Search
Search results
Smashbomb (4687 KP) created a post in Smashbomb AMA
Jul 12, 2019
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated The Signal (2014) in Movies
Apr 30, 2018
Meh
Three college students get more than what they bargained for when they try to track down a computer genius that hacked their computers and end up fighting for their lives instead.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 5
Characters: 4
The characters harbored no depth whatsoever. As a result there was never a point in the film where I cared about what happened to any of them. They were stale, moving about the film aimlessly. The only time they were remotely interesting was towards the end and I won't spoil why.
Not only did they bore me, they infuriated me at the same time. The decision-making of main character Nic (Brenton Thwaites) was just maddening. How he repeatedly found himself in the same perilous situations blew my mind. At one point, I remember saying, "At this point, you deserve what happens." You know it's going to be a long film when the main character can't win you over.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Conflict: 4
While there are some points of intrigue, the film seems to bumble along for the most part with much ado about nothing. You recognize that there is a mystery unfolding, but the terrible character development didn't help to raise my level of caring. The two action sequences that are worthwhile don't redeem the film as a whole.
Genre: 4
I love sci-fi. There are too many films to count that have helped shape the genre. When it comes to sci-fi, this ranks towards the bottom of the barrel for me. There are no real points of connection that gave it the spark it needed to capture my interest. The true sci-fi elements come too little too late.
Memorability: 7
Pace: 5
Watching this film is like watching a baby trying to walk, but not quite as cute. You're waiting for the film to collapse at any moment due to its shaky foundation and then you get to a point where you say, "Just be done already." After about the fourth or fifth eyeroll, I was beyond ready for the film's conclusion.
Plot: 3
Just dumb. Do I need to expand on this? The story has enough holes to make swiss cheese jealous. Sure, things became less confusing as the story progressed, but the answers given were beyond far-fetched. I think a stronger story overall is what could have turned the tides of the entire film.
Resolution: 6
From a visuals standpoint, the ending was pretty cool. From a justifiable and satisfaction-level standpoint? Going to take a hard pass. I won't spoil the ending, but I'll just say the payoff is far from worth it. Interesting yes...but incomplete.
Overall: 56
Even before the ending brought the film to a necessary close, there were so many points along the way director William Eubank could have tweaked to improve this film. Alas, it didnt seem to be worth his time and neither should this film be for yours.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 5
Characters: 4
The characters harbored no depth whatsoever. As a result there was never a point in the film where I cared about what happened to any of them. They were stale, moving about the film aimlessly. The only time they were remotely interesting was towards the end and I won't spoil why.
Not only did they bore me, they infuriated me at the same time. The decision-making of main character Nic (Brenton Thwaites) was just maddening. How he repeatedly found himself in the same perilous situations blew my mind. At one point, I remember saying, "At this point, you deserve what happens." You know it's going to be a long film when the main character can't win you over.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Conflict: 4
While there are some points of intrigue, the film seems to bumble along for the most part with much ado about nothing. You recognize that there is a mystery unfolding, but the terrible character development didn't help to raise my level of caring. The two action sequences that are worthwhile don't redeem the film as a whole.
Genre: 4
I love sci-fi. There are too many films to count that have helped shape the genre. When it comes to sci-fi, this ranks towards the bottom of the barrel for me. There are no real points of connection that gave it the spark it needed to capture my interest. The true sci-fi elements come too little too late.
Memorability: 7
Pace: 5
Watching this film is like watching a baby trying to walk, but not quite as cute. You're waiting for the film to collapse at any moment due to its shaky foundation and then you get to a point where you say, "Just be done already." After about the fourth or fifth eyeroll, I was beyond ready for the film's conclusion.
Plot: 3
Just dumb. Do I need to expand on this? The story has enough holes to make swiss cheese jealous. Sure, things became less confusing as the story progressed, but the answers given were beyond far-fetched. I think a stronger story overall is what could have turned the tides of the entire film.
Resolution: 6
From a visuals standpoint, the ending was pretty cool. From a justifiable and satisfaction-level standpoint? Going to take a hard pass. I won't spoil the ending, but I'll just say the payoff is far from worth it. Interesting yes...but incomplete.
Overall: 56
Even before the ending brought the film to a necessary close, there were so many points along the way director William Eubank could have tweaked to improve this film. Alas, it didnt seem to be worth his time and neither should this film be for yours.
Becs (244 KP) rated Restorations in Books
May 22, 2019
Rather interesting and intriguing read
I received a copy of Restorations by Charles Strickler to read and review from Smith Publicity. Everything I say is one hundred percent my own opinions.
I'm generally not a fan of Historical Fictions but my attention was gripped by this intriguing novel. Charles Strickler's writing style is very informative and it doesn't have that "boring history" tone to it. It was rather light and flowed like water. You can also tell that Charles Strickler did a ton of research prior to writing Restorations and it honestly shows.
