Posts Tagged ‘review’

Critiquing For A Friend

Posted: April 24, 2013 in Living and Life, Reflections, short story, Writing
Tags: , , , , ,
0

I saw a friend of mine yesterday at the library a little after 2pm. He and I began talking about finals (the topic de jeur during this last week of the semester) and he mentioned that he had to write a short story for his history class based on some of the stuff he’s been learning in class. I offered to look at his short story and critique it if he wanted, to which he said he’d send it over.

This evening I took a look at it and I wrote a quick critique of it before e-mailing my friend. After I finished and sent the email, I thought to myself, Hey, that’s the first time I critiqued something for a friend that wasn’t required by a class of mine. I don’t count that one time my sister asked me to look at her speech as she was running for a position on the board of the youth group we both belonged to in high school, mostly because we couldn’t get past the opening without her disagreeing about my assessment of the opening. God, that was a long time ago.

“This blog post is perhaps the worst thing I’ve ever read online. Now your friend’s short story…”

Okay, enough rambling. Back on topic:

I’ve been in two workshop classes in the past year, and I had to do a similar assignment to what my friend did when I took a world history course my first year in college. I’ve looked at a lot of short stories, occasionally had to look stuff up just to understand what a certain word meant or what the action revolved around, and written close to fifty critiques for each story. I’ve seen bad short stories, I’ve read ones that absolutely floored me with their first drafts, and I’ve read one or two that confused me so bad that I mentioned how confused I was in the critique letter.

But writing for a friend…it’s an entirely different experience. You want to give them the best critique possible. You want to tell them their story has potential. You want to say they did a great job. You want to tell them it’s only a matter of time before they’re selling books in bookstores and receiving royalty checks. But at the same time, you have to point out flaws, you have to say that they should possibly rewrite the whole thing, and sometimes you have to tell your friend that, for one reason or another, the story stunk to high heaven and you absolutely hated it. It’s a very different experience than critiquing for classmates you don’t know that well, and finding a balance between kind to your friends and critical of the work is tough, especially if you’re sensitive to a friend’s feelings or there’s a chance that they may say their work is too high-brow and those who don’t like it or understand it are literary fools.

Luckily my friend doesn’t aspire to literary stardom and even if he did, he’s a chill dude who doesn’t get emotional over critiques. But still, I took his feelings into account when I critiqued his work, and I hope he appreciates the critique and isn’t daunted or upset by what I had to say. (For the record I wrote a very positive critique and suggested that he rewrite the story from the POV of the sheriff character and do more showing and less telling) It was the first time I understood what my friend Matt goes through every time he looks at a chapter of Reborn City for me and tells me what he thinks, and what my friends and family go through when they review my work for me, and it’s a pretty crazy feeling.

I’m not sure if I’ll ever do a critique like this ever again, though I’m sure I might be asked in the future to look at someone else’s work, especially if it’s for class. If I am asked by a friend to look at his work though, I hope I’ll be able to do a serviceable critique that will help them with their work and with their writing over time. Because if there’s one thing writers can do for each other, especially indie writers, it’s help to make each other’s work better and make sure they reach wider audiences.

What do you think when you get your work critiqued or someone critiques your work?

Review: “From A Name To A Number”

Posted: April 13, 2013 in Review
Tags: , ,
4

F0r Passover, I received a gift from a friend of my mother’s as a thank-you for letting her come to our Passover Seder. Unusual for Passover to receive a gift, but I was extremely grateful to receive the gift, and heck, Kelly was grateful for the chance to attend a Passover Seder. The gift: signed copies of “From A Name To A Number: A Holocaust Survivor’s Autobiography” by Alter Weiner. As the focus of my History major is the Holocaust and yesterday I wrote a post about the dehumanization that occurred during the Nazi regime, I thought it’d be appropriate to finish the book over Shabbas and review it here. Later I’ll send it to Kelly (apparently she manages the author’s Facebook page for the book).

