Search
Louise (64 KP) rated See What I Have Done in Books
Jul 2, 2018
*I received a copy of this book from Netgalley and the Publisher Grove Atlantic in exchange for an honest review*
I do like reading Historical Fiction but even more so when the book is based on a true story. This is the story following the murders of Andrew and Abby Borden. They were found with their skulls smashed in by their daughter Lizzie. Lizzie and Emma Borden are spinsters and still live with their father, step-mother and Bridget the maid. They seemed to have a sheltered life and been well-kept by their father. This story delves in to the lives of the Bordens and what happened behind closed doors of this well-respected family.
<b>"Lizzie Borden took an axe, And gave her mother forty whacks; When she saw what she had done, She gave her father forty-one,"</b>
I am going to be truthful and say that this book was ok but nothing really blew me away. I don’t think that there was much added to this story than what you could actually read on Wikipedia. The story was repetitive, slow and didn’t always hold my attention. The problem with stories like these are you know how they are going to end you don’t have that thrill of finding out who done it. I liked the writing style of this book and the way she wrote Lizzie’s character.
The story is told from four perspectives, Lizzie, Emma, Bridget and Benjamin.It was through them that the story was told of the events leading up to the murders and afterwards. The character that stuck out the me was Lizzie, she was spoilt, childish, rude and clearly deluded. Benjamin was the only character that was added to put a bit of a spin on the story but really didn’t come to anything and a bit pointless.
How easy it was to get away with murder though in the 1800’s, there was no DNA testing, no blood spatter analysis or proper interrogations in those days, yet in there were times in the story when I wanted the police to grasp onto something and for them to start piecing it altogether. Lizzie’s statement of what happened was fragmented,not making sense and was taken as shock, whereas nowadays this would be deemed as suspicious behaviour and you would be arrested at the drop of a hat.
In conclusion I think this is a good debut novel by Sarah Schmidt but it didn’t really bring anything new to the table.
I rated this 3 out of 5 stars
I do like reading Historical Fiction but even more so when the book is based on a true story. This is the story following the murders of Andrew and Abby Borden. They were found with their skulls smashed in by their daughter Lizzie. Lizzie and Emma Borden are spinsters and still live with their father, step-mother and Bridget the maid. They seemed to have a sheltered life and been well-kept by their father. This story delves in to the lives of the Bordens and what happened behind closed doors of this well-respected family.
<b>"Lizzie Borden took an axe, And gave her mother forty whacks; When she saw what she had done, She gave her father forty-one,"</b>
I am going to be truthful and say that this book was ok but nothing really blew me away. I don’t think that there was much added to this story than what you could actually read on Wikipedia. The story was repetitive, slow and didn’t always hold my attention. The problem with stories like these are you know how they are going to end you don’t have that thrill of finding out who done it. I liked the writing style of this book and the way she wrote Lizzie’s character.
The story is told from four perspectives, Lizzie, Emma, Bridget and Benjamin.It was through them that the story was told of the events leading up to the murders and afterwards. The character that stuck out the me was Lizzie, she was spoilt, childish, rude and clearly deluded. Benjamin was the only character that was added to put a bit of a spin on the story but really didn’t come to anything and a bit pointless.
How easy it was to get away with murder though in the 1800’s, there was no DNA testing, no blood spatter analysis or proper interrogations in those days, yet in there were times in the story when I wanted the police to grasp onto something and for them to start piecing it altogether. Lizzie’s statement of what happened was fragmented,not making sense and was taken as shock, whereas nowadays this would be deemed as suspicious behaviour and you would be arrested at the drop of a hat.
In conclusion I think this is a good debut novel by Sarah Schmidt but it didn’t really bring anything new to the table.
I rated this 3 out of 5 stars
Lindsay (1812 KP) rated Charlie Goes to School (Adventures with Charlie #1) in Books
Sep 17, 2022
Charlie Goes to School is a story based on a true story. It is about a little boy that has some special needs. The book focuses on what Charlie can rather than what he can not do. This is a good book for children and parents alike. An to show that being different is okay. They may look and do things a bit differently.
This book goes through the adventures that Charlie does to go to school. It shows and tells us how he goes about his day at school. It shows the help and friends he does have at school and in town. Some of his favorite things he likes to do and classes. The pictures are done well.
I love reading about different children and learning what they can do with their abilities, whether they are physical or mental. This book can teach children and parents that having someone with special needs can teach and inspire others how they do things.
