Search
Search results
Justice Denied: Extraordinary Miscarriages of Justice
Book
An incisive examination by the bestselling author of The Mammoth Book of Gangs of some of the many...
Berlin Marco Polo Handbook
Book
For advice you can trust, look no further than Marco Polo. The Berlin Marco Polo Handbook offers...
My Lai: Vietnam, 1968, and the Descent Into Darkness
Book
On the early morning of March 16, 1968, American soldiers from three platoons of Charlie Company...
history
The Future of Foreign Intelligence: Privacy and Surveillance in a Digital Age
Book
Since the Revolutionary War, America's military and political leaders have recognized that U.S....
Looking for the Outsider: Albert Camus and the Life of a Literary Classic
Book
The Outsider is a rite of passage for readers around the world. Since its publication in France in...
Gerhard Fieseler: The Man Behind the Storch
Book
The Fieseler Storch is the most famous slow-speed aircraft of the Second World War. A remarkably...
Ross (3284 KP) rated The Shadow Man in Books
Feb 19, 2021 (Updated Feb 19, 2021)
Good thriller, but not a patch on Fields' other books
This standalone (as far as I know) book sits beside Fields' Luc Callanach (Ava Turner) series, again set in Edinburgh. Other than the brash Chief Superintendent Overbeck, none of those characters are introduced here. Instead, because of the workload of Edinburgh's Major Incident Team, DI Baarda has been called in from London to assist in a murder/kidnapping. Along with him is Dr Connie Woodwine, a brash American criminal psychologist. They are looking into the disappearance of one woman, and quickly link it to the death of another and find that they are on the hunt for someone with issues.
Connie is a fairly stereotypical academic, clinical type as she has virtually no people skills on the surface, issuing demands and attacking conversations head-on in a very un-British way. And yet when we see her interviewing witnesses, such as a young girl who saw a schoolmate be abducted, she is suddenly very tactful and sensitive. In this way, she is both an interesting, complex character, but also a much seen cliched one. She has a tendency to do an awful lot of telling during interviews, explaining to all in the room the theory of her approach to the interview. While this was interesting, it took me right out of the book as something completely unnatural, and read more as a brain dump of the author's research for the book. A little more show, less tell as usual would have worked well here.
Baarda is similarly familiar, a dedicated career cop with marital problems (his wife having an open affair with another officer).
Together, the pair piece together few clues and start to evolve something of a profile for the man who has been kidnapping people. However, I felt this aspect didn't yield results until quite late on, all progress up to that point (next to none) was through standard police work/luck.
The antagonist here was interesting, but nowhere near as dark and mysterious as the blurb makes him sound. We're not talking Hannibal Lecter here, just a confused man with a fairly typical upbringing. Fields essentially cottoned on to an interesting medical/psychological condition and pieced together a plot based on it. While this was enjoyable, it made it somewhat crime-by-numbers.
A good book, but left me longing for Ava Turner's more likable policing style.
Advance reading copy received from the publishers and netgalley in exchange for an honest review.
Connie is a fairly stereotypical academic, clinical type as she has virtually no people skills on the surface, issuing demands and attacking conversations head-on in a very un-British way. And yet when we see her interviewing witnesses, such as a young girl who saw a schoolmate be abducted, she is suddenly very tactful and sensitive. In this way, she is both an interesting, complex character, but also a much seen cliched one. She has a tendency to do an awful lot of telling during interviews, explaining to all in the room the theory of her approach to the interview. While this was interesting, it took me right out of the book as something completely unnatural, and read more as a brain dump of the author's research for the book. A little more show, less tell as usual would have worked well here.
Baarda is similarly familiar, a dedicated career cop with marital problems (his wife having an open affair with another officer).
Together, the pair piece together few clues and start to evolve something of a profile for the man who has been kidnapping people. However, I felt this aspect didn't yield results until quite late on, all progress up to that point (next to none) was through standard police work/luck.
The antagonist here was interesting, but nowhere near as dark and mysterious as the blurb makes him sound. We're not talking Hannibal Lecter here, just a confused man with a fairly typical upbringing. Fields essentially cottoned on to an interesting medical/psychological condition and pieced together a plot based on it. While this was enjoyable, it made it somewhat crime-by-numbers.
A good book, but left me longing for Ava Turner's more likable policing style.
Advance reading copy received from the publishers and netgalley in exchange for an honest review.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Spiral: From the Book of Saw (2021) in Movies
May 23, 2021
Usually I would feel the urge to watch the series of films before seeing a new one. In this instance, knowing I've only seen one film (possibly two), kept me happy enough to go with this one. I wasn't convinced I had it in me to watch the whole series.
Detective Banks works alone in his departments after standing up against a corrupt cop. Now he has to partner with a rookie cop as he's thrown into a case as a spate of horrendous murders, with more than a passing resemblance to those that lie deep in the cities past, plague the PD.
