Search
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Wild Rose (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Three Chords and the Truth.
BAFTA named Jessie Buckley as one of their “Rising Stars” for 2019, and here she proves why.
Buckley plays Glaswegian Rose-Lynn Harlan, a decidedly wild child electronically tagged and released from the clink but straight down to some very public cowgirl sex with her erstwhile boyfriend. Only then does she have the afterthought of going round to the house of her Mum (Julie Walters) where two young children live. For Rose-Lynn is a single mum of two (#needs-to-be-more-careful-with-the-cowgirl-stuff), and the emotional damage metered out to the youngsters from her wayward life is fully evident.
Rose-Lynn is a frustrated ‘country-and-weste’… no, sorry… just ‘western’ singer, and she has a talent for bringing the house down in Glasgow during a show. The desire to ‘make it big’ in Nashville is bordering on obsession, and nothing – not her mum, not her children, nothing – will get in her way.
Rose-Lynn has no idea how to make her dream come true. (And no, she doesn’t bump into Bradley Cooper at this point). But things look up when she lies her way to a cleaning job for the middle class Susannah (Sophie Okonedo) who sees the talent in her and comes up with a couple of innovative ways to move her in the right direction.
Will she get out of her Glasgow poverty trap and rise to fame and fortune as a Nashville star?
Difficult to like.
Rose-Lynn is not an easy character to like. She is borderline sociopathic and has a self-centred selfish streak a mile wide. As she tramples all over her offspring’s young lives, breaking each and every promise like clockwork, then you just want to shout at her and give her a good shaking. It’s a difficult line for the film to walk (did the ghost of Johnny Cash make me write that?) and it only barely walks it unscathed.
Memories of Birdman.
A key shout-out needs to go to director Tom Harper (“Woman in Black 2“, and the TV epic “War and Peace”) and his cinematographer of choice George Steel. Some of the angles and framed shots are exquisitely done. A fantastic dance sequence through Susannah’s house (the best since Hugh Grant‘s No. 10 “Jump” in “Love Actually”) reveals the associated imaginary musicians in various alcoves reminiscent of the drummer in “Birdman“. And there are a couple of great drone shots: one (no spoilers) showing Rose-Lynn leaving a party is particularly effective.
The turns.
The camera simply loves Jessie Buckley. She delivers real energy in the good times and real pathos in the bad. She can – assuming it’s her performing – also sing! (No surprise since she was, you might remember, runner up to Jodie Prenger in the BBC search for a “Maria” for Lloyd Webber’s “Sound of Music”). She is certainly one to watch on the acting stage.
Supporting Buckley in prime roles are national treasure Julie Walters, effecting an impressive Glaswegian accent, and Sophie Okonedo, who is one of those well-known faces from TV that you can never quite place. BBC Radio 2’s Bob Harris also turns up as himself, being marvellously unconvincing as an actor!
But I don’t like country music?
Frankly neither do I. But it hardly matters. As long as you don’t ABSOLUTELY LOATHE it, I predict you’ll tolerate the tunes and enjoy the movie. Followers of this blog might remember that – against the general trend – I was highly unimpressed with “A Star is Born“. This movie I enjoyed far, far more.
Buckley plays Glaswegian Rose-Lynn Harlan, a decidedly wild child electronically tagged and released from the clink but straight down to some very public cowgirl sex with her erstwhile boyfriend. Only then does she have the afterthought of going round to the house of her Mum (Julie Walters) where two young children live. For Rose-Lynn is a single mum of two (#needs-to-be-more-careful-with-the-cowgirl-stuff), and the emotional damage metered out to the youngsters from her wayward life is fully evident.
Rose-Lynn is a frustrated ‘country-and-weste’… no, sorry… just ‘western’ singer, and she has a talent for bringing the house down in Glasgow during a show. The desire to ‘make it big’ in Nashville is bordering on obsession, and nothing – not her mum, not her children, nothing – will get in her way.
Rose-Lynn has no idea how to make her dream come true. (And no, she doesn’t bump into Bradley Cooper at this point). But things look up when she lies her way to a cleaning job for the middle class Susannah (Sophie Okonedo) who sees the talent in her and comes up with a couple of innovative ways to move her in the right direction.