This little boy is an inspiration and a charmer, just being himself, and his family accepts him for being him. If you love him and do what is best for him, that is all that matters. Charlie seems like he been happy and is learning to do some adventures of his own. This series is called “Adventures with Charlie” Charlie Goes to School. Charlie seems to join the fun of trying new things. What fun will you do on a school bus and at school?
This book goes through the adventures that Charlie does to go to school. It shows and tells us how he goes about his day at school. It shows the help and friends he does have at school and in town. Some of his favorite things he likes to do and classes. The pictures are done well.
I love reading about different children and learning what they can do with their abilities, whether they are physical or mental. This book can teach children and parents that having someone with special needs can teach and inspire others how they do things.
This little boy is an inspiration and a charmer, just being himself, and his family accepts him for being him. If you love him and do what is best for him, that is all that matters. Charlie seems like he been happy and is learning to do some adventures of his own. This series is called “Adventures with Charlie” Charlie Goes to School. Charlie seems to join the fun of trying new things. What fun will you do on a school bus and at school?
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Papillon (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
Henry “Papillon” Charriere (Charlie Hunnam) is a safecracker making his name in the Parisian underworld. But when he decides to keep some diamonds from a big score to himself his luck changes. He is framed for a murder and given a life sentence. Even worse for Papillon is that he is being shipped to the Devil’s Island penal colony in French Giana. With no chance at an appeal his only chance at freedom is to escape. On the long boat ride from France to South America he finds an unlikely ally in the form of the forger Louis Dega (Rami Malek). The slight and awkward Dega does not want to escape but rather just survive long enough to have his appeal heard. Papillon agrees to protect Dega in exchange for financing any escape plan Papillon can devise. With Dega’s financial backing Papillon now only has to figure out how to escape from prison no one has been known to escape from on an island surrounded by rivers and ocean, unforgiving jungle and guards who shoot to kill.
Papillon is based on a true story and adapted from the novels “Papillon” and “Banco” written by Charriere himself. This is the second film adaptation of these novels. The other film, also Papillon, is from 1973 stared Steve McQueen and Dustin Hoffman. I have not seen the 1973 version but I did enjoy the story and could be worth viewing to get another directors vision.
The 2018 version is powered but a captivating story of survival and the unlikely friendship of two men thrust together in a harsh environment. Both Hunnam (King Arthur, Pacific Rim) and Malek (Mr. Robot – TV Series, Night at the Museum) give excellent performances. The rest of the cast is okay but these two stars give great performances. Danish director Michael Noer (R, Northwest) does a decent job in the telling of the story visually. There was blood in one scene that was a pink colored and did not look anything like blood and that was a little distracting. The prison seemed realistic and grimy, but also weirdly bright.
Overall I enjoyed this film. I didn’t have any expectations going in and was pleasantly surprised but interesting story. At 2 hours and 13 minutes it does seem a bit too long. This would be a film I would enjoy watching at home and not necessarily something I would spend theater money on.
Papillon is based on a true story and adapted from the novels “Papillon” and “Banco” written by Charriere himself. This is the second film adaptation of these novels. The other film, also Papillon, is from 1973 stared Steve McQueen and Dustin Hoffman. I have not seen the 1973 version but I did enjoy the story and could be worth viewing to get another directors vision.
The 2018 version is powered but a captivating story of survival and the unlikely friendship of two men thrust together in a harsh environment. Both Hunnam (King Arthur, Pacific Rim) and Malek (Mr. Robot – TV Series, Night at the Museum) give excellent performances. The rest of the cast is okay but these two stars give great performances. Danish director Michael Noer (R, Northwest) does a decent job in the telling of the story visually. There was blood in one scene that was a pink colored and did not look anything like blood and that was a little distracting. The prison seemed realistic and grimy, but also weirdly bright.
Overall I enjoyed this film. I didn’t have any expectations going in and was pleasantly surprised but interesting story. At 2 hours and 13 minutes it does seem a bit too long. This would be a film I would enjoy watching at home and not necessarily something I would spend theater money on.
Bila Yarrudhanggalangdhuray
Book
Gundagai, 1852 The powerful Murrumbidgee River surges through town leaving death and destruction...
The War Nurses
7.0
Rate It
Book
You will love every moment of this absolutely brilliant wartime saga, perfect for fans of Diney...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Box (2009) in Movies
Aug 9, 2019
Norma Lewis (Cameron Diaz) and her husband, Arthur Lewis (James Marsden), are having a bad day. She just found out her educational scholarship will be ending and he is not going to become an astronaut even when he fits the bill. It is on this particularly challenging day that a mysterious box arrives on their doorstep. The package contains a button which when pressed is worth a million dollar payout but also will kill a random person unknown to the button pusher. Should they push the button and what happens if they do?
