Search
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Divergent (2014) in Movies
Sep 20, 2020
𝘋𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨. Unabashed (better) 𝘏𝘶𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘳 𝘎𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘴 ripoff which doesn't just have nothing to say - but worse - it has nothing to say yet *thinks* it has something to say. A fucking terrible metaphor about conformity depicted through surface-level teenage angst and wince-worthy 2014 YA genre tropes while deliberately (and frustratingly) refusing to provide any world-building above routine exposition, but sometimes it's fun! Woodley is pretty crappy but everyone else is solidly engaging, Teller is great as a piece of shit and James is shockingly one of the better 'faceless white beefcake' roles - but of course the winner goes to evil Kate Winslet in full Hillary Clinton mode, pantsuit and all. I fully admit to being enchanted by this movie's stupid little world and it's never unwatchable either, often quite enjoyable - but can we talk about how idiotic of a system this is? You're telling me in order to stop discrimination and foster peace (from some conveniently absent events just known as "the war" [ugh]) they thought it'd be a good idea to make distinctly unconnected factions based on - essentially - a Buzzfeed "What's Your Personality Type" quiz, which aren't allowed to communicate and all of whom evidently hate each other that they then force a bunch of moody TEENAGERS to choose which one they want to be in - the single MOST IMPORTANT AND PERMANENT LIFE DECISION they'll ever make - and AREN'T ALLOWED a single switch EVER (because... reasons, ostensibly you aren't allowed to change as a person); and if they fail or want to choose a different path they just become HOMELESS FOR LIFE. (A sadly close unintentional riff on capitalism, actually). Anyway I like when this gets trippy and when it acts as a slideshow of these supposedly helpful organizations (which don't serve their respective purposes here at all) just start doing a bunch of fucked up things to their new recruits literally from day one but all its non-politics aside I'm sick of when movies like these make the blandest character in the movie not only lead the whole thing, but also make their only discernable personality feature that they're "not like the rest of us". Yeah, no shit they aren't - they're way less interesting.
Anthropocene by Peter Oren
Album Watch
Indiana-born, everywhere-based singer-songwriter Peter Oren possesses a remarkable singing voice,...
folk rock
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated The Other Countess (The Lacey Chronicles, #1) in Books
Feb 15, 2019
THE OTHER COUNTESS is a sweet and harmless love story set in Tudor England during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, in the year of 1582 to be exact. Lady Eleanor Rodriguez, Countess of San Jaime, is our penniless heroine who is saddled with her absent-minded alchemist father; the roles of child and parent have been long since been reversed. The preface, which takes place in 1578, gives us our first glimpse of William Lacey, the new Earl of Dorset at age fourteen, as he throws a twelve-year-old Ellie and her father off his land.
The story itself isn't exactly original and doesn't go into any unfamiliar territory, but it's ably told and fairly inoffensive, making it suitable for older teens (there are numerous allusions to sexual situations but that's as far as it goes). The dialogue and sensibilities are more modern in nature and don't always ring true to the era, but some liberties are always taken in young adult fiction, therefore making it something I can forgive. Very light on historical content, this is more for the romantics out there who like a historical backdrop to a love story. For the first half, I wasn't very involved into either the characters or their story, and it didn't help that it moved at a slow pace, though at the halfway point it picked up and started charming me. However, the hero and heroine were a little too perfect, more so in Ellie's case, as she didn't seem to really have any negative attributes other than she has a bit of a temper. Maybe if they had a few more rough edges I would have rooted for them to have their happy ending, as it is, I wasn't that invested. I do think that the secondary character, Lady Jane Perceval, has promise on that front since her narrative had a more realistic feel to it, so I may just pick up her story when it comes out ([b:The Queen's Lady|8805112|The Queen's Lady (The Lacey Chronicles, #2)|Eve Edwards|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1327950501s/8805112.jpg|13679272]). The resolution to Will and Ellie's story came far too easily and some more conflict would have made it much better. Still, as I said, it's a sweet story, even if nothing sets it apart from other books. An easy read that should appeal to teenage girls.
