Search
Search results
THE END OF THE F***ING WORLD - Season Two
8.5
Rate It
TV Season Watch
Based on the comic book series by Charles Forsman, "The End of the F...ing World" sees two...
Blue Bloods
7.4
Rate It
TV Show
Tom Selleck stars as Frank Reagan, the New York Police Commissioner, and patriarch of the Reagan...
Furioza (2021)
6.0
Rate It
Movie
An event from the past separates the fate of three friends. Unexpectedly, in the life of David...
David McK (3540 KP) rated Moriarty: The Devil's Game in Books
Sep 22, 2024 (Updated Sep 22, 2024)
Moriarty, the Napoleon of crime.
Sherlock Holms arch-nemesis.
But what if Moriarty was actually an innocent man and Sherlock a ruthless narcissist who just happens to have some very (very) good PR?
That's pretty much the basis for this audio-drama, which starts with Moriarty developing an equation to tell the future' before being framed for the death of his fiancee, sentenced to death himself, meets Col Sebastian Moran in Newgate, escapes from the same and goes on the run in the criminal underworld of Victorian London in an effort to clear his name.
The result, I found, was surprisingly enjoyable, with loads of 'call-backs' to the Arthur Conan Doyle stories point which it is based (albeit from a different point of view) and numerous characters from the same.
I think I'll be listening to season 2 no too far in the future ...
Sherlock Holms arch-nemesis.
But what if Moriarty was actually an innocent man and Sherlock a ruthless narcissist who just happens to have some very (very) good PR?
That's pretty much the basis for this audio-drama, which starts with Moriarty developing an equation to tell the future' before being framed for the death of his fiancee, sentenced to death himself, meets Col Sebastian Moran in Newgate, escapes from the same and goes on the run in the criminal underworld of Victorian London in an effort to clear his name.
The result, I found, was surprisingly enjoyable, with loads of 'call-backs' to the Arthur Conan Doyle stories point which it is based (albeit from a different point of view) and numerous characters from the same.
I think I'll be listening to season 2 no too far in the future ...
JD
Jane Doe January: My Twenty-Year Search for Truth and Justice
Book
In the vein of Alice Sebold's Lucky, comes a compelling, real-life crime mystery and gripping memoir...
Norco '80: The True Story of the Most Spectacular Bank Robbery in American History
Book
In the spirit of Killers of the Flower Moon and The Onion Field, Norco ’80 is a gripping true...
Malicious Intent
Book
World-renowned Attorney Alexandra Phillips has a knack for turning open and shut cases for the...
medical thriller thriller
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated The Winner's Crime (The Winner's Trilogy, #2) in Books
Jan 23, 2020
Dear <i>The Winner's Crime</i>,
You remind me of <i>Revenge.</i> Just... more fun.
Lady Kestrel is like Emily and the emperor is like Victoria or Veronica or whats-her-face, and her words are so carefully plotted, her moves so masterfully calculated - I've pretty much decided to not make an attempt to predict you. I find that not predicting sometimes is more fun and more enjoyable.
You are like any other movie or TV show consisting of royalty - espionage, drama, tension, gossip, the like. But I like you, and I enjoyed reading you. Kestrel is clever, but so is the prince and Arin and almost all the other characters in this novel. Yet, I still enjoy it. I enjoy the lies and deception, the drama and tension in the palace as Kestrel's wedding day gets closer and closer.
Thus, I find you more a guilty pleasure read. I find you such a guilty pleasure, I don't want to rate you, because if I do, it'll be a high one for sure. I can't high-five you - you're on a hold shelf already and that's just a fatal flaw of libraries, but it's a great feeling because someone else can enjoy the fabulousness of what you are. Then you'll be placed on a shelf somewhere else, or on a hold shelf again, traveling to another reader and then another, and your older sibling will repeat the same process.
And when your younger sibling comes around, s/he will be doing the same thing. In fact, it'll be your fault - you left everyone at a cliffhanger and all of us are demanding to know how this story will unfold.