Restorations follows Miles' journey in recovering a 1928 Stutz Black Hawk Boat Tail Roadster he bought from an auction. There is a mysterious aura around the Black Hawk and Miles is set on getting answers. This journey he takes includes a pretty woman, a few near death experiences, the mafia, and surprisingly loads of action. You're not going to want to miss this!!
"Stop living in your father's shadow."
Characters:
Miles West - the main character who buys the Black Hawk. Nothing overall special that needs to be pointed out about him.
Bramley Ann Fairchild - the auctioneer who sold Miles the car. She ends up helping him figure out the mystery behind the Black Hawk.
Ms. Gardner - basically the mother figure for Miles and she is dead set on trying to get Miles and Bramley together.
Mr. Howe - the lawyer of Carlo Bello. He seems to be absolutely terrified of Bello.
Carlo Bello - a mob leader who will do anything to get what he wants. He's trying to get the Black Hawk from Miles.
Maximilian "Lefty" Webber - the original owner of the Black Hawk that Miles purchased, deceased.
Wil - the repair man.
Reasons why I rated it 4 stars:
1. The plot:
The plot flowed pretty smoothly, minus a few bumps and turns. I did notice a few spots where the plot jumped and there wasn't story/ character development. But overall, it wasn't the worst thing I've read.
2. My enjoyment:
I really enjoyed reading Restorations and would most defiantly reread. I actually sent the review copy I received to a good friend as she is a fan of the mafia and this style of books. (Fingers crossed she enjoys it as well)
3. Character and story development:
There were a few parts where the reader could have used a bit more character and story development/ background, as it lacked. But it really was a great debut novel, especially for it being in Historical Fiction!
4. Grammar and spelling:
Charles Strickler is a great writer and I did not notice any major grammatical or spelling errors. I did find a few that are usually overlooked but they didn't take away from the overall story.
5. The overall story:
I rather enjoyed reading Restorations and would reread. I just wish the parts that seemed to be lacking where able to be added too.
"Accidents happen all the time."
I'm generally not a fan of Historical Fictions but my attention was gripped by this intriguing novel. Charles Strickler's writing style is very informative and it doesn't have that "boring history" tone to it. It was rather light and flowed like water. You can also tell that Charles Strickler did a ton of research prior to writing Restorations and it honestly shows.
Restorations follows Miles' journey in recovering a 1928 Stutz Black Hawk Boat Tail Roadster he bought from an auction. There is a mysterious aura around the Black Hawk and Miles is set on getting answers. This journey he takes includes a pretty woman, a few near death experiences, the mafia, and surprisingly loads of action. You're not going to want to miss this!!
"Stop living in your father's shadow."
Characters:
Miles West - the main character who buys the Black Hawk. Nothing overall special that needs to be pointed out about him.
Bramley Ann Fairchild - the auctioneer who sold Miles the car. She ends up helping him figure out the mystery behind the Black Hawk.
Ms. Gardner - basically the mother figure for Miles and she is dead set on trying to get Miles and Bramley together.
Mr. Howe - the lawyer of Carlo Bello. He seems to be absolutely terrified of Bello.
Carlo Bello - a mob leader who will do anything to get what he wants. He's trying to get the Black Hawk from Miles.
Maximilian "Lefty" Webber - the original owner of the Black Hawk that Miles purchased, deceased.
Wil - the repair man.
Reasons why I rated it 4 stars:
1. The plot:
The plot flowed pretty smoothly, minus a few bumps and turns. I did notice a few spots where the plot jumped and there wasn't story/ character development. But overall, it wasn't the worst thing I've read.
2. My enjoyment:
I really enjoyed reading Restorations and would most defiantly reread. I actually sent the review copy I received to a good friend as she is a fan of the mafia and this style of books. (Fingers crossed she enjoys it as well)
3. Character and story development:
There were a few parts where the reader could have used a bit more character and story development/ background, as it lacked. But it really was a great debut novel, especially for it being in Historical Fiction!
4. Grammar and spelling:
Charles Strickler is a great writer and I did not notice any major grammatical or spelling errors. I did find a few that are usually overlooked but they didn't take away from the overall story.
5. The overall story:
I rather enjoyed reading Restorations and would reread. I just wish the parts that seemed to be lacking where able to be added too.
"Accidents happen all the time."
Nadya R (9 KP) rated The Handmaid's Tale in Books
Jul 2, 2018
"Nolite te bastardes carborundorum"
Strange book.
I really wanted to like it and I kinda do.
Its way too biblical for me. With all these references to different Books connected with the Bible - the Bible stories are not really my thing. Yeah, I know that this is the point - the Religious takes over the world. But the author brings it too far than needed.
