Search
Search results
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated Star Light, Star Bright in Books
Feb 15, 2019
Review added: May 16, 2013
First off, things I liked about the book: (1) the title, it's a nice touch of whimsy, (2) the cover colors, and (3) the little shooting star above the chapter numbers (hey, it's cute!). I'm sorry to say that's about it.
This book was just a disaster; there was an excessive amount crammed into 360 pages, and all of it was predictable, over-the-top, and unbelievable. All the characters are supposed to be flawed but they were one-dimensional and boring. Lily and Peter were an exception; I think they had possibilities, most likely better suited to a completely different book. Brooke was an absolutely horrible character; she's boring, whiney, and did many things that I don't think her character would do (such as leave her horses without a by-your-leave), not to mention when her mother tells Brooke about her father and she's not affected by it in the least. What?! Then she spends the whole rest of the book a whole mess of a person who really needs to be sent to a psychiatric clinic, it's just too bad no one else sees this. Ugh, why would anyone like this person, let alone love her?
I don't think the author knew quite what to do with the book. First, the prologue, I'm sorry but it really didn't make sense to the rest of the book, not that the rest made much sense either. Secondly, the author was always changing direction; from the back of the book, I thought it was a love triangle, not exactly. Ms. Stone shifted to and from that but never really settled on a solution to have the triangle. Next, the conversations were a joke; everybody just opens up to a stranger and tells them a whole story? Every conversation was so melodramatic too.
Now for the relationships... No love triangle, that's why I read the book, I thought it sounded interesting. Rafe and Brooke: he's 26, she's 17 when they meet, they spend 9 days together...they're in love? Ha! Not to mention it's very creepy. I can pretend that Brooke is a mature 17 but I don't think a relationship for 9 days would reckon they love each other, they don't even know each other well. I'm sorry but 9 years in between, especially when the younger is 17 is huge; it's not like when someone is 30 and the other is 39, it's a big difference. I also find it hard to believe that 12 years later, everyone is the same and feels the same, no one has really changed. Then from here, the rest of the book is played out in a week, and the last bit totals a month. Way too much for the time period.
I know I had many, many more problems with this story but I think I'll stop here because I gave the main ones. If I continued on I might give spoilers and I don't want to do that in case someone actually wants to read this book. I don't know if this story was supposed to be like a fable, but if it was, it was a dismal failure.
First off, things I liked about the book: (1) the title, it's a nice touch of whimsy, (2) the cover colors, and (3) the little shooting star above the chapter numbers (hey, it's cute!). I'm sorry to say that's about it.
This book was just a disaster; there was an excessive amount crammed into 360 pages, and all of it was predictable, over-the-top, and unbelievable. All the characters are supposed to be flawed but they were one-dimensional and boring. Lily and Peter were an exception; I think they had possibilities, most likely better suited to a completely different book. Brooke was an absolutely horrible character; she's boring, whiney, and did many things that I don't think her character would do (such as leave her horses without a by-your-leave), not to mention when her mother tells Brooke about her father and she's not affected by it in the least. What?! Then she spends the whole rest of the book a whole mess of a person who really needs to be sent to a psychiatric clinic, it's just too bad no one else sees this. Ugh, why would anyone like this person, let alone love her?
I don't think the author knew quite what to do with the book. First, the prologue, I'm sorry but it really didn't make sense to the rest of the book, not that the rest made much sense either. Secondly, the author was always changing direction; from the back of the book, I thought it was a love triangle, not exactly. Ms. Stone shifted to and from that but never really settled on a solution to have the triangle. Next, the conversations were a joke; everybody just opens up to a stranger and tells them a whole story? Every conversation was so melodramatic too.
Now for the relationships... No love triangle, that's why I read the book, I thought it sounded interesting. Rafe and Brooke: he's 26, she's 17 when they meet, they spend 9 days together...they're in love? Ha! Not to mention it's very creepy. I can pretend that Brooke is a mature 17 but I don't think a relationship for 9 days would reckon they love each other, they don't even know each other well. I'm sorry but 9 years in between, especially when the younger is 17 is huge; it's not like when someone is 30 and the other is 39, it's a big difference. I also find it hard to believe that 12 years later, everyone is the same and feels the same, no one has really changed. Then from here, the rest of the book is played out in a week, and the last bit totals a month. Way too much for the time period.
