#and was genuinely just a fantastic fantasy romp by itself | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

grigori77 · 3 years

Text

Summer 2021′s Movies - My Top Ten Favourite Films (Part 1)

The Runners-Up:

20. LUCA – I’ll admit I really wasn’t sold on Disney/Pixar’s coming-of-age fantasy comedy, which revolves around a pair of young sea monsters living off the coast of the 1950s Italian Riviera, who discover they can assume human form when they dry out and go on land on a quest of discovery. Thankfully the strong reviews convinced me to give it a chance – this is a frothy and irreverent romp through an exotically nostalgic world filled with Vespas, pasta-eating contests and found families that’s fun for kids of all ages.

19. FAST & FURIOUS 9 – the high concept action franchise may be bursting under the ever-increasing weight of its own ludicrousness, but it’s still TONS of fun, packed with stunning over-the-top action, colourful globe-trotting and a loveable bunch of misfits we’ve grown incredibly fond of over the past TWENTY YEARS. This time Dom (the irrepressible Vin Diesel) and the team are up against ruthless hi-tech mercenary Jakob (John Cena), a lethal jack-of-all-trades with a dark connection to the Toretto name.

18. REMINISCENCE – Westworld co-creator Lisa Joy’s attempt to make it on the big screen looks set to go down as one of the biggest cinematic flops of 2021, which is a shame because the feature-debuting writer-director has crafted a genuinely fascinating speculative sci-fi noir detective thriller. Set in a darkly dystopian future in which Global Warming has caused the sea levels to rise and society to start breaking down, it tells the story of Nick Bannister (Hugh Jackman), a former soldier who ekes out a living using revolutionary tech to help the idle rich relive their fondest memories, until a life-changing mystery from his own past resurfaces, threatening to tear his whole world apart. Frustratingly, it looks like most audiences are going to bypass this, which is a criminal loss.

17. FREE GUY – after a seven year hiatus, Night at the Museum director Shawn Levy returns to the big screen in fine form with this deliriously inventive fantastical comedy adventure about Guy (a typically on-fire Ryan Reynolds), an NPC in an anarchic, Grand Theft Auto style MMORPG called Free City who discovers his own sentience after falling in love with Millie (Killing Eve’s Jodie Comer), a player with a hidden agenda that puts them both at odds with the game’s nefarious creator, Antwan (a thoroughly hilarious Taika Waititi).

16. EVANGELION 3.0 + 1.01: THRICE UPON A TIME – visionary anime creator Hideaki Anno brings his long-running sci-fi saga to a close with this fourth instalment to his wildly ambitious cinematic “Rebuild” of cult TV series Neon Genesis Evangelion. It’s as frothy, melodramatic and bonkers as ever, packed full of weighty themes and crazy ideas, while the animation maintains this series’ ridiculously high levels of quality and the action is as explosive as ever, and Hideaki brings the whole mad mess to a climax that’s as rich, powerful and thoroughly befuddling as the saga deserves.

15. THOSE WHO WISH ME DEAD – Sicario writer Taylor Sheridan returns to the director’s chair (after impressive debut Wind River) with this intense and enthralling suspense thriller adapted by bestselling author Michael Koryta (along with Sheridan and Blood Diamond’s Charles Leavitt) from his own acclaimed novel. Angelina Jolie is (ahem) fiery but fallible as haunted smokejumper Hanna Faber, whose PTSD drives her to protect a desperate boy (Finn Little) who’s being hunted through the wilds of Montana by a pair of relentless assassins (Aidan Gillen and Nicholas Hoult).

14. CRUELLA – far from the clunky cash-in retcon many were predicting, Disney’s ambitious black comedy crime caper does a thoroughly admirable job in delivering this fascinating and deeply compelling reimagining of the story of rogue fashion designer Cruella de Vil (one of the best performances I’ve ever seen Emma Stone deliver, hands down), the dastardly villainess of 101 Dalmatians. She’s certainly far more complex here, no longer a raging monster, but far from a whitewashed PC apologist, either, much more of a morally grey antihero with a very wicked dark side – then again, with I, Tonya director Craig Gillespie at the helm it’s not really a surprise. Richly designed and dripping in spectacularly adventurous period detail, this is an divine romp from start to finish.

13. THE GREEN KNIGHT – the latest feature from writer director David Lowery (Ain’t Them Bodies Saits, Pete’s Dragon, The Old Man & the Gun) is as offbeat and unusual as you’d expect from a visionary filmmaker with such a wildly varied CV. Adapting the fantastical chivalric romance Sir Gawain & the Green Knight, he’s crafted what’s surely destined to be remembered as the year’s STRANGEST film, but it’s a work of aching beauty and introspective imagination that sears itself into the memory and rewards the viewer’s patience despite its leisurely pace. Dev Patel is unbearably sexy and wonderfully complex as Gawain, while Sean Harris delivers show-stopping support with stately charisma and world-weary integrity as King Arthur. This film is sure to divide opinions as well as audiences, but I think it’s a bona fide masterpiece that must be seen to be believed.

12. CANDYMAN – after watching this wildly imaginative and frequently gut-wrenching soft-reboot/sequel to Bernard Rose’s acclaimed adaptation of Clive Barker’s short story The Forbidden, I feel supremely confident about emerging writer-director Nia DaCosta’s coming MCU breakout with The Marvels. Wisely papering over the clunky previous sequels, this streamlined trailblazing deep dive into the pure horror of the legend of the righteously mad spectral killer haunting the Chicago housing ghetto of Cabrini-Green sees a daring modern artist (Aquaman’s Yahya Abdul-Mateen II) find his latest project turning into a dangerously self-destructive obsession. Writer-producer Jordan Peele’s fingerprints are all over this, but DaCosta clearly shows signs that she’s going to be a hell of a talent to watch in the future.

11. THE WITCHER: NIGHTMARE OF THE WOLF – I wouldn’t normally shout about an animated spinoff to a TV series like this, but I was SO INSANELY IMPRESSED with this brilliant prequel to Netflix’ popular fantasy show (which clearly intends to lay some origin story groundwork for the impending second season) that I just can’t help myself. Recounting the backstory of Geralt of Rivia’s own Witcher mentor Vesemir, this beautifully expands on the already compelling universe the series has created, as well as delivering some breath-taking thrills and chills through some of the most exquisite cell animation I’ve ever seen outside of the greats of anime. A must-see for Witcher fans, then, but one I’d also highly recommend to anyone who likes their animation a bit more grown-up and edgy.

#movies 2021 #luca #disney luca #fast & furious 9 #reminiscence #reminiscence movie #free guy #evangelion thrice upon a time #rebuild of evangelion 4 #those who wish me dead #those who wish me dead movie #cruella #cruella movie #the green knight #the green knight movie #candyman #candyman 2021 #the witcher nightmare of the wolf #awesome sauce

19 notes · View notes

redisriding · 4 years

Text

King of Scars - Review

I have just finished reading King of Scars and let me tell you, I have some THOUGHTS™

I don’t want to spoil anyone though, so read below the fold at your own discretion…

(Also contains spoilers of the Shadow and Bone Trilogy and the Six of Crows Duology, but it is unlikely that one has not read those books but has read King of Scars).

Nb. I word vomited this onto the page so apologies for any typos/misspellings/incomplete trains of thought!

Okay so, let me start by stating my position in respect of the other Grisha Verse books. I enjoyed the Shadow and Bone Trilogy. I really liked the first one, thought the second one did nothing but elongate the story, but found the third one redeeming. I wasn’t the biggest fan of the two main characters/love interest as I found both Alina and Mal annoying in parts, but I have to remind myself that I am in my mid-20s reading YA books so maybe I can’t be too critical of the behaviour of teenagers(?!). I am however a sucker for when the female lead chooses the good boy they grew up with over the mysterious creepy stranger, so yeah I shipped them. What made this trilogy for me was the amazingly vivid universe that was created – the Grisha Verse – and the absolute romp of supporting characters. So, not wanting to leave the world behind just yet I read the Six of Crows duology and I LOVED THESE BOOKS. Not only did we get to delve deeper into the Grisha Verse, but the storyline is fantastic, the characters are brilliantly painted, and the dialogue is some of the most witty, most wonderful dialogue I have ever read (Jesper anyone?). Plus, the Nina x Matthias dynamic is my absolute favourite romance trope!!! With honourable mentions to Kaz and Inej of course.

Going into King of Scars I was hopeful for a thrilling adventure across the Grisha Verse I have come to know so well, with some excellent characters and cracking banter.

Was that what I found?

In short, no.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t hate this book. It was an enjoyable read. However, I do think the King of Scars is Leigh Bardugo’s weakest work. Now, I don’t know whether she was writing under pressure from her publishers, fans etc., if there was something going on in her life perhaps to throw her off her game, or if the King of Scars was genuinely the direction she wanted to take this series/story/universe. The characterisation was good as always, I enjoyed learning more about Nikolai and Zoya’s respective backstories, and yeah, I ship them hard, but there wasn’t as much witty banter as I had hoped. Particularly from a character like Nikolai who gave so much in previous books. Sure, the argument can be made that this book is about him battling his own demons, so fair enough if he was somewhat off his game. I think however this book fell down in two key ways, (1) the universe and (2) the story itself.

What do I mean in respect of not liking the “universe” as conceptualised in King of Scars? This might sound a little strange, but in the Shadow and Bone trilogy and Six of Crows duology the “magic” that the Grisha possess appears very “real” (if magic can indeed be real). There are rules about how Grisha power works and thus seems plausible to me. I feel like King of Scars departed from this. I don’t mean the Zoya/Dragon story line. I actually quite enjoyed the exploration of “but aren’t we all things” and the blurring of the lines between different Grisha powers. I think that will make an interesting development in the story. What is less clear in how magic works in the Grisha Verse is (1) the demon that possesses Nikolai (but sure I can get on board with it for the purpose of the story and to be quite honest I don’t REALLY care about a lot of the minute details about the world’s in fantasy books operate), and (2) the whole mid-section of the book where Nikolai and Zoya are sucked into this Twilight Zone/Alice in Wonderland alternative dimension that emerges in the fold. This is where the book lost me. I didn’t totally understand what was going on, and I think the writing fell down here. It was like even Leigh Bardugo didn’t have a clear idea as to what was happening. Trying to make sense of it was a bit like trying to look through fog. Dragons, bees, three-headed bears, a big rock that became a palace, thorns??? I was totally baffled by it all. Where they in the fold or the Unsea? How did they just suddenly disappear? Where did that pilgrimage camp go? Was any of that real or just an illusion to trap Nikolai and Zoya there? Even at the end I’m unsure as to how much Yuri knew, how much he was leading them knowing what was going to happen or was he just a hapless buffoon that got caught up in the whole thing? How exactly did Zoya defeat the bee witch queen? What happened with Nikolai and his demon? Is it is half defeated? Is the demon the Darkling himself rather than a residue of the Darkling’s monster? Does that mean that the Darkling lives half within Nikolai and half within Yuri? Maybe some of this is deliberately vague and will be cleared up in the next book, but I honestly think that a lot of it has to do with the writing because there are parts that are perfectly clear and I do understand what is happening, for example when Zoya slays the dragon. Perhaps this was because I had read the previous books and I understood what it meant to kill a creature to create an amplifier, but equally, I believe that Leigh Bardugo wrote this section clearer because she had written the previous books!

Essentially, I felt that I had a good grasp of the Grisha Verse but this whole section is too off the wall for it to be believable to me and just doesn’t feel like it “fits” with the universe that had been created/developed in the other books.