The story doesn’t have any logical order. It sounds like a diary of somebody who lost their common sense. All this illogical sentences. Like a flashes of memory in between the current situation. Lack of direct speech - there is no distinction between the narrator and the different characters. It’s so senseless in some points that I have to go back and to read the past couple of pages all over again so I can get the line out.
It's is situated in not-so-far future and it’s told by a woman with no name. All women are named after the family who owns them. In this case our narrator is OfFred - owned by a commander Fred’s family. The new government, that had risen, is proclaiming no rights for the women. Their only purpose is to give birth to a healthy babies. They don’t need money, jobs, books, pens or other things that we are taking for granted in our lives. They don’t need them to deliver babies, so they don’t need them at all.
"Tell, rather than write, because I have nothing to write with and writing is in any case forbidden.
But if it's a story, even in my head.
I must be telling it to someone. You don't tell a story only to yourself. There's always someone else.
Even when there is no one."
The Republic of Gilead, as I said, uses religion to control their lives. Every atrocity they do is justified by the Bible. The Bible has all the answers.
The story line is going around OfFred’s inner fights, her struggle to make the right choices, her dreams to be free again and to be with her child and her husband again. Along with her thoughts she shows us what is like to be a Handmaid. Her daily routine, the Rituals and all these small things that distract her from the reality.
"You can only be jealous of someone who has something you think you ought to have yourself"
Personaly, I don’t like the book that much. It’s senseless and not that easy to read. Not because of the topic, but the way it’s written. The shortage of direct speech took away the movement of the book. I know it should look like a diary, but even in the diaries, the difference between the narrator and others is shown in proper way. Probably I will need a second read to fully understand it. But for now the book left a big mess in my head.
"A man is just a woman's strategy for making other women."
Strange book.
I really wanted to like it and I kinda do.
Its way too biblical for me. With all these references to different Books connected with the Bible - the Bible stories are not really my thing. Yeah, I know that this is the point - the Religious takes over the world. But the author brings it too far than needed.
The story doesn’t have any logical order. It sounds like a diary of somebody who lost their common sense. All this illogical sentences. Like a flashes of memory in between the current situation. Lack of direct speech - there is no distinction between the narrator and the different characters. It’s so senseless in some points that I have to go back and to read the past couple of pages all over again so I can get the line out.
It's is situated in not-so-far future and it’s told by a woman with no name. All women are named after the family who owns them. In this case our narrator is OfFred - owned by a commander Fred’s family. The new government, that had risen, is proclaiming no rights for the women. Their only purpose is to give birth to a healthy babies. They don’t need money, jobs, books, pens or other things that we are taking for granted in our lives. They don’t need them to deliver babies, so they don’t need them at all.
"Tell, rather than write, because I have nothing to write with and writing is in any case forbidden.
But if it's a story, even in my head.
I must be telling it to someone. You don't tell a story only to yourself. There's always someone else.
Even when there is no one."
The Republic of Gilead, as I said, uses religion to control their lives. Every atrocity they do is justified by the Bible. The Bible has all the answers.
The story line is going around OfFred’s inner fights, her struggle to make the right choices, her dreams to be free again and to be with her child and her husband again. Along with her thoughts she shows us what is like to be a Handmaid. Her daily routine, the Rituals and all these small things that distract her from the reality.
"You can only be jealous of someone who has something you think you ought to have yourself"
Personaly, I don’t like the book that much. It’s senseless and not that easy to read. Not because of the topic, but the way it’s written. The shortage of direct speech took away the movement of the book. I know it should look like a diary, but even in the diaries, the difference between the narrator and others is shown in proper way. Probably I will need a second read to fully understand it. But for now the book left a big mess in my head.
"A man is just a woman's strategy for making other women."
Darren (1599 KP) rated Alien: Covenant (2017) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: Alien Covenant starts with the colony ship the Covenant heading towards a new planet, a crew of 15 and over 2000 colonist on board with just Walter (Fassbender) the android running the ship. When the ship encounters a freak storm in space leads the crew suffering loses they need to let the new captain Oram (Crudup) guide them through the damage to the systems.
When the repairs find a ghost transmission from a planet which appears perfectly habitable Oram goes against first mate Daniels’ (Waterston) opinion to continue their mission and takes a crew to this planet.
While on the planet the crew learn, this planet isn’t as safe as they had thought as they learn the deadly species waiting to be awoken along with a discovery which will give them answers about one of the mysterious of space.
Thoughts on Alien: Covenant
Characters/Performance – Walter is the latest model of the androids that joins the mission to do the jobs humans can’t manage he is good natured and understands his mission. Daniels is the second in command after the early tragedy, she doesn’t want to investigate the new planet but soon becomes the one we must rout for once she decides to fight. Oram is your standard captain trying to take the role with his own stamp, also he is meant to be religious. The rest of the crew are what you expect.
