'A Star is Born' remake exceeds previous attempts

By Source: Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=57620360

Everybody loves to complain about how remakes never live up to the originals movies.

I'd say that a solid 90% of the time, that's true. However, the latest incarnation of the classic film "A Star Is Born" is a very big exception to that rule.

The story is the same, and should come as little surprise to anybody who has seen one of the three previous versions - 1937, starring Janet Gaynor and Fredric March; 1954, starring Judy Garland and James Mason; and 1976, starring Barbra Streisand and Kris Kristofferson.

This time, the film follows hard-drinking musician Jackson Maine (Bradley Cooper), who discovers a talented performer, Ally (Lady Gaga), when he stumbles into a drag bar looking for another drink. Ally is a waitress with dreams of being a singer-songwriter, but who has been rejected by record labels because of her look - specifically, her big nose. Jackson, though, loves her look, her music, and - soon - falls in love with her. But Ally's ascent into superstardom is mirrored in reverse with Jackson's alcohol- and drug-fueled descent.

"A Star Is Born" is a remarkable film, made even more remarkable by the fact that it's Bradley Cooper's directorial debut and Lady Gaga's first starring turn on the big screen. But even if they'd been veterans, I would be amazed by this film. There's an intimacy to it that previous versions of the film - at least the most famous, starring Garland and Streisand - never pulled off. There are a lot of big moments, particularly the scenes of huge stadium concerts, but Cooper never lets the audience forget that the film is, at its essence, about these two people.

The excellent direction of the film is incredibly important, but what really makes "A Star is Born" great is the two leads. Cooper and Lady Gaga both have amazing screen presence, and they have incredibly chemistry together. But what is really refreshing is that the film focuses on them and their relationship, rather than the stars playing in the lead. In particular, the 1954 and 1976 versions of the film became vehicles for the leading ladies. It's not that I don't love Garland and Streisand, because I do. In fact, Lady Gaga is, in many ways, very much in their mold - women with enormous talent who don't quite fit that Hollywood look. But, both because of Cooper's excellent direction and the stunning performance by Lady Gaga, you don't watch this movie going, "Oh wow, Lady Gaga!" She allows herself to disappear into the role and become Ally. She moved me to tears several times, both with her powerful singing and with her raw performance.

While "A Star Is Born" hinges on the performances of Cooper and Lady Gaga, I would be remiss if I didn't mention some of the excellent costars who help the film along. I was delighted to see Anthony Ramos, of "Hamilton" fame, as Ally's best friend, not to mention famous drag queens Shangela and Willam. The real supporting star, though, is Sam Elliott in a dramatic and heart-wrenching turn as Jackson's brother Bobby. He put a lot of soul into his nuanced performance, and while he really isn't in the film for long, every appearance is perfection.

If you've seen a previous version of "A Star Is Born," none of the story beats will surprise you, but that doesn't mean that this film isn't well-worth seeing. The Oscar buzz is well-deserved, and even those who love the previous versions of the film will be pleased by this gut-wrenching, soul-stirring take on this well-known story. It is about as close to perfection as you can get on the big screen.

Jenny's Take: See it tonight.
(Rated R for language throughout, some sexuality/nudity and substance abuse. Runs 2 hours, 15 minutes.)

Book Review: "Too Wilde to Wed" by Eloisa James

Full disclosure: I received a free advance reader copy of this book in my work as a librarian and in exchange for an honest review.

Eloisa James is a powerhouse of the historical romance genre, and reading "Too Wilde to Wed," I was reminded why. 

"Too Wilde to Wed" is a fantastic example of what can be done with a historical romance; it fits perfectly into the genre while also feeling new and exciting. 

The book follows North, heir to a dukedom, who is shocked when he returns from war to find his ex-fiance, Diana, who jilted him, working as a governess in North's home, Lindow Castle. 

I am really enjoying the continuing saga of the Wildes - I am currently reading an ARC of the next book, Born to be Wilde. Readers who are fans of quirky families, like Lisa Kleypas' Hathaways and Julia Quinn's Bridgertons, will likely find a lot to love with the Wildes, too. I'm a particular fan of Fitzy, Lindow Castle's resident peacock. I also greatly enjoy the drama that comes with the Wilde family being though of as, well, wild by the press and the people of Britain, and the consequences of that. 

I found "Too Wilde to Wed" particularly delightful, even though our hero and heroine suffer from a bad case of Not-Talking-About-It-itis that plagues so many couples that could otherwise be happy. Still, James' smart writing and a whole group of colorful characters makes this one well worth reading! 

Book Review: "Unmasked by the Marquess" by Cat Sebastian

Full disclosure: I received a free advance reader copy of this book in my work as a librarian and in exchange for an honest review.

I have been following Cat Sebastian's career with interest since her first book, "The Soldier's Scoundrel," was published. I had been DYING to read "Unmasked by the Marquess," the first book in the Regency Imposters series, and also her first romance novel that isn't M/M. However, this is far from a traditional romance.

One of the things I love about Sebastian is that she takes romance tropes and makes them fit into LGBTQ stories, and it's on display particularly well here. "Unmasked by the Marquess" follows the grumpy, bisexual Alistair de Lacey, Marquess of Pembroke, who finds himself intrigued by - and maybe falling in love with - a young country squire named Mr. Robert Selby, in London for the Season to see his sister, Louisa, make an adventageous match. However, Selby is actually a former maid named Charity Church, who has been dressing as Robert so long that she really doesn't identify as a woman anymore. It takes the trope of the woman-dressed-as-a-man and makes it far more interesting - and a realistic experience of a non-binary person. 

