Search
Search results
David McK (3562 KP) rated The Shepherd's Crown in Books
Jan 28, 2019
THE FINAL DISCWORLD BOOK
Those four words were always going to make a long-time Discworld reader feel quite emotional, making it hard to objectively review the novel itself: are you reviewing this last peek into Pratchett's mirror reality, or are you reviewing the entire 41-book series? I'm going to try both:
THE SERIES
The first Disworld book I read (I'm pretty sure it was [b: Pyramids|64217|Pyramids (Discworld, #7)|Terry Pratchett|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1439098306s/64217.jpg|968512]) wasn't actually the first in the series (that would be [b: The Colour of Magic|833512|The Colour of Magic The Illustrated Screenplay|Vadim Jean|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1347346368s/833512.jpg|17589693]), although I did later go back and read the earlier works. Reading them in order released (as opposed to one of the numerous Discworld Reading Order Guides: I'm quite partial to the 'Unofficial Discworld Reading Order Guide'), you can see how Terry Pratchett's writing style evolved, how he moved from outright satire to a more subtle comedy fantasy that holds a mirror up to real-world issues. Personally, I feel he was at his best at around the mid-way point of the series (say, [b: Maskerade|64305|Maskerade The Play|Terry Pratchett|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1170622047s/64305.jpg|62427] or [b: Men at Arms|7557548|Men at Arms The Play|Terry Pratchett|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1353573652s/7557548.jpg|9910828], after he'd found his feet (so-to-speak), but before the 'embuggerance' of his posterior cortical atrophy set in and the novels - perhaps understandably - started becoming almost too serious.
Throughout the series, there was a rich tapestry of characters introduced, from CMOT Dibbler through to the Patrician of Ankh-Morpork, with certain groups of characters (e.g. The City Watch) effectively becoming a sub-series in their own right. One of those groups - Granny Weatherwax (first introduced in [b: Equal Rites|34507|Equal Rites (Discworld, #3; Witches, #1)|Terry Pratchett|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1407706800s/34507.jpg|583611] and The Witches of Lancre (first introduced in [b: Wyrd Sisters|233664|Wyrd Sisters The Play|Terry Pratchett|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1388363090s/233664.jpg|17589683] - would later themselves have 'guest spots' in another group of such characters, ostensibly written for Young Adult Readers but still very enjoyable for older; the Nac Mac Feegles (Crivens!) and Tiffany Aching, both of who first appeared in [b: The Wee Free Men|7881001|The Wee Free Men The Beginning (Discworld, #30 & #32)|Terry Pratchett|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1388181365s/7881001.jpg|22017239]. Which nicely brings me to:
THE NOVEL ITSELF
'The Shepherd's Crown' sees a return of both Tiffany Aching, now a young Witch setting out on her career path, and those Nac Mac Feegles. There's a strong sense of change throughout, kicked off by the surprising early exit of a previous major character in the entire series, leading to old foes - the Elves - to try to make their way back into the world. These Elves, remember, are *not* the dainty do-gooders of Tolkien: these are nasty, malicious, self-serving creatures who last attempted to invade in [b: Lords and Ladies|34529|Lords and Ladies (Discworld, #14; Witches #4)|Terry Pratchett|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1469186110s/34529.jpg|1185086], before eventually being defeated by Granny Weatherwax, Nanny Ogg and Magrat Garlik. Those three characters make a return in this, as well as bit-parts for the Arch-Chancellor of Unseen University, Ponder Stibbons (and HEX) alongside King Verence and the Patrician. Despite all these, the novel, however, is really Tiffany's story, and of how she finds her feet in the circumstances into which she is rather abruptly thrown. There's also a plot element that recalls [b: Equal Rites|34507|Equal Rites (Discworld, #3; Witches, #1)|Terry Pratchett|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1407706800s/34507.jpg|583611]: that of a person wanting to do a role that is generally considered to be that for a member of the opposite sex.
As always, footnotes are present and correct, with the novel even raising a few laugh-out-loud moments. While the story does finish with the words 'THE END', the world itself will continue on: all that has come to an end is our ability to peek into it.
In the words of the Nac Mac Feegle: "Waily waily waily ..."