Performance wise, well this is where things get interesting, Fassbender is fine but let’s face it he is wasting his talent in movies like these. Waterston struggles to follow in the strong leading action heroine footsteps with Crudup being easily forgettable. This does have known names but nothing that comes off truly memorable in the performances.
Story – The story looks to follow up what happened after the Prometheus in what just feels like a complete rip off, of plenty of films, we have horribly written characters that just do panic instead of being professional in the role that would remain calm through each situation. This is a rinse, repeat film that ends up being one of the most predictable movies you have ever seen.
Horror/Sci-Fi – There is little to no horror in a movie that has ALIENS in which is the whole point. The sci-fi side of the story is all what you have come to expect from the genre without being anything fresh.
Settings – The film looks beautiful and stunning throughout but they also don’t have anything looking original though.
Special Effects – The special effects show us the settings looking almost flawless, it is the aliens which come off weak in places.
Final Thoughts – This is a poor addition to the franchise of aliens, we barely see them and the science versus religion question doesn’t end up getting discussed enough.
Overall: Poor franchise addition that is weak in every single aspect.
https://moviesreview101.com/2017/05/16/alien-covenant-2017/
When the repairs find a ghost transmission from a planet which appears perfectly habitable Oram goes against first mate Daniels’ (Waterston) opinion to continue their mission and takes a crew to this planet.
While on the planet the crew learn, this planet isn’t as safe as they had thought as they learn the deadly species waiting to be awoken along with a discovery which will give them answers about one of the mysterious of space.
Thoughts on Alien: Covenant
Characters/Performance – Walter is the latest model of the androids that joins the mission to do the jobs humans can’t manage he is good natured and understands his mission. Daniels is the second in command after the early tragedy, she doesn’t want to investigate the new planet but soon becomes the one we must rout for once she decides to fight. Oram is your standard captain trying to take the role with his own stamp, also he is meant to be religious. The rest of the crew are what you expect.
Performance wise, well this is where things get interesting, Fassbender is fine but let’s face it he is wasting his talent in movies like these. Waterston struggles to follow in the strong leading action heroine footsteps with Crudup being easily forgettable. This does have known names but nothing that comes off truly memorable in the performances.
Story – The story looks to follow up what happened after the Prometheus in what just feels like a complete rip off, of plenty of films, we have horribly written characters that just do panic instead of being professional in the role that would remain calm through each situation. This is a rinse, repeat film that ends up being one of the most predictable movies you have ever seen.
Horror/Sci-Fi – There is little to no horror in a movie that has ALIENS in which is the whole point. The sci-fi side of the story is all what you have come to expect from the genre without being anything fresh.
Settings – The film looks beautiful and stunning throughout but they also don’t have anything looking original though.
Special Effects – The special effects show us the settings looking almost flawless, it is the aliens which come off weak in places.
Final Thoughts – This is a poor addition to the franchise of aliens, we barely see them and the science versus religion question doesn’t end up getting discussed enough.
Overall: Poor franchise addition that is weak in every single aspect.
https://moviesreview101.com/2017/05/16/alien-covenant-2017/
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Rosemary's Baby (1968) in Movies
Jan 13, 2019
Good...Not Great
Rosemary’s Baby takes you down a rabbit hole and you have no idea what’s waiting for you at the other end. It drove me mad at times as I tried to figure out just what exactly was going on. The story follows a couple and the strange happenings that ensure when they move into a new apartment complex.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 8
I’m watching this movie as I write this as I typically try and do when I write reviews. The beginning is intriguing because it’s chocked full of foreshadowing. Hints are dropped here and there and you recognize almost instantly that something is off. Great job here of being subtle without being overbearing.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
The film succeeds with a visual jarring aspect where you never really gain your footing. You spend most of the film trying to figure out up from down and that’s in large part due to the fact that nothing really seems out of sorts…except for a few things here and there. Director Roman Polanski is like a cat owner with a laser pointer directing your attention in the right place for a bit then redirecting. Everything is under the surface waiting to boil over.
Conflict: 8
As the film progresses and Rosemary (Mia Farrow) descends into madness, you are hoping she can unravel the mystery of what exactly is happening. The conflict comes in the tension of the movements, the things moving under the surface that you know are there. Every new occurrence brings you closer to the truth and makes things more tense.
Genre: 4
This was probably a solid pass for the 1960’s, but it’s honestly pretty tame for today’s standards. I might catch some heat for not respecting the time period it was filmed in, but if we are identifying this as a horror film, then it pales in comparison to some of the horror that has kept me up at night. Also, when I compare it to a film like The Birds from the same period, it comes up short for me.
Memorability: 5
Pace: 7
Things move quickly enough, especially after the famous “dream sequence” that occurs. The pace is driven by the mystery of all the craziness unfolding. You are looking for answers along with Rosemary. A handful of scenes could have been shortened, but things never really drag on for the most part.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 4
Probably my biggest issue with the film. I won’t ruin it, but after everything that transpired, I was looking for a bit more hope for Rosemary. A few tweaks here and there may have altered my opinion of the entire film as a whole.