The second thing I dislike is the story. Yes, see previous thoughts above in respect of the whole mid-section of the book, but this whole story was just angling to bring the Darkling back? Nah, I don’t like it. Not because the Darkling is a baddie and the thought of him being back can only mean bad things, but because I think its lazy writing. There is already so much conflict, or potential for conflict, in these books with Nikolai becoming King and trying to save Ravka that there was no need for the Darkling to return. For one, I think it undermines everything that happened in the Shadow and Bone series for him to return and presumably be defeated in the next book?. Mal sacrificed himself for Alina to destroy him, only for her to lose her power afterwards. It doesn’t seem right that he went on “living” in this alternative universe. The whole body swap thing was just bizarre, and again, lazy writing. I’m not a fan of people suddenly appearing back from the dead as a trope anyway, but this was particularly sloppily done. (Yes, I know Mal came back from the dead too but there was some explanation as to have him having two souls/lives inside him and as I say I was an Alana/Mal shipper so I was prepared to overlook it). I just felt that the Alina/Mal/Darkling storyline was wrapped up so nicely at the end of the Shadow and Bone trilogy that is doesn’t seem right to bring the Darkling back as the villain in a Nikolai/Zoya story. The final line in the Shadow and Bone series about Alina and Mal living a normal life if a life with love could ever be such a thing absolutely destroyed me (I wept for the evening after reading that – it’s my catnip), but that story felt complete. I don’t see how the Darkling can come back within at least Alina being involved again, and she doesn’t have her powers anymore which were the only things that defeated the Darkling. I think what my uneasiness boils down to is, presumably Nikolai and Zoya are going to defeat him in the next book, but no matter how comprehensively they do so, I’m never going to believe that he is actually dead, or that death in the Grisha Verse really exists. That at any time, anyone, not matter how long they have been dead for could just reappear with some absolutely insane story of how they managed to remain living even though they were totally, utterly, completely, without a doubt dead.

I think the crux of my disappointment with King of Scars can be summed up as follows:-

Will I be reading the sequel?

Yeah...probably.

Will I be thinking about what is happening to these characters every day until that book is released?

No.

#king of scars #leigh Bardugo #book review #Grishaverse

6 notes · View notes

kolbisneat · 4 years

Text

MONTHLY MEDIA: November 2019

Whoa November is over! So I didn’t see any movies this month but there are so many I want to check out. Parasite! Knives Out! Jojo Rabbit! Maybe December.

……….TELEVISION……….

Daybreak (Episode 1.01 to 1.03) This seems like fun so far! Characters are great, the world seems well-established and feels like it’s been lived in for a while, and it’s really just the plot that I’m not clicking with. Most of the stuff works until it goes back to “gotta find dream girl!” It just feels...dull. Especially when compared to all the other far more interesting stuff going on. Gonna keep watching but hot dang I hope they move on from the “where’s Sam?” stuff soon.

The Good Place (Episode 4.01 to 4.05) I’m not ready for this series to end but hot dang does it feel like it knows where it’s going and how it’s going to get there. I’m just happy to be along for the ride.

Queer Eye: We’re In Japan! (Episode 1.01 to 1.04) I appreciate that they addressed the magic of translators at the end of the first ep and I wish they would’ve gone into more of it. Their “guide” was likely a choice based on social media influence and bilingualism, but it seemed like a missed opportunity to have a gay Japanese man introduce the Fab 5 to the culture. Even the comedian from Episode 3 seemed like a better fit. I just don’t know if I got the right introduction into various nuances of the culture, you know? Also this article says a lot more and in a much clearer way.

……….READING……….

Emperor Mollusk Versus the Sinister Brain by A. Lee Martinez (Page 191 of 293) Very breezy and easy read but for an interplanetary romp with a hyper-smart squid as the protagonist, it isn’t quite connecting. The book is full of alien tropes and the premise is fun, but the lead character doesn’t really get challenged and there’s little impact from events as they happen. It feels pulpy but doesn’t seem to have the melodrama that makes it read like the author couldn’t commit to the bit.

A Spell for Chameleon by Piers Anthony (Complete) I have a vivid memory of seeing this cover when I was a child and really wanting to read it. So when I saw it at a thrift store I immediately picked it up. There were some fun magical ideas in here but it is dripping with so much 70s sexism that I can’t, in good faith, recommend this to anyone. If it was maybe one or two moments then you could maybe give some leniency to the era, but every chapter has at least one moment where the author takes a shot at women. It’s real bad.

Silver Surfer Omnibus by Dan Slott, Michael Allred, Laura Allred, and many many more (9 issues/chapters in...sorry this book doesn’t really have page numbers) Okay I love it. I didn’t know what to expect but you know when you just have a gut feeling that you’ll like something? Exactly this. I knew nothing about Silver Surfer but the book catches you up and then takes you on a fun series of intergalactic adventures. When I realized it was essentially Marvel Doctor Who, I knew this was for me. I’m really taking my time with this cause I think it’s something special.

James Bond Origin by Jeff Parker, Bob Q, Roman Stevens, Jordan Boyd, Jordie Bellaire, and Simon Bowland (Complete) Pinpointing what makes a Bond story a “Bond” story is tricky. This series is a fun and engaging spy narrative, but I think showing the early days of Bond makes it read the same way Young Indiana jones felt: you know where they’re going but they’re not quite there yet. That isn’t to say it’s not great, cause it is. I suppose I’d just recommend this to those who like spy stories, narratives set during the second world war, or a combination of the two. Those are likely the same people as those who like James Bond as a character, but I think it lends itself more to the genre than the character. Great start to the series.

Delicious in Dungeon: Volume 6 by Ryoko Kui (Complete) Still fantastic. It took a weird turn in the middle and I was worried it was moving away from the characters to focus on big fantastical monsters and melodrama, but it quickly corrected course. I can’t not recommend this to anyone who likes small fantasy with a gimmick.

The Tomb of Black Sand by Jacob Hurst, Gabriel Hernandez, and more! (Complete) This was mostly for research and I love this D&D module. It’s a fun concept with nuance and one of my favourite fundamental details: the characters are doing their own thing with their own goals and have been doing things before the party shows up. If you’re okay with spoilers, check out this review.

The Wolves in the Walls by Neil Gaiman and Dave McKean (Complete) It’s interesting reading a true picture book by Neil Gaiman. I enjoy it as an adult, but I wonder if it connects well with its target audience. With that said, I loved the craftsmanship of the story and seeing Gaiman’s work stripped down to its essentials really helps to understand his approach to writing.

……….AUDIO……….

The Adventure Zone: Graduation (Podcast) Back to D&D and having Travis DM is a great change up! With that said, I’m having a hard time getting past the first ep. It introduces so many characters and so much world-building that I’m not really getting into it.

……….GAMING……….

Untitled Goose Game (House House) Fantastic, silly fun. I love the concept and the execution is perfect. I wish the game was maybe...2 levels longer, but what we do have is fantastic. Highly recommend.

Maze of the Blue Medusa (Satyr Press) The group just sorted out a major threat that has been following them throughout the dungeon. A peek behind the curtain: I’m not sure this module is connecting with the group. I don’t think there’s a clear goal and the party hasn’t really taken the initiative to make their own goals. Maybe that’s my fault and I think part of it has to do with our previous adventure being fairly bespoke and rather on rails. They loved it, but I also think it set a precedent. I need to pull back and chat with the players to see how they’re feeling.

A Red & Pleasant Land (Lamentations of the Flame Princess) We don’t get to play often but when we do, it’s a great time. The party stumbled into a genuine warzone and had their first taste of real danger. But they also landed their first true kill and it really had a lot of impact! Up until now, enemies have been whimsically changing when they “die” so to kill someone really meant something. It was a moment that really stuck with me.

And that’s it! As always, Let me know if you have anything you think I should check out and happy Saturday.

#Monthly Media #Rambles #Kolbisneat #Andrew Kolb

28 notes · View notes

hayleysstark · 5 years

Note

(PT 2 of 2). I also wanted to say that, unfortunately, my Netflix account is going to be cancelled soon, so I can't watch all of Merlin. Can you recommend any must-see episodes?

Ugh, for real? That sucks, Queenie, I’m sorry. (I mean, I get it, things like Netflix are luxuries, but luxuries are nice to have around, and it’s tough to lose one, and I’m sorry that you have to.) To tell the truth, I really,,,,, don’t know if separate episodes can really stand on their own? I mean, don’t get me wrong, a solid ninety percent of the episodes are great, and absolutely worth the watch, but they all feel ((at least to me. maybe I’m alone in this)) like just scattered pieces of a whole until you put them all together into the series. But I think I can rustle up a solid handful that’ll still give you a good feel for the show as a whole ((and help you decide whether you want to continue it when you can - this series really isn’t for everyone.))

1x13: Le Morte D’Arthur: The entirety of S1 is really Merlin at its absolute best--smooth, believable dialogue, excellent comedic timing, wonderful plot structure, characterizations that are just to die for--but let’s be honest, this one, the S1 finale, is the one that takes my breath away. Colin Morgan and Anthony Head are both superb in their respective roles as the titular character and the hotheaded, short-sighted King Uther, and this episode is where they both just shine. Bradley James (Arthur) doesn’t receive a whole lot of screentime in this one, unfortunately, but there’s no denying he’s the center of the episode, and the moments we do get to see him, he’s just as incredible as the other two. The scenery is gorgeous, the worldbuilding is fantastic, and the emotion, oh, the emotion. Colin Morgan delivers some of his absolute rawest lines in this one. He knows when to play up the rage, the grief, the terror, and--I don’t say this lightly, but it’s really nothing short of flawless. Also, I’m in love with the villain. Her name is Nimeuh. I’m going to marry her someday. I am in love with that woman. she’s beautiful.

2x01: The Curse of Cornelius Sigan: This one is nothing on Le Morte D’Arthur in terms of plot, dialogue, or emotion, but damn if it isn’t the funniest fucking episode in the entire series. It’s essentially just a fun romp. The villain is so Obviously Evil, and of course no one else in Camelot SEES that he’s evil except Merlin. And Merlin??????? a petty, jealous bitch?????? yes absolutely. oh my god this one is just hilarious you would not believe.

2x08: The Sins of the Father: Finally, an episode where we get to see the true depth of Bradley James’ talent!! Really, his performance sells the entire episode in and of itself, but this one’s got plenty more to recommend it as well. Anthony Head returns as brilliant as ever, of course, and we get introduced to yet another incredible villain. Nowhere near as fleshed-out as Nimeuh, but this lady’s definitely got spunk, and she’s just fun to watch overall. Merlin’s warring loyalties are put into conflict yet again, Arthur gives his asshole father the call-out of the century, honestly, what more could you want? And we get to see a much softer side of Arthur as well, one that almost never reappears again - which is a real shame, by the way, considering how well Bradley James does strong emotions.

2x09: The Lady of the Lake: okay this one. this one does. it doesn’t. it doesn’t need to be on the list. it really doesn’t. but Merlin gets a ladylove and it’s absolutely BEAUTIFUL and everyone can shut their mouths. the girl he falls for?? 10/10. would die for her. she is beautiful and sweet and amazing and she dOES NOT DESERVE ALL THE PAIN SHE HAS SUFFERED I LOVE HER. I WOULD TAKE A BULLET FOR HER.

2x13: The Last Dragonlord: ahhh here we go!! This one’s the one. This one’s where it’s at. This episode has absolutely everything I initially started watching Merlin for - knights, dragons, sword fights, branches of magic no other fantasy series has yet explored, and to top it all off, Colin Morgan AGAIN goes above and beyond in his performance. I am convinced there’s nothing this man can’t do anymore. i would fight and die for the last dragonlord. both the episode and the dragonlord himself.

3x04: Gwaine: if you take nothing else away from this series, then for fuck’s sake, remember that Gwaine is, objectively speaking, beautiful. honestly. what a bastard. what a gorgeous, gorgeous bastard.

4x01 (and 4x02): The Darkest Hour: honestly incredible. i weep. the knights are such bros and look, Arthur has feelings, and hE’S GOT A SMARMY-ASS UNCLE NNNN I HATE WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK I HATE HIM HIS NAME IS LORD FUCKING AGRAVAINE AND I WILL HATE HIM UNTIL MY DYING DAY and Merlin gets whumped!! excellent, perfect, 10/10. three cheers for Merlin whump.

4x03: The Wicked Day: ohhhh gosh just a whole bundle of emotions here. Merlin is trying his best. Arthur deserves better. Gaius watches with a raise of his infamous eyebrow. Everything goes to hell. Merlin still tries his best. that’s it. that’s the whole show.