Rating for the series: 5*
Rating for the novel: 4*
Those four words were always going to make a long-time Discworld reader feel quite emotional, making it hard to objectively review the novel itself: are you reviewing this last peek into Pratchett's mirror reality, or are you reviewing the entire 41-book series? I'm going to try both:
THE SERIES
The first Disworld book I read (I'm pretty sure it was [b: Pyramids|64217|Pyramids (Discworld, #7)|Terry Pratchett|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1439098306s/64217.jpg|968512]) wasn't actually the first in the series (that would be [b: The Colour of Magic|833512|The Colour of Magic The Illustrated Screenplay|Vadim Jean|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1347346368s/833512.jpg|17589693]), although I did later go back and read the earlier works. Reading them in order released (as opposed to one of the numerous Discworld Reading Order Guides: I'm quite partial to the 'Unofficial Discworld Reading Order Guide'), you can see how Terry Pratchett's writing style evolved, how he moved from outright satire to a more subtle comedy fantasy that holds a mirror up to real-world issues. Personally, I feel he was at his best at around the mid-way point of the series (say, [b: Maskerade|64305|Maskerade The Play|Terry Pratchett|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1170622047s/64305.jpg|62427] or [b: Men at Arms|7557548|Men at Arms The Play|Terry Pratchett|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1353573652s/7557548.jpg|9910828], after he'd found his feet (so-to-speak), but before the 'embuggerance' of his posterior cortical atrophy set in and the novels - perhaps understandably - started becoming almost too serious.
Throughout the series, there was a rich tapestry of characters introduced, from CMOT Dibbler through to the Patrician of Ankh-Morpork, with certain groups of characters (e.g. The City Watch) effectively becoming a sub-series in their own right. One of those groups - Granny Weatherwax (first introduced in [b: Equal Rites|34507|Equal Rites (Discworld, #3; Witches, #1)|Terry Pratchett|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1407706800s/34507.jpg|583611] and The Witches of Lancre (first introduced in [b: Wyrd Sisters|233664|Wyrd Sisters The Play|Terry Pratchett|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1388363090s/233664.jpg|17589683] - would later themselves have 'guest spots' in another group of such characters, ostensibly written for Young Adult Readers but still very enjoyable for older; the Nac Mac Feegles (Crivens!) and Tiffany Aching, both of who first appeared in [b: The Wee Free Men|7881001|The Wee Free Men The Beginning (Discworld, #30 & #32)|Terry Pratchett|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1388181365s/7881001.jpg|22017239]. Which nicely brings me to:
THE NOVEL ITSELF
'The Shepherd's Crown' sees a return of both Tiffany Aching, now a young Witch setting out on her career path, and those Nac Mac Feegles. There's a strong sense of change throughout, kicked off by the surprising early exit of a previous major character in the entire series, leading to old foes - the Elves - to try to make their way back into the world. These Elves, remember, are *not* the dainty do-gooders of Tolkien: these are nasty, malicious, self-serving creatures who last attempted to invade in [b: Lords and Ladies|34529|Lords and Ladies (Discworld, #14; Witches #4)|Terry Pratchett|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1469186110s/34529.jpg|1185086], before eventually being defeated by Granny Weatherwax, Nanny Ogg and Magrat Garlik. Those three characters make a return in this, as well as bit-parts for the Arch-Chancellor of Unseen University, Ponder Stibbons (and HEX) alongside King Verence and the Patrician. Despite all these, the novel, however, is really Tiffany's story, and of how she finds her feet in the circumstances into which she is rather abruptly thrown. There's also a plot element that recalls [b: Equal Rites|34507|Equal Rites (Discworld, #3; Witches, #1)|Terry Pratchett|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1407706800s/34507.jpg|583611]: that of a person wanting to do a role that is generally considered to be that for a member of the opposite sex.
As always, footnotes are present and correct, with the novel even raising a few laugh-out-loud moments. While the story does finish with the words 'THE END', the world itself will continue on: all that has come to an end is our ability to peek into it.
In the words of the Nac Mac Feegle: "Waily waily waily ..."
Rating for the series: 5*
Rating for the novel: 4*
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Murder on the Orient Express (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
You’ll never guess who dunnit…
There’s a big problem with Kenneth Branagh’s 2017 filming of the Hercule Poirot-based murder mystery…. and that’s the 1974 Sidney Lumet classic featuring Albert Finney in the starring role. For that film was so memorable – at least, the “who” of the “whodunnit” (no spoilers here) was so memorable – that any remake is likely to be tarnished by that knowledge. If you go into this film blissfully unaware of the plot, you are a lucky man/woman. For this is a classic Agatha Christie yarn.
The irascible, borderline OCD, but undeniably great Belgian detective, Poirot, is dragged around the world by grateful police forces to help solve unsolvable crimes. After solving a case in Jerusalem, Poirot is called back to the UK with his mode of transport being the famous Orient Express. Trapped in the mountains by an avalanche, a murder is committed and with multiple suspects and a plethora of clues it is up to Poirot to solve the case.
Branagh enjoys himself enormously as Poirot, sporting the most distractingly magnificent facial hair since Daniel Day-Lewis in “The Gangs of New York”. The moustache must have had its own trailer and make-up team!
