Search
Search results
CT
Challenging the Modern: Conservative Revolution in German Music, 1918-1933
Book
This book challenges commonplace conceptions of musical conservatism during Germany's Weimar...
Human Rights Approaches to Climate Change: Challenges and Opportunities
Book
Despite the clear link between climate change and human rights with the potential for virtually all...
FitLife for Women: Challenging Exercises Focusing on Abs, Legs, Butt, Cardio, and Yoga!
Health & Fitness and Lifestyle
App
Looking for great workouts that target all the important areas to have a rocking body! Join the...
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2336 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.
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.
:(
Alexis Taylor recommended Like Flies On Sherbert by Alex Chilton in Music (curated)
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.