I know I had many, many more problems with this story but I think I'll stop here because I gave the main ones. If I continued on I might give spoilers and I don't want to do that in case someone actually wants to read this book. I don't know if this story was supposed to be like a fable, but if it was, it was a dismal failure.
Dana (24 KP) rated The Tempest in Books
Mar 23, 2018
I had to read this play for my Shakespeare class in college and it was the first time I had ever read it.
This was an interesting play, and I'm not sure where it will fit on my scale for my favorite Shakespearean plays. While the plot was pretty straightforward, I do not know how I necessarily felt about the characters themselves. This being Shakespeare's final play, I feel like he wanted to pull in some aspects from his previous plays to draw the crowds in one last time.
I definitely see Shakespeare in Prospero. Both men are known for their art, Prospero's being magic and Shakespeare's being his writings, and in the end, both will give up those arts to be with their families. While it cannot be proved, Shakespeare did die fairly soon after his career ended, making yet another connection where possibly his "every third thought would be of the grave" just as Prospero foretold. And of course, Prospero's final soliloquy is said to be Shakespeare's swan song, his final curtain call.
Miranda can be seen as a voice for the audience a lot throughout the play. She is the reason we get the backstory about why Prospero is doing what he is doing, she voices concerns that the audiences may all be thinking. I think this was intentional because in most of the Shakespearean plays, there is at least one character who stands in for the audience.
Ariel, not going to lie, I thought he was a female character, though I found out by reading more, and watching a filmed production of it, that he is often portrayed as a male. I do, however, want to see what a female could do with this character. Especially since he is such a pivotal character to the plot line being in most, if not all, scenes in some way or another. Without Ariel, the story would not have been able to happen.
Caliban is weird. I understand why he hates Prospero and Miranda so much, but that doesn't excuse his actions both in the actual play and before it in the history sections.
I do not quite know what to classify this play as. It is definitely not one of the tragedies (mainly because it doesn't have a character name in the title) but it also isn't really a comedy. Would it be a mystical play? I don't really know. If you do, please, message me or comment on the post, because I am curious.
This play is often referenced in literature and in pop culture, but I never fully understood what they meant, so it was fun to be able to finally get what people were talking about. That being said, I do not think this is one of his most popular plays. Yes, it was his last, but I have not seen it come up as much in my studies as, let's say, Hamlet or Romeo and Juliet.
Overall, I enjoyed the play, but it definitely isn't my favorite. That spot still goes to Macbeth.
This was an interesting play, and I'm not sure where it will fit on my scale for my favorite Shakespearean plays. While the plot was pretty straightforward, I do not know how I necessarily felt about the characters themselves. This being Shakespeare's final play, I feel like he wanted to pull in some aspects from his previous plays to draw the crowds in one last time.
I definitely see Shakespeare in Prospero. Both men are known for their art, Prospero's being magic and Shakespeare's being his writings, and in the end, both will give up those arts to be with their families. While it cannot be proved, Shakespeare did die fairly soon after his career ended, making yet another connection where possibly his "every third thought would be of the grave" just as Prospero foretold. And of course, Prospero's final soliloquy is said to be Shakespeare's swan song, his final curtain call.
Miranda can be seen as a voice for the audience a lot throughout the play. She is the reason we get the backstory about why Prospero is doing what he is doing, she voices concerns that the audiences may all be thinking. I think this was intentional because in most of the Shakespearean plays, there is at least one character who stands in for the audience.
Ariel, not going to lie, I thought he was a female character, though I found out by reading more, and watching a filmed production of it, that he is often portrayed as a male. I do, however, want to see what a female could do with this character. Especially since he is such a pivotal character to the plot line being in most, if not all, scenes in some way or another. Without Ariel, the story would not have been able to happen.
Caliban is weird. I understand why he hates Prospero and Miranda so much, but that doesn't excuse his actions both in the actual play and before it in the history sections.
I do not quite know what to classify this play as. It is definitely not one of the tragedies (mainly because it doesn't have a character name in the title) but it also isn't really a comedy. Would it be a mystical play? I don't really know. If you do, please, message me or comment on the post, because I am curious.
This play is often referenced in literature and in pop culture, but I never fully understood what they meant, so it was fun to be able to finally get what people were talking about. That being said, I do not think this is one of his most popular plays. Yes, it was his last, but I have not seen it come up as much in my studies as, let's say, Hamlet or Romeo and Juliet.
