Search
Search results
Amanda (96 KP) rated Soul Suites in Books
Mar 14, 2019
I received a physical copy of this book in exchange for an honest review. So thank you to the publisher for giving me the opportunity to read this book!
***There will be a SLIGHT Spoiler***
I wasn't entirely sure about it. The story starts off with the author stating that he is recounting what he has done and feels the story should be told. So at first, you're thinking, wait? Is this a true story?
The more I read about Reaching Dreams and Charles Pearson's disappearance, the more I really started to wonder if this was truly a real story. About halfway through the book, I finally decided to just google the story and the company. Surprise, surprise...yeah, not real.
Basically, Charles Pearson (CEO of Reaching Dreams) goes undercover as a homeless man in one of their districts in the streets of Chicago to see how this company was thriving while others were not. One night, while he was sleeping in his sleeping bag, he was picked up and taken to an unknown location, along with quite a few others that have gone missing.
The establishment is run by Dr. Raymond, whom is such a fickle kind of character. I inflicts torture on these people and actually KILLS them to prove that there is indeed an afterlife, but he misses having a relationship with patients and wants to connect with them. It really rubbed me the wrong way how the guards and other technicians are just OKAY with the procedures because they get paid well and benefits. Money makes the world go round, unfortunately.
Reading through this story, it makes me sad to think about some people who do live on the streets and are just trying to get by. There are some, however, that choose to live on the streets because they are essentially free.
The story was difficult to read, but it wasn't a bad story either. It's told by an unreliable narrator for the most part, which are not my favorite kind of books. I will say, Morse had me going. The story was pretty steady paced. Some chapters were long detail that were a bit drawn out, but it's necessary to understand each individuals backgrounds.
Charles' story is heartbreaking that it was a struggle to read through some of it.
Even though the story is fiction, you can't rule out the possibility that something like this could very well be hidden and we have no idea about it. Something to think about.
It is dark and has some detailed stories on some people and torture.
***There will be a SLIGHT Spoiler***
I wasn't entirely sure about it. The story starts off with the author stating that he is recounting what he has done and feels the story should be told. So at first, you're thinking, wait? Is this a true story?
The more I read about Reaching Dreams and Charles Pearson's disappearance, the more I really started to wonder if this was truly a real story. About halfway through the book, I finally decided to just google the story and the company. Surprise, surprise...yeah, not real.
Basically, Charles Pearson (CEO of Reaching Dreams) goes undercover as a homeless man in one of their districts in the streets of Chicago to see how this company was thriving while others were not. One night, while he was sleeping in his sleeping bag, he was picked up and taken to an unknown location, along with quite a few others that have gone missing.
The establishment is run by Dr. Raymond, whom is such a fickle kind of character. I inflicts torture on these people and actually KILLS them to prove that there is indeed an afterlife, but he misses having a relationship with patients and wants to connect with them. It really rubbed me the wrong way how the guards and other technicians are just OKAY with the procedures because they get paid well and benefits. Money makes the world go round, unfortunately.
Reading through this story, it makes me sad to think about some people who do live on the streets and are just trying to get by. There are some, however, that choose to live on the streets because they are essentially free.
The story was difficult to read, but it wasn't a bad story either. It's told by an unreliable narrator for the most part, which are not my favorite kind of books. I will say, Morse had me going. The story was pretty steady paced. Some chapters were long detail that were a bit drawn out, but it's necessary to understand each individuals backgrounds.
Charles' story is heartbreaking that it was a struggle to read through some of it.
Even though the story is fiction, you can't rule out the possibility that something like this could very well be hidden and we have no idea about it. Something to think about.
It is dark and has some detailed stories on some people and torture.