4x04: Aithusa: I SWEAR IM NOT GOING TO RECOMMEND EVERY SINGLE EPISODE OF S4 ((well maybe I am but that is because S4 is amazing and i am a GARBAGE HEAP.)) THERE ARE JUST. A LOT OF GOOD ONES. RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING. ghjhyghgb okay this one is just??? really good in general?? More dragons!! More knights being bros!!! And some serious character development on Merlin’s part like holy hell I don’t remember him having em that big in S3. this dude is getting what he wants and that is Just That.

4x06: Servant of Two Masters: okay let’s be real this one has a super intense start - in the first three minutes, Merlin is given a fatal wound, with a fucking MACE, no less - but honestly, at about the fifteen-minute mark, it just?? turns into comedy gold??? Merlin Emrys’ entire existence is a power move for forty straight minutes. he is Salty. he is Sassy. he is an absolute, stone-cold, unforgiving bitch. he takes no one’s shit. he will come for you and your family, and probably your hopes and dreams, too. he will stop at nothing. It’s somehow funnier when you stop and think about how genuinely sweet he usually is. this is just the most complete and comedic turnaround, and I love it.

4x12 (and 4x13): The Sword in the Stone: HERE’S where the myth and the series really start to collide. congratulations, only took 4 entire seasons. still kind of irritates me that the sword in the stone is Excalibur. what can you do. a lot of retellings condense. understandable but annoying as all hell. Arthur’s character arc comes to an admittedly unsatisfying end, but Tristan and Isolde make a cursory appearance, so that’s something I wasn’t expecting. Also, Merlin’s S4 character arc comes to an AMAZING head like wtf. we did not deserve that. Merlin Emrys is chaotic and vengeful.

5x03: The Death Song of Uther Pendragon: listen,,,,,, listen,,,,,,, this one serves Literally No Purpose and Does Not Need to be on here. it doesn’t advance the plot. it doesn’t build toward anything whatsoever. it’s just really fucking hilarious. it’s Arthur and Merlin being bros. Uther is his usual bastard self. Gwen is beautiful and we do not deserve her. Sir Leon makes an appearance and is very confused. Sir Leon is extremely relatable.

5x05: The Disir: Admittedly not my favorite, just??? not my favorite. But it really does take Merlin’s character in an absolutely stunning direction that still blows me away to this day, and it’s worth the watch just for that alone. Very dark episode though, very sad. Kind of has a “hopeless” vibe going tbh so. (May need to watch 1x08, The Beginning of the End, to get a bit of backstory for this one.)

5x08: The Hollow Queen: YOU WILL PRY THIS ONE FROM MY COLD DEAD FINGERS IT SERVES NO PURPOSE IT ADDS NOTHING TO THE PLOT BUT MERLIN GETS WHUMPED SO MUCH??? EMOTIONAL. PHYSICAL. IT’S ALL HERE. HE SUFFERS SO MUCH. IT’S GREAT. IT’S INCREDIBLE. maybe watch the two before it ((The Dark Tower and A Lesson in Vengeance)) before, though, because it’s kind of hard to understand unless you’ve got backstory lmao.

5x10: The Kindness of Strangers: More Merlin whump on every side, but this one also gives us our first (and only) look into Merlin’s position in the magical community? We don’t get to see him interact with people like him a whole lot over the course of the series, and who he actually is, what he represents, to his kind as a whole, is often left very fuzzy. There’s just a lot of confusion surrounding it, and this episode goes a pretty long way toward clearing that up.

And of course the series finale should be on here, but ehh. not that great tbh. really dropped the ball if we’re being honest. SO. those are. all of them. not really going to give you a sense of the full scope of the series dfhffgfdfgb probably just going to confuse the hell out of you and give you a sudden, insatiable thirst for Merlin whump ((which I can sate w/ fic recs. do you want fic recs. I’ve got fic recs. so many authors love to torment this man.)

ANYWAY THOUGH. I hope this helped!!

#merlin #bbc merlin #ask #queenie #Anonymous

144 notes · View notes

preserving-ferretbrain · 5 years

Text

When Harry Met Enid

by Dan H

Wednesday, 20 December 2006

In which Dan dismisses Harry Potter as a jolly hockey-sticks boarding school romp.~

My childhood was almost embarrassingly suburban. We lived in a semi-detached house with privet hedges. I spent my evenings doing my homework, watching Children's BBC or reading. To fully round out the picture of cosy BBC normalcy, I should add that my preferred reading material, as a child, was a mixture of Roald Dahl and Enid Blyton.

I always preferred Dahl. His stories were strange, macabre, often surreal. His worlds were familiar yet peculiar, whimsical and disturbing. They were nice places to visit, but you most certainly wouldn't want to live there. It is perhaps interesting to note that, Great Glass Elevator aside, Dahl never went back to his worlds once the book had finished. His stories were self contained, they began at the beginning, and stopped at the end.

Blyton, of course, created a very different world. Teams of children with solid dependable names like Dick and Anne had very proper adventures while drinking lashings and lashings of ginger beer. Unlike Dahl, Blyton did write long-running series, the St Clare's and Malory Towers books followed the same cast of characters through their stint at boarding school, and of course the Famous Five and Secret Seven had endless adventures. Unlike Dahl, Blyton's world was ultimately a safe place, and gender aside I would have been quite happy to spend a summer term at St Clare's. I was and still am guiltily fond of Enid Blyton's 1950s utopia: it's nice sometimes to forget about the troubles of the real world, and escape to one where hardened criminals get their comeuppance at the hands of a gang of plucky twelve year olds.

A lot of people (JK Rowling first amongst them) like to talk about how much more there is to Harry Potter than to other children's books. They talk about the real danger that Harry faces, about how terribly, terribly dark Rowling's world is, and about how it's all very serious and mature. One Times reviewer, comparing Potter to the Worst Witch series writes:

But though Mildred, the Worst Witch, like Harry Potter, gets into scrapes with bullies and teachers, there is never a twinge of real terror in Murphy's imaginary world. Harry Potter experiences not only the ordinary trials and triumphs of the boarding-school genre, but repeated attempts to murder him.

This critic, I think, misses two important points. Firstly, while I admit that my memory of The Worst Witch is a little hazy, I am fairly certain that there actually is a villain in TWW who actually does have a plan to kill everybody in the school. Secondly, the repeated attempts to "murder" Harry are carried out by the most ineffectual, bungling, non-threatening group of incompetents ever to grace the pages of a children's book. Harry Potter's encounters with the Death Eaters are no more frightening than the Secret Seven's frequent run-ins with thieves and smugglers, and they represent no greater physical danger.

Now, I don't think this is a weakness in itself. When Harry and Ron confront the troll in Philosopher's Stone it's a genuinely exciting scene. We understand that Harry and Ron are willing to risk their lives for their friend thereby displaying the cardinal virtues of Courage and Friendship and Pluckyness. This scene is in no way marred by the fact that I do not on a rational level actually expect Harry, Ron, or Hermione to be killed. However, I do not think that the troll-fighting scene involves any more danger or sacrifice, or has any greater merit than (for example) the bit in The Naughtiest Girl in the School where Elizabeth risks detention in order to buy a birthday present for her less wealthy best friend. Both sequences involve the protagonist choosing to place themselves in danger (either physical danger in the case of Harry, or social danger in the case of the Naughtiest Girl) in order to help a friend. It doesn't matter whether the risk is of death or of detention, the point is the decision that the character makes, and the consequences that follow from it.

Thinking about it, it's this fixation on the physical events of the series (Harry Gets Attacked, Harry Goes Into The Dark Forest, Harry Fights Death Eaters), rather than the narrative points behind those events, which is responsible for most of the utter tosh that gets written about Harry Potter. The fans say "Harry Potter is placed in real, physical danger, this means that the Harry Potter series is Dark and therefore Good" the detractors say "Harry Potter is not placed in real, physical danger, this means that the Harry Potter series is Not Really Dark and therefore Not Really Good." Both of these groups of people completely miss the point. Harry Potter is a children's series about the importance of friendship and courage. Whether it chooses to illustrate those points with midnight feasts and ginger beer or with trolls and dragons and the occasional deaths of significant characters is completely beside the point. It is what it is, a children's adventure story set in a boarding school, with some wizards in it.

And that should be the end of it, and it would have been had something peculiar not happened to the series around about book four.

Harry Potter books 1-3 are excellent children's books. They combine exciting adventure with boarding school cosiness to produce thoroughly engaging stories about wizards and magic and the importance of friendship and courage. Books four to six (and I strongly suspect book seven will follow suit) are sub-par fantasy about Wizards and Magic.

Normally, this wouldn't annoy me as much as it does. It'd be a shame, but I'd cope. However I actually think that the course taken by the Potter books has actually had a detrimental effect on Children's Fiction as a whole.

It is absolutely right and correct to say that books for children are in no way inferior to books for adults. It is absolutely true that children are capable of dealing with issues far more complicated than adults give them credit for. Unfortunately this leads some people to the conclusion that there should be literally no difference between children's books and books for adults or, worse, that the merits of a children's book should be weighed according to how similar it is to a book for adults.

So many of the things which the later Harry Potter books are praised for the richness of the world, the complexity of the overarching plot are attributes which belong to adult, not children's fiction. That is not to say that children's fiction cannot be complex, but that its complexities should lie in areas other than the intricacies of the backplot and the precise functioning of Horcruxes.

To put it another way: Snape in the first book is complex in precisely the right way for a children's book. We start out thinking that he is Bad, but it turns out that he is Good. This is a nice twist, and children are smart enough to appreciate the moral complexity of it. Snape is horrible, but he is a good person. Snape in the later books is "complex" in precisely the wrong way for a children's book. He is a tangle of conflicting motivations, which may or may not actually make very much sense. He's probably going to wind up having been in love with Lily Potter, and blame himself for her death and blah blah blah.

Now I'm not saying that children are incapable of understanding characters with complex motivations. I'm saying that children won't gain anything by being asked to understand characters with complex motivations (particularly when said motivations are spurious and rather cliched). When you hear children talk about the Potter books, they always talk about how much they love the wizards and the broomsticks, you hear remarkably few people saying "well I'm really interested in the formative childhood experiences of Severus Snape."

Just look at the great classics of children's literature (particularly fantastic children's literature). We aren't asked to analyse the motivations of the Mock Turtle, or wonder whether the Queen of Hearts is really as bad as she seems. Nobody expects us to be interested in the political climate of Oz (well ... Gregory Maguire does). Children's books shouldn't be preoccupied with the same petty minutiae which fill up so much adult literature (particularly fantasy literature). In pandering to the fans' desire to speculate about the inner workings of her magical world (guess what folks, it doesn't have any, it's completely nonsensical) Rowling is breeding a generation of "book lovers" accustomed to the worst excesses of the fantasy genre.

Dahl, Carroll, Baum and the others may not have had the "moral" heart of the Harry Potter books (at least, that's Miss Rowling's analysis), but they had an imagination which far exceeds the few simple ideas which JK spins out over the Potter series. They may not have had long running plots, or complex character arcs (like the "Lupin shacks up with Tonks" arc or the "Harry goes out with Ginny for all of five minutes" arc), but for pity's sake children get enough of that sort of thing watching Eastenders.

JK Rowling is raising a generation of children to value world above plot, plot above meaning, and volume of written material above everything.Themes:

J.K. Rowling

Books

Young Adult / Children

bookmark this with - facebook - delicious - digg - stumbleupon - reddit

~Comments (

go to latest

)

Rami

at 14:07 on 2006-12-20I don't read Harry Potter, but I agree with your points about Children's Fiction As A Whole - it *shouldn't* just be adult fiction with shorter words and more colorful packaging!

permalink

go to top

Wardog

at 13:04 on 2007-01-01And Harry Potter, of course, has its range of "adult" covers, as if to further distance itself from the rest of children's fiction. As I shall surely write in an article of my very own, JK seems to be no longer writing books for children, she's writing books for Harry Potter fans which is actually a completely different thing.

permalink

go to top

TheMerryMustelid

at 17:59 on 2012-04-21"Snape He's probably going to wind up having been in love with Lily Potter, and blame himself for her death and blah blah blah..."