The story itself isn't exactly original and doesn't go into any unfamiliar territory, but it's ably told and fairly inoffensive, making it suitable for older teens (there are numerous allusions to sexual situations but that's as far as it goes). The dialogue and sensibilities are more modern in nature and don't always ring true to the era, but some liberties are always taken in young adult fiction, therefore making it something I can forgive. Very light on historical content, this is more for the romantics out there who like a historical backdrop to a love story. For the first half, I wasn't very involved into either the characters or their story, and it didn't help that it moved at a slow pace, though at the halfway point it picked up and started charming me. However, the hero and heroine were a little too perfect, more so in Ellie's case, as she didn't seem to really have any negative attributes other than she has a bit of a temper. Maybe if they had a few more rough edges I would have rooted for them to have their happy ending, as it is, I wasn't that invested. I do think that the secondary character, Lady Jane Perceval, has promise on that front since her narrative had a more realistic feel to it, so I may just pick up her story when it comes out ([b:The Queen's Lady|8805112|The Queen's Lady (The Lacey Chronicles, #2)|Eve Edwards|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1327950501s/8805112.jpg|13679272]). The resolution to Will and Ellie's story came far too easily and some more conflict would have made it much better. Still, as I said, it's a sweet story, even if nothing sets it apart from other books. An easy read that should appeal to teenage girls.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated 13 Days of Midnight in Books
Dec 17, 2018
<i>This eBook was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review
Thirteen Days of Midnight</i> is the slightly lighthearted, young adult novel by Leo Hunt set in contemporary Northeast England. Luke Manchett is an average sixteen-year-old boy who mostly cares about his reputation as a member of the school rugby team, and attracting the attention of his crush, Holiday Simmon. However, his life drastically changes on discovering that his absent, psychic exorcist, of a father has died.
Luke is not affected by the actual death, as he barely knew his father; it is the things he inherits as the only named beneficiary of his father’s will that twist his life upside down. It turns out that Horatio Manchett was not a television phony but actually a powerful necromancer. The biggest shock of all is that Luke is now the owner of a collection of eight sinister ghosts who want him dead. With Halloween fast approaching, when the souls’ powers will be at their strongest, Luke with the help of mysterious school friend, Elza Moss, and an ancient book they cannot read, must find a way to release the ghosts without causing harm to anyone else.
<i>Thirteen Days of Midnight </i>is not scary in the way some readers may expect paranormal novels to be. Although it contains ghosts and death threats it is not written in a way meant to terrify, rather to entertain. Luke and Elza’s lack of knowledge and experience with a large number of spirits helps the reader relate to the story, as it is with great doubt that any other teenager would have known exactly what to do. Luke’s dog, Ham, also adds a bit of humour to the book.
There were a few typical aspects to the story, which made it less original. A paranormal novel based at Halloween seems a fairly obvious choice of setting, and popular boy developing a friendship (and possibly more) with an unpopular girl seems rather mainstream in regards to current young adult books.
Some paranormal/horror novels can be a bit over the top and occasionally confusing, therefore it was a surprise to discover how good Thirteen Days of Midnight is. The main characters are likable, the narrative flows well and it is overall entertaining to read. It is definitely a recommendable book.
Thirteen Days of Midnight</i> is the slightly lighthearted, young adult novel by Leo Hunt set in contemporary Northeast England. Luke Manchett is an average sixteen-year-old boy who mostly cares about his reputation as a member of the school rugby team, and attracting the attention of his crush, Holiday Simmon. However, his life drastically changes on discovering that his absent, psychic exorcist, of a father has died.
Luke is not affected by the actual death, as he barely knew his father; it is the things he inherits as the only named beneficiary of his father’s will that twist his life upside down. It turns out that Horatio Manchett was not a television phony but actually a powerful necromancer. The biggest shock of all is that Luke is now the owner of a collection of eight sinister ghosts who want him dead. With Halloween fast approaching, when the souls’ powers will be at their strongest, Luke with the help of mysterious school friend, Elza Moss, and an ancient book they cannot read, must find a way to release the ghosts without causing harm to anyone else.