Based on the short story Button, Button by Richard Mathason, “The Box” stays true to Mathason’s one of a kind style. It is an interesting premise, and would make an interesting television episode, but falters as a full-length film.
“The Box” gives almost nothing to viewers, running so far off the original ‘push the button, don’t push the button’ issue as to baffle audiences. The more time goes on the more ridiculous the plot becomes and as a viewer you begin to wonder if the movie will ever end.
Furthering the joylessness of “the Box” is the overabundant use of 1970s décor and objects. Not at all subtle, the film’s need to beat you over the head with the time period is distracting from the plot of this already shaky film. Far to blatant to be unnoticeable, you leave the film not entirely sure what has happened but very sure it happened in the 1970s.
This is not to say that the film doesn’t offer some satisfaction, but the work put into stretching this short story into a full-length feature film leaves many lingering questions for the viewer.
So if you really enjoy a yellowish tint to your film going experience or overly blatant references to the 1970s you should definitely go see “The Box” but if you lack these offbeat qualities I suggest quickly reading the short story.
Based on the short story Button, Button by Richard Mathason, “The Box” stays true to Mathason’s one of a kind style. It is an interesting premise, and would make an interesting television episode, but falters as a full-length film.
“The Box” gives almost nothing to viewers, running so far off the original ‘push the button, don’t push the button’ issue as to baffle audiences. The more time goes on the more ridiculous the plot becomes and as a viewer you begin to wonder if the movie will ever end.
Furthering the joylessness of “the Box” is the overabundant use of 1970s décor and objects. Not at all subtle, the film’s need to beat you over the head with the time period is distracting from the plot of this already shaky film. Far to blatant to be unnoticeable, you leave the film not entirely sure what has happened but very sure it happened in the 1970s.
This is not to say that the film doesn’t offer some satisfaction, but the work put into stretching this short story into a full-length feature film leaves many lingering questions for the viewer.
So if you really enjoy a yellowish tint to your film going experience or overly blatant references to the 1970s you should definitely go see “The Box” but if you lack these offbeat qualities I suggest quickly reading the short story.
In the Beginning Was the Sea
Frank Wynne, Tomas Gonzalez and Robert Frank Hunter
Book
Death in paradise: sea, sex and a sinister downward spiral on a Caribbean coast The young...
![We Fly Beneath the Stars [Audiobook]](/uploads/profile_image/802/80aa1332-831c-401a-87dd-f91c5a08d802.jpg?m=1670160938)
We Fly Beneath the Stars [Audiobook]
8.0
Rate It
Book
1942, Europe: Based on the true story of a female-only bomber battalion, this is a totally...
Queen of Shadows
Book
She should have stayed in the shadows—but Leonor de Guzmán yearned for the sun Castile in the...
Historical Fiction Medieval Romance
Dianne Robbins (1738 KP) rated Adrift (2018) in Movies
May 25, 2019
Confusing (1 more)
Grim
Contains spoilers, click to show
You are immediately thrown into the action of Tami coming to after being tossed about below deck from the hurricane. Had I not been reading a play-by-play on IMDB, I might have been more confused than I was but I was intrigued by what I read so I wanted to see how it all played out onscreen. I would have preferred to see the hurricane shown because I'm a fan of disaster films, but instead, we are shown the aftermath and flashbacks of the couple's first meeting and the romance that followed. I would also have liked to see more of the actual rescue and her telling her story to the Japanese sailors and/or people in Hawaii when she was taken to the island instead of brief and vague glimpses of it.
The doldrums of trying to survive aboard a broken vessel and all the boredom of hours upon hours of being adrift is shown.
The acting is decent enough.
There is very little excitement to hold one's interest. I was disappointed that in the movie but it wasn't my story to tell. This is based on the true story of Tami Oldham Ashcraft, who is listed as one of the writers and is shown briefly at the end of the movie.
It's not great. Reading about the actual story online is more satisfying. I am curious about Ashcraft's book but it's probably as boring as the movie.
The doldrums of trying to survive aboard a broken vessel and all the boredom of hours upon hours of being adrift is shown.
The acting is decent enough.
There is very little excitement to hold one's interest. I was disappointed that in the movie but it wasn't my story to tell. This is based on the true story of Tami Oldham Ashcraft, who is listed as one of the writers and is shown briefly at the end of the movie.
It's not great. Reading about the actual story online is more satisfying. I am curious about Ashcraft's book but it's probably as boring as the movie.