Overall, I enjoyed the play, but it definitely isn't my favorite. That spot still goes to Macbeth.
Joe Goodhart (27 KP) rated Phoenix Resurrection: The Return of Jean Grey in Books
Nov 30, 2020
So, confession time, I had bought this on a Comixology sale a couple months before the whole "Death of the X-Men", etc., etc. I was not really following the recent X-debacles, but I am a Jean Grey fan from way (like when the whole "Dark Phoenix Saga" was coming out for the first time. Yeah, I'm OLD! lol) and well, I had pretty high hopes, y'know?
Unfortunately, I could not get into it at the time. Mind you, this was all pre-"Dawn of X"; as I am starting a big "Dawn of X" re-visit from HoX/PoX up to present, only without the dumpster fire that was FALLEN ANGELS, it made sense to try this one again! And, as I read it all in one afternoon, it's needless to say, but I am hella glad I did!
---
When I started reading it at first, I was apprehensive, as I saw some of Bendis' O5 X-Men were in it. It would appear my "apprehensive[ness]" was not really necessary as the O5 members included really had no memorable role to the story.
Matthew Rosenberg is an author's name I had heard in passing but had never had an occasion to read anything he'd written. Before embarking on this tale, I read Rosenberg's NEW MUTANTS: DEAD SOULS, giving me a taste (which I liked despite the unresolved cliffhanger ending) of his writing style and how he would handle writing for mutants.
I really liked his treatment of the characters! Beast felt in character, as did nearly everyone else. Even Old Man Logan, who was a great character in Millar's miniseries but who felt like a guest who didn't really know when to go home, was quite likable, bringing some real feels to the story, and the story's ending.
Do I think this was the worst way to bring back Jean? Good Lord, no! There have been a few other occasions over the years, which were closer to that notion! But this story? Yeah, it made sense (like <b>that</b> ever happens in comics!), giving Jean a return that felt proper as well as some genuine caring for her character's history as a whole!
And how about that art? WOW! I am not what you'd call a fan of Leinil Francis Yu's art style, finding it to be too "sketchy" at times. However, in the issues he turned in (Issues 1 and 5) were unlike any I had ever seen him draw before! While the other issues from Carlos Pacheco (Issue 2)Illustrator), Ramon Rosanas (Issue 4) and Joe Bennett (Issue 3 and Issue 5, alongside Yu) all seemed to tie together perfectly, never once swaying in art style, helping the story to remain visually consistent for all five of the issues of the the mini-series!
At the end of the day, I can find very little, if anything, to gripe about with PHOENIX RESURRECTION: THE RETURN OF JEAN GREY! It's a solid story that is all about characters we have grown up with and loved, as well as more than hearty helping of the feels! And, really, at the end of the day, isn't that what it's all about anyway?
Peace.
Unfortunately, I could not get into it at the time. Mind you, this was all pre-"Dawn of X"; as I am starting a big "Dawn of X" re-visit from HoX/PoX up to present, only without the dumpster fire that was FALLEN ANGELS, it made sense to try this one again! And, as I read it all in one afternoon, it's needless to say, but I am hella glad I did!
---
When I started reading it at first, I was apprehensive, as I saw some of Bendis' O5 X-Men were in it. It would appear my "apprehensive[ness]" was not really necessary as the O5 members included really had no memorable role to the story.
Matthew Rosenberg is an author's name I had heard in passing but had never had an occasion to read anything he'd written. Before embarking on this tale, I read Rosenberg's NEW MUTANTS: DEAD SOULS, giving me a taste (which I liked despite the unresolved cliffhanger ending) of his writing style and how he would handle writing for mutants.
I really liked his treatment of the characters! Beast felt in character, as did nearly everyone else. Even Old Man Logan, who was a great character in Millar's miniseries but who felt like a guest who didn't really know when to go home, was quite likable, bringing some real feels to the story, and the story's ending.
Do I think this was the worst way to bring back Jean? Good Lord, no! There have been a few other occasions over the years, which were closer to that notion! But this story? Yeah, it made sense (like <b>that</b> ever happens in comics!), giving Jean a return that felt proper as well as some genuine caring for her character's history as a whole!
