if not memorable sequence.
Overall, The Wicker Man is low budget British movie of the 1970’s and one which has endured to earn it’s classic status, by meeting the main criteria of being smart, engaging and visually compelling, along with several standout performances throughout.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Boss (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Where's the comedy?
Melissa McCarthy is one of the biggest stars in Hollywood. Her rise to fame has been nothing short of extraordinary, helped in part by her leading roles in The Heat, Spy and of course the hilarious Bridesmaids.
However, each of those examples of comedic brilliance had one thing in common, apart from McCarthy, director Paul Feig. He brings out the very best in the actress and we’ll see if this formula continues to work with the controversial Ghostbusters reboot, released later this year.
For now, McCarthy teams up with director and real-life husband Ben Falcone (Tammy) in The Boss. But does it offer you a laugh a minute?
The Boss follows the fall from grace of Michelle Darnell (McCarthy), one of America’s wealthiest women, and her efforts to get back on top. Her plan? To start a cake-making empire. Alongside her for the ride is long-suffering assistant Claire (Kristen Bell). Side roles are reserved for Game of Thrones star Peter Dinklage as Michelle’s rival and Kathy Bates as her mentor.
Unfortunately, the biggest problem The Boss has is one that blights many films nowadays; the best bits have already been shown in the trailer. For an action adventure, this is disappointing, but for a comedy, it’s silver-screen suicide. Having laughed in the pre-release clips already, the rest of the film is as barren as the Sahara when it comes to raising a titter.
That’s a real shame as the film’s plot, whilst hardly ground-breaking, is fundamentally solid and the acting is, Dinklage’s hammy performance aside, decent. McCarthy in particular takes a poor script and injects some much-needed spice into it – a testament to her incredible talents as a comedienne. Bell is on-point and bounces off McCarthy’s presence very well while Kathy Bates provides the film with one of its more memorable scenes, albeit one already used in the trailer.
There’s also a well-choreographed bust-up between two groups of teenage girls that manages to raise a chuckle, but again the majority of it was added to the most recent trailer.
Overall, The Boss is McCarthy’s second true turkey with Tammy being the first, but there’s no blame to be placed on her shoulders here. Michelle Darnell is a cracking character, despite her striking resemblance to Rita from Coronation Street, and is one that deserves far better than a film that’s light on laughs and has to rest on the laurels of its lead star – now that’s just lazy.
Perhaps the next time her husband asks her to star in one of his comedies, she should really, really think about it first.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/06/11/wheres-the-comedy-the-boss-review/
However, each of those examples of comedic brilliance had one thing in common, apart from McCarthy, director Paul Feig. He brings out the very best in the actress and we’ll see if this formula continues to work with the controversial Ghostbusters reboot, released later this year.
For now, McCarthy teams up with director and real-life husband Ben Falcone (Tammy) in The Boss. But does it offer you a laugh a minute?
The Boss follows the fall from grace of Michelle Darnell (McCarthy), one of America’s wealthiest women, and her efforts to get back on top. Her plan? To start a cake-making empire. Alongside her for the ride is long-suffering assistant Claire (Kristen Bell). Side roles are reserved for Game of Thrones star Peter Dinklage as Michelle’s rival and Kathy Bates as her mentor.
Unfortunately, the biggest problem The Boss has is one that blights many films nowadays; the best bits have already been shown in the trailer. For an action adventure, this is disappointing, but for a comedy, it’s silver-screen suicide. Having laughed in the pre-release clips already, the rest of the film is as barren as the Sahara when it comes to raising a titter.
That’s a real shame as the film’s plot, whilst hardly ground-breaking, is fundamentally solid and the acting is, Dinklage’s hammy performance aside, decent. McCarthy in particular takes a poor script and injects some much-needed spice into it – a testament to her incredible talents as a comedienne. Bell is on-point and bounces off McCarthy’s presence very well while Kathy Bates provides the film with one of its more memorable scenes, albeit one already used in the trailer.
There’s also a well-choreographed bust-up between two groups of teenage girls that manages to raise a chuckle, but again the majority of it was added to the most recent trailer.
Overall, The Boss is McCarthy’s second true turkey with Tammy being the first, but there’s no blame to be placed on her shoulders here. Michelle Darnell is a cracking character, despite her striking resemblance to Rita from Coronation Street, and is one that deserves far better than a film that’s light on laughs and has to rest on the laurels of its lead star – now that’s just lazy.