Wow! You're a prophetic genius! How _do_ you do that? ;)

You hate JK Rowling as much as I hate Dan Brown. Let's get together and do coffee! :) Though I actually enjoyed the Potter series *ducks* I recognize it for the big magic soap opera it is. I have no illusions that it's great literature, but I think fellow fantasy writers like Terry Pratchett are just a _mite_ jealous that she captured the youth market before they did.

Whatever you may think of Rowling, you gotta give her credit for getting young kids around the world excited about

reading

. That's no small feat. Sorry if the visual image of a 5 year old hugging the latest Harry Potter tome to their elated breast gives you the vapors, but I find it inspiring. :P

permalink

go to top

Dan H

at 22:32 on 2012-04-21

Whatever you may think of Rowling, you gotta give her credit for getting young kids around the world excited about reading.

Obviously getting kids to read is good, but I'm genuinely not convinced JKR actually increased the amount of books read by children - I strongly suspect that the sorts of kids who read Harry Potter are the sorts of kids who would have been reading anyway. I think the anecdotal evidence gets skewed here in the sense that for kids-who-read, there is likely to be a particular author who you remember as being the author who got you into reading (for me it was Dahl with a side order of Pratchett) and while I think there's a generation of kids for whom that author was Rowling, I don't think that's quite the same as Rowling getting kids to read. It's like the Yoko Factor in reverse, the kids got themselves to read, Rowling was just there at the time.

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 00:31 on 2012-04-22Plus: getting lots of kids to read is benign enough. Getting lots of kids to

all read the same stuff

brings me out in chills.

As a young person the most valuable books I read were the ones which were strictly speaking not actually intended for people my age.

permalink

go to top

Sister Magpie

at 06:03 on 2012-04-22I could swear I remember reading some actual research about this idea with HP. The basic result was, unsurprisingly, that while HP did certainly get kids interested in reading those books (just as Star Wars got kids interested in seeing Star Wars), the number of readers (meaning kids who read for pleasure) was basically the same.

So essentially the same idea--there are now a lot of adult readers whose first amazing books were HP, but the generation that were kids when HP came out don't have a higher percentage of readers as a result.

permalink

go to top

James D

at 06:56 on 2012-04-22Man, that's kind of depressing. There must also be kids out there whose 'first amazing books' were the Twilight series.

permalink

go to top

http://fishinginthemud.livejournal.com/

at 15:17 on 2012-04-22Yeah, some kids are just readers. They'll read whatever's in front of them, whether it's Harry Potter or the cereal box. Kids who don't like to read because reading is hard or boring will just wait to see the movies, as always.

I'm honestly impressed with Rowling for tapping exactly the right cultural vein at the right time. I mean, the woman literally wrote books that managed to appeal to *every kind of person everywhere*. Even people who hated the books enjoyed hating them, and often for very different reasons. She tried to give everyone everything and failed spectacularly, but she did manage to give everyone something. And she did it just by being herself and writing the kind of books she would want to read.

permalink

go to top

TheMerryMustelid

at 16:22 on 2012-04-22I'd like to see those statistics about how the number of kids reading Potter were "reading kids" anyway. I'm writing from the states and let me tell you, seeing American kids

under

7 years old _pack_ bookstores (and I'm talking the

big

chains here) just to read a story was a new phenomena to me. Kids that young usually are not into reading as a rule.

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 16:25 on 2012-04-22

I'd like to see those statistics about how the number of kids reading Potter were "reading kids" anyway. I'm writing from the states and let me tell you, seeing American kids under 7 years old _pack_ bookstores (and I'm talking the bigchains here) just to read a story was a new phenomena to me. Kids that young usually are not into reading as a rule.

Were they packing the bookstores year-round or just around the Potter release dates? Because if it's the latter, that might just be a side effect of them all being keen to read the same books by the same author rather than being particularly more keen to read than their forebears.

permalink

go to top

TheMerryMustelid

at 16:28 on 2012-04-22

James D: Man, that's kind of depressing. There must also be kids out there whose 'first amazing books' were the Twilight series.

I see what you did there. :P

God, that would be even

depressing, wouldn't it?

permalink

go to top

Sister Magpie

at 17:17 on 2012-04-22

I don't have the actual statistics, but the upshot of what I read was the opposite. It wasn't that the books were read by kids who were readers anyway. They were also read by non-readers because they were a huge thing everyone wanted to read. But they didn't get kids interested in reading so much as interested in Harry Potter. So it didn't create readers, it created HP fans who read that.

Though in my experience having worked at a kids' bookstore there are plenty of kids who would pack a bookstore to hear a story. There just aren't huge events where a specific book coming out brings in the crowd all at once--which of course was true for adult readers with HP too.

permalink

go to top

http://fishinginthemud.livejournal.com/

at 17:21 on 2012-04-22I think if the goal was to get kids to start reading Harry Potter and then graduate them to actual good books, it didn't work. There are kids who read Harry Potter and nothing else, which doesn't quite make them "readers."

permalink

go to top

http://roisindubh211.livejournal.com/

at 20:09 on 2012-04-22

I have no illusions that it's great literature, but I think fellow fantasy writers like Terry Pratchett are just a _mite_ jealous that she captured the youth market before they did.

That was never the problem- Pratchett, at least, was annoyed at the way she was presented in the news as if she was the first person ever to put MAGIC in books for CHILDREN, etc, in pieces obviously written by people who do not read fantasy (and yet think they know what's what in the genre).

permalink

go to top

http://lonewolf-eburg.livejournal.com/

at 21:07 on 2012-04-22The main problem with Harry Potter isn't that the books stop being "children's books" halfway though. "These books are no longer for children" is a statement that implies something that is nor positive, nor negative.

The problem is that in the later books, "childlike" elements inherited from earlier ones uncomfortably mesh with the new "adult stuff". I'd argue that in HBP and DH this is particularly noticeable, though two previous books suffer from that as well. As a result, both the series and every particular post-PoA book taken in itself have a hard time realizing who the hell is their primary audience. That results in a lot of dissonant Mood Whiplashes, aborted storylines and themes as the narrative merrily goes from "childlike" to "adult" and back again, and inconsistent characterization.

permalink

go to top

TheMerryMustelid

at 21:19 on 2012-04-22TheMerryMustelid:

I have no illusions that it's great literature, but I think fellow fantasy writers like Terry Pratchett are just a _mite_ jealous that she captured the youth market before they did.

http://roisindubh211.livejournal.com/

Didn't Pratchett also take Rowling to task for effectively saying her books

weren't

fantasy? Like she was trying to distance her series from the "taint" of the genre or something. If she did say something as bone-headed as that, I don't blame him for jumping down her throat.

I love Pratchett and am happy to see him finally getting a wider audience in the States. For many years it seemed he was almost the American fantasy geek's best kept secret. I used to sneer at Terry Brooks readers while I clutched the latest then-hard-to-find Pratchett tome. But that was way back and Pratchett has had good american distribution for at least a decade now.

Ogg is my Co-pilot. :D

To get back on topic, if it's statistically true that Rowling didn't inspire more kids to read beyond her series, that is too bad, but is it necessarily her fault? One of my little pet theories is that fantasy in general has benefitted from the Harry Potter frenzy, because during the waits between Potter books & after the series ended, readers needed something to fill the void. So in effect, Rowling did help other fantasy writers by making fantasy more popular than ever before, even mainstream.

permalink

go to top

Sister Magpie

at 00:04 on 2012-04-23I don't think anybody would say it was her fault. It came up, I think, because there were a lot of people crediting her with single-handedly boosting literacy rates etc. That idea has gotten repeated a lot, so it just gets corrected. Blaming her for not performing that feat is like blaming her for not actually being able to fly a broomstick--I don't think anybody could do it!

permalink

go to top

Dan H

at 09:37 on 2012-04-23

The main problem with Harry Potter isn't that the books stop being "children's books" halfway though. "These books are no longer for children" is a statement that implies something that is nor positive, nor negative.

I think I disagree, but only margainally. I think "these books are no longer for children" does in fact imply something negative, simply because it implies - well - all of the stuff you mention later.

The reason I would suggest that it was bad for a series of children's books to become a series of books for adults is simply that it is inevitable that the "for kids" stuff doesn't fit with the "for adults" stuff. Part of the problem here is that people seem to forget that you can have a dark, serious story in which bad things happen to people which is still fundamentally a children's story, or a lighthearted wacky romp which is still for grownups.

Rowling's error - essentially - was that she mistakenly believed that the only way to engage with the "serious" themes she wanted to engage with in her children's stories was for her to stop writing children's books.

permalink

go to top

http://lonewolf-eburg.livejournal.com/

at 15:16 on 2012-04-23I agree that JKR's OMGADULT!change was always going to have some problems, but I also think that she could've done more to alleviate the problem of thematic discordance. She didn't seem to be aware that she has a problem that needs fixing at all.

permalink

go to top

Frank

at 17:04 on 2012-04-23I, too, recall reading that HP did not increase readers. My understanding is that the series may have increased literacy within age groups. Increasing one's ability to read books does not necessarily make one a reader of books.

permalink

go to top

http://fishinginthemud.livejournal.com/

at 17:24 on 2012-04-23I agree that after about book three Rowling was no longer clear which market she was targeting, and it didn't matter because she was solidly hitting all of them. I can imagine her and her publishers having their minds blown by their success and wanting more of it, without really being sure what was working and shouldn't be changed and where they had room to let her go crazy and do what she liked. There may not have been a conscious choice to turn the books "adult," but an organic growth in that direction, which no editor ever bothered to sit down and take a good look at and realize just how fucked up it was.

Basically, I think Rowling was a decently talented newbie who was deeply injured by her early success, and it'll be interesting to see whether she ever recovers from it as a writer.

permalink

go to top

http://fishinginthemud.livejournal.com/

at 17:34 on 2012-04-23

She didn't seem to be aware that she has a problem that needs fixing at all.

I think closer to the end, her only thought was "finish these fucking books so I can get the fuck on with my life." It's probably more that she simply didn't care what she wrote anymore as long as she got words on paper, and her editors cared even less.

permalink

go to top

http://scipiosmith.livejournal.com/

at 20:06 on 2012-04-23

She didn't seem to be aware that she has a problem that needs fixing at all.

Given that her next book seems to be a satire on the State of the Nation, I'd say she does at least realise that a work primarily for adults will allow her more room to engage with the ideas she wants to in the manner which she would like. As Dan and others have noted, the social commentary in HP was hampered by the fact that it was ultimately a story about the Chosen One defeating the Dark Lord.

permalink

go to top

http://lonewolf-eburg.livejournal.com/

at 20:29 on 2012-04-23I think that Scipio is correct here. To make her later books truly "grow" and be consistent at least in themselves (even if we disregard the earlier ones), JKR needed her books to change from "ultimately a story about the Chosen One defeating the Dark Lord". But while some fanfiction writers could do that (with varying degrees of success), Rowling, understandably, couldn't afford it.

That's why GoF and OotP weren't as bad as DH. In then, JKR could allow herself to deviate a little. HBP, IMO, is just plain badly written.

"I'd say she does at least realise that a work primarily for adults will allow her more room to engage with the ideas she wants to in the manner which she would like"

To be fair, sometimes fantasy can be a good vessel for real-world commentary. But then, see the previous points made on the thread.

permalink

go to top

http://scipiosmith.livejournal.com/

at 19:05 on 2012-04-24

To be fair, sometimes fantasy can be a good vessel for real-world commentary. But then, see the previous points made on the thread.

Oh, definitely. One of my favourite fantasies of the moment is Shadows of the Apt, which tries very hard to engage with race, privilege and the nature of prejudice and discrimination in general. I just think that a series for children is perhaps not the best medium for that sort of thing.