Will she get out of her Glasgow poverty trap and rise to fame and fortune as a Nashville star?
Difficult to like.
Rose-Lynn is not an easy character to like. She is borderline sociopathic and has a self-centred selfish streak a mile wide. As she tramples all over her offspring’s young lives, breaking each and every promise like clockwork, then you just want to shout at her and give her a good shaking. It’s a difficult line for the film to walk (did the ghost of Johnny Cash make me write that?) and it only barely walks it unscathed.
Memories of Birdman.
A key shout-out needs to go to director Tom Harper (“Woman in Black 2“, and the TV epic “War and Peace”) and his cinematographer of choice George Steel. Some of the angles and framed shots are exquisitely done. A fantastic dance sequence through Susannah’s house (the best since Hugh Grant‘s No. 10 “Jump” in “Love Actually”) reveals the associated imaginary musicians in various alcoves reminiscent of the drummer in “Birdman“. And there are a couple of great drone shots: one (no spoilers) showing Rose-Lynn leaving a party is particularly effective.
The turns.
The camera simply loves Jessie Buckley. She delivers real energy in the good times and real pathos in the bad. She can – assuming it’s her performing – also sing! (No surprise since she was, you might remember, runner up to Jodie Prenger in the BBC search for a “Maria” for Lloyd Webber’s “Sound of Music”). She is certainly one to watch on the acting stage.
Supporting Buckley in prime roles are national treasure Julie Walters, effecting an impressive Glaswegian accent, and Sophie Okonedo, who is one of those well-known faces from TV that you can never quite place. BBC Radio 2’s Bob Harris also turns up as himself, being marvellously unconvincing as an actor!
But I don’t like country music?
Frankly neither do I. But it hardly matters. As long as you don’t ABSOLUTELY LOATHE it, I predict you’ll tolerate the tunes and enjoy the movie. Followers of this blog might remember that – against the general trend – I was highly unimpressed with “A Star is Born“. This movie I enjoyed far, far more.
Discovr - discover music
Music and Entertainment
2.0
Rate It
App
Explore the world of music with Discovr * No. 1 music app in 50+ countries (US, UK, AU and more) *...
Darren (1599 KP) rated Peter Rabbit (2018) in Movies
Nov 29, 2019
Verdict: Poor Film
Story: Peter Rabbit starts as we see how Peter Rabbit and his family and friends had a battle with old Mr McGregor (Neill) after they continued to steal from his garden, until he passes away. The next-door neighbour Bea (Byrne) does try to keep them safe the best she can.
When Thomas McGregor (Gleeson) moves into the house with plans to sell it, which sees the war coming back for Peter and his family, this time it might become deadlier.
Thoughts on Peter Rabbit
Characters – Peter Rabbit is the mischievous little rabbit that always gets his siblings into trouble as they always seem to terrorise the McGregor family, that does seem to be the only thing he does each day, making him out to be a horrible little rabbit. Thomas McGregor is a completely by the book toy store employee wanting to get to management, when he loses his job, he ends up following in his uncle footsteps, getting into a battle with the rabbits. Bea is the nice neighbour that has always tried to look after the animals, loves nature and is an artist.
Performances – Domhnall Gleeson is great along with Rose Byrne are the two main live action stars that both work well with how they act towards the animals. Most of the voice acting is mixed, with the three sisters working well, but James Corden not suiting the character.
Story – The story follows the adventures of Peter Rabbit against the McGregor’s, which just seems to keep escalating. The story is strange because it doesn’t make Peter likeable at all, he just seems to annoy McGregor and never do anything else, surely there would have been another food supply for him. Most of the story revolves around pop culture jokes, which have dated quickly, but by the end the story just becomes boring more than anything else.
Adventure/Comedy – The adventure is just the troubles Peter gets himself in, we don’t seem to go any further, while the comedy is a miss already.
Settings – The film keeps the action in the country, which does seem to have only show how close the war between the two was.
Animation – The animated animals looks solid for the most part, but some of the moments seem weird.
Scene of the Movie – Harrods break down.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Peter Rabbit.
