Search
Search results
Becs (244 KP) rated Garden of Ashes in Books
Apr 11, 2019
Overall - an amazing story (1 more)
Background was added
There were a few plot holes (1 more)
Something was lacking but I'm not sure what
Thrilling!
You can also find this review on my blog: bookingwayreads.wordpress.com
I received a copy of Garden of Ashes (book 2 of the Snow Spark series) to read and review for my honest opinion from The Parliament Press.
TRIGGER WARNINGS: Gore, Oppression, Violence, Discrimination
This little novel carried a good left hook. It picks up right where The Bone Roses left off and really delves into the background of a few characters. The story still is geared toward a mature audience, especially with Garden of Ashes so beware of more graphic scenes when reading.
Starting where we left off, Rags has been caught and is now on a train with Colton and Nigel to the Kingdom. More specifically, the Threshing Floor. This is not any place for a rustler, or really anybody for that matter. Just think cattle herding but with humans and loads of death. That's what you get when dealing with the Threshing Floor. The major problem with the non-bowing criminals who go in, they never come out and are never seen again.
Rags is given only two options - either bow to the Kingdom and Hyperion or face death. Using everything she has to survive, she is forced to play the twisted rigged game that the Kingdom has laid out. Luckily, she has the help of Henny and Colton, who both stand by her side helping shape her into the Kingdom's standards and also giving her opportunities to remain a rustler at heart.
The overall story had me reeled, but I also felt like something was lacking a tad bit. I have no idea what that bit that is missing is but you could just tell that the story was lacking in places. There was plot, as it continued on from book 1, and new characters were introduced with a small bit of background on them that eventually came to light later on down the road. Drama upon drama was interlaced into the story-line and really kept the reader engaged with the story as a whole.
Characters:
Rags - stubborn and yet sympathetic, able to get in and out of trouble, and very realistic.
Henny - the smol angry cinnamonroll we all thought was going to be the person to cause Rags' death has turned to be an ally. Maybe even a possible love interest to Rags?
Colton - still a sarcastic green-eyed red head as he was in book 1. He was there to help Rags stay out of trouble and seemed to become more friends with Rags then a possible love interest.
Hyperion - the complete a** of a king that wants everyone to worship him.
Sahrobi - Hyperion's sadistic murder loving daughter that honestly needs to be in a psych ward cause she got some problems!
Margo - Sahrobi's husband, as cruel and sadistic as Sahrobi also got some problems. Thank goodness he got his a** handed to him in the end.
Ethan and Ali - two slaves that Rags helps saves and cares for while in the Threshing Floor.
Rosemary - a slave that is in debt to the Kingdom, possible relation to Rags?
Reasons why I rated it 4 stars:
1. It was lacking something and I can't put my finger on it.
2. Grammar and spelling seemed to be great!
3. There were a few plot holes while reading, but that could be because I feel asleep during reading and lost where I was at.
4. There was background added to some of the characters, but there wasn't as much that really needed to be added.
5. The overall story was amazing and really added to the story that took place in The Bone Roses. I will defiantly be rereading!
"False hope is worse than no hope on a good day."
I received a copy of Garden of Ashes (book 2 of the Snow Spark series) to read and review for my honest opinion from The Parliament Press.
TRIGGER WARNINGS: Gore, Oppression, Violence, Discrimination
This little novel carried a good left hook. It picks up right where The Bone Roses left off and really delves into the background of a few characters. The story still is geared toward a mature audience, especially with Garden of Ashes so beware of more graphic scenes when reading.
Starting where we left off, Rags has been caught and is now on a train with Colton and Nigel to the Kingdom. More specifically, the Threshing Floor. This is not any place for a rustler, or really anybody for that matter. Just think cattle herding but with humans and loads of death. That's what you get when dealing with the Threshing Floor. The major problem with the non-bowing criminals who go in, they never come out and are never seen again.
Rags is given only two options - either bow to the Kingdom and Hyperion or face death. Using everything she has to survive, she is forced to play the twisted rigged game that the Kingdom has laid out. Luckily, she has the help of Henny and Colton, who both stand by her side helping shape her into the Kingdom's standards and also giving her opportunities to remain a rustler at heart.
The overall story had me reeled, but I also felt like something was lacking a tad bit. I have no idea what that bit that is missing is but you could just tell that the story was lacking in places. There was plot, as it continued on from book 1, and new characters were introduced with a small bit of background on them that eventually came to light later on down the road. Drama upon drama was interlaced into the story-line and really kept the reader engaged with the story as a whole.
Characters:
Rags - stubborn and yet sympathetic, able to get in and out of trouble, and very realistic.
Henny - the smol angry cinnamonroll we all thought was going to be the person to cause Rags' death has turned to be an ally. Maybe even a possible love interest to Rags?
Colton - still a sarcastic green-eyed red head as he was in book 1. He was there to help Rags stay out of trouble and seemed to become more friends with Rags then a possible love interest.
Hyperion - the complete a** of a king that wants everyone to worship him.
Sahrobi - Hyperion's sadistic murder loving daughter that honestly needs to be in a psych ward cause she got some problems!
Margo - Sahrobi's husband, as cruel and sadistic as Sahrobi also got some problems. Thank goodness he got his a** handed to him in the end.
Ethan and Ali - two slaves that Rags helps saves and cares for while in the Threshing Floor.
Rosemary - a slave that is in debt to the Kingdom, possible relation to Rags?
Reasons why I rated it 4 stars:
1. It was lacking something and I can't put my finger on it.
2. Grammar and spelling seemed to be great!
3. There were a few plot holes while reading, but that could be because I feel asleep during reading and lost where I was at.
4. There was background added to some of the characters, but there wasn't as much that really needed to be added.
5. The overall story was amazing and really added to the story that took place in The Bone Roses. I will defiantly be rereading!
"False hope is worse than no hope on a good day."
Sign Off, a murder mystery by Patricia McLinn, is a marvelous book about a woman named Elizabeth who works for a news station when a little girl asks her to look into a murder case that has been unsolved. At first Elizabeth wasn’t sure if she could solve it, but as she looks at the news from the case, she finds herself curious about all parties involved and begins asking questions. Along the way, she start to find herself after having had a rough past that left her in a small town, as well as finding someone who might be interested in her. With her small team of colleagues, they all work to try to solve the case and find out what really happened.