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated Misery in Books
Mar 15, 2018
Also read my review here: http://bookbum.weebly.com/book-reviews/misery-by-stephen-king
<b><i>Annie Annie oh Annie please please no please dont Annie I swear to you Ill be good I swear to God Ill be good please give me a chance to be good OH ANNIE PLEASE LET ME BE GOOD -
Just a little pain. Then this nasty business will be behind us for good Paul.</b></i>
Well hot fucking damn. Is this the best book Ive read all year? <b>I think it might be.</b> I am officially a Stephen King fan. A Stephen King convert as my mother is calling me. Misery is a goddamn masterpiece. Its <i>so</i> tense. I dont know how anyone can write so well that Im actually squirming. <b>LEGIT SQUIRMING AS I READ.</b>
Misery is about a bestselling author, Paul Sheldon, who, after celebrating his completion of his next (and best) book, drinks a little too much champagne and gets himself into a nasty car accident in the middle of nowhere. He wakes to find his legs shattered but splintered (splinted???) in a mysterious house. Luckily, or unluckily, hes found himself saved and in the capable hands of his number one fan and ex-nurse, Annie Wilkes.
I put off reading Misery for, oh I dont know, maybe 5 years? I watched the film, of course, because disliking a film can be down to a number of variables, the wrong director, actors you dislike, bad script etc, but not liking a book, <i>a Stephen King book</i>, is down to one and one thing only, the author. And I was <i>so</i> terrified I wouldnt like Stephen King! Honestly, terrified is this right word for it. I didnt want to turn around in a house, no, a society, that claims Stephen King is a modern day Charles Dickens, of sorts, and say nah, not that into him myself. But lo and behold, I ended up liking both the film and the book, thank Christ. The book more so than the film, but isnt that usually the case? Although the actors for both Paul and Annie in the film version were <i>spot on.</i>
I dont think Ive ever been so vocal whilst reading a book. Misery had me yelping and oohing and arring and laughing and yucking all the way through. Kings writing is so vivid you <i>are</i> Paul Sheldon for the duration of the book. Youre Paul, rolling around in his wheelchair, holding your breath and crying and sweating, hoping that car you hear isnt Annies. Hoping shes holding those Godsent Novril tablets every few hours to subdue your pain. Wondering how the hell youre ever going to be able to escape. You completely immerse yourself in the nail biting story, page by page. This is a perfect novel from start to finish, thats all I have left to say.
If youve never read Stephen King before, start with Misery. <b>I double donkey dare you.</b>
<b><i>Annie Annie oh Annie please please no please dont Annie I swear to you Ill be good I swear to God Ill be good please give me a chance to be good OH ANNIE PLEASE LET ME BE GOOD -
Just a little pain. Then this nasty business will be behind us for good Paul.</b></i>
Well hot fucking damn. Is this the best book Ive read all year? <b>I think it might be.</b> I am officially a Stephen King fan. A Stephen King convert as my mother is calling me. Misery is a goddamn masterpiece. Its <i>so</i> tense. I dont know how anyone can write so well that Im actually squirming. <b>LEGIT SQUIRMING AS I READ.</b>
Misery is about a bestselling author, Paul Sheldon, who, after celebrating his completion of his next (and best) book, drinks a little too much champagne and gets himself into a nasty car accident in the middle of nowhere. He wakes to find his legs shattered but splintered (splinted???) in a mysterious house. Luckily, or unluckily, hes found himself saved and in the capable hands of his number one fan and ex-nurse, Annie Wilkes.
I put off reading Misery for, oh I dont know, maybe 5 years? I watched the film, of course, because disliking a film can be down to a number of variables, the wrong director, actors you dislike, bad script etc, but not liking a book, <i>a Stephen King book</i>, is down to one and one thing only, the author. And I was <i>so</i> terrified I wouldnt like Stephen King! Honestly, terrified is this right word for it. I didnt want to turn around in a house, no, a society, that claims Stephen King is a modern day Charles Dickens, of sorts, and say nah, not that into him myself. But lo and behold, I ended up liking both the film and the book, thank Christ. The book more so than the film, but isnt that usually the case? Although the actors for both Paul and Annie in the film version were <i>spot on.</i>
I dont think Ive ever been so vocal whilst reading a book. Misery had me yelping and oohing and arring and laughing and yucking all the way through. Kings writing is so vivid you <i>are</i> Paul Sheldon for the duration of the book. Youre Paul, rolling around in his wheelchair, holding your breath and crying and sweating, hoping that car you hear isnt Annies. Hoping shes holding those Godsent Novril tablets every few hours to subdue your pain. Wondering how the hell youre ever going to be able to escape. You completely immerse yourself in the nail biting story, page by page. This is a perfect novel from start to finish, thats all I have left to say.