Above all, the film is glorious to look at, featuring a rich and exotic colour palette that is reminiscent of the early colour films of the 40’s. Cinematography was by Haris Zambarloukos (“Mamma Mia” and who also collaborated with Branagh on “Thor) with lots of innovative “ceiling down” shots and artful point-of-view takes that might be annoying to some but which I consider as deserving of Oscar/BAFTA nominations.
The pictures are accompanied by a lush score by Patrick Doyle (who also scored Branagh’s “Thor”). Hats off also to the special effects crew, who made the alpine bridge scenes look decidedly more alpine than where they were actually filmed (on a specially made bridge in the Surrey Hills!).
All these technical elements combine to make the film’s early stages look and feel truly epic.
And the cast… what a cast! Dame Judi Dench (“Victoria and Abdul“); Olivia Coleman (“The Lobster“); Johnny Depp (“Black Mass“); Daisy Ridley (“Star Wars: The Force Awakens“); Penélope Cruz (“Zoolander 2“); Josh Gad (Olaf!); Derek Jacobi (“I, Claudius”); Willem Dafoe (“The Great Wall“) and Michelle Pfeiffer (“mother!“). A real case again of an “oh, it’s you” film again at the cinema – when’s the last time we saw that?
It’s also great to see young Lucy Boynton, so magnificent in last year’s excellent “Sing Street“, getting an A-list role as the twitchy and disturbed countess.
With all these ingredients in the pot, it should be great, right? Unfortunately, in my view, no, not quite. The film’s opening momentum is really not maintained by the screenplay by Michael Green (“Blade Runner 2049“; “Logan“). At heart, it’s a fairly static and “stagey” piece at best, set as it is on the rather claustrophobic train (just three carriages… on the Orient Express… really?). But the tale is made even more static by the train’s derailment in the snow. Branagh and Green try to sex up the action where they can, but there are lengthy passages of fairly repetitive dialogue. One encounter in particular between Branagh and Depp seems to last interminably: you wonder if the problem was that the director wasn’t always looking on to yell “Cut”!
All this leads to the “revelation” of the murderer as being a bit of an anticlimactic “thank heavens for that” rather than the gasping denouement it should have been. (Perhaps this would be different if you didn’t know the twist).
However, these reservations aside, it’s an enjoyable night out at the flicks, although a bit of a disappointment from the level of expectation I had for it. I can’t be too grumpy about it, given it’s a return to good old-fashioned yarn-spinning at the cinema, with great visuals and an epic cast. And that has to be good news.
For sure, Branagh does make for an amusing and engaging Poirot, even if his dialogue did need some ‘tuning in’ to. There was a suggestion at the end of the film that we might be seeing his return in “Death on the Nile” – the most lush and decorous of Peter Ustinov’s outings – which I would certainly welcome. He will have to find another 10 A-list stars though to decorate the boat, which will be a challenge for casting!
The irascible, borderline OCD, but undeniably great Belgian detective, Poirot, is dragged around the world by grateful police forces to help solve unsolvable crimes. After solving a case in Jerusalem, Poirot is called back to the UK with his mode of transport being the famous Orient Express. Trapped in the mountains by an avalanche, a murder is committed and with multiple suspects and a plethora of clues it is up to Poirot to solve the case.
Branagh enjoys himself enormously as Poirot, sporting the most distractingly magnificent facial hair since Daniel Day-Lewis in “The Gangs of New York”. The moustache must have had its own trailer and make-up team!
Above all, the film is glorious to look at, featuring a rich and exotic colour palette that is reminiscent of the early colour films of the 40’s. Cinematography was by Haris Zambarloukos (“Mamma Mia” and who also collaborated with Branagh on “Thor) with lots of innovative “ceiling down” shots and artful point-of-view takes that might be annoying to some but which I consider as deserving of Oscar/BAFTA nominations.
The pictures are accompanied by a lush score by Patrick Doyle (who also scored Branagh’s “Thor”). Hats off also to the special effects crew, who made the alpine bridge scenes look decidedly more alpine than where they were actually filmed (on a specially made bridge in the Surrey Hills!).
All these technical elements combine to make the film’s early stages look and feel truly epic.
And the cast… what a cast! Dame Judi Dench (“Victoria and Abdul“); Olivia Coleman (“The Lobster“); Johnny Depp (“Black Mass“); Daisy Ridley (“Star Wars: The Force Awakens“); Penélope Cruz (“Zoolander 2“); Josh Gad (Olaf!); Derek Jacobi (“I, Claudius”); Willem Dafoe (“The Great Wall“) and Michelle Pfeiffer (“mother!“). A real case again of an “oh, it’s you” film again at the cinema – when’s the last time we saw that?