And how about that art? WOW! I am not what you'd call a fan of Leinil Francis Yu's art style, finding it to be too "sketchy" at times. However, in the issues he turned in (Issues 1 and 5) were unlike any I had ever seen him draw before! While the other issues from Carlos Pacheco (Issue 2)Illustrator), Ramon Rosanas (Issue 4) and Joe Bennett (Issue 3 and Issue 5, alongside Yu) all seemed to tie together perfectly, never once swaying in art style, helping the story to remain visually consistent for all five of the issues of the the mini-series!
At the end of the day, I can find very little, if anything, to gripe about with PHOENIX RESURRECTION: THE RETURN OF JEAN GREY! It's a solid story that is all about characters we have grown up with and loved, as well as more than hearty helping of the feels! And, really, at the end of the day, isn't that what it's all about anyway?
Peace.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Fantastic Beasts: Crimes of Grindelwald (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
Well where do I start? I love the fact that there is no substantial synopsis for this film, a lot have just gone with "the ongoing adventures of Newt Scamander" or similarly vague offerings.
It's difficult to separate them from their Harry Potter ancestry. They are of course the same universe. If you can sever the links then the films aren't too bad, but they're not amazing either. The other issue is that with the links you're obviously given lots of issues with continuity and timelines.
After only given a brief sighting of Grindelwald in the first film we're sold a creepy and scary version in this one very early on. His suspension during the transfer to the coach gives him the sinister grace of a dementor. This leads to the first of two problems for me. Abernathy in this whole introductory section is odd and you can tell something is up, so when we're eventually presented with that was happening it wasn't a surprise.
Here's problem two. Once Grindelwald is secured in the coach the rest of the sequence takes place outside, in the dark, in a storm. Very atmospheric with striking shots... most of which you can't see because of the lightning and rain. Everything is so fast that it's just a blur. It seems to be a popular occurrence recently and I will never understand why you would spend so much money on them when you can't see what's happening. One of the bits that you can see properly is the ghostly face of Grindelwald appearing in the coach window... which is a shame because it felt like it was awfully done and could have used some covering up.
As a quick note while I remember, I would like to acknowledge the impressive advances in wizarding technology. Early roombas and Fitbits. Great job!
Looking back over the notes most of them were about characters. Barely any about storyline. Just one thing that seemed completely out of place/inaccurate, and that was Minerva McGonagall. I'm not well enough versed in Harry Potter history but looking at the chatter I don't think her timeline matches with that of the film... but I'll leave that to the super nerds. If it is inaccurate it would have been very easy to avoid so it seems ridiculous to have had in at all.
The fluffy, feathered and scaly friends also need an honourable mention. *gets out soap box and steps up* Nifflers rule. I will fight anyone who thinks otherwise. Although, bad film! Getting my hopes up and then dashing them. You give them leeway with the animation considering they're fantastic beasts, but the only creatures that don't really have a decent presence on screen are the matagots that protect the Ministry of Magic. Even as hairless catlike creatures you'd expect something a little more impressive than what feels like CGI with a layer of detail missing.
I'm also intrigued by the phoenix. Is it Fawkes? How did Albus get his? Of course I could have missed things that answer all of the questions I have about it.
After reviewing all my notes I can (un)happily say that almost all of the women come off quite badly in this film. Bunty, Newt's assistant (I hope that was her name, she was fairly forgetable other than this point), came over as a little creepy with her comments that clearly show her affections for him. Queenie has a bit of a transformation in this one. She's still got her optimistic outlook but she's devolving a bit. Tina is taken by jealousy, which seems a little off for her. The newest addition of Nagini came out relatively unscathed and I'm hoping for an intriguing ongoing story for her.
The male characters came off slightly better. Jacob and Flamel were some welcome relief from this bleak installment of the franchise. Hats off to Callum Turner and Joshua Shea though. They both managed to pick up the Newt mannerisms really well. I can appreciate it even though it's one of the things I dislike about Fantastic Beasts, the constant head tilting.
Jude Law as Albus Dumbledore still doesn't sit quite right, but he made a reasonable job of it. He doesn't quite hold the same presence in the scenes as you'd expect him to for the man he becomes though. Everyone also got into a tizzy about his sexuality. Who cares? Whether he is or isn't gay makes no difference to the movie whatsoever. Just enjoy a film a don't worry about it until it's relevant.
It really is difficult to sum the story line up for this one. There's a reason that everyone has generalised the synopsis. It's just a lot of nothing in particular. It's part two of five. There didn't really seem to be a lot apart from filler. What I can tell you is that the first time I saw this (I went to the midnight screening at Vue originally) I fell asleep through a significant chunk in the middle and yet I still came out with the same understanding and enjoyment as I did after the second time.