#Ferretbrain #Harry Potter #Roald Dahl #Enid Blyton #J.K. Rowling #Dan H

2 notes · View notes

creative-type · 6 years

Text

Wyrd Sisters and Witches Abroad Review

So I think by now you all know the routine: This year I resolved to diversify my reading and to keep myself accountable I’ve decided to tell all my lovely followers about it. This time around I’m making my first foray into the works of Sir Terry Pratchett, and I enjoyed the first one so much that I read the next of the same series back to back and figured I might as well talk about both at the same time.

So without further ado, let’s talk about witches

Why I Read These Books

As previously stated, these are the first and so far only books of Terry Pratchett that I’ve ever read. I greatly enjoy fantasy and humor alike so I suppose it was only a matter of time. As for why I started with Wyrd Sisters...all I can say is I like magic, so I thought it would be fun to start with the first witch-centric Discworld novel.

My Thoughts On Wyrd Sisters

Wyrd Sisters was, in a word, fantastic. It borrows heavily from and relentlessly parodies Shakespeare, particularly Hamlet and Macbeth. I would describe it as a love-letter to the theater, but it also manages to be smart and clever in its own right.

I feel that’s a fine line to tread. I’ve read parodies or retellings that depended too much on their source and fail as an independent work. I think what makes this story so good is the titular wyrd sisters, a triumvirate of witches made up of Granny Weatherwax, Nanny Ogg, and Magrat Garlik (who I misread as Margret until the text explicitly pointed out the misspelling). The way these three characters bounce off of each other is nothing short of comedy gold.

I was pleasantly surprised by how complex the plot turned out being. There are multiple storylines involving the witches, the evil duke and his wife, the Fool, and various theater shenanigans. Death himself makes a few appearances, and at one point there is literally a magical timeskip. For all the laughs, there were moment when Duke Felmont managed to be a genuinely chilling and effective villain.

My favorite humorous exchange had to be when the witches were talking to the king’s ghost about the whereabouts of his infant son

“What kind of people?” said the king. “Not commoners, I trust?”

“Absolutely not,” said Granny with considerable firmness as a vision of Vitoller floated across her imagination. “Not common at all. Very uncommon. Er.”

Her eyes implored Magrat for help.

“They were Thespians,” said Magrat firmly, her voice radiating such approval that the king found himself nodding automatically.

“Oh,” he said. “Good

“Where they?” whispered Nanny Ogg. “They didn’t look it.”

“Don’t show your ignorance, Gytha Ogg,” sniffed Granny. She turned back to the ghost of the king. “Sorry about that, your majesty. It’s just her showing off. She don’t even know where Thespia is.”

Which brings me to perhaps the most unexpected pleasure of all: The fact that the witches, while intelligent, weren’t educated. It added a certain down to earth quality that I have a hard time putting into words but really enjoyed. The witches employ a certain home-spun wisdom, with Granny Weatherwax especially being fond of using “headology” instead of magic. It was a unique perspective Pratchett was able to use to really bring home one of the sub-themes of the book, and that was the power words and entertainment have on the world.

“Granny had never had much time for words. They were so insubstantial. Now she wished that she had found the time. Words were indeed insubstantial. They were as soft as water, but they were also as powerful as water and now they were rushing over the audience, eroding the levees of veracity, and carrying away the past.”

“Granny subsided into unaccustomed, trouble silence, and tried to listen to the prologue. The theatre worried her. It had a magic of its own, one that didn’t belong to her, one that wasn’t in her to control. It changed the world, and said things were otherwise than they were. And it was worse than that. It was magic that didn’t belong to magical people. It was commanded by ordinary people, who didn’t know the rules. They altered the world because it sounded better.”

But enough of me gushing. Let’s move on to the next one.

My Thoughts on Witches Abroad

My thoughts on Witches Abroad are more complicated than that of Wyrd Sisters. While my only knowledge of Shakespeare is limited to what was forced upon me in highschool, I have a deep love for story conventions and storytelling in general, which is what this book deconstructs. Hard.

There are individual pieces that I found just as funny (if not moreso) than the previous book, and the scene deconstructing Little Red Riding Hood was absolutely gut-wrenching. I can’t fathom how Pratchett got the idea to combine the idea of Disney World and Mardi Gras into one setting, but it works surprisingly well.

On the other hand, there’s something I can’t quite put my finger on that kept me from enjoying it as much as Wyrd Sisters, and I think part of it is because I have a fundamentally different worldview than the author, and he reaches philosophical conclusions that I just don’t agree with.

I also think the pacing in this one’s a little wonky. I enjoyed all of the one-shot fairy tale references in the first half, but collectively it’s quite a lot of time spent not going anywhere, while the second half could have stood to be fleshed out a little bit more for my tastes.

The final climax though...Never have the words “this one” been more powerful.

All in all, I think the highs of Witches Abroad were higher, but it’s lows were definitely lower. Wyrd Sisters was the more consistently good of the two books.

In Conclusion

There’s a reason Terry Pratchett is as beloved as he is. I’ve read two of his books and can already tell why he’s so highly regarded as an author. Even though I didn’t enjoy Witches Abroad as much as Wyrd Sisters I still thought it was a fun romp with something to say about itself (even though I didn’t agree with what it was saying).

It’s always interesting to read an author who has different views than yourself. In this case I found that I couldn’t really separate the author’s thoughts from my feelings on the story because the books were written in such a way where they were inseparably intertwined with one another.

I’ll probably read more of Pratchett’s works in the future, and if these two books are any indication I’ll probably enjoy them immensely, but I won’t deny that there were reasons that kept me from enjoying them as much as other people do.

#creative-type reads #Wyrd Sisters #Witches Abroad #Terry Pratchett

9 notes · View notes

eyanril · 6 years

Text

Movie Round-Up 2017

My opinions only, of course! :)

Best of 2017:

Logan - This movie is magnificent from the opening to the end credits, and if you haven’t seen it, go out and rectify that RIGHT NOW. Hugh Jackman brings an utterly heartbreaking vulnerability to an aging Wolverine. Patrick Stewart as Charles Xavier and newcomer Dafne Keen as X-23 keep pace easily with Jackman’s fantastic performance. The story is amazing, the acting is phenomenal, the special effects and fight choreography are stunning. Seriously, just sit down and watch it already, even you are not a fan of the X-Men franchise. You won’t regret it.

Thor: Ragnarok - A delightful romp that, although it doesn’t hold up particularly well on its own, lightens up the Marvel Cinematic Universe almost as easily as a Guardians film. And despite its overall silly tone, it does a good job wrapping up the Asgardian story line and delivers some actual consequences that will reverberate in later films.

Wind River - Stunning cinematography and superb writing elevate this fairly by-the-book murder mystery above its brethren. Jeremy Renner and Elizabeth Olson (as well as the supporting cast) are fantastic, and their performances alone make it worth watching.

Get Out - As much biting social commentary as it is thrilling horror movie, this was by far the biggest surprise of 2017 for me. Everything about Get Out was meticulously crafted, and it deserves every bit of praise it got. I can’t wait to see what else Jordan Peele has up his sleeve.

Tie: Guardians of the Galaxy 2 and Spider-Man:Homecoming - Both manage to balance the humor and the gravity of their plots fairly well, giving us plenty of funny interspersed with character growth. I have to give a slight edge to Spider-Man because of Tom Holland’s adorkable performance as Peter Parker, but I enjoyed them both a lot.

Most Disappointing of 2017:

Ghost in the Shell - Damn, I wanted to love this, but even Scarlett Johansson wasn’t enough to make this live action adaptation of the beloved anime work. (In fact a lot of people seemed to think she was part of the problem. I disagree). It’s gorgeous, and it’s well acted, but at the end of the day it just felt flat and forgettable.

Alien: Covenant - Not sure what I expected, considering the let down that was 2012’s Prometheus. A far cry from the quality of the original Alien and Aliens, it has all the shine but none of the substance that would be a good modern addition to the franchise. It goes in a direction that makes little sense, and made less of an impression on me than even the much derided Alien:Resurrection.

The Dark Tower - Ugh. It took me months to read Stephen King’s epic fantasy/horror series in its entirety, and all my hopes and dreams for a good adaptation of the source material were dashed very quickly during The Dark Tower. Not only was it a bad adaptation, it was a bad movie in general. I only hope that someday down the road someone can do the saga justice, even if it’s as a TV show or miniseries, because at this point anything would be better than this movie.

Kong: Skull Island - Another one I had high hopes for, another one that let me down. Tom Hiddleston and Brie Larson were given nothing interesting to do in a movie with a bloated run-time and little plot, which is a shame because they are both fantastic actors. Utterly forgettable.

Beauty & the Beast - Why, Disney? Why do you have to keep making these mediocre live action adaptations of your already excellent animated films? I don’t know exactly what I expected with this one, other than more of what made the original good. Instead we got a charmless scene for scene rehash, with lukewarm chemistry and tepid song and dance numbers that don’t hold a candle to that of the original.

Surprises of 2017:

The Lego: Batman Movie - Having enjoyed 2014’s The Lego Movie on a very basic level, I wasn’t expecting to like this as much as I did. Genuinely funny and heartwarming, it was a better Batman movie than Batman V. Superman and a better DCU movie than Justice League.

Star Wars: The Last Jedi - Hear me out on this one. Going into The Force Awakens in 2015, I had seen only A New Hope and The Phantom Menace in their entirety, so I had no idea what to expect of this new iteration. As it turned out, I was largely indifferent to The Force Awakens. Color me shocked when I walked out of The Last Jedi very excited for Episode IX. Was The Last Jedi flawed? Absolutely - and yet, due to a few very crucial elements (mainly any part involving Rey or Kylo Ren), I wouldn’t call it unsalvageable. In fact, it’s one of the few movies I’d ever consider going to see in the theaters twice, just so I can have more of the good stuff.

IT - I may have spent half the movie covering my eyes, but as far as horror movies go, that’s high praise coming from me. While IT has a few issues, overall I found this modern adaptation of Stephen King’s classic novel to be thrilling, terrifying, and terribly beautiful.

Power Rangers - Having grown up with a cousin who spent a good chunk of time obsessed with the original Mighty Morphin version, I watched this mostly for nostalgia. While it takes itself way too seriously for the most part, Elizabeth Banks’ campy turn as Rita Repulsa elevates the quality whenever she’s hamming it up onscreen. Overall I enjoyed it, which was not something I expected for a movie rebooting a very bad 90s kids’ show.

Colossal - Based on the trailer, you’d think Colossal was a comedy - and you’d be completely wrong. Hiding a slightly disturbing redemption story behind a funny facade, this one came out of left field, but managed to leave a good impression.

Movies of 2017 that I wish I had seen:

Lady Bird - From all accounts, it’s brilliant, and I’m just upset that no theater within a reasonable driving distance is playing it. Saoirse Ronan is an amazing young actress and I’ve always enjoyed anything I’ve seen her in.

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri - See above, ha. As we both consider In Bruges to be one of the best movies ever made, my husband and I are eager to see it.

Baby Driver - For some reason my husband and I completely missed this in the theaters and we’re now regretting it, considering the amount of praise it has gotten. Edgar Wright’s movies are always fantastically shot, and I’m sure this is no different.

19 notes · View notes

easyfoodnetwork · 4 years

Text

For All Its Whimsy, ‘Crazy Delicious’ Can’t Escape Reality

Channel 4/Netflix

A fantastical setting and famous “Food Gods” Carla Hall and Heston Blumenthal only underline how conventional this Netflix effort is

Strawberry cheesecake chicken wings. Prosecco waterfalls and cheese growing on trees. Chef Heston Blumenthal descending in a thunderclap, wearing a tight white suit. It’s not a lucid dream diary: it’s the newest cooking show on Netflix, Crazy Delicious, wherein three contestants compete in three rounds, taking ingredients and inspiration from a Willy Wonka-like garden where nearly everything is edible. The first round is based on a hero ingredient like a strawberry or tomato, the second is a reinvention of a classic, and the third is a showstopper, with inspiration ranging from brunch to barbecue.