First, I’d like to say that this book is very touching (what do you expect?). But also, it’s very revealing. Covering the author’s entire life from his younger years, to the deportation and incarceration in five different concentration camps, to liberation and resettlement in Israel, and later life in America, where to this day Mr. Weiner goes to high schools, churches, and even prisons to tell his story and let people know what his life is like.

Some things came to me while I read this book. First, that the Holocaust left many of its victims with PTSD. I already knew this, but hearing it for the first time from a survivor, even if only in book format, made me realize how much Mr. Weiner was suffering years after the Holocaust. While many contemporaries of his and his own family brushed off his constant preoccupation with the Holocaust, the reader’s own emotions are stirred and we want to reach out and hug the author over the distance.

Second, how lucky we are. I have a loving family, a fairly liberal society, and I’m getting a great education. Mr. Weiner’s formal education ended at age 13, when the Nazis took over Poland. He lost most of his family shortly thereafter, and lived in slavery and horrifying conditions for three whole years. It’s affected his very person to this day, and it makes the reader appreciate his/her blessings.

And finally, we learn the evil of hate. “Hate hatred and shun violence”, Mr. Weiner implores several times throughout the book. Indeed, I find it hard to hate anyone on a daily basis, but now it’s even harder for me after reading this. I hope Mr. Weiner’s story affects all others similarly and that you treasure this book for years to come.

On a scale of 1 to 5, I give this book a well-deserved 5 out of 5, for reminding me to count all my blessings and to love my life no matter what. I hope you pick up a copy and read it yourself so you can see the magical effect of this autobiography by a living treasure.

Review: Evil Dead

Posted: April 7, 2013 in Review, Scary Stuff
Tags: , , ,
2

I swear, it’s so hard to find a good scary movie that doesn’t rely on obscene amounts of gore these days. However, the remake/sequel of 1981’s The Evil Dead does do the original justice, even with the amount of gore involved. Throughout the film we see both homages to the original, and we see it made anew with much better special effects (which apparently never relied on CGI, though at times I find that really hard to believe, especially during that first scene and the scene with the meat cutter). Plus there’s a bit more substance to this film in terms of character motivations and what-not, but like I said, just a bit.

For those of you not familiar with the original film, these films revolve around a magic book that summons sleeping demons that possess human bodies in order to resurrect something much worse. As five teens get possessed and become bloody and disgusting, it’s up to the one normal dude (or gal, in this case) to kill them all to save their souls. The original films were DIYers, so they didn’t have much in the way of special effects and they were simplistic in nature. However the odd camera angles and filming techniques were what made this indie project a classic, spawning sequels, comic books, video games, and now a new line of films meant to bring the old and the new films together.

I warn you, if you’re not easily scared, you may only receive minimum scares to satisfy your morbid self. If you scare easily though, you will not be disappointed by this film. I would’ve preferred a lot less gore and more focus on building suspense and causing terror, but what’re you going to do, except either not see the film or show the world how you make a scary film?

On the whole, I’ll give this film a 3.6 out of 5. Not bad, but still room for improvement.

Review: Hannibal Pilot Episode

Posted: April 4, 2013 in Review, Scary Stuff
Tags: , , ,
1

I’ve got a thing for serial killers–the fictional kind, not the ones that actually kill people. And with The Following, Bates Motel, and the second season of AHS, you’d think I’d be pretty satisfied right now. But no, I’m more excited for Hannibal, the prequel TV series to the first Hannibal Lecter novel, Red Dragon (with all the prequel TV series based on famous fictional killers these days, I’m hoping someone will do a prequel to Nightmare on Elm Street, but I digress). In fact, I’ve been geeking out about this show since I heard it was being made. And tonight, I made some popcorn, sat down in front of the TV, rocking back and forth like a hyperactive kid who had too much ice cream.