Final Thoughts – This is a big disappointment because the characters used are loveable for the most part, while this movie just makes them horrible.
Overall: Boring.
Story: Peter Rabbit starts as we see how Peter Rabbit and his family and friends had a battle with old Mr McGregor (Neill) after they continued to steal from his garden, until he passes away. The next-door neighbour Bea (Byrne) does try to keep them safe the best she can.
When Thomas McGregor (Gleeson) moves into the house with plans to sell it, which sees the war coming back for Peter and his family, this time it might become deadlier.
Thoughts on Peter Rabbit
Characters – Peter Rabbit is the mischievous little rabbit that always gets his siblings into trouble as they always seem to terrorise the McGregor family, that does seem to be the only thing he does each day, making him out to be a horrible little rabbit. Thomas McGregor is a completely by the book toy store employee wanting to get to management, when he loses his job, he ends up following in his uncle footsteps, getting into a battle with the rabbits. Bea is the nice neighbour that has always tried to look after the animals, loves nature and is an artist.
Performances – Domhnall Gleeson is great along with Rose Byrne are the two main live action stars that both work well with how they act towards the animals. Most of the voice acting is mixed, with the three sisters working well, but James Corden not suiting the character.
Story – The story follows the adventures of Peter Rabbit against the McGregor’s, which just seems to keep escalating. The story is strange because it doesn’t make Peter likeable at all, he just seems to annoy McGregor and never do anything else, surely there would have been another food supply for him. Most of the story revolves around pop culture jokes, which have dated quickly, but by the end the story just becomes boring more than anything else.
Adventure/Comedy – The adventure is just the troubles Peter gets himself in, we don’t seem to go any further, while the comedy is a miss already.
Settings – The film keeps the action in the country, which does seem to have only show how close the war between the two was.
Animation – The animated animals looks solid for the most part, but some of the moments seem weird.
Scene of the Movie – Harrods break down.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Peter Rabbit.
Final Thoughts – This is a big disappointment because the characters used are loveable for the most part, while this movie just makes them horrible.
Overall: Boring.
Lee (2222 KP) rated 1917 (2020) in Movies
Jan 11, 2020
British soldiers Schofield (George MacKay) and Blake (Dean-Charles Chapman) are taking a well earned rest in a peaceful French field when they are summoned to a meeting down in the trenches with General Erinmore (Colin Firth). Having believed that the Germans had retreated, and were now on the run, the General has now learned that they are in fact armed to the teeth and lying in wait for the unsuspecting battalion of 1600 Brits who are preparing to advance on them. Unfortunately, that battalion is quite a distance across country, and with telephone lines currently out of action, Blake and Schofield have been tasked by the General with delivering the message to call off the attack. And the reason for choosing Blake? His brother is one of the 1600 likely to meet their death if the message isn’t received before they attack the following morning.
The big talking point surrounding 1917 has been the ‘single shot’ effect that it uses in order to tell its story. We effectively follow Blake and Schofield in real time as they undertake their mission, with only a single camera shot tracking them, and only noticeably cutting away just once. The result is outstanding, delivering a seamless and fully immersive experience unlike anything you’ve experienced before, outside of a first person shooter video game.
Late last year, a short behind the scenes video for 1917 was released, showing how they’d used cameras hanging from wires, which were then passed to guys on foot, then to guys on vehicles, back and forth in order to achieve the effect. The result is that the camera glides effortlessly around the soldiers in the trenches and on the battlefields, through barbed wire and across bodies of water filled with rotting corpses. You feel the tension and all of the emotion right there, right alongside the soldiers who are experiencing it. It’s a truly amazing technical achievement.
Their journey takes them across no mans land, across the war-torn countryside, avoiding danger and all other obstacles in their way. And it’s edge of seat stuff, aided by an amazing heart pumping score and that incredible camera work. Hats off to George Mackay as Schofield too, who carries the majority of the movie and is really put through the wringer.
1917 has already earned itself a Golden Globe, and nine BAFTA nominations, just this last week alone. And it deserves it all. Bold, ambitious storytelling, and an early contender for this years best movie.