At first, I was worried the book would leave out details about the main character that could help fill in her background, but upon reading further I was pleasantly surprised with hoe they would tie in the information that was left out in the beginning, using the case to help introduce the said information. I enjoy the suspense and the way the book was written so that you were trying to solve the murder mystery alongside Elizabeth and Mike. The details McLinn used to describe different scenes and things in the book was chilling to think about. Even though it would be accurate in the way she was suing them, it still makes me shiver at the thought of such descriptions used.
I enjoyed the different characters and their personalities which made you want to suspect someone over another person and even take notes mentally in hopes to figure it out before the murderer was revealed. Though, your thoughts may be wrong. I also enjoyed the underlying tone of romance in the brewing. It made it so that it was realistic and made it able to give reasons for Mike to want to spend time with Elizabeth other than helping solve the case. I would have loved to see that develop more, but was pleasantly surprised with everything that was said about such a development between the characters and seeing them be mature about it.
Though they were mature about most things, it was clear not everything earned such merit. While the characters seemed to be able to handle themselves, you couldn’t help but wonder why in some instances where they so brave and in others seemed slightly cowardly or lost for words. There were also a few things that had confused me on the approach the characters took to certain problems but wasn’t like confused in the way that left you unhappy, but more like “why would they do that instead of this”? While I believe even though the characters made some slight error in my own opinion of what should be done, I found that these small errors made the story feel more well-rounded, unlike some story-lines that can make their characters seem like a god in their area of expertise. I quite enjoyed the reality feel for this murder mystery.
Sign Off was a real page turned that kept me wanting more, and even though it is book one of the Caught Dead in Wyoming series, I will have to say I was pleasantly surprised that it could easily stand alone. I will be looking forward to the rest of the series, as there are currently seven books in total. Patricia McLinn has given us a fabulous product that can satisfy just about any need you may have. It you want action, mystery, suspense, and a tad bit of romance mixed in with some comedy, this is a book for you. I would rate this book 4 star out of 4 stars. It was just a truly amazing tale that kept me wanting more.
At first, I was worried the book would leave out details about the main character that could help fill in her background, but upon reading further I was pleasantly surprised with hoe they would tie in the information that was left out in the beginning, using the case to help introduce the said information. I enjoy the suspense and the way the book was written so that you were trying to solve the murder mystery alongside Elizabeth and Mike. The details McLinn used to describe different scenes and things in the book was chilling to think about. Even though it would be accurate in the way she was suing them, it still makes me shiver at the thought of such descriptions used.
I enjoyed the different characters and their personalities which made you want to suspect someone over another person and even take notes mentally in hopes to figure it out before the murderer was revealed. Though, your thoughts may be wrong. I also enjoyed the underlying tone of romance in the brewing. It made it so that it was realistic and made it able to give reasons for Mike to want to spend time with Elizabeth other than helping solve the case. I would have loved to see that develop more, but was pleasantly surprised with everything that was said about such a development between the characters and seeing them be mature about it.
Though they were mature about most things, it was clear not everything earned such merit. While the characters seemed to be able to handle themselves, you couldn’t help but wonder why in some instances where they so brave and in others seemed slightly cowardly or lost for words. There were also a few things that had confused me on the approach the characters took to certain problems but wasn’t like confused in the way that left you unhappy, but more like “why would they do that instead of this”? While I believe even though the characters made some slight error in my own opinion of what should be done, I found that these small errors made the story feel more well-rounded, unlike some story-lines that can make their characters seem like a god in their area of expertise. I quite enjoyed the reality feel for this murder mystery.
Sign Off was a real page turned that kept me wanting more, and even though it is book one of the Caught Dead in Wyoming series, I will have to say I was pleasantly surprised that it could easily stand alone. I will be looking forward to the rest of the series, as there are currently seven books in total. Patricia McLinn has given us a fabulous product that can satisfy just about any need you may have. It you want action, mystery, suspense, and a tad bit of romance mixed in with some comedy, this is a book for you. I would rate this book 4 star out of 4 stars. It was just a truly amazing tale that kept me wanting more.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated 3 Idiots (2009) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020
So, I am writing a coffee table book that selects the 200 top films of 2000 – 2019. Called, predictably, 21st Century Cinema: 200 Unmissable films. It uses a system of rating I devised called The Decinemal, which takes the ten categories by which a film can be rated (Direction, Script, Design, Lead Acting, Support Acting, Music, Photography, Critical Acclaim, Watchability and X-Factor) and scores them out of 10, to give an overall score out of 100. Whilst not foolproof, it does give a remarkable working basis for comparing movies of different genres, and the ratings often bear a striking relation to the democratic system used by IMDb – a film scoring 7.2 on that website might be a 75 decinemal, for example, and that feels like that validates its use.
It has been a very fun, if time consuming, project. The difficulty is keeping up with new releases every year, and trying to catch some of the more obscure foreign language films out there that get high scores on IMDb. One such film was 3 Idiots, to date the highest rated Bollywood film on that website, with a score of 8.5; which is high! Very high! So I have to watch it and find out for myself.
Now, Bollywood is not me for, barring the odd amusement of how bizarre they can be. I find the musical interludes often grating and incongruous, and the melodramatic acting styles something that the cinema of most other countries outgrew decades ago. So it is hard for me to be objective about it. On the whole they just don’t compete on any level with American, European or, well, any other country’s output. In short, I would never normally watch one at all.
Surprisingly, I found 3 Idiots, although clownish and OTT, quite entertaining from the start. I even found one or two of the obligatory musical numbers very catchy and a lot of fun! Also, lead actor Aamir Khan, one of India’s biggest stars, was very charming and watchable. Of course, it is colourful, loud and has a childish sensibility, but some moments made me genuinely laugh. The main problem actually came from it being padded out to almost 2 and 1/2 hours, which was far too long for comfort. If it had been more economical I may have even been able to say it was worth watching.
Sadly, it is the moments of cultural difference and pure silliness that dragged it down. Despite its positive points, ultimately it is a mess, and to compare it on the standard I judge all films I see I have to be fair and not patronise it. Certainly in terms of the Bollywood fare I have seen bits of over the years, I can see why it is so well thought of. I can also see how films like this gain such a high rating, because it is the native audience it was made for that cast the votes. Which is fair enough, but does give it an unreasonably high score.