I walked away very intrigued, similar to the feeling I get when I’m working with an interesting story and an interesting main character. Here’s why:

First off, there’s Will Graham, the profiler who tackled Lecter before Clarice Starling was even out of high school, and there’s Hannibal the Cannibal himself. Hugh Dancy plays Graham, the third actor to play the character. This incarnation though is different: whereas other versions have only hinted at how troubled they are by their gifts to find and figure out serial killers, Dancy’s Graham is almost reminiscent of Sheldon Cooper, brilliant, but with annoying quirks that help him keep strangers away but force him to struggle to keep the people he likes close to him. As he himself states early in the pilot episode, “I’m more Asperger’s and autism than narcissistic and psychopathic.” Instead of being a physics genius in love with himself, Graham is gifted and cursed with the ability to emphasize with any person, even killers, and the degree to which he does that scares him.

Contrast that with Dr. Lecter, played this time by Danish actor Mads Mikkelsen. This incarnation of the man-eating doctor shows him as a stoic, detached gentlemen, soft-spoken and not one bit creepy…unless we see him cooking or eating. We already know that he’s a cannibal and active at it too, as opposed to the other characters of the show, who believe he’s just a brilliant psychiatrist, and Mikkelsen does a damn good job of making us almost believe that. In fact, I think it’s going to be a long wait before we see any definitive proof that the doctor is the killer, and while we wait, we’ll be preoccupied with Graham and Lecter’s relationship. You see despite a rocky start, both men are connecting to each other on some level…and that’s where this show’s emotional conflict will come from.

There’s no music in this show except during very drama-filled moments, giving the show a very life-like quality. The special effects mostly come from Graham seeing what he thinks as he reconstructs crime scenes and solves puzzles in his head, mostly in the form of a neon-green light rewinding the crime scene to its pre-crime state, and dreams he has that reveal the killer’s thinking to him. And there’s an air to the show that mystifies me, an air created by the show’s creators. It’s saying, “We’re not trying to entertain you…we’re trying to tell you a story that’s never been told before.” Which is the truth, and it all in turn intrigues me.

I’m giving this episode a 4.6 out of 5. Let’s hope they can keep this going, keep me intrigued, and maybe we’ll see not only the stunning but inevitable conclusion to this first season, but we’ll see the appearance of another famous killer as well…

Review: Olympus Has Fallen

Posted: March 23, 2013 in Review
Tags: , ,
0

More and more I find myself disagreeing with Entertainment Weekly‘s reviews. I might stop reading them altogether, but along with being entertaining (obviously) and occasionally I agree with them.

Not this time though: Olympus Has Fallen is a thrill-a-minute, and comes with all the gunfire and explosions of an action film for guys, with a lot more substance to it. The ever-impressive Gerard Butler plays Secret Service agent Mike Banning, who must go into the White House and save Aaron Eckhart’s President Asher from being killed by North Korean terrorists with a much darker intention than simply destroying one of the symbols of the nation. With surprises around every corner, you’ll be left on the edge of your seat as you watch this film and the evil plan of the North Koreans unfold. Also, watch Morgan Freeman’s character. In every role he plays, he’s just the bomb (and I don’t mean literally in the case of this film).

For anyone in need of a good break from reality, or afraid of Kim Jong-Un playing with his daddy’s toys, I seriously recommend this film, which I give a 4.2 out of 5.

Review: A Good Day To Die Hard

Posted: February 18, 2013 in Review
Tags: , , ,
0

You might want to wait till it comes out on DVD.

(The following post contains many spoilers, so consider yourself warned!)

I went to this film expecting to be wowed…and left seeing why the reviewer from Entertainment Weekly gave this film a C. Honestly, doesn’t anyone care about making good sequels? Let alone making a good movie? Apparently not.

In this sequel, Bruce Willis reprises his role as John McClane, who goes to Moscow to meet his son Jack Jr., a CIA agent who’s gotten himself in jail all with the express purpose of liberating a political prisoner with some national security secrets that could jeopardize a corrupt politician’s corrupt career. Along the way, we get the requisite amount of explosions and public destruction, but very little in terms of plot–unless you count a trip to Chernobyl, Ukraine plot!