Perhaps the next time her husband asks her to star in one of his comedies, she should really, really think about it first.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/06/11/wheres-the-comedy-the-boss-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Dirty Grandpa (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Dirty De Niro
It’s hard to imagine an acting career that has continuously impressed as much as that of Robert De Niro. The two-time Academy Award-winner has also racked up an incredible five further nominations at the Oscars, cementing him as a Hollywood great.
However, over the last few years, this acting veteran has spiralled into rather dangerous territory. Taking on thankless role after thankless role with terrible romantic comedies, his filmography makes for grim reading these days.
His latest movie sees him star alongside the hunky Zac Efron in Dirty Grandpa, a gross-out comedy following the pair on a road trip from Atlanta to Florida, but does it do enough to restore some sheen to De Niro’s CV?
De Niro stars as Richard ‘Dick’ Kelly, an army veteran mourning the loss of his late wife. To ease his grief, he and his uptight lawyer grandson Jason (Efron) take a trip together as a way of catching up. Though for Dick, there’s more than scenery on his mind.
I’ll get this off my chest before we go any further. The script is absolutely atrocious and one of the worst I have ever come across in the genre, and Dan Mazer’s inconsistent direction only highlights these major flaws.
Both Efron and De Niro look uncomfortable with the overly offensive dialogue that targets homosexuals and ethnic minorities just to try and raise a laugh. This is comedy at its laziest and Dirty Grandpa is more than happy to admit that to you – it’s definitely not ashamed of what it is.
Nevertheless, it’s such a shame to see a former Oscar winner taking on the role of a borderline perverted grandparent. The constant leering at college girls and the cringe-worthy talk of sex just don’t sit well with those who know of De Niro’s once unrivalled talent and this is why he feels sorely miscast.
Efron too starts off incredibly poorly. As the uptight lawyer, he spouts legalese that you know he doesn’t truly understand, though once he starts to unwind we see him at his best. The actor knows that he works well in films where he can use his cracking smile and body to full effect and it’s certainly out in force here.
Elsewhere, a supporting cast that includes Parks and Recreation’s Aubrey Plaza fares much better with Plaza being the film’s standout character. Her sex-obsessed Lenore is actually very funny indeed and provides Dirty Grandpa with what it sorely needs – genuine comedy.
Unfortunately, despite a few laughs, the film tries too hard with the tired old clichés. From fart jokes to racism and sexism, it’s all there – all the while unaware it’s adding another nail in the coffin of Robert De Niro’s acting career.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/02/05/dire-de-niro-dirty-grandpa-review/
However, over the last few years, this acting veteran has spiralled into rather dangerous territory. Taking on thankless role after thankless role with terrible romantic comedies, his filmography makes for grim reading these days.
His latest movie sees him star alongside the hunky Zac Efron in Dirty Grandpa, a gross-out comedy following the pair on a road trip from Atlanta to Florida, but does it do enough to restore some sheen to De Niro’s CV?
De Niro stars as Richard ‘Dick’ Kelly, an army veteran mourning the loss of his late wife. To ease his grief, he and his uptight lawyer grandson Jason (Efron) take a trip together as a way of catching up. Though for Dick, there’s more than scenery on his mind.
I’ll get this off my chest before we go any further. The script is absolutely atrocious and one of the worst I have ever come across in the genre, and Dan Mazer’s inconsistent direction only highlights these major flaws.
Both Efron and De Niro look uncomfortable with the overly offensive dialogue that targets homosexuals and ethnic minorities just to try and raise a laugh. This is comedy at its laziest and Dirty Grandpa is more than happy to admit that to you – it’s definitely not ashamed of what it is.
Nevertheless, it’s such a shame to see a former Oscar winner taking on the role of a borderline perverted grandparent. The constant leering at college girls and the cringe-worthy talk of sex just don’t sit well with those who know of De Niro’s once unrivalled talent and this is why he feels sorely miscast.
Efron too starts off incredibly poorly. As the uptight lawyer, he spouts legalese that you know he doesn’t truly understand, though once he starts to unwind we see him at his best. The actor knows that he works well in films where he can use his cracking smile and body to full effect and it’s certainly out in force here.
Elsewhere, a supporting cast that includes Parks and Recreation’s Aubrey Plaza fares much better with Plaza being the film’s standout character. Her sex-obsessed Lenore is actually very funny indeed and provides Dirty Grandpa with what it sorely needs – genuine comedy.