The big talking point surrounding 1917 has been the ‘single shot’ effect that it uses in order to tell its story. We effectively follow Blake and Schofield in real time as they undertake their mission, with only a single camera shot tracking them, and only noticeably cutting away just once. The result is outstanding, delivering a seamless and fully immersive experience unlike anything you’ve experienced before, outside of a first person shooter video game.
Late last year, a short behind the scenes video for 1917 was released, showing how they’d used cameras hanging from wires, which were then passed to guys on foot, then to guys on vehicles, back and forth in order to achieve the effect. The result is that the camera glides effortlessly around the soldiers in the trenches and on the battlefields, through barbed wire and across bodies of water filled with rotting corpses. You feel the tension and all of the emotion right there, right alongside the soldiers who are experiencing it. It’s a truly amazing technical achievement.
Their journey takes them across no mans land, across the war-torn countryside, avoiding danger and all other obstacles in their way. And it’s edge of seat stuff, aided by an amazing heart pumping score and that incredible camera work. Hats off to George Mackay as Schofield too, who carries the majority of the movie and is really put through the wringer.
1917 has already earned itself a Golden Globe, and nine BAFTA nominations, just this last week alone. And it deserves it all. Bold, ambitious storytelling, and an early contender for this years best movie.
MelanieTheresa (997 KP) rated The Wife Who Knew Too Much in Books
Mar 10, 2020
From the moment I finished It's Always the Husband, Michele Campbell quickly became one of those authors whose books are added to my TBR pile immediately. The two titles that followed, She Was the Quiet One and A Stranger on the Beach, were similarly excellent. Now, with The Wife Who Knew Too Much, Michele Campbell has solidified her position among my favorite authors.
Rich boy meets middle-class girl at his country club and embarks upon a summer fling that becomes a little more. Rich boy can't bear the thought of giving up his money for the love of the middle-class girl, and so their summer fling is unceremoniously concluded. Some years later, middle-class girl is waitressing when rich boy (now married, still rich, but with his wife's money instead of his grandmother's) pops back up in her life (is this orchestrated somehow, or fate?), and the ride truly begins.
"I'm writing this to raise an alarm in the event of my untimely death. This is hard to admit, even to myself. For obvious reasons. He's in love with someone else. And he wants my money."
Connor's wife, Nina, is a rich widow whose diary entries we are privy to, detailing what she believes to be the plot between her husband and his mistress to kill her and inherit her millions, and this is what immediately sucked me in to the story, because of course I wanted to know if he/they killed her! The author almost manages to make Nina a sympathetic character, but never quite gets there; she's quite unpleasant, but she probably didn't deserve to die.
Tabitha (middle-class girl) can be a semi-annoying character. She makes questionable decisions and justifies them to herself all for her love of Connor (rich boy). Half the time you can almost see the hearts in her eyes. I understand being in love, but being so completely besotted that you disregard some major red flags? That's something else entirely.
And Connor? Well, Connor's kind of a dick, while also being clueless in many ways. As a teen, he "loves" Tabby but gives her up for his grandmother's money. As an adult, he "loves" Tabby but can't quite leave his rich wife just yet. Come ON.
I do have to say that I saw the big reveal coming, so it was a bit predictable in that way, but everything builds to a satisfying conclusion. See for yourself June 9th!
Thank you to St. Martin's Press for the digital ARE!
Rich boy meets middle-class girl at his country club and embarks upon a summer fling that becomes a little more. Rich boy can't bear the thought of giving up his money for the love of the middle-class girl, and so their summer fling is unceremoniously concluded. Some years later, middle-class girl is waitressing when rich boy (now married, still rich, but with his wife's money instead of his grandmother's) pops back up in her life (is this orchestrated somehow, or fate?), and the ride truly begins.
"I'm writing this to raise an alarm in the event of my untimely death. This is hard to admit, even to myself. For obvious reasons. He's in love with someone else. And he wants my money."
Connor's wife, Nina, is a rich widow whose diary entries we are privy to, detailing what she believes to be the plot between her husband and his mistress to kill her and inherit her millions, and this is what immediately sucked me in to the story, because of course I wanted to know if he/they killed her! The author almost manages to make Nina a sympathetic character, but never quite gets there; she's quite unpleasant, but she probably didn't deserve to die.