We do see some interesting bits. There are some betrayals and cool reveals, there’s a death scene that harks back to the first movie with a new twist, and Willis gets to make some of his trademark zingers. However, Jai Courtney is so one-dimensional as Jack Jr, you find yourself wishing for Justin Long as Matt Farrell from the fourth film. Indeed, you could switch Courtney for Long in this film and get a much more interesting film. That, and if you add about forty minutes and a revenge plot involving nuclear missiles after the main villain gets scissored in half! Oh, and the car chase that happens right after Willis arrives in Moscow without any time to prepare us for what’s about to happen? It’s so like the DC car chase from the last film, you feel like you’re watching the fourth film for the third time!

After all this, I left the theater feeling disappointed. I hope they don’t make a sixth film, because I’m not sure I could take it if they made another! For all the reasons listed above, I give Die Hard 5 a 2.8 out of 5, and unofficially rename it A Good Day to See A Different Movie or Go to Redbox.

Review: Justin Bieber on Saturday Night Live

Posted: February 10, 2013 in Review
Tags: , , ,
0

People are free to disagree with me. I’m fine with that. But I must say it, because it has to be said: I was not that impressed by Justin Bieber on SNL tonight.

I think the funniest skits were the ones where they made fun of Bieber, like during the Miley Cyrus show sketch. However there were moments where Bieber shown through as having comedic talent. That opening monologue, where he messed up Black History Month facts was hilarious. And the Californians sketch is goofy as ever. Oh, and Bieber as a greaser–ha! They made the impossible look halfway possible.

Still, this is one of those episodes where they really didn’t know what to do with the host, so they mostly made fun of who and what he is, with a few brilliant moments besides (for another illustration of this, check out the Bruno Mars episode from October).

However, the regular cast members were phenomenal as usual. I love Vanessa Bayer’s impression of Miley Cyrus, and those Booker T. Washington sketches always get me, especially when Jay Pharoah and Keenan Thompson do their thing as Principal Frye and the gym teacher. Plus that one sketch with “glice” and Taram Killan acting like a total doofus was hilarious. Even Bieber couldn’t keep a straight face. And let’s not forget that Cold Open, where they made fun of the Super Bowl blackout was genius. I couldn’t stop giggling. And during Weekend Update, Thompson once again wowed with that dude from every commercial. That was so hip and fun.

Oh, and speaking of Weekend Update, despite what was said on Richard III, he didn’t actually kill his nephew, and he wasn’t particularly ruthless. In fact, nobody knows who killed his nephew, or if it was even murder; they just seemed to disappear one day. It’s a historical mystery. Not only that, but Richard III seemed to be very merciful, from what I’m told; he pardoned or gave reduced sentences to several people involved in a plot to overthrow him. Can you believe that? The whole bad image of him that history and Shakespeare gave about him was part of a disinformation campaign by the House of Tudor, who took over the throne after destroying Richard’s Plantagenet house. The whole point was to make Richard look like a villain so that the uneducated masses would look upon the new rulers more kindly than the old ones. I’m a History major, so I know this stuff.

I know it’s not essential to this review to point that out, but I had to anyway. I can’t stand it when history is obfuscated by ignorance or misinformation (which is why I also fight against Holocaust deniers).

Now back to the review.

Really happy to see Whoopi Goldberg in the monologue. That woman is an inspiration. And the Grease parody sketch was so funny, you could ignore that an 11-year-old was in a high school. Also, I thought seeing Bieber with his old hair in the “Glice” sketch was a treat for me. The music was not my thing–I don’t like Bieber–but I’m sure there were others who thought it was soulful. I was more surprised that there wasn’t any big performances with some of his more pop music hits, to tell you the truth. And that Valentine’s Day message was crazy funny. I’ve never seen Bieber’s supposed sex appeal skewered like that before.

And who knew he was so inked? Yes, I noticed that stuff. Call it a weird detail to notice, but notice it I did.

Overall, a good episode. Not great, but good. 3.5 out of 5. Good night, and if you disagree with my assessment, please feel free to voice your opinion. I’m always open to differing opinions.

Review: Adam Levine on Saturday Night Live

Posted: January 27, 2013 in Review
Tags: , , , ,
2

Can I just say, when SNL does a good episode, they do an amazing string of sketches garaunteed to get me laughing?