I think if more people watched it and rated it, it would balance out at a 6.5, and it probably deserves that for sheer entertainment value. I have certainly seen many worse films! Applying The Decinemal objectively, however, it comes out like this: Direction 4, Script 5, Design 6, Lead Acting 6, Support acting 4, Music 5, Photography 6, Critical Acclaim 7, Wachability 5, x-Factor 6. Added up that gives it a Decinemal of 54 – a far cry from the 74 it would have needed to make my top 200. And I stand by that score, as the level of likelihood of everyone’s enjoyment of it.
To an extent it discourages me from watching anything from this part of the world again, but I can’t say I didn’t appreciate why it was such a big hit. Interesting.
It has been a very fun, if time consuming, project. The difficulty is keeping up with new releases every year, and trying to catch some of the more obscure foreign language films out there that get high scores on IMDb. One such film was 3 Idiots, to date the highest rated Bollywood film on that website, with a score of 8.5; which is high! Very high! So I have to watch it and find out for myself.
Now, Bollywood is not me for, barring the odd amusement of how bizarre they can be. I find the musical interludes often grating and incongruous, and the melodramatic acting styles something that the cinema of most other countries outgrew decades ago. So it is hard for me to be objective about it. On the whole they just don’t compete on any level with American, European or, well, any other country’s output. In short, I would never normally watch one at all.
Surprisingly, I found 3 Idiots, although clownish and OTT, quite entertaining from the start. I even found one or two of the obligatory musical numbers very catchy and a lot of fun! Also, lead actor Aamir Khan, one of India’s biggest stars, was very charming and watchable. Of course, it is colourful, loud and has a childish sensibility, but some moments made me genuinely laugh. The main problem actually came from it being padded out to almost 2 and 1/2 hours, which was far too long for comfort. If it had been more economical I may have even been able to say it was worth watching.
Sadly, it is the moments of cultural difference and pure silliness that dragged it down. Despite its positive points, ultimately it is a mess, and to compare it on the standard I judge all films I see I have to be fair and not patronise it. Certainly in terms of the Bollywood fare I have seen bits of over the years, I can see why it is so well thought of. I can also see how films like this gain such a high rating, because it is the native audience it was made for that cast the votes. Which is fair enough, but does give it an unreasonably high score.
I think if more people watched it and rated it, it would balance out at a 6.5, and it probably deserves that for sheer entertainment value. I have certainly seen many worse films! Applying The Decinemal objectively, however, it comes out like this: Direction 4, Script 5, Design 6, Lead Acting 6, Support acting 4, Music 5, Photography 6, Critical Acclaim 7, Wachability 5, x-Factor 6. Added up that gives it a Decinemal of 54 – a far cry from the 74 it would have needed to make my top 200. And I stand by that score, as the level of likelihood of everyone’s enjoyment of it.
To an extent it discourages me from watching anything from this part of the world again, but I can’t say I didn’t appreciate why it was such a big hit. Interesting.
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated Let's Go Play At The Adams' in Books
Mar 15, 2018
<b><i>Warning, this review is kind-of spoilery.</i></b>
Im not even sure where to start with this review what a disturbing, strange, and violent novel.
I had so many different thoughts running through my head with this novel, that I actually had to start myself a little review notebook where I could put all my thoughts on paper. This is going to be a long review I can already feel it.
I should start by saying, this book turned out to be nothing like I thought it would be, but that hasnt let me down. This is a very uncomfortable 4 star read. Where American Psycho was 5 stars because I enjoyed the reading experience and Patrick Batemans deranged, dorky character (in the least sadistic way possible), this is the complete opposite. This was an unenjoyable 4 stars because it was just so dark and disturbing am I making sense?
What struck me about this novel at the beginning was that I disliked our victim, Barbara. She awoke gagged and tied up, and was merely annoyed, if not amused by the childrens game. Even later, when she realised that she really was a prisoner, she was snooty and still thought herself better than the children. Obviously, as the torture progressed and got worse, my opinion of her did change, as she changed too.
While this book sounds like its going to be a quick, dark story about the kidnapping and torture of a babysitter, its actually a lot slower than that and there isnt a huge amount of the torture in front of our eyes. It goes on behind closed doors and is only hinted towards this doesnt make it any less skin crawling, however! This novel is largely focused on the characters and their thoughts throughout the week-long crime.
A lot of peoples reviews mentioned how the characters in this werent believable, but I think otherwise. Yes, maybe the idea that 5 kids all come together and mutually agree to kidnap and torture an adult is a little strange, but as individual people, I think its easy to assume they all really exist.
The eldest of the group is Dianne, at the age of 17, and I personally think she was the least likable but also least believe character. Her involvement in the kidnapping went no further than just because she was in charge of all the children simply because she was the oldest and she let them do whatever they wanted. She had no motive to want to hurt Barbara, she was simply cruel for crueltys sake.
Secondly, theres John, aged 16, and his involvement in the kidnapping went a lot further and was a lot more controversial. He had a motive, and that was simply lust. A sexually frustrated teenager is definitely easy to imagine and while only a teeny tiny amount go on to commit sex crimes, its totally plausible.
Afterwards comes Paul, aged 12, whose presence in the story is very strange. Hes not really got any motive other than his own dark desires. A weirdo 12 year old with violent tendencies is really nothing new Paul was just a little more over the top!
Next is Bobby, aged 10, the only kid of the bunch who shows any remorse at what theyve done. I personally feel that Bobby was the subject of peer-pressure. He thought kidnapping an adult would be fun, and as a young child, couldnt comprehend the consequences of his actions. Other reviewers didnt feel sorry for Bobby, but in a way, I did.
Lastly is Cindy, the youngest of the group at 9 years old. Cindy doesnt feature in the novel an awful lot, but when she does shes simply a bored young girl who doesnt fully understand the reality of whats happening. Even at the end, when things are getting more and more violent, Cindy doesnt care. Shes just going along with the rest of her friends.
As I mentioned before, there isnt a huge amount of on screen torture and violence, but when it is there, its grotesque and nightmarish. Johnson really did know how to write horrifying descriptions. Reading bits and pieces got really dark and at times I felt pretty squeamish.
One quick thing to say about the writing is that it really would have been nice to have more paragraph breaks! When the story is so dark and heavy, you need a bit of a breather sometimes, and you didnt get much of that with this novel.
Right, sorry this review has been a bit of a long, messy ramble! I really wasnt sure how to go about reviewing this weird, sinister book. If you like horrible books that are going to make you feel uncomfortable, and you can get your hands on this for cheap, I think its worth reading even just to be able to say youve read it! But its definitely, definitely not for everyone not even every horror reader.