Unfortunately, despite a few laughs, the film tries too hard with the tired old clichés. From fart jokes to racism and sexism, it’s all there – all the while unaware it’s adding another nail in the coffin of Robert De Niro’s acting career.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/02/05/dire-de-niro-dirty-grandpa-review/
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Girl with the Lower Back Tattoo in Books
Feb 1, 2018
Amy Schumer's book comes out at a time when it seems like every celebrity in the world has a book out: some collection of essays about their life, showcasing how funny they are and what their life is like as a celebrity. In Schumer's, we hear about her life from childhood to her post <i>Trainwreck</i> success and nearly everything in between: her friendships, her relationships, her parents, and her growth as a comedian. And, of course, a lot about sex. The book is told in a series of chapters - essays if you will - each one covering a particular moment in Schumer's life. They don't go in any particular order, but cover the gamut of her range of experiences.
I found this book to be a refreshing and engaging celebrity book. It carried a surprising depth. I don't know a ton about Schumer, but loved <i>Trainwreck</i> and have had a crush on her for ages. That crush has only intensified upon reading her book, as I discovered several similarities between us: introverts who love hotdogs and have complicated relationships with their mothers, who both internalize stress to the point where it makes us sick. We're a match made in heaven! But, seriously, Schumer is an excellent writer, and her book is an easy read, with well-written and wonderful essays that range from humorous to serious (and often both).
Her book avoided all of my usual celebrity autobiography/memoir/essay pet peeves. In this book, we really learn about Schumer, instead of just a few token stories. I was fascinated to hear about her career trajectory: you get a great look into how hard she worked in her early years as a comedian. In addition, we actually get a lot of insight into her early life-- her childhood and teenage years. What I love is that she comes across as a real human being, instead of giving us a book that is simply full of polished, trite jokes and well-worn stories.
In fact, while parts of the book make you laugh out loud, other places make you empathize with Schumer. The book is funny, but not too funny or fake funny. And it's serious without preaching. She covers topics such as sexual assault, gun control, her father's MS, her relationship with her parents, and other serious childhood experiences that molded her, with a realism that is refreshing. Sure, there are a few "woe is me" moments about how hard it is to be a celebrity, or what it's like to have money, but they are few and far between. By the end, I admired Amy even more as a person and a comedian, and my crush will continue on stronger than ever.
I found this book to be a refreshing and engaging celebrity book. It carried a surprising depth. I don't know a ton about Schumer, but loved <i>Trainwreck</i> and have had a crush on her for ages. That crush has only intensified upon reading her book, as I discovered several similarities between us: introverts who love hotdogs and have complicated relationships with their mothers, who both internalize stress to the point where it makes us sick. We're a match made in heaven! But, seriously, Schumer is an excellent writer, and her book is an easy read, with well-written and wonderful essays that range from humorous to serious (and often both).
Her book avoided all of my usual celebrity autobiography/memoir/essay pet peeves. In this book, we really learn about Schumer, instead of just a few token stories. I was fascinated to hear about her career trajectory: you get a great look into how hard she worked in her early years as a comedian. In addition, we actually get a lot of insight into her early life-- her childhood and teenage years. What I love is that she comes across as a real human being, instead of giving us a book that is simply full of polished, trite jokes and well-worn stories.
In fact, while parts of the book make you laugh out loud, other places make you empathize with Schumer. The book is funny, but not too funny or fake funny. And it's serious without preaching. She covers topics such as sexual assault, gun control, her father's MS, her relationship with her parents, and other serious childhood experiences that molded her, with a realism that is refreshing. Sure, there are a few "woe is me" moments about how hard it is to be a celebrity, or what it's like to have money, but they are few and far between. By the end, I admired Amy even more as a person and a comedian, and my crush will continue on stronger than ever.
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated A Pleasure and a Calling in Books
Mar 15, 2018
Also read my review here: http://bookbum.weebly.com/book-reviews/a-pleasure-and-a-calling-by-phil-hogan
<b><I>You won’t remember Mr Heming. He showed you round your comfortable home, suggested a sustainable financial package, negotiated a price with the owner and called you with the good news. The less good news is that, all these years later, he still has the key.
That’s absurd, you laugh. Of all the many hundreds of houses he has sold, why would he still have the key to mine?