The focus on the PD and Banks really worked for me, and the partnership between Banks and Schenk was strong. It transitioned the story well from being a Saw film without being a Saw film. For me that was a bonus.
Chris Rock was an interesting choice in the lead role. There are moments where he stood out and was convincing in the part, but others that gave me flashbacks to Dogma and Lethal Weapon 4. While it was an enjoyable piece of acting, it did occasionally take me out of the story.
Dynamics between the characters were pretty solid throughout, and I'd be hard-pressed to say someone didn't fit in the cast. What did put me out a little was the tension within the police department. There are some flashbacks that give you some context, but the current day points felt... too petty? But that might just be something I don't have enough knowledge of.
Not being tied to the Saw franchise probably helps. I liked the idea of this horror breaking out into a police thriller sort of thing, and I got Bone Collector and Criminal Monds vibes as I watched. Anyone who knows me will know that's a winner.
I was very entertained as I watched, but it wasn't until I got outside and was chatting about it that I kept stumbling across flaws that had thankfully escaped me while in the cinema. I did know the ending before I got there, and that didn't bother me as much as it had in other films. I think mainly because I was engaged in finding out the why of it all. Despite both of those things, it was a good film for me, but I sense a Saw purist might not agree.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/05/spiral-movie-review.html
Detective Banks works alone in his departments after standing up against a corrupt cop. Now he has to partner with a rookie cop as he's thrown into a case as a spate of horrendous murders, with more than a passing resemblance to those that lie deep in the cities past, plague the PD.
The focus on the PD and Banks really worked for me, and the partnership between Banks and Schenk was strong. It transitioned the story well from being a Saw film without being a Saw film. For me that was a bonus.
Chris Rock was an interesting choice in the lead role. There are moments where he stood out and was convincing in the part, but others that gave me flashbacks to Dogma and Lethal Weapon 4. While it was an enjoyable piece of acting, it did occasionally take me out of the story.
Dynamics between the characters were pretty solid throughout, and I'd be hard-pressed to say someone didn't fit in the cast. What did put me out a little was the tension within the police department. There are some flashbacks that give you some context, but the current day points felt... too petty? But that might just be something I don't have enough knowledge of.
Not being tied to the Saw franchise probably helps. I liked the idea of this horror breaking out into a police thriller sort of thing, and I got Bone Collector and Criminal Monds vibes as I watched. Anyone who knows me will know that's a winner.
I was very entertained as I watched, but it wasn't until I got outside and was chatting about it that I kept stumbling across flaws that had thankfully escaped me while in the cinema. I did know the ending before I got there, and that didn't bother me as much as it had in other films. I think mainly because I was engaged in finding out the why of it all. Despite both of those things, it was a good film for me, but I sense a Saw purist might not agree.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/05/spiral-movie-review.html
Andy K (10823 KP) rated Frankenstein (1931) in Movies
Sep 24, 2019
Everyone remembers the story of Frankenstein, or at least the first part. We all know Dr. Frankenstein assembles his "creation" from the bodies of the deceased and his assistant henchman brings him the brain from a criminal instead of a "normal" brain. His creation is then elevated to the heavens during a lightning storm and given the 1.21 Gigawatts of electricity he needs to regain life and drive the DeLorean back to the future! (Come to think of it, that might be a different film!) 😋
What you may not remember is the 2nd half of the film where the monster, presumed dead, wanders the countryside searching for the meaning of life and meets a young girl. The two sit by the shore trading flowers and tossing them into the water. The monster thinks it would be a good idea t toss the girl as well accidentally killing her.
After hearing about the atrocity, the townspeople form a lynch mob determined to hunt down and destroy the monster once and for all. The creature ends up at a lighthouse where his final fate is carried out.
Some other facts I may not have remember or never knew at all:
-Dr. Frankenstein's first name is Henry (I thought it was Viktor)
-Henchman' name Fritz (not Igor)
-Mary Shelley's opening writing credit is listed as Mrs. Percy B. Shelley (lame)
- The Monster's acting credit at the beginning is listed as "?" (not until the end credits is Boris Karloff given his due)
-No soundtrack during the film at all other than the opening and closing credits (I found out from the film historian DVD audio commentary in film music wasn't begun as a normal practice until sometime after this film's release in 1931)
Some other facts you may not remember is how excellent Boris Karloff really is as the monster. He takes you from hating him, to loving him, to feeling pity for him in the course of his limited screen time.
Also, for the time period, the set design and cinematography are breathtaking in glorious black and white. You really feel you are there with Frankenstein as he creates his masterpiece and watches quickly while he decidedly begins to regret his decision.
This time of year is fun to watch the spooky and scary. In this case, this classic is both and is not that long so you can watch more than one Frankenfilm tonight!
What you may not remember is the 2nd half of the film where the monster, presumed dead, wanders the countryside searching for the meaning of life and meets a young girl. The two sit by the shore trading flowers and tossing them into the water. The monster thinks it would be a good idea t toss the girl as well accidentally killing her.