<i>Thirteen Days of Midnight </i>is not scary in the way some readers may expect paranormal novels to be. Although it contains ghosts and death threats it is not written in a way meant to terrify, rather to entertain. Luke and Elza’s lack of knowledge and experience with a large number of spirits helps the reader relate to the story, as it is with great doubt that any other teenager would have known exactly what to do. Luke’s dog, Ham, also adds a bit of humour to the book.
There were a few typical aspects to the story, which made it less original. A paranormal novel based at Halloween seems a fairly obvious choice of setting, and popular boy developing a friendship (and possibly more) with an unpopular girl seems rather mainstream in regards to current young adult books.
Some paranormal/horror novels can be a bit over the top and occasionally confusing, therefore it was a surprise to discover how good Thirteen Days of Midnight is. The main characters are likable, the narrative flows well and it is overall entertaining to read. It is definitely a recommendable book.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Macbeth (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Directed by Justin Kurzel, the 2015 release of Macbeth stars Michael
Fassbender
as Macbeth and Marion Cotillard as Lady Macbeth.
There are a ton of blood and guts in this movie. Many of the action
scenes have slow-motion insets, which for me were better than the jerky
camera movement of the close-up fighting scenes, but still felt weird
inside the film.
This is the traditional Macbeth story-line, with the typical language of
the original play. The accents of most of the actors were very heavy,
making it quite difficult to follow the actual dialogue.
I was able to follow the story because I know the basic premise of
Hamlet (who doesn’t?) but if I hadn’t basically known what the story was
about, and had to rely solely on the spoken words in the film, I would
have been dreadfully lost.
Marion Cotillard plays a very good conniving, plotting Lady Macbeth, and
Michael Fassbender does a great job of portraying a manipulated, power
hungry man, being driven mad by his atrocities.
The supporting cast gave great performances as well. The three witches
were played by Lynn Kennedy, Seylan Baxter, and Seylan Mhairi Baxter.
They were sufficiently creepy and mysterious to add the right amount of
darkness to their roles, without overpowering the concept that had
Hamlet interpreted their predictions differently, the entire story may
have gone differently.
There were parts of the movie that I held my breath at, and felt myself
responding emotionally to, but it would be very hard NOT to feel some
sort of emotion at watching a family being burned at the stake at the
whim of a mad-man.
If I were a die-hard Macbeth or Shakespeare fan, I likely would have
enjoyed the film far more. On the other hand, a die-hard Shakespeare fan
probably would have been upset at some of the pieces that were trimmed
from the famous lines of the original (“something wicked this way comes”
was noticeably absent)
Overall I would give this movie 2 out of 5 stars, based on the hard time
I had understanding the dialogue. If I had been able to not have had to
concentrate so hard to understand what was being said, I would have
given it 3.5 out of 5 stars.
Fassbender
as Macbeth and Marion Cotillard as Lady Macbeth.
There are a ton of blood and guts in this movie. Many of the action
scenes have slow-motion insets, which for me were better than the jerky
camera movement of the close-up fighting scenes, but still felt weird
inside the film.
This is the traditional Macbeth story-line, with the typical language of
the original play. The accents of most of the actors were very heavy,
making it quite difficult to follow the actual dialogue.
I was able to follow the story because I know the basic premise of
Hamlet (who doesn’t?) but if I hadn’t basically known what the story was
about, and had to rely solely on the spoken words in the film, I would
have been dreadfully lost.
Marion Cotillard plays a very good conniving, plotting Lady Macbeth, and
Michael Fassbender does a great job of portraying a manipulated, power
hungry man, being driven mad by his atrocities.
The supporting cast gave great performances as well. The three witches
were played by Lynn Kennedy, Seylan Baxter, and Seylan Mhairi Baxter.