What you should do
You're going to have to see it at some point if you're into the HP universe. Just a statement of fact there!
Movie thing you wish you could take home
That magic spell for collapsing all my belongings into a couple of trunks, I'm assuming it would come in handy for cleaning as well.
It's difficult to separate them from their Harry Potter ancestry. They are of course the same universe. If you can sever the links then the films aren't too bad, but they're not amazing either. The other issue is that with the links you're obviously given lots of issues with continuity and timelines.
After only given a brief sighting of Grindelwald in the first film we're sold a creepy and scary version in this one very early on. His suspension during the transfer to the coach gives him the sinister grace of a dementor. This leads to the first of two problems for me. Abernathy in this whole introductory section is odd and you can tell something is up, so when we're eventually presented with that was happening it wasn't a surprise.
Here's problem two. Once Grindelwald is secured in the coach the rest of the sequence takes place outside, in the dark, in a storm. Very atmospheric with striking shots... most of which you can't see because of the lightning and rain. Everything is so fast that it's just a blur. It seems to be a popular occurrence recently and I will never understand why you would spend so much money on them when you can't see what's happening. One of the bits that you can see properly is the ghostly face of Grindelwald appearing in the coach window... which is a shame because it felt like it was awfully done and could have used some covering up.
As a quick note while I remember, I would like to acknowledge the impressive advances in wizarding technology. Early roombas and Fitbits. Great job!
Looking back over the notes most of them were about characters. Barely any about storyline. Just one thing that seemed completely out of place/inaccurate, and that was Minerva McGonagall. I'm not well enough versed in Harry Potter history but looking at the chatter I don't think her timeline matches with that of the film... but I'll leave that to the super nerds. If it is inaccurate it would have been very easy to avoid so it seems ridiculous to have had in at all.
The fluffy, feathered and scaly friends also need an honourable mention. *gets out soap box and steps up* Nifflers rule. I will fight anyone who thinks otherwise. Although, bad film! Getting my hopes up and then dashing them. You give them leeway with the animation considering they're fantastic beasts, but the only creatures that don't really have a decent presence on screen are the matagots that protect the Ministry of Magic. Even as hairless catlike creatures you'd expect something a little more impressive than what feels like CGI with a layer of detail missing.
I'm also intrigued by the phoenix. Is it Fawkes? How did Albus get his? Of course I could have missed things that answer all of the questions I have about it.
After reviewing all my notes I can (un)happily say that almost all of the women come off quite badly in this film. Bunty, Newt's assistant (I hope that was her name, she was fairly forgetable other than this point), came over as a little creepy with her comments that clearly show her affections for him. Queenie has a bit of a transformation in this one. She's still got her optimistic outlook but she's devolving a bit. Tina is taken by jealousy, which seems a little off for her. The newest addition of Nagini came out relatively unscathed and I'm hoping for an intriguing ongoing story for her.
The male characters came off slightly better. Jacob and Flamel were some welcome relief from this bleak installment of the franchise. Hats off to Callum Turner and Joshua Shea though. They both managed to pick up the Newt mannerisms really well. I can appreciate it even though it's one of the things I dislike about Fantastic Beasts, the constant head tilting.
Jude Law as Albus Dumbledore still doesn't sit quite right, but he made a reasonable job of it. He doesn't quite hold the same presence in the scenes as you'd expect him to for the man he becomes though. Everyone also got into a tizzy about his sexuality. Who cares? Whether he is or isn't gay makes no difference to the movie whatsoever. Just enjoy a film a don't worry about it until it's relevant.
It really is difficult to sum the story line up for this one. There's a reason that everyone has generalised the synopsis. It's just a lot of nothing in particular. It's part two of five. There didn't really seem to be a lot apart from filler. What I can tell you is that the first time I saw this (I went to the midnight screening at Vue originally) I fell asleep through a significant chunk in the middle and yet I still came out with the same understanding and enjoyment as I did after the second time.
What you should do
You're going to have to see it at some point if you're into the HP universe. Just a statement of fact there!
Movie thing you wish you could take home
That magic spell for collapsing all my belongings into a couple of trunks, I'm assuming it would come in handy for cleaning as well.