Adam Levine is a great actor, a wondeful singer, and can I just say I was a little overwhelemed in a good way when he took off his shirt? Holy crap! My buddy and I were watching the show together, and I both think we developed man-crushes on the guy. Also, Mr. Levine does a great gay talk show host, and he interacts so well with Bobby Moynihan (more on that later).

That being said, the other actors also were wonderful. Nasim Pedrad always kills me as Arianna Huffington on Weekend Update, the way she’s flirting with Seth Meyers without actually flirting. Bill Hader showed us what would’ve happened if one of his other characters, Stefan, was named Bryce, had his sexuality repressed, developed rejection issues, and developed a need to control everything around him while showing me that his voice can go higher than I thought possible. And I just love it when Bobby Moynihan dresses in drag, especially when he dresses as Janet, the strange woman from Yonkers who has a horrible face and yet beds a lot of celebrities.

Some highlights from the show include the Janet sketch, the Cold Open where Jay Pharaoh as Barack Obama has a weird conversation with Keenan Thompson as Martin Luther King Jr, the SNL Digital Short featuring The Lonely Island (how I missed you guys and your shorts!), the joke commercial for a prequel series to The Sopranos that almost put me in an early grave and…I’m forgetting something…oh right. ANDY SAMBERG! Along with Cameron Diaz and Jerry Seinfeld, they parodied Levine’s show The Voice and got him to take his shirt off. I missed that dude and his Digital Shorts.

Kendrick Lamar was a good musical guest. He’s not my thing, but you know what? I didn’t dislike him, and I didn’t totally ignore his act either. So there’s something to be said for that.

For this episode, I give it a 4.2 out of 5 for a ton of entertainment, a ton of laughs, Janet, and Andy Samberg.

Join me for a review in two weeks, which will probably involve me either tearing into Justin Beiber or being pleasantly surprised by him in most aspects except his singing.

Review: Jennifer Laurence on Saturday Night Live

Posted: January 20, 2013 in Review
Tags: , , , ,
0

Can I just say, I think I have a crush on that woman? I’m not kidding, I’m going to say it right now: I love Jennifer Laurence! Can I treat you to dinner, provided you come out to meet me here at OSU and any place we go is within walking distance of campus?

Anyway, I think this was one of my favorite SNL episodes ever, and not just because I fell in love again. Nope, the writers were just hilarious, and the actors were top-notch! My favorite skit was the Top Dog Chef bit, where every character looked positively adorable as they ate stuff out of a garbage bag! At the end of it all, I was laughing for two whole minutes, right as the commercials came on. In addition, there was a Hunger Games sketch that I couldn’t help but giggle about. And Taram Killan as an abnormally short Peeta Mellark was a hoot! Kudos to the make-up and costume artists as well, you made the actors really look like they came right out of the book. Plus, Laurence can rap and rhyme…sort of. It’s still hilarious. And check out the foreign film sketch Danielle: A Free European Woman, which catches all the cliches of old foreign films that are attempting to be the film equivalent of artsy, elite literary novels.

My one complaint was that Weekend Update was a little too short for my tastes, though I was happy to see Bobby Moynihan reprise his role as Anthony Crispino, who never seems to get the news right. Also, I expected some more coverage of the gun control debate, but instead they decided to make fun of Manti Te’o and his unfortunate hoodwinking by a conwoman. I’m not sure I would’ve gone that way myself, personally. I mean, the guy found out a girl he loved and whom he thought had died was all a hoax. Cut the guy a little slack.

Still, gotta say, I found the show hysterical.

Can’t say I enjoyed the Lumineers, but I’m not familiar with their music. Now if Lorne Michaels got Disturbed or Marilyn Manson, then maybe we could talk.

For this show, I give SNL a 4.5 out of 5, for bringing in the new year with an awesome episode that’ll definitely be remembered as a highlight for the season. Look forward to next week, when Adam Levine hosts and Kendrick Lamar sings. By the way, my sister is obsessed with Lamar, so is he any good? We’ll find out next week.