They were sufficiently creepy and mysterious to add the right amount of
darkness to their roles, without overpowering the concept that had
Hamlet interpreted their predictions differently, the entire story may
have gone differently.
There were parts of the movie that I held my breath at, and felt myself
responding emotionally to, but it would be very hard NOT to feel some
sort of emotion at watching a family being burned at the stake at the
whim of a mad-man.
If I were a die-hard Macbeth or Shakespeare fan, I likely would have
enjoyed the film far more. On the other hand, a die-hard Shakespeare fan
probably would have been upset at some of the pieces that were trimmed
from the famous lines of the original (“something wicked this way comes”
was noticeably absent)
Overall I would give this movie 2 out of 5 stars, based on the hard time
I had understanding the dialogue. If I had been able to not have had to
concentrate so hard to understand what was being said, I would have
given it 3.5 out of 5 stars.
The Organized Mind: Thinking Straight in the Age of Information Overload
Book
Author and neuroscientist Daniel Levitin tackles the problems of twenty-first century information...
Lottie disney bookworm (1056 KP) rated A Frozen Heart in Books
Sep 20, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
It seems like adaptations of Frozen and Frozen 2 are everywhere right now: it must be so hard for an author to come up with a story that is different enough to draw readers in but still in-keeping with the story. Luckily, Elizabeth Rudnick’s skilled writing turns the typical Frozen tale on its head: telling it solely from the perspective of Anna and Hans.
It is this, seemingly simple, difference that gives “A Frozen Heart” it’s edge. The inclusion of Hans’ viewpoint allows us to witness his upbringing as the 13th Prince of The Southern Isles: we visit looming, black, inhospitable castle with it’s stern, hard-to-please King; an absent-minded, weak but loving Queen and the youngest Prince who has been bullied for his entire life.
Rudnick’s characterisation of Hans is nothing less than pure genius. It is difficult to feel anything but pity for Hans during his childhood: he is constantly disappointing his father and being physically and emotionally bullied by his brothers. The only family member whom Hans truly seems to love is his mother but she is portrayed as somewhat absent in her mental state. (As a mother I can only assume this is from having 13 sons! I struggle with 2!)
Even when Hans “plots” his way to Arendelle, it is purely an evacuation plan. He is so desperate to leave the Southern Isles that he believes Elsa, a social enigma of a future queen, is his best chance for a new life. Then, when Hans realises Elsa is a lost cause and goes off singing and dancing into the night with Anna, at first, the reader genuinely believes his intentions are good. It even reminded me of the fan theory that Hans is the real deal until the trolls sing “get the fiancé out of the way”.
Hans is never completely trustworthy though: he is too acutely aware of how others view him and his actions, as well as the relative power those onlookers have and whether they will support him with his next, calculated move.
Hans also seems to be of the opinion that a Queen needs a King and the King will rule. Apart from being adoringly archaic(!), it is likely that this could be an effect of the relationship between his parents: the brief insight we have into the King and Queen of the Southern Isles suggest Hans has never had a strong female role model in his life. Again, Rudnick’s writing and characters implying that Hans is not 100% to blame: perhaps he is merely a product of the harsh environment he was brought up in?
Unfortunately, the deep-rooted power complex instilled from his father wins out in the end and Hans can see no alternative life but one where he is ruler. Thus, the villain in him rises; constantly calculating and predicting how his actions will be judged by others and the tale with which we are so familiar plays out.
Anna’s story runs along similar parallels to Hans, with neglect and isolation from her closest family. However, the way this pain manifests in Anna could not be further than that of the Prince of the Southern Isles.
‘A Frozen Heart’ reflects Anna’s vulnerability in every sentence. As a young girl Anna lost her freedom as well as her best friend and sister; as a teenager she loses her parents and this has formed an extremely fragile, trusting, naïve young woman. Anna has lived the definition of a sheltered childhood: is it any wonder she falls in love with the first man who pays her attention? Anna’s even confesses to herself: “That is all I ever wanted. For someone to love me”.