<i>Thanks to Virginia on Goodreads for lending me her copy to read!</i>
Im not even sure where to start with this review what a disturbing, strange, and violent novel.
I had so many different thoughts running through my head with this novel, that I actually had to start myself a little review notebook where I could put all my thoughts on paper. This is going to be a long review I can already feel it.
I should start by saying, this book turned out to be nothing like I thought it would be, but that hasnt let me down. This is a very uncomfortable 4 star read. Where American Psycho was 5 stars because I enjoyed the reading experience and Patrick Batemans deranged, dorky character (in the least sadistic way possible), this is the complete opposite. This was an unenjoyable 4 stars because it was just so dark and disturbing am I making sense?
What struck me about this novel at the beginning was that I disliked our victim, Barbara. She awoke gagged and tied up, and was merely annoyed, if not amused by the childrens game. Even later, when she realised that she really was a prisoner, she was snooty and still thought herself better than the children. Obviously, as the torture progressed and got worse, my opinion of her did change, as she changed too.
While this book sounds like its going to be a quick, dark story about the kidnapping and torture of a babysitter, its actually a lot slower than that and there isnt a huge amount of the torture in front of our eyes. It goes on behind closed doors and is only hinted towards this doesnt make it any less skin crawling, however! This novel is largely focused on the characters and their thoughts throughout the week-long crime.
A lot of peoples reviews mentioned how the characters in this werent believable, but I think otherwise. Yes, maybe the idea that 5 kids all come together and mutually agree to kidnap and torture an adult is a little strange, but as individual people, I think its easy to assume they all really exist.
The eldest of the group is Dianne, at the age of 17, and I personally think she was the least likable but also least believe character. Her involvement in the kidnapping went no further than just because she was in charge of all the children simply because she was the oldest and she let them do whatever they wanted. She had no motive to want to hurt Barbara, she was simply cruel for crueltys sake.
Secondly, theres John, aged 16, and his involvement in the kidnapping went a lot further and was a lot more controversial. He had a motive, and that was simply lust. A sexually frustrated teenager is definitely easy to imagine and while only a teeny tiny amount go on to commit sex crimes, its totally plausible.
Afterwards comes Paul, aged 12, whose presence in the story is very strange. Hes not really got any motive other than his own dark desires. A weirdo 12 year old with violent tendencies is really nothing new Paul was just a little more over the top!
Next is Bobby, aged 10, the only kid of the bunch who shows any remorse at what theyve done. I personally feel that Bobby was the subject of peer-pressure. He thought kidnapping an adult would be fun, and as a young child, couldnt comprehend the consequences of his actions. Other reviewers didnt feel sorry for Bobby, but in a way, I did.
Lastly is Cindy, the youngest of the group at 9 years old. Cindy doesnt feature in the novel an awful lot, but when she does shes simply a bored young girl who doesnt fully understand the reality of whats happening. Even at the end, when things are getting more and more violent, Cindy doesnt care. Shes just going along with the rest of her friends.
As I mentioned before, there isnt a huge amount of on screen torture and violence, but when it is there, its grotesque and nightmarish. Johnson really did know how to write horrifying descriptions. Reading bits and pieces got really dark and at times I felt pretty squeamish.
One quick thing to say about the writing is that it really would have been nice to have more paragraph breaks! When the story is so dark and heavy, you need a bit of a breather sometimes, and you didnt get much of that with this novel.
Right, sorry this review has been a bit of a long, messy ramble! I really wasnt sure how to go about reviewing this weird, sinister book. If you like horrible books that are going to make you feel uncomfortable, and you can get your hands on this for cheap, I think its worth reading even just to be able to say youve read it! But its definitely, definitely not for everyone not even every horror reader.
<i>Thanks to Virginia on Goodreads for lending me her copy to read!</i>
KittyMiku (138 KP) rated Shadow of Night in Books
May 23, 2019
Shadow of Night is the second book of Deborah Harkness’ All Souls Trilogy. As with the first one, Harkness takes you on adventure with her two protagonists, a witch named Diana and a vampire named Mathew. However, unlike the first one, this book is placed in Elizabethan England. Though the characters remain the same at heart, they change to better suit each other and the time period, as it is needed. With the imminent danger around every corner, the two are still not able to find piece, but Diana is able to learn more about her powers while she learns about her vampire lover in the process.
The details in the book are beautifully done and give a great visual to how it must have looked in 1590, where the main storyline is. The clothing style was accurate and there were a great many nods to our history. However, even though some of it remained factual, or close to, there was no denying that there was whole lot of fiction intertwined to help create the illusion that witches, vampires, and daemons exist. Harkness has a way with her facts and her words to create such a wonderful woven story to have the facts and the fictions mix that you could practically believe that it could all be true and we just would never know about it. I am again truly amazed by the story and how it seems to flow from the first book to the second book so flawlessly. I am hardly able to express such enthusiasm I have for Harkness and her wonderful tale. Once again, she was able to submerge me into a tale that caused emotions to wax and wane in my soul.
With all the tears, joys, and laughs this book was able to get out of me, I thought the ending felt a tad bit rushed, and though I am grateful for the speed of the final chapters and how it sort of answered more questions while leaving the conclusions of the trilogy still to come, I feel I would have liked a bit more out of the characters in their reunions. With new characters being introduces slightly at the end, it left a lot of questions on what was going on. I understand that the last book in this trilogy would be what wrapped everything up, but I can’t help but feeling a little more should have been included about some of the characters that had been introduced. I will hold my breath on this matter though and wait to see how the trilogy ends.
I did find that Harkness was able to pin point things normal couples seem to be troubled with, such as jealousy and secrets, never mind should that couple have secret abilities or be of another entire species. I was overjoyed to see that even fictional characters could do something I see normal people due in reality without all the melodramatics that most romance novels and romantic comedies would have us believe. To watch the main characters have the differences, stand their ground, and even argue about things like secrets, other people, and insecurities makes it feel more at home. Not every romance should be almost perfect with a few flaws; Couples fight and through the power of love, the stay together. Even though they have chance to fall apart, it never ceases to amaze how simple communication, even between a d vampire and a witch, can make troubles and misunderstandings cease to exist. Even with the couple at ends at times, and the world seemingly against them, it was fun to watch them explore the world and themselves, if not to just become themselves more and learn how powerful love and trust could be.