Because it's Cat Sebastian, it's also funny, sexy, and sweet. Sebastian always has some comedy and a good amount of sexytimes in her books, but there's always an underlying sweetness that leaves me swooning. And, there are also several mysteries to discover as Alistair and Robin (Alistair's pet name for Robert/Charity) slowly reveal themselves to each other throughout the book. It's really an almost perfectly written book, and as much as I've loved all of Sebastian's books (especially "It Takes Two to Tumble," which featured a lot of my particular romance catnips), I think "Unmasked by the Marquess" might be my favorite. 

PBS Sunday Night Reaction: "Great British Baking Show," "Downton Abbey," and "Grantchester"

("PBSident2009" by Source. Licensed under Fair use via Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PBSident2009.png#mediaviewer/File:PBSident2009.png)

Lately on Sunday nights, I've had my butt parked on the couch, watching PBS. Last night, I watched three hours of PBS programming! 

I have to laugh at myself, because that is exactly what my grandmother, in her 80s, is also doing on Sunday nights, but I can't help it if PBS is playing some really delightful British programming! Also, the fact that they don't have commercials during their shows makes me much more likely to just turn it on at 8 p.m. and know I'll be solidly entertained for three hours.

So, let's take a little look at what was on last night: "The Great British Baking Show," "Downton Abbey," and "Grantchester."

(Mild spoilers ahead.)

Goodreads Review: "The Fault in Our Stars"

The Fault in Our Stars by John Green
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

"The Fault in Our Stars" really is a remarkable book - a book about a person with cancer that manages to be almost completely down-to-earth and actively avoids being obnoxiously sappy. (It's pretty much the antithesis of the Nicholas Sparks book I read recently.)

Just for that, John Green deserves major accolades. The fact that it's also compelling, entertaining, and funny, and features some really genuinely interesting characters, means that "The Fault in Our Stars" is really one of the most fantastic books I've read in a while.

"The Fault in Our Stars" follows Hazel, a 16-year-old girl living with terminal cancer. She is happy - or as happy as she can be - watching "America's Next Top Model" with her parents and rereading her favorite book over and over again, until she meets Augustus Waters, a 17-year-old boy whose cancer is in remission. Hazel and Augustus strike up a friendship that soon becomes a full-blown, deep, intense romance.

Hazel is a wonderfully likeable main character. Her cancer doesn't change the fact that she's a snarky 16-year-old girl - she's just a snarky 16-year-old girl with cancer. Green did a wonderful job crafting her, and it's easy to completely dive into Hazel's life and instantly fall in love with her. I absolutely love her spunk and the fact that she's snotty and annoyed a lot. She can also be very loving and is very conscious of the feelings of the people she loves - her parents and Augustus - but she really feels like a real person, not a noble caricature of a person with cancer. Just because someone has cancer doesn't mean that they lose their personality, and Hazel has a personality outside of being a Girl with Cancer. It's wonderful and, really, shockingly rare in books.

Augustus is, to be honest, kind of a douche, but I really mean that in the most loving way, too. He's one of those hilariously pretentious, "deep" teenagers, just a little bit more pretentious and "deep" because he had cancer. (I feel like he was probably pretentious before he had cancer, too.) I rolled my eyes at him a lot, but Augustus had just enough moments of warmth and genuine emotion that his douchiness really just ended up being endearing teenager stuff. I kind of wanted to not like him, but I really did. And his deep love for Hazel always came through the facade.

"The Fault in Our Stars" is not a perfect book, so why did I give it five stars? Because despite the fact that I knocked off a star for being a little bit pretentious at times, it gets at least one star, if not more, tacked back on for being such a superb, different, enjoyable, wonderful book about cancer and dying. Normally if a character has terminal cancer in a book, my eyeballs are rolling out of my head at the sappiness of it all (horrible, perhaps, but true!), but "The Fault in Our Stars" is down-to-earth and straightforward about what happens. Cancer sucks and dying of it is horrible, and "The Fault in Our Stars" doesn't shy away from showing that. There are some really, really sad moments, and some really, really horrible, gross moments in this book, and I'm glad that John Green wrote honestly about it. But also, in the midst of such a horrible situation as cancer, whether it's terminal or not, there are moments of light and moments of humor, and John Green wrote so well about those, too. People with cancer are still the people they were before they had cancer and I'm glad that John Green understands that. It's a wonderfully balanced, realistic, honest and entertaining book.

Seriously, though, grab the tissues - this book is a tearjerker if ever I read one.

View all my reviews

'I, Frankenstein' continues tradition of January stinkers

This review was originally published on the KPC Media Group website. Read the original review here. 

It's so nice that movie studios let audiences stay home during the cold winter months.

That has to be the reason that they released "I, Frankenstein" during January, right? Anybody who ventures out in the cold and snow to see this stinker is crazy. You'd be better off staying home and watching Netflix. Or a DVD. Or the snow fall, or melt, depending on the weather report. It's not worth getting up off the couch to see this movie.

"I, Frankenstein" follows Victor Frankenstein's monster (Aaron Eckhart). After killing his master, he is attacked by demons. But before the demons can get him, he's saved by a group of gargoyles, led by the queen gargoyle, Leonore (Miranda Otto). The gargoyles, who can switch from flying stone beasts to a human appearance with a swish of a cape, try to get the monster, who Leonore names Adam, to help them kill demons, but he refuses. Fast-forward 200 years, and a big, bad demon (Bill Nighy) is trying to figure out the secret of reanimating corpses - just like Frankenstein did to Adam.