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated Would-Be Witch (Southern Witch, #1) in Books
Feb 15, 2019
While at first (in the first four pages) it seemed that the character of Tammy Jo Trask would be a good one, that was quickly proven to be a false notion. To put it quite simply, she was a helpless moron. Now, I don't expect a MC to be invulnerable or a genius, but I would still hope for someone who can think and act for herself. As if her ex-husband with benefits is an Alpha of the worst kind isn't enough, he also belittles her just about all the time and tells her what and what not to do. But that's okay because he comes to her rescue and shows an occasional kindness. Excuse me? That makes his emotional abuse alright? I don't think so! And Bryn (whose name seems female to me), her other love interest, isn't much better. He is also derogatory towards her and orders her around, so basically he's just as big a jackass as her ex. To make matters even worse, Bryn is on this list, that was written ages ago, of people the Trask women cannot fraternize with, and Tammy doesn't even question why. She just accepts everything she is told, and all she's says about the list is that it has "something to do with the family being destroyed for all of eternity." Mmm-hmm, likely. Ever heard of family feuds or women scorned? Now I'm not saying it's not totally impossible, but how can I like or respect a character who doesn't look into things herself and let's people (re: men) treat her the way they do? And I don't care how sheltered someone is, how can Tammy not know what a red light district is? There is a difference between sheltered and stupidity, and Tammy Jo doesn't even straddle the line (most of the time she's on the side of stupid). Now, to be fair, she does do some things on her own that aren't always moronic, but for me, that's all trumped by her numerous negative attributes.
Onto the plot, which is pretty convoluted to say the least. Finding her locket is supposed to be the main storyline, but it quickly gets lost in the midst of zombies, werewolves, and who-knows-what? because I couldn't take anymore and stopped reading on page 180. What little so-called humor came across mean-spirited and close-minded and made me cringe more than once. Also, all the terms of endearments were very annoying and distracting to read, especially when it wasn't used in the dialogue. Honestly, I know it's a small Texas town, where they might use sugar, honey, sweetie, etc. more than, well anywhere, but it seemed overdone and far-fetched. Still, if only Tammy had been more sympathetic and had more qualities that I admire, I might have made it to the end. While I did read the last chapter or two and it looks as if she may have gotten a little better by that point, it's way too little, too late for this reader. How Mercutio puts up with her is beyond me, because cats are smart and regal creatures (the majority anyway :P). Good luck to future readers out there, maybe you won't have any problems with what I did, but I'd advise anyone who finds what I mentioned annoying, to skip the book then.
Onto the plot, which is pretty convoluted to say the least. Finding her locket is supposed to be the main storyline, but it quickly gets lost in the midst of zombies, werewolves, and who-knows-what? because I couldn't take anymore and stopped reading on page 180. What little so-called humor came across mean-spirited and close-minded and made me cringe more than once. Also, all the terms of endearments were very annoying and distracting to read, especially when it wasn't used in the dialogue. Honestly, I know it's a small Texas town, where they might use sugar, honey, sweetie, etc. more than, well anywhere, but it seemed overdone and far-fetched. Still, if only Tammy had been more sympathetic and had more qualities that I admire, I might have made it to the end. While I did read the last chapter or two and it looks as if she may have gotten a little better by that point, it's way too little, too late for this reader. How Mercutio puts up with her is beyond me, because cats are smart and regal creatures (the majority anyway :P). Good luck to future readers out there, maybe you won't have any problems with what I did, but I'd advise anyone who finds what I mentioned annoying, to skip the book then.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Hard Candy (2005) in Movies
Feb 21, 2019
Solid Movie
Hardy Candy is as good as it is unsettling. There is an art in movies to making you feel creeped out and director David Slade definitely pulls it off here. I don’t really want to disclose too much of the plot in fear of giving it away for those that haven’t seen it, but I will say that it starts with a teenager meeting a thirty-something year-old in a chat room and agreeing to meet him in person. I definitely wasn’t expecting or ready for what happened next.
Acting: 10
Ellen Page plays the role of the aforementioned teenager Hayley Stark. In a word: Fantastic. I can almost imagine a role of this nature being somewhat freeing and therapeutic. I love the angle that she took as Hayley, calm on the surface but a loose cannon ready to explode. The emotional range here is noticed and appreciated.
Shout-out to Patrick Wilson playing the role of Jeff Kohlver the thirty-something. He, just like Page, excels in playing a multi-dimensional character that has that “other” side. Seeing the two work on screen together is like magic.
