Reviews by Kyle Ellis

I saw Gran Torino mainly as an admirer of Clint Eastwood, both as an actor and as director. And I was very impressed, there were parts that amused me and others that had me moved. Gran Torino was a very well made and beautifully directed movie, complete with a fitting soundtrack, a strong script with smooth enough tone shifts and a powerful message that is well conveyed and one that I think many, myself included, would identify with. The story is mostly engaging with an interesting protagonist, but there are a few moments where it is hackneyed and predictable, which is my only criticism of this movie. In regard to the acting, Clint Eastwood gives a very commanding performance and the kids are also very good mostly. Overall, very well done. 9/10 Bethany Cox

I love movies of all kinds regardless of their age. 2011 so far has been a very hit-and-miss year, luckily alongside Drive and The Tree of Life(though both won't appeal to all) Warrior is among my favourites of this year.

Warrior is a well made and directed movie, with lighting that consistently fits with the mood and cinematography that is skillful and intelligently used. The dialogue was thought-provoking and written with vigour and heart, the fight scenes are incredible feeling both authentic(you can smell the sweat and feel the tears) and harrowing and the story for me was absorbing and hit me hard emotionally.

The characters are fully credible too, and the wonderful performances help. Tom Hardy is outstanding in one of his best performances to date, and Joel Edgarton is every bit his equal, but Nick Nolte is a sheer delight and comes close to stealing the film on several occasions. The climax was very exciting, and while the film's end is rather inconclusive, everything else is so good you don't care so much.

In conclusion, fantastic film and one of the best of the year. 10/10 Bethany Cox

I love movies of all kinds regardless of their age. 2011 so far has been a very hit-and-miss year, luckily alongside Drive and The Tree of Life(though both won't appeal to all) Warrior is among my favourites of this year.

Warrior is a well made and directed movie, with lighting that consistently fits with the mood and cinematography that is skillful and intelligently used. The dialogue was thought-provoking and written with vigour and heart, the fight scenes are incredible feeling both authentic(you can smell the sweat and feel the tears) and harrowing and the story for me was absorbing and hit me hard emotionally.

The characters are fully credible too, and the wonderful performances help. Tom Hardy is outstanding in one of his best performances to date, and Joel Edgarton is every bit his equal, but Nick Nolte is a sheer delight and comes close to stealing the film on several occasions. The climax was very exciting, and while the film's end is rather inconclusive, everything else is so good you don't care so much.

In conclusion, fantastic film and one of the best of the year. 10/10 Bethany Cox

'Lion' showed a lot of promise. There was potential for a very powerful story, had heard a lot of good things about it (as seen from many positive reviews and a high rating here) and there is a lot of talent involved. A lot of my friends had said how much it touched them, as have many reviewers here, and it seemed like my kind of film.

Fortunately, 'Lion' was a film that had great potential and mostly lived up to it. Cannot say that for many recent viewings, with a few too many wastes of good concepts and potential (along with wastes of talent, that is a bugbear of mine because it feels like somewhat of a slap of the face) so that there was a film that did not waste it was refreshing and restored a bit of faith. It is a very good film, albeit it was very nearly a great film. That it wasn't the great film all the way through than when it started is something of a shame, but there are so many great qualities all the same.

It is an uneven film sure, starting with the negatives. The second half is not as strong as the first half, it is not as compellingly paced and the clarity of storytelling is less good, some of it feeling vague. That is not to say it is unwatchable, it is still touching in spots in a film that is quite the emotional experience.

Rooney Mara also came over to me as the cast's weak link. She didn't look very interested and her character felt like a misplaced and underwritten plot device.

However, 'Lion's' first half is wonderful. Hugely compelling and very emotional, and what is meant by why the film very nearly was great. The whole film though was poignant, and count me in as another film who has become tougher generally over the year but got through several tissues by the film's end.

Throughout, 'Lion' is beautifully filmed and complements the beautiful sceneries very well. Scoring and sound never come over as obvious or intrusive. The script provokes thought, charms and moves. The story is never dull and the emotional impact never feels forced or manipulative.

Garth Davis does a very good job directing. Aside from Mara, the cast are very good. Dev Patel's performance here is perhaps the best seen from him personally and David Wenham and Nicole Kidman are similarly excellent. The star here though is Sunny Pawar who is just outstanding, have not seen a child performance this good in a long time, it is perhaps among the best ever.

In conclusion, very good and very nearly great. 8/10 Bethany Cox

Slumdog Millionaire was so much better than I expected, after reading mixed reviews in general. The very talented director Danny Boyle directs with a very sharp focus, that made the film as clever and engaging as it was. The film also allows an insight into the fully fleshed-out characters, that we do empathise with, and has very relevant themes presented throughout. The story for the film was a fantastic and very original one, and was beautifully constructed. The script was well crafted, and the excellent performances from all involved brought it across fine. Though I must say, the real star is the city of Mumbai itself, captured perfectly on cameras, thanks to the superb cinematography. My only minor criticism was that I wasn't sure what the dance at the end was all about;apart from that the acting, direction and scripting were all top notch, and made it the wonderful film that it actually is. 9/10 Bethany Cox

I've taught this book to my 6th graders nine years in a row. Once I realized that the book is actually a mystery, and not the bland sci-fi adventure it seemed at first skim, I loved it more and more each time. Nine years, two classes most years... 17 TIMES. I've come to see that the book isn't the story of a depressing utopia. It's the story of the relationship between the main characters the Giver, Jonas, and... I won't say her name. And of course, the baby Gabe.

Every year, as we read the book out loud together, I am amazed at details the students notice (things I've missed the previous 15 times), or questions they raise that lead to further insights for not just the class but ME. My God, the things they come up with, that I as an English major, or even me if I'd read this with a book club, could never have gone that far in depth.

