Showing posts with label book reviews. Show all posts
Showing posts with label book reviews. Show all posts

Friday, January 13, 2012

Judi Dench Book review: And Furthermore (Central Queensland News)

13th January 2012


MUCH-LOVED British actor Dame Judi Dench could hardly be less like a dame in her delightful autobiography.
And Furthermore by Dame Judi Dench.

BOOK: AND FURTHERMORE
AUTHOR: Judi Dench
PUBLISHER: Phoenix (Hachette Aust)
RRP: $22.99
REVIEWER: Mary Ann Elliott


MUCH-LOVED British actor Dame Judi Dench could hardly be less like a dame in her delightful autobiography.


Coming from a down-to-earth Yorkshire family, the star of stage and screen talks candidly about her long career, starting with her professional debut with the Old Vic Company, appearing in many Shakespeare plays.


Graduating to such diverse roles as Sally Bowles in Cabaret, Cleopatra, Jean in As Time Goes By, Mrs. Brown (Queen Victoria), and as M in the James Bond films, Judi Dench has thrived on variety.


In her book it is obvious that the more challenges and diversity she has, the more she likes it.


Her generosity of spirit towards her fellow actors and her friends also leaps from the pages.
Altogether she comes across very much as one imagines her to be; honest, kind, charming and witty, loving what she does.


At 77 she has no thoughts of retiring, fortunately for us, her adoring fans, having recently shot films in Rajasthan and in Hollywood, the latter directed by Clint Eastwood.


http://www.cqnews.com.au/story/2012/01/13/book-review-and-furthermore/




Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Rex Reed Review:Alan Rickman Teaches the Texas Chainsaw Massacre of Writers Workshops in Seminar

Theresa Rebeck’s misanthropic master class is saved by devastating performances

Rickman, center.

I’ve never been a fan of Alan Rickman’s tight-lipped, prissy-mouthed acting style, but sometimes he picks a role that fits like a knee-high nylon sock, in a play that suits his nasal, slanty-eyed mannerisms with the sound of two hands clapping instead of one. The result in Theresa Rebeck’s Seminar, at the Golden, is a blessing. In fact, the entire cast of five is a marvel of well-oiled introspection, which is certainly a good thing, because without them, the enjoyable but often untidy and uneven play would be nothing more than a lot of clever one-liners.

Mr. Rickman plays Leonard, a sour, disillusioned, once-respected author who mysteriously gave up writing to take up copy editing at Random House. Impoverished and bitter, he now teaches writing workshops for pretentious young hopefuls with ambitions to write the great American novel. His current seminar is set in an $800-a-month rent-stabilized apartment on the Upper West Side with nine rooms and a river view belonging to one of the four students in the class who have shelled out $5,000 apiece to impress each other by dispensing earth-shattering undergraduate proclamations such as “Kerouac is a misogynist hack” and “Post-modernism has really fallen on hard times.”

The students are Kate (riveting Lily Rabe, who looks more like her mother, Jill Clayburgh, every time I see her), the wealthy, overeducated pseudointellectual Bennington graduate whose apartment serves as a makeshift classroom; Izzy (Hettienne Park), an Asian sexpot whose ambition is to write the kind of steamy stuff that will land her on the cover of New York magazine and bares her breasts to prove she’s ready for the task; Douglas (Jerry O’Connell), a preppie dude who learns to his horror that he’s cut out for nothing better than junky Hollywood screenplays; and Martin (Hamish Linklater), a skinny snob who annoys everyone by acting like a member of the semantics police (“Inigo! You said ‘Indigo Jones.’ It’s Inigo!”). Secretly, they all want to win the approval of their teacher, but what they get is humiliation, insults, discouragement and a torrent of colorful four-letter words that reduces them all to little more than literary larvae. Ms. Rebeck cusses more than David Mamet, but is more amusing than deadly.