Tabitha (middle-class girl) can be a semi-annoying character. She makes questionable decisions and justifies them to herself all for her love of Connor (rich boy). Half the time you can almost see the hearts in her eyes. I understand being in love, but being so completely besotted that you disregard some major red flags? That's something else entirely.
And Connor? Well, Connor's kind of a dick, while also being clueless in many ways. As a teen, he "loves" Tabby but gives her up for his grandmother's money. As an adult, he "loves" Tabby but can't quite leave his rich wife just yet. Come ON.
I do have to say that I saw the big reveal coming, so it was a bit predictable in that way, but everything builds to a satisfying conclusion. See for yourself June 9th!
Thank you to St. Martin's Press for the digital ARE!
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Footloose (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Public dancing is against the law in the small religious town of Bomont. But Boston-raised teenager, Ren McCormack and the Reverend’s daughter Ariel have other ideas in this remake of the 1984 classic.
The original “Footloose” requires a 1980s mindset and was successful partially due the disjointed storytelling of teen films during that era. Up until now it could be said that there is no “Footloose” without Kevin Bacon. But surprise! The remake is so good that you may need to step back.
The cast is more polished than the original, particularly in lead female role of Ariel Moore brought back to the screen by Julianne Hough. Hough’s performance is more engaging than that of the original portrayal by Lori Singer. Taking the reigns of the role that made Kevin Bacon famous is Kenny Wormald as city boy Ren. Wormald wears the role with charm and the required “Footloose” too-cool-for-school style.
Reverend Shaw Moore, now played by Dennis Quaid, is far more emotional than the original depiction of the character first played by a John Lithgow. However, the same cannot be said for his wife, Vi Moore, with a disappointing performance from Andy McDowell. This is balanced however by the truly enjoyable portrayal of Ren’s best friend Willard by the well-timed comedy of Miles Teller.
Yes, there were cheesy moments. There was even a sunset so over the top that it may remind you Star Wars buffs of a certain lengthy romance scene in Episode Two. And yes, more than one of the reanimated lines from the classic film was forced. But the flubs were few and far between as this “Footloose” remake manages to succeed in many places where the original could have been improved.
The explanation of tragedy that originally befell Bomont has been extended, giving the town’s anti-dance perspective a little more sway. And this time around “Footloose” directly addresses a number of the small town versus big city stereotypes with strong dual sided humor.
The new “Footloose” still has less dancing then you want from a film entirely about dance, but when it does occur the style is much more diverse, ranging from hip hop to that famous “Footloose” country. There were things missed from the original; particularly the precision of Bacon’s solo dance scene, but this remake honors the impact of the original while standing on its own.
Now where do you buy a pair of red cowboy boots?!
The original “Footloose” requires a 1980s mindset and was successful partially due the disjointed storytelling of teen films during that era. Up until now it could be said that there is no “Footloose” without Kevin Bacon. But surprise! The remake is so good that you may need to step back.
The cast is more polished than the original, particularly in lead female role of Ariel Moore brought back to the screen by Julianne Hough. Hough’s performance is more engaging than that of the original portrayal by Lori Singer. Taking the reigns of the role that made Kevin Bacon famous is Kenny Wormald as city boy Ren. Wormald wears the role with charm and the required “Footloose” too-cool-for-school style.
Reverend Shaw Moore, now played by Dennis Quaid, is far more emotional than the original depiction of the character first played by a John Lithgow. However, the same cannot be said for his wife, Vi Moore, with a disappointing performance from Andy McDowell. This is balanced however by the truly enjoyable portrayal of Ren’s best friend Willard by the well-timed comedy of Miles Teller.
Yes, there were cheesy moments. There was even a sunset so over the top that it may remind you Star Wars buffs of a certain lengthy romance scene in Episode Two. And yes, more than one of the reanimated lines from the classic film was forced. But the flubs were few and far between as this “Footloose” remake manages to succeed in many places where the original could have been improved.