It’s also great to see young Lucy Boynton, so magnificent in last year’s excellent “Sing Street“, getting an A-list role as the twitchy and disturbed countess.
With all these ingredients in the pot, it should be great, right? Unfortunately, in my view, no, not quite. The film’s opening momentum is really not maintained by the screenplay by Michael Green (“Blade Runner 2049“; “Logan“). At heart, it’s a fairly static and “stagey” piece at best, set as it is on the rather claustrophobic train (just three carriages… on the Orient Express… really?). But the tale is made even more static by the train’s derailment in the snow. Branagh and Green try to sex up the action where they can, but there are lengthy passages of fairly repetitive dialogue. One encounter in particular between Branagh and Depp seems to last interminably: you wonder if the problem was that the director wasn’t always looking on to yell “Cut”!
All this leads to the “revelation” of the murderer as being a bit of an anticlimactic “thank heavens for that” rather than the gasping denouement it should have been. (Perhaps this would be different if you didn’t know the twist).
However, these reservations aside, it’s an enjoyable night out at the flicks, although a bit of a disappointment from the level of expectation I had for it. I can’t be too grumpy about it, given it’s a return to good old-fashioned yarn-spinning at the cinema, with great visuals and an epic cast. And that has to be good news.
For sure, Branagh does make for an amusing and engaging Poirot, even if his dialogue did need some ‘tuning in’ to. There was a suggestion at the end of the film that we might be seeing his return in “Death on the Nile” – the most lush and decorous of Peter Ustinov’s outings – which I would certainly welcome. He will have to find another 10 A-list stars though to decorate the boat, which will be a challenge for casting!
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated The Secret Life of Pets 2 (2019) in Movies
May 24, 2019
Put it down
#secretlifeofpets2 like its predecessor offers nothing new to the #animated film genre in a film thats not only overlong (even at just an hour & a half) but extremely souless too. I hated the #original #secretlifeofpets & im actually a big fan of cgi animated movies too so when we decided to go see this with my nephews i wasnt to excited but i figured it might be an improvement on the first, boy was i wrong. First of all my nephews absolutely #loved this film laughing, sitting on the edge of their seats, talking about the characters & feeling #anxious during the action so while my review is a negative one younger kids will dig its #furry characters, loud action & vibrant colour pallet for sure. Heres why i hated it - i find the pets themselves so visually ugly & lazily designed that it offends my eyes looking at them (seriously some of them or hideous). Dialog is so atrocious & basic you could practically guess what flat one liner would be delivered predictably by almost every one. Story for about an hour felt non existent & i questioned myself on whether id missed a part that told us about the end goal or the #journey the film was taking us on. It was like we had just watched a bunch of 10 minute short films all cut together to make a feature length movie with no payoff. Once the film does finally reach the end we do get an in site into what the film was overall trying to say (#parents arnt alone in bringing up kids, theres always other things that aid in the up bringing & although the world is a #dangerous place #failure & getting #hurt is all part of #learning & growing as a person process) but it just seems it got side tracked along the way. Animation is nice & theres some good looking scenes no doubt but its standard stuff. #Soundtrack wise its quite fun & keeps the films pace lively. Pact full of stereotyping, stolen set pieces from the likes of #toystory, storylines that are all over the place & #jokes that fall flat its hard film for #adults to sit through as it offers nothing as a reward. Your kids might #love it but you might not be able to stay #awake to even notice. #pets #dog #cat #illumination #minions #kids #children #kevinheart #pet #silly #funny
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated Rocketman (2019) in Movies
May 27, 2019
Satalight Flight
#rocketman explodes, leaps, dazzles & shines filling the entire screen at every opportunity with colour, #camp & charisma. I can not pretend i know anything about #eltonjohn or his #music because ive gone through life with having little interest in his #career (apart from that cool #robertdowneyjr video) so for me to say how much i enjoyed this movie might actually be less than if i was a huge #fan so bare that in mind. This film isnt just your average paint by numbers #biopic... well no i lie... it is, & even though i #hated how obvious #Elton clearly had a lot of influence & choice over how he was portrayed (feeling at times like a pro Elton John promotional video at times) i really did admire its style & its ability to shake things up which is something other films in this genre dare not do. So what i mean by this is in a sense the film is a #fantasy musical, think of it as a theatre show but instead of in real life more like one in your #dreams & youve nailed it. Not only is this #super fun, visually interesting, #creative & flashy it gives us an in site into Eltons mind explaining to us how being on stage makes him feel or showing us all those #emotions he struggles to express. It doesnt shy over #drug abuse, #sex addiction or alcohol dependence either which is something #BohemianRhapsody failed to do & this brings the film back down to reality injecting #emotion & conflict. #Rocketman is a somewhat tragic #story about how lack of parent support in an upbringing can have devastating effects on someones mental state & life choices. Elton is #shy, reserved, confused & with no one willing to trully understand him he's alone so on stage seems to be his way of shouting out, being #loved & being someone everyone whats him to be. Well filmed with an impressive supporting cast too & #taronegerton gives the best performance of his career becoming/losing himself as Elton but giving off such an energetic, #charming & almost #showman like quality to the role also. While the film does have its flaws its a great time, well made & different enough to stand out from the rest. A good film especially for people #hungry for more music biopics. #pride #gaypride #gay #kingsman
Awix (3310 KP) rated The Incredible Hulk in TV
Mar 16, 2018 (Updated Mar 16, 2018)
The weird thing about the Hulk TV show is that it is almost nothing like the comic book version of the character, but still manages to be a classic piece of television (and was, for a long time, by far the most successful adaptation of a Marvel character to another medium). Creator Kenneth Johnson didn't want to do it, and did his hardest to distance his version from the book (he wanted to change the colour of the Hulk, but Marvel refused to let him), and ended up basically doing an American version of Les Miserables (the novel, not the musical) with Jean Valjean getting cross and swelling up into a monster twice an episode.