After hearing about the atrocity, the townspeople form a lynch mob determined to hunt down and destroy the monster once and for all. The creature ends up at a lighthouse where his final fate is carried out.
Some other facts I may not have remember or never knew at all:
-Dr. Frankenstein's first name is Henry (I thought it was Viktor)
-Henchman' name Fritz (not Igor)
-Mary Shelley's opening writing credit is listed as Mrs. Percy B. Shelley (lame)
- The Monster's acting credit at the beginning is listed as "?" (not until the end credits is Boris Karloff given his due)
-No soundtrack during the film at all other than the opening and closing credits (I found out from the film historian DVD audio commentary in film music wasn't begun as a normal practice until sometime after this film's release in 1931)
Some other facts you may not remember is how excellent Boris Karloff really is as the monster. He takes you from hating him, to loving him, to feeling pity for him in the course of his limited screen time.
Also, for the time period, the set design and cinematography are breathtaking in glorious black and white. You really feel you are there with Frankenstein as he creates his masterpiece and watches quickly while he decidedly begins to regret his decision.
This time of year is fun to watch the spooky and scary. In this case, this classic is both and is not that long so you can watch more than one Frankenfilm tonight!
Darren (1599 KP) rated A Most Wanted Man (2014) in Movies
Sep 2, 2019
Thoughts on A Most Wanted Man
Characters – Gunther Bachmann is the German agent that is tracking known terrorists, his team has connections and keeps eyes on most of the suspects with their latest one being one wanted worldwide, he must figure out if this man is a danger or not. Martha Sullivan is part of the American team searching for the terrorist, she is trusting Gunther to do the right thing only she isn’t sure what he is going to do. Annabel Richter is an attorney that is trying to help the suspect get into Germany, she is just doing his job using her connection to help make his move go smoother. Tommy Brue is the bank manager that has been dealing with multiple nationalities through the years, he gets involved in trying to get the transfer of money done.
Performances – Philip Seymour Hoffman in the leading role steps into the German character with ease, showing the composure to take his character to be the standout of the film. Robin Wright, Rachel McAdams and Willem Dafoe fill the supporting roles well through the film.
Story – The story here follows the German and American intelligence agencies as they are trying to figure out if an immigrate is a potential terrorist suspect, both sides have difference of opinion on what is true and they must try to stay ahead of each other the best they can. This story does try to come off like an intense spy thriller that seems to get bogged down too easily, by making everything seem like it is just an everyday incident, this does move at a slow pace which only brings down everything because they do just seem to pick a random person, that could have reason to suspect from the early point in the film.
Crime – The crime side of the film shows how the authorities operate to try and tackle potential criminal actions, it does show that they could be above the law at times too.
Settings – We have the German backdrop for this movie, showing how they are planning to operate to keep tracks on terrorists.
Scene of the Movie – Pick up.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It just seems dull.
Final Thoughts – This is a spy thriller that never seems to get going, it tries to play along with the idea that we are building, but we soon lose the attention because it is more of a political spy thriller over anything going on thriller.
Overall: Slow burning thriller that just doesn’t get going.
Characters – Gunther Bachmann is the German agent that is tracking known terrorists, his team has connections and keeps eyes on most of the suspects with their latest one being one wanted worldwide, he must figure out if this man is a danger or not. Martha Sullivan is part of the American team searching for the terrorist, she is trusting Gunther to do the right thing only she isn’t sure what he is going to do. Annabel Richter is an attorney that is trying to help the suspect get into Germany, she is just doing his job using her connection to help make his move go smoother. Tommy Brue is the bank manager that has been dealing with multiple nationalities through the years, he gets involved in trying to get the transfer of money done.
Performances – Philip Seymour Hoffman in the leading role steps into the German character with ease, showing the composure to take his character to be the standout of the film. Robin Wright, Rachel McAdams and Willem Dafoe fill the supporting roles well through the film.
Story – The story here follows the German and American intelligence agencies as they are trying to figure out if an immigrate is a potential terrorist suspect, both sides have difference of opinion on what is true and they must try to stay ahead of each other the best they can. This story does try to come off like an intense spy thriller that seems to get bogged down too easily, by making everything seem like it is just an everyday incident, this does move at a slow pace which only brings down everything because they do just seem to pick a random person, that could have reason to suspect from the early point in the film.
Crime – The crime side of the film shows how the authorities operate to try and tackle potential criminal actions, it does show that they could be above the law at times too.
Settings – We have the German backdrop for this movie, showing how they are planning to operate to keep tracks on terrorists.
Scene of the Movie – Pick up.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It just seems dull.
Final Thoughts – This is a spy thriller that never seems to get going, it tries to play along with the idea that we are building, but we soon lose the attention because it is more of a political spy thriller over anything going on thriller.
Overall: Slow burning thriller that just doesn’t get going.