Overall: 74
Great cinematic storytelling isn’t quite enough to elevate Rosemary’s Baby to a classic in my opinion. Intriguing but not earth-shattering. Worth a one-time watch.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 8
I’m watching this movie as I write this as I typically try and do when I write reviews. The beginning is intriguing because it’s chocked full of foreshadowing. Hints are dropped here and there and you recognize almost instantly that something is off. Great job here of being subtle without being overbearing.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
The film succeeds with a visual jarring aspect where you never really gain your footing. You spend most of the film trying to figure out up from down and that’s in large part due to the fact that nothing really seems out of sorts…except for a few things here and there. Director Roman Polanski is like a cat owner with a laser pointer directing your attention in the right place for a bit then redirecting. Everything is under the surface waiting to boil over.
Conflict: 8
As the film progresses and Rosemary (Mia Farrow) descends into madness, you are hoping she can unravel the mystery of what exactly is happening. The conflict comes in the tension of the movements, the things moving under the surface that you know are there. Every new occurrence brings you closer to the truth and makes things more tense.
Genre: 4
This was probably a solid pass for the 1960’s, but it’s honestly pretty tame for today’s standards. I might catch some heat for not respecting the time period it was filmed in, but if we are identifying this as a horror film, then it pales in comparison to some of the horror that has kept me up at night. Also, when I compare it to a film like The Birds from the same period, it comes up short for me.
Memorability: 5
Pace: 7
Things move quickly enough, especially after the famous “dream sequence” that occurs. The pace is driven by the mystery of all the craziness unfolding. You are looking for answers along with Rosemary. A handful of scenes could have been shortened, but things never really drag on for the most part.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 4
Probably my biggest issue with the film. I won’t ruin it, but after everything that transpired, I was looking for a bit more hope for Rosemary. A few tweaks here and there may have altered my opinion of the entire film as a whole.
Overall: 74
Great cinematic storytelling isn’t quite enough to elevate Rosemary’s Baby to a classic in my opinion. Intriguing but not earth-shattering. Worth a one-time watch.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Spontaneous in Books
Dec 14, 2018
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</i>
Dubbed the “funniest book about spontaneous combustion you will ever read” by the acclaimed best-selling author, John Green, <i>Spontaneous</i> by Aaron Starmer is a story about growing up and blowing up. Seeing a classmate explode in front of you during third-period pre-calc class is not something you ever expect to happen. Nor do you expect this to be the first of many to randomly occur throughout your senior year, but for Mara, this is her appalling fate.
Mara’s senior year was not all that exciting until the first explosion, but after a few more students from her class spontaneously combust, it is clear she is never going to get a normal final year of school. Only affecting the seniors, Mara and her friends are ostracised from society while FBI agents try to solve the problematic situation. With bombs, terrorists and government conspiracies eventually ruled out, the class is left abandoned to explode at their own leisure – although they would rather not!
Mara, along with boyfriend, Dylan, and best friend, Tess, attempts to continue living their lives. They encourage students to start up their own school so that they can still graduate at the end of the year, but with an increasing number of messy ends, they begin to doubt they will make it that far.
Full of crack-pot ideas that will leave readers laughing, Mara’s dry sense of humour gets her through most of the year, however, the painful loss of her friends and acquaintances soon catch up with her. It is hard not to despair when you know you could detonate at any moment.
The easiest way to describe <i>Spontaneous</i> is bonkers, absolutely bonkers. For a start, spontaneous combustion is not a likelihood for any living creature. Mara’s inappropriate humour and acidulousness only add to the farcical state of affairs, providing a comical and entertaining narrative. However, as Mara begins to acquiesce to her new situation, and live as if regularly being sprayed with blood and guts is normal, the story takes a sombre downturn.
Annoyingly, the conclusion of <i>Spontaneous</i> is rather ambiguous, leaving attentive readers with no answers. Had Starmer not imaged a solution, or was it too difficult to explain? Whatever the reason, it leaves us with a dissatisfying ending.
On the other hand, the ending of a book is only one fragment of a story. The beginning and middle were of the author’s optimum quality. Combining typical teenage emotion and behaviour - romance included - with a horrifying crisis, results in a book that will make you “feel all the feels”, to borrow a Mara term, and enjoy every moment.
<i>Spontaneous</i> will entertain young and old adults, although perhaps not the more sensitive reader. With uncensored language and no sugarcoating, Mara gives us all the gory details blow-by-blow (literally). Be prepared for laughter, shock and unadulterated pleasure.
Dubbed the “funniest book about spontaneous combustion you will ever read” by the acclaimed best-selling author, John Green, <i>Spontaneous</i> by Aaron Starmer is a story about growing up and blowing up. Seeing a classmate explode in front of you during third-period pre-calc class is not something you ever expect to happen. Nor do you expect this to be the first of many to randomly occur throughout your senior year, but for Mara, this is her appalling fate.