Everyone remembers this show as the one with the Hulk rasslin' small-time thugs every week, lots of jokes about 'how many shirts does this guy get through, ha ha', and 'you won't like me when I'm angry', but the range of styles and influences involved is really much greater - the programme goes from serious movie-of-the-week drama, to freewheeling comedy, to B-movie inspired horror and SF, and makes a pretty good job of all of them. Highlights include 'The Snare' (psycho millionaire whose hobby is hunting and killing drifters picks the wrong target), 'The Psychic' (a woman with unusual powers discovers Banner's secret just as it seems the Hulk has committed a murder), 'Equinox' (Banner and his indefatigable nemesis McGee finally come face-to-face at a masked ball, rather inspired by Masque of the Red Death), and 'The First' (Banner encounters another Hulk, created in the 1940s).
The programme's great strength is Bill Bixby's performance as Banner, for he is always utterly committed and usually highly convincing even when the episodes themselves wobble a bit. The show's Hulk is mute, but even so Ferrigno gives an increasingly effective turn as the creature (and eventually gets an episode where he appears as himself, so to speak, and does a pretty good job).
It is occasionally a bit formulaic, and you have to accept a few built-in implausibilities in the format, but this is a show which still stands up extremely well, and is still probably the biggest single influence on public perceptions of the Hulk. Well worth watching.
Everyone remembers this show as the one with the Hulk rasslin' small-time thugs every week, lots of jokes about 'how many shirts does this guy get through, ha ha', and 'you won't like me when I'm angry', but the range of styles and influences involved is really much greater - the programme goes from serious movie-of-the-week drama, to freewheeling comedy, to B-movie inspired horror and SF, and makes a pretty good job of all of them. Highlights include 'The Snare' (psycho millionaire whose hobby is hunting and killing drifters picks the wrong target), 'The Psychic' (a woman with unusual powers discovers Banner's secret just as it seems the Hulk has committed a murder), 'Equinox' (Banner and his indefatigable nemesis McGee finally come face-to-face at a masked ball, rather inspired by Masque of the Red Death), and 'The First' (Banner encounters another Hulk, created in the 1940s).
The programme's great strength is Bill Bixby's performance as Banner, for he is always utterly committed and usually highly convincing even when the episodes themselves wobble a bit. The show's Hulk is mute, but even so Ferrigno gives an increasingly effective turn as the creature (and eventually gets an episode where he appears as himself, so to speak, and does a pretty good job).
It is occasionally a bit formulaic, and you have to accept a few built-in implausibilities in the format, but this is a show which still stands up extremely well, and is still probably the biggest single influence on public perceptions of the Hulk. Well worth watching.
Louise (64 KP) rated A Tyranny of Petticoats (A Tyranny of Petticoats, #1) in Books
Jul 2, 2018
A Tyranny of petticoats is an all female written anthology about badass females. The 15 stories consist of Pirates, Assassins, Ghosts and Robbers whilst covering relevant American history such as Gold mining, the slave trade and war.