<div style="text-align: right;">Sincerely,</div>
<div style="text-align: right;">Sophia</div>
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-the-winners-crime-by-marie-rutkoski/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
You remind me of <i>Revenge.</i> Just... more fun.
Lady Kestrel is like Emily and the emperor is like Victoria or Veronica or whats-her-face, and her words are so carefully plotted, her moves so masterfully calculated - I've pretty much decided to not make an attempt to predict you. I find that not predicting sometimes is more fun and more enjoyable.
You are like any other movie or TV show consisting of royalty - espionage, drama, tension, gossip, the like. But I like you, and I enjoyed reading you. Kestrel is clever, but so is the prince and Arin and almost all the other characters in this novel. Yet, I still enjoy it. I enjoy the lies and deception, the drama and tension in the palace as Kestrel's wedding day gets closer and closer.
Thus, I find you more a guilty pleasure read. I find you such a guilty pleasure, I don't want to rate you, because if I do, it'll be a high one for sure. I can't high-five you - you're on a hold shelf already and that's just a fatal flaw of libraries, but it's a great feeling because someone else can enjoy the fabulousness of what you are. Then you'll be placed on a shelf somewhere else, or on a hold shelf again, traveling to another reader and then another, and your older sibling will repeat the same process.
And when your younger sibling comes around, s/he will be doing the same thing. In fact, it'll be your fault - you left everyone at a cliffhanger and all of us are demanding to know how this story will unfold.
<div style="text-align: right;">Sincerely,</div>
<div style="text-align: right;">Sophia</div>
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-the-winners-crime-by-marie-rutkoski/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Finding Steve McQueen (2019) in Movies
Nov 9, 2020
This heist comedy (we'll come to that later) sounds pretty good from the synopsis, I can't really elaborate much on it like I normally would because, for once, it's spot on!
I had a big issue almost straight off the bat... "In 1972"... that's how the synopsis starts. I had reread it just before starting the film and as it begins it actually flashes up "1980", very quickly it's explained (and it makes sense) but I didn't enjoy starting the film with that confusion. Now, if I was seeing this in the cinema it wouldn't have been an issue because you don't tend to sit there in the trailers reading the synopsis before it starts, but with it hitting digital you will be instantly seeing it before you press play... I know it's a really minor thing to be bugged by... but it did bug me.
The reason for the jump in years is that we're seeing Harry Barber telling his girlfriend, Molly, the story of his past and the heist. Flashbacks are a time-honoured tradition in films, but they're difficult to get right. The story jumps several times, but there's very little differentiation between time unless the diner is involved on one side of the jump. At one point it jumps because he talks at the camera and we hop back to Molly talking, it stuck out... it either never happened again or it blended in so well that I didn't notice it. It wouldn't be the first film to add something random like that and abandon the style choice. Some else will have to let me know if it happened more than I think it did.
These two things, combined with some free moving camerawork (that you know I hate) meant that I found the beginning of Finding Steve McQueen, especially when the heist that is pushed in the marketing doesn't appear for quite a while.
IMDb lists crime thriller as a guide... thriller is definitely the wrong word. Heist comedy (as per the PR I saw) is definitely more accurate, though I didn't find it particularly funny. It did bring a mild laugh out of me, but not enough to stamp it with the comedy tag. Even "heist" feels like it doesn't fit well, it may be about one but what's presented is much heavier on other parts of the story. It's more like a biopic with romance than crime. In the end that's a little bit disappointing when you're looking forward to crime.
William Fichtner was an instant standout for me, I thought he handled the role of Enzo Rotella particularly well, and there was a great dynamic with Louis Lombardi as Pauly. Rachael Taylor as Molly Murphy was great too, when she wasn't freaking me out with how much she looked like Nicole Kidman. Somehow I've never noticed that before so I'll have to put it down to a cunning makeup artist.
From there though I was underwhelmed. I'm not familiar with Travis Fimmel, and sadly, from this performance I've not been convinced to check out anything in his back catalogue. Apart from two well-played emotional scenes I didn't enjoy the character of Harry Barber at all.
