The best critic for the book
352372
The best critic for the book: my 3 year old grand daughter declared that this was her favorite book!
Her room is stacked with many of them but she loved the illustrations in the book and the magical story!
This book made the bedtime process easy... Bath, Dewey, Milk and zzzzz
524155
Take a close look at the reviews for this book, and the reviewers who write them.
4010061
A landmark in Vaughan Williams criticism.  The book handles questions both of intellectual milieu (Frogley's essay on English musical identity relates it to a wider movement) and of Vaughan Williams's musical art.  The essay  on VW's use of rhythm is outstanding, thoroughly refuting the picture of  him as some musical bumpkin, but essays of this type require some  familiarity with the nuts and bolts of music as well as the ability to read  it.  The book well rewards the effort it requires.  This has become a  favorite book, one that I reread.
796775
This book is one of my favorite books of all time. I bought it at a harvard bookstore, and as soon as i was done, i pawned it off to all my friends it was so good.

Also, 1 star review people, go and post a proper review. After, go get your head checked.
4380778
Loved the book. You can see my full review here:

[...]
3548153
I've listened to Robbins version of this fabulous book twice, and i'm relistening to parts of it again. I think he does a great job of emphasizing the key points. His Tom Buchanan is exceptional. And since Tom Buchanan is a key figure in the book, for him to ace this character really helps this reading shine. Robbins also does a good job bringing to life Fitzgerald's exceptional dialogue skills. To write good dialogue is hard. I'm amazed how modern Fitzgerald's characters sound, how they talk to one another like people i know and talk with each other. I'm not seeing much difference between the wealthy of 1920 and those of 2000.
There are two scenes that show how well Robbin's gets this book. In the key confrontation scene between Tom and Gatsby at the hotel, Gatsby says he wants to tell Tom something. Robbin's voice conveys Tom's welcoming this challenge, even enjoying it.
Compare that to Redford's movie version, where Bruce Dern says it, then pleads with Daisy to take him (Tom) back.  In the book, Tom doesn't plead to Daisy. Robbin's portrayal is more effective than the movie.
A second scene happens on the drive drive to the hotel. Tom, Nick & Jordan are driving, and Tom says "I've been looking into this Gatsby fella." And Jordan jokes "What, you hired a medium?" And tom says "What? What? A medium?! No. Like i said, i hired an investigator."  Robbins portrays how an irritated alpha-male would sound at such a flighty, feminine joke. (You've got to hear it, but it cements Tom's character as a strong alpha-male.)
Robbin's has a lot of moments where he makes the dialogue effective.
I gave 4 stars because a few times, he mixes up the voices, which makes it confusing about who just spike. Also, the female voices are so similar, so he doesn't delve into the character differences between Daisy and Jordan. But all in all, recommended.
297227
You have to love a well known award-winning critic, who is willing to praise Aaron Spelling and pan M*A*S*H.  Of course he also takes the time to take down such icons as the Smother's Brothers, who in my opinion have been foisted upon the American public as the be all and end all of high brow political commentary (try sitting thru tapes of some of those old shows.) I was especially floored by the chapter about Vengeance Unlimited -- an obscure show starring Michael Madsen -- which Tucker very accurately calls one of the most underrated shows of the '90s. Anyone who is that on point with his comments is worth listening to.  I certainly didn't agree with everything in the book -- but my Spider-sense is that was the point.  This book is interesting and well written and Tucker is not afraid to go out on a limb and tick people off.  There's alot to both love and hate about that kind of approach.  Whether you love or hate TV you will love this book.
3297159
After falling in love with "The Book of Mormon" soundtrack I wanted to know more about the story and since I can't exactly afford a trip to NYC to see the show (not that i could get a ticket) the book was the next best thing.

The book in includes a forward by Mark Harris, authors notes from each of the three authors, production history, a list of scenes and song titles and, finally, the complete script with song lyrics. The pages are nice and glossy with colorful accents and small photos from production throughout the script.

The script itself is brilliant. I think the review from Hollywood Reporter by David Rooney says it best:

"The show manages to have a comic field day with Mormonism while simultaneously acknowledging - maybe even respecting - the right of everyone to follow any faith they choose. Or invent."