Beginning; 10
Characters: 9
The story centers around Hayley and Patrick but, in a way, one could argue that the movie is about four people: Their characters and the ones underneath the surface. The way they play off of each other is fascinating. You want to see more of them, know more about what got them to this point. It’s a cat-and-mouse game and you don’t quite know who’s who.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Colors and tones play a significant role in setting the mood of the movie. Again, it’s that eery creepiness Slade manages to capture in every shot, even when things feel normal. Emotional moments are captured in a way that manage to magnify the way a viewer feels. That’s where I feel the visuals succeed the most. On the downside, it got somewhat monotonous having the characters be in one location for the majority of the movie. Maybe breaking it up with flashbacks or something would have made the pill a little easier to swallow.
Conflict: 4
Let’s just say I was expecting a lot more to happen than what actually did. In other words, there was DEFINITELY room for more conflict here. Just slightly more subtle than I was hoping for.
Genre: 5
This score would have been higher had there been just a bit more action and a fluctuation of location changes. While it checks most boxes for what makes a quality movie, I have seen better dramas that are worth the higher score.
Memorability: 7
Pace: 10
Sometimes intensity can magnify a situation and that’s one of a number of things Hard Candy is great at. Because you’re dealing with two characters that are loaded pistols, you don’t really know what’s going to unfold from one scene to the next. That’s ultimately what makes the movie so fun to watch. There is always something to pay attention to here.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
Overall: 83
Hard Candy is a great example of why I created my scoring system in the first place. Some movies slip in some areas and they get called a bad movie as a result. When you look at all the moving parts separately, however, you potentially learn the opposite. Is it a perfect movie? Not at all. Is it a solid, fun movie to watch. Absolutely.
Acting: 10
Ellen Page plays the role of the aforementioned teenager Hayley Stark. In a word: Fantastic. I can almost imagine a role of this nature being somewhat freeing and therapeutic. I love the angle that she took as Hayley, calm on the surface but a loose cannon ready to explode. The emotional range here is noticed and appreciated.
Shout-out to Patrick Wilson playing the role of Jeff Kohlver the thirty-something. He, just like Page, excels in playing a multi-dimensional character that has that “other” side. Seeing the two work on screen together is like magic.
Beginning; 10
Characters: 9
The story centers around Hayley and Patrick but, in a way, one could argue that the movie is about four people: Their characters and the ones underneath the surface. The way they play off of each other is fascinating. You want to see more of them, know more about what got them to this point. It’s a cat-and-mouse game and you don’t quite know who’s who.
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Colors and tones play a significant role in setting the mood of the movie. Again, it’s that eery creepiness Slade manages to capture in every shot, even when things feel normal. Emotional moments are captured in a way that manage to magnify the way a viewer feels. That’s where I feel the visuals succeed the most. On the downside, it got somewhat monotonous having the characters be in one location for the majority of the movie. Maybe breaking it up with flashbacks or something would have made the pill a little easier to swallow.
Conflict: 4
Let’s just say I was expecting a lot more to happen than what actually did. In other words, there was DEFINITELY room for more conflict here. Just slightly more subtle than I was hoping for.
Genre: 5
This score would have been higher had there been just a bit more action and a fluctuation of location changes. While it checks most boxes for what makes a quality movie, I have seen better dramas that are worth the higher score.
Memorability: 7
Pace: 10
Sometimes intensity can magnify a situation and that’s one of a number of things Hard Candy is great at. Because you’re dealing with two characters that are loaded pistols, you don’t really know what’s going to unfold from one scene to the next. That’s ultimately what makes the movie so fun to watch. There is always something to pay attention to here.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
Overall: 83
Hard Candy is a great example of why I created my scoring system in the first place. Some movies slip in some areas and they get called a bad movie as a result. When you look at all the moving parts separately, however, you potentially learn the opposite. Is it a perfect movie? Not at all. Is it a solid, fun movie to watch. Absolutely.
KittyMiku (138 KP) rated Witch's Bell in Books
May 23, 2019
This was a free book on Amazon and the reviews make you wonder if you should even pick it up, but I still did and I have never been happier. I did find some of the complaints to be true to word, but I did enjoy the book way too much to just say it wasn't worth the read. However, we will be discussing Ebony Bell and her adventures and what Bell may have been done to make it better. Let's dive in.