The explanation of tragedy that originally befell Bomont has been extended, giving the town’s anti-dance perspective a little more sway. And this time around “Footloose” directly addresses a number of the small town versus big city stereotypes with strong dual sided humor.
The new “Footloose” still has less dancing then you want from a film entirely about dance, but when it does occur the style is much more diverse, ranging from hip hop to that famous “Footloose” country. There were things missed from the original; particularly the precision of Bacon’s solo dance scene, but this remake honors the impact of the original while standing on its own.
Now where do you buy a pair of red cowboy boots?!
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Peter Rabbit 2: The Runaway (2021) in Movies
Jul 3, 2021
When I imagined the first time back into my Cineworld I was of course envisioning an epic first film back, something monumental... I succumbed to peer pressure and saw Peter Rabbit 2, but it was in a double bill with Spiral, what a combo. Bunnies and butchery.
Following Thomas and Bea's wedding, things start to change for this country family. Bea's story has become so popular that there's a book deal on the horizon, and the family head off to the big city to talk to the publisher. But Peter isn't happy about the way things are changing. He wanders off into the city streets where he meets a mysterious stranger that shows him a new way of living where he can be the bunny he wants to be.
Where do I begin? Peter doesn't like being cast as a brat, disappears and... does some brattish things. It's on brand for the bunny, so feels right for this second outing.
The animal antics felt right throughout the film, but the humans one... no so much. I know I'm probably overthinking about this film a little, but I honestly don't think this situation would have happened at all, not with the sort of person Bea was. That's the card we were dealt though so I guess we have to accept it.
I found the film to be very slow going at the start, it essentially wasn't very different from the first. Thankfully, somewhere at the midpoint it does pick up and you get more of the crazy action that, let's face it, was the only reasons that us adults are seeing this. (Apart from Hannah, Hannah is here for some Gleeson goodness as well as the bunnies.)
It seems a little daft to go over most of the things about this film as it really is a carbon copy where everything but the storyline is concerned. There are a few moments that even taking artistic license into account didn't sit right with me, but they would all constitute spoilers so I won't elaborate, rest assured though, you will have the same quibbles if you watch it.
Peter Rabbit 2 The Runaway. (not that anyone remembers the second bit), would have been good competition with the first had the beginning had the same pace as the rest of the film. What we've got is a sequel that is really just for the kids to enjoy, we'll just hang around for the action.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/07/peter-rabbit-2-runaway-movie-review.html
Following Thomas and Bea's wedding, things start to change for this country family. Bea's story has become so popular that there's a book deal on the horizon, and the family head off to the big city to talk to the publisher. But Peter isn't happy about the way things are changing. He wanders off into the city streets where he meets a mysterious stranger that shows him a new way of living where he can be the bunny he wants to be.
Where do I begin? Peter doesn't like being cast as a brat, disappears and... does some brattish things. It's on brand for the bunny, so feels right for this second outing.
The animal antics felt right throughout the film, but the humans one... no so much. I know I'm probably overthinking about this film a little, but I honestly don't think this situation would have happened at all, not with the sort of person Bea was. That's the card we were dealt though so I guess we have to accept it.
I found the film to be very slow going at the start, it essentially wasn't very different from the first. Thankfully, somewhere at the midpoint it does pick up and you get more of the crazy action that, let's face it, was the only reasons that us adults are seeing this. (Apart from Hannah, Hannah is here for some Gleeson goodness as well as the bunnies.)
It seems a little daft to go over most of the things about this film as it really is a carbon copy where everything but the storyline is concerned. There are a few moments that even taking artistic license into account didn't sit right with me, but they would all constitute spoilers so I won't elaborate, rest assured though, you will have the same quibbles if you watch it.
Peter Rabbit 2 The Runaway. (not that anyone remembers the second bit), would have been good competition with the first had the beginning had the same pace as the rest of the film. What we've got is a sequel that is really just for the kids to enjoy, we'll just hang around for the action.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/07/peter-rabbit-2-runaway-movie-review.html
Guitar! by Smule
Music and Social Networking
6.0
Rate It
App
Play guitar alongside top singers from our companion app: Sing! Karaoke. Add personal flourishes on...