No, I am not making any of this up, despite the fact it sounds like a goth kid's fever dream, right down to the part where the story doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

It's sad that such a bad movie came from a relatively cool concept. Frankenstein's monster in the modern world, fighting demons alongside gargoyles sent from heaven by the archangel Michael. Yes, it's still a goofy concept, but in the hands of an excellent writer and director it could be a super hip supernatural thriller.

Sadly, "I, Frankenstein" just plods along with about as much life as Frankenstein's monster before it was zapped with electricity. The plot is nearly incoherent, with characters' motivations changing every 10 minutes. The city where the movie takes place (it's never explained where it's supposed to be) doesn't have a strong vision and just feels bland.

Aaron Eckhart is a dull leading man for "I, Frankenstein," too. The most exciting thing in his boring performance is when he pulls off his shirt, revealing an artfully scarred, totally ripped chest. But, it isn't worth the price of admission. Other than that brief interlude, Eckhart delivers his lines in a completely wooden fashion, without a hint of irony or enjoyment or even interest in what's going on. Bill Nighy, at least, is more fun to watch. He chews the scenery as the bad guy, complete with delightful dramatic pauses. I think he's at least trying.

There are a few laughs to be had when watching "I, Frankenstein." I certainly enjoyed whispering snide comments to my husband when the plot took yet another inexplicable turn, but that's also no reason to bother with seeing a movie like this in the theaters.

Despite a concept that could have worked, nearly everybody involved with "I, Frankenstein" just seemed to phone it in. The result is a big, sloppy mess, otherwise known as "just another January at the movies."

Jenny's Take: See it on DVD.
(Rated PG-13 for sequences of intense fantasy action and violence throughout. Runs 92 minutes.)

Goodreads Review: "The Last Song" by Nicholas Sparks

The Last Song by Nicholas Sparks
My rating: 1 of 5 stars

I absolutely hated "The Last Song." There are ways that this general plotline could have worked, but in the hands of Nicholas Sparks, it was an overwrought, contrived, schlocky mess.

"The Last Song" follows 17-year-old Ronnie, forced to spend the summer away from her home in New York City with her estranged father and her little brother, Jonah, in a small North Carolina town. On the surface, Ronnie is a troubled teen, not only because she occasionally shoplifts, but also because she *gasp* has a streak of purple in her hair and wears black, which Sparks is clear to point out about a dozen times or more in the course of the book.

Anyway, Ronnie's father, Steve, is a pianist, and Ronnie is a great piano player, too, but she has refused to play since her dad left. But soon she begins to soften, as she watches her dad and brother work on the stained glass window for the church up the beach that had burned down; as she guards a sea-turtle nest near the house; and as she slowly but surely falls in love with hot rich-guy Will. However, Ronnie has issues with some of the "bad kids" in town - the first friend she makes, Blaze, is dating a complete psychopath named Marcus, who takes a liking to Ronnie almost immediately.

I have a lot of issues with "The Last Song."

First of all, the main characters, Ronnie and Will, are bland. Ronnie is supposed to be this super troubled teen, which, as a concept, is both interesting and understandable in the context of her life, but Sparks cannot just let her be a bratty, bad kid who slowly learns a valuable lesson about life and love. Almost immediately, he has to let the audience know that she's not really such a bad person. She doesn't drink or take drugs like her friends back in New York, she's a vegetarian, and she loves puppies. Will, meanwhile, is obnoxiously perfect. His biggest fault in the whole book is that he cares too much about his friend, Scott. Gag.

The rest of the characters are complete caricatures. There is no shading, no quirks and nothing remotely interesting about them. They're just stock characters, and I felt absolutely no emotional attachment to them, nor was I remotely surprised by anything they did.

I also really resented the way that "The Last Song" seemed absolutely contrived to make the reader cry. I love to cry at good books, but reading a Nicholas Sparks book is like being beat over the head with a 2x4 while Sparks screeches, "CRY! You WILL cry! CRY AT THE TRAGEDY OF IT ALL!" It's disgusting.

The "big twists" at the end of the book were all atrociously transparent and easy to guess, and I'm terrible at guessing what a "twist" is going to be. The big tragedy was contrived and totally obvious, and the way that the characters in the book handled it was criminal.

(Spoiler Alert) The fact that Steve never told his children that he had terminal cancer for the three months they were staying with him, even though he had known his diagnosis for four months before they came, is just irresponsible, and no amount of explaining that he "wanted to get to know his children" makes that better. I didn't find it endearing - I couldn't help but think that it would be horrific to do that to someone, especially to your children. I had assumed through the book that he didn't know that he was terminally ill, and that he would find out when his children did, leading to some soul-searching together. Keeping that information from his children until he was hospitalized for it is selfish and cruel. I almost threw the book across the room at that point, and I had to stop reading it until the next day. If I hadn't been committed to finishing the book (I was reading it on what boiled down to a dare from my sister), I would have stopped right there and refused to pick it up again. (End Spoiler Alert)

I also didn't like the way that the religious references were shoehorned into the book in the most schlocky and awkward way ever. I like the idea of tackling the religious and spiritual implications of the things that happened in the book, but they were crammed in the book in the absolute most corny way possible. Gag.

"The Last Song" is a schlocky, corny, annoying mess that is insulting to the reader and incredibly annoying and infuriating to read. The story is contrived and it was obviously callously calculated to wrench the most tears from the readers. It's just plain gross. This book is absolutely terrible.