I believe this book is 3 stars out of 4 stars for it rating. It is truly an amazing book and has the potential to stand alone, it is clear that without certain prior knowledges, a reader could get lost at the end of what is happening. Shadow of Night is as beautifully written as was A Discovery of Witches and I definitely would recommend it, if the person was will to start at the beginning with A Discovery of Witches. Luckily both can be bought on Amazon and in other places that sell books.
The details in the book are beautifully done and give a great visual to how it must have looked in 1590, where the main storyline is. The clothing style was accurate and there were a great many nods to our history. However, even though some of it remained factual, or close to, there was no denying that there was whole lot of fiction intertwined to help create the illusion that witches, vampires, and daemons exist. Harkness has a way with her facts and her words to create such a wonderful woven story to have the facts and the fictions mix that you could practically believe that it could all be true and we just would never know about it. I am again truly amazed by the story and how it seems to flow from the first book to the second book so flawlessly. I am hardly able to express such enthusiasm I have for Harkness and her wonderful tale. Once again, she was able to submerge me into a tale that caused emotions to wax and wane in my soul.
With all the tears, joys, and laughs this book was able to get out of me, I thought the ending felt a tad bit rushed, and though I am grateful for the speed of the final chapters and how it sort of answered more questions while leaving the conclusions of the trilogy still to come, I feel I would have liked a bit more out of the characters in their reunions. With new characters being introduces slightly at the end, it left a lot of questions on what was going on. I understand that the last book in this trilogy would be what wrapped everything up, but I can’t help but feeling a little more should have been included about some of the characters that had been introduced. I will hold my breath on this matter though and wait to see how the trilogy ends.
I did find that Harkness was able to pin point things normal couples seem to be troubled with, such as jealousy and secrets, never mind should that couple have secret abilities or be of another entire species. I was overjoyed to see that even fictional characters could do something I see normal people due in reality without all the melodramatics that most romance novels and romantic comedies would have us believe. To watch the main characters have the differences, stand their ground, and even argue about things like secrets, other people, and insecurities makes it feel more at home. Not every romance should be almost perfect with a few flaws; Couples fight and through the power of love, the stay together. Even though they have chance to fall apart, it never ceases to amaze how simple communication, even between a d vampire and a witch, can make troubles and misunderstandings cease to exist. Even with the couple at ends at times, and the world seemingly against them, it was fun to watch them explore the world and themselves, if not to just become themselves more and learn how powerful love and trust could be.
I believe this book is 3 stars out of 4 stars for it rating. It is truly an amazing book and has the potential to stand alone, it is clear that without certain prior knowledges, a reader could get lost at the end of what is happening. Shadow of Night is as beautifully written as was A Discovery of Witches and I definitely would recommend it, if the person was will to start at the beginning with A Discovery of Witches. Luckily both can be bought on Amazon and in other places that sell books.
Despite running in very different circles in school, Sam Jones and Zoe Miller have more in common than they think: they both want to escape the difficulty that is their home lives. Sam is a quiet loner, content to spend Sundays with her best friend, Will. She loves the stars, but isn't sure she'll ever be able to study them, thanks to her mom, whose life is ruled by obsessive compulsive disorder. Ever since her Dad moved overseas, the burden of caring for her Mom falls squarely on Sam. Meanwhile, at school, Zoe seems carefree and popular. But her charisma hides her secrets: she struggles with the fact that she's adopted. She also has a mom in remission from cancer and a disabled younger brother who is the main focus of her parents. When the girls have a chance meeting at school, they exchange phone numbers, and suddenly find themselves bonding over text messages and a land they've created together: Starworld. Starworld gives Zoe and Sam the escape from reality they both so desperately need. But can it survive all the outside influences and stress each are facing?
"If I have a superpower, it's invisibility. Like the perpetually overcast skies of Portland in winter, I'm part of the background -- a robot with a disappearance drive, the dullness against which everyone else shines."
~Sam
This was an interesting and somewhat different YA novel. I enjoyed the story of two brave girls battling tough circumstances. Boy, poor Zoe and Sam certainly had the weight of the world on their shoulders. I really liked both of our main characters. The book tells the story from each of their perspectives, making it easy to know each girl. I found myself a bit more aligned to Sam--probably because she was queer and shy (like drawn to like, right?). As other reviews have mentioned, some of the book is in texting format, as Sam and Zoe fall into Starworld. Being far removed from teenagehood myself (sigh), I will admit that I did sometimes sort of "fast read" or skim those sections. I appreciated them--because Starworld meant so much to these girls and their friendship--but the text-speak wasn't always the easiest to read and digest.
I had picked this up thinking it was a love story, but it's not a true romance, though there's love in other forms. There's some great representation in this book: a queer character in Sam, plus discussion of adoption, mental illness (OCD and anxiety), disabilities, and more. All were very well treated too, I felt.
The book felt a little slow at times. It felt a little repetitive in its insistence on Zoe feeling different due to being adopted. Still, I was very drawn to Sam and Zoe's story. There was a strength in each of them, and I was intrigued to see what was going to happen. Sam's arc as she struggled with her romantic feelings was especially strong and wonderfully done.
Even though much of the book is serious, it's also very funny at times, with some excellent quotes and zingers. (I really did love Sam and her sense of humor; she was right up my alley.)
"I hate using phones for their original intended purpose. It's like Alexander Graham Bell wondered, Hey, what could maximize the awkwardeness of human-to-human communication? And then answered himself by giving us the ability to speak to one another through stupid disembodied little boxes."
I mean, right? One of the best quotes ever.
So, overall, this book is really a love story of friendship and triumph. It's very easy to root for the characters and get caught up in their lives. I was often just aghast at how much these poor girls had to go through. If you're not necessarily used to text-speak, it may give you a pause, but Starworld is a big part of the book (obviously!) and it's woven well into the story. This was a different and intriguing read, and I'm glad I picked it up. 3.5+ stars (rounded up to 4 here).
"If I have a superpower, it's invisibility. Like the perpetually overcast skies of Portland in winter, I'm part of the background -- a robot with a disappearance drive, the dullness against which everyone else shines."