As I began to more fully understand the book over the years, I was better able to guide their discussions, which helped them think more deeply about the book, and made me appreciate the book even more. And by "guide," I don't mean calm, controlled, teachery, "I already know the answer" talk.

My discussion techniques, simple:
--I'd stop the tape (books on tape are AWESOME- the narrator is always so much better than I could ever be) and say something like, "So, what do you think? Doesn't this seem a little WEIRD?" and off they'd go, bouncing ideas off each other until finally someone said something incredible, something no kid had thought of in the past nine years. Once I myself knew how to be interested in this book, I knew what might keep them hooked.
--Or, I myself would suddenly realize something new, and I'd stop reading and say, "OH MY GOD DID YOU GUYS GET WHAT THAT MEANT??? WHAT IT MIGHT MEAN????"
I feel free to participate myself, since I myself still have so many questions about the book. I'm not spoiling the ending when I bring up my own questions, because I know this book is a mystery in which things don't much get answered- they're left to linger, and that's part of the beauty and hopefulness in this book.

There are still lines, moments, in the book that give me chills. I wait for them greedily, just to hear the words spoken.

I feel lucky to have been forced to read this book a dozen times. There are other books I've read a lot with my students, and this is the one that most stands up over time, the only one that keeps my interest. I truly am on the edge of my seat to see what we will realize next. Because I've seen that, even if I think I have it all figured out, some kid is going to say something to rock my world.

I can't believe Lowry was able to make a book this clever; part of me thinks a work this good is impossible, and that we are just reading too much into it. But no, it's all there, all the pieces, and she put them there. I just don't see how could she have written such a tightly woven mystery- how could she have know all of the questions the book would raise? And you know what, she probably didn't. A book isn't like drawing a map. You make the world, and things happen. And in this case, she did make a perfect world. (I SO did not mean that as a UTOPIA PUN!!!!!!! I hate puns so much!!!!!! I mean, she so fully created that world where everything that happens is plausible.)

Just read the damn book, then call me.

Or, call me after like, Chapter 13, then after 18 and 19.


he book. Lines that almost make me cry-

There are some terrible reviews of SH5 floating around Goodreads, but one particularly awful sentiment is that Slaughterhouse-Five isn't anti-war.

This is usually based on the following quote.

"It had to be done," Rumfoord told Billy, speaking of the destruction of Dresden.
"I know," said Billy.
"That's war."
"I know. I'm not complaining"
"It must have been hell on the ground."
"It was," said Billy Pilgrim.
"Pity the men who had to do it."
"I do."
"You must have had mixed feelings, there on the ground."
"It was all right," said Billy. "Everything is all right, and everybody has to do exactly what he does. I learned that on Tralfamadore."
For context, Mr. Rumfoord is an old military historian described as "hateful and cruel" who wants to see weaklings like Billy exterminated.

On Tralfamadore, Billy was introduced to the revelation that all things happen exactly as they do, and that they will always happen that way, and that they will never happen any other way. Meaning, time is all at once. The aliens, incidentally, admit to destroying the universe in a comical accident fated far into the future, and they're very sorry, but so it goes.

This book is far from perfect. Its characters lack depth, its rhetoric is sometimes didactic, its plot (well, half of it anyway) was lifted from Zumyatin’s We, and the lengthy Goldstein treatise shoved into the middle is a flaw which alters the structure of the novel like a scar disfigures a face.

But in the long run, all that does not matter, because George Orwell got it right.

Orwell, a socialist who fought against Franco, watched appalled as the great Soviet experiment was reduced to a totalitarian state, a repressive force equal in evil to Fascist Italy or Nazi Germany. He came to realize that ideology in an authoritarian state is nothing but a distraction, a shiny thing made for the public to stare at. He came to realize that the point of control was more control, the point of torture was more torture, that the point of all their "alternative facts" was to fashion a world where people would no longer possess even a word for truth.

If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever.

Orwell’s vision of the world is grim; too grim, some would argue, for it may deprive the faint-hearted among us of hope. But Orwell never wanted to take away hope. No, he wished to shock our hearts into resistance by showing us the authoritarian nightmare achieved: a monument of stasis, a tribute to surveillance and control.

Here, in the USA, in 2017, our would-be totalitarians are a long way from stasis. Right now they’re stirring up chaos and confusion, spreading lies and then denying they spread them, hoping to gaslight us into a muddle of helplessness and inactivity. They are trying to destroy a vigorous democracy, and they know it will take much chaos and confusion to bring that democracy down. They hate us most when we march together, when we occupy senate offices and jam the congressional switchboard, when we congregate in pubs and coffee houses and share our outrage and fear, for they know that freedom thrives on solidarity and resistance, and that solidarity and resistance engender love and hope. They much prefer it when we brood in solitude, despairing and alone.

Which reminds me...one of the things we should never do is brood about the enemy’s ideology (Is Steve Bannon a Fascist? A Nazi? A Stalinist?), for while we try to discern his “ideological goals,” the enemy is busy pulling on his boots, and his boots are made with hobnails, with heel irons, and equipped with toecaps of steel.

Finally, it does not matter who heads up the authoritarian state: a bully boy like Mussolini, a strutting coprophiliac like Hitler, a Napoleonic pig like Stalin, or a brainless dancing bear like Trump. Whatever the current incarnation of “Big Brother” may be, the goal is always the same:
A nation of warriors and fanatics, marching forward in perfect unity, all thinking the same thoughts and shouting the same slogans, perpetually working, fighting, triumphing, persecuting - three hundred million people all with the same face.