View all my reviews

Goodreads Review: "Allegiant"

Allegiant by Veronica Roth
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

While there were definitely some things I liked about "Allegiant," the final chapter of the "Divergent" trilogy by Veronica Roth, this book just didn't quite work for me.

"Allegiant" finishes the story of Tris Prior, who, with the help of her boyfriend, Tobias, tries to save the people of dystopian future Chicago from the people who want to tear it apart with war.

When I read "Divergent" and "Insurgent," I really liked the world but I feel like it suffered quite a bit when everything was explained. Part of it was that Roth likes to info-dump. I understand the temptation, especially when there is a lot of information to try to jam into a book, but it led to some pretty dry passages, and made the overall flow of the book uneven. I still like the idea of the world, but the execution left something to be desired.

The whole feel of "Allegiant" was just kind of off. Part of the big problem was that this book had chapters from Tobias' point of view, rather than telling the whole book from Tris' point of view. I see why Roth structured the book that way, because Tobias and Tris were separated and doing a lot of important things away from each other, but it made the book kind of confusing. It was hard to tell who was talking in what chapter, because there wasn't much of a stylistic change between Tris and Tobias. I would find myself saying, "Why is Tris ... oh, this is Tobias' chapter!"

I also felt like there was a lot of rehashing in "Allegiant," while other parts (specifically the ending) were really rushed. I could have done without Tris and Tobias talking in circles about things, and instead given a little more time for the book to wrap up properly.

I didn't hate "Allegiant" though - in fact, I read several hundred pages in one sitting. The plot was still exciting, when it moved forward (which it did in fits and starts sometimes), and I like the relationship between Tobias and Tris. I felt like their romance was very natural for older teens, and it was a bit steamy besides. I also have to give props to Roth for a brave plot decision near the end of the book that I wasn't expecting. It was a bit contrived, I thought, but it was not something that every author would do.

I'm not sorry that I read "Allegiant," or the other "Divergent" books, but I have definitely read YA dystopian novels that were much better (*cough*HungerGames*cough*). However, there were some spots where "Allegiant" really held its own, and it's definitely worth a quick read sometime.

View all my reviews

'Jack Ryan' solid, despite treading little new ground

This review originally appeared on the KPC Media Group website and in its three daily newspapers on Sunday. Read the original review here. Reprinted with permission. 

I suppose there is some way to reinvent the action-thriller, but until some genius comes up with a new twist on the old standby, Hollywood will probably keep churning them out.

But if they're as zippy and fun as "Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit," you won't hear me complaining.
The movie follows Jack Ryan (Chris Pine), a brilliant young former Marine turned CIA analyst who is thrust into the field to try to stop evil Russian banker Viktor Cherevin (Kenneth Branagh) from ruining the U.S. economy with a terror attack timed perfectly with some economic mumbo-jumbo. Adding an additional wrinkle - but also an additional asset, as it turns out - Jack must also protect his fiance, Cathy (Kiera Knightley).

Jack is a little different from your basic action-thriller hero, in the sense that he is not immediately good at field work. Even though he is a former Marine, he is an egghead at heart, with a Ph.D. in economics and very little training in field work. But like every good action hero, he soon finds his footing and is sneaking into heavily guarded buildings, beating bad guys to a pulp and generally being awesome by about halfway through the movie.

Also a little bit refreshing is Cathy, who, thank goodness, breaks out of the suspicious, shrewish girlfriend role partway through the movie and proves herself to be a brave, capable sidekick for Jack for a big chunk of the middle of the movie before being relegated to the background for the final showdown. Still, she's also incredibly smart - I mean, she's a doctor - and she's brave, too. I would actually love to see Cathy and Jack put their brains together to bring down terrorists on a regular basis in movies. Get on that, Hollywood!

Still, these notable aspects are really just slight tweaks on extremely common tropes. During the movie, even though I enjoyed it, "Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit" all seemed pretty familiar. And, let's face it, that's not a surprise. In addition to being in more than a dozen novels penned by Tom Clancy, this is far from the first time Jack has been on the big screen. Although he's played by different actors, Jack Ryan is the main character of "The Hunt for Red October," "Patriot Games," "Clear and Present Danger" and "The Sum of All Fears."

Despite the fact that it's not exactly fresh, though, "Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit" is not a waste of time at the movies. Chris Pine does an excellent job putting his own stamp on the character, which can't be easy when Jack Ryan has also been played by Alec Baldwin, Harrison Ford and Ben Affleck. Pine does an excellent job of making Jack's motiviations clear. He's tough, but that's because he's determined to do his job and save the country. He's not an action hero robot, though - it's nice to see the main character in a thriller visably shaken after killing somebody. There's an underlying humanity that is always there, and it gives "Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit" just a little more depth.

This movie doesn't reinvent the wheel, and it doesn't even really tread much new ground. What it does do, though, is deliver a solid, watchable story with a lead character that's relatable (and good-looking, if you're into that sort of thing). Some days, there's nothing I'd rather watch more.

Jenny's Take: See it before it leaves theaters.
(Rated PG-13 for sequences of violence and intense action, and brief strong language. Runs 105 minutes.)

'Sherlock' season 3 premiere worth the long wait

Note: This review is spoiler-free, so don't be afraid to read it!

I feel like I've been waiting years for the third season of BBC's "Sherlock" to premiere in the U.S.

Hello, boys! I've missed you!

(Photo credit)

It's actually only been a little less than a year and a half, but season 2 ended with such a dynamic, surprising, exciting and soul-wrenching finale that it was torture to wait for the story to continue.