~Sam
This was an interesting and somewhat different YA novel. I enjoyed the story of two brave girls battling tough circumstances. Boy, poor Zoe and Sam certainly had the weight of the world on their shoulders. I really liked both of our main characters. The book tells the story from each of their perspectives, making it easy to know each girl. I found myself a bit more aligned to Sam--probably because she was queer and shy (like drawn to like, right?). As other reviews have mentioned, some of the book is in texting format, as Sam and Zoe fall into Starworld. Being far removed from teenagehood myself (sigh), I will admit that I did sometimes sort of "fast read" or skim those sections. I appreciated them--because Starworld meant so much to these girls and their friendship--but the text-speak wasn't always the easiest to read and digest.
I had picked this up thinking it was a love story, but it's not a true romance, though there's love in other forms. There's some great representation in this book: a queer character in Sam, plus discussion of adoption, mental illness (OCD and anxiety), disabilities, and more. All were very well treated too, I felt.
The book felt a little slow at times. It felt a little repetitive in its insistence on Zoe feeling different due to being adopted. Still, I was very drawn to Sam and Zoe's story. There was a strength in each of them, and I was intrigued to see what was going to happen. Sam's arc as she struggled with her romantic feelings was especially strong and wonderfully done.
Even though much of the book is serious, it's also very funny at times, with some excellent quotes and zingers. (I really did love Sam and her sense of humor; she was right up my alley.)
"I hate using phones for their original intended purpose. It's like Alexander Graham Bell wondered, Hey, what could maximize the awkwardeness of human-to-human communication? And then answered himself by giving us the ability to speak to one another through stupid disembodied little boxes."
I mean, right? One of the best quotes ever.
So, overall, this book is really a love story of friendship and triumph. It's very easy to root for the characters and get caught up in their lives. I was often just aghast at how much these poor girls had to go through. If you're not necessarily used to text-speak, it may give you a pause, but Starworld is a big part of the book (obviously!) and it's woven well into the story. This was a different and intriguing read, and I'm glad I picked it up. 3.5+ stars (rounded up to 4 here).
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
Director Quentin Tarantino is well known for his language and excessive violence-based movies. All one needs to do is look at some of his earlier works such as Reservoir Dogs or Pulp Fiction to really get an understanding of how over-the-top they really can be. So, when I saw the initial previews for his latest dramatic comedy Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, I wasn’t sure what to expect. This only fueled the expectation and interest I had going into the film.
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood takes place in 1969 near the end of the golden age of Hollywood. Rick Dalton (Leonardo DiCaprio) is an aging star of Westerns trying to desperately remain relevant in a world that considers those even in their 30’s as ancient, much like the black and white film common even to that day. His stuntman and best friend Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt) is happy to go along for the ride. More of an assistant and better known as the man who got away with killing his own wife, Cliff is content with his role in the world and isn’t looking for the next big break.
You can’t have a Hollywood story in 1969 without involving one of the most brutal murders of the time, that of Sharon Tate (Margot Robbie) and the now infamous Charles Manson and his “family”. A dark cloud that would leave a lasting mark on Hollywood itself. Their presence reminds us of the chilling reality to the evil that is lurking just outside the amazing set pieces and bright lights of the city itself.
Brad Pitt and Leonardo DiCaprio do a phenomenal job as one would expect. It’s always interesting to watch a movie where the actor is portraying another character in an entirely different movie and Leonardo delivers in spades. Brad Pitt brings his usual lovable charm to the otherwise tough persona as Cliff, the dog loving, Bruce Lee ass kicking sidekick. The chemistry between the two is undeniable, displaying both touching and comedic undertones throughout. It’s almost surreal to think that they are portraying characters that do represent themselves in the real world. It’s hard not to make the comparison of Brad and Leo to their onscreen characters, as aging stars wondering what the future holds for them.
Tarantino does a marvelous job of transporting his viewers back to 1969. Everything from episodes of old television shows, to advertisements on the street envelop the viewers in the tie-dyed/hippy reality of what the 60’s was. It’s hard not to be impressed with the cinematography that has been so lavishly recreated before us. The streets, the cars, even the film itself all take their cues from the time period. Car scenes are shot with laughably fake backdrops at times to remind us exactly the types of effects that went into filming back in the day. It’s a mix of old school and new school filming that takes you from one reality and places you in another. Tarantino does his best to make the audience more than spectators to what is developing on screen and instead as active participants.
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is a fairytale of sorts, of what made Hollywood so special back in the 60’s. It lacks much of the brutal nature that has become second nature to Tarantino films, and those who are going to see it for its brutality will likely be very disappointed. It’s a film that is incredibly difficult to talk about without spoilers, because outside the general plot synopsis the viewer is left with more questions than answers. The film is long, coming in at two hours and forty minutes, and there are scenes that tend to drag on a little longer than necessary. Thankfully though, Tarantino has weaved a story of what was and what could have been, if Rick and Cliff both had existed…Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.
4 out of 5 stars
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood takes place in 1969 near the end of the golden age of Hollywood. Rick Dalton (Leonardo DiCaprio) is an aging star of Westerns trying to desperately remain relevant in a world that considers those even in their 30’s as ancient, much like the black and white film common even to that day. His stuntman and best friend Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt) is happy to go along for the ride. More of an assistant and better known as the man who got away with killing his own wife, Cliff is content with his role in the world and isn’t looking for the next big break.
You can’t have a Hollywood story in 1969 without involving one of the most brutal murders of the time, that of Sharon Tate (Margot Robbie) and the now infamous Charles Manson and his “family”. A dark cloud that would leave a lasting mark on Hollywood itself. Their presence reminds us of the chilling reality to the evil that is lurking just outside the amazing set pieces and bright lights of the city itself.
Brad Pitt and Leonardo DiCaprio do a phenomenal job as one would expect. It’s always interesting to watch a movie where the actor is portraying another character in an entirely different movie and Leonardo delivers in spades. Brad Pitt brings his usual lovable charm to the otherwise tough persona as Cliff, the dog loving, Bruce Lee ass kicking sidekick. The chemistry between the two is undeniable, displaying both touching and comedic undertones throughout. It’s almost surreal to think that they are portraying characters that do represent themselves in the real world. It’s hard not to make the comparison of Brad and Leo to their onscreen characters, as aging stars wondering what the future holds for them.
Tarantino does a marvelous job of transporting his viewers back to 1969. Everything from episodes of old television shows, to advertisements on the street envelop the viewers in the tie-dyed/hippy reality of what the 60’s was. It’s hard not to be impressed with the cinematography that has been so lavishly recreated before us. The streets, the cars, even the film itself all take their cues from the time period. Car scenes are shot with laughably fake backdrops at times to remind us exactly the types of effects that went into filming back in the day. It’s a mix of old school and new school filming that takes you from one reality and places you in another. Tarantino does his best to make the audience more than spectators to what is developing on screen and instead as active participants.