The answer to that is, he has the keys to them all.</b></i>
This is a truly chilling novel. With such a unique plot line, excellent narration and beautiful descriptions, I’m amazed this hasn’t found itself being more popular. After scanning this books lower reviews, I can understand some people's frustrations with this because they were expecting a thriller, and while this technically does class as a thriller, it’s not what most people associate with thrillers. When you think of a thriller, you think Jason Bourne, fast-paced, exciting, and, of course, thrilling, so when you open this to find it’s slow-paced narration of Heming’s day-to-day life you’re going to be a bit miffed. So don’t go into this thinking your socks are going to be blown off in super fast-paced action.
Heming is a seriously unreliable narrator. Thanks to his wonderful storytelling, we’re drawn into his life, eager to know what happens next with almost no regard to the horrible things he’s actually doing! The narration is amazing at masking the creepiness of the situations Heming puts himself into, making you want to like his character, when really we know we shouldn’t.
Each character in this novel was presented in an excellent way, giving you enough to know about them without things becoming confusing and too heavy. As for the plot, well, what can I say? It was magnificent! It was so well thought out and solidly presented. I had wanted to read this novel for such a long time, I’m remarkably pleased it didn’t let me down, not even in the slightest!
I don’t have a lot more to say about this other than I loved it completely, I don’t think it let itself down at all and I was prepared for it to be a slow moving, almost dream like novel (which is a writing style I personally adore). In many ways, this is a very Lolita-esque novel, the unreliable narrator, the slow moving pace, in-depth and beautiful descriptions, deep infatuation etc etc, so if Lolita was a novel you enjoyed, for all of those reasons, then definitely give this a try.
<b><I>You won’t remember Mr Heming. He showed you round your comfortable home, suggested a sustainable financial package, negotiated a price with the owner and called you with the good news. The less good news is that, all these years later, he still has the key.
That’s absurd, you laugh. Of all the many hundreds of houses he has sold, why would he still have the key to mine?
The answer to that is, he has the keys to them all.</b></i>
This is a truly chilling novel. With such a unique plot line, excellent narration and beautiful descriptions, I’m amazed this hasn’t found itself being more popular. After scanning this books lower reviews, I can understand some people's frustrations with this because they were expecting a thriller, and while this technically does class as a thriller, it’s not what most people associate with thrillers. When you think of a thriller, you think Jason Bourne, fast-paced, exciting, and, of course, thrilling, so when you open this to find it’s slow-paced narration of Heming’s day-to-day life you’re going to be a bit miffed. So don’t go into this thinking your socks are going to be blown off in super fast-paced action.
Heming is a seriously unreliable narrator. Thanks to his wonderful storytelling, we’re drawn into his life, eager to know what happens next with almost no regard to the horrible things he’s actually doing! The narration is amazing at masking the creepiness of the situations Heming puts himself into, making you want to like his character, when really we know we shouldn’t.
Each character in this novel was presented in an excellent way, giving you enough to know about them without things becoming confusing and too heavy. As for the plot, well, what can I say? It was magnificent! It was so well thought out and solidly presented. I had wanted to read this novel for such a long time, I’m remarkably pleased it didn’t let me down, not even in the slightest!
I don’t have a lot more to say about this other than I loved it completely, I don’t think it let itself down at all and I was prepared for it to be a slow moving, almost dream like novel (which is a writing style I personally adore). In many ways, this is a very Lolita-esque novel, the unreliable narrator, the slow moving pace, in-depth and beautiful descriptions, deep infatuation etc etc, so if Lolita was a novel you enjoyed, for all of those reasons, then definitely give this a try.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The French Girl in Books
Feb 12, 2018
Slow-moving yet mesmerizing thriller
Kate and five of her friends spent a week at a French farmhouse whilst students at Oxford. All goes well until the last night of the trip, when there's a huge blowup among the group. And, always, flitting at the edges is Severine, the French girl who stayed next door where the group was vacationing. After that night, Severine disappeared, but her body was never found. Until, ten years later, it turns up in a well behind the farmhouse. Suddenly Kate and her friends are being questioned by the French police, bringing up old memories, and jeopardizing the life Kate has worked so hard to create.
This novel takes some getting used to. Kate herself takes some getting used to. For instance, Kate "sees" Severine, as in she imagines Severine is watching her--sometimes she just sees her skull, sometimes Severine's entire body is following Kate, or languidly sitting in her apartment. In the beginning, these mentions are odd and a little creepy and the book moves rather slowly, making it hard to keep your interest. Kate and her group of friends still seem like the gaggle of college students they were ten years ago when Severine disappeared--and you find yourself wondering why you should care about any of them and their manufactured drama. It's hard to get invested in these somewhat spoiled, immature characters.