So first of all, I fell in love with the idea behind this book and apparently the series. With characters like Nathan Wall and Ebony Bell, I couldn't help but be intrigued on whatever relationships was forming between them. I think this book was pretty well thought out considering it cold have left the scenes bare making it hard to visualize where the characters were and what was exactly going on. However, I did think there could have been a little less rambling about different things, though I feel it may be foreshadowing for other books. I feel that even though Ebony was pretty fleshed out, that there could have been a little more on the other characters we find ourselves following a bit. For example, Avery's mother is described by her looks and a bit of how she acted when Ebony was a child, but as a member of the Coven, I wanted a little more. Like how did she become apart of the Coven who were supposedly the strongest witches around as well as the oldest? It left a few questions popping to mind and hope they will be answered in the future. Nathan was another character I felt could have been fleshed out a bit more and not really semi revealed at the end. It left a lot to be desired, but again could just be information that makes you want to read on.
I loved, and I mean LOVED, how when Ebony had her magic blocked from her, the way she saw things changed a bit. Do not get me wrong, her outfits made me giggle, but seeing her actually notice the small things even though she didn't have to and hadn't noticed before, was kind of nice. You were able to see her actually begin to appreciate things she hadn't before. I always love seeing characters grow as a person. Ebony had learned to really appreciate what she was seeing as well as what she had. To see her struggle had brought some delight and I found myself a little mad at how she would forget the most important thing she had thought about until it was almost too late. I did find that the use of other characters did help make what was going on around her seem a little more dire.
I found the love interest between Ebony and Nathan to be a bit subtle, which was kind of nice since it left a lot of room for something to blossom a wonderful romance. I do like how Nate gets under Ebony's skin and no matter how hard she tries rattle him he is unfazed. This made them polar opposites, which made me smile a bit, Though I would have loved to see more between them in the form of witty banter and teasing. but what I was given, I didn't think it was all that bad, just could have been more.
Overall, I would rate this book 4 stars out of 5 stars. There could have been more given and even explained something better while not rambling on things that made you begin to question a character's mental state. I loved the story line and hope that as the books move forward we can figure it all out about our mysterious Detective Nathan Wall, the Coven and whoever is behind trying to rewrite Ebony Bell's story.
So first of all, I fell in love with the idea behind this book and apparently the series. With characters like Nathan Wall and Ebony Bell, I couldn't help but be intrigued on whatever relationships was forming between them. I think this book was pretty well thought out considering it cold have left the scenes bare making it hard to visualize where the characters were and what was exactly going on. However, I did think there could have been a little less rambling about different things, though I feel it may be foreshadowing for other books. I feel that even though Ebony was pretty fleshed out, that there could have been a little more on the other characters we find ourselves following a bit. For example, Avery's mother is described by her looks and a bit of how she acted when Ebony was a child, but as a member of the Coven, I wanted a little more. Like how did she become apart of the Coven who were supposedly the strongest witches around as well as the oldest? It left a few questions popping to mind and hope they will be answered in the future. Nathan was another character I felt could have been fleshed out a bit more and not really semi revealed at the end. It left a lot to be desired, but again could just be information that makes you want to read on.
I loved, and I mean LOVED, how when Ebony had her magic blocked from her, the way she saw things changed a bit. Do not get me wrong, her outfits made me giggle, but seeing her actually notice the small things even though she didn't have to and hadn't noticed before, was kind of nice. You were able to see her actually begin to appreciate things she hadn't before. I always love seeing characters grow as a person. Ebony had learned to really appreciate what she was seeing as well as what she had. To see her struggle had brought some delight and I found myself a little mad at how she would forget the most important thing she had thought about until it was almost too late. I did find that the use of other characters did help make what was going on around her seem a little more dire.
I found the love interest between Ebony and Nathan to be a bit subtle, which was kind of nice since it left a lot of room for something to blossom a wonderful romance. I do like how Nate gets under Ebony's skin and no matter how hard she tries rattle him he is unfazed. This made them polar opposites, which made me smile a bit, Though I would have loved to see more between them in the form of witty banter and teasing. but what I was given, I didn't think it was all that bad, just could have been more.
Overall, I would rate this book 4 stars out of 5 stars. There could have been more given and even explained something better while not rambling on things that made you begin to question a character's mental state. I loved the story line and hope that as the books move forward we can figure it all out about our mysterious Detective Nathan Wall, the Coven and whoever is behind trying to rewrite Ebony Bell's story.