Mara’s senior year was not all that exciting until the first explosion, but after a few more students from her class spontaneously combust, it is clear she is never going to get a normal final year of school. Only affecting the seniors, Mara and her friends are ostracised from society while FBI agents try to solve the problematic situation. With bombs, terrorists and government conspiracies eventually ruled out, the class is left abandoned to explode at their own leisure – although they would rather not!
Mara, along with boyfriend, Dylan, and best friend, Tess, attempts to continue living their lives. They encourage students to start up their own school so that they can still graduate at the end of the year, but with an increasing number of messy ends, they begin to doubt they will make it that far.
Full of crack-pot ideas that will leave readers laughing, Mara’s dry sense of humour gets her through most of the year, however, the painful loss of her friends and acquaintances soon catch up with her. It is hard not to despair when you know you could detonate at any moment.
The easiest way to describe <i>Spontaneous</i> is bonkers, absolutely bonkers. For a start, spontaneous combustion is not a likelihood for any living creature. Mara’s inappropriate humour and acidulousness only add to the farcical state of affairs, providing a comical and entertaining narrative. However, as Mara begins to acquiesce to her new situation, and live as if regularly being sprayed with blood and guts is normal, the story takes a sombre downturn.
Annoyingly, the conclusion of <i>Spontaneous</i> is rather ambiguous, leaving attentive readers with no answers. Had Starmer not imaged a solution, or was it too difficult to explain? Whatever the reason, it leaves us with a dissatisfying ending.
On the other hand, the ending of a book is only one fragment of a story. The beginning and middle were of the author’s optimum quality. Combining typical teenage emotion and behaviour - romance included - with a horrifying crisis, results in a book that will make you “feel all the feels”, to borrow a Mara term, and enjoy every moment.
<i>Spontaneous</i> will entertain young and old adults, although perhaps not the more sensitive reader. With uncensored language and no sugarcoating, Mara gives us all the gory details blow-by-blow (literally). Be prepared for laughter, shock and unadulterated pleasure.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated State of Play (2009) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
In the corridors of the nation’s capital, Washington D.C. alliances and wheeling and dealing are the name of the game. With billions if not trillions of dollars hinging on new laws and policy, corporations clearly have an interest in which way the political winds are leaning and how it will affect their all important bottom line.
In the political thriller “State of Play”, Director Kevin MacDonald has combined a stellar cast with a strong script from Tony Gilroy, Billy Ray, and Matthew Michael Carnahan to craft one of the best dramas since Gilroy’s “Michael Clayton”.
When the lead researcher of Congressman Stephen Collins (Ben Affleck), dies in an accident, it is a devastating blow to the young Congressman as he prepares for a series of hearings intended to cull the growth of a private security firm.
What is at first listed as an accident raises suspicion in veteran news reporter Cal McAffrey (Russell Crowe), who has had a long friendship, with Collins. Despite tension in recent years, Collins turns to Cal when it is revealed that he had an affair with his researcher. As Cal looks into the story he is under pressure from his editor (Helen Mirren), to deliver a story to keep the papers new owners happy. If this was not bad enough, Cal is also dogged by an online reporter for the paper named Della (Rachael McAdams), who is looking to make a name for herself at the paper.
Cal soon learns that the assistant was killed in what was made to look like an accident, and that a shooting incident that occurred prior to the death may be related to the murder.
Cal teams up with Della and soon learns that some very big players may be involved and that they will stop at nothing to protect their secret.
In a race against time, Cal and Della must get to the bottom of the mystery and stay alive. Unsure who to trust and which way their leads will follow, Cal and Della look for the answers that unaware that the quest they have undertaken will affect the halls of power as well as the very nation itself.
“State of Play” is a very tight thriller that is filled with twists and turns. The characters are interesting and well developed and the performances are first rate. Crowe is powerful as the determined Cal and works well with Affleck and Adams. Robin Wright Penn and Helen Mirren also give very strong performances.
The story of the film seems ripped from the headlines and has an eerie sense of reality to it, and works much better than “The International” attempted to do with its conspiracy premise.
While I have avoided as many spoilers as I could, suffice it to say that the film does have a deep plot that twists and turns to a rewarding conclusion and will keep your attention. I would hope that the fine work in this film is not forgotten when the Oscars come up next.
In the political thriller “State of Play”, Director Kevin MacDonald has combined a stellar cast with a strong script from Tony Gilroy, Billy Ray, and Matthew Michael Carnahan to craft one of the best dramas since Gilroy’s “Michael Clayton”.
When the lead researcher of Congressman Stephen Collins (Ben Affleck), dies in an accident, it is a devastating blow to the young Congressman as he prepares for a series of hearings intended to cull the growth of a private security firm.