Luckily, I have to say, there was still some sort of pull about Kate that made me want to keep reading. You can't help but remain curious about what went down that night between the six friends and if one (or more) of them truly had a hand in Severine's death. It was enough to keep me reading, and I have to admit, Kate grew on me, I found myself feeling almost protective of her as the book wore on. You have to buy-in to the Severine premise a bit, but I won't lie, by the end, I liked the darn woman. What can I say? Elliott also does a good job in keeping you guessing, always casting suspicion on each friend, so you never quite get a handle on exactly what happened that week.
Overall, this one is a slow-moving thriller. It's focused on the build-up of its characters and meandering along to its reveals. If you're looking for a fast-paced, twisty mystery, this isn't it. But if you want to get sucked into the lives of your characters and discover some surprising things along the way, you'll enjoy this one. 3.5+ stars.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Edelweiss in return for a honest review. More at http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/.
This novel takes some getting used to. Kate herself takes some getting used to. For instance, Kate "sees" Severine, as in she imagines Severine is watching her--sometimes she just sees her skull, sometimes Severine's entire body is following Kate, or languidly sitting in her apartment. In the beginning, these mentions are odd and a little creepy and the book moves rather slowly, making it hard to keep your interest. Kate and her group of friends still seem like the gaggle of college students they were ten years ago when Severine disappeared--and you find yourself wondering why you should care about any of them and their manufactured drama. It's hard to get invested in these somewhat spoiled, immature characters.
Luckily, I have to say, there was still some sort of pull about Kate that made me want to keep reading. You can't help but remain curious about what went down that night between the six friends and if one (or more) of them truly had a hand in Severine's death. It was enough to keep me reading, and I have to admit, Kate grew on me, I found myself feeling almost protective of her as the book wore on. You have to buy-in to the Severine premise a bit, but I won't lie, by the end, I liked the darn woman. What can I say? Elliott also does a good job in keeping you guessing, always casting suspicion on each friend, so you never quite get a handle on exactly what happened that week.
Overall, this one is a slow-moving thriller. It's focused on the build-up of its characters and meandering along to its reveals. If you're looking for a fast-paced, twisty mystery, this isn't it. But if you want to get sucked into the lives of your characters and discover some surprising things along the way, you'll enjoy this one. 3.5+ stars.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Edelweiss in return for a honest review. More at http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/.
Bookapotamus (289 KP) rated How Hard Can It Be? in Books
May 29, 2018
It's all fun and games until someone posts a belfie.
Kate Reddy is back. And her daughters backSIDE is causing some trouble. We jump right into our favorite bad-a$$, anxiety-ridden, take-charge heroine Kate's life as she is approaching 50 and it seems the hilarity and struggles of parenting, working, wife-ing, friendship and everything else in Kate's life is just as amusing as ever.
Kate's daughter Emily has taken a pic of her butt and the crazy life of Kate's we all know and love, just cannot seem to get any more complicated - until it does. She's been out of the workforce, and looking to get back in, She's not having much of any sort of pleasant relations with husband Richard (yes, surprisingly, still married). She's having a mini mid-life crisis trying to accept she's almost 50, her parents are aging, and her kids are now teenagers and the struggles to communicate with these digital-age micro-adults is almost as difficult as communicating with Russian Investors.
As Kate tries to make her way back into the world of investing she once was so good at, she has some pretty cringeworthy experiences, and struggles to find a way in that world as an "aging" woman. We find several comparisons to the past, when just being a mother was the wall between her and success. She finds herself lying to herself and others, trying her best to tiptoe through a marriage in crisis and lack of communication with her children, and praying the looming milestone birthday isn't going to be the demise of any semblance of the woman that she knows she is, and desperately wants to find again. Oh, and did I mention Jack is BACK?!
The book is classic Allison Pearson: witty, entertaining and full of laughs. I didn't realize how much I missed Kate (I totally still picture SJP in every situation...) and I settled into a familiar routine of rooting for her to find her stride and finally be happy with who she is, who she's becoming, and where she might be headed next.
The story is nostalgic of I Don't Know How She Does It, but reads well as a standalone with snippets of backstory that are well-placed and don't interfere. Avoiding any spoilers, I'll just say that I'm pretty sure readers and fans of Kate Reddy will be pleased at how it all turns out. How Hard Can It Be? was refreshing but familiar and it felt like an old friend was back in my life.
Thanks to NetGalley and St. Martin's Press for the Advanced Copy and opportunity to review this book.