If youve never read Stephen King before, start with Misery. <b>I double donkey dare you.</b>
Rickey A. Mossow Jr. (689 KP) rated Child's Play (2019) in Movies
Sep 14, 2019
A good modernization of the cult classic killer doll film.
As a man in my 30s, I grew up on the original Child's Play and the sequels that followed. So, I was half excited and half worried when this reboot/remake was announced. So many attempts by Hollywood to bring back beloved and cult classics have failed miserably and ruined the magic of the originals. Through the first 20 or so minutes of this one, I was worried this one would fall into this category. And while I wasn't completely thrilled with the film's liberties taken with the doll's origin story, it was easy to set aside due to some decent storytelling. You get to know Chucky in these scenes and a basis for his later acts is laid. You feel for him, and you laugh (a thing done often in the Child's Play canon.) Then, the 2nd and 3rd acts of the film ramp up and continue to build in an understandable, graphic gorefest with a horror plot to keep you riveted. Although I am a purist and would have preferred they stick closer to the original, I thoroughly enjoyed this modernization of the killer doll tale. (But I'll never forget Charles Lee Ray or the chant of dooey de dim bella, give me the power I beg of you!)
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2103 KP) rated Charlie Thorne and the Lost City in Books
Mar 24, 2021 (Updated Mar 24, 2021)
Tracking Darwin Through the Amazon
It's been a few months since Charlotte “Charlie” Thorne has gone missing. While she was initially presumed dead, she took advantage of the confusion of the situation to slip away. She’s currently hiding out in the Galapagos Islands, which turns out to be very fortunate. One day, she is approached by Esmerelda, a researcher from the Darwin Institute who thinks she’s found a message left behind by Charles Darwin almost 200 years ago. Unfortunately, it’s in code, and Esmerelda needs Charlie to help her figure it out. Suddenly, Charlie finds herself on another wild ride that will take her deep into the heart of the Amazon pursued by people out to get the treasure first. But what did Darwin leave behind?
When I realized that Charles Darwin was going to be the featured scientist in this book, I was worried. As expected, there are some jabs taken at people like me, Christians who believe in microevolution (which Darwin clearly observed) but not the theory of macroevolution. I realize that will only be an issue for some readers. The rest will be thrilled with the action, danger, and twists that Charlie finds herself caught up in once again. I do struggle a bit with Charlie’s characters since she comes across as too perfect, but there are others in the book who are more realistic. I appreciated the rising tension we got while traveling through the Amazon as well as the humor that helped lighten the mood at times. There are some great seeds planted, and I’m looking forward to seeing how they pay off in future books. Fans of Stuart Gibbs will certainly enjoy this book.
When I realized that Charles Darwin was going to be the featured scientist in this book, I was worried. As expected, there are some jabs taken at people like me, Christians who believe in microevolution (which Darwin clearly observed) but not the theory of macroevolution. I realize that will only be an issue for some readers. The rest will be thrilled with the action, danger, and twists that Charlie finds herself caught up in once again. I do struggle a bit with Charlie’s characters since she comes across as too perfect, but there are others in the book who are more realistic. I appreciated the rising tension we got while traveling through the Amazon as well as the humor that helped lighten the mood at times. There are some great seeds planted, and I’m looking forward to seeing how they pay off in future books. Fans of Stuart Gibbs will certainly enjoy this book.
Alexis Taylor recommended Like Flies On Sherbert by Alex Chilton in Music (curated)
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) in Movies
Jul 27, 2019 (Updated Jul 27, 2019)
Overhyped and disappointed
Contains spoilers, click to show
This review will contain spoilers.... and this is my opinon.
Once upon a time in hollywood is Quentin Tarantino’s ninth film and has a large ensemble cast.
This to me didnt seem like a quentin tarantino film, i mean it had some elements that he does but overall it didnt seem like a tarantino film, it was missing all of elements pervious used in his other films. There are only three storylines in this film. Rick's storyline, Cliff's storyline and Sharon's storyline and thats it. When in reservoir dogs, pulp fiction, jackie brown and four roons their were more than three storylines. Its also missing all the blood and gore like in his other films. Yes that sence at the end, and one of Rick's movies he has a flamflower but thats it. When as the other films that tarantino did had alot of blood and gore and violence and swearing. This movie seemed like it had none of that.