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is a fairytale of sorts, of what made Hollywood so special back in the 60’s. It lacks much of the brutal nature that has become second nature to Tarantino films, and those who are going to see it for its brutality will likely be very disappointed. It’s a film that is incredibly difficult to talk about without spoilers, because outside the general plot synopsis the viewer is left with more questions than answers. The film is long, coming in at two hours and forty minutes, and there are scenes that tend to drag on a little longer than necessary. Thankfully though, Tarantino has weaved a story of what was and what could have been, if Rick and Cliff both had existed…Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.
4 out of 5 stars
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Loveless (2017) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
Speaking as someone who grew up in the United States, prides themselves on having a vast and diverse movie library, and only leaves the confines of the greater Seattle-area on very rare occasions .. I’m the first to admit that there are times when I don’t fully appreciate the films produced in other countries. It’s amazing how different they can be based on even differences in other cultures. Take films made in Russia for example. Perhaps it’s the cold and bleakness of the country but Russian filmmakers are amongst the best when it comes to tragedies. I imagine it’s a ‘carry over’ in part from the great literary masterpieces to come out of that country. Not to give it all away right from the beginning but if you’re like me, you need to prepare yourself for a good tragedy and that’s exactly what the film is that is up for your consideration.
‘Loveless’ is a 2017 Russian tragedy from noted director Andrey Zvyaginstev and co-written by Zvyaginstev and Oleg Negin. As with Zvyaginstev’s 2014 tragedy ‘Leviathan’, ‘Loveless’ has quickly risen to critical acclaim and already won several accolades including the Jury Prize at 2017 Cannes Film Festival and was nominated for Best Foreign Language Film at the 90th Academy Awards.
‘Loveless’ stars Maryana Spivak, Aleksey Rozin, and Matvey Novikov. It’s the end of the day for 12 year-old Alexey (Novikov). He says farewell to the few friends he has at school and takes the long way home through the woods following a river on the outskirts of Moscow. It’s a cold, dreary afternoon yet it’s preferable to what awaits him at home. His parents Zhenya (Spivak) and Boris (Rozin) are separated and engaged in bitter divorce proceedings but to both, the marriage was over long ago. The only difference is now are that they are living separately and they’re also trying to shrug parental responsibilities off on one another. They seem to have no issue vocalizing their mutual belief that having Alexey was a mistake. Their only real concerns seem to be getting their son out of their lives so they can move on with their new spouses and each begin a whole new family obliterating any connection they ever had or made. All this in a country that that is engaged in a war against its own people and against the Ukraine. The destruction of a family with parents at war with one another leaving the child as the innocent victim.
Zhenya returns to her apartment after spending time with her new lover to find Alexey gone and messages from his school stating he had not been there in two days. She calls Boris in an attempt to locate Alexey and after another argument over the phone finally decides to call in the police. After starting to show the smallest amount of concern for Alexey and disgust over the low priority that the police are assigning their son’s case, Zhenya and Boris call in a special volunteer unit specializing in searching for missing persons. While the parents actively participate in searching for their son, they continue to fight and engage in hostilities towards one another showing such selfishness and a blatant disregard for their son’s well being that you begin to wonder how far they can take it.
Although the film isn’t my ‘normal cup of tea’, i’m going to give it 4 out of 5 stars Zvyaginstev has crafted another tragic masterpiece putting ‘Loveless’ almost on par with ‘Leviathan’. The film highlights the lack of empathy displayed by families in modern society. Although the film has a ‘predictability’ given Zvyaginstev’s past work it is beautifully shot and well written. Watching the downward spiral of the family in this film is almost like reading a piece sheet music. It’s ominous. It’s not just name calling and insults … it’s as though it’s being disassembled piece by piece which although dark and bleak is still quite intriguing. I’d personally recommend you catch it in an independent movie theater or a small art house theater. It’s a 2 hour movie so I’d recommend catching it at a small theater.
‘Loveless’ is a 2017 Russian tragedy from noted director Andrey Zvyaginstev and co-written by Zvyaginstev and Oleg Negin. As with Zvyaginstev’s 2014 tragedy ‘Leviathan’, ‘Loveless’ has quickly risen to critical acclaim and already won several accolades including the Jury Prize at 2017 Cannes Film Festival and was nominated for Best Foreign Language Film at the 90th Academy Awards.
‘Loveless’ stars Maryana Spivak, Aleksey Rozin, and Matvey Novikov. It’s the end of the day for 12 year-old Alexey (Novikov). He says farewell to the few friends he has at school and takes the long way home through the woods following a river on the outskirts of Moscow. It’s a cold, dreary afternoon yet it’s preferable to what awaits him at home. His parents Zhenya (Spivak) and Boris (Rozin) are separated and engaged in bitter divorce proceedings but to both, the marriage was over long ago. The only difference is now are that they are living separately and they’re also trying to shrug parental responsibilities off on one another. They seem to have no issue vocalizing their mutual belief that having Alexey was a mistake. Their only real concerns seem to be getting their son out of their lives so they can move on with their new spouses and each begin a whole new family obliterating any connection they ever had or made. All this in a country that that is engaged in a war against its own people and against the Ukraine. The destruction of a family with parents at war with one another leaving the child as the innocent victim.
Zhenya returns to her apartment after spending time with her new lover to find Alexey gone and messages from his school stating he had not been there in two days. She calls Boris in an attempt to locate Alexey and after another argument over the phone finally decides to call in the police. After starting to show the smallest amount of concern for Alexey and disgust over the low priority that the police are assigning their son’s case, Zhenya and Boris call in a special volunteer unit specializing in searching for missing persons. While the parents actively participate in searching for their son, they continue to fight and engage in hostilities towards one another showing such selfishness and a blatant disregard for their son’s well being that you begin to wonder how far they can take it.