Kate Reddy is back. And her daughters backSIDE is causing some trouble. We jump right into our favorite bad-a$$, anxiety-ridden, take-charge heroine Kate's life as she is approaching 50 and it seems the hilarity and struggles of parenting, working, wife-ing, friendship and everything else in Kate's life is just as amusing as ever.
Kate's daughter Emily has taken a pic of her butt and the crazy life of Kate's we all know and love, just cannot seem to get any more complicated - until it does. She's been out of the workforce, and looking to get back in, She's not having much of any sort of pleasant relations with husband Richard (yes, surprisingly, still married). She's having a mini mid-life crisis trying to accept she's almost 50, her parents are aging, and her kids are now teenagers and the struggles to communicate with these digital-age micro-adults is almost as difficult as communicating with Russian Investors.
As Kate tries to make her way back into the world of investing she once was so good at, she has some pretty cringeworthy experiences, and struggles to find a way in that world as an "aging" woman. We find several comparisons to the past, when just being a mother was the wall between her and success. She finds herself lying to herself and others, trying her best to tiptoe through a marriage in crisis and lack of communication with her children, and praying the looming milestone birthday isn't going to be the demise of any semblance of the woman that she knows she is, and desperately wants to find again. Oh, and did I mention Jack is BACK?!
The book is classic Allison Pearson: witty, entertaining and full of laughs. I didn't realize how much I missed Kate (I totally still picture SJP in every situation...) and I settled into a familiar routine of rooting for her to find her stride and finally be happy with who she is, who she's becoming, and where she might be headed next.
The story is nostalgic of I Don't Know How She Does It, but reads well as a standalone with snippets of backstory that are well-placed and don't interfere. Avoiding any spoilers, I'll just say that I'm pretty sure readers and fans of Kate Reddy will be pleased at how it all turns out. How Hard Can It Be? was refreshing but familiar and it felt like an old friend was back in my life.
Thanks to NetGalley and St. Martin's Press for the Advanced Copy and opportunity to review this book.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated The Predator (2018) in Movies
Sep 27, 2018 (Updated Oct 5, 2018)
The Ultimate Hunter Becomes Hunted Trope
After letting my girlfriend drag me to see A Simple Favor at the weekend, it was my turn to drag her to see something and to be honest, I think that she enjoyed this thing more than I did. This is a film that you can look at a couple of ways. You can either look at it and take none of it seriously, in which case this is a fairly fun, if extremely dumb action sci-fi romp, or you can take a bit more seriously, which I think the moviemakers want you to, in which case it is messy and unbearably cringey at times.
The main problem here is that I am not sure how the director wants us to take this film because the tone is all over the place, with some characters playing it totally straight and some just having a laugh with the ridiculously cheesy material they have been given to work with. The cast are okay, but it is as if they are all working on different movies. Boyd Holbrook, Alfie Allen and Olivia Munn are taking the whole thing pretty seriously and playing it straight while everyone else around them plays it comically and the clash of tones never really sits well throughout the movie. I am a long time Predator fan, I love the original and I think that Predators is a solid sequel too, (let's not mention Predator 2,) I am also a fan of Shane Black. I love the Lethal Weapon movies, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang and The Nice Guys, so I should have loved this movie, yet it just didn't work as well as it sounds on paper.
The VFX in the film was okay at times, but at others the CGI, especially on The Predator himself, felt light and floaty and weightless, which is kinda the opposite of how the Predator is supposed to look as he moves about onscreen.
The whole 'hunter becomes the hunted,' trope actually serves as an appropriate metaphor for what this series has become. The once king of action sci fi (Predator) is now on the back foot and being outdone by a bigger, stronger competitor, (Avengers,) and by comparison, the OG hunter can't stand up to it's superior successor.
Overall, it's not the best Predator movie by a long shot, but it's definitely not the worst either. There are some laughs and some cool kills sprinkled through the film, but there are better action films that have dropped this year and there are better sci fi movies out there too that are more worthy of your time.
The main problem here is that I am not sure how the director wants us to take this film because the tone is all over the place, with some characters playing it totally straight and some just having a laugh with the ridiculously cheesy material they have been given to work with. The cast are okay, but it is as if they are all working on different movies. Boyd Holbrook, Alfie Allen and Olivia Munn are taking the whole thing pretty seriously and playing it straight while everyone else around them plays it comically and the clash of tones never really sits well throughout the movie. I am a long time Predator fan, I love the original and I think that Predators is a solid sequel too, (let's not mention Predator 2,) I am also a fan of Shane Black. I love the Lethal Weapon movies, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang and The Nice Guys, so I should have loved this movie, yet it just didn't work as well as it sounds on paper.