No mere panel of mortals will judge such a show. Enter the “Food Gods” — made up of Blumenthal, Top Chef legend Carla Hall, and “Michelin-starred chef” Niklas Ekstedt. Dressed in their pristine white costumes and accompanied by ominous music, the trio might be set up as transcendent, but their actual job is that of the classic food show judge: offer some opinions, throw some concerned looks, and dish out zingy one-liners. (When a contestant tells Hall, that their dish is made with love, Hall replies, “Well, [love] doesn’t have salt, unless you’re crying, honey.”) Host Jayde Adams, meanwhile, adds a decidedly dry British slant to the show’s proceedings, despite the show trying to turn her into a Lewis Carroll character.

While Crazy Delicious aims to break the food show mold — creating something more zany than Chopped and Masterchef, more bonkers than Nailed It, and cuter than The Great British Baking Off — it falls short on everything but the set. What unfolds in the short season is six episodes torn between total culinary fantasia and convention, the result of which is a basic cooking competition, but with more crafting supplies for sets and costumes. Its best efforts to bring something new to food TV only reveal just how conventional Crazy Delicious actually is.

Food TV shows, crazy or delicious, pivot on power dynamics: the relationship between the judges and the judged, mediated and molded by the hosts. While in recent years, shows like Great British Baking Off and Australian hit The Chefs’ Line have extricated themselves from boorish villain/hero tropes, Crazy Delicious wants to go as far as to extricate its judges from earth itself. They are Food Gods: remember this and do not forget it — but in case you do, production is here to remind you with thunder, lightning, and, well, that’s all.

The Food Gods, though, are also actual people with restaurant chops. While their duties rarely go beyond encouraging praise or gentle criticism, the show asks them to show off their conventional culinary credentials, rather than representing anything transcendent or wacky. Ekstedt references Michelin stars as a point of comparison when praising dishes; Hall harks back to her time as a contestant on Top Chef. When Heston Blumenthal becomes a Food God in his Edenic realm, he’s still being leaned on as a famous chef — the famous chef subject to widely reported accusations of wage theft and restaurant mismanagement, and a late-career pivot to casual sexism. The choice of name also unfortunately recalls Time Magazine’s infamous “Gods of Food” feature, whose anointing chefs as figures of worship excluded women entirely. There is no need for them to be culinary gods other than to be culinary Gods — deified shibboleths, set apart from the mortal contestants who try to please them by walking up a slightly steep hill godly mountain with their possibly crazy, possibly delicious food.

The contestants don’t quite get to realize the fantasy either. The diversity in every episode is a welcome development, and it’s interesting that contestants are neither the rank amateurs of Masterchef nor the trained chefs of Chopped. These are keen, often technically proficient cooks, and there is quality technique and great skill on display, so it’s a shame that they’re dealt kind of a raw deal. The stakes too often feel too low, and with each 45 minute episode being a self-contained story, there’s little time to develop intrigue or connections to the people on screen. The prize for winning is a golden apple, which means when crackers break and parfaits don’t set, it’s pride and self-worth that are at stake, not money or prestige. While this makes for more genuine emotion, it also puts limits on the show’s range. With neither financial reward nor — as with Great British Bake Off — the promise of access into the world of culinary celebrity, Crazy Delicious has to stand or fall between the start of each episode and its end. It falls more than it stands..

The prize golden apple is picked from the phantasmagoria of the Willy Wonka set — the most striking departure from the “faintly cool, faintly dangerous kitchen” template of its competitors; exceptions made for the GBBO tent. It could have been the ace in the hole: Everything is edible, and the contestants are instructed not just to find cheese in nooks and eggs in nests, but to “go forth and forage,” plucking tomatoes from vines and digging carrots from the earth, engaging with the agricultural systems that produce food.

Well, not quite. This bounty is artificial, because of course it is, and other ingredients like chopped meat and packets of pasta are not delved from grottos, but removed from fridges and pantries. This happens in any show with an ingredients tray, which is almost all cooking shows, but they don’t try to pretend otherwise. The creation of a fake, bountiful food system that is not entirely fictional but is entirely alienated from labor feels incongruous to the admirable, if unfulfilled ambition of other food TV in 2020 to reflect on the fact that everybody eats. Asking something as fanciful as Crazy Delicious to bear the weight of expectation around Taste the Nation or near-namesake Ugly Delicious might appear unkind, but the show wants it two ways — a magical respite from typical food TV, but with all the same prestige trappings — and ends up in some confused middle ground.

The genuinely fun elements of Crazy Delicious, like candles that burst smilingly with mango pulp or edible cherry blossoms that are sweets, unfortunately become little more than gags; the contestants never engage with them or use them in their cooking. Even Chopped, set in a kitchen and not an edible eden, does more with its introduction of comparatively conventional curveball ingredients. The Crazy Delicious set’s unchanging nature also means that the show runs out of secrets early on. A prosecco waterfall might bubble with whimsy in episode one, but it’ll go flat by episode three. There are some interstitial incursions which are funny albeit a little outdated, like a momentary send-up of the errant coffee cup in Game of Thrones, but as with the rest of the show’s elements, these jokes only further confuse the tone. Indeed, the omnipresent Big Green Egg — the favorite barbecue of chefs, sponconned across the industry — is significantly more disconcerting.

Overall, the place that Crazy Delicious is asking viewers to escape from — the world of food TV — looms so large that the show ends up reiterating familiar tropes rather than subverting them as intended. A set with ovens and blenders and barbecues surrounded by foliage is still a set with ovens and blenders and barbecues. Eurocentric restaurant discourse, standards, and techniques are so present that any fantasy never gets to genuinely establish itself; the final four-hour challenge of the series is “takeaway,” and of course, it pigeonholes Indian cuisine. Ultimately Crazy Delicious is frustrating: it could have been deeply weird, deeply fantastical; it could have been a jolly romp, contestants competing to grab the fruit candles and chocolate tree branches, the chaos of Supermarket Sweep unmanacled from the supermarket. Instead, even with its sweet burgers and activated charcoal pizza volcanoes, it feels like a waste.

It would be seemingly easy to write all these annoyances off because Crazy Delicious is, quite clearly, trying to be a bit of harmless fun. Viewers seeking a six-episode bliss-out with a few laughs and some Willy Wonka flourishes are just in it for the escapism, not the optics, right? But the titular crazy is leaning too much on the delicious, and the delicious is just normie interpretations of “good” food. Despite the ongoing insistence on the show’s wackiness, the results are a less fun, less weird, less intelligent, less crazy, and less delicious follow up to Chopped, GBBO, The Chef’s Line, and Nailed It. Try as it might, Crazy Delicious cannot unmoor itself from the fact that unlike its edible punchlines, food, and restaurants don’t just grow on trees.

from Eater - All https://ift.tt/2AiHpLL https://ift.tt/2AlE3ru

Channel 4/Netflix

A fantastical setting and famous “Food Gods” Carla Hall and Heston Blumenthal only underline how conventional this Netflix effort is

from Eater - All https://ift.tt/2AiHpLL via Blogger https://ift.tt/38h1T4j

#Blogger #cooking #Eater #food #recipes

0 notes

illeity · 7 years

Text

Winter 2017 Anime Awards!

(From the ones I actually watched.)

Best Overall: 3-gatsu no Lion/ March Comes in like a Lion

Into the light.

With consistent quality during the second part despite a shift in focus, perfectly managed tone that never leads to excess sentimentality or overt levity, and a story that ebbs and flows with such grace that it melts metaphor and direct description like an impressionist painting, Chica Umino's March Comes in Like a Lion remains the top spot for two consecutive seasons for the simple reason that it tells a rich story of individuals and making meaning.

In the first part, it introduces shogi professional, sometimes student, and introvert Rei Kiriyama and the facets of his life, particularly his close ties with the Kawamoto siblings. At the beginning of Part 2, Rei hugs the youngest Kawamoto sibling, Momo, and says that he has personal and professional matters to deal. While he sees the Kawamoto family as comfort and healing, he understands that he can't come running to them each time. With a major tournament upcoming he stops visiting them and the narrative shifts to the lives of the Shogi players that he plays against. With their own dreams and regrets, he becomes an observer of their lives as he compares it against his own, not to pass judgement on his failings, but to see the possibilities there is to life and to recognize that in the end, there are no bad guys, just people driven by very different motivations and showing how they cope with the consequences of a lifetime of choices.

With another season later in the year and a two-part live action movie currently showing in Japan, the series deserves all the accolades it gets. And if you're ever in the market for something substantial, with a deep, beating heart, this is your anime.

Best Drama: Youjo Senki, The Saga of Tanya the Evil

What is a god to an non-believer?

Tanya von Degurechaff is the fiercest, deadliest, and most cunning soldier of the Empire (Not-Germany) as they wage the first World War (Until it becomes muddled when they introduce a Panzerkampfwagen IV.). She's also under thirteen years old and is hated by God, or a god.

Why is that?

The god sees Tanya has such little faith in him and has therefore cursed her: Should she die a death that is not natural, she will be taken off the wheel of reincarnation and sent to hell.

But why a kid? And why so much hatred for an individual?

While these questions are answered to an extent, the most important thing to consider is that these driving forces are what sets up Tanya as she is placed in conflict for most of the war as she struggles to survive. She puts in as many legal means as possible to leave the war, only to have her end up on the front lines anyway, whether by her own fault, or by divine intervention.

As she leaves a trail of bodies, her actions reverberate throughout the war as everyone slowly pushes down into a black hole, no matter who is winning. And as with the nature of war, there are no heroes, only murderers.

Best Comedy: Kono Subarashii Sekai ni Shukufuku o!

"This anime is like every insane D&D story I have ever heard." -henlp

The second season of Konosuba! continues the adventures of Satou Kazuma as he is pulled from the real world into a fantasy world where RPG game mechanics exist in reality. He's accompanied by a Goddess who drinks too much and wastes her skill points on party tricks, a Wizard who knows only one spell (and collapses after every use), and a Crusader who can tank, but cannot hit any living thing with her sword (not out of principle, she just can't hit at all). Also, that Crusader is a masochist.

"Insane and crazy" is the proper descriptor for the way the series is plotted, as comedic plot points are introduced and escalated versions of those plot points are put to use later on. The characters are made aware that they are in the mess they are in because of the solution that resolved a previous conflict made ample fuel for another. "It gets worse" is another descriptor as they are battered by bad luck and only somehow manage to escape as even their most competent moments are displays of excellence borne out of their utter stupidity. It's a show that's shameless enough to throw everything at a wall to make you laugh, and most of the time, what they throw in, sticks.

Honorable Mention: Kobayashi-san Chi no Maid Dragon

The Lion falls in love with the Mouse.

Miss Kobayashi is a Systems Engineer who, after a night of drunken revelry, somehow saves the life of a dragon, Tohru. Still drunk, she invites the Dragon back to her apartment, and into her life.

Unlike Konosuba! which fills narrative space with ever increasing, crazy humor, Miss Kobayashi's strength is mixing in the fantastical elements with the mundane, to create the comedy or the heart-warming plots, something that Gabriel DropOut only marginally succeeded in doing.

All throughout are discussions on the comfort between partners and the lives of people from vastly different backgrounds. It's about love and growing into it, even though we've largely been on autopilot. It's about the surprise we get when we realize to what degree people can love us for.

Best Cute Girl Anime: Demi-chan wa Kataritai, Interview with Monster Girls

Science, Folklore, and Free Hugs

Almost all Cute Girl Anime narratives occur within a casting closed system, that is, primary and secondary characters are all girls and they play off their antics onto each other and whatever conflict they find themselves in. So this is a very special case where the Primary female characters shine in their characterization with the aid of a Primary male character, Takahashi Tetsuo, Biology teacher, Demi-Human Researcher, and member of the pantheon of the "Greatest Teachers in Fiction".

So for the girls, we have Takanashi Hikari, vampire, Machi Kyouko, dullahan, Elsa, Kusakabi Yuki, a snow woman, and Satou Sakie, succubus and Math teacher.

The daily motions of these monster girls is already interesting enough, but a subtle beauty comes from the setting and the way the plot is crafted with a keen eye for science and human foibles.