What is at first listed as an accident raises suspicion in veteran news reporter Cal McAffrey (Russell Crowe), who has had a long friendship, with Collins. Despite tension in recent years, Collins turns to Cal when it is revealed that he had an affair with his researcher. As Cal looks into the story he is under pressure from his editor (Helen Mirren), to deliver a story to keep the papers new owners happy. If this was not bad enough, Cal is also dogged by an online reporter for the paper named Della (Rachael McAdams), who is looking to make a name for herself at the paper.
Cal soon learns that the assistant was killed in what was made to look like an accident, and that a shooting incident that occurred prior to the death may be related to the murder.
Cal teams up with Della and soon learns that some very big players may be involved and that they will stop at nothing to protect their secret.
In a race against time, Cal and Della must get to the bottom of the mystery and stay alive. Unsure who to trust and which way their leads will follow, Cal and Della look for the answers that unaware that the quest they have undertaken will affect the halls of power as well as the very nation itself.
“State of Play” is a very tight thriller that is filled with twists and turns. The characters are interesting and well developed and the performances are first rate. Crowe is powerful as the determined Cal and works well with Affleck and Adams. Robin Wright Penn and Helen Mirren also give very strong performances.
The story of the film seems ripped from the headlines and has an eerie sense of reality to it, and works much better than “The International” attempted to do with its conspiracy premise.
While I have avoided as many spoilers as I could, suffice it to say that the film does have a deep plot that twists and turns to a rewarding conclusion and will keep your attention. I would hope that the fine work in this film is not forgotten when the Oscars come up next.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Be Cool (2005) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
It has been ten years since audiences last saw Chili Palmer (John Travolta), a former criminal who uses his criminal experiences to become a successful film producer. The how and why Chili made this transition was documented in the 1995 film Get Shorty.
As the film opens, Chili is discussing his frustrations with the film industry with his associate Tommy (James Woods), at a sidewalk cafe. The conversation is interrupted by a barrage of bullets that leaves Tommy dead and Chili with more questions than answers. It seems that Tommy was taken down by a criminal organization and as such, his record company now finds itself in dire straits as his widow Edie (Uma Thurman), struggles to keep the company afloat.
Since Chili is friends with Edie and wants to move to the music business, he uses this opportunity to introduce a new prodigy named Linda Moon (Christina Milian) to her and prepares to record her.
Things become complicated when Chili discovers that Linda is under contract to some very shady characters, including Nick Carr (Harvey Keitel) who, like Chili, has a criminal past and is not above using thugs to eliminate or intimidate those into doing his bidding. His right hand man is the hood obsessed Raji (Vince Vaughn) and his massive yet closeted muscle Elliott (Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson).
If you are not confused yet, don’t worry as the plot will be come even more complex when record producer Sin LaSalle (Cedric the Entertainer), demands $300,000 in owed money from Tommy, due in under a week to keep his boys from taking out Chili and ruining Edie’s company.
The great thing about Be Cool is that no matter how many characters come and go from the every changing plot, it is always well paced and funny, and does not lose momentum.
The audience, like most of the characters, is forced to figure things out as they happen with the exception being Chili who seems to have things figured out even before he takes the necessary steps to resolve the situation.
The cast seems to be having a great time playing their parts and Travolta and Thurman seem to have a very easy going and natural chemistry, especially when they follow up their Pulp Fiction dance with a spirited number. The film also boasts many cameos and I will refrain from spoiling them here.
The highlight of the film would have to be The Rock as he daringly pokes fun at his tough guy persona and signature raised eyebrow by playing the identity confused Elliott who is more at ease belting out torch songs than he is at bashing heads.
The only real issue with the film was that Thurman’s character did not always have much to do aside from standing around looking pretty and being the supportive love interest in the film.
That being said, if you do not mind a twisting plot, over the top characters, and some goofiness, than Be Cool is just the film for you.
As the film opens, Chili is discussing his frustrations with the film industry with his associate Tommy (James Woods), at a sidewalk cafe. The conversation is interrupted by a barrage of bullets that leaves Tommy dead and Chili with more questions than answers. It seems that Tommy was taken down by a criminal organization and as such, his record company now finds itself in dire straits as his widow Edie (Uma Thurman), struggles to keep the company afloat.
Since Chili is friends with Edie and wants to move to the music business, he uses this opportunity to introduce a new prodigy named Linda Moon (Christina Milian) to her and prepares to record her.
Things become complicated when Chili discovers that Linda is under contract to some very shady characters, including Nick Carr (Harvey Keitel) who, like Chili, has a criminal past and is not above using thugs to eliminate or intimidate those into doing his bidding. His right hand man is the hood obsessed Raji (Vince Vaughn) and his massive yet closeted muscle Elliott (Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson).