Nothing they come up with discussing and dissecting each other’s work rouses the hooded eyelids of their pompous ass of a leader. He calls them whores, dismisses their stories as hollow and chides them for knowing nothing about what they are writing about—like, for instance, the world. He has traveled the globe rubbing elbows with HIV patients, Rwanda genocide survivors and “a Russian prostitute of indeterminate gender” who inspired him. Why can’t they experience life before they attempt to describe it in a “soul-sucking waste of words”? A story Kate has been working on for six years is trashed in one sentence for lack of relevance. (“I don’t have to go beyond the first five words, because I don’t give a shit!” he attacks.) While Leonard takes a two-week break from the 10-week seminar to inspect the damage in Somalia, the group begins to suspect maybe they’re being ripped off. Since no seminar I’ve ever attended in the craft of fiction writing (or anything else) has ever been taught by such a cruel, mean-spirited sadist, I began to suspect Ms. Rebeck’s plausibility quotient is lacking.

New York Observer

Monday, November 21, 2011

Ray Stevenson - Pitch Perfect in Punisher: War Zone

Movie Mondays: Punisher: War Zone

Frank Castle aka The Punisher
This looks awesome!
Title: Punisher: War Zone
Director: Lexi Alexander
Writers:
Nick Santora, Matt Holloway, and Arthur Marcum; based on the works of Gerry Conway, Ross Andru, and John Romita Sr
Distributed By:
Lionsgate, Marvel Knights, Valhalla Motion Pictures, MHF Zweite Academy Film, SGF Entertainment
Starring:
Ray Stevenson, Wayne Knight, Dominic West, Julie Benz, Colin Salmon, Doug Hutchison
Release Date:
December 5, 2008
MPAA:
Rated R

Hey there everybody! Welcome to part THREE of our month long look into the gritty, seedy, violent world of Frank Castle…otherwise known as The Punisher! Throughout the month we’ll be taking a look at his various forays into the film industry, as well as looking at the franchise as a whole! This week, we look at the third, and so far most recent, Punisher film, PUNISHER: WAR ZONE! A grim, hyper-violent, nasty, gory adaptation of the Punisher comic book franchise. Be sure to check this out, and any previous installments you may have missed. And come back NEXT MONDAY for our final installment, where we take a look at the PUNISHER franchise as a whole!

Ray Stevenson is pitch-perfect as the battle-hardened veteran in a war on crime!

So…the movie is just over two hours, and I enjoyed about 1 hr 30 min of it (not in order).
It’s my second favorite Punisher movie to be sure, which sadly isn’t saying much. It got a lot of stuff right. Ray Stevenson is PERFECT as Frank Castle. Wayne Knight was great as Microchip. I enjoyed a lot of the cast. I thought it was really decently acted by those that mattered (i.e. Microchip, the mother and daughter), and superbly acted by Stevenson. But, that cannot be said for the film’s “heavies” (more on that later). The film was FOR THE MOST PART what I expected from the movie based on Punisher War Zone, which ran from 1992-95 (and a lot of the Ennis run with the Marvel Knights printing of Punisher, yet managed to be gorier than any actual Punisher comic I can think of).

The action sequences were awesome. Every scene where Ray Stevenson gets to act is fantastic. Especially the more human touches, like flashbacks of his family’s death or his interactions with the little girl that, of course, reminds him of his daughter. The pacing and editing were very well done. The musical score (what little they used) provided by Michael Wandmacher was excellent. I especially enjoyed a brief exchange near the end where Frank Castle gathers himself in a cathedral.

His old friend, a priest named Michael, tries to talk him out of his violent way of life.

Mike: “Why do you do this?”
Frank: “Somebody has to punish the corrupt.”
Mike: “For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged. And in the measure you use it will be measured to you.”
Frank: “Matthew 7:2. I know. I’m okay with that.”
Mike: “God be with you, Frank.”
Frank: “Sometimes I’d like to get my hands on God.”
That being said, there were a lot of things wrong with this picture. The villains were ridiculously campy and over-the-top. Anyone who reads Punisher knows that the villains aren’t like that. It appeared as though the actors playing the villains all seemed not to give a crap about their performances. All of them played up the ham-and-cheese, overacting (with the worst offensive stereotypical fake accents, no less). The worst part of the film has to be the inclusion of movie-exclusive character “Loony-bin Jim,” whose every scene just about ruins the film. Which is really a shame, since the filmmakers seemed to really capture the LOOK of the comics. Even the makeup effects for Jigsaw, the main villain, were spot on.