The VFX in the film was okay at times, but at others the CGI, especially on The Predator himself, felt light and floaty and weightless, which is kinda the opposite of how the Predator is supposed to look as he moves about onscreen.
The whole 'hunter becomes the hunted,' trope actually serves as an appropriate metaphor for what this series has become. The once king of action sci fi (Predator) is now on the back foot and being outdone by a bigger, stronger competitor, (Avengers,) and by comparison, the OG hunter can't stand up to it's superior successor.
Overall, it's not the best Predator movie by a long shot, but it's definitely not the worst either. There are some laughs and some cool kills sprinkled through the film, but there are better action films that have dropped this year and there are better sci fi movies out there too that are more worthy of your time.
Ross (3284 KP) rated Reign of Madness in Books
Nov 30, 2018 (Updated Nov 30, 2018)
Good but needlessly long and slow
Following on from Free the Darkness, which ended somewhat abruptly ("we're going on an adventure, the end"), Reign of Madness sees Rezkin "Marty Stu" travelling to the King's Tournament with a group of fellow travellers. As before, his motives are somewhat hidden or confused but largely he is looking for answers to what his purpose was and why he had to kill all of his boyhood mentors.
In almost every chapter, something happens that makes it abundantly clear that Rezkin is of royal descent, and yet nobody picks up on the massive clanging hints that abound. Even right to the last page, his companions remain so stupid as to miss the obvious that it gets annoying. This might be Kade suggesting something of human nature / not wanting to accept the facts, but it comes across more that he hasn't hidden the clues as well as he thinks he has and only plain exposition could possibly lay them bare.
Part of this I think stems from the omniscient narrator again, the reader gets far too much information on everyone's thoughts and events so it is hard to put yourself in one character's position and their behaviours just seem so much more flawed than they would if we had only single person snapshot PoVs.
And Rezkin's character seems to be inconsistent - one minute he is meant to be a master of disguise and can insert himself into any situation, the next he doesn't understand any emotions; one chapter he nearly attacks a woman for approaching him quickly, the next he allows a grown man to hit him in anger as they grieve their recent bereavement.
As with book 1, the story is good, the action sequences well written and the underlying long-term plot is strong. However, some of the writing of it is clumsy (chapters of nothing but expository dialogue), the characters one-dimensional (especially the female characters) and a lot of the world (especially the magic such as it is) seems to be made up on the spot. And the whole thing just takes so long to get through. I think if you are dedicated and determined to plough through 20% plus a day this will be fine, if you pick it up now and then and get through less than 10% you will find yourself grinding to a halt through the first half of this book, where nothing happens except a donkey being healed and A LOT of dialogue about not a lot (which essentially just replaces things that should really have been explained in book 1).
I will carry on with the series but these long rambling tomes are stretching my tolerance (and the value for money from my Kindle Unlimited trial!).
In almost every chapter, something happens that makes it abundantly clear that Rezkin is of royal descent, and yet nobody picks up on the massive clanging hints that abound. Even right to the last page, his companions remain so stupid as to miss the obvious that it gets annoying. This might be Kade suggesting something of human nature / not wanting to accept the facts, but it comes across more that he hasn't hidden the clues as well as he thinks he has and only plain exposition could possibly lay them bare.
Part of this I think stems from the omniscient narrator again, the reader gets far too much information on everyone's thoughts and events so it is hard to put yourself in one character's position and their behaviours just seem so much more flawed than they would if we had only single person snapshot PoVs.
And Rezkin's character seems to be inconsistent - one minute he is meant to be a master of disguise and can insert himself into any situation, the next he doesn't understand any emotions; one chapter he nearly attacks a woman for approaching him quickly, the next he allows a grown man to hit him in anger as they grieve their recent bereavement.
As with book 1, the story is good, the action sequences well written and the underlying long-term plot is strong. However, some of the writing of it is clumsy (chapters of nothing but expository dialogue), the characters one-dimensional (especially the female characters) and a lot of the world (especially the magic such as it is) seems to be made up on the spot. And the whole thing just takes so long to get through. I think if you are dedicated and determined to plough through 20% plus a day this will be fine, if you pick it up now and then and get through less than 10% you will find yourself grinding to a halt through the first half of this book, where nothing happens except a donkey being healed and A LOT of dialogue about not a lot (which essentially just replaces things that should really have been explained in book 1).