I was very disappointed because iam a huge quentin tarantino fan, i think he is one of the best directors of all time and like his other movies. So i was very excited for this movie and turns out i was very disappointed.
It didnt seem like it was a 2h and 40min movie.
Also lets talk about charles manson and his family throwed into this movie. I thought the movie was going to be about Rick and Cliff invisagating the murder of sharon taron and invisagating the manson family. Their are only three sences that have to do with the manson family.
1. The scene were charles introduces himself to polanski home.
2. When cliff goes to Spahn ranch run by the manson family and thier meanching charlies and cliff should meet him. This sence right here is the best part of the movie. Its myserious, dramatic, you dont know if the family is going to murder cliff or not. So your questioning if thats going to happen. But unfourtaly this sence is only like 5-15 mins long and at no point charles comes. You think something is going to happen than boom sence ends.
3. The end, were some of the manson family are about to kill tate and her friends and then thier try to kill rick and cliff because cliff was mad at them for being hillbillys and being on privite property. Which was like a unexpected turn but why??? Cliff fights them off and kills two of them and then rick kills one with a flameflower.
Thats it, three sences with the manson family and one with charles what a let down.
This whole movie was a let down,
Dakota Fanning, Bruce Dern, Luke Perry , Damian Lewis, Timothy Olyphant and micheal madsen all had one sence and these are big movie stars. To waste all of this talent is sad. Basically most of the supporting cast was wasted and only had one sence.
Also the ending, after rick and cliff fight off some of the manson family, cliff is being taking off to the hostipal and rick finally meets sharon tate then the movie's title comes on and then boom movie off. I thought that cant be it, that wasnt 2h and 40mins. It didnt feel like it, but it was. I thought why are the credits showing. Their should be more, but no the credits are showing.
Once upon a time in hollywood, is alternate timeline movie about the late 1960's in hollywood. But why have the manson family in it when your not going to use them that much. Why develop this alternate storyline, when their is a real life story and your using the real life people in the movie. Stupid it.
I can go on and on how this movie was very disappointed but i think i did this movie its justice.
Overall, once upon a time in hollywood is a very dissappointed movie.
:(
Once upon a time in hollywood is Quentin Tarantino’s ninth film and has a large ensemble cast.
This to me didnt seem like a quentin tarantino film, i mean it had some elements that he does but overall it didnt seem like a tarantino film, it was missing all of elements pervious used in his other films. There are only three storylines in this film. Rick's storyline, Cliff's storyline and Sharon's storyline and thats it. When in reservoir dogs, pulp fiction, jackie brown and four roons their were more than three storylines. Its also missing all the blood and gore like in his other films. Yes that sence at the end, and one of Rick's movies he has a flamflower but thats it. When as the other films that tarantino did had alot of blood and gore and violence and swearing. This movie seemed like it had none of that.
I was very disappointed because iam a huge quentin tarantino fan, i think he is one of the best directors of all time and like his other movies. So i was very excited for this movie and turns out i was very disappointed.
It didnt seem like it was a 2h and 40min movie.
Also lets talk about charles manson and his family throwed into this movie. I thought the movie was going to be about Rick and Cliff invisagating the murder of sharon taron and invisagating the manson family. Their are only three sences that have to do with the manson family.
1. The scene were charles introduces himself to polanski home.
2. When cliff goes to Spahn ranch run by the manson family and thier meanching charlies and cliff should meet him. This sence right here is the best part of the movie. Its myserious, dramatic, you dont know if the family is going to murder cliff or not. So your questioning if thats going to happen. But unfourtaly this sence is only like 5-15 mins long and at no point charles comes. You think something is going to happen than boom sence ends.
3. The end, were some of the manson family are about to kill tate and her friends and then thier try to kill rick and cliff because cliff was mad at them for being hillbillys and being on privite property. Which was like a unexpected turn but why??? Cliff fights them off and kills two of them and then rick kills one with a flameflower.
Thats it, three sences with the manson family and one with charles what a let down.
This whole movie was a let down,
Dakota Fanning, Bruce Dern, Luke Perry , Damian Lewis, Timothy Olyphant and micheal madsen all had one sence and these are big movie stars. To waste all of this talent is sad. Basically most of the supporting cast was wasted and only had one sence.