Despite this, Anna does not present as a weak character. Yes, she is a hopeless romantic: all the best people are in my opinion! However, she is also strong-willed and is willing to go to any lengths to bring back her sister. Rudnick’s first-person perspective only highlights this strength in Anna: she completely accepts her faults and can see the error in her actions, particularly when it comes to Hans, but she can not and will not give up.
I really enjoyed the insight into Hans and Anna’s thoughts and particularly into Hans’ background. However, once this initial thrill was over, I felt that ‘A Frozen Heart’ merely followed along with the plot of the movie and, dare I say, became a bit lazy?
Please don’t misunderstand me, I did enjoy the book and Rudnick did an amazing job bringing to life our favourite characters on the page but I just needed a little bit more: perhaps an insight into Kristoff’s backstory? How does a young boy with a reindeer find himself adopted by trolls? Is Kristoff even an orphan? What has he experienced in order to consider the trolls love doctors?
‘A Frozen Heart’: an interesting concept but maybe played it a little too safe? Please let me know your thoughts.
It is this, seemingly simple, difference that gives “A Frozen Heart” it’s edge. The inclusion of Hans’ viewpoint allows us to witness his upbringing as the 13th Prince of The Southern Isles: we visit looming, black, inhospitable castle with it’s stern, hard-to-please King; an absent-minded, weak but loving Queen and the youngest Prince who has been bullied for his entire life.
Rudnick’s characterisation of Hans is nothing less than pure genius. It is difficult to feel anything but pity for Hans during his childhood: he is constantly disappointing his father and being physically and emotionally bullied by his brothers. The only family member whom Hans truly seems to love is his mother but she is portrayed as somewhat absent in her mental state. (As a mother I can only assume this is from having 13 sons! I struggle with 2!)
Even when Hans “plots” his way to Arendelle, it is purely an evacuation plan. He is so desperate to leave the Southern Isles that he believes Elsa, a social enigma of a future queen, is his best chance for a new life. Then, when Hans realises Elsa is a lost cause and goes off singing and dancing into the night with Anna, at first, the reader genuinely believes his intentions are good. It even reminded me of the fan theory that Hans is the real deal until the trolls sing “get the fiancé out of the way”.
Hans is never completely trustworthy though: he is too acutely aware of how others view him and his actions, as well as the relative power those onlookers have and whether they will support him with his next, calculated move.
Hans also seems to be of the opinion that a Queen needs a King and the King will rule. Apart from being adoringly archaic(!), it is likely that this could be an effect of the relationship between his parents: the brief insight we have into the King and Queen of the Southern Isles suggest Hans has never had a strong female role model in his life. Again, Rudnick’s writing and characters implying that Hans is not 100% to blame: perhaps he is merely a product of the harsh environment he was brought up in?
Unfortunately, the deep-rooted power complex instilled from his father wins out in the end and Hans can see no alternative life but one where he is ruler. Thus, the villain in him rises; constantly calculating and predicting how his actions will be judged by others and the tale with which we are so familiar plays out.
Anna’s story runs along similar parallels to Hans, with neglect and isolation from her closest family. However, the way this pain manifests in Anna could not be further than that of the Prince of the Southern Isles.
‘A Frozen Heart’ reflects Anna’s vulnerability in every sentence. As a young girl Anna lost her freedom as well as her best friend and sister; as a teenager she loses her parents and this has formed an extremely fragile, trusting, naïve young woman. Anna has lived the definition of a sheltered childhood: is it any wonder she falls in love with the first man who pays her attention? Anna’s even confesses to herself: “That is all I ever wanted. For someone to love me”.
Despite this, Anna does not present as a weak character. Yes, she is a hopeless romantic: all the best people are in my opinion! However, she is also strong-willed and is willing to go to any lengths to bring back her sister. Rudnick’s first-person perspective only highlights this strength in Anna: she completely accepts her faults and can see the error in her actions, particularly when it comes to Hans, but she can not and will not give up.