The stories are written in historical order, starting from 1710-1968. These are my ratings for each story:
Mother Carey's table by J.Anderson Coats ⭐.5 stars
The Journey by Marie Lu ⭐⭐⭐stars
Madeleine's choice by Jessica Spotswood ⭐⭐⭐.5 stars
El Destinos by Leslye Walton ⭐⭐⭐stars
High Stakes by Andrea Cremer ⭐⭐⭐ stars
The Red Ravenue Ball by Caroline Tung Richmond ⭐⭐stars
Pearls by Beth Revis ⭐⭐⭐.5 stars
Gold in the roots of grass by Marissa Meyer ⭐⭐⭐⭐stars
The Legendary Garnet Girls by Y.S.Lee ⭐⭐⭐stars
The colour of the sky by Elizabeth Wein ⭐⭐⭐ stars
Bonnie and Clydebank by Sundra Mitchell ⭐⭐⭐stars
Hard times by Catherine Longshore ⭐⭐⭐stars
City of Angels by Lindsay Smith ⭐⭐⭐.5 stars
Pulse of the Panthers by Kekla Magoon ⭐⭐⭐ stars
The whole world is watching by Robin Talley ⭐⭐stars
I wanted to read this collection of short stories as I had heard great things about it. This book should have been ideal for me, it's feminist historical fiction. Sadly this didn't deliver, none of the stories blew me away. In actual fact I have a hard time remembering what the stories were about. Some of the stories felt like they were an excerpt from a novel, some felt rushed and others under developed.
However,I am glad I got to read this as I get to explore authors that I have not read before and got to sample their work and see if I get on with their writing styles.
The book also has a short note from the author as to why they picked the era, why they contributed to the anthology and so on. I definitely want to explore more novels with American history such as the gold mining and slavery thanks to these authors.
Overall I rated this 3 out of 5 stars
The stories are written in historical order, starting from 1710-1968. These are my ratings for each story:
Mother Carey's table by J.Anderson Coats ⭐.5 stars
The Journey by Marie Lu ⭐⭐⭐stars
Madeleine's choice by Jessica Spotswood ⭐⭐⭐.5 stars
El Destinos by Leslye Walton ⭐⭐⭐stars
High Stakes by Andrea Cremer ⭐⭐⭐ stars
The Red Ravenue Ball by Caroline Tung Richmond ⭐⭐stars
Pearls by Beth Revis ⭐⭐⭐.5 stars
Gold in the roots of grass by Marissa Meyer ⭐⭐⭐⭐stars
The Legendary Garnet Girls by Y.S.Lee ⭐⭐⭐stars
The colour of the sky by Elizabeth Wein ⭐⭐⭐ stars
Bonnie and Clydebank by Sundra Mitchell ⭐⭐⭐stars
Hard times by Catherine Longshore ⭐⭐⭐stars
City of Angels by Lindsay Smith ⭐⭐⭐.5 stars
Pulse of the Panthers by Kekla Magoon ⭐⭐⭐ stars
The whole world is watching by Robin Talley ⭐⭐stars
I wanted to read this collection of short stories as I had heard great things about it. This book should have been ideal for me, it's feminist historical fiction. Sadly this didn't deliver, none of the stories blew me away. In actual fact I have a hard time remembering what the stories were about. Some of the stories felt like they were an excerpt from a novel, some felt rushed and others under developed.
However,I am glad I got to read this as I get to explore authors that I have not read before and got to sample their work and see if I get on with their writing styles.
The book also has a short note from the author as to why they picked the era, why they contributed to the anthology and so on. I definitely want to explore more novels with American history such as the gold mining and slavery thanks to these authors.
Overall I rated this 3 out of 5 stars
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated Abominable (2019) in Movies
Oct 19, 2019
You darted Dave
Abominable movie was one of my most anticipated animated films of the year and while it didn't live up to my own hype me and my nephew had an absolute blast watching it. Being such a humongous Big Hero 6 fan when I first saw the Abominable trailer I couldnt help but get extremely excited as it looked like it was heavily inspired by the baymax adventure it in every way. However while Abominable does share similarities with Big Hero I feel it fails to capture its charm, humour and heart which is a huge shame. Dont get me wrong its tremendous fun, has some truly stunning set pieces and its story always felt interesting its just let down by a pace thats a little to fast, some shortcuts in animation and no down time to let us understand and truly connect with its main characters. Visually colour wise it really is great to look at and animation is good (especially Everest his character design is simply wonderful fluffy and cheeky) its just not quite up there with How to train your dragon standards meaning sometimes I did notice some terrible textures. Messages are also strong as our main character feels alone with no purpose in life struggling with loss and feeling held back by those around her. That is until she learns to gain the confidence to take charge of her life, face her demons, realise her worth, embrace the memories/motivations of her past and become a stronger more appreciative person with drive of her own. Its inspiring stuff especially for kids and it really feels like shes taken this journey changing as a character along the way. Villains here feel refreshing too with one having a sad surprising back story of his own that shows why his heart grew cold and his motives in life become confused and muddled. My nephew loved every minute of it but said he became tired when the villain was on screen because he didn't like him.He also said it was almost as good as Big Hero 6 but not quite as good. I did really enjoy this movie I just wish a bit more time had been put into the animation and to fleshing out the characters because with a bit more heart/soul those set pieces could of really made a much bigger impact emotionally.