Review: “The Hunger Games” Trilogy

Posted: January 13, 2013 in Novel, Reflections, Review, Writing
Tags: , , , , , ,
2

Normally I wait a week before doing another review, but I think this time I’ll make an exception.

I decided to read The Hunger Games books for a number of reasons. One, because m sister was upset at how many things got changed between book and movie (the movie I saw first) and I wanted to know if it was really something to be upset over (I decided it wasn’t, but actually very clever). Another was that the second film is coming out later this yea and I wanted to be prepared for what I’d find, maybe be as upset as my sister (though that usually doesn’t happen). But finally, I decided to read the books because Ohio State’s having this mock-Hunger Games thing called the OSU Honor Games, a nonviolent contest based on Suzanne Collins’s twisted imagination, and I want to be a tribute for my dorm (go Jones Tower!).

So I read the books. And without going into what I thought of each separate book, I’ll give you my thoughts:

First off, I don’t read a lot of YA, so I don’t necessarily know the conventions that are associated with it. Still, I thought certain moments in the story, Collins relied too much on telling rather than showing. For instance, at the end of Books 2 and 3, Collins ties up events in only a short few paragraphs. At the end of Book 2 I was like, “There’s a rebellion in progress and Katniss was apart of it without knowing it, and yet you expect to tell me that in four little paragraphs and that I’d be satisfied with that? Puh-leaze!” And at the end of Book 3, after Katniss (spoiler alert!) kills Coin while Snow expires from being a sick, bloody old man, I tought Collins was rushing a bit to finish up the story, to have everything resolve itself without doing too much writing or exposition or lengthy conversation. Too much telling, and maybe a little lazy.

Not only was that a problem for me, but at certain points Collins puts us into dramatic moments without putting on the drama. When Katniss and her crew go into the Capital in Book 3 to take down Snow, it seems Collins is deliberately under-dramatizing it, making the mission seem as drawl as possible. I would’ve cued in on Katniss’s feelings as she stepped into the Capital with a gun and bow and arrows, looking around the snow-swept streets and the rising excitement and tension as she awaits her chance to kill Snow.

But Collins decides to just put us smack in the middle of the Capitol, and things only get dramatic when she actually feels like telling us in detail what’s happening instead of summarizing it for us.

And finally, the ending for Book 3 left me stunned. I mean really, Katniss kills Coin just like that? A little out of left field, if you ask me. Where’s the dramatic build-up, the chance to let the world know what Coin did, to refute it so that the world will see how cruel war can make us and make it stick that we shouldn’t fight like monsters? Nope, just kills the old hag after agreeing the Capitol children should participate in a Hunger Games. And speaking of which, did that ever happen? Or after President Coin’s death, did they just decide not to let the Capitol kids not die?

Whatever.

I thought the first book fantastic, but Books 2 and 3 were not as good. Sure, Collins made an effort to make Book 2 more than just a bridge between Books 1 and 3, but at times it dragged, and I thought it took too long to get to the Quarter Quell. And Book 3 alternated between me being interested and me being annoyed and bored.

Plus the resolution of the whole Peeta-Gale thing…Oy Gevalt! I feel like there were so much more to those characters. They were both capable of being great political and military leaders, especially Peeta. But all we really see is their obsessions with Katniss and perhaps a darker side of Peeta after he’s been hijacked. And then the way Katniss finally picks her man…was that Collins’s way of saying, “Oh yeah, this is who she finally picks and how it happens.” I definitely wouldn’t have written it that way, and I think I would’ve gone into Katniss actually weighing her feelings and what each boy represents to her. You know, make it seem like they’re both dreamy and she just can’t choose?

And by the way, what do those guys do at the end of the book? Does Peeta become mayor of District Twelve? Does Gale find a new girl while leading reconstruction efforts in other districts? A little explanation please! God, now I know why the movie went into further detail of the behind-the-scenes stuff: it was needed to make up for what was left out of the novel.

So finally, how about my ranking? For The Hunger Games, Catching Fire and Mockingjay, I give the whole trilogy a 2.6 out of 5. Great premise, great story overall, but there was room for improvement, if you ask me.

Older Entries
Newer Entries