The world-building is present but hardly emphasized, and shows how the world accommodates the Demi-Humans and their special needs. Vampires get blood packs subsidized by the government, Succubi get visits from Demi-Human agencies to check up on how well they're adjusting to their environment, and the rest are treated not so much because they're demi-humans, but how they are as people. Kusakabe Yuki, for instance, is seen as cold by a few of her peers, but never attribute her nature as a snow woman to be the cause.

The science part is interesting, because several chapters detail efforts by Takahashi trying to explain the physiology of the Demi-Humans, drawing on folklore for insight and the scientific method to explain "how" they function, without asking "why". In Magical Realism, whys have never been the point anyway.

And so we have a Cute Girl anime that stands above and beyond what is generally expected of the genre. By having the willingness to introduce other characters in the mix, we experience something a bit more different in how humor is constructed and how conflict is resolved. True to its efforts to ground itself through science, the warmth comes off even more genuine and realistic.

Best Sci-Fi/ Fantasy: Little Witch Academia

Better than Harry Potter.

What started off as a crowd-funded film about a young girl aspring to become a great witch, has turned into a full-blown series as it should have from the start. It carries with it all the trademarks of Trigger: Stark and clean character design, slick animation, and a wild ride of a story. Whereas previous works were about killer clothes and literal shared experiences, this one is a straight-forward romp into the realm of fantasy.

Except, while the premise is straight-forward, the execution has all the majesty and scope of an epic tightly-knit inside the trappings of what is essentially a coming-of-age, high school story. Add a pinch of the ever classic industry versus magic trope, excellent characters and well-realized relationships, and you have something that only ever appears plain and overdone.

Best Girl: Tsukinose Vignette April from Gabriel DropOut

No good or evil, only kawaii.

I have reached the conclusion that in the world of Gabriel DropOut, the one reason neither Heaven nor Hell have made any greater stride against the other is not because of balance, but rather because both are equally inept.

That being said, Tsukinose Vignette April, a demon from Hell, is the worst kind of inept but the also the best kind of character to be best girl: Kind, disciplined, being the one person responsible enough to go over to Gabriel's home to wake her up for school, scared of horror movies, and just... angelic. Compound her difficulty with being the only straight man in a comedy quartet gives her the patience of a saint.

Some people, like Gabriel, could never grasp the responsibility of being a divine being. For Vignette, she was just unlucky enough to not have been born to a role she's a natural in: that of a normal human being.

Best OP: "Shadow and Truth" by ONE III NOTES from ACCA: 13-Territory Inspection Dept.

"It's never really what it seems."

In the latest of slice-of-life/ food/ mystery anime is ACCA: 13-Territory Inspection Dept, where Otus tries to do his job as inspector in what is ostensibly a Fascist state that is under rumors of a coup.

Of course, the general goal of any good OP is to draw the viewer into the show and communicate what they'll come to expect from it. And for a show with such style and class it's masterful to pick a song that blends hip-hop and jazz as the vocalists rap about the hazy nature of truth as people play games with relationships and politics into each other.

The striking visuals complement the song nicely, with shots of the various characters shifting in and out of blur and limiting visuals to white, black, and one more color for every scene to evoke a unique feel for every single character and teasing the role they'll play in the show.

Best ED: "Los! Los! Los!" by Aoi Yūki from Youjo Senki, Saga of Tanya the Evil

Bedenke, dass du sterben musst.

An ode to madness and bloodlust, Los! Los! Los! (German for "Come on! Come on! Come on!") is a war speech in song form with very simple visuals: Shots of Tanya's face in various states of anger/ madness, a battlefield, and a few illustrations by the Light Novel's artist, Neichiru. How and when they're shown is where the song melds and gains greater power.

The angry/ mad face and the battlefield are shown and interchange with each other to follow the beat of the song during the chorus, which are commands in German to attack, take cover, or stand in attention.

Neichiru's illustrations take over during the verses, which celebrates war, the joys of taking away life, and surrendering your own life to your country, which the song sees as a great achievement, good enough to reach heaven for by building dead bodies one atop another.

Listening to the full song is recommended , as it expands on the nihilism even further, calling for those who advocate peace as weaklings and calling for ceaseless violence and depravity akin more to Heaven rather than Hell.

For its dark and horrifying thesis (sung with the voice of a young girl), the song would not be out of place in a battlefield setting where you know there is no way out, so you might as well go and fight and relish every drop of blood spilled, whether your own, or your opponents.

#March Comes in Like a Lion #youjo senki #konosuba #miss kobayashi's dragon maid #demi-chan wa kataritai #acca 13-ku kansatsu-ka #gabriel dropout #little witch academia #anime awards

195 notes · View notes

moviesarereel-blog · 7 years

Text

Movies Are Reel: Top 10 Movies of 2016

youtube

2016 is dead.

It has been roughly a year since we have started this podcast.

We have seen a lot of movies in 2016.

So it seems only fitting that we rank what we have agreed upon to be the top 10 movies of the year 2016.

This list came together by using a scientific method that is indisputable*.

*completely disputable

It took a lot of discussion, list making, and some of us had to make some sacrifices, but this is a list that all three of us of could agree upon as a podcast.

That being said, we do have different opinions, which is why you will also find our individual top three films of the year.

Movies That We Didn’t Get Around to Seeing

Listen, we can’t get around to watching everything, but we will admit that there were some significant films that we could not see for one reason or another that we should have.

For some of these, specifically La, La, Land and The Eyes of My Mother, they just were not showing at a theater near us at the time we put this list together.

The movies that we just could not see for this list are:

The Nice Guys

La La Land

Manchester By The Sea

The Eyes of My Mother

The Edge of Seventeen

Honorable Mentions

As I said, we all had to make some sacrifices for this list. Stuff got cut, got added back on, and some great movies didn’t crack the top ten. Which is why we decided to give these movies their own spotlight.

These are our honorable mentions for the top 10 movies of 2016:

The Conjuring 2

youtube

On the coattails of the success of this film’s predecessor, it would have been very easy to skate by and make something sub-par. Thankfully, The Conjuring 2 has decidedly staked its claim onto the hearts of most horror fans. The continued dissection of Ed and Lorraine Warren’s case files brings us to the events surrounding the Enfield Poltergeist. While some dissenters say that The Conjuring 2 is too by the books for a haunted house-centric story, the film proves that it’s not only aware of the expectations held by the audience as far as cliche and the retreading of tropes, but it’s able to manipulate them and draw genuine scares, while still maintaining a level of warmness and heart that makes its characters likable and present. With a superb focus on tension and suspense, The Conjuring 2 has more than earned a place of honorable mention.

- Karrie Lyles

The Invitation

youtube

The Invitation is a slow and fascinating burn. It’s a film that constantly challenges the audience’s perception up to it’s climatic and memorable finale. It does a great job of placing you in a space and making you feel on-edge. Part drama, thriller, and horror film, The Invitation is a tense movie that is engaging up to its conclusion.

- Jurge Cruz-Alvarez

The Lobster

The Lobster is a satire on the systematic and emotionless approach many people take to finding love. In an alternate reality where being single is outlawed, one would think that loneliness would be hard to come by. However, the characters at the forefront of our story inhabit a constant state of cold and stark isolation, even when they do find love, whether it be organically or manufactured. In this world however, love in all it’s forms is quantified, measured and heavily scrutinized, like some sort of product on an assembly line. The tone this film presents is one of prevailing melancholia which aches with solitude. The lines are delivered with zero inflection or emotion, yet still demonstrate the eccentric sense of dry humor at the core of the story. On concept alone this film is one of the best offerings of 2016, but is bumped to the next level with strong and nuanced performances and clever writing.

- Karrie Lyles

The Top 10 Movies of 2016

Alright, well, here we go.

No more putting it off, here is our top 10 movies of 2016:

10. Zootopia

Zootopia is an original animated film put together by the folks over at Walt Disney Animation Studios that refuses to talk down to its primary audience, children. It’s a film that fits the bill of a colorful and lively Disney romp for children, but it also sands alone as a smart, technically impressive, and fantastical film. In a year with a lot of animated films of varying quality, Zootopia is not only one of the best animated films of 2016, but one that will probably stand the test of time.

- Jurge Cruz-Alvarez

9. The Jungle Book

It’s easy to say that the film industry is over-saturated with remakes and sequels that are uninspired and unnecessary. However, when it comes to Jon Favreau’s journey into the Disney classic The Jungle Book, there’s nothing tired about it. The story has newfound power and mastery leaving behind any conceptions that it’s nothing more than a movie for kids. Propelled ahead of other talking animal movies by the amazing performances of the leading cast and the beautiful atmosphere created in the landscape of the film, The Jungle Book is a stellar experience.

- Karrie Lyles

8. Arrival

Arrival is fresh. Of the films in its genre that have released in the past five years, Arrival is one of the best, if not the best. It tells its story in an eerie, mysterious, and well, alien way. Its style is haunting and its performance from its lead Amy Adams is strong. While some story threads are connected in a questionable fashion, it’s one that works well and leaves the audience with nuanced questions.

- Jurge Cruz-Alvarez

7. Southbound

youtube

Southbound has proven itself not only as a unique and unforgettable horror romp, but also as a test of endurance. An amalgamation of brutality, unease, and terror, this anthology horror film enters the list as an exciting and stylized plunge into purgatory in the form of the open road. Five stories are laced loosely but effectively together by the desolate stretch of highway, the radio host encouraging the driver, and the omnipresent sense of dread. The many facets of this film, from the dissonant and purposeful soundtrack to the haunting design of the creatures, establish an isolated world that seems to have an agenda all its own. Would it be too cheesy to say buckle up?

- Karrie Lyles

6. The Neon Demon

A film as divisive as it is stylish. The Neon Demon creates a beautiful fantasy world that slowly morphs into a vaporwave nightmare. Some will fall in love with it, others will despise it, and many will find themselves fluctuating in between. It’s unique nature is worth the watch to see which end of the spectrum you fall on.

- Ryan Lance

5. Rouge One: A Star Wars Story

As outrageous as it might sound, Rogue One wound up being a grounded film; certainly when compared to other films in the franchise. Its focus on a group of nobodies who are truly presented as a group of nobodies, and the clever ways it ties itself to A New Hope gives the conflict of the original three Star Wars films a new sense of humanity and weight. While it certainly has some fat around the edges, that does not stop Rogue One from being a strong action sci-fi film.

As someone who thinks A New Hope stands alone and is the best thing to have the name Star Wars, I was happy to see this film successfully enrich such a classic.

- Jurge Cruz

4. Green Room

Green Room’s relatively simple premise sets up a brutal thriller that keeps you invested all the way through. It’s a violent and gritty ride you’ll be watching while curled into a ball on your couch (At least I was). With some outstanding performances from Patrick Stewart and the late Anton Yelchin, Green Room is a must watch for all fans of the thriller genre.

- Ryan Lance

3. Swiss Army Man

Swiss Army Man is one of those films where the people who talk about it always seem to be compelled to throw in a “where do I begin?” or a “you have to see it to believe it” or something of similar awestruck yet confused wonder. An unflinching look at what constitutes a full life. This film breaks down what fuels and perpetuates societal shame and illustrates what an imposition decency can be.The devastating reality of a suicidal man having to convince someone how beautiful and fulfilling it is to be alive. Born from what the directors, Daniels, hate most in film; bodily humor, acapella music, and musicals, comes a heartfelt and wonderfully crafted film that you just can’t get out of your head.

- Karrie Lyles

2. 10 Cloverfield Lane

10 Cloverfield Lane leaves you feeling as claustrophobic as its characters, with tension rising the longer you are trapped in there. This type of psychological thriller isn’t one you come across often, as it plays with your fears and anxiety in thoughtful ways similar films fail at. Add in some fantastic performances by the small cast of Mary Elizabeth Winstead, John Goodman, and John Gallagher Jr., and 10 Cloverfield Lane is a film I’d recommend to anyone.

- Ryan Lance

And finally…

1. The Witch

youtube

The Witch was one of our most anticipated films of this year, and there was certainly some skepticism if it could live up to the excitement we ourselves built up for it. It was clear that it was a horror film of a different species, one slower and very deliberate.