So when the episode started (I was lucky enough to see the episode a week early thanks to a screening by my local PBS station), I was incredibly excited.

I was also nervous though - nervous that the premiere episode, "The Empty Hearse," would fall far short of "The Reichenbach Fall."

It doesn't beat season 2's finale, but it was still a great, enjoyable, exciting episode that was worth the wait.

Goodreads Review: "Dragonfly in Amber"

Dragonfly in Amber by Diana Gabaldon
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

I'm really enjoying my slow but sure trek through the "Outlander" series. I read the first book last spring, and while I wasn't so enthralled that I had to read "Dragonfly in Amber" immediately, but when I was looking for a book to read, I decided I wanted to know what happened next to Claire & Jamie.

"Dragonfly in Amber" is a delightful, fun read. It, like "Outlander," is a guilty pleasure romance read for the historical fiction set or, alternately, an especially richly plotted, relatively historically accurate book that the historical romance set can feel all classy reading. Since I don't like to categorize my reads like that, though, I will just say this - it has a great story, good characters, stomach-fluttering romance, fun historical plotlines and a good dose of time-travel fun.

"Dragonfly in Amber" doesn't quite start where "Outlander" leaves off. Rather, it starts with our heroine, Claire, and her daughter, Brianna, in Scotland in 1968, shortly after the death of Claire's 20th-century husband, Frank, 20-some years after Claire returned to the 20th century disoriented and pregnant. While Frank was alive, Claire never told Brianna about her true parentage, or about Claire's adventure in the 18th century. But in "Dragonfly in Amber," Claire tells Brianna about her work with her 18th century husband, Jamie, to stop the Jacobite rebellion and save Jamie's clan from the bloody Battle of Culloden.

"Dragonfly in Amber" is a lot of fun to read, and I really loved revisiting the characters from "Outlander." I thought I would have trouble remembering the secondary characters and plot threads, since I finished "Outlander" nine months before I started "Dragonfly in Amber," but with a few exceptions, characters and plotlines were reintroduced in wonderful way that made it easy for me to recall what happened.

But more than that, I felt like "Dragonfly in Amber" gave me a chance to reconnect with some characters I really like, and deepen my love for them. Claire is a wonderful, strong heroine, and Jamie, while distinctly and sometimes annoyingly old-fashioned, is also sweet, tough and easy to love. With the addition of some strong new characters and more scenes with old favorites (and great old villains, too), "Dragonfly in Amber" is a blast to read. I'm looking forward to reading the next one sometime soon!

View all my reviews

Legend and laughs continue with 'Anchorman 2'

This movie review was originally posted at KPC Media Group's website. You can read the review here. Reprinted with permission.

When I told my husband I was planning to review 'Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues' this week, he gave me a wary look and told me, "You don't need to review that!"

"Why not?" I asked.

"Because, from the previews, it looks like all you'll need to say is, 'If you liked the first 'Anchorman,' you'll like this movie," he replied.

And, as much as I hate to admit it, he was pretty much right. "Anchorman 2" does not quite live up to the screamingly hilarious, intensely quoteable "Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy," but it still delivers enough laughs to make it well worth the time and money.

"Anchorman 2" picks up in 1980, several years after the original "Anchorman." Newsman Ron Burgundy (Will Ferrell) and his now-wife, Veronica Corningstone (Christina Applegate), are an anchor team in New York City. But after Veronica is promoted to nightly news anchor and Ron is fired, Ron leaves for a disasterous new life alone in San Diego.

Lucky for Ron, though, he is soon tapped to work at a new news venture - GNN, the first 24-hour news network. He gets his news team - Champ Kind (David Koechner), Brian Fantana (Paul Rudd) and Brick Tamland (Steve Carrell) - out of retirement and they jet off to New York to work under tough producer Linda Jackson (Meagan Good). Unfortunately, they have to contend with the likes of stuck-up newsman Jack Lime (James Marsden), and Ron has the added complication of Veronica's new lover, Gary (Greg Kinnear).

"Anchorman 2" has a couple of things going for it. One is the incredible chemistry and comedic timing of the actors. Many of the scenes with Ferrell, Koechner, Rudd and Carrell all together are magic. Their characters are all totally weird and sometimes just too much when they have scenes apart from each other, but when they mesh, that's when the belly-laughs start. Applegate, unfortunately, gets relagated to the background for most of "Anchorman 2," but when she is on screen, she's solid. However, Kristen Wiig does a great job with a super strange character, a GNN secretary named Chani. In another actress' hands, Chani might not have worked, but Wiig is talented and unself-concious enough to make the character a welcome addition.

Ferrell is also, once again, a wonderful star for the center of this crazy circus they call "Anchorman." Ron Burgundy is clearly a character that Ferrell loves to play, and it shows throughout the movie. He has fleshed out the character so completely, and he inhabits him so fully, that it's actually kind of amazing to watch. Ferrell's comedic characters can sometimes cross the line into being obnoxious, but with Burgundy, Ferrell walks that line between hilarious and annoying perfectly.

The other thing that makes "Anchorman 2" great is the way it critiques 24-hour cable news. There is a lot about those channels to mock, and "Anchorman 2" hits them just right. When Ron comes up with the brilliant (and ratings-friendly) idea to give people what they want to watch - funny videos of animals, car chases and good old-fashioned patriotism - it's funny because it's so true-to-life. But it goes deeper than that. The commentary gets biting at times, like when an investigative story gets cut because it messes with the "synergy" of the parent company. I think writers Ferrell and Adam McKay have been paying attention!