I will carry on with the series but these long rambling tomes are stretching my tolerance (and the value for money from my Kindle Unlimited trial!).
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Creed II (2018) in Movies
Dec 7, 2018
Good Enough
By my count, this is the 8th time that Sylvester Stallone has put on the character of Rocky Balboa. This time it comes after the resurgence of this character (and franchise) with the introduction of Adonis Creed (Michael B. Jordan) and a script that allowed Stallone to explore the character in a way that he had not previously been able to - and garnered him a well-deserved Oscar nomination for his efforts.
In CREED II we are back to an above average by-the-numbers boxing picture with Jordan's Adonis Creed character starting the picture on top, losing it all when he loses himself (and stops listening to Rocky) in his success only to go on a journey of redemption (by following Rocky's advice) at the end. This is, in essence, a regurgitation of ROCKY III and I was somewhat bored by it.
That is, until the final bout, then (gosh darnnit) I was drawn right into the melodrama, pomp and pageantry of the fight and was cheering along with the rest of the audience at all the appropriate moments.
In Creed II, Apollo Creed's son battles Ivan Drago's son. For those of you not up on your Rocky history, Drago (Dolph Lundgren, reprising his role) was the boxer that killed Apollo Creed (Adonis' father) in the ring all those years ago.
Jordan is properly cocky, arrogant, stubborn, shell-shocked, morose, repentant and cocky (again) as the script would indicate. Tessa Thompson (as his wife) deserves better material than what she is given as does Stallone, who falls back to "being Rocky" without anything really new here. Surprisingly, Dolph Lundgren does a nice job as the washed-up boxer who's life was "ruined" when he lost to Rocky at the end of Rocky IV (not a spoiler). Finally, Russel Horsnby (as the "I just want to earn money" promoter of the fight) and Phylicia Rashad (as Adonis' mother/Apollo's wife) are both really good in roles that deserved to be much bigger - and more fleshed out - than they were.
My biggest disappointment from this film is the ommision of Director Ryan Coogler. He brought a visceral attitude to the series in the first CREED film and I felt that this spark of energy was just missing throughout this film with Steven Caple, Jr at the helm. It seemed, to me, that this series is quickly devolving into "paycheck" movies for Stallone and that really saddens me.
All-in-all a rather above average "by-the-numbers" boxing flick with a really good fight at the end of the film that is well worth sticking around for.
Letter Grade: B
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
In CREED II we are back to an above average by-the-numbers boxing picture with Jordan's Adonis Creed character starting the picture on top, losing it all when he loses himself (and stops listening to Rocky) in his success only to go on a journey of redemption (by following Rocky's advice) at the end. This is, in essence, a regurgitation of ROCKY III and I was somewhat bored by it.
That is, until the final bout, then (gosh darnnit) I was drawn right into the melodrama, pomp and pageantry of the fight and was cheering along with the rest of the audience at all the appropriate moments.
In Creed II, Apollo Creed's son battles Ivan Drago's son. For those of you not up on your Rocky history, Drago (Dolph Lundgren, reprising his role) was the boxer that killed Apollo Creed (Adonis' father) in the ring all those years ago.
Jordan is properly cocky, arrogant, stubborn, shell-shocked, morose, repentant and cocky (again) as the script would indicate. Tessa Thompson (as his wife) deserves better material than what she is given as does Stallone, who falls back to "being Rocky" without anything really new here. Surprisingly, Dolph Lundgren does a nice job as the washed-up boxer who's life was "ruined" when he lost to Rocky at the end of Rocky IV (not a spoiler). Finally, Russel Horsnby (as the "I just want to earn money" promoter of the fight) and Phylicia Rashad (as Adonis' mother/Apollo's wife) are both really good in roles that deserved to be much bigger - and more fleshed out - than they were.
My biggest disappointment from this film is the ommision of Director Ryan Coogler. He brought a visceral attitude to the series in the first CREED film and I felt that this spark of energy was just missing throughout this film with Steven Caple, Jr at the helm. It seemed, to me, that this series is quickly devolving into "paycheck" movies for Stallone and that really saddens me.
All-in-all a rather above average "by-the-numbers" boxing flick with a really good fight at the end of the film that is well worth sticking around for.
Letter Grade: B
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Andy K (10821 KP) Feb 18, 2019