Also the ending, after rick and cliff fight off some of the manson family, cliff is being taking off to the hostipal and rick finally meets sharon tate then the movie's title comes on and then boom movie off. I thought that cant be it, that wasnt 2h and 40mins. It didnt feel like it, but it was. I thought why are the credits showing. Their should be more, but no the credits are showing.
Once upon a time in hollywood, is alternate timeline movie about the late 1960's in hollywood. But why have the manson family in it when your not going to use them that much. Why develop this alternate storyline, when their is a real life story and your using the real life people in the movie. Stupid it.
I can go on and on how this movie was very disappointed but i think i did this movie its justice.
Overall, once upon a time in hollywood is a very dissappointed movie.
:(
Katarzyna Krasuska (81 KP) rated Find Her in Books
Aug 15, 2018 (Updated Aug 16, 2018)
Very strong female character (2 more)
Very gripping
Female Charles Bronson
Make this into a movie!
This is definitely a book that should be made into a film.
I saw this interview with Reese Witherspoon, where she talks about books, that she has made into films, because they're female driven. Yet the books she focuses her attention on are not strong or interesting enough, like "Gone girl " or "Husband's secret" . Here we have a female author, a female kick ass character, that is not just strong, but smart, brave and I would happily say dangerous. Not just that, I genuinely believe men would like to watch this too.
The main character of this book was abducted by a psycho and kept in a box for 472 days. When she gets rescued, instead of just trying to move on with her life, she goes into avenger mode. She learns how to fight, reads awful lot about self defense and decides to get the justice herself.
Amazing story, that I think all women should read.
I saw this interview with Reese Witherspoon, where she talks about books, that she has made into films, because they're female driven. Yet the books she focuses her attention on are not strong or interesting enough, like "Gone girl " or "Husband's secret" . Here we have a female author, a female kick ass character, that is not just strong, but smart, brave and I would happily say dangerous. Not just that, I genuinely believe men would like to watch this too.
The main character of this book was abducted by a psycho and kept in a box for 472 days. When she gets rescued, instead of just trying to move on with her life, she goes into avenger mode. She learns how to fight, reads awful lot about self defense and decides to get the justice herself.
Amazing story, that I think all women should read.
Andrew Kennedy (199 KP) rated The Muppet Christmas Carol (1992) in Movies
Dec 10, 2019
I love the Muppets.
This film is the best of many retellings of Dickens classic ghost tale.
Gonzo is my favourite as Charles Dickens, his narration along with Rizzlo the rat is humorous and fun.
Kermit as Bob Crachit as the lead book keeper is amusing and his team of rats are hilarious.
Michael Caine plays Scrooge who's path of redemption is believable as he is visted by three ghosts who show Scrooge the errors of his ways.
Also, the songs are catchy.
Disney tried other versions but none can top this one. A true Christmas classic to watch every year.
This film is the best of many retellings of Dickens classic ghost tale.
Gonzo is my favourite as Charles Dickens, his narration along with Rizzlo the rat is humorous and fun.
Kermit as Bob Crachit as the lead book keeper is amusing and his team of rats are hilarious.
Michael Caine plays Scrooge who's path of redemption is believable as he is visted by three ghosts who show Scrooge the errors of his ways.
Also, the songs are catchy.
Disney tried other versions but none can top this one. A true Christmas classic to watch every year.
David McK (3251 KP) rated The Last Berserker in Books
May 8, 2021
First entry in Angus Donald's new 'Fire Born' Viking series, in which the main character is what we would term as a Berserker (although never named as such).
This is set in an even earlier time period than his 'Holcroft Blood' series (set during the time of Charles II) or even his even-earlier set 'Outlaw' series (about Robin Hood), but - unfortunately - I found it to be inferior to both.
That's not to say that it's bad; just that it didn't resonate (with the twists not really hitting home) as much with me as this earlier series did.
This is set in an even earlier time period than his 'Holcroft Blood' series (set during the time of Charles II) or even his even-earlier set 'Outlaw' series (about Robin Hood), but - unfortunately - I found it to be inferior to both.
That's not to say that it's bad; just that it didn't resonate (with the twists not really hitting home) as much with me as this earlier series did.