But despite some solid satire, "Anchorman 2" is really just another super-silly, ridiculously goofy comedy that exists to make a whole lot of jokes, most of which are funny. "Anchorman 2" does have some low spots, but the hilarious highs more than make up for slow moments. Ferrell and McKay employed the "throw it all at the wall and see what sticks" method of comedy, full of rapid-fire jokes that are sometimes hit-and-miss, but a smattering of hysterical scenes throughout the movie and an enjoyably ridiculous last half-hour featuring no less than a dozen celebrity cameos make it a lot of fun to watch.

"Anchorman 2" is exactly what I'm looking for in an "Anchorman" sequel - a couple of hours of laughing really hard at stupid jokes. The fact that it made a bit of a satirical point about something that actually needs to be mocked now and then - 24-hour cable TV news - is just a little added bonus to an already enjoyable couple of hours.

Jenny's Take: See it before it leaves theaters.
(Rated PG-13 for crude and sexual content, drug use, language and comedic violence. Runs 120 minutes.)

Goodreads Review: "The Bride Wore Size 12" by Meg Cabot

The Bride Wore Size 12 by Meg Cabot
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

I am a huge fan of every Meg Cabot book I've read - and I've read quite a few! - but I have a special place in my heart for Heather Wells.

Heather is a former teen pop star who, after a run of bad luck, ends up with no record deal and no money. Instead of whining and having a meltdown, the industrious Heather gets a job at a college dorm.

In "The Bride Wore Size 12," Heather must, once again, solve a murder mystery at Death Dorm. This time, an RA is found dead, and Heather suspects that it has something to do with a Very Important Resident in the dorm this semester. But she can't devote all of her time to solving another murder, because she's also in the last weeks of planning her wedding to her true love (and pop star ex-boyfriend's brother), private investigator Cooper Cartwright.

"The Bride Wore Size 12," like all of the previous Heather Wells books, is silly and fun to read. If you're looking for a thickly plotted mystery full of twists and turns, this ain't it. While the murder is interesting and the solution is not TOTALLY obvious, it's not super shocking, either. While "The Bride Wore Size 12" does not quite fit the strictest definition of a cozy mystery, it's basically a cozy with a dash of chick-lit sass.

The thing that really makes this series sparkle is the lead character, Heather. She is a smart, resourceful woman making her way in the world after getting screwed over by her recording label, her ex-boyfriend, her mother, her father and her manager. But far from being bitter (well, she's not TOO bitter, anyway), Heather makes the best of her situation by finding a job, starting school and writing songs in her spare time.

Heather feels like a real, realistic, likeable person, and that's one of the things that really makes "The Bride Wore Size 12" a fun book to read. Heather ranks up there with Sookie Stackhouse and Stephanie Plum as my favorite chick-lit characters. (In fact, if I were ever to write fan-fic, it would involve Heather, Sookie and Stephanie getting together to solve a mystery.) She's the kind of character I just want to meet, hug, and hang out with while eating chocolate chip cookies, drinking wine and watching crappy reality TV.

There are fun side characters, too. In addition to Cooper, who is dreamy and wonderful, there are also the workers and students in the dorm, Cooper's hilariously horrible family and several other friends of Heather and Cooper. They round out the book nicely.

I absolutely loved "The Bride Wore Size 12." It's a fluffy, fun little mystery that is a quick, easy and delightful read. While this would be a perfectly acceptable ending to the series - things were wrapped up nicely - I hope that Meg Cabot decides to write some more of these fun, tasty morsels!!!

View all my reviews

Best Movies of 2013

It's hard to put together a list of the best movies of 2013, but I did it, in a recent article I wrote for KPC Media Group. You can check it out here.

One of my New Years Resolutions is to post more on the blog, since I've been slacking for, oh, a few months ... so expect to hear more from me soon!

'American Hustle' sparkly bit of '70s fun - and a great film to boot

This review was originally posted at KPC Media Group's website. You can read the original review here. It was also published in KPC's three daily papers. Reprinted with permission.

Conventional wisdom says that a movie that features nothing but deplorable characters with very few redeeming qualities won't work.

But conventional wisdom flies out the window in the face of a crime film as delightful as "American Hustle." While it does indeed feature some pretty terrible people in the leading roles, everything is just so glittery, funny and so darn likeable that there isn't anything to do except love this film.

The movie, based loosely on the FBI's ABSCAM operation, follows con man Irving Rosenfeld (Christian Bale) and his beautiful partner-in-crime, Sydney Prosser (Amy Adams). The pair is doing well for themselves, embezzling and selling fake art, until they're caught by FBI agent Richie DiMaso (Bradley Cooper). DiMaso is looking to make a name for himself in the FBI, and in exchange for letting them avoid a long stint in jail, he has them help him take down Camden, New Jersey, mayor Carmine Polito (Jeremy Renner), who is trying to raise money to open casinos in Atlantic City. Unfortunately, they almost immediately get in way over their heads, especially when Irving's nutty wife, Rosalyn (Jennifer Lawrence), gets involved.

The people in this movie are all pretty awful people, when you really think about their behavior. Irving and Sydney are conning people left and right, with Sydney especially adept at using her feminine wiles to play Irving and Richie against each other. Irving is, of course, a cheater and a terrible husband to Rosalyn, who is unstable and goofy, but also smart enough to be excessively manipulative. Richie is an incredibly angry, unstable person himself. The nicest person in the movie is Carmine Polito, the guy that our "heroes" are trying desperately to catch bribing government officials.