I personally was worried that it would turn out as a plodding film with a lot of ambition.

But The Witch delivers. It’s an unsettling film with unforgettable imagery and a fascinating dissection of a family and their inner politics. Its lead character, played Anya Taylor-Joy, is probably one of the most complicated and multifaceted characters in the history of horror. The growth she goes through is one that challenges critical thought while still being gripping.

Its ending is also pretty darn fun.

It’s because of this that it is our movie of the year.

- Jurge Cruz

Personal Lists

Well, that was a lot of work. Now that the weight is off our backs, let’s get a bit more casual.

Here are our top three films of 2016,

Karrie’s Top Three Movies of 2016:

1. Swiss Army Man (Karrie already talked about it on the list)

2. Southbound (Karrie already talked about it on the list)

3. Gods of Egypt

Some people just want to watch the flat Earth burn, or be attacked by a giant space snake. I get it, OK? This movie is hot garbage BUT, it’s the best and hottest garbage in all the land. Somewhere along the line of making fun of this movie constantly, I found myself genuinely liking it. The chorus of characters that are shallow and unlikable, the metallic humanoid CGI battle bots, the fact that post Pirates of the Caribbean Geoffrey Rush is condemned to be a disgruntled sea captain forever, it’s a bottomless pit of things that you should never do in a film, but THIS film has the gumption to not only do all of them, but to sequel bait at the end. This movie is pure gold just like the blood that runs through the veins of the slightly above average sized gods who walk among us. Even if it’s for all the wrong reasons Gods of Egypt is one of my favorite films of 2016.

- Karrie Lyles

Jurge’s Top Three Movies of 2016:

1. The Witch (Jurge already talked about it on the list)

2. Green Room

From my review

“Green Room is a compact and human horror thriller. Its tension is so high because it respects its young cast and makes them human. The violence it is so good at displaying hits hard and adds to that tension. For a movie about a bunch of kids getting picked off one by one, it is really, really smart. Apart from two notable exceptions, its characters aren’t all that likable or memorable, but you can still buy into them. They aren’t obnoxious. They are people. That’s why it’s a cut above a lot of films in the genre, and why it’s one of 2016’s best films.”

- Jurge Cruz-Alvarez

3. Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (Jurge already talked about it on the list)

So, that’s 2016. If you have read this or have given any of our content any attention, thank you. It means a lot. We’re excited to jump into 2017 and hope to keep the podcast going strong.

Here’s hoping January is a strong start.

Ryan’s Top Three Movies of 2016:

1. 10 Cloverfield Lane (Ryan already talked about it on the list)

2. The Witch

3. The Neon Demon

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jurge:

twitter: https://twitter.com/suparherojar26

blog: http://jcruzalvarez.tumblr.com/

Ryan

twitter: https://twitter.com/fryanpans

blog: http://freezevolt.tumblr.com/

Karrie

twitter: https://twitter.com/kar_elyles

blog: sylvia-socioplath.tumblr.com

#best movies of 2016 #best of 2016 #top 10 movies of 2016 #green rrom #the witch #the neon demon #rogue one #zootopia #the lobster #the inviation #arrival #soutbound #swiss army man #movie talk #movie discussion #movies #film #podcast #feature

18 notes · View notes

instantdeerlover · 4 years

Text

For All Its Whimsy, ‘Crazy Delicious’ Can’t Escape Reality added to Google Docs

For All Its Whimsy, ‘Crazy Delicious’ Can’t Escape Reality

Channel 4/Netflix

A fantastical setting and famous “Food Gods” Carla Hall and Heston Blumenthal only underline how conventional this Netflix effort is

via Eater - All https://www.eater.com/2020/6/30/21308778/crazy-delicious-carla-hall-heston-blumenthal-netflix-review

Created July 1, 2020 at 04:26AM /huong sen View Google Doc Nhà hàng Hương Sen chuyên buffet hải sản cao cấp✅ Tổ chức tiệc cưới✅ Hội nghị, hội thảo✅ Tiệc lưu động✅ Sự kiện mang tầm cỡ quốc gia 52 Phố Miếu Đầm, Mễ Trì, Nam Từ Liêm, Hà Nội http://huongsen.vn/ 0904988999 http://huongsen.vn/to-chuc-tiec-hoi-nghi/ https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1xa6sRugRZk4MDSyctcqusGYBv1lXYkrF

0 notes

easyfoodnetwork · 4 years

Quote

Channel 4/Netflix A fantastical setting and famous “Food Gods” Carla Hall and Heston Blumenthal only underline how conventional this Netflix effort is Strawberry cheesecake chicken wings. Prosecco waterfalls and cheese growing on trees. Chef Heston Blumenthal descending in a thunderclap, wearing a tight white suit. It’s not a lucid dream diary: it’s the newest cooking show on Netflix, Crazy Delicious, wherein three contestants compete in three rounds, taking ingredients and inspiration from a Willy Wonka-like garden where nearly everything is edible. The first round is based on a hero ingredient like a strawberry or tomato, the second is a reinvention of a classic, and the third is a showstopper, with inspiration ranging from brunch to barbecue. No mere panel of mortals will judge such a show. Enter the “Food Gods” — made up of Blumenthal, Top Chef legend Carla Hall, and “Michelin-starred chef” Niklas Ekstedt. Dressed in their pristine white costumes and accompanied by ominous music, the trio might be set up as transcendent, but their actual job is that of the classic food show judge: offer some opinions, throw some concerned looks, and dish out zingy one-liners. (When a contestant tells Hall, that their dish is made with love, Hall replies, “Well, [love] doesn’t have salt, unless you’re crying, honey.”) Host Jayde Adams, meanwhile, adds a decidedly dry British slant to the show’s proceedings, despite the show trying to turn her into a Lewis Carroll character. While Crazy Delicious aims to break the food show mold — creating something more zany than Chopped and Masterchef, more bonkers than Nailed It, and cuter than The Great British Baking Off — it falls short on everything but the set. What unfolds in the short season is six episodes torn between total culinary fantasia and convention, the result of which is a basic cooking competition, but with more crafting supplies for sets and costumes. Its best efforts to bring something new to food TV only reveal just how conventional Crazy Delicious actually is. Food TV shows, crazy or delicious, pivot on power dynamics: the relationship between the judges and the judged, mediated and molded by the hosts. While in recent years, shows like Great British Baking Off and Australian hit The Chefs’ Line have extricated themselves from boorish villain/hero tropes, Crazy Delicious wants to go as far as to extricate its judges from earth itself. They are Food Gods: remember this and do not forget it — but in case you do, production is here to remind you with thunder, lightning, and, well, that’s all. The Food Gods, though, are also actual people with restaurant chops. While their duties rarely go beyond encouraging praise or gentle criticism, the show asks them to show off their conventional culinary credentials, rather than representing anything transcendent or wacky. Ekstedt references Michelin stars as a point of comparison when praising dishes; Hall harks back to her time as a contestant on Top Chef. When Heston Blumenthal becomes a Food God in his Edenic realm, he’s still being leaned on as a famous chef — the famous chef subject to widely reported accusations of wage theft and restaurant mismanagement, and a late-career pivot to casual sexism. The choice of name also unfortunately recalls Time Magazine’s infamous “Gods of Food” feature, whose anointing chefs as figures of worship excluded women entirely. There is no need for them to be culinary gods other than to be culinary Gods — deified shibboleths, set apart from the mortal contestants who try to please them by walking up a slightly steep hill godly mountain with their possibly crazy, possibly delicious food. The contestants don’t quite get to realize the fantasy either. The diversity in every episode is a welcome development, and it’s interesting that contestants are neither the rank amateurs of Masterchef nor the trained chefs of Chopped. These are keen, often technically proficient cooks, and there is quality technique and great skill on display, so it’s a shame that they’re dealt kind of a raw deal. The stakes too often feel too low, and with each 45 minute episode being a self-contained story, there’s little time to develop intrigue or connections to the people on screen. The prize for winning is a golden apple, which means when crackers break and parfaits don’t set, it’s pride and self-worth that are at stake, not money or prestige. While this makes for more genuine emotion, it also puts limits on the show’s range. With neither financial reward nor — as with Great British Bake Off — the promise of access into the world of culinary celebrity, Crazy Delicious has to stand or fall between the start of each episode and its end. It falls more than it stands.. The prize golden apple is picked from the phantasmagoria of the Willy Wonka set — the most striking departure from the “faintly cool, faintly dangerous kitchen” template of its competitors; exceptions made for the GBBO tent. It could have been the ace in the hole: Everything is edible, and the contestants are instructed not just to find cheese in nooks and eggs in nests, but to “go forth and forage,” plucking tomatoes from vines and digging carrots from the earth, engaging with the agricultural systems that produce food. Well, not quite. This bounty is artificial, because of course it is, and other ingredients like chopped meat and packets of pasta are not delved from grottos, but removed from fridges and pantries. This happens in any show with an ingredients tray, which is almost all cooking shows, but they don’t try to pretend otherwise. The creation of a fake, bountiful food system that is not entirely fictional but is entirely alienated from labor feels incongruous to the admirable, if unfulfilled ambition of other food TV in 2020 to reflect on the fact that everybody eats. Asking something as fanciful as Crazy Delicious to bear the weight of expectation around Taste the Nation or near-namesake Ugly Delicious might appear unkind, but the show wants it two ways — a magical respite from typical food TV, but with all the same prestige trappings — and ends up in some confused middle ground. The genuinely fun elements of Crazy Delicious, like candles that burst smilingly with mango pulp or edible cherry blossoms that are sweets, unfortunately become little more than gags; the contestants never engage with them or use them in their cooking. Even Chopped, set in a kitchen and not an edible eden, does more with its introduction of comparatively conventional curveball ingredients. The Crazy Delicious set’s unchanging nature also means that the show runs out of secrets early on. A prosecco waterfall might bubble with whimsy in episode one, but it’ll go flat by episode three. There are some interstitial incursions which are funny albeit a little outdated, like a momentary send-up of the errant coffee cup in Game of Thrones, but as with the rest of the show’s elements, these jokes only further confuse the tone. Indeed, the omnipresent Big Green Egg — the favorite barbecue of chefs, sponconned across the industry — is significantly more disconcerting. Overall, the place that Crazy Delicious is asking viewers to escape from — the world of food TV — looms so large that the show ends up reiterating familiar tropes rather than subverting them as intended. A set with ovens and blenders and barbecues surrounded by foliage is still a set with ovens and blenders and barbecues. Eurocentric restaurant discourse, standards, and techniques are so present that any fantasy never gets to genuinely establish itself; the final four-hour challenge of the series is “takeaway,” and of course, it pigeonholes Indian cuisine. Ultimately Crazy Delicious is frustrating: it could have been deeply weird, deeply fantastical; it could have been a jolly romp, contestants competing to grab the fruit candles and chocolate tree branches, the chaos of Supermarket Sweep unmanacled from the supermarket. Instead, even with its sweet burgers and activated charcoal pizza volcanoes, it feels like a waste. It would be seemingly easy to write all these annoyances off because Crazy Delicious is, quite clearly, trying to be a bit of harmless fun. Viewers seeking a six-episode bliss-out with a few laughs and some Willy Wonka flourishes are just in it for the escapism, not the optics, right? But the titular crazy is leaning too much on the delicious, and the delicious is just normie interpretations of “good” food. Despite the ongoing insistence on the show’s wackiness, the results are a less fun, less weird, less intelligent, less crazy, and less delicious follow up to Chopped, GBBO, The Chef’s Line, and Nailed It. Try as it might, Crazy Delicious cannot unmoor itself from the fact that unlike its edible punchlines, food, and restaurants don’t just grow on trees. from Eater - All https://ift.tt/2AiHpLL

http://easyfoodnetwork.blogspot.com/2020/07/for-all-its-whimsy-crazy-delicious-cant.html

#EasyFoodNetwork #ComfortFoodRecipes #EasyRecipes #GoodFood #BestComfortFoodRecipes #TastyFoodv

0 notes