Gotta hand it to the makeup department for making Dominic West look so much like his comic book counterpart.

The entire last two minutes of the movie should be taken out. It’s just more of the ham-and-cheese that only serves to bring this movie down. You’ll know what I mean if you’ve seen it, or when you see it. There was too much humor, especially accidental humor. There were many scenes that you could tell were meant to be “oh, awesome” moments, but were so over-the-top they were funny.
For example:
(SPOILER.)
(IF YOU COUNT EXPLAINING HOW PUNISHER KILLS SOMEONE AS A SPOILER.)
During one scene, a henchman adept in the art of free-running gets his own slow motion jump scene wherein he does a cartwheel off a building, just to be blown up with a heat seeking rocket launcher. Violence can be a source of humor. But not cheesy humor. So, yeah, the over-the-top violence was too much, too cheesy.

 Furthermore, the over the top violence was not only silly but inconsistent. Frank would be punching people in the face and it would play out normally, but one random thug catches Franks knuckles with his nose and his entire skull caves in.
(END SPOILER.)

Another perfect example of the misuse of humor in this film comes from a sequence near the end, where our villain, Jigsaw (Dominic West), parodies military recruitment and recruiters. Recruiting gangs in the war on The Punisher with an American flag flying behind him, while “America The Beautiful” plays in the background.
I couldn’t make this up if I wanted to, people!
Little things happen like this throughout the movie, and they only bring the film down instead of build it up.

Ladies and Gentlemen! A shining example of the "humor" that kills this movie.

A perfect example of the dark humor playing through the violence DOES work:
Two deaths during the film, where the henchman both basically said “oh…well fuck” before biting the big one, were absolutely priceless and felt like something right out of the comics. I don’t want to spoil them for you, because they really are quite pitch-perfect for this adaptation. If only the rest of the movie had delivered the goods in the same way. In fact, with very few exceptions (like one moment in the film where Frank Castle apparently gains the temporary ability to cave someone’s skull in with his fist) the action is handled rather well.

Ray Stevenson KILLS as Frank Castle! Sorry, couldn't pass up the bad pun!

So to sum up. Ray Stevenson rules!! Too much over-the-top violence made it unfortunately silly. The villains were ridiculous. The neon lighting for the different sets is distracting. The movie is well paced and edited. The many overall poor moments of the film (in total about 30 min) are enough to majorly detract from the rest of the film.

The actors' facial expressions from left to right: 1) "What is going on with this movie?!" 2) "I don't think we can save this movie!?" 3) "I'm the best part of this movie!"

Judging the film as an adaptation of the comic, I’d give it a 6. But as a film in general, overall, I’d give it a solid 6.5 out of 10.

Be sure to check out next week’s entry for MOVIE MONDAYS, for the final installment in our month-long look at The Punisher. We’ll be taking a look at everything PUNISHER related, from the original comics, to video games, and everything else! It’s gonna be killer! (Yay, more bad Punisher humor.)
Aaron Nicewonger
aarongni@gmail.com
Aaron@comicattack.net


Comic Attack

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

John and Paul go solo in 'Composing Outside the Beatles: Lennon & McCartney 1973-1980'

Published: Monday, November 14, 2011, 4:01 PM Updated: Tuesday, November 15, 2011, 6:20 AM

 
beatles.1583986h.jpg
After the Beatles broke up, the four lads from Liverpool embarked on solo musical careers in the 1970s, with varying degrees of success. The in-depth, unauthorized documentary, "Composing Outside the Beatles: Lennon & McCartney 1973-1980," compares the efforts of former songwriting partners Paul McCartney and John Lennon as they try to find their footing on their own.