Had this been advertised as a biography instead of a crime/heist then I probably would have had a more favourable opinion, but we're presented with a slow and light film. I'm not expecting all crime films to be gritty and dark, but I do expect them to focus more on the actual crime and investigation. That's also where I found the flashback idea falling apart because we're shown things for context that Harry wouldn't have known and been able to tell Molly.
What I did love about this film was the setting and the look of everything. It had a wonderful freshness about it and that coupled with the costumes felt natural and like it captured the era perfectly.
I by no means hated this film, but I was extremely disappointed. The way the story was balanced means that the heist gets lost in everything else that's happening and although it's hailed as an amazing feat in American history it doesn't feel all that impressive in this portrayal. The only real criminal thing about this film was the underuse of Forest Whitaker.
As a biography I could have seen clear to give this a 3, maybe a 3.5, but as a crime I can't give it more than a 2. It feels entirely misrepresented, had it not been for the few excellent performances, and the hope of exciting crime drama, I think I would have turned it off.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/11/finding-steve-mcqueen-movie-review.html
I had a big issue almost straight off the bat... "In 1972"... that's how the synopsis starts. I had reread it just before starting the film and as it begins it actually flashes up "1980", very quickly it's explained (and it makes sense) but I didn't enjoy starting the film with that confusion. Now, if I was seeing this in the cinema it wouldn't have been an issue because you don't tend to sit there in the trailers reading the synopsis before it starts, but with it hitting digital you will be instantly seeing it before you press play... I know it's a really minor thing to be bugged by... but it did bug me.
The reason for the jump in years is that we're seeing Harry Barber telling his girlfriend, Molly, the story of his past and the heist. Flashbacks are a time-honoured tradition in films, but they're difficult to get right. The story jumps several times, but there's very little differentiation between time unless the diner is involved on one side of the jump. At one point it jumps because he talks at the camera and we hop back to Molly talking, it stuck out... it either never happened again or it blended in so well that I didn't notice it. It wouldn't be the first film to add something random like that and abandon the style choice. Some else will have to let me know if it happened more than I think it did.
These two things, combined with some free moving camerawork (that you know I hate) meant that I found the beginning of Finding Steve McQueen, especially when the heist that is pushed in the marketing doesn't appear for quite a while.
IMDb lists crime thriller as a guide... thriller is definitely the wrong word. Heist comedy (as per the PR I saw) is definitely more accurate, though I didn't find it particularly funny. It did bring a mild laugh out of me, but not enough to stamp it with the comedy tag. Even "heist" feels like it doesn't fit well, it may be about one but what's presented is much heavier on other parts of the story. It's more like a biopic with romance than crime. In the end that's a little bit disappointing when you're looking forward to crime.
William Fichtner was an instant standout for me, I thought he handled the role of Enzo Rotella particularly well, and there was a great dynamic with Louis Lombardi as Pauly. Rachael Taylor as Molly Murphy was great too, when she wasn't freaking me out with how much she looked like Nicole Kidman. Somehow I've never noticed that before so I'll have to put it down to a cunning makeup artist.
From there though I was underwhelmed. I'm not familiar with Travis Fimmel, and sadly, from this performance I've not been convinced to check out anything in his back catalogue. Apart from two well-played emotional scenes I didn't enjoy the character of Harry Barber at all.
Had this been advertised as a biography instead of a crime/heist then I probably would have had a more favourable opinion, but we're presented with a slow and light film. I'm not expecting all crime films to be gritty and dark, but I do expect them to focus more on the actual crime and investigation. That's also where I found the flashback idea falling apart because we're shown things for context that Harry wouldn't have known and been able to tell Molly.
What I did love about this film was the setting and the look of everything. It had a wonderful freshness about it and that coupled with the costumes felt natural and like it captured the era perfectly.
I by no means hated this film, but I was extremely disappointed. The way the story was balanced means that the heist gets lost in everything else that's happening and although it's hailed as an amazing feat in American history it doesn't feel all that impressive in this portrayal. The only real criminal thing about this film was the underuse of Forest Whitaker.