If you are not confused yet, don’t worry as the plot will be come even more complex when record producer Sin LaSalle (Cedric the Entertainer), demands $300,000 in owed money from Tommy, due in under a week to keep his boys from taking out Chili and ruining Edie’s company.
The great thing about Be Cool is that no matter how many characters come and go from the every changing plot, it is always well paced and funny, and does not lose momentum.
The audience, like most of the characters, is forced to figure things out as they happen with the exception being Chili who seems to have things figured out even before he takes the necessary steps to resolve the situation.
The cast seems to be having a great time playing their parts and Travolta and Thurman seem to have a very easy going and natural chemistry, especially when they follow up their Pulp Fiction dance with a spirited number. The film also boasts many cameos and I will refrain from spoiling them here.
The highlight of the film would have to be The Rock as he daringly pokes fun at his tough guy persona and signature raised eyebrow by playing the identity confused Elliott who is more at ease belting out torch songs than he is at bashing heads.
The only real issue with the film was that Thurman’s character did not always have much to do aside from standing around looking pretty and being the supportive love interest in the film.
That being said, if you do not mind a twisting plot, over the top characters, and some goofiness, than Be Cool is just the film for you.
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated The First Time Lauren Pailing Died in Books
Feb 3, 2020
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Book-Review-Banner-7.png"/>;
<b><i>The First Time Lauren Pailing Died is a beautifully-written novel that opens your eyes about life and its meaning. A very powerful novel with interesting story. I have read books that have a few similarities to this one, but I haven't read anything like this before.</i></b>
The main character in this book is without a doubt, Lauren. In the first chapters, we learn more about her and her parents. Lauren is an intriguing child, able to stare in the distance for a long time and able to see a different mummy that doesn't exist. When Lauren dies as a teen, the story splits into a few parts and we have parallel universes and different story lines happening.
In one of them, Lauren hasn't died at all. She wakes up and continues life as normal. In another, her parents have a little daughter and are coping with Lauren's death while raising the little girl. The third would represents Lauren's mum who can't cope with the pain and commits suicide, leaving Lauren's dad on his own. With all of the story lines, one thing stays the same - a mysterious disappearance of Lauren's dad's boss - Peter.
In every life Lauren lives - she feels like she needs to find out what happened to Peter. In all honesty, this mystery was supposed to be the centre of the story in the book, but to me it just didn't make sense at all. Once we got all the answers, all I could think of was that these two stories could have easily been made into two separate books.
While I had mixed feelings about the mystery of Peter, I definitely loved the parallel universe theme in the book. There were so many alternatives in Lauren's life. It puts into perspective how one choice in your life can make a difference in the long run. If you only change one decision, you could end up somewhere completely different.
<b>I cannot recommend this book enough, if this is a genre that intrigues you. If you are planning to read it, I would suggest to avoid reading reviews and synopsis and go with a blank page of expectations. The less you know - the better your experience will be. Keep your mind open and enjoy. Happy Reading! <3</b>
Thank you to the team from HQ for sending me a hardcover ARC copy in exchange for an honest review.
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Book-Review-Banner-7.png"/>;
<b><i>The First Time Lauren Pailing Died is a beautifully-written novel that opens your eyes about life and its meaning. A very powerful novel with interesting story. I have read books that have a few similarities to this one, but I haven't read anything like this before.</i></b>
The main character in this book is without a doubt, Lauren. In the first chapters, we learn more about her and her parents. Lauren is an intriguing child, able to stare in the distance for a long time and able to see a different mummy that doesn't exist. When Lauren dies as a teen, the story splits into a few parts and we have parallel universes and different story lines happening.
In one of them, Lauren hasn't died at all. She wakes up and continues life as normal. In another, her parents have a little daughter and are coping with Lauren's death while raising the little girl. The third would represents Lauren's mum who can't cope with the pain and commits suicide, leaving Lauren's dad on his own. With all of the story lines, one thing stays the same - a mysterious disappearance of Lauren's dad's boss - Peter.
In every life Lauren lives - she feels like she needs to find out what happened to Peter. In all honesty, this mystery was supposed to be the centre of the story in the book, but to me it just didn't make sense at all. Once we got all the answers, all I could think of was that these two stories could have easily been made into two separate books.
While I had mixed feelings about the mystery of Peter, I definitely loved the parallel universe theme in the book. There were so many alternatives in Lauren's life. It puts into perspective how one choice in your life can make a difference in the long run. If you only change one decision, you could end up somewhere completely different.
<b>I cannot recommend this book enough, if this is a genre that intrigues you. If you are planning to read it, I would suggest to avoid reading reviews and synopsis and go with a blank page of expectations. The less you know - the better your experience will be. Keep your mind open and enjoy. Happy Reading! <3</b>
Thank you to the team from HQ for sending me a hardcover ARC copy in exchange for an honest review.
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;