Vintage clips and performances mix with recent interviews with experts. While no Beatles songs are heard, probably due to licensing issues, the film does feature a lot of their solo work, from Paul's "Live and Let Die" to John's "Mind Games."

The dated 1970s fashions sometimes look surprisingly goofy, especially on Paul as he tries a bit too hard to stay current.

Diehard Beatles fans will enjoy the knowledgeable analysis, but the film fusses too much about whether John or Paul is finding more commercial success at any given time. Good grief, they're rich enough that they never have to work again if they don't want to, so maybe they're not all that concerned about having a hit record in the charts. Maybe they're more interested in artistic accomplishments. Or just making music they enjoy.

The film, the third in a trilogy, has an impressive roster of experts, including musician and Beatles friend Klaus Voorman, Wings guitarist Denny Laine and Wings drummer Denny Seiwell.
Unrated, 139 minutes. DVD extras: extended interviews, biographies and more.

From MVD Visual Entertainment. Released Oct. 25.
Related topics: blu-ray, dvd, movies, music, reviews, the
 

Friday, November 4, 2011

INDULGE ME PLEASE - A GREAT REVIEW FOR DARCY AND FITZWILLIAM, MY BOYS!!!!

(And I've just today received my very first royalty check ever.   Not quite enough to travel to England yet.  We may just make Tampa - but its a ROYALTY CHECK!  Unbelievable. Thank you, Lord - Karen)

 

Trees and Ink

Darcy and Fitzwilliam: Jane Austen’s Men

28Sep


Jane Austen’s memorable characters have been captivating readers for generations, and none are as endearing as Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy and Miss Elizabeth Bennet. Fans of Austen’s work have continued her stories where she left off, allowing the beloved characters to explore marriage, parenthood, and a variety of other friendships. I’ve never read any books based on Austen’s work, but this one stood out as interesting for one reason: it tells the story from the men’s perspective.

Darcy, a gentleman and the husband of one of literature’s most beloved characters, Elizabeth Bennet, and Fitzwilliam, a leader in the British army, are cousins that are as close as brothers. Over the course of the book, they see one another through troubles with marriage, women, family, and their children. A pair that truly grows together, loyally experiencing life’s ups and downs by each other’s side, Darcy and Fitzwilliam follow their hearts and take on the aftermath that high London society throws at them when they make less than popular choices.

Title and Cover: The title is perfect, but the cover is what really caught my attention. A beautiful cover, it was designed by Karen Horton and is well thought out from every angle.
Plot and Writing: Karen Wasylowski has done a terrific job of pulling a plot together that perfectly weaves the right amount of details from Pride and Prejudice into the story. I was fascinated by the perspective, as Austen hardly ever reveals what the men are thinking, and loved the banter between Fitzwilliam and Darcy. Certainly, the camaraderie and love between these two characters is clear and, more importantly, believeable.

The storyline is easy to follow without being boring or predictable, but I was a bit disappointed in the ending. Wasylowski decided to end the story many, many years later, when Darcy and Fitzwilliam are grandfathers. This limits her ability to continue the story she has started, and I for one would have definitely picked up a second book.

Characterization: The development of Darcy and Fitzwilliam is wonderful, and Wasylowski is able to transform them from their supporting roles to stand alone characters that are strong enough to carry the weight of the plot on their shoulders.

The characterization of Elizabeth, on the other hand, is a little disappointing. I know that, being such an iconic character, no author is going to be capable of creating an Elizabeth that appeals to everyone. Each reader has their own way of viewing her, and the fact that she means something to so many people is a mark of Austen’s success; however, Wasylowski has created several scenes in which Elizabeth appears too dependent, almost too feminine (though she certainly is feminine, in her own way). I had hoped that her strong personality would remain intact, but there are several instances in which I felt she would have confronted her husband but didn’t.

Elizabeth’s characterization does not ruin the story by any means. At the heart of the plot is the relationship between Darcy and Fitzwilliam, and this is a relationship that is developed beautifully. I would highly recommend this book to anyone that loves Austen’s characters and is interested in seeing what the men have to say about the dances, the courtships, and the women who run London’s society.