As a biography I could have seen clear to give this a 3, maybe a 3.5, but as a crime I can't give it more than a 2. It feels entirely misrepresented, had it not been for the few excellent performances, and the hope of exciting crime drama, I think I would have turned it off.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/11/finding-steve-mcqueen-movie-review.html
Sarah (126 KP) rated The Staircase in TV
Aug 10, 2018
A Compelling Watch
All are punish'd.
The final words of The Staircase, taken from the last scene of Romeo & Juliet, seem particularly fitting for the series.
This series is centred on the untimely death of Kathleen Peterson, wife of author Michael Peterson.
For fans of true crime documentaries such as Making a Murderer, Evil Genius and Wild, Wild Country, this may seem something of a "slow burn"; however, from the initial report of Kathleen apparently tumbling down the stairs, we are quickly taken on a journey which spans several decades, two continents and which reveals lies and betrayal the likes of which seem more fitting of a crime thriller novel than a real life crime drama.
As with pretty much of these true crime series', we are left with a lot of unanswered questions; what makes The Staircase different is that it actually takes from the initial 911 call right up to the closure of the case.
What this start to finish coverage of the matter does give is a stark indication of the sheer length of time (and amount of money) that justice can take - if, indeed, one considers that justice was in fact served in this matter - and the toll that can take.
The level of coverage - of coaching of the witness pre-Trial, interviews with the Judge following the conclusion, and pretty much everything in between - allows us great insight into the US judicial process, as well as a close look at the Defendant himself and his family.
While each and every viewer will undoubtedly form their own opinion as to the guilt or otherwise of Michael Peterson - even though we aren't privy to all of the evidence, investigations, etc of the prosecution team - this series is certainly serves as an insight into the criminal justice process in the United States and how it can affect entire families.
My only criticism would be that the last few episodes seem to have been really dragged out - including lots of long, lingering shots of Michael Peterson, perhaps to reinforce how he had aged and suffered over the course of the series. In my opinion, it really could have been reduced by several episodes which would have actually made the whole thing flow better.
As regards guilt, one line towards the end of the series really stood out to as being the most honest thing said by anyone: "is there ever anyone in this family who isn't performing?"
The final words of The Staircase, taken from the last scene of Romeo & Juliet, seem particularly fitting for the series.
This series is centred on the untimely death of Kathleen Peterson, wife of author Michael Peterson.
For fans of true crime documentaries such as Making a Murderer, Evil Genius and Wild, Wild Country, this may seem something of a "slow burn"; however, from the initial report of Kathleen apparently tumbling down the stairs, we are quickly taken on a journey which spans several decades, two continents and which reveals lies and betrayal the likes of which seem more fitting of a crime thriller novel than a real life crime drama.
As with pretty much of these true crime series', we are left with a lot of unanswered questions; what makes The Staircase different is that it actually takes from the initial 911 call right up to the closure of the case.
What this start to finish coverage of the matter does give is a stark indication of the sheer length of time (and amount of money) that justice can take - if, indeed, one considers that justice was in fact served in this matter - and the toll that can take.
The level of coverage - of coaching of the witness pre-Trial, interviews with the Judge following the conclusion, and pretty much everything in between - allows us great insight into the US judicial process, as well as a close look at the Defendant himself and his family.
While each and every viewer will undoubtedly form their own opinion as to the guilt or otherwise of Michael Peterson - even though we aren't privy to all of the evidence, investigations, etc of the prosecution team - this series is certainly serves as an insight into the criminal justice process in the United States and how it can affect entire families.
My only criticism would be that the last few episodes seem to have been really dragged out - including lots of long, lingering shots of Michael Peterson, perhaps to reinforce how he had aged and suffered over the course of the series. In my opinion, it really could have been reduced by several episodes which would have actually made the whole thing flow better.
As regards guilt, one line towards the end of the series really stood out to as being the most honest thing said by anyone: "is there ever anyone in this family who isn't performing?"