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated The Lion King (2019) in Movies
Jul 19, 2019 (Updated Jul 19, 2019)
If this is where the monarchy is headed Count me out!
Lion king 2019 is by far the worst of the Disney live action remakes & while newcomers/children will certainly love it many of the people that hold the original close to their hearts will leave wishing they had just stayed home with the far superior predecessor instead. Aladdin & The Lion King are two of the greatest animated feature films of all time & as I experienced them both in cinema on release they are very special to me. Now i loved the Aladdin remake & im not one for comparing these to the animated features but while I was watching this all i could think about was how much better the original is. While it looks absolutely gorgeous (until anything starts to move) the animation at times is so unnatural especially when animals are walking slowly that its constantly distracting & kills the illusion of these creatures being real. Voice work is bland/mediocre & delivered with almost no enthusiasm at all like the cast were more concerned with sounding different to the original than giving the characters charm & personality. Voices also dont feel connected to the characters like your watching a nature documentary thats been dubbed over. While Aladdin did its own thing & changed up the movie Lion King is practically & infuriatingly a scene for scene remake which would be ok if it had the charm, colour, grand scale, imagination, excitement, thrill, humour & emotional impact of the original but it doesnt. Songs are butchered/dull with seemingly no energy or spectacle to them at all feeling significantly toned down/grounded rather than fun & toe tapping (they have also ruined 'Be Prepared'). So whats new? theres new humour & yup you guessed it its really bad with awkward timing & dragged out jokes that just fall flat. I wanted so bad to love this movie but not even a scense of nostalgia kicked in either because the film is just soulless, unenthusiastic, boring, bland, lacking in excitement & magic. Kids will no doubt love it but for me its this years biggest let down. If it were a silent film with an epic score over the top it might of at least been unique/watchable & helped be bearable but as it is I just cant recomend seeing it. A big fat cash grab.
JT (287 KP) rated Green Lantern (2011) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
You feel that had The Green Lantern arrived on the scene in 2011 not competing with a host of other super hero films, such as Thor, X-Men: First Class and Captain America, it might have had a better welcome.
For me the super hero genre really is bordering a mass overkill, what with this years upcoming Avengers getting so much press its hard to turn a corner without seing one of Iron Man, Hulk or Thor adoring a billboard or poster somewhere.
So it’s a shame then that Hollywood’s Mr. Nice guy, Ryan Reynolds, was given a role so bland and pointless it was almost insulting.
Director Martin Campbell’s previous outings Casino Royale and Edge if Darkness were deep gritty affairs and he really should have carried that over into this, there was so much flamboyant colour you wondered if Joel Schumacher had some how been a part of it.
That isn’t to say that during some stages the film was not enjoyable. Test pilot Hal Jordan is given the power bestowed on him by a mysterious ring with a back story shoe horned into an opening five minute monologue, if you’re not paying attention its going to be a little confusing.
The action and special effects are very good, with the Green Lantern able to concoct a wide range of objects from his mind ranging from missile launchers, swords and even a necklace, all transferred through the power and energy of the ring.
The less so, well Reynolds is surrounded by characters that only really dip their toe into the water of the film. With thousands of Green Lanterns we only really here from two, Tomar-Re and Kilowog voiced by Geoffrey Rush and Michael Clarke Duncan respectively.
Mark Strong as Sinestro on first glance has the look of someone bound to step over to the evil side, and maybe that is to come if a sequel is due at some point.
Peter Sarsgaard’s large headed villain only serves as an entrée before Hal has to tackle the large bellowing cloud that is Parallax, an entity that thrives on sucking out the fear of its victims.
The film has its moments, but it never really has the energy that so many other super hero films have. Perhaps that fact that the back story of Hal is not nearly as exciting as say Spider-man, Batman or any of the Avengers for that matter.
For me the super hero genre really is bordering a mass overkill, what with this years upcoming Avengers getting so much press its hard to turn a corner without seing one of Iron Man, Hulk or Thor adoring a billboard or poster somewhere.
So it’s a shame then that Hollywood’s Mr. Nice guy, Ryan Reynolds, was given a role so bland and pointless it was almost insulting.
Director Martin Campbell’s previous outings Casino Royale and Edge if Darkness were deep gritty affairs and he really should have carried that over into this, there was so much flamboyant colour you wondered if Joel Schumacher had some how been a part of it.