I can't recommend this enough, if you like the soundtrack, or are curious to see what all the fuss is about and can't see the show itself this book is the perfect way to experience and enjoy "The Book of Mormon".
3801340
First of all, in order to properly consider the merits of this book, and not be surprised at the tenor of the writing or style of the criticism, it's worthwhile to check out the editorial reviews for this volume (accessible on the menu to the left), which provide an excerpt from the guide and offer some hint of whether or not you'll like the Rough Guides approach. The passionate denunciations of this book from the other customer reviews are interesting, but not particularly well-founded. By its own admission, this guide is somewhat Anglocentric, coming from a British publisher and aimed at CDs available in England - which shouldn't deter you in the slightest, since many are available in the U.S. as well, or can be easily ordered through Amazon's partner UK site. As for the complaints about the tone of the criticism, this is a wholly subjective judgment that every reader must consider. All too often with highly opinionated criticism, though, many readers take offense and launch into fiery diatribes against the author, accusing him of various literary sins, real and imagined. In this case, it's important to understand that although you will not agree with everything this author applauds or condemns, you will likely find his writing style fluid and compelling - unless of course you go for the "Classical Music for Complete and Utter Imbeciles" type of guidebook-writing. The greatest attributes this book offers are its wide breadth, covering a slew of historically obscure and unfairly ignored modern composers (typically dismissed by the likes of Jim Svejda and his fire-breathing, conservative ilk), and its pointed analysis of contemporary trends and developments in the classical world. If it's a large number of reviews per opus you're after, by all means go for the invaluable Gramophone or Penguin guides, but if you value well-written, thoughtful criticism that doesn't provide easy answers or rely on knee-jerk canonical worship, this guide is a must, both for novices and aficionados of music from plainchant to postmodernism.
128129
This book is even better than Buscombe's book on "Stagecoach."  It is clear this movie has a stronger emotional hold on him than the earlier film.  Buscombe does a very thorough job, comparing where the film deviates from the novel and the script.
He does something I have seen no other writer on "The Searchers" do, and that is to discuss the film's music, which is based on the 19th Century song "Lorena," which has a theme about separated lovers that reflects the Ethan-Martha relationship.
The book concludes with the changing critical reception of "The Searchers."  Frankly, I think this is a fine, and fair assessment of the movie, one free from a lot of cant and academic jargon.  I wish Buscombe would write a major book about the Western genre.
888555
This is a great book.  Do an internet search on the three-star reviewer and you will learn something about the value of his review.
4857113
I read book reviews regularly. Often times I find the book review better than the book, especially when discussing art, and walk away frustrated. Art is not always meant to be analyzed but felt individually. This book is a wonderful exception to the rule. It does not spend an inordinate amount of time discussing the art by itself but focuses on the artists, relationships, the influences and how greatness comes from being pushed. At times the focus seems limited but this is a wonderful read that helps explain different modernist art and art works that is accessible. Highly recommended.
3949357
Great edition of a classic along with excellent reviews and editorial insights.
3116214
Edward Wagenknecht is, to my mind, the preeminent critic of silent film; his "Movies in the Age of Innocence" is my all-time favorite book on the silent era. This book is a collection of some chapters from "Movies in the Age of Innocence," published when that book was out of print, as well as a new  (I believe) essay on Clarine Seymour. I'd strongly recommend "Movies in the Age of Innocence" if you have the opportunity to read it; if not, this book is a fine stopgap measure.
3595240
This is an incredible compilation of writings by various authors and with comments by the editor throughout. The question is: which Bible is the best translation and which Greek and Hebrew witnesses are the best. Fuller cites Robert Dick Wilson, Zane Hodges, Terence Brown, Henry Coray, Edward Hills, George Sayles Bishop, Sir Robert Anderson, Herman Hoskier, Alfred Martin, and Benjamin C. Wilkinson. Every honest seeker of truth should read this book. It is the best of the best in proving the Textus Receptus as being the best Greek text and in proving the King James Bible as being the best English translation from that text. Don't let the naysayers persuade you that this book isn't worth reading. Read it for yourself and let the Holy Spirit guide you. Fuller admits that he doesn't agree with every point upon which his authors write and neither does he necessarily agree with their interpretations in other areas of theology which are not discussed in this book (such as eschatology). The book is well footnoted with relevant footnotes (unlike Metzger and Erhman's book which is extensively footnoted with irrelevant footnotes - they never back up their most controversial claims, but only footnote things are are generally accepted or they twist the original author's intent through a footnote knowing that few people actually check footnotes). I also recommend Floyd Nolen Jones' book Which Version is the Bible?, Forever Settled by Jack Moorman, and The Causes of Corruption of the New Testament Texas by John W. Burgon. Those who discard this as a cult-like King James only argument are sadly misled.
2580570
Anyone who has claimed to have read the book and proceeds to summarize that it presents a case that lacks evidence will have to get rid of the rest of human history. It is so thorough that most won't last past the first 50 pages out of shear boredom. If you love history, as I do, you will love this book!