Lyndsey Gollogly (2893 KP) rated Smoulder ( Anita Blake book 29) in Books
Mar 27, 2023
Contains spoilers, click to show
‼️‼️ spoiler in review ‼️‼️
37 of 235
Book
Smoulder ( Anita Blake book 29)
By Laurell K Hamilton
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Vampire hunter Anita Blake is no stranger to killing monsters. It’s part of her job as a Preternatural U.S. Marshal, after all. But even her experience isn’t enough to stop something that is bent on destroying everything—and everyone—she loves.
Anita Blake is engaged to Jean-Claude, the new vampire king of America. Humans think she’s gone over to the side of the monsters. The vampires fear that their new king has fallen under the spell of the most powerful necromancer in a thousand years.
In the midst of wedding preparations—including getting Edward, aka U.S. Marshal Ted Forrester, fitted as best man—Anita gets a call that the local police need her expertise at a brutal murder scene linked to a nationwide slaughter of vampires and humans, dubbed the Sunshine Murders.
But there is more than just a murderer to catch: an ancient evil has arrived in St. Louis to challenge Jean-Claude for his crown, his life, Anita, and all they hold dear. Even with Jean-Claude’s new powers as king and Anita’s necromancy, it isn’t enough; they must embrace their triumvirate or allow primeval darkness to spread across the country, possessing first the vampires and then the humans. Evil will triumph unless Jean-Claude and Anita can prove that love conquers all.
Omg this book has had me going crazy!!! The first 4 chapters were not good and I was seriously worried for the rest of the book. Then we had a little case and a bit of drama at Guilty Pleasures the Bang! Richard makes his entrance yes I am one of those very few that love him and I think although he was a bit kiss’assy he turned it round for me. I normally hate the relationship bull crap and I don’t like Nathaniel at all but even he impressed me.
So then we get to the new big bad and honestly he sounds bloody awesome I mean what’s not to love a demigod Dragon! I can’t wait to see how and if they take him down!
I do have a few issues one my god Peter is annoying! And two why are Asher and Kane still alive??? I mean the end has pissed me off! Why on earth didn’t they just wipe them both out? Oh and take Rosina with them!!
37 of 235
Book
Smoulder ( Anita Blake book 29)
By Laurell K Hamilton
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Vampire hunter Anita Blake is no stranger to killing monsters. It’s part of her job as a Preternatural U.S. Marshal, after all. But even her experience isn’t enough to stop something that is bent on destroying everything—and everyone—she loves.
Anita Blake is engaged to Jean-Claude, the new vampire king of America. Humans think she’s gone over to the side of the monsters. The vampires fear that their new king has fallen under the spell of the most powerful necromancer in a thousand years.
In the midst of wedding preparations—including getting Edward, aka U.S. Marshal Ted Forrester, fitted as best man—Anita gets a call that the local police need her expertise at a brutal murder scene linked to a nationwide slaughter of vampires and humans, dubbed the Sunshine Murders.
But there is more than just a murderer to catch: an ancient evil has arrived in St. Louis to challenge Jean-Claude for his crown, his life, Anita, and all they hold dear. Even with Jean-Claude’s new powers as king and Anita’s necromancy, it isn’t enough; they must embrace their triumvirate or allow primeval darkness to spread across the country, possessing first the vampires and then the humans. Evil will triumph unless Jean-Claude and Anita can prove that love conquers all.
Omg this book has had me going crazy!!! The first 4 chapters were not good and I was seriously worried for the rest of the book. Then we had a little case and a bit of drama at Guilty Pleasures the Bang! Richard makes his entrance yes I am one of those very few that love him and I think although he was a bit kiss’assy he turned it round for me. I normally hate the relationship bull crap and I don’t like Nathaniel at all but even he impressed me.
So then we get to the new big bad and honestly he sounds bloody awesome I mean what’s not to love a demigod Dragon! I can’t wait to see how and if they take him down!
I do have a few issues one my god Peter is annoying! And two why are Asher and Kane still alive??? I mean the end has pissed me off! Why on earth didn’t they just wipe them both out? Oh and take Rosina with them!!