I really enjoyed the insight into Hans and Anna’s thoughts and particularly into Hans’ background. However, once this initial thrill was over, I felt that ‘A Frozen Heart’ merely followed along with the plot of the movie and, dare I say, became a bit lazy?
Please don’t misunderstand me, I did enjoy the book and Rudnick did an amazing job bringing to life our favourite characters on the page but I just needed a little bit more: perhaps an insight into Kristoff’s backstory? How does a young boy with a reindeer find himself adopted by trolls? Is Kristoff even an orphan? What has he experienced in order to consider the trolls love doctors?
‘A Frozen Heart’: an interesting concept but maybe played it a little too safe? Please let me know your thoughts.
Rachel King (13 KP) rated The Lightning Thief in Books
Feb 11, 2019
I decided to read this partly because I had just seen the movie and partly because I heard that it was a good series for fans of the Harry Potter series. Well, in regards to the movie, it's appalling how much the producers changed the book's plot to make the movie. If they make a second movie, I likely will not be interested, as I much more prefer the book's plot. In regards to the book's similarities to Harry Potter, they are vast, but really, who wouldn't aim to write something as popular and complex as the Harry Potter series? J.K. Rowling owns a castle! So, on to the actual book.
Years ago I thought that writing a fantasy series that uses Greek mythology would be a great idea, so I was excited when I heard of the Percy Jackson series. I love the modernized spin on the various good and bad characters, bringing them to life in both creative and believeable ways, such as Ares on a Harley and "Mr." Charon wearing Italian suits. The "Gods" of mythology at times seemed more like immature teenagers or work-aholic parents, with as much flaws as any normal human, and I really appreciated that they were differentiated from The GOD early on, and their place in the known universe was explained in the context of Percy's world. I especially like the scene of Hephaestus' trap that Percy and Annabeth get caught in. How the "normal" humans explained away the activities of the mythological characters was probably the most creative of the whole text, and at times rather humorous. It actually makes me wonder how much of what I see everyday is only a cover for what is really happening in the spiritual realm.
The only element that really bugged me about the text was how Percy changed from this moody, victimized pre-teen to a rather mature young man with almost no transition - emotional or otherwise. It almost felt like Percy possessed two different personalities that shared the same body. While Percy often says that he did not want to be the son of Poseidon, I found evidence of inner termoil strangely absent throughout the text. I also felt that there were smaller issues that could have been more detailed and developed, such as the characters of Grover and Annabeth. I will be continuing the series with The Sea of Monsters (Percy Jackson and the Olympians, Book 2) in the near future.
Years ago I thought that writing a fantasy series that uses Greek mythology would be a great idea, so I was excited when I heard of the Percy Jackson series. I love the modernized spin on the various good and bad characters, bringing them to life in both creative and believeable ways, such as Ares on a Harley and "Mr." Charon wearing Italian suits. The "Gods" of mythology at times seemed more like immature teenagers or work-aholic parents, with as much flaws as any normal human, and I really appreciated that they were differentiated from The GOD early on, and their place in the known universe was explained in the context of Percy's world. I especially like the scene of Hephaestus' trap that Percy and Annabeth get caught in. How the "normal" humans explained away the activities of the mythological characters was probably the most creative of the whole text, and at times rather humorous. It actually makes me wonder how much of what I see everyday is only a cover for what is really happening in the spiritual realm.
The only element that really bugged me about the text was how Percy changed from this moody, victimized pre-teen to a rather mature young man with almost no transition - emotional or otherwise. It almost felt like Percy possessed two different personalities that shared the same body. While Percy often says that he did not want to be the son of Poseidon, I found evidence of inner termoil strangely absent throughout the text. I also felt that there were smaller issues that could have been more detailed and developed, such as the characters of Grover and Annabeth. I will be continuing the series with The Sea of Monsters (Percy Jackson and the Olympians, Book 2) in the near future.