Bottom line is that the critics always have motives, ironically something Licona addresses quite thoroughly, just ignore them their comments are useless in your decision of whether or not you want to read this book.

If you love history (I mean really love history), you'll find this book indispensable and will be a part of your permanent library. If you're looking for a book that just praises the Bible and spares you the technical details of how historians determine whether or not things actually happened in history, you won't last 50 pages. For the right person this book is the best I've read so based upon this I give it 5 stars.

As you can I am verified by Amazon as a person who purchased this book. Check that with the naysayers, it should help you dismiss the trash and make a good decision to purchase it or not.
4078607
Readers might be inclined to think this book is a put-on, but Adam Nayman's apparent sincerity, obvious writing talent and impressive analytical dexterity is convincing. Convincing that he means it, if not necessarily right. Nayman is a 20-something film critic, and his well-researched treatise on Paul Verhoeven's legendary 1995 box office bomb is a thoroughly entertaining read, if not necessarily a completely convincing defense. Nayman is among a group of critics that have turned the table on the film's initial reception, suggesting that Showgirls isn't just not bad, it's a modern classic that was sorely misunderstood by both reviewers and viewers.

The key to appreciating Showgirls is, paraphrasing author Anne Rice, to interrogate the text from the right perspective. Nayman's approach isn't tongue-in-cheek irony, simple-minded contrarianism, or the mental slight of hand of Jason Hartley's&nbsp;<a data-hook="product-link-linked" class="a-link-normal" href="/Advanced-Genius-Theory/dp/B004H8GMJ4/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_txt?ie=UTF8">Advanced Genius Theory</a>; his appreciation is unabashed fandom.  Nayman argues that the careers of director Verhoeven and writer Joe Eszterhas anticipate their work in Showgirls, and that analysis of the film itself reveals that the filmmakers knew exactly what they were doing. Verhoeven is posed as a satirist and provocateur, the film's lack of subtlety as an artistic choice, and the laughter it generates for over-serious scenes as an opportunity rather than an accident.

If one accepts the film's most ridiculous moments as intentional, rather than unconscious mistakes, a number of critical analyses begin to flow. First and foremost for Nayman are the film's mirror-like, self-reflexive qualities. Starting with the film's star, Elizabeth Berkley, Nayman suggests that Showgirls provided an opportunity for her reinvention as a grown-up actress that parallels the film's main character, Nomi Malone. But as Nayman continues to ascribe intention to what might easily be a lack of care or perspective, one starts to wonder if Occam's razor is a more straightforward explanation of the parallels. Berkley and Malone both aimed for grown-up, but ended up in entertainment that was merely adult.

It's possible that Nayman is seeing depth where there are really only artistic shallows, and he's seeing causation where there is really only coincidence. Nomi's relationship with her roommate might be subtle and complex, but it might simply be poorly thought out and rendered. The homophones for Nomi - "Know Me?" and "No Me" - could be clever entendre, or they could be nothing more than on-the-nose, inch-deep word-play. He argues that the film is too self-conscious to be camp, but it's difficult to overcome the feeling that no matter how many of the film's worst moments you explain away, the film still manages to be worse.

Nayman brings welcome context for casual viewers, including the existence of the little-known companion book&nbsp;<a data-hook="product-link-linked" class="a-link-normal" href="/Showgirls-Portrait-of-a-Film/dp/1557042675/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_txt?ie=UTF8">Showgirls: Portrait of a Film</a>&nbsp;and Rena Riffel's low-budget spoof sequel,&nbsp;<a data-hook="product-link-linked" class="a-link-normal" href="/Showgirls-2-Penny-s-From-Heaven/dp/B00D6I7K4C/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_txt?ie=UTF8">Showgirls 2: Penny's From Heaven</a>. Though he occasionally employs the sort of hyperbole for which the film was originally ridiculed, the bulk of his analysis is well-reasoned, deftly written and hugely entertaining. Nayman may be an analytical genius, or simply a talented writer tackling a lost cause; but either way, his book is a fun and surprisingly thought-provoking read. [2014 Hyperbolium]