Tags: , , , , , ,

Thursday, October 20, 2011

Judi Dench - Book Review, "And furthermore"

Windy City Times

And Furthermore
BOOK REVIEW
2011-10-19




by Judi Dench, $26.99; St. Martin's Press; 268 pages REVIEW BY SALLY PARSONS

She's loved by movie fans (M in the Bond series, Queen Elizabeth I in Shakespeare in Love, among other roles), and adored weekly in the ever-repeating TV series As Time Goes By on PBS. In her memoir, as told to her biographer John Miller, Judi Dench fills in the gaps not covered in his bio of her published in 1998 (Judi Dench, With a Crack in Her Voice).

Anglophiles will no doubt adore this book, steeped as it is in British theater names, British humor, and tales of life on the boards in prestigious British theater companies.

Actors as well may lap up a pointer or two on how to improve thespian skills. For example, in rehearsal for Antony and Cleopatra, the director Peter Hall gave Dench a note she finds works for any part in any play. Don't try to play all of the character in the first scene, he instructed. "'… play aspects of her [Cleopatra] in all the scenes,'" and at play's end, he summed it up, hopefully all the character will be in place.

Dench enjoys sharing with us the numerous theatrical antics she's witnessed or been a part of. Dench (who would have guessed?) is quite a practical jokester. One time, in a production of Cabaret, she and John Mills decided to get back at an actor they thought was behaving badly. In the scene, which called for members of three theatrical companies to grab their luggage and scatter in different directions, Dench and Mills put heavy stage weights in the offender's suitcase. Everyone else launched their cases over their heads with ease. The target actor tried and simply fell over, then had to drag his case along while the others scattered easily, their suitcases bouncing aloft.

Born in 1934 in York to a doctor in general practice and a homemaker, Dench was immersed in the theater from the git-go as her parents took an active role in local theater groups. She acted as a child in school productions (playing a fairy in the Nativity Play, "… which I was quite cross about, because I knew the Nativity story did not involve fairies.").

She originally wanted to be a ballet dancer. After studying acting at the Central School of Speech and Drama in London, Dench was asked to audition at the Old Vic and in 1957 was offered the part of Ophelia in Hamlet. And so began her professional life in the theater. She stayed at the Old Vic four years, moving on to the Royal Shakespeare Company and the National Theater Company, to both of which she has returned several times throughout her long career.

Dench has also taken a turn in musicals, playing Sally Bowles in Cabaret, in Sondheim's A Little Night Music, and—most recently—as the producer's mother in the film Nine. (When rehearsing her song for this role, she panicked when Sophia Loren sat in the first row with Daniel Day-Lewis to observe. It's refreshing to note a pro of Dench's character can be shy in front of her peers). Her movie roles add up to an impressive list, including notable roles such as Mrs. Brown (another queen!), Iris, Notes on a Scandal, and Jane Eyre.

Dench has also starred in two popular British TV series—A Fine Romance, in which she appeared opposite her husband Michael Williams, and in As Time Goes By.

In addition to her Oscar for Best Supporting Actress in Shakespeare in Love, she has been awarded Best Actress awards by the British Academy of Film and Television Arts (BAFTA) many times. She was also awarded a Tony for her role in Amy's View on Broadway.

She was appointed a Dame Commander of the Order of the British Empire in 1988 and a Companion of Honour in 2005.

Here are some other things about Dench you might be surprised to learn: despite the many accolades she's received, she doesn't approve of awards for acting. "Acting," she says, "is such a personal, imperfect kind of art." She credits Frank Sinatra, along with Sir John Gielgud, as the best teachers of how to speak Shakespeare. She detests The Merchant of Venice ("… everyone behaves so frightfully badly").

Dench touches on her family in this book but devotes most of it to her theater life reminiscences. The many photos, however, satisfy one's curiosity about both.

She doesn't want to retire—and that is good news for those of us who love Judi Dench.