Although the film isn’t my ‘normal cup of tea’, i’m going to give it 4 out of 5 stars Zvyaginstev has crafted another tragic masterpiece putting ‘Loveless’ almost on par with ‘Leviathan’. The film highlights the lack of empathy displayed by families in modern society. Although the film has a ‘predictability’ given Zvyaginstev’s past work it is beautifully shot and well written. Watching the downward spiral of the family in this film is almost like reading a piece sheet music. It’s ominous. It’s not just name calling and insults … it’s as though it’s being disassembled piece by piece which although dark and bleak is still quite intriguing. I’d personally recommend you catch it in an independent movie theater or a small art house theater. It’s a 2 hour movie so I’d recommend catching it at a small theater.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Hustlers (2019) in Movies
Sep 19, 2019
Bland and boring DESPITE J-Lo's performance
When I first saw the trailer for the Jennifer Lopez "strippers get back at scummy Wall Street-types" film, HUSTLERS, I wasn't at all interested in seeing it But then I got wind of strong early reviews with some (very faint) Oscar talk about J-Lo's performance in this film, so I thought I'd check it out.
I should have trusted my instincts.
What a lame disappointment this film is. It starts out flat and then flattens out even further to produce a movie that starts at one (fairly low) level and then stays there the entire time.
HUSTLERS stars Constance Wu (CRAZY, RICH ASIANS) as a a young stripper who is taught the ropes of the stripping game by uber-stripper Jennifer Lopez (if you don't know who this is, then go ahead and skip to the rating of this film at the bottom of this review and move on). When J-Lo's character, Ramona, comes up with an idea to get back at the scummy Wall Street types AND make some money along the way, Wu's character, Destiny (of course) is a reluctant participant becoming - over time - the leader.
A potentially interesting, "based on True Events" story (this film is based on the real life exploits of Ramona as described in a New York Magazine story), this film just falls flat and I put the blame for this in 2 places.
Lets start with Director and Writer of the screenplay, Lorene Scafaria (SEEKING A FRIEND AT THE END OF THE WORLD). She wrote - and directed - this film like it is a modest-scaled, low-key independent film (much like the very good SEEKING A FRIEND...), but the second that this film cast Jennifer Lopez as the flashy leader Ramona, words like modest and low-key should have been thrown out the window but Scafaria chose not to do this, she downplays the best asset in her movie and plunks most of her effort on a lead who could not match Lopez star power wattage.
And that lead is Constance Wu - the other weak link in this chain. I thought she was "just fine" in CRAZY RICH ASIANS, blending into the scenery when more flamboyant personalities were on the screen (in CRA it was Michelle Yeoh's "tiger mom") and she blends into the scenery whenever J-Lo is on the screen in this film - and that just doesn't work here. She needed to step up and step out and match J-Lo blow for blow, but she backs up and backs away in these crucial moments, so when her character is on the screen alone - trying to get the audience's sympathies - I just didn't care.
What I did care about is Jennifer Lopez's performance as Ramona. She is the brightest spot in this film and brings her star power and natural charisma to the screen. The ultimate problem with this performance (and NO, it is NOT Oscar-worthy) is it feels that she is fighting the "low-key" headwinds of writer/director Scafaria the entire time.
Former Disney star Keke Palmer and current RIVERDALE star Lili Reinhart bring some fun and energy to the screen as the 3rd and 4th partners in this quartet of stripper Robin Hoods, but they are all too often sentenced to strut around in the background in tight outfits. I would have loved to see a movie with Lopez, Palmer and Reinhart that was more "out there" and less restrained.
Finally, two very good actresses - Julia Styles and Mercedes Ruehl - are in this film in "what-the-heck-are they-doing-in-this-film" roles that are underwritten and underutilized the talents of these actresses - another missed opportunity by Writer/Director Scafaria.
I've heard this film called a "female empowerment" film or "the stripper version of Goodfellas" and I couldn't disagree more. The only "empowering" part of this film is when the credits rolled and I could leave.
Letter Grade: C
4 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
I should have trusted my instincts.
What a lame disappointment this film is. It starts out flat and then flattens out even further to produce a movie that starts at one (fairly low) level and then stays there the entire time.
HUSTLERS stars Constance Wu (CRAZY, RICH ASIANS) as a a young stripper who is taught the ropes of the stripping game by uber-stripper Jennifer Lopez (if you don't know who this is, then go ahead and skip to the rating of this film at the bottom of this review and move on). When J-Lo's character, Ramona, comes up with an idea to get back at the scummy Wall Street types AND make some money along the way, Wu's character, Destiny (of course) is a reluctant participant becoming - over time - the leader.
A potentially interesting, "based on True Events" story (this film is based on the real life exploits of Ramona as described in a New York Magazine story), this film just falls flat and I put the blame for this in 2 places.
Lets start with Director and Writer of the screenplay, Lorene Scafaria (SEEKING A FRIEND AT THE END OF THE WORLD). She wrote - and directed - this film like it is a modest-scaled, low-key independent film (much like the very good SEEKING A FRIEND...), but the second that this film cast Jennifer Lopez as the flashy leader Ramona, words like modest and low-key should have been thrown out the window but Scafaria chose not to do this, she downplays the best asset in her movie and plunks most of her effort on a lead who could not match Lopez star power wattage.
And that lead is Constance Wu - the other weak link in this chain. I thought she was "just fine" in CRAZY RICH ASIANS, blending into the scenery when more flamboyant personalities were on the screen (in CRA it was Michelle Yeoh's "tiger mom") and she blends into the scenery whenever J-Lo is on the screen in this film - and that just doesn't work here. She needed to step up and step out and match J-Lo blow for blow, but she backs up and backs away in these crucial moments, so when her character is on the screen alone - trying to get the audience's sympathies - I just didn't care.
What I did care about is Jennifer Lopez's performance as Ramona. She is the brightest spot in this film and brings her star power and natural charisma to the screen. The ultimate problem with this performance (and NO, it is NOT Oscar-worthy) is it feels that she is fighting the "low-key" headwinds of writer/director Scafaria the entire time.
Former Disney star Keke Palmer and current RIVERDALE star Lili Reinhart bring some fun and energy to the screen as the 3rd and 4th partners in this quartet of stripper Robin Hoods, but they are all too often sentenced to strut around in the background in tight outfits. I would have loved to see a movie with Lopez, Palmer and Reinhart that was more "out there" and less restrained.
Finally, two very good actresses - Julia Styles and Mercedes Ruehl - are in this film in "what-the-heck-are they-doing-in-this-film" roles that are underwritten and underutilized the talents of these actresses - another missed opportunity by Writer/Director Scafaria.
I've heard this film called a "female empowerment" film or "the stripper version of Goodfellas" and I couldn't disagree more. The only "empowering" part of this film is when the credits rolled and I could leave.
Letter Grade: C
4 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