That isn’t to say that during some stages the film was not enjoyable. Test pilot Hal Jordan is given the power bestowed on him by a mysterious ring with a back story shoe horned into an opening five minute monologue, if you’re not paying attention its going to be a little confusing.
The action and special effects are very good, with the Green Lantern able to concoct a wide range of objects from his mind ranging from missile launchers, swords and even a necklace, all transferred through the power and energy of the ring.
The less so, well Reynolds is surrounded by characters that only really dip their toe into the water of the film. With thousands of Green Lanterns we only really here from two, Tomar-Re and Kilowog voiced by Geoffrey Rush and Michael Clarke Duncan respectively.
Mark Strong as Sinestro on first glance has the look of someone bound to step over to the evil side, and maybe that is to come if a sequel is due at some point.
Peter Sarsgaard’s large headed villain only serves as an entrée before Hal has to tackle the large bellowing cloud that is Parallax, an entity that thrives on sucking out the fear of its victims.
The film has its moments, but it never really has the energy that so many other super hero films have. Perhaps that fact that the back story of Hal is not nearly as exciting as say Spider-man, Batman or any of the Avengers for that matter.
JT (287 KP) rated Only God Forgives (2013) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Now here is a film that completely split critics. It’s not going to be everyone’s cup of tea and it’s clear to see why. Anyone expecting a well constructed follow up to Winding Refn’s hit Drive are going to be sorely disappointed, as Only God Forgives serves up a mix of beautiful neon visuals, character dreamscapes and minimal dialogue.
Julian (Ryan Gosling) runs a Thai boxing club deep in the heart of Bangkok using it as front for a drug smuggling ring with his brother. Events take a horrific turn when his brother rapes and murders an underage prostitute. Enter retired cop Chang (Vithaya Pansringarm), more well known as the ‘Angel of Vengeance’ who has a unique and almost godlike way of handing out retribution to those who cross his path.
When he allows Julian’s brother to be murdered by the father of the girl he killed, Julian’s mother Crystal and family matriarch heads out to demand that Julian take revenge for his brothers death.
Only God Forgives is a film doused in deep colours that awash the actors on screen and cast them in a variety of different lights. It feels a bit art house and at times arrogant. This must have been the easiest pay cheque that Gosling has ever picked up. He barely speaks and stamps any authority on screen by long drawn out stares of which he is the master.
Scott Thomas is not the mother figure that you would expect to have. Goading Julian into submission in a vile and disgusting manner she belittles him, prompting the question that he is half the man his brother is. She is one of the few standouts. All blonde hair and jewellery along with a arsenal of foul language. However, it will be Chang that leaves the afterthought, as he glides about unleashing his sword on those who stand in his way.
Only God Forgives is violent, and it is certainly not for the faint-hearted, the spilling of blood (particularly one hard to watch scene) is in keeping with the tonal colour of the setting. It doesn’t have Drive’s slickness but does come with an equally pulsating sound track.
There is no arguing that from a cinematography point of view this film his head and shoulders above others. But there is the odd occasion when you really have to question the director and what it was that he set out to achieve?
Julian (Ryan Gosling) runs a Thai boxing club deep in the heart of Bangkok using it as front for a drug smuggling ring with his brother. Events take a horrific turn when his brother rapes and murders an underage prostitute. Enter retired cop Chang (Vithaya Pansringarm), more well known as the ‘Angel of Vengeance’ who has a unique and almost godlike way of handing out retribution to those who cross his path.
When he allows Julian’s brother to be murdered by the father of the girl he killed, Julian’s mother Crystal and family matriarch heads out to demand that Julian take revenge for his brothers death.
Only God Forgives is a film doused in deep colours that awash the actors on screen and cast them in a variety of different lights. It feels a bit art house and at times arrogant. This must have been the easiest pay cheque that Gosling has ever picked up. He barely speaks and stamps any authority on screen by long drawn out stares of which he is the master.
Scott Thomas is not the mother figure that you would expect to have. Goading Julian into submission in a vile and disgusting manner she belittles him, prompting the question that he is half the man his brother is. She is one of the few standouts. All blonde hair and jewellery along with a arsenal of foul language. However, it will be Chang that leaves the afterthought, as he glides about unleashing his sword on those who stand in his way.
Only God Forgives is violent, and it is certainly not for the faint-hearted, the spilling of blood (particularly one hard to watch scene) is in keeping with the tonal colour of the setting. It doesn’t have Drive’s slickness but does come with an equally pulsating sound track.
There is no arguing that from a cinematography point of view this film his head and shoulders above others. But there is the odd occasion when you really have to question the director and what it was that he set out to achieve?