And yet, they're all so likeable and sympathetic in their own ways. Their motivations, while morally questionable at best, are also incredibly understandable. They are ambitious and desire to climb the ladder of life by any means necessary. Who hasn't had a moment of that ambition? They only really get into trouble when they try to climb too high, too quickly. And as they do get into trouble, it's a blast to watch - the situations are so ridiculous, and they just keep piling up and causing more and more crazy problems.

"American Hustle" is a dynamic, energetic movie that is absolutely irresistable. It's the same talent that was on display in director David O. Russell's Oscar-nominated "Silver Linings Playbook" last year. I didn't find "American Hustle" as cozy or as compelling as "Silver Linings," which is one of my favorite movies I've seen in years, but "Hustle" has the same snappy dialogue, quick editing and dark humor that makes a movie like this so fun to watch.

It helps that the lead actors are perfectly cast. I was thrilled to see such a high-caliber cast in a movie, and they didn't disappoint. There is sleaze all over the screen - Christian Bale and Bradley Cooper made my skin crawl at times, and Amy Adams can turn from icy to sexy on a dime and make it completely believable - but there also is charisma and chemistry everywhere. Especially delightful is Jennifer Lawrence in a rather small but completely memorable role as Rosalyn. She's deliciously daffy in the role, and the screen lights up even brighter every time she's on it. It just reiterates my opinion that Lawrence is one of the most talented people in Hollywood right now.

"American Hustle" is rounded out with the perfect tone of the costumes and sets. The movie has a wonderful sense of time and place, in the overblown, scuzzy late 70s. The outfits, the hair, the decor - it all just screams 1978. That's the cherry on top of this wild sundae. It's already a treat to watch because of the story and characters and acting, and then the movie is just that much better because it's also an eye-searing spectacle.

"American Hustle" is clearly gunning for an Oscar, and it definitely deserves the buzz its receiving. It's an energetic, entertaining, darkly funny, well-told story with an all-star cast that elevates the movie into the stratosphere. It's definitely not a feel-good movie, but it sure does feel good to watch it anyway.

Jenny's Take: See it tonight.
(Rated R for pervasive language, some sexual content and brief violence. Runs 138 minutes.)

Review of "American Hustle" posted at KPC Media Group

It's getting Oscar buzz, and it's well-deserved. "American Hustle" is a sparkly, energetic delight. My review is online at KPC Media Group - you can read it by clicking here - or you can read it in the newspaper on Sunday. I'll post it here on Monday!

'The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug' still bloated, but improves on predecessor

This review was originally written for KPC Media Group and was posted at KPC's website, as well as published in three daily newspapers. You can read the original review here.

As much as I'm enjoying three straight Decembers of new adventures in Middle Earth, thanks to "The Hobbit" trilogy, in this second installment, subtitled "The Desolation of Smaug," it's still clear to me that this trilogy is a case study in the "less is more" school of storytelling.

"The Desolation of Smaug" expands on the already-bloated story started in "An Unexpected Journey" last December. Hobbit Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman), a contigent of dwarves led by Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage) and wizard Gandalf (Ian McKellen) march across the land of Middle Earth with the goal of reclaiming the dwarves' ancestral homeland, Erebor. 

Along the way, they battle giant spiders, orcs and wargs; get captured by the Elf King Thranduil (Lee Pace); sneak into the city of Laketown with the help of a mysterious man named Bard (Luke Evans); and, of course, face off against the dragon, Smaug (voice and motion-capture performance by Benedict Cumberbatch), who destroyed Erebor and took up residence there. They meet up with Thranduil's son, Legolas (Orlando Bloom), and the chief of the guards, Tauriel (Evangeline Lilly). Oh, and at one point, Gandalf runs off to have his own adventure fighting The Necromancer, who threatens to bring darkness across the land.

In short, there is a lot going on, and it contains a lot more material than J.R.R. Tolkein's slim, delightful novel "The Hobbit" has in it. There are fights and action sequences galore, and lots of new and interesting characters to see.

And yet, here's where the "less is more" idea comes in: The best part of the entire movie is almost straight from the book, and it only features two characters. Amid all the kerfluffle of elves and dwarves and humans and wizards and orcs, the most magical part of the entire nearly three-hour movie is when Bilbo walks in to Smaug's treasure room and faces off against the fearsome dragon. It's a nearly perfect scene, taut and exciting, and with Martin Freeman showing off exactly why he was the perfect choice to play Bilbo Baggins. It doesn't hurt that Smaug is wonderfully acted by Benedict Cumberbatch and beautifully animated. It doesn't take much to believe that it's really a dragon up on the screen, instead of a series of pixels.

It's especially interesting to me that almost the same thing can be said about the best scene in the first Hobbit movie, "An Unexpected Journey." That movie only truly shines in the scene between Bilbo and Gollum. "The Hobbit" doesn't really need all of the folderol that was added - all it really needs is Bilbo, his adventure and the growth that comes from his time with the dwarves.

That's not to say that "The Desolation of Smaug" wasn't a pretty great movie, because it was. While "An Unexpected Journey" got pretty far off the rails in parts, I felt like writers Peter Jackson, Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens and Guillermo del Toro regained the movie's narrative footing in a big way. There were still a few awkwardly huge pauses between characters' scenes - a big chunk of time passes between the times we see Legolas and Tauriel near the beginning of the movie and when they show up again near the end - but overall this was a better composed and more consistently entertaining movie. It does suffer a little bit from being in the middle of a trilogy, since it has a pretty abrupt beginning and an even more abrupt ending, but it really is a much cleaner, better movie than "An Unexpected Journey."

And, being a pretty big Tolkein fan, I can't help but love seeing so much more of Middle Earth. There are a lot of fun nods to Tolkein's writings scattered throughout the movie, and even though some of those asides are unnecessary and even distracting from a moviemaking perspective, I get a nerdy little smile on my face when I catch them.

It's not a perfect movie, and both the book and "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy are better, but I had a great time watching "The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug." For fans of fantasy, or just epic blockbusters in general, this latest foray into Middle Earth is a worthwhile trip.

Jenny's Take: See it before it leaves theaters.

(Rated PG-13 for extended sequences of intense fantasy action violence, and frightening images. Runs 161 minutes.)

Review of "The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug" online at KPC Media Group

It's still totally overkill - there's NO WAY "The Hobbit" should be three movies - but "The Desolation of Smaug" is a huge improvement over "An Unexpected Journey."

My full review of the movie is online at KPC Media Group's website now. Read it by clicking here, or wait until Sunday to read it in print in one of KPC's daily newspapers. I'll post the full review on the blog on Monday.

Review: 'Frozen' a warm, fun treat for both children and adults

This movie review was originally written for KPC Media Group and published online and in its daily newspapers. Read the original version here. Reprinted with permission.

Despite the huge amount of snow and ice in Disney's latest animated feature, "Frozen" is as warm and fun an animated musical as I've seen in several years. The movie hearkens back to the old Disney princess movies, which makes it feel extra cozy for fans, but it also has a modern edge, featuring princesses with a little more personality than the old damsels I grew up watching.

"Frozen" follows Anna (voiced by Kristen Bell), the princess of a small kingdom called Arendelle. On the coronation day of her sister, Elsa (Idina Menzel), Anna discovers why Elsa has been cold to her for years - Elsa is magical and can turn things to ice and snow, but she can't control her magic. When the people of Arendelle find out, however, they call Elsa a monster, and Elsa disappears into the mountains, leaving the kingdom in a deep freeze. Anna, however, wants to help her sister, and so she enlists the help of the burly Kristoff (Jonathan Groff) and his reindeer, Sven.

It's a sweet, exciting story, but what really gives "Frozen" some bite are the characters - specifically Elsa and Anna. The sisters are distant and at odds for most of the movie, but it's clear throughout the entire film that they really love each other. It probably helped that I was sitting next to my own sister when I was watching the movie, but I was really touched by the depth of their bond and the way they watched out for each other.
It was also incredibly refreshing to see some royal women who could stand on their own two feet. Elsa is an incredibly strong, magical woman, and although she functions somewhat as the villain for a lot of the movie, she's a much more nuanced character than the old Disney villains. As much as I adore old-school bad girls like Maleficent from "Sleeping Beauty" or Ursula the Sea Witch from "The Little Mermaid," it's refreshing to see a powerful woman who isn't irredeemably corrupted by power. She's confused and terrified, and she does some bad things, but it isn't because of jealousy or because she's just plain old evil, like the villains of old.

Anna is also an interesting and strong character. Yes, she's silly sometimes, and, yes, she does need the help of Kristoff sometimes, but she's also brave, smart and cares deeply for her sister. There's even a some sly commentary on the Disney princess tendancy to fall in love immediately with a cute guy she barely knows. A friend of mine was just complaining about that tendency a few weeks ago, so I was pleased to note that it's not treated as the norm in this movie.

There are plenty of other characters to love, too. Kristoff is quirky and adorable, and his friendship with his goofy reindeer provides a lot of the comic relief in the movie. Also on the silly end of the spectrum is a snowman named Olaf (Josh Gad) who Elsa has brought to life. The posters and some of the commercials for "Frozen" made me nervous that Olaf would be too obnoxiously silly, but he actually hit the perfect balance between the wackiness that children will enjoy and being a real enough character so that he doesn't annoy the adults in the audience.

"Frozen" is also a very beautiful movie. The characters' designs are fairly reminiscent of those in "Tangled," but the scenery is stunning. Arendelle was clearly influenced by Scandinavian countries, specifically Norway, and the buildings are all decorated beautiful, colorful rosemaling designs. The warmth of those buildings stands in contrast to the stunning ice castle that Elsa creates for herself. The winter scenes are the most beautiful in the movie, and they're so realistic that I shivered several times while watching the movie. You can almost feel the icy cold coming off the screen.

"Frozen" is never going to be a timeless classic like "The Lion King" or "Beauty and the Beast," but it's solidly in the second tier of Disney movies - a little less stunning and a little more silly than the best the studio has to offer, but ultimately still a pretty darn great movie. "Frozen" is a warm little treat that children and adults alike will enjoy.

Jenny's Take: See it tonight.

(Rated PG for some action and mild rude humor. Runs 108 minutes.)

Review of "Frozen" posted at KPC Media Group website

Hope everyone had a super Thanksgiving and Black Friday! I have so far ... not only because I got to eat delicious food and bought a couple of great deals, but also because I got to see "Frozen." It's not a top tier Disney classic like "The Lion King," but it's a solidly entertaining second-tier Disney film which, let's face it, is way better than a lot of movies geared toward the kiddies. I really enjoyed it! Plus, it had some pretty decent female character who weren't completely stupid or evil! Success!!!!!

Anyway, read my entire review online RIGHT NOW at KPC Media Group's website by clicking here, or read it in Sunday's KPC Media Group newspapers. Monday